Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1857-11-17

snsta;ninv his reelection. The Governor presents
his views of Governor Walkers conduct, and gives
hS opinion upon the question whether the Constitu'
xon of Kansas should be submitted to the people, Tor
ratification or rejection. His letter speaks TOR Itself
and will be read by all. 1t is needless, therefore, tor
us to call further attention to it.
-. go -
"THE ENQUIRER'S TEST OF DEMOCRACY"
Such is the caption of an article in "The South OF
Yesterday, in which our n~eighbor ingeniously endea'
yors TO convince his readers, that the Enquirer IN
discriminatory Classics among the enemies OF the
Administration, all who dare 10 dissent from Inc
views of the President on any "single point OF poll
cy." "The South most egregiously mistakes our
test of Democracy We do not contend that feal-
Y to party demands an ignominious subserviency OF
the independent opinions of individuals to the police
of auy Administration. Bat We do maintain, that no
Democrat can 80 far forget his allegiance to the prin'
c,ples Of his party, as to deny and attack them, with
ou, a forfeiture OF his faith. 1t is contradictory to
the teachings of experience not less than TO the intel.
lectual organism Of man, to expect such an und's'
turbed unanimity of feeling and exact accordance OF
sentiment in a political party, as 1.-THE South" seems
to intimate the Enquirer" would demand for the pre-
s~ervatiou of the purity of Democracy. And hence
the ~propriety and the practice Of putting forth a new
platform at every Convention for the nomination OF
President. Principles, of course, cannot change
But their liability to be misnterpreted, and conse.
ouently misapplied in their adaptation 20 measures,
renders it important that the party should enter into
the contest understandingly, with a programme OF
policy prescribed. Was not this done at Cincinnati!
Did not the Democratic party proclaim to the world
the principles to which its candidate should ard
would conform! Aud upon the faith of that platform
and the pledges then made, was not james Buchanan
honored With an almost unanimous support from the
Southern Statesl And now we ask "The South" for
an unequivocal answer Has the Admlnistrh-
ton departed from that policy, with reference
to the pursuance Of which, the election OF
Mr.. Buchanan was advocated and Effected
IL go. those Democratic who oppcsei 1t are entitled to
the thank. Of the nation for 80 timely an exercise
of their superior patriotism and sagacity. If not, they
are recreant TO the principles and pledges OF their
party. 1t will not be denied thar the slavery question
was the principal issue 10 the late contest for the Pre-
sidency. The Democratic creed, illustrated in the his.
tory aud impersonated in the presence OF the Demo.
cratic candidate, was accepted by the country as the
surest remedy for ills We were then enduring, and the
best preventive against those that were threatened.
The time had come, when abolitionisIn must be beaten
back, and the republic restored 10 its equilibrium, by
an impartial enforcement of the Constitution, or the
Union must be divided to save the South. Fremont
was defeated, Fillmore WAS forgotten, and Buoha"a"
q chart, according TO which the ship should sail. The
Southern people inspected it, and agreed that all
would be- well as long as II was observed. On the 4'h
of March Mr.. Buchanan took the helm;a and We hold
that those who advocated his election then and oppose
him now, must either prove that he has violated his
pledges to the country by deviatiug from the course
marked out for him by the Cincinnati convention, or
they must expect to ba regarded as factious aud dis
affected Democrats. We concur with 1.-The South
in the general proposition, that "a difference with the
President on a single point Of policy does not involve
an inevitable and absolute hostility to the Admins.
~tra,ion." But when that point of policy pertains di.
rectly and portentously to the slavery question, We
cannot admit that the difference is not seriously signi.
ficant of something more than a mere friendly remon.
STRANGE; and here is the precise point at which 1.-The
South" and ourselves meet. Our neighbor denounces
Walker as an migrate and q traitor, who has usurped
authority to aid in the advancement Of aboli;iOnism.
With little or no intermission he has been heap.
ing upon him epithets of insective for MONTHS
He was long ago convinced that Wslker had forfeited
all claim to the confidence Of the Southern people; and
each new scene in the drama Seems, in itself, to present
TO him undeniable evidence Of the base treachery o.
the principal actor. And yet, the Administration re.
tains Gov. Walker in office. Now we contend that
if Walker has all the while been abusing his preroga-
tives of office, TO further the anti.slavery cause in
Kansas, the Administration has been conniving at this
nefarioas conduct. and should be held responsible.
How "The South can consider Gov. Walker clear
iy convicted of the grave charges it has brought
against him, and, at the same time, acquit Mr.. Buo.
hananan, is a mystery to us. If one is a traitor, the
other has encouraged his treason. And if MIR. Buc.
hansn's course towards the slave States is the "single
would be mere mockery for the same Southern men
who bring against him such a charge. to pretend 10
support his Administration ain the main." He il
either true to the South, or he is not. And as to "a
single point of policy" on which Southern men may
differ from him and still not be hostile to him, it must
be some other point than that on which no is now d.
-ectly and indirectly assaulted.
THE South is positively assured, beyond the
shadow of a doubt, that Governor Walker has inten.
tionally and illegally favored the abolitionists in Kan
sss. Mr.. Buchanan has not removed him notwith-
standing. Does he not then approve bis course7-
Most assuredly. And stil our neighbor would draw a
wide distinction between the two. 1t is iaexplicably
Inconsistent.
'rhe South" must remember that We have repeated
ly declared, that Democrats may and do disapprove
the course Of Gov. Walker, and still stand by MFR
Buchanan with mistaken confidence. Blu, when tina:
disapprobation amounts to an absolute assurance that
Walker has repeatedly demonstrated his fsvoritism for
the abolitionists in his official acts and by usurpation
of authority, we repeat it, We cannot understand how
they can profess friendship for the Administration
"The Enquirer's test of Democracy" is neither
more nor less than a conformity to the principles and
pledges of the party.
THr Richmond "Whig" has repeatedly called our