The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-09-13
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE IN
VIRGINIA.

The following paragraph shows the contempt
into which the principles of Republican Free
dom have fallen III Virginia The Erdminer
claims 10 be Democratic organ, and we be-
reye faithfully reflects the prevalent sentiment
among the slaychoding interest. 1t will be
seen that it holds up the Declaration of indie
pendence, the corner stone of our Republican
Institutions, TO the scorn and laughter of It's
:,ristocraiic readers. 1t adopts the same weap-
ons Of irony and ridcuIe for sapping the found
alton of the political faith of the People, which
Tom Paine and Volaire used in the vain effort
10 undermine their religious convictions. How
can the Examiner pretend to charge the North
with disloyal,y to the Constitution, with a vio-
lation of plighted faith, and with a design to
perveri the Government from its original pur-
pose, at the very moment that it thus openly
repudiates aud derides the principles of Free
dom on which the Constitution and Govern
ment were founded? The editor of that Jour
nal is ostentalious of his candor and independ-
encc in the ayowal Of his obnoxious principles
aud in following them to their logical conse
qnences; but he has one step further to take,
the subject He should not charge the North
with an attempt TO pervert the Federal Gov
ernment from the objects contemplated by its
orr ginal founders, but he should candidly avow
that the ruling class in the South have abar-
doned the principles of their ancestors, and re-
pcnied the bargain they made with the North,
in forming Constitution on the basis Of Uni
versal Freedom. The following article is a
tact admission of this change of position on
the part of the slaycholding class and the Er-
oi"iaer cannot keep up its high professions to
candor, while it persists in charging the North
with perverting the Constitution. We ask the
Eramiacr if the Declaration of Independence
Is not the foundation on which the Constitution
is built? Were not the trainers and rati6ers
oi the Constitution actuated by The same love
OF Universal Freedom which inspired the au-
thors of the Declaration? Were they not in
great part the same men? And was the strug-
isle OF seven years with the Tory despotism
which ruled England calculated TO weaken the
attachment O. the patriots of the Revolution to
the principles of Freedom? Will the Examiner
:,nswcr these questions? If the editor will do
- within II reasonable compass, we promise to
hay bis exposition before the hundred thousand
readers of the National Era, so that they shall
have every opportunity of correcting their mis-
conceptions OF the Constitution by the touch
stone Of Virginia orthodoxy.
Our position is simply this: That the Decla-
ration of Independence, which proclaims that
Ill e..
Constitution, which was formed "to establish
justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide
for the common defence, promote the general
welfare, aud secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves aud our posterity;" which guarantees
the trial by jury and the writ Of ha6eas corpus );
which declares that no person shall be de-
rrived of life, liberty, or property, without due
process Of law;' which studiously refrans from
the use of the words stare and sldrsry, and
which nowhere indirectly refers to slaves except
rs persons-are one in spirit and purpose, and
that the Lawmakers and expounders of the
Constitution should interpret its meaning with
a constant reference TO the principles of the
Declaration. Does the, Examiner controvert
this position ?-and il SO, on what grounds
The following is the article referred to:
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.
A humorous friend related to us, the other
day, the following anecdotes, which, if not ver
liable, are at least rrdisem5ie.
During the Revolution, an officer, on his way
to Join Washington at Monmouth, met a soldier
in full retreat, many miles from the field OF
battle. lie asked him where he was going In
such haste. The soldier replied he was in
"pnrsut OF happiness which certainly was
not to be found in the direction of the British
cannon-ihat the Declaration of Independence
taught him that life, liberty, and the pursuit OF
happiness, were inalienable rights. lie there
fore had a right to quit when he pleased, and
was lot bound to leopard or yield his life on
contract the contract being originally null and
void. The officer let him pass, because he
knew desertion had rendered him desperate.
In a certain court in the West, young attor
ney, in defending client, charged with one o
the felonies, insisted that the offence was no
punishable. because it was committed in tn,
eager "pursuit of happiness" which was al
:" inalienable right" The Judge called him t.
order, telling him that the Declaration of In
dependence was fine sentiment, but bad law
and forthwith made it a rule of court, that an.
lawyer citing the Declaration of independence
as legal authority should be subject to fine a
the discretion of the court-RichDioad E1
0saiaer.
We presume that the Western Judge REFEREES
to above must have been Judge Stringfelow, o
perhaps the Judge Lynch who recently sen
fenced the Rev. Mr.. Butler TO be BACKED an,