Arkansas true Democrat., 1860-08-11
Bell and Everett Congregational Pro-
 tection.

or opposition party (which is it Capt. Dan. ley?) support the Bell and Everett ticket and claim that Bell is perfectly sound on the territorial question. The ablest de- fence of that ticket which we have read is made by the National Intelligencer, paper which, we believe, stands confessedly at the head of the list-formerly as an old line whig-and lately as a Bell and Everett exponent. In the issue of July 7th is grave and dignified article, very ably writ ten and extending through. .fre long columns. the strong point of which is to prove that the Union party does not hold either the Douglas or anti Douglas dogmas on the vexed question of congressional protec- tion." If that paper is sound expositor of the faith of the Union party, its princi- ples may thus be defined: We disapprove of 'squatter soveriegnty' and we are not iii favor of or opposed to congressional pro- lection, but we regard both doctrines as barren distractions. The first we regard an abstraction because natural causes will adjust the matter if let alone; we esteem the second equally barren of interest inas- much as the question is not practically be- fore the country" This is fair state ment, we believe, of the views of the Union party.
 But in order to be sure that we do not misrepresent we will quote largely from this veteran of the press. It sets out with the following general protest against the public taking so much interest in the ques- tion:
 "For the last eight nine months the po- litical activity of the country has been almost wholly engrossed in the tedious and prottless dis eussion of single topic-he constitutional status of slapery in the territories Having given to this question an elaborate consideration, well histo rical theoretical, in deference rather to its cur rent interest than from any conviction of it's essen- tal importance ceased to weary our readers with the barren and endless plattudes to which it gave rise in the hands of those who find more pleasure in political metaphysics than in any topic of prac tical concern. Having brought to the elucidation of the subject all the light at our command, we did not feel it due either to ourselves our req ders to darken counsel by multiplying words with out knowledge, and the self-appointed leaders of public opinion having apparently persuaded large mass of our countrymen to close their ears to any other political considerations than those relating to the socalled territorial question: we havelatt
 y found our vocation as political journalists placed in 'crcumscrption and confne' to which we pre- ferred to submit rather than waste strength in the unprofitable litgations of the hour.'
 Itnext quotes from the "address" which called together the convention that nomi- hated Bell and Everett, signed by the most prominent and respectable members of the new party, the list headed by the name of John J. Crittenden, of Kentucky. If that "address" does not indorse "non-inter- vention" in plain terms we do not under stand the meaning of plain English. AL luding to the democratic and republican parties, 1t states:
 "The one by it's frequent and unnecessary in truson of the slavery question into party politics, mas exasperated sectional feeling at the north and increased the growing spirit of dlsunion at the south, while the other has been prompt to avail itself of these opportunities for anti slavery agta tion''
 But the address states specifically that it is a cardinal principle:
 "To remove the subject of slavery from the of party politics, and leave it to the inde- pendent control of the States in which it exists, and to the unbiased action of the judiciary"
 If this is not non -intervention what is it? Besides it is well known that the north- ern wing of the Union party will almost be g unit against congressional protection.- With what face then can the supporters of the Union ticket object to Mr. Douglas, when their own doctrine is as odious to the true, unadulterated State rights democracy north and south, and to the intelligent DOT tion of their own party at the south. Can there be in the bosom of their party which claims to be so pure, politicians so selfish and corrupt that they will delude the south as to the real principles of their own party? Washington Hunt, the president of the Union party convention which nominated Bell, indorses Douglas and proposes to sell out to the great expositor of the heretical doctrine of squatter sovereignty. This is the constitutional party! This is the "dead mans ticket galvanized into life in order to be sold out to the highest bidder, like broken down horse groomed for the occa- sion and put under the hammer of the auc toneer.
 In further proof that the Union party regards the question of congressional pro- tection as barren issue examine the fol- lowing extract:
 "The policy of non-action recommended under this head by the Constitutional Union party has, therefore, nothing in its terms to which any parti san of the Breckinridge democracy is entitled to object forourselves, we can con- ceiye of nothing more preposterous than this ve. hement assertion of dubious right to protection for a redundant negro population, which does not eyist in territory where they could not live with profit to their masters, unless it is equaed by the corresponding fallacy of those who insist upon the necessity of erecting congressional break water. to resist the rising tides of slavery in direction towards which it's waves are destined never to set The laws of population and territorial settlement, under the present circumstances Of our public do- main do not stand in much greater need of con pressional assistance to secure their natural and inevitable working, than the laws of gravitation demand the intervention of the federal legislature in order to prescribe, for military purposes, the paraboc flight of projectiles."
 We have thus given candidly the views of the Union party as defined by their lead ing and ablest organ. We refrain from quoting the individual opinions of Bell and Everett as they have not recently defined their positions on the territorial question" !"