Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1856-06-14
CONSIDERATIONS
For the STANDARD
HON. Z. G. READEs LETTER

For the STANDARD.
HON. E. g. READES LETTER.
MEssRs. EDnoas / have just arisen from the pc
rusal Of Hon. e. G. Readcs letter to his constitu-
ents in reply to Mr. Clingnan, and confess to you
nv great disappointment Mr.. Reade is a gentle
man whose acquaintance esteem very highly, ana
that he is an artful advocate none who have ever
heard him will pretend to question. BY many.
too, he has heretofore been regarded as very
conscientious good man. But this letter does not
show him to be an insincere politician am greatly
mistaken. No one acquainted with him can for o
moment suppose him to be at all an ignorant man.
II therefore, any intelligent man can come to any
other conclusion than that he is insncere IN many
of the positions assumed in his letter, know not
by what process he arrives at his conclusion. lam
filled with melancholy when reflect upon the de-
generacy of certain politicians of the present age
That man discussing subject Of such vital impOr-
lance to the country and especially ofsuch great i'm
portance to particular section should
dare to deal with it in the manner that Mr.. Reade
does the great, and to US Of the South the para
mount, subject of slavery, is matter Of astonsh-
ment; and cannot refrain from expressing my deep
modification that gentleman who stands SO pre-
eminently high as does Mr.. Reade, should so lower
himself in the scale Of political integrity as to de.
scend to such miserable soph:stry to deceive his
people-the people who have elevated him to the
high position he now occupies-about question of
Clingmans controversy, except where third parties
are referred to. I am not concerned. Mr. Clingman
can take care of himself But in regard to Mr..
Reade's references to the administration OF Gen.
Pierce every patriot in the land is interested and
deeply interested If Franklin Pierce, when tried
by the record is not deserving of the confidence of
the South and of the entire country, then is there
no longer yeneration in the land for our glorious
Constitutions longer respect for administrative
skill and patriotic effort.
But let us examine Mr.. Reade's letter, and hold
up his positions to public gaze and see whether we
are justified in the remarks we have just made about
him. Mr. Reade sets out with the assertion that ne
agrees with Mr.. Clingman, that "the country is in
peril" He quotes Mr.. Cs language that the uti-
mate destiny of our present political system will be
determined by events soon to occur is most proba-
ble," and adds I am sorry to be obliged to agree
with him." The fact then being admitted by both
of these distinguished gentlemen that the country
is in peril -" that its destiny is to be determined
by events soon to occur" what course should patr-
otism prompt him to pursue, who feels it to be his
duty to occupy the position Of aoatehnan. and to
cry danger while it is yet in Il distance?" Deal
candidy with his constituents, or endeavor to mis-
lead them by Misrepresentation and appeals to un-
worthy prejudices? None but fool or knave would
answer the question in any other way than by re-
spending in the affirmative. How does Mr.. Reade
answer to this post of the "watchnnan ?" Look at
his letter and Judge. He admits that "the causes
of this unsettled condition are several: but that
which seems to be prominent now, the controver.
sy in regard to slavery" Here, then, is "the coun-
try in peril by an unjust and most damnable war
fare upon the institution of slavery, and Mr. Reade
stands up as soatchman and cries out " to his
people, the very interested in the institution
assailed, and what does he say? Does he encour-
age them to stand firm in the maintenance of their
rights? Does he deal candidly with his own peo-
PIE, and tell them the true of the difficulty
between the North and the South? No. He does
no such thing. But he tells them with the utmost
complacency, 1--WE have had controversy with our
Northern Jiiends about this matter before. In 1920
Missouri asked to be admitted State into the
Union. Her constitution allowed of slavery. The
North objected to her coming in, and there was a
very dangerous excitemen: about it. At length it
was compromised, in this way: 1t was agreed that
Missouri should come in as slave State and that
all the balance of the territory had should be d.
vided by line right through it, and that all North
the public mind rested quietly" let me ask what
this simple statement means? Does Mr.. Reade adj
wise the South to settle the controversy now going
on in the same way? He does not say so in so many
words but can any one draw any other inference
from his language and manners If it means not
this what does it mean Did Mr. Reade make the
statement because he supposed his constituents were
ignorant about this matter2 Certainly not because
he had spoken too frequently of this matter before
them when canvassing for the seat he now holds,
if he supposed them previously ignorant; and more
than this, he expressly apppoued of Mr. Kerrs vote
by which this Missouri line was repealed. Then
what can you make of it, except that Mr.. Reade
has changed his position upon this great and i'm
portant question, and now stands with bis party
platform in opposition to Mr.. Kerrs vote upon this
question? Read over the settlement proposed again
and ask yourself southern reader, ifyou are willing
that the South should again purchase the right Of
admission into the Union ola State oleratins slave
ry. All! Mr.. Reade, your constituents have reason
to begin to fear that short experience in political
life has clouded your judgment with thousand
phantasies of the interest of self and party" How
melancholy to contemplate the sad change that has
come over the mind of Mr.. Reade in few short
months spent at Washington City! Seward, Sum-
cry out, no more slave States shall be admitted into
the Union,-the Missouri compromise line shall be
restored; and Mr.. Reade answers them, why gentle
men, it's not worth while to talk SO loud about this
matter. You need not be so much excited. This
is just exactly the same old controversy we had a
long time ago. 1t was then settled by our yielding
up the territories and giving most of them into your
hands. You then gave up that Missouri should
come into the UaiOn as slave State but no such
concession on your part is now asked for No slave
State is seeking admission. You have, therefore,
only to ask for the Missouri line That will put the
thing at rest AT least. know when the old con-
troversy was settled in this manner the public
mind rested quietly" Yield nothing. The whole
OF the controversy is to be settled in your favor
The South will submit to your demands and crest
quietly" Certainly Mr.. Seward and his allies must
yield implicitly to Mr. Reade. There can be no
doubt about it. They must come right down. And
has it come to this? Are Southern men ready to
yield up their rights in the territories Of the d. S.
now when large portion Of Northern citizens come
to us and say we know you have had injustice done
you tor upwards of 35 years, we are now determin-
ed to see justice meted out to all portions of the
Union up for your rights and we'll stand by
you to the bitter endf Are they, 1 say, ready to
do this because they were forced to it once before
use the term forced purposely because Mr.. Reade