Clarksville chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1857-1865, 1859-03-18
pa- It is surprising to see how clearly

VIZ IL 10 surprising " SEC Nv" CledIiy
some southern democratic leaders can
perceive the pernicious, effects of false
doctrines after those effects are developed,
and how candidly they can tell the truth
on the subject, yet adhere, with wilful
pcrtinacity to the party which advocates
them. The Charleston Ne,os, democratic,
makes the following remark:
Douglass and Glass; although democrats,
have done the South more injury than all
other men-more than the whole array of
the Aboltionists ever could do. They
have given effect to anti.slavery under
specious aud treacherous guises.
So they have. Yet when the wings de-
nounced the Nicholson letter as giving "ef-
feet to anti slavery under specious and trea-
cherous guises, the whole locofoco press of
theSouth denounced the wings as enemies to
southern institutions and allies of aboli-
tionism. When Douglass brought forward
his Nebraska ansas bill--another of the
"specious and treachcrous guises" to give
effect to anti-slavery, many southern wings
and Americans exposed the trick, and, for
their pains, we're denounced as allies of
abolitienism But when Cass acknow-
logged the truth of the wing version of
his Nicholson letter, southern democracy
chung as closely to him, for the sake of
party, as though he had not 'given effect
to anti. slavcry, under specious and treach,
erous guises." And after Douglass had
proclaimed his Nebraska bill better free
soil measure than the Wilmot proviso-
even after he had openly taught the
doctrine of squatter sovereignty, all over
Illinois, from Carlo to New Orleans
southern democrats greeted him with
demonstrations of the most cordial APP
proval, and, as in the case Of Cass, were
eager, in return for his "specious and
treacherous guiscs, to elevate him to the
Presidency.
Have Cass and Douglass changed their
opinions, or reformed their actions? BY
no means. Yet southern locofocos claim
them as brothers, and assign them the APP.
pellation of National, which can not be
true unless the southern wing has been
equally engaged in giving "effect to anti
slavery under specious and treacherous
guises )" and that this latter suppositiou
is correct, is demonstrated by the fact
hat nd
pudiated, but retained in full fellowship
as democrats in good standing. But why
throw the blame upon them altogether
Has there been a solitary concession t.
anti-slavery that has not received thu
assent, if not the direct co-peration, o
southern locofocos? Point to an instanc,
to the contrary 1t is needless to argu,
that the southern wing is opposed t.
squatter sovereignty, and thereby attemp
to exculpatc that faction. The locofoco
Of the South, are in full aud compiled
alliance with Douglass, Cass and their fol
lowers, and are, therefore, as much t,
blame for the practical effect of squatte
sovereignty as if they had originated, ant
enforced it. So it is with every theor,
and measure inimical to slavery that hay
been taught and practiced by the democrat
of the North The two wings have eve
acted together in clecting a locofoco feder
al Administration, and for the effects tina
have followed, tho southern faction is a
much to blame as the northern. Tha
Hthis is true, we cite the case of the Charles
ton Ners which sees and confesses the in
iquity Of Cuss and Douglass, yet donounce,
and refuses to act with, the party that ha
opposed and exposed that iniquity, an
u labored to hurl from power, the men VIII
"hsve given etSot TO anti-slavery undo
spocious and troa?herous guises." Sue
iuconsistency-to use no harsher teri
engendcrs contempt.