The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-10-30

b. MGR n. w MoHWIsos Il. w. WHEY, wa. l.. wArERs4S
Ajax n. cARsoE d. X. musTs, Bns. r. swAIs T. AsHNAs
and r. DAVIS.
PRESIDENT PlERCE'S LETTER ON NON-INTERVEN
TIoN.-THE ABOLITION ANSWER ANSWERED.
1t neither TO be expected desired that the
centy-published letter of President Pierce Mr. Taylor
OF New York. non-inteenton, would escape the scru
tiny the of the champions Of aboltonism We
are therefore neither disappointed panied by the eab
crate and vigorous onslaught made upon both the Pres
dent and his letter by the New York Evening Post The
editor Of that journal has the ability 70 present plausible
reasons when any exist for its erroneous doctrines II
therefore show that its objections to nonineryen
ton not plausible, much less enabe 1t will fur
nsh the best evidence that the President has planted him
self on an impregnable position.
1t is out of place to observe that President Perces
letter written after the Nebraska bill had become
law, and when the question whether the principle Of
that ought to be sustained and acquesced in as
test of democratic orthodoxy This regard different
presentation Of the question from that which whilst
the bill pending before Congress The very fact that
the received the votes of than seyentenths
the democratic members Of Congress furnished strong
presumptve evidence that it involved sound democratic
principle But independent of this Impressive fact the
principle of non-nteryenton rests clearly basis OF
democracy for disturbing collateral influences there
never could have been reasonable doubt whilst the bill
was pending before Congress- to the proprety of
king it test of democracy Out of tenderness that dis
position yield collateral considerations which often
maniiess itself when new issue arises, took the
ground when the Nebraska bill pending, that fail
ue to support it did necessarily involve ndeity to
the democratic party But when the Issue became one OF
acqescece the measure the restoration ofan arbitrary
rule which we deemed clearly incompatible with the
stituton could hold be sound democrat who
arrayed himself the side Of congressional Intervention
This we take to be the position of the President in the let
ter to Mr. Taylor from which the Post yehemeny dis
sents The following is the letter:
WAsHrSGros, %. CO. Aug. 20, 1854
NV DEAR SIR Accept my thanks for your kind letter Of
the I'D instant in the general views of which heartily
concur.
The members OF party only together cordially
and efficiently when they cordially recognise common
platform
The principle of intervention" which constitutes the
leading of the Nebraska and Kansas bill received the
sanction of the democracy of the republic in 1852 twas
rearmed by than seyentenths of the democracy
House and Senate upon the passage of the bill referred
to and will within eighteen months furnish from its inhe
soundness the strongest Issue tender to OPP
ponents
But il otherwise to abandon the right
ism of the people by significant silenceg
If we and middle States unable
tain ourselves upon the ground of maintaining for and
ring the people of every State and Territory Of this Union
all their constitutional rights and immuntes, nominal
ascendency would to be either honorable to ourselves
useful the country Besides far the democratic
party concerned all experience that apparent
advantage gained by temporzng policy by concessions
and fanatcsm has only resulted in ultimate dstrac
ton and weakness individuals who desire to retain nomi
nay position in the democratic ranks but who unw
ling stand upon national platform, should understand
that while the well dispense with their coopera
tiop they cannot by silence occupy doubtful position
fundamental questions affecting the cordial and permanent
these States without losing public confidence and
with it sef-respect.
am, with high esteem, your friend,
FRANKLIN PIERCE
Hon. j. j. TAYLOR, Owego, N. Y
We do not stop TO express admiration of
the ankness and fearcssness with which the President
condemns and repudiates resort to Incorporating poll
cy when great principles stake. His sentiments
this subject will cordial response from those who
condemn well those who approve the principle Of
Don-ntervenon Our business is with that princi-
Pile and with the objections it urged deliberately by
the Post That journal seeks advantage in the
in which it the position of the President when
says "The President in his late owego letter and the
administration organ have asserted opposition 10 he Ms
compromise 10 DC INC True Post
the Presidents letter his late Owego letter II
is proper to remark that the letter written in August
1854 and whilst the elections in the free States which
succeeded the passage of the Nebraska bill pending
This fact shows that it the opinion, then as well
now entertained by the President that the democratic
party ought to adhere firmly and zealousy the great
leading principle of the Nebraska bill. That principle
non-ineroento and its object the maintaining for and
securing 10 Mepeople Of ery State and Territory oe Union
all their constitutional rights and immunesp Itnvoved ne
cessarily opposition the Missouri Compromise because that
compromise rested upon the assumption that Congress had
to ngene for the purpose of restricting the rights
and mmunes of the people north of the designated line
but the principle of non-intervenon which President
Pierce asserted to be test of democracy embraced the
right of the people, in epery State and euy Territory Of
The Union to regulate their domestic Institutions
The principle rests upon that clause of the constitution
which declares that the powers delegated the Uni
ted States by the constitution prohibited by it the
States reserved The States respectively hepeopn
II is applicable alike to the States and the Territories
and in each appeals the constitution for its
ution President Pierce and all good democrats assert to
be test Of deoerdcy-no is assumed by The Post that
it is doctrine founded the principle that the govern
ment Of the United States has right to interfere or to