Washington sentinel., 1855-02-24
THE KNOw-NOTHING IDEA OF STATE
RIGHTS-ANALYSIS OF A KNOWING.
THING CORRESPONDENCE

= ic" uays SiHcc VIC pupiSneu u cOrreSpOn
dence between the editor of the american o.
gan and the new Senator from Massachusetts,
General Wilson. 1t was remarkable cores
pondence. But for the gravity and vital i'm.
portance Of the subject it would have been an
amusing correspondence. 1t referred to the
rights of the States and the rights Of slave.
holders. The correspondence was commenced
by the editor Of the Organ, who is evidently
solicitous to hold up Senator Wilson and the
Abolitionized Know-nothings of Massachusetts
to the people Of the South as sound State rights
men. We shall endeavor to present an analy.
sis Of this correspondence.
The 6rst question propounded by the editor
Of the Organ is as follows: Italics n~n
Referring you to my editorials for the last
two weeks, have to ask you how far Ihare
correctly represented your riers in my comments
upon your lette, Of the 20th Of January, and
the articles IN the Boston Bee, aohich haze co.
pieds In otherwords, do you or not recognize the
doctrine Of State rights, so far as to permit the
ssrerdl States TO regulate the question Of slure,y
The Senator'S answer is
lst fully recognize the doctrine of State
rights in its application to slavery, as well as
10 any other matter Of public concern.
The Virginia and Kentucky resolutions OF
1898, in the main, as | think, correctly set
forth that doctrine.
The whole subject OF slavery mahin Statr
Hmfs shoald be ieft absolutely to State legis,
lati0n.
1t is observable that Senator Wilson does
not say one word abont the editorial com
mentsn Of the Organ on his letter Of the 2Oth
orJannary," or the articles in the Boston Bee
Nor il it TO be wondered at, since the Oygan
and the Bee represented General Wilson as "a
strict constractionist," which in Massachusetts
is taniamount TO political damnation.
But says the editor Of the Organ, I" do you
or not recognize the doctrine Of State rights 50
fay as 10 permit (mark the delicate phrase
ology) the several States to regulate the ques
ton Of slavery in their own mode acihm Meir
State limits
The ready answer of the Senator THE
whole subject Of slavery aoahin State limits
should be left absolutely to State legislation
This most satisfactory, strict construction south
ern rights answer Of the Massachusetts Senator
is instantly published in the columns Of the
Organ, and be is held up to the country as .an
Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile"
Question second BY the Editor Of the Organ:
"Do you, or not entertain the opinion that
Congress has power to interfere with slavery in
tie SdteSr'
Answer Of the Massachusetts, Senator:
"My response to your second question is in
cluded in my answer to your first. i do not
entertain the opinion that Congress has any
power to interfere with slavery as it exists m.
der State ldrS."
We will here indulge in few comments.
The object Of this correspondence is plain.
1t is TO make General Wilson appear State
rights man, SO that the Know-nothings of the
South may not disapprove Of his election.
Now, what is the true doctrine of State rights.
as respects the institution Of slavery? Ii is not
that Congress has no manner Of right to in.
terfere with slavery in the States. That is
but part Of the doctrine--its beginning.
The doctrine Of State rights not only inhibits
Congress from legislating on, or interfering
with, slavery in the States, but it inhibts Con
gressional interference with slavery in the Ter
ritories, in the District Of Columbia, in any
place, or places, belonging to the United States.
Let the Editor Of the american Organ write
to Mr.. Giddings and PROFOUND the questions
he propounded to General Wilson, and be will,
we doubt not, return the same answers. II
the Editor Of the Organ had desired the whole
truth, he would have propounded other ques.
tons to the new Senator We would respect.
fully inquire why, as he commenced question
ing General Wilson on the subject Of slavery,
did he not go through the series Of questions?
Why did he not ask him IL HE HOLDS
THAT CONGRESS HAS POWER TO LIE.
GISLATE ON THE SUBJECT OF SLAVE.
RY IN THE TERRITORIES-To ABOL-
ISH SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA, AND If He is IN FAVOR
OF REPEATING THE FUGITIVE SLAVE
LAW AND THE NEBRASKA BILL?
Why did he not ask him if.he made the re.
marks imputed TO him, in which he endorsed
every word" Of Mr.. Burlingame's Abolition
lecture, in which this creed was laid down?
II asked to state specifically what he would
do, he would answer: lst. repeal the Nebraska
bin; I'd. repeal the fugitive slave law; Sd.
abolish slavery in the District Of Columbia !;
18th. abolish the interstate slave trade; next
he would declare that slavery should not spread
~ one inch Of the territory of the Union; he
would then put the Government actually aud
perpetualy on the side Of freedom-by which
hc meant that a brighteyed boy in Massa.
etts should have as good a chance for promo.
ton in the Navy as boy of one Of the first
families in Virginia. He would have our
foreign consus take side with the noble Kos
suth and against the Papal butcher Bedin.
lie would have judges who believed in higher
law, and an ant-slavery constitution, an anti
slavery Bible, and an antislavery Godr'
When we republished from the Boston 7ele.
g,oph General Wilson's remarks, made imme
datey after the delivery Of Mr.. Burlngame
lecture, from which the above paragraph is