Weekly North Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1850-1858, 1855-10-10
NORTHERN SENTIMENT.

sachusetts there many voices there still raised
in behalf of the right and of Constitutional Union
Read the following NOBLE just, and liberal article
from the Boston Post
The Position OF THE NoRrH."--On Tuesday the
Boston Atlas put a question, which it is earnestly
hoped every citizen will thoroughly consider before
ne lends himself to movement so conspicuous and
alarming as that journal advocates, to wit the for
nation of great Northern sectional party. The
question is this: .. 49,. ..
The great question is not, is the South pleased,
but is the North right?" ...,.
We agree to this form of putting the issue. Is the
North right? Is it right in its present defiant atti-
tude? Is it right in forming party for national
purposes in which the citizens Of fifteen States in the
Union cannot enrol themselvesP Is it right in ma
king the basis OF this party to be attack one
of the great interests-the slavery interest-which
by the Constitution, was left to be dealt with by the
States where it exists? 1t is fact that these slave
States refused 60 into union with the free States
on the basis of the international law, that slave
reaching free country became free; but stipulated
that the fugitive should be returned; and this was,
prior the Constitution put into the North western
ordinance. With this in view, is it right for the
North to say that no slave shall be reclaimed from
its soil? Is it any more ght that this interest,"
minority interest be attacked in spite of the
State rights limitation than it would be if the navi-
cation interest, or the manufacturing nterest-both
minority nterests-should be attacked9 In word,
is the North right in trying to the fraternal
ties that connect the South and the North in the
grand old common bond of country? We earnestly
hope that each patriotic citizen WILL in the feeling of
a Washington patriotsm-at least as near to it as
he can get-put the question: Is the North right in
all this?
To show more clearly in what position the North
has been let go back little and state question
with scrupulous historical exactness Bearing in
mind that the Northwestern ordinance prohibiting
slavery passed before the adoption of the present
constitution, we remark that, from 1889 up to 1920,
no law was passed by Congress in relation to pro.
hibtion of slavery in the Territories of the United
States and no State excluded from the Union
account of slavery. 1t is true discussions arose
on this subject in Congress Thus, Illinois and
Indiana, when Territories, passed slavery laws-we
mean laws recognizing and protecting savery-not-
withstanding the Northwestern ordinance; and when
Illinois, in 1918, came in State, objection was
raised to her admission on this ground, but it was
sustained We state facts that cannot be success
fully controversies; and repeat that from 1889 to
1s20no prohibitory law passed relative to slave
ry,and State excluded on account of slavery.
In 1S19-2O the North took position that Missouri
should not be admitted into the Union without hav-
ing restriction put upon her, prohibiting her from
allowing slavery to exist within her limits and the
North announced this determination in resolutions
passed by, we think, nearly every Northern legisa-
ture. And in this manner, the united North stood
upon the position that Congress had the power to
enact perpetual prohibition a sovereign State.
was tne NOTCn III taxing tilIS pOSlLOl 1o
answer this fully would require elaborate argument,
for the considerations bearing it were so weighty
as to involve the issue whether there should be q
continuance of the old union of co-equal States,
whether a new union should be commenced of su-
perior and inferior States. Rather than go this
ground we prefer to state that statesmen Illus
trous as the country has produced went into the
argument, and have left record answers to the
question, the North right in the position it took
i. e., that of insisting on a prohibition on SOW
ereign State? These answers were given by Presi-
dents jefferson, Madison Monroe John Quincy Ad-
ans, jackson, and Harrison by host of states
men, from Henry Clay and John G. Calhoun, to
those far inferior to them in talents and reputation
and these arc all to the point that the North was
not right! We challenge contradiction on this point
We affirm that the opinions of all the great men
whose names we have given directly opposed to
the doctrines that Congress has power to impose a
restriction on a sovereign State. They pronounced
such restriction to be unconstitutional Ifthe judg
mentS of these patriots and statesmen have weight
they show that in lsl9-'20 the whole North stood
upon the ground that was not tenable. 1t was
ground marked out by clanor, passion, demagogu-
ism, and not by reason, judgment, and regard to
the obligations to common country.
We now return from the past to the present, and
repeat that nothing can be more patriotic more
salutary than for each citizen to ask the question: is
the North right? The course its orities-thanks
to Maine patriotism, one State excepted-are pursu-
ing, inevitably tends to deyide this noble country,
to its commerce and its manufacturers, to tear
into halves its noble banner and to make the first
experiment the annals of the word afford of great
self governed people, to be failure. Look, patrio-
tic citizens, at the results of this American system
thus far, after sxtyf years of trial of Con-
stitution Is it possible that the North be right
to act the part of parrcide and scnrn the bless
ings which the Union confers? Can the North be
right in throwing itself in the hands of the madmen
tribe of Senator Wade, and proclaim that there is
no Union? Will not patriotic instincts here in old
Hancock and Adams Massachusetts,, and everywhere
in our country, compel citizens to pronounce the
demagogues who thus play on feelings, and pas
sions, and prejudices to be traitors?
Patriotic citizens! The voices from the past, the
prosperous freedom of the present-al that is dear
the North is not right in seeking to divide our no.
BILE country. -,
W Judging from all the signs of the times the
probability is that the next movement of the Know
Nothings of the South will be of ultra devotion
to Southern rights. The leaders must have percev'
ed by this time that their Order in the free States is
hopelessly fused and abolitionized; and that the
Union of the States, far they concerned as
national party. is gone These leaders affect to
have no confidence in the national Democratic par
ty and as, under the circumstances they must dc
something for the country, they will be apt to 60 of
to extremes for Southern rights. They may still
struggle on with their Northern brethren, and labor
to produce the impression on the minds of their de-
luded followers that the brethren referred to are
sound and worthy to be trusted or they may bow
down in silence and submit to the threatened ag
gressons and insults of the abolitionists and free
soilers No one can predict with absolute certainty
what they will debut thew will bear watchi Ig-