Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1857-07-17
THE RICHMOND ENQUIRER
FRIDAY MORNING., JULY H. 80
THE DUTY OF THE DEMoCNAoi.

FRlDAY MORNING, july H' So
u DuTY OF THE DEMOCRACY.
T. :. .;,o Gov ,hs friends Of the Administration "
enquire, a. far as may be, into Tie nature u oNe
I-o....;,;,, n,w developing in our midst, anu
ths cause of which nothing has yet uahSP''eu u'
close. 1t may be Of Importance to know whe'"'i
sach opposition is the result OF a preconcer'eu organ
,ixa,ion, or whether it is employed only by soine '"u.
yiduals, to effect an org anizatioD, secret or aVo"eu'
MANY circumstances indicate that the opposi''on"
the work Of a faction or q conclave, and all u : Z"
cumstauces eyince something more than partial nos
tility or temporary Irritation. This is mostly appa
rspt in the tone adopted by some organs OF the o"u'''
ern press, and which commenced almost F." 'o
event of tho Presidents inauguration
permitted to attribute this hostility to any elect pro-
dused by the principles set forth III 'e
dress. Those principles were al ones
to be generally satisfactory ~ the pemocraoS y | '"e
whole country; aud if in any case, the enumeration u
a nripciple was unsatisfactory, the dissenting members
of the party seemed resolved 10 await the event o
soms practical issue, when they would be enabled 10
Judge more accurately as to the necessity, or the ex-
tent, of sctual collision with a Democratic Executive.
But the opposition to Which we refer, seems TO
evidence the existence, rather than the nature Of
some underlined policy in which it's originates.
Clsmors against the Presidents official aPpolntees;
disinesnuous Misrepresentation Of his general poiicy
of official appointment; uncalled for vindlca'ohs Vi
the administration on charges hypotheslsed oy the
indicators themselves; gratuitous expressions OF
confidence in the Presidents fidelity, coupled with
a show of suspicion as if unwillngiy enter'aineu'
such has been the mode of guerilla attack, to which
the President has boon subjected. This is not bold
nor direct enough for an opposition OF principle. 1t
wants the vigor of faith which the advocacy OF a
nrincipls infuses. 1t betrays an opposition instituted
for a concealed purpose, which aims evasively to &C.
complish it's end, by straining at every immaterlal
point on which it is possible TO hang a doubt.
There is one infallible test, which discloses this
species of opposition, and that is the standard OF con-
sistency. Its application to the present cutlery against
the proposed reference OF the Constitution OF Kansas
TO popular ratification, and to the invectives directed
against the Governor Of Kansas, discloses no ord'na'
ny variance between the present professions and the
past course Of their authors.
Those politicians, foremost in the present opposl'
ton, who arrogate to themselves the sole guardian
ship of Southern interests, and the exclusive eSposi'
tion Of the principles of Southern Democracy, found
no difficulty in accepting aud endorsing the Kansas
Nebraska bill, pure and simple, without change or
exception.
The Kansas Nebraska bill was regarded. then as
now, as declsratory Of the unrestralned right OF the
people Of each Territory. TO prescribe the organic
law under which the Territory should be admitted a.
a State, in such manner that the form Of Constitution
should be adapted to the wishes OF tue sovereign
people, Immediately upon its proclamation as the su
preme law; that each people, about to become a
sovereign people, should be left to devise for them
selves the mode in which they should choose to e1er'
else thereafter tho attribute of perfect sovereignty
with which they were to be invested.
Such is the simplest statement Of the issue, en-
yeloped though it has been, in discussions where the
terms Imperfect sovereignty" "incipient soVer-
~eiputy,' and " squatter sovereignty " followed eacl,
other in a circle Of confusion.
This was adopted as the principle best promoting
tue rights and interests Of the territories themselves,
aud the best guaranty Of the rights Of all the States
It was for the assertion of thi, principle that the con
travening enactments Of the Missouri Compromise
were repealed. And since the decision given in til.
bred Scott case, the broad and general assertion Of
this principle, by Legislative sanction, is the only Ak
-'ynr arr ftGs;s i nc Sf III: *. NJ tSa ifsssl"t ssh fs g" q ff lincoln /
stitutionslity, or a simple legislative repeal, applied
TO the Missouri Compromise act, would in itself have
been sufficient to revive in full vigor, within the ter
~ritories Of Kansas and Nebraska, n municipal law
constituted for the protection Of slave property-tle
old law of French Louisiana. We have obtained
both the judicial sentence and the legislative act, and
yet We have failed to secure the consequent revival
OF the Louisiana law. And this Is the result Of q
,Au,p.~ oNka.uol - tta Eonuon N.Ironln ri IL
self, which reads thus:
provided, That nothing herein contained shall be
construed to revive or put in force any law or regula.
ton which may have existed prior to the act of sixth
March, eighteen hundred and twenty, either protect
ing, establishing, prohibiting or abolishing slavery"
Here is Legislative enactment directly interfering
TO deprive slave property-South as well as North Of
the line Of 36' 3U-of pre.existing legal projections;
aud this embodied in a statute which specifically de-
mics the competency OF Congress to lcgislate for or
against slavery in a territory; thus ~palpably render.
ing the act contradictory in its provisions, making a
non. Intervention measure intervene to Disseminate be-
tween slave property and other property--invidiously
to tue former.
And yet, this provision was the work Of Southern
men. The governmental measure which par excel
ience now tends to prevent the introduction Of slave
property into Kansas, and thus deprives tho South of
the benefit which otherwise would have resulted imme-
diately from the decision in the bred Scott case, was
engrafted on the Kansas. Nebraska bill by a motion
originating with the South aud sustained by South
ern votes. 1t will DO remembered that the objection
on the part Of the North was urged TO a repeal Of the
act of 1870; that such a repeal would revive the al.
cient law of Louisiana for the protection OF slave
,-o,4t, NOtxn A.. ,,oa I.o,-lt ,.n,ast 90, fN,n
gress by a Northern member. Southern gentlemen
faltered in their efforts for All unconditional repeal Of
the Missouri Compromise act-faltered and rstreated.
A Senator from the South, Mr.. Badger, Of North Ca,
rolina, proposed the amendment embodied in
the proviso above cited. Southern Democrats
did not hesitate to adopt the suggestion Of a
leader, whose political antecedcnts were certain.
iy not such as to anoint him the chosen guar
dian of State rights or sectional rights, for the sole
purpose Of conciliating Northern votes, by the repeal
of a law instituted for the protection of Southern pro
perty. This was too grave a concession for Southern
men to yield for such n consideration; 80 important,
indeed, that any Southern msn might we'll have been
excused for refusing his adherence to the entire mea
sure, with such a proviso annexed. One Southern
Democrat, u representative from Virginia. did 40 re.
fuse; and for such refusal. narrowly escaped political
msrtyrdom at the hands of the same men who now
deprecate any assurance or profession which, acct.
dentally even, tends TO conciliate Northern concur.
renee.
1t might be well for those gentlemen who now
seek to establish their own competency for the pre-.
servation of Southern rights and the championship of
Southern Democracy, by branding Governor Walker
with disloyalty, and by seeking to cast suspicion on
the conduct Of the Administration, to reflect how far
they have compromised themselves by a course in.
inical 10 the interests Of the pro-slavery cause in
Kansas.