Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1856-05-31
From the Fayetteville Observer.

49, From the Fayetteville Observer +
Il RocKINaHAN, 10th May, 1866. q
Editors of the OIssroer It is evident that the
Editor of the Argus alluded to soma body, when ne
characterized certain persons who claimed to De OLD
line Wings, who were endeavoring as such IN lnlure
and traitors always" The denunciation is in gen
erul terms, to be sure but many persons in this
section of country, and in yours too, learn have
supposed that Mr. Cameron intended to include the
undersigned in the category Of traitors" whom he
has denounced The Editor may probably suppose
it vanity, when say that have never had q doubt
that the piece was aimed at me- in part if not entire
w. As think so, ask for the use of your col
umns for Standardization and to let my friends IN
this county and elsewhere know what position &C.
cupy in regard to the politics of the present day.
Outside of this county, it is, presume, OF no con,
have many friends who have heretofore given me
their confidence, and which confidence have never
betrayed who have right to know what my opin-
ions are. The reasons for these opinions, shall
probably take another means of giving them.
In 1874 voted for the first time, and the vote
was cast for Gov. Graham against Col Hoke. Since
then, have steadily voted for the candidates Of the
Wing Party. never supported any other candi-
dates, until the last Congressional election, when
gave my aid to Mr.. Reid the candidate of the party
to which the Argus now belongs. have aso as
the Editor well knows been five times Wing MEM
ty of Richmond. As such, I have attempted to
discharge, with rational loyalty" my duty to
those who chose as their representative. acted
always independently, as the Journals will show,
and thus believe secured the confidence OF moder.
ate men, both in the Legislature and out OF It. AT
all events the good people whose agent was, nave
more than once expressed their satisfaction ota y
"loyalty" to their principles and fathfuness to r
interests, in a way to make me feel proud CT my
constituents. They never did regard me as trail
tor" and they do not now. The Argus has no
power to make them think thus harshly OF me-
"Secessionists in 1851. and traitors always" In
1851 it is we'll known differed from many OF those
with whom it was my pleasure generally to act, in
regard to the nature Of our Government. did not
think that the resistance of State such, to the
General Government, was of the same character as
the resistance of portion of the people OF State
to the authorities of the State. In other words, al
though did not go to the extent that many per-
sons did, in my notions of State Rights, class
ed as "secessionist," and denounced as an enemy
to the peace of the Union and the integrity Of the
Constitution. l denied it. l stated over and over
again. that the charge of disunion brought against
me, was false, by whomsoever made. say so now
l always was, and am now, as true friend to the
Constitution of the United States and, therefore, to
that Union which it made, as any man can be. But
the Argus says l am traitor" l. scorn the
charge, and hurl it in his teeth! " traitor !!
Who is he that dares to apply the word traitor"
to those who are at least his equals? Is he a man
who has changed his principles? Has not
the Editor himself opposed Internal Improvements
Did he not take that position before the people of
Richmond county in 1852? Did not the Argus Edl-
tor get his Southern blood warmed up when he Is
sued prospectus to publish paper in South Caro-
lima Did he hot quit the Wing Party, simply De-
cause it did not run candidate for Congress IN
District containing 5000 Democratic majority
,ohere but one Wing had eoer seriously contested?
There is but one charge in the characteristic ar
tice to which ailude, which is true, and that is
that am opposed to the American Party. There
is no doubt Of that. shall not support the nomi-
nees of the Party, unless believe them most likely
to defeat the Black Republicans. Then, objectona'
Bile as the position of the party is, would not hesi-
tate to support them. l regard the rights Of the
South paramount to every thing else, and never
will support a party which does not, in my opinion,
boldly stand up for the guarantees of the Constitu'
tion and thus pledge itself to protect the section in
which live. And yet, do not claim to be bet
ter friend of the South than many who differ from
me- have not questioned their honesty, and will
not do so. have been and am believer in that
part of the Kansas Nebraska bill which leaves the
people free to mould their domestic institutions as
may please them; and announced in the last House
of Commons that would support no man for Uni.
ted States Senator who was opposed to it. l voted
for Messrs. Badger and BaTringer, who were known
to be its friends. The platform Gf it has one) OF
the American Party denounces the repeal OF the
Missouri Compromise, and therefore places the party
in opposition to the Kansas bill for it is well
known that the two are Incompatible For that rea-
son, l cannot 60 for Fillmore and Donelson. l wiA
not denounce President Pierce for signing a bill
schich reaored odious statute from the books,
ohereby tout injustice aoas done to the South.
l cannot but oppose party which, though claim.
ing to be NATIONAL has not Representative in Con-
gress from the North (no not one-not even the
great Fuler,) who preferred the election of Gov.
plyc thn p1ocl
them States denounced the Kansas BILL and opposed
the admission Of new States into the Union whose
Constitutions tolerate slavery. cannot aid in the
success Of party, at the North, which calls upon
to defend it against the Irish and the Roman
Catholics, ohle 1t IS soarring my rights. If they
can't let US alone, we, who not troubled with
Foreigners and Romanists, ought to allow them to
defend themselves cannot support party which
is ant-Romanism in North Carolina, and not anti.
Romanism in Virginia, South Carolina and Louis.
iana cannot support party which joins with
IL. <.~A o Cz-N