New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-05-17

IS Ast tne known TINT that Franklin Pierce had
= NY FEY, ratss The telegraph carried my mes-.gc
concentrating him az the tlst CHOW " ~ ,b
ana il was read in the ,oss A. Donylas eliJ |
Vete was pn"banan received Il majority he sent y !
r,seage 10 his friends 70 wiihdfw ns n mn 70
MAKE The nomination unanimous. hs Mo.u ~, ,ho
- he standari-bearer Of any party nc was npt ~.
.S Wv; &c The marty; but he did rejoice that the oiu
noocrai;c party determined TO adhere 70 'i,e 8roi'
;r;nie of nonntervention by the Federal Govern
ment with the domestic aiiars OF distant lerl,'ore
~ ss pleasant duty to defend this glorious old party
;rs, Hose who would destroy II because the party
Win not change s platform 70 suit their purposes. Inc
leadership of this attempt TO destroy the party was wen
inrustedto appropriate hanas i S man mn ,s o,eJ
Yancev who has right TO feel proud OF the achieve,
ment he won az Charleston. In ls4S he proclaimed
hte same doctrane but failed He boldly ana gallant
" entered his protest and withheld Ms assent 70 .ne
surport of the nominee because he believed the
South should insist on the doctrine Of intervention.
In 1856 he concluded 10 submit but very soon ne
came TO the conclusion that this great Dcmocrauc
party not competent 10 preserve ana MAINTAIN 'e
rights of the South under the Constitution, ana nc
came to the conclusion it was time for them 10 lnst
ute some other organization for the maintenance OF
Southern rights. That he was conscientious IN ms
views he Or Douglas did not doubt, but he Thought
those views would lead 10 dissolution OF the Union
MR. Yanceys letter 10 Mr. Slaughter was read.j IL
is due 10 Hr Yancey to state this was intended as
private letter, but was published and severely COM
nened on by the editor of The Richmond sour, Mr'
Pryorl when Mr.. YanCey made an explanation III
another letter. He had been unable TO procure
copy of the whole of this latter letter, bnt had founo
long extract in The National ineHigencer, OF Sept.
A. 1853 In the first part OF this letter MI iaucey
says he cannot trust such States Delaware, regard
ing her as Anti-Slavery in which he differs very much
from the Senator from Delaware MIR. Bayardl, who
thinks Delaware has such an interest IN Slavery lhat
he is willing to break up the Democratic party &c oroea
keeps an AboltiOnist in Congress-; nor Missouri,
because she sustained a Free-Soiler; nor Ten
nessee. because she kept an Abohtionist III The
Senate SO long; nor Kentucky, because ior 90
Clay and Crittenden. Laughter IN gaieries.I
He does not name Virginia, and then he pro-
ceeds to give his reasons for separating the COTTON
States. THE extract read. He does not ASA
the border States to join the Southern Confederacy at
first. He asks the Old Dominion TO remain with as,
in order that she may distract and annoy MS for the
benefit of those who went out and, perhaps, after
time Virginia Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missouri,
v oud be sound enough 10 come INTO the Southern
Confederacy. If they did good service IN such
manner rs TO be entitled to his respect then they
might be taken into the COniederaoy OF the cotton
States This plan he tells us was not 10 be acted OH at
once They must retain their place and influence IN
the Democratic party, and then be ready TO have more
influence by pFecptating this result upon the party
A part Of the plan 10 pretend 10 De Democrats,
and at the proper time to plunge the cotton States
into revolution. What the suspicious mo-
mentl Was it the Charleston Convention '"as
that the proper time The history OF me event
shows that Mr. Yancey acted up TO his pro-
gramme, as hid down in his letters. AZ The
proper time he preciptated the Cotton States INTO
revolution and lead them out Of the Convention Inc
programme carried out to the letter. leaving IN tne
Convention those unsound States which he conid
not trvst, such Virginia, Tennessee, hentucKy,
Missouri Delaware and Maryland. part oil Deld-
wars followed him out, but they came to the conc-
zion that Delaware not large enough 10 dlVide,
and her champion retired and came back TO the
NrrtheFn Coniederaey. Was it 20 keep watchf Ia
Delaware to be received into Mr.. fanceys South
ern Confederacy after while VIII Tennessee be
permitted TO come in now she has got free soil Will
be allow Kentucky 10 join when she sends here sc!
Abolitionss as Clay and Crittenden l beg pardon
of the Senator from Kentucky turning to Mr. Cft,eh-
denl for repeating it. The gallant Senator from kel-
tucky an Abolonist and Free-Soier! man whose
fame is HIS wide civilization, and whose patriotism
and loyalty to the Constitution Was never exceeded ny
| anybodyi Applause in the galleries wish to
| God the whole American people We're jus; such Abo-
tonists as Clay and Crttenden. Renewed applause.
The CHAIR stated if the applause Was repeated,
| The galleries must be cleared.
| Mr. DOUGLAS resumed Tie would not say Mr..
Yancey and his associates meant disunon IL was said
that The orders of Gen. Scott before the battle of Cerfo
Gordo were complete history of the battle after II
was fought and so the programme of Mr.. Yanccy,
published two years ago. is truthful history OF the
seoession movement at Charleston. He had not the
idea that all those who united with him IN maturing
these measures concured in the objects to which
they inevitably led; hut what were Mr.. fanceys
measurcsl They were 20 insist on platform identl-
cal with the caucus resolutions which the Senate rs now
asked 10 adopt lie did not suppose the gentlemen u0w
advocating these in the Senate mean desire disunon
lie acquitted every man of such purpose, but such
platform insisted upon would lead directly to a dissolu
ton of the Uuon This platform demands Congressional
Intervention in the Territories Tor Slavery in certain
events In the event that the people Of the Territory do
want Slavery, and will not provide by law for s
introduction and protection, Congress is 10 pledge itself
pass laws TO force the people 10 have it, So long
the people want Slavery, they are willing to lei them
alone, but when they do not want it, then Congress
will intervene force Slavery unwilling people.
On the other hand the Republican party are also for
intervention IN certain conaitions. They for non
Intervention Just so long the people do not want
Slavery and say so, by law; but whenever the people
Of the Territories gay by their Legislature they do
want Slavery then the Republicans for intervening
10 deprive them Of 1t. Each Of you is iii favor OF
intervening for your own section and against when
noninteryention benefits you. There Is no differ
ence between the principle of Intervention at the
North and the South Each asserts the duty Of Con-
gress 10 force institutions unwilling people, |
and each denies the right OF sei-goyernment 10 the
people of "a Territory. Each appeals to the pas
sions, prejudices and ambition Of its seetion
country. Let this doctrine of North and South
become rallying point Of two great parties, aud
there viii be two sectional parties divided by |
that line which separates the Free from the Slave
holding States and then VIII the irrepressible
conict of which we have heard SO much. Mr Douglas
referred TO the fact that there bill from the House
repeating the Slave code established in Mexico,
and side by side with resolution 10 repeal the
prohibition of Slavery in Kansas The doctrine
OF the Democratic party, as proclaimed IN |
1913 1892, Je56, and last 81 Charleston in
$780, is to resist both of these propositions.
He stood on the Democratic doctrine If Congressional
non-intervenlion tauntingly called "Squauer Sove-
relgnty Under il the people Of NeW-Mexico pro-
teced ard established Slavery. In 1919 aud 1850 the
South only asked up to Sc 30 and non-inieryenion
had since gwen them Slavery up TO 80. The South