Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-03-28

There is a wide difference in The views Of the or
gans Of the great Third Party raovement as shown
by their criticism upon the recent letter Of Mr..
Bates. For instance, the Nashville Banner objects
e That letter. not because it subscribes to every
article IN the Republican creed and ia the pecu-
bar Republican spirit for upon this question the
Banner says conservative, Union-loving men must
and viii differ but because The leading idea
with Southern, Union men-the party which is ar
rayed against sectional organizations, North and
South-is opposition 10 he agitation Of he subject o.
siaUag' and Ar. Barns, by conserving 70 make
known his views upon the subject has offended
against this leading idea
The Louisville Journal, that very seldom says
anything to approve, takes a very different view
from the Banner. 1t criticises Mr.. BATES, not fol
having written letter, giving a candid expression
Of his sentiments, but because the sentiments thus
expressed are ,1tsoad, and not in accordance viii
what his old personal friends and fayorers in the
South had a right to expect from him. For, say'
the J0lauaI
Looking TO the antccedents Of Mr. BATES
these liberal-miEded gentlemen of the South haC
a right to suppose that he. like his professed eX
emplar, the illustrious CLAY, no matter what hi'
private views might be- reckOned total importantly
or cOmpete neutrality touching the extension or non
extension Of slavery the first and most solemn
duty Of the Government n TINS felaloh- 4ney were
fully warranted under the circumstances, III bellcv
ing that Mr. Bates Whatever might be his opinion
of slavery in the abstract, would, as conscientious
practical statesman insist on the broad and equal GC
upright discharge Of the trust contded to the 60Ue7
nle5u b the organic dl0 Of the nation They were en-
trey justified in entertaining the belief that Mr.
Bates and Mr. CLAY would recognize the great pril
cDeS Of justice and Of comfy as Sdcrediy binding o.
he statesmen Of The UnH and JrOlld regard the dbcli
ton Of sldJay ia the District of Columbia and the er
cilSiOa Of SLAVERY from the common Territories a.
equally IL Ui0ation Of the national trlst if noah.
graUer."
Here is irrepressible conflict" between the Ban
aer and the Jola7a. One says that Mr.. BATES has
offended against the Is conservative Unon-loying
men Of the South-not from having subscribed to
every article in the Republican creed-but from
having offended against tat leading idea of SOP
position 20 the agitation of the subject Of slavery,
upon which the Third Party movement is based
The other makes no objection to Mr.. BATES fol
having given publicity to his views upon thu
question Of slavery, but objects that in his letter
he does not insist on the broad and equal anC
upright discharge Of the trust confded to the Gov
ernment by the organic law of the nation = anC
BECAUSE lte utS 70 'tcOJfttSo lS great PLlACIliS
Of justice and comfy IS sacredly binding on tho
statesmen of the Union and because he does moi
"regard the abolition Of slavery in the District Of
Columbia and the exclusion of slavery from the com
mon Territories as equally in violation Of the nation
al trust, if nothing graver.7
Now. the Journal is right, and, outside Of the ac
tive political circles at Nashville, under the imme
date influence Of Mr.. BELL we can but believe
that the majority Of those in Tennessee known as
Oppositoniss will coincide with iJagainst the Ban
uer. We cannot believe that there is a handful
at the South, among the rank and file Of even the
Opposition faction who willing to characterize
letter that subscribes to every article in the
Republican creed as the discussion of question
upon which conservative, Unon-loving men mus
and will differ