Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1857-06-19
THE WILMINGTON JOURNAL.
70I7 =H1INcToN. N. O.. FRIDAY. JUNE 10. 1857.

dav does US justice IN It's article headed Clrcum-
stances alter Cases." We cannot see that any dis
crepancy or inconsistency exists between our course
towards the administration of Mr. Fillmore and that
of Mr.. Pierce in connection with Filibustering.
We are now-we were then, and trust we always
shall be-favorable to the fair and proper enforce
nent of all constitutional laws, enacted by proper
authority The Neutrality Laws of the United States
may be nexpedient, Or they may not be-many other
laws may stand in the same category, but we do not
know that any competent jurist has even minated,
in the most remote degree, any opinion adverse to
the constitutionality of these laws law, to be a
law at all, must be thing of binding authority,
otherwise it is mere advice vague expression of
opinion, to be respected condemned, interest or
caprice may dictate. 1t is true that some laws pass
into desuetude, and are too often regarded as dead
letters, and in connection with these, species Of
tyranny may be exercised, approaching in character
that guarded against by the provision Of the Federal
Constitution, forbdding the enactment of ex post faco
laws-that is, OF laws making that penal offence
which was not penal offence at the time when the
act was done.
Now, then, what we chiefly objected 10 in MIR.
Fllmores course with reference 10 the Pampero, the
steamer which carried the Lopez expedition against
Cuba was that while Mr. Fillmore talked against the
fitting out Of expeditions while the Pampero was
getting ready and while her doomed five hundred
were sailing he did nothing else, and they led
to believe that it was all talk. But when these men
had gone when they were in the lions den, from
which nothing but the additional aid upon which
they confdentially calculated could them from
inevitable destruction, then Mr.. Fillmore Acted
But one result could have been anticipated-that
result with which we are all familiar. One fourth of
the force that employed to prevent succo going
hundred from placing themselves in position which
the too late vigilance of Mr.. Filmores administra
ton rendered one OF death. We did not then, we
do not now, accuse Mr.. Fillmore of deliberate COM
pcity in design to bsray these unfortunate men,
We merely assert that he was guilty OF blunder,
carrying with it all the consequences and much Of
the odium of deliberate crime.
Again, in regard TO the Sonora or nicaragua ex.
petitions Of Mr.. Walker, there is this in the
of Mr. Pierce different from that of Mr.. Fillmore in
the Pampero case. There was no letting Walker
and few men get off with a mere verbal " don't
you do it," and then rigid blockade to prevent any
reinforcements getting out, that the little install
ment might fall inevitable sacrifice. The course
was uniform. Without means and appliances, not at
the disposal OF the authorities it failed of success
with active agents. and the assistance of speculativey
interested steamboat owners, men could 20 at any
time as passengers down the coast and no vigilance
could prevent them These speculative steamboat
parties fell out with MIR. Walker, who, it is said,
attributes most of his reverses to Vanderbilt and his
accessory Transit Company.
Over and over again steamers were stopped at New
York and San Francisco but, so we'll was the matter
arranged, that little nothing could be DONE and
finally the efforts were relaxed, in view of their in.
efficiency 1t cannot be said that Walker was at one
time allowed to get to Nicaragua through the nom
action Of the authorities, and at another starved out
and done 10 death for want of support, through the
Over.action or superlatve vigilance of the au-
thorites There have been no scenes to match the
contrast of the open sailing of the Pampero with poor
old Lopez and his five hundred, compared with the
fercely active blockade of Round Island some time
after.
We really are unable 10 see wherein we violate
the doctrine of the homely proverb which afirms
that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the
gander" from the simple fact that the cases are not
parallel.
Naturally, we all sympathise, to some extent, witt
those who 60 out from among US and are fighting
against men Of another tongue and another race, who
hate them because of their being Americans, but i
it was ground for diplomatic rupture with Grea
Britain that certain of her officials were implicated il
the raising of men on our shores 10 fight her battles
in the Crmea, how is the law of the case diffaren
when the government or what claims TO be the gov
eminent, of another. foreign power openly avows
through its agents. the purpose of raising troops il
the United States to fight the battles of that othe
foreign government in Central America!
The supremacy of law, the sacredness of our ma
ional soil, are both involved in this question: ani
neither of Them can be maintained unless public
opinion takes the matter in hand It is not popular
we know, to argue thus. The extension of American
freedom-the dominance of American influence, ar
all powerful considerations urged the other side
But experience has shown that these are not pro
moted-that Americans are less popular-have fewe
rights and less influence in the States which have
the theatre OF these private wars, now than before
such wars were waged. We would like to see-wt
hope yet to see-the stars and stripes the emblem o.
dominant authority and influence, if not the token o.
actual possession, over every foot of the Central
American States but know that it only obtain
this position through the power and prestige of III.
confederacy. We want 10 see government take suct
a sand-assume position so far advanced, as; viii
satisfy the STRINGS of the national heart which nov
find vent in abortive private and illegal efforts.
They must have had fine tine of it at Charlotte
on the 18th inst, during the continuance of the tor
nado, which visited that place 1t lasted only ter
minutes and vet did damage TO the amount of ahnn