Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1859-05-07
For the Standard

MESsRs. EDITORS: As am an old subscriber and
have not been troublesome in this way heretofore.
hope You will allow me small space in your excel
lent paper for the purpose Of clcitins information
in reference toa matter involvinga question: in which
We, as Southern men, are very deeply interested
My attention has been called to an editorial report
in the Lire GircTe Of the proceedings Of our Con-
grcssional District Convention, held in Fnnklinton
on Thursday last in which it is stated that Mr..
Bledsoe offered the following resolution:
Rtsolred, That We recognize the right Of the
people of all the Territories including Kansas and
Nebraska, acting through the fairly expressed will
of the majority Of actual residents and whenever
the number Of their inhabitants stifcs il, to form
a Constitution, with or without domestic slavery,
and to be admitted into the Union upon terms Of
perfect equality with the other States.
That motion was made to lay it upon the table,
and that. after the voting had commenced. and the
county Of Franklin had voted aye. Mr.. Bc,isoc ask
cd the privilege Of withdrawing II, which privilege
was granted.
The action Of the convention. rs reported in the
Gafe if allowed to pass unexplained Is calculated
to iniure the Democratic party. Mr. Blc,Soc nav
have had good reason for Withdrawing ihc rcsolu-
ton, and the convention may have been influenced
by no improper motive in declining to adopt Il as a
part Of its PLATFORM but their are unknown
to the public.
The action Of the convention. unexplained, places
the Democratic party in attitude ot apparent op
position to the the doctincs Of popular sovereignty
and nonntervention by Congress with slavery in
the Territories, upon which the party, North and
South are almost q unit.
am, therefore, 10th to believe that there was
majority Of the convention opposed to the rc>olu-
ton, but II there was. they certainly dill not reflect
the sentiments Of the Democracy of the district.
If it was important to define the position of the
party upon the questions of distribution the tariff
internal improvements by the general government,
and Cuba, it seems to me equally important in view
Of the fact that all in favor If the acquisition
Of Cuba to assert the right Of North Carolnans to
go to Cuba after We acquire it. and take with them.
and hold, under the Constitution of the United
States any kind Of property they choose, until
Cuba shall he admitted into the Union as . sovcr-
eign State.
If understand the resolution II presents no new
question. but simply cnuncatcs the great doctrines
| Of popular sovereignty. and non-intcrvcntion nv
Congress with slavery in the Territories, which
were the basis Of the Compromise acts Of 1850 /;
endorsed by the national Democratic and Wing Con.
ventons Of 1852; embodied in the Kansas Nebraska
act Of 1851 incorporated into the Democratic plat.
form by the Cincinnati Convention in 1856. in the
precise language Of the resolution offered by Mr..
Blcdsoe; and upon which Mr.. Buchanan and every
Democratic Governor and member Of Congress
North and South, since 1856. was elected. Had
that resolution have been stricken from the plat.
form. Mr. Buchanan could not, as You very well
know have carried single southern State. II these
things be true why was not the resolution adopted!
Why was it withdrawn? Arc there those in ouI
ranks, in this district, who are willing to subordin
ate the rights Of slave owners to the success Of the
party? Has the time arrived when motives Of poll
cy alone sufficient to prevent Convention o.
trcts in the State, from asserting the rights o
Southern men in our common Territories?
l have no fear that the Democratic party vii
abandon any Of the great cardinal principles which
have thus far held it together and upon which tn,
government has been so successfully administered
but eternal vigilence is the price Of liberty, an.
the people have right to demand the reasons which
control the actions Of their agents. And as ! Sc
that Mr. Holden was delegate to the Convention
and know that he fully understands and general,
expresses the views Of the Democracy Of the dstrc
and of the State, hope he will explain to us VIII,
it was that the resolution was not adopted but with
drawn. His attention will very much ohligc
ONE OF THE PEOPLE
Nay Sd, 1859.
We know our correspondent to be good Dcmt
cra and we have no hesitation, therefore, in reply
ing to his questions.
Our opinion is that the resolution referred to me
the approval Of large majority Of the Convention
We feel sure it was offered by Mr.. Bedsoc in goo
faith, and with no expectation that II would be
bled or rejected; and the fact that he withdrc
: it-not because, As the paper referred to BY OF
= correspondent insinuates, he feared II would
tabled, but to relieve tho Convention from di
+ cussion of it and to promote harmony-is Il
/ best evidence of the disposition by which he vi
t actuated. Indeed, Mr.. Blcdsoc stated in WITHDRAW
J. ing the resolution, that he did so to prevent even
o appearance of . want Of harmony in the Convc
, ton It is by no means certain that tho rcs
Y luton would have been laid upon the table; but
y it had been, that would not, in our opinion, ha
been conclusive indication that the ConvcntiooU
e opposed to it We believe the Democracy OF
District are IS true now IS heretofore to the gre
g. principle of non-intervention and to the rights
e. the South in the common Territories We
l. readily understand why the resolution was vii
,e drawn but We do not kaow Why Il was not adope'
The disposition which was manifested to table Il
y suited, no doubt first from the fact that The Co
es mittee had reported no resolution Of the kin
IN secondly, from the fact that the position Of the De
IL anti Wa1o