, 1855-09-28
From the Washington Union.
The Democratic Position on the Slayrry 0urSii0f

o towards an agrccuent betwiXt the diSpil
tantS. Those who are opposed to SLAYER,
heeanSe they regard it as an immoral insti
tnfion have not been convinced 10y the rea
sonlng oi those who maintain that it vic
latcS 40 moral obligation or Christian duty
On the other hand, the advocates Of sla
very ss u legal aud moral institution hay,
found notliag in the arguments Of It's oppo
ncnts to weaken their original opinions
I As 10 whether the institution is moral OF
immoral, or whether il is q social or politi
cal blessing or evil, the question is as iaI
from settlement rs il wus when the discus
sion commenced Perhaps IL would he
more strictly accurate TO say that the only
elect OF the discussion has been to Strength-
en- the original convictions Of the contest.
ing parties The northern man who was
educated to regard slavery as great NOR
al and so,'ial wrong, ndhcrcs TO the opin
ion with which he has grown up, andwhiell
I Is almost IN instinct of his nature. The
southern man who has been familiar with
the institution from his childhood, aud lias
been taught from his earliest recollection TO
regard il as entirely consistent with nor.
ality and the teachings Of the Bible, still
cheriSics the same sentiments We think
it may be safely assumed that an agree
mcnt OF opinion on the subject between
northern aud southern men is an impossi-
bility aud in looking at the danger n-
volvcd in the question and in seeking for
the means of avoiding those dangers, it is
iustifable TO act upon ihc assumption that
all hope of ever chectng such agreement is
impossible. aru-.
II We are right in assuming TINT the
north and the south can never harmonize
on the abstract subject of slavery, it fol
lows that there eau be no such thing us
national parties except upon the basis Of
an entire exclusion Of the subject from tl.eir
political crecds No mathematical promo
sition is more true than that tho only basis
Of parry organization is an agreement
amongst those who enter into it upon the
subjects which they recognize as belonging
TO It's creed. They may differ rs widely us
is possible as To all subjects npt embrS ced
by their party creed, but 70 be harmonious
inside Of their organization they must haze
common sentiments, aud stand together on
common platform These truths viii
command ready assent and they will dem
onstrate' the proposition that no party en-
bracing members at the north and the
south can be national or harmonious IN its
organization which does not exclude the
question Of slavery from its creed. @ If
northern men insist upon migrating upon
their party creed The doctrine that slavery
is moral or political evil, they raise an
insupcrable barrier against harmonious
association with southern men. In like
manner, IL southern men insis, on making
it part of their party creed that slavery is
morally and politically right, they thereby
cut off northern men from political assoea-
ton with them. The necessary result is,
that, without liberation Of differences of
opinion as to the abstract question of sla-
very, parties are necessarily sectional, aud
cannot possibly be national, \. Ed ..5..-
The same disagreement between the two
sections as to slavery which exists now has
existed from the beginning Of the govcriiL
ment, and, at that time, constituted one of
the chief obstacles TO the formation Of a
constitutional union. 1t resulted in com.
promise, which was intended to be per-
uanent rule for avoiding future dissensions
between the different sections Of the cor
federacy The democratic party bases its
claim TO nationality upon the fact that,
whilst it recognizes the validity and oblga-
tory character of the compromises Of the
constellation, It denies to the federal gov
ernment any right to Interfere with the
question Of slavery beyond the instances so
specified in the constitutional compromises,
The action of the democrats in the adop-
tion Of the measures Of 1850 was based
upon the principle that Congress could not
rightfully intervene as to slavery, except in
matters expressly enumerated 10 the con-
stitution. The act for the organization Of
Kansas and Nebraska was based upon the
same principle Of congressional non-inter-
vcntion; and 1t is upon this principle alone
that any party can be national, or that the
federal Union can be perpotuated. AS it
may not be amiss at this time to recur to
the authentic position OF the democratic
party on the subject Of slavery, we repro
duec SO much OF the democratic platform
as embraces that position. We quote from
the last Baltimore resolutions ...
That Congress has no power under the
constitution to interfere with or control the
domestic institutions Of the several States,
and that such States are the sole and prop
er judges of everything appertaining to
their own affairs, not prohibited by the
constitution; that all efforts of the aboli-
tionsts or others made to induce Congress
to interfere with questions of slavery, or to
take incipicnt steps thereto, are calculated
to lead to the most alarming and danger
Gus consequences; and that all such efforts
have an inevitable tendency to diminish the
happiness OF the people and endanger the
stability and permanency Of the Union
and ought not to be countenanced by an,
friend Of our political institutions. ri
! Resolred, That the foregoing PROPOSE