Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1860-06-02


The Northern Democratic press, with almost one
voice insists that the slavery question shall not be
reopened solemnly announcing that if is, and II
they are required to advocate protection by Con-
gress to slave property in the Territories, they can
not sustain themselves and that State after State in
thelr region will go over to the abolition side.
The debate to which we have referred shows an
apparently irreconcable difference between North
ern and Southern Democrats. We say apparently
lrreconcable for it may be discussed and settled on
fair terms to both sections, and the harmony and
unity Of the national Democratic party maintained.
Southern Democrats must not be expected to sur
render the rights of the South in the common Ter
rores nor to abate one jot or title Of their equa
ty with Northern Democrats yet it should be re-
membered that no cause less than that which would
Justify dissolution of the Union should be permit
ted to divide the national Democracy, for if that
party should be sectionalized, all other parties
now are the end would be at hand. That the South
has heretofore trusted to non-intervention by Con-
gress to the Constitution ITSELF and to the Supreme
Court cannot be denied Trusting thus and hoping
for the best yet prepared for disappointment and re-
verses, especially in Kansas, she has nevertheless
gained in New Mexico, if she has lost in Kansas. -
Whether she will now demand protection by Con-
gress to slave property in the Territories, remains
to be seen. One thing is certain: she may demand
it but Congress WiU nerer grant at. The Southern
Democracy may require the Northern Democracy in
Convention at Charleston to unite with them in this
demand; but If they should, the result will most
probably be the total overthrow of the Northern
Democracy in 1860. They cannot carry this weight,
added to the fugveslave law and the repeal of the
Missouri restriction, and triumph. 1t is simply i'm
possible. They are our friends-they have stood
nv us and fought for OH many field where our
constitutional rights were at stake; but their num-
bers are diminishing and they cannot afford to lose
many more of their rank and file. Let US hope
that the whole question may be finally and prop
prlV 6iSnOSn6 Of or NJ Charleston Con-
vention, so that the national Democracy-the great
and as VIC believe, the only hope of the Union
NAV 90 forward as heretofore conquering and to
conquer. The opposition to the national Democra-
cy can hold out no promise even OF justice to the
South. Their stronghold is in the North, and there
the watchword of their leaders is more slave
Territories slave States The national Democra-
cy may not be able to secure for all that we have
a right to ask or all we may fairly demand under
strict construction of the Constitution; but they
have the will to do for u.s. and toU do for us greatly
more upon this vital question of slavery than any
other party in existence, that may be formed
hereafter. Strike down that Democracy-let it he
diSmembered and scattered, and the day it is thus
dismembered and given over to defeat will be sad
one for the Constitution and the Union of the States"
1t will be seen thSt, but little more than year
ago, when discussing this question, we distinctly
announced "that the South has heretofore trusted
to non-intervention by Congress- to the Constitution
ITSELF" and to the Supreme Court as the final ex-
FOUNDER of the Constitution. We did not ask for
Congressional protection in 1S4S in 1850 in 1854,
or in 1852 and we do not ask for it now.
Again, in the Standard of September Sd, 1859,
we said:
1.-THE Wmot Proviso, Territorial sovereignty, and
Intervention by Congress to protect slavery in the
Territories, are all but not equally, Objectionable
The Wilmot Proviso proposes to prohibit slavery in
the Territories by act of Congress That is the Sew
ard doctrine. Territorial sovereignty proposes to
exclude prohibit slavery by the Territorial Legis
| latures That appears to be the Douglas doctrine.
Intervention means that Congress shall interpoSe to
protect slavery in the Territories. That is the Wise
doctrine We are opposed to all of them. If the
| Co s tuition and the Supreme Court, both being in
our favor, cannot command for Shareholders fair
hearing and fair trial OF their species Of labor in
| the common Territories. Congress cannot and if
Congress could, it would not 1t is idle to ask for
! Congressional protection. 1t will never be granted
! 1t is also idle to ask for it, if do for the pur
! pose of making point on which to stake the exist
ence Of the Union, for the people will sustain no
movement looking to dissolution such point as
! that If the Consultation and the Supreme Court
cannot protect property in the common Terrific
ries, then might makes right, and the government
has failed to answer one of the great purposes for
which it was established"
| But we find in the Standard of August 27th
1852 still stronger confirmation Of the conssten-
CIV of our course on this question. In our issue Of
that date we said:
Nor will the South demand any thing more on
the subject of slavery in the Territories than the
outions of the last Convention and an endorsement
of the bred Scott decision. The Democracy of the
| South do not desire a Congressional Stare code
They are nOu as they hare been from tie first, in
TdrOr Of nOn-actiOn non-interrenton By Congress
aoih respect to sldrery in the Territories They are
for leaving it to the people, when they assemble
| in Convention to frame a Constitution, TO say
| whether they will have slavery not; and mean
aohile from the time the Territory organized until
Convention is held, they are Milling TO rely for
protection to Stare property on the Constitution Of
! the United States rs erpounded on this subject by
the Supreme Court" .-
1t is true that at Charleston we approved Of and
preferred the majority reports and we anxious
if it could be DONE consistently with the preserva-
ton of the national Democratic party, TO have the
Convention set its face directly against the North
ern construction of the Cincinnati platform. We
are thus frank, because it is known, and it would
be useless to deny that large portion of the North
ern Democracy have held the opinion that, under
the Cincinnati PLATFORM the people of the Terrific
res have the right to settle the question of slavery
for themselves through their Territorial Legisla
lures. But we were answered, and truly answered,
that by the Kansas-Nebraska act the whole ques-
ton taken out of Congress and referred to the
people of the Territories subectto the ruling of the
Supreme Court; that this difference between the
North and the South to the power of Territorial
Legislature was natural, and was to have been ex-
pected; that agreeing on non-intervention by Con-
gress, it was impossible to agree upon point which
had been expressly left to the Courts by the Kan
sasNebraska act ITSELF and that the best course if
not the only course to ensure harmony in the party
and triumph in the election the black Repub-
icans was to leave the whole question where it was
| ,,lncnd hu the I,onunnton Of 1870 tho