Daily national Democrat., 1860-09-27

Z ICCitQ 10 uJNN lildl Alltlt vas AltN movement
/ in the Breckenridge party tending to seces-
1 sion from the Union, in the event Of the elec
/ ton of Lincoln Now, however. it admits
! that there is such movement ltsouuds the
alarm Of danger, and tells us it is not sur
/ prisiug that the Southern people should give
expression to their feeiings"-not surprising
that they should become excited. and talk
about dissolution of the Union. '-DcH0ceat.
The above contains gross misstatement Of
our position. We do not and have not ad-
mitted at any time, that there is a movement
on the part of the Brecknridge party tend
/ ing TO secession from the Union.-Erpress.
We ask the Express if we have not quoted
its language correctly in Che above extract
from the DEMOCRAT? 1t tellsus plainly that
the southern people talk about dissolution
Of the Union, and that it is not surprising
that they do. Does it allege that such talk
amounts to nothing? Ifso, how are we to
understand it when it says
There can be no doubt that the Union is
in danger. 1t would be folly to deny the
fact, os unpleasant as it may be-
Or when it says in speaking of the Democ.
racy (the Douglasites it calls them) and the
Republicans:
with these sectional parties before the
country it is useless to deny that the Union
is in danger. Should either of them unfor-
tunately obtain control of the Government
10y mistaken verdict of the people nothing
but discord could be the result and we may
well fear that serious consequences to the Ma
tion would result thereirom.'
Or when it says:
"IIave they (the people of the South not
cause Of alarm? Look at the condition OF
the country to-day At the North there is
a powerful sectional party whose very life
!. blood consists in hostility to the South and
= her institutions This party j. now buoyant
with hopes of success, and indeed, have bet
ter prospects than ever before
Il We might go on five chose and giyemore
+ extracts from the Express similar to these
l. quoted but it is unnecessary.
If as the Express alleges there is no move
ment on the part of the Breckenridge party
tending to secession from the Union, why
: does it sound the alarm of danger? If its
party is satisfied to acquiescc in the verdict
) of the people in the coming election, why
8 does it use the language above quoted? Per-
! haps it will say that in speaking Of the peo-
5 pie of the South, it doest not mean the Breck
: inridge party alone But the fact is, that
party is opposed at the South as well as else
? where, on the ground chiefly, that they are
secessionists. They aIe termed there the
Disunion party by the supporters Of Bell, as
. well of Douglas, and the issue made there,
: is whether the reasonable doctrine of Yancey
+ shall triumph or not. The Express tells US
2 plainly enough what it apprehends will he
Q the action of its party in the South should Il
! Republican administration be inauguratcd
Would it take it upon itself to give the alarm
v il there was no movement already tending to
: a secession from the Union? Would it take
S it upon itself to say that the danger was i'm
minent, when no alarm Of danger had been
sounded elsewhere? If the danger of seces-
sion from the Union be as threatening as it
says it is, there must certainly he move
I ment on foot tending to that result. Itwould
be folly TO announce the probability Of
, speedy secession or attempt at secession from
the Union on any other ground than that
, party strong enough to bring about that ca
; tastrophe were even now making a movement
6 in that direction. But the Express in replying
! to us, has changed its tone somewhat. Ac-
: cording to its language in its Issue ofyester-
, day, it appears to admit that after all there
I : is no great immediate danger, for it says:-
8 "We presume it will not he denied that, if
! the South cannot obtain her constitutional
y y rights in the Union she will be justidable in
\ resisting" This is well enough. We say let
u the chiyalrous South have her zig hts all her
rights-and when she is declared from the
exercise of those constitutional rights, she
r can then talk about secession and all who
love justice and the constitution will harken
to her. But let not her sons now, through
the pernici1us advice of ambitious leaders.
talk about a dissolution of the Union as an
/ event near at hand Let them not couiure
up contingencies which do not exist, or at
any rate are yet in the future. Their consti-
J tional rights they yet possess and while as
they say they will receive nothing less, let
them demand nothing more. Through the
plea of constitutional rights, let them not de-
mand that a law Of the Federal Government
should be enforced where it is not wanted.
Thus while they claim justice for themselves
from the Federal Govern ment let them not
do injustice to their brothers elsewhere bv
demanding the passage of a needless law for
the Territores-a law obnoxious to the peo-
pie there We said the South was not de
barred from her constitutional rights. The
seceders Go not claim that she is, nor do their
most rabid leaders. Is it not unwise then for
the press and the speakers of that party to
add fuel to the secession fame by coninu-
ally harping about those rghts-iust as tho
they were even now passing from the grasp
Of the Southern people? They talk as tho
they were sure that those rights would tie
lost to the South within the next four wears
Just as though they did not know that such
a thing Is scarcely within the bounds of pos
sibiity, considering the relative strength of
parties in both houses of Congress. More
over, We are told that although the Demo-
cratic papers Of Kentucky have insisted upon
Mr. Breckinrdge answering the question put
to Mr.. Douglas (and emphatically answered
by him), it has not been alluded to by Mr..
Breckinridge. This question was, whether
he was in fnyor of the secession of the South
ern States in the event of Lincoln's election.
1t may be that the Presidential candidate Of