Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1857-05-19
- PnLITICAL UNI0N OF No SOUTH, :

THE POLITICAL UNION OF THE SOUTH
We had hoped that the result Of the late PresideD-
tial election would teach the organs Of Southern
Know Nothingism the difference between "union
Of the South for the sake Of the Union, and I'M
ion Of the South for the sake Of disunion. The
Banner, however, seems to have derived no useful
lesson from that contest Its editor wifuly or ig-
norantly persists in the error Of atributing to the
democratic party the design of establishing ''souh-
ern party whose "policy is the initiatory step to
dissolution Of the Union. This is the same error
which marked the course Of the Know Nothing or
eans and speakers in the late canvass. The Union
was then in imminent peril because of the fOrma-
ton Of sectional party at the North, whose object
was to withhold from the South the rights guaranteed
70 its people bv the Constitution. 1t was then
iest that if there any material division in the
South the Northern sectional party would triumph,
and no sane man could doubt that such a triumph
would be "the initiatory step the dissolution OF
the Union" To avoid this perilOus result the
Democratic party Of the South was appealed to by
the friends Of the Union in every section Of the con-
federacy to stand united as one on the side Of
the constitutional rights Of the South National
men, as well at the North as at the South, saw that
the salvation Of the Union could be secured only by
o substantial union Of the South. Hence, the
union Of the South for the sake Of the Union" be-
came the prevailing sentiment Of national men
throughout the country. It was not a union of the
South for the purpose Of promoting Southern inter-
ests at the expense Of Northern interests, but for
the purpose of resisting at the ballot box the fur
Their aggression Of Northern sectionalism and Of
establishing on permanent grounds the constitution
al rights Of the South. The South with the excep-
ton of one State) stood together Ike band Of
brothers, and thus, by the cooperation Of few Of
the Northern States averted the threatened eatastrO
phe and vindicated the wisdom and patriotism Of
the policy of the democracy.
During that contest the Banner could not, or
would not, comprehend the democratic policy of
union Of the South but either blindy perversely
persisted in disappearing the object of the dem
oeratie party charging it with Interior sectional and
disunion designs, and aboring to create divisions
and discussions in the South by urging the election
Of candidate whose main strength was in the South
and every vote cast thence for whom only increased
the chances Of success of the Northern sectional
candidate. We regret to observe that the editor of
the Banner is still afflicted with the same incapacity
either to see or TO acknowledge the Importance of
united South. Whilst he makes loud professions of
devotion to the Union, his policy new, it du
ring the late Presidential canvass, is exactly that
best calculated to encourage Northern secionalism
by producing division in the South. The people Of
the South may afford to disagree on most political
questions but on that which involves the enjoyment
Of their constitutional rights connected with the
institution Of slavery, they cannot disagree without
peril, and whoever suggests or advocates policy
whose tendency is disagreement on that subject,
takes the initiatory step to a dissolution Of the
Union. The Banner takes that step just often as
it seeks to make the impression that the democracy
Of the South advocate cordial union Of the South
for the mere purpose Of forming sectional Southern
party Such misrepresentation, as often as made,
are seized upon by such organs of the North the
Tribune and Post and paraded proof against the
nationality Of Southern democracy. The Banner in
this way becomes responsible for the false impress
sions made on the northern mind and deserves to be
rebuked by southern men as an indirect ally Of
northern sectionalism.
These remarks are suggested by a recent article
in the Banner commenting toast given by Judge
Nicholson at the late editorial dinner at Memphis,
during the late railroad jubilee which took place in
that city. The company was composed Of forty or
fifty representatives Of the press, some democrats,
some old-line wings, and some Americans, from six
or eight Southern States. Judge Nicholson was
called on to respond to a sentiment which referred
10 the completion of the railroad connection through
Southern territory, between the Atlantic and the
Mississippi. After auuding briefly to the impOr-
lance of the connection as a means Of promoting a
more cordial union socially, commercially and po-
Iticay, between the people Of the South, he point
ed out its value in national point Of view as pro-
noting more cordial union between the North and
the South, and closed by proposing the following
sentiment:
50 The Federal JIqi0H-Its permanency can be best
secured by a cordial union, socially, commercially
and politically, Of the Southern States"
The BqHner discovers disuniOn lurking under this
sentiment and takes the liberty Of aaliesing the
words "and politically" by way of giving color to
its suspicion. We sincerely regret that our cOtem-
porary INDUCES so morbid sensitiveness in regard
to political union Of the Southern States. We had
reason to know that he was heretofore opposed to
such union but we did hope that after the glorious
union Of the South which took place in November,
1856 he would be less rash in advocating the dsun5H
Of the South a remedy for preserving the federal
Union. The difference between the Banner and
Judge Nicholson is simply this Judge Nicholson
guided by experience as well as reason, believes
that so long as the South is united to its cOnstu-
tiona rights it will always have sufficient co-opera-
ton from the national men of the North to save the
federal Union The Banner dissents from this
proposition, and Of course must maintain that the
best way to preserve the federal Union is to keep
the Southern States divided and disunited as to their
constitutional rights. With all proper Difference to
the wisdom and patriotism Of our know-nOthing CO.
temporary, we think Judge NichOlson's remedy for
preserving the Union much more reliable than his
own.
But the Banner is not more unfortunate in its con-
sruction of Judge Nchosons toast than it is in its
illusions to his connection with the Nashville Con-
vention which met in this city in 1850 It so hap
mems that Judge Nicholson was an original advocate
of the Compromise Measures Of 1850, and in the
Nashville Convention, as a uRmber Of the committee
on resolutions, opposed the proposition to recon-
mend the Missouri line as an uibRatua, and advo-
Gated the Compromise of 1850, as containing the
true principle for final adjustment Of the slavery
question. His views on that subject were published
afterthe adiomumentof the Convention, and we find
in them perfect coincidence with the principles