Daily national Democrat., 1859-01-08

: .
litical knowledge and experience of our cotempo-
rary in expecting it TO understand the force or
significance of the observation, vet we will ven
ture to make it, that parties are not made for men,
but men for parties, that the Democratic party,
at least. recognises no obligation to any man,
however exalted in intellect or position that it
selects its representatives and commands their
services, not to the party, but to the country
that the conflicting asplrants of different mem
bers of the party, so far from affurdiug an evi-
dence OF dscord, give the most conclusive proof
ofharmony upon principle, in the cheerful alacrl-
ty with which all yield their individual preferen-
ces for the good of the whole. Express
We care not how much the Express may
presume, or not presume, upon our "politi-
cal knowledge and experience" but we would
mildly hint to our cotemporary that there is
sometimes such a thing as a mans presuming
altogether too much upon his oca political
knowledge and experience. We like to see
the bump of self esteem pretty large on a
mans head, but there is such thing as its
being altogether too large for the balance of
the organization, causing to the beholder
somew hat painful sense of disproportion AS
to the comparative depths to which either
our cotemporary or ourself have gone in the
vast ocean of political knowledge, to bring
therefrom its hidden gems, our respective
readers and not ourselves are the best Judges.
We pretend to have read something of his.
tory, and to have taken some pains to un-
derstand little of the science of govern
ment, as well as to have had some expert
ence in political affairs, but we are very
willing to acknowledge that our investiga-
tions have led us to very different conclusions
from those entertained by our cotemporary
We think we should have read the history of
the foundation of this government, and studi
ed the principles of its original trainers, to
little purpose, were we to base our doctrines
upon the assumption, land Lecomptonism is
based upon that same) that there is a higher
voice in this government than the voice of
the people. We know of no principle, in
tended by the founders of this republic to be
Incorporated into it, by which the creatures
of the people are to dictate to their political
creators; by which the Congress of the
United States can rob the people of their
sovereignty at the ballot.box, and nullify the
doctrine that all just powers of government
are derived from the consent of the govern
ed We think we understand the difference
between line ofargument which is made up
of pettiioggng technicallties common to
one horse court of justice, (for such is the
Lccompton argument) and that other species
of reasoning which goes down at once into
the pith of original principles, and strips off
the mere husks of legal construction for the
vital substance which is to be found within.
Technicalities might be piled mountain high,
if it were possible to thus pile up cob-webs,
in order to prove to us, for instance that
Kansas ought to have been forced in under
the Lecompton Constitution, and, after il
was all done, we should simply answer that
that instrument icaS yotcd do,cH, By mqjori-
ty Of ten thousand Of tie Sogereign people Of
Kansas, and that that was sufficient for us.
1t never was their act and Geed, and all the
technicalities that We're ever spun out of the
spider brains Of Federalistic theorists with
which to bind down the imperial lion of pop
ular sovereignty, could never make it their act
and decd As to who was to blame or who
was not to blame, in the history of that trans.
action-whether this set of men did one
thing and another set of men did the other
thing-or whether they ought to have
done this thing or that thing and didn't
it all matters nothing beside the plain,
palpable, naked and indisputable FACT,
that the Lecompton Constitution was not the
act and deed of the people of Kansas When
we have found the fact we then apply the
principle, and in this case we find no difficult
ty whatever in doing it.
If the Express is disposed to draw from its
political knowledge and experience" differ
ent conclusions from these it is welcome to
all its political knowledge and all its politi-
cal experience-we want none of it. When,
by any distortion of logic we can be brought
to consent that the people shall be robbed,
in any single instance, of their right to
to speak their sovereign will at the ballot
box, we shall be prepared to advocate mon
archy.
AS to the highsounding talk of the Ex-
press about parties not being made for men,
but men for parties" and all that, nobody
disputes that party can throw man out
of its pale if he abandons its principles and
refuses to come back to them-and that is
precisely what will be done with James the
First of America, if he does not speedily look
to the paths of his feet.