Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1859-10-01
Rc-aaoption OF the Cincinnati PLATFORM.

s7g er<s ure ondrped0 or ds ddcereisernspfa
Re-adoption OF the Cincinnati Platform.
What called the particular attention of our neigh
Dor Of tho Erdniaer to, week ago is the fact
that the Eraanr is in favor Of the simple naked re-
adoption OF the Cincinnati platform by the Charleston
Convention in the of the fact that itself and its
Southern associates put one construction that plat
FORM in reference the subject of slavery in the Terri
tories while Douglas and his supporters put another and
an opposite construction upon it. We suggested that
in view Of these radically opposite constructions
the duty OF the Charleston Convention If it wished
avoid the imputaton Of deliberately seeking deceive
aud impose upon the people, TO declare, in many
words whether the Cincinnati platform should be under
stood involving the construction put upon by Doug
las that put upon by the Erdminer and the entire
Solihern Democracy. In short maintained that the
Charleston Convention If it disposed TO act
trcaeherously and dishonesty would be obliged to say
whether the Cincinnati platform contains the doctrine of
Squatter Sovereignty, as Douglas alleges, whether it
ignores and repudates that doctrine contended by
abe Examiner and its Southern allies.
We stated further, that Douglas and the Examiner al
though differing widely and irreconcilably in their
construction of the Cincinnati PLATFORM agreed in the
demand for its naked readoption by the Charleston Con-
venOn leaving each member of the party perfectly free
place his construction upon it-that is leaving
the Southern members free to declare they have al
ways done, aud doing that there recosni
ton endorsement of the dogma of SquatteY Sovc-
rcignty in it, and leaving the Northern members free to
declare, they have always DONE and are now doing
that il does contain full and clear recognition and en-
dorsement of Squater Sovereignty in all its length and
breadth. Such being the fact in regard to the position
occupied this question by Douglas and the ErdDiner
respectively, were, and STILL at a loss account
for the agreement between them in respect the simple
naked readopton of the Cincinnati platform by the
Charleston Convention We understand how the
Erani,,er with full knowledge of Douglas construc
ton Of that platform, unite with him in camoring
for its re-adopton, without any declaration by the
Convention TO its true intent and meaning Where is
the Of any PLATFORM unless it be understood in the
10y all the members of the party in every
State in the Union Aud how can the Democratic party
he called national party, especially in regard their
views of the slavery question, when half of that
party espouse the odous dogma Of Squater Sovereignty
and the other half Indignantly purn and repudiae it
The ErImiHe and its Southern associates contend that
the Opposition are not national in their views of the
slavery issue because the Northern wing maintain the
consdtuouaty of the Wilmot Proviso and the South
wing maintain its uncOnstitutonay. But Is not the
difference just wide between the advocates Of Souatter
Sovereignty and its opponents between the advocates
Of the Wlmot Proviso aud its opponents. And If the
Democratic party is national this territorial slavery
question, does it not follow, logically and necessarily
that the Opposition is national asog And if both are
national or if neither is national may no, the Southern
people coaesce with the Opposition readily and with
much proprety and safety, with the Democracy?
The Examiner may be shocked it constantly init
mates, willingness unite with the Northern op-
position in the next Presidential election But we can
neghbor that equally shocked at is
Willingness unite with the Douglastes and ever SUP
port Douglas himself for the Presidency. Indeed we
ought be far shocked, for the Examiner has
been far more OF Southern EXTREMIST than VIC have
been and has evnced far less love and devotion 10
the Union It has pded itself its advocacy Of and
inacxbe adherence TO- all the doctrines of the extreme
Southern Rights school while the contrary we have
looked upon many Of those doctrines the merest alb
Of distractions aud mischevous in their tenden-
cy the last degree. The Examiner has been in the
habit Of udyrg and repeating the resolutions of 9s99
with The earnesness and JUNCTION (perhaps much
more than it studied aud repeated its catechsm whilst
we the other hand, have been accustomed to look
upon those resolutions with very little reverence, and
with positive aversion of meaningless and
demagogica party catch-words In view of its antece-
dents therefore, necessarily obliged be shock
ed and startled the avowed willingness of the ErdBi.
support for the Presidency, who scornfuy
tranpes all its cherished Southern Rights doctrines IN
der bis feet-a who is the author and advocate Of
plpaby unconstitutional heresy" and which heresy
according the solemn declaration of the father of
Southern Rights is odous and dangerous to
the South than the Wimot Provso 1t is really enough
10 astouh and confound 70 find the Erdniner thus
departing from its early teachings and expressing its
purpose 10 support STEPHEN ARSoLD DOUGLAS for the
Presidency the living embodiment of doctrine init
maiey affecting the rights of the South compared with
which, according Mr.. Calhoun the wilmot Provso it.
self is innocuous and harmless Is there hope of e-
claiming the Examiner and bringing it back into the
path Of Southern Rights? Is il, too,-this hitherto
staunch aud rampant Southern Rights journal-to follow
after Douglas and pay worship at the foul shrine Of
Squlter Sovereignty? Can devotion to party thus
msead aud betray the most honest and intrepid
champions Of the South?
We shall admonsh, plead with, and pray over our
ncighbor Of the Bya,"iHcr-for his backsrdings are
melancholy 70 behold. Will pous efforts to reclaim
the wandcrer be successful Nous rerrousi