Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-04-22


own amendment to the Texas annexation resolu>
ton, he said:
"Wbile Texas remained independent power,
it was all slave territory from the Gulf of Mexico
to the forty second parallel of latitude. By the res
oution of nuexaton, five AID a half degrees OF
this slave territory 10 wit: all between thirtysix
and hall and the forts second parallels were to
become fixed, pledged, fastened II be- free, and
not slave territory forever, BY the solemn guAran~
tees of law Here is Territory stretching across
five and hall degrees of latitude, withdrawn from
slausry and deUoted to eedo by the very act which
the Senator (Mr. Websterl has chosen to denOunce
and deride as tie loork of the Northern Democracy"
"And when the Northern Democrats are arraign
ed and condemned for having contributed to the
extension of slavery, the fire and half degrees Of
latitude north of SO deg. 80 min. which provision
was made to be concerted from slave into free terri
tory absolutely, and probably double that amount
south OF that line By the action. of The people them
seIves when they come TO torn State constitution,
ought to have been brought 10 the notice OF the
public and put to credit iil the stdteDlent Of the
Gccount"
Here we have Judge Douglass ocn Interpretation
of his ooa action connected with the three most
nsntouS questions touching the public territories, for
which his Southern friends give him 80 much credit
Is it not Legitimate to present these record facts Of
history? Still is just say, that Messrs Douglas,
Northern Democrats, and are really entitled to
much credit for the patriotism and general nation
atty of their sentiments.
They are far better than the masses of the Dem
ocratc party at the North, who have been so fear
fully complicated with Freesoilism and the Wimot
Proviso. So generally has this been so, that after
Mr.. Pierce's nomination for the Presidency, the
Washington Union edited by Tennessean, was
forced 20 say-at least have often seen this Ian
gusge quoted from it,
"Ihe FreesoH Democratic leaders Of me North are
a regular portion Of the Democratic Party; and
General Pierce, If elected 1CiH make distinction
betICee1a them and The rest Of the Democracy IN the
distribution of official patronage and in tie selection
Of agents for administering tie Government"
The public offices accordingly filled, to a
great extent by Freesoi Democrats from the North
such Dix, Bishop, Cochrane, Fowler, Crocker,
&c.-while sound national meD-such as Dickin
son, Bronson, and others-were neglected or pro-
scribed w. J. Brown, of Indiana, who would
have been made the Democratic Speaker of this
House in the Thrty-Second Congress, but for the
accidental discovery that he had given a written
pledge to Wilmot that he would coHDOst the CONT
mLttees Nth F.eesoa nagjoTitieS, appointed to,
and now holds under the administration a high and
important Office. The present Secretary Of the
Interior is Witmot ProViSo Feesoiier of so strong
type as 10 deny that Slaves dre property Our
Minister PlenipOtentiary 10 Russia is a FreeSOer
Of the seventy delegates appointed By the Solts 70
attend the Democratic Convention IN June next
all were old Buffalo Platform Freesoilers of 1913,
(says the New York National Democracy but seven
But have not to 20 further into these prolific de-
tails.
What is the present ostensible position of the
Democratic party? Why its platform is not founded
upon principle at all, but upon solitary mcclure
the Nebraska bil-whch is construed vdrOusly
by its various supporters Gen Cass for example
heads those who see in It squatter sovereignty; my
colleague is Of those who understand il very differ
entity; Gen. Shields is OF the class who think it
measure ''for freedom" and the distinguished c.
G. Cambreleng, as orthodox Democrat as any Of
them, is in love with it, because he says it will SO
operate as to leave mot single square inch Of
slave territory in the United States"
Where then, il the identity OF pyincipls-where
the sOundHeSs OF the Democratic party, of which
my colleague sDeak-? The same radical differences
which characterize them on slavery questions, also
attend them on other leading branches of public
policy. But my colleague claims that his party are
strict constructionsts and before leave this
slavery question: let me call attention to the fact
that there is large section of the Democratic party
who are such strict constructiOnsts that they deny
the Federal Government had the constitutional
right to pass the present fu sitive slave law
Mr.. SMITH, Of Tennessee. Do | understand my
colleague to say that any recognised part of the
Democratic party at the North resist the execution
OF the fugitive slave law?
Mr. ZoLLICOFFER cite the late distinguished
gentleman from Massachusetts,, Robert Rantol, j.
formerly mber Of this House.
Mr.. SMITH Mr.. Rantuol Was al Abol ionist, aud
was turned, heels over head, out OF the Baltimore
Convention, in 1852, upon that very account
Mr.. ZoLLICOFFER. l will give my colleague
smother instance, not of Northern man but a
Southern man, | mean the present Secretary Of
War, who is reported As saying, in a published
speech, that "when any State in the Union shah
choose to set aside the fugitive savej law, it il
1Oithin our sovereignty and beyond our poDer." And
further to have said that in such contingency II
tor WH neUer give my Dote 10 ertend the IF the
Federal pOVer for her cOerciOn."" Sucn IS tue
tent to which strict construction is carried in the
Democratic patyl
Now, as we have seen there is no unity of senti-
ment among Democrats upon slavery questions
where do We discover the unity? l. it to be found
in questions relating the disposition Of the pub
lie lands? Look at the votes taken in this Hall
and you will find that the Democratic members,
have been divided upon every of land ques
ton Isit upon improvement OF rivers aud har
bOrs?-upon the homestead bs!-upOn the Pa.
cifc rOsd?-or any other leading subject of legsla-
ton? The same contrarirty OF position is found
among Democratic members in all 1t was but the
other day that the Democratic member from Vir
ginia Mr. Letcher read strict construction
lecture upon the Pacific railroad and yet my col
league is in favor of that measure.
In regard to internal improvements, let me ask
my colleague whether he did not vote for the great
river and harbor bill Of last Congress, which was
passed by large majority in a House having
Democratic majority of eighty-which also passed
Democratic Senate, but was vetoed by the Pres
dent upon the ground that it was unconstituriouag
Mr.. SMITH | did vote for il, and should vote
for it again; aud do not look to the President TO
form opinions for me upon constitutional questions
Mr. ZoLLIcoFFER. Ny argument is thus illustrat
ed that there has been no unity Of opinion or ac-
ton among Democrats. either upon the slavery
question any other unless it j. that unity which
holds together a body OF men of diverse and ex.
IRENE opinions for The sake Of party success.
Its proper 20 say, that while | belong TO the
American party, and am ardent American. for rea.
cons which have assigned to my constituents, and
am ready 10 assign on all proper occasions there
are those who are sail 10 belong TO the Am, rcan
Know Nothing party from whom differ so widely
upon slavery questions, and upon other questions
that can have no political utilization with them.
There were some such for time IN the National
Council at Philadelphia, and very plainly so de-
cared to them. Il IS RICH, and proper that We
should be candid upon such matters; aud think
my coleagu, has fallen into very great error in
propagatiug the idea the other cay, snd in his
speech year sgo-ani as he is in the habit Of do
ing-that the Democracy is unit in elementary
principles, OF sound national materials, and ought
to be securely trusted by the patriotic masses who
would guard and preserve the Consultation aud the
Union. 1t is great iallacy, sir.
The Americans have nominated sound national
men for President aud Vice President Who will
faithfully regard the constitutional rights Of every
section Of the Union Ny colleague says that On.
less the South can unite aud defend those men In
the North who stand by the guarantees Of the con
sttution, Tbs UHioR Is gone. Why, then, should
not Union-loving men 10 the South at oCce unite
upon hiilard Fillmore! Ny colleague says the
only effect OF his nomination is 20 divide the