Daily national Democrat., 1860-08-23
.IThe Issue Again."

y
review Of our fosmer article, under this cap
tion W are lothe to believe that our words
could be tortured into such folly and weak
ness as are attributed to them. We said that
the Constitution of the United States was it
self a compromise and said this only to en-
courage the spirit of compromise, but says
the Express:
The editor comes to the grave conclusion that
the Cousttuticr of the United States was COM
/ uromise and hen { beng compromise, the
/ only way TO settle u..d ques tons under It Is
by COMPROMISE. m other words II one party
plants tsef upon plain Constitutional right ana
,mands its rec Zuluuu, and another party, lor
the purpose Of defeating It, places itSelt IN opposl'
tiou 20 t the only way for the question to be set
tied, is for the party conteuding for Consttu-
tiouai right 10 serrender it by compromise
1t is enough to say that, never entertaining,
We never expressed such a thoaght. But the
Express. hoirifed at phantom of its own
raising dashes of in style peculiarly patri-
otto and pathetic. 1t tells us We have
heretofore been of the impression that the
Constitution of the United States was the
supreme id,o Of tie land, guaranteeing certain
rights" etc. and then it announces the sol
emn truth, that every member of Congress
is sworn to support the Constitution, and
gives force and double emphasis to the senti
ment 10y adding we thought it was the
sworn duty of the members of Congress to
support the Constitution Having reached
this pinnacle of patriotic fervor, and again
charged the DEMOCRAT with contending chat
Constitutional rights should be surrendered
in a spirit Of eompromise'-a charge it is not
worth while again 10 deny-the Express de-
scends with aecelorating speed into deepen
ing darkness. 1t attempts to explain com
promises that have been made, compromises
that have made patriots glad, have secured
peace aid prosperity to the Union by the
interesting information; interesting, whether
we regard it as matter of constitutional law
or political history, that "the extent of the
powers Of Congress over the Territories was
unsettled How unsettled or 10y whom, we
are not informed But the Express adds
"the language of the Constitution was not
sufficiently clear and explicit to settle the
question and hence disputes" etc and finally
gropes out of the dark, by informing us that
"iadsH'ich as there 1cas no positjue propision
in tie Constitution, settling the poi,a," it was
agreed to leave it to the Supreme Court and
that all would acquiese
Our readers will remember that all this
/ vol 10, i, Il a.. Ia,
history of legislation on that su' ject from
1920 until now We are told by the EXPIRES.
10y way of text, that there can be no com
promise of Constitutional rights; then that
the extent of certain Constitutional powers
was unsettled then that the language of the
Constitution was not clear and explicit and
then that it contains no positive provision on
the point and that in consequence a compro
mise had TO be effected. 1t then, after its
usual fashion of sweeping charges without
shadow Of proof, alleges that Mr.. Douglas
and the Marysville DEMOCRAT repudiate this
compromise.
Wehaye appealed, again and again, to the
people to treat this subject in IA spirit 4
compromise to abide by the decisions of the
supreme Court We have deprecated Con-
gressional Intervention, because we could see
nought but evil to grow out of it. In this
We have but reflected the conservative Dem
ocratic sentiment of the whole country. How
was it when Senator Brown of Mississippi
demanded that the laws OF Kansas, excluding
slavery, should oe annulled? lie was only
supported 10y johnson, Of Arkansas, and NAL
| lory, of Florida. And on the other hand, did
not the Democrats in Congress unite in oppo
sition to any repeal of the law Of New Mexico
establishing slavery2
But it "a be useless TO pursue the dis
eussion Il subject, The very fogs oflogic
in which IT, l&press wanders first to find
out CON promise, when it argues there
should be none, and then to show how con-
sistently it adheres to the compromise, ought,
We think, to induce the editor himself to try
to seek the light of day, if only 10y taking an
observation to find how fur it has wandered
from the course of patriotism and safety.
In conclusion we viii only add, that we
cannot believe We are compromising our
constitutional rights in repeating our desire
to let well enough alone; to create no new is
sues that may be avoided and submit all ques
tions of Constitutional law that must arise. to
the only tribunal known to the Constitution.
for their adiuatment-the Federal Courts.
WHEN the Seceders have succeeded in dis
| solving the Union and shall have formed a
Southern Confederacy, what are the States Of
said Corfederacy agoing to do for Fugitive
Slave Law whereby to return runaway ne.
groes who may escape into the Northern Con
federaey2 Do they hope to induce the Re
publican States (Which in case of dissolu.
tion would be in the majority in the North
ern Confederacy) to continue our present
Fugitive Slave Law in full force ?
The hopeless condition in which the North
ern Democracy would be left by dissolu-
ton, wonld place them entirely at the mercy
of the Republicans, and the Northern Con
federacy would, in very short time be-
come a second Canada for fugitive negroes.
And who would be the losers? Southern
slave holders, of course You are far better
oil in the Union, gentlemen, than you will
be out of It,
The contest in Mississippi has narrowed
down to Union and Disuuion-Douglas and
Breckenridge The canvass commenced at
]
Corinth; the Hon. B. N. Kenyon speaking for
The Demoeralie nominees. and GOV. Mathews