The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-09-16


fut this being done, and being legal the President
esteemed II best to submit it approvngly 10 Congress
"THis was grave error aid ''btt his bling done
are istintes where the ref renee s just muddy as
those before cited 1t Is impossible TO discover what
these is-ss refer to- Upon the suppositon that they
the partial submission to the people aforesaid
told in the first of these extracts that every who Is
sane must admit 1t grave error mat
ter Of Juee and in the second that it yet illegal
proceeding If IL was s,aI and proper transaction in
! ITSELF why should we conclude that the men wes
mad on dishonest who supported it He proceeds:
ut LII so doing had he the sanction of Al Of his hest
hiends Of the best and oldest friends of the pan ~
No one viii answer afirnatyey who was in Washington
at the time, and attentive observer of all that was
then said and done." 80
Another assumption, and mere opinion, The course Of
nine -tenths of the democratic senators and reprcscn
tives, for example, might possibly Justify different view
OF the ,ft, s fa M
One Of ths ii6st udicrous examples of Mr. Johnson's
apparently utter carelessness "a expressing himself b The
next sentence, as follows m SKA nF.4 Ea
That the President acted conscientiousy and ps he
believed for the BEST have doubt but very many
of his ruest and fastest friends entertained different
opinion" l.N ta #,ts@ a.ega sa
Mr. johnson ent ,rtars no doubt That the President
was cosclehtious = but vey many of his best friends
sentertaned different opinion. As to what Obviously
the meaning of this is that the Presidents friends
differed upon the point chehT not h' had aefd cons
~6ouy r. and yet it is hardly to be presumed that Mr..
johnson meant such an inference TO DC drawn Again
when it had been determined TO submit Iocompton to
Congress- 'na and pretty general acquescence In the
measure given from desire to have q matter 80
fruitful Of mschevous uncasness in the country settled
and from conviction that in the way proposed IT could
be settled And present reason for doubling the
accuracy Of this Belief tte ~
IT. now, the passage of Lecompton would have settled
the whole difficulty, and Mr. Johnson did not doubt
that it would why its supporters characterized by
Mr. johnson .';rsane, ''dishonest,' deceived
men, and Lecompton itself ''tmsy rretext2" Or
how could he say of proceeding thus admitted to have
been fruitful of good that 'it measure, from its
very nature of such Temporary duration aud nhu-
enee that its erection into test of party alty would
be ''unmixcd party yrenny and 'the very essence Of
follyY"
In further explanation Of the sainess' of applying
party test he wishes to know whether it is to be APP
piled to those democrats who doubted the proprety Of
repeating the "Mssouri restriction, and says, '1hese
are r Iknee, to be found South well North and
amongst these doubtless be ranged the President
himself "
And further
Who believes had he at that period been in the egs
atve councils of the naon that he would have given
that his supportp certainly believe it
than that had been there, southern am, not
blindy hope, but strongly and afectonately, with
equal attachment to the other States 1t would have
ceived my support E
Now take leave to say that this assertion concern
ing the President is hardly which Mr. johnson is
titled to make, without producing evidence of its
correctness Jf not very much mistaken, the pre-
sumption, at least is the other way for VIC have
remembrance of letter written by Mr.. Buchanan IN
which he thoroughly approved the Kansas Nebraska ae
and everybody knows that he warmly sustained it in his
inaugural he has done every occasion on which he
has since mentioned the subject. The other ntimaon
made above that Mr.. johnson himself would have OPP
posed the repeal of the missouri restriction, is
which that gentleman has undoubted right to make
but it will be not tho less surprising to his friends and t,
all who known and who has not his in ref
erence to that repeal for is very generally understood
I'm tba nra1S Mr. irt.
an cip to maintain the of the master, and to
insist upon the dogma that the Missouri restriction
rncoaaiaioatl The Court wisely decided in its opin
ion and no has received credit for that decision
than Mr.. johnson himself We submit it is somewhat
singular to hear him intimate that he would have
opposed the repeal of restriction which, by the force of
his volunteered augmentation, he had proved was
unconstitutional and unjust f5s4 8 sts sta{
There is yet another nconscqucnce in this letter. not
less glarng than the Others lis general drift is to foster
the impression that all who not with Mr. Douglas
in the pending contest necessarily against him. and in
favor of Lincoln which, satisfied, no statement
can be more unfair unjust. Why may not man be
true democrat in Illinois and yet opposed to Mr. Doug
lass return to the Senate Neither Mr.. Douglas nor
any other man has tho right, by his act to
make himself the candidate of the party for that position
That candidate is to be made by the democratic members
who shall be elected to the legislature of Illinois, and it
is certainly in accordance with political ethics and
practice to this time, that until those members shall
make choice Of candidate, erey ds@ rat in Illinois my
hare his preference 1t is question which the party
there must settle for ITSELF and on which no one man. by
his personal authority has right to command away
all differences of opinion. We should call such an
sumption of authority ''unmixed party tyranny, in
deed and satisfied that, in this instance, it will
turn out to have been ''the very of folly
This brief review of letter which has attracted much
attention while noting the strangely loose style of its
language will also to indicate the not less remark
ably inconsderate in which its cphets are APP
piled and its conclusions drawn The almost utter want
Of precision of statement of cleaness of reference of
which nearly every sentence affords examples and the
singular nconcusivenes Of nearly every inference sought
to be made constitute 1t rather curious production
coming from gentleman of Mr.. Johnsons emnence
and would have rendered it glorious treat for CoBBEr
But cannot that the of the letter.
the positions of the writer the conclusions he would
rive at any clearer than the language the argumen
taton in which he has sought to convey them Wecanno
suppose that Mr. johnson opposed to the Kansas Nebras
a b because he approves its principles expounded by
Mr. Douglas, and argued before the Supreme Court that
the " Missouri restriction unconstitutional yet he
intmates he would have voted against that bill We
hardly suppose him hostile to the Supreme Court
decision yet the ntimation might give ground for
such inference. He says the Lecompton constitution
legal, and yet denounccs it - injustice He
says would have settled the question: and yet rovles ii
of madness. He has doubt its effects
would have been excellent, and yet in its successive
stages it was " folly and himsy prctext" He has
doubt the President a Conscientious but he
leaves him in the company of whom he represents
either knayes FOOLS participant in their schemes
He clearly shows that Lecompton wrong bccause il
right and would have been sevicoable and that the
President wrong because he had the law on his sde
and was acting honestly The letter. therefore while
cvdencng the utmost carelcssncss and sovenness of
accompjshes the most c,nsun,