The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-03-05

Senator Stewards course has been sufficiently
cratic of late to impaIt some little interest to
| the speech be delivered in the Senate on Wed
nesday last on the Kansas question. The indie
| peDdence ofparty which he proclaimed in his
| reply to Senator Hale, and illustrated In his
support of the Army bill, may perhaps have led
| some to expect that new and startling ground
would perhaps be taken on the important ques-
| ton Of the admission of Kansas with the Lee
compton constitution Those, If any such there
were, have by this time perceived their mis-
take. The new speech of the New York Sena-
tor differs in no essential particular so far as
doctrine and idea are concerned. from the
| speeches which he has been delivering on the
topic of slavery for the past ten or twelve
| years. 1t is the same speech, in general terms,
as the one he delivered in Ohio in the Taylor
campaign; as several which he made in the
Scott canvass; and as the Grafton he pronounced
at Detroit and elsewhere in favor of John c. Ere
mont's election to the Presidency. There are new
facts introduced and the history of the slavery
controversy is brought down to the present day.
Kansas is described according to the latest ad-
| and opinions are concerned, the speech u.s. in
matter, manner and shape, very familiar old
| story.
Mr.. Stewards pet theory with regard to the
| two great divisions of this country is that the
South is an oDgarchy, where all the power and
| influence rest in the hands of the slaveholders
and the labQring population are counted as no
Ling while the sIc Meth IN the other hand. Ia
democracy, where every man is the equal of his
| neighbor, and none are before or above the
other. Surely, reflection ought to have by this
time satisfied Mr.. Seward of the folly and super
fciality of this statement. That the South is to
| some extent an oligarchy, that is to say that
| the control of its affairs is In many parts
wholly and generally mostly in the hands of
the landed proprietors, and that persons who
are not owners of land or slaves exercise less
apparent influence than the same class are sup
posed to do here, cannot be we'll denied but
where is the evidence to show that the absence
Of negro slavery In the North excludes the pos
ibility of an olgarchy there also? So far
from oligarchies being excluded, in fact, it
must be abundantly evident to every judicious
ly and helplessly in the hands of oligarches
which are infinitely worse to serve than the
landed proprietors of the South The pri-
vileged class here are not men, but corpora
tions; railway companies, banks, and other
financial institutions, which by the aid
Of their immense means obtain sove-
reign control over the legislature. The theory
lie hiatt e he 81
latures. This is only nominally true. In
many parts Of the North the ruling corporation
| of the State dominates and elects the Legisla-
| ture; where this is not done, ii buys them up
when they are elected. At any rate, il owns
and controls them. 1t is notorious that with
rare exceptions the Legislation of every North
ern State is permanently under the control Of
some moneyed corporation, such as bank or a
railway company; even Congress- recent
events have shown--is not Independent of the
power Of these institutions. They are the
Northern oligarchy. Whether such an oligar-
cby as theirs-based upon money alone-is
happier system to live under than the particu-
lar system of the South, every man of common
sense can judge. One thing is certain: so far
der a system by which he has a lien on the soil,
and is cared for in bad as well as good times
than under one which, looking to no other ends
than immediate profits, naturally leaves him to
starve when 1t ceases to pay to work him. And
Senator Seward would probably find it no easy
task to persuade the Southern laborers that the
| Northern form Of servitude was 80 much the
more desirable condition.
Mr.. Seward considers that the pro slavery
doctrines have killed every party which
ever adopted them; and be deplores
the destruction which he sees impending upon
the present administration and the democratic
party. Mr.. Seward is not precisely the person
who will be expected to burst into tears If ever
| the democratic party should go to pieces His
interest in that party is considered small, and
his sympathy with its fate remarkably slender.
When, therefore he expresses sorrowful concern
for the prospects Of the party. one may well
question his sincerity. The fall Of the demo
cratic party might be the signal for the triumph
Of the party OF which William II. Seward has
been for 80 many years prominent standard
bearer. and whose Presidential candidate he
might prove. Mr. Seward IL not just to himself
when he would lead us to believe that he
mourns over the prospect of that event.
There are other persons in this country whose
interest in the fortunes of the democratic party
s at least as large a. Mr.. Stewards, who differ
with him on this somewhat important crisis in
political affairs; and who, after maturely
weighing the case in all its bearings, have come
to the deliberate conclusion that the admission Of
the, State of Kansas under the Lecompton
constitution will do more for the democratic
party than anything that has happened since
the compromise measures Of 1850 These per-
sons do not disguise from themselves the proba-
bility that many who have hitherto been classed