Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1861-03-21

stated, must nrSC De BASED upon the conciuSlOE
that the General Government is irretrievably
fixed in the power of the Aboltionist and all its
ends subverted to their use-a premises which
we cannot by any course of reason bring our
selves to believe, and which we emphatically
deny.
Then the question for Maryland is, the Gov.
eminent formed by our fathers and preserved in
its purity, or some other yet untried. Every
man it seems agrees that the interest of Mary.
land, the life and salvation Of Maryland, is in
the Union, if she can get her rights. If this be
the case, why not set forth the rights which we
claim, and demand them at the hands of the
Government. If we claim that the institution
of slavery shall not be interferred with in on,
State and demand it, will it not be respected I
If we demand the delivery of persons held tc
labor" does not the fugitive slave law grant us
our demand? If John Brown raids are set on
foot in our State, does not the law punish it.
the law of State as well as Federal law =? And
if we claim the right to settle the Territories
with slaves, if we so desire, do we secure the
claim, to the disputed Territory? This in fact
seems to be the great sticking point-the Terri
tory and yet we hear, that if we cannot have
part, or the acknowledged right to part, we
cannot exist-we are undone, and straightway
we withdraw from the Union, and leave the
very morsel for which we were so bitterly con-
tending behind us, and calculate to live great
deal better without it than with it. Is not this
singular reasoning? To us it is indeed strange
reasoning.
But all this, it may be, is not relevant to the
issues It may be that the Border Convention
is not the best means of adjusting the difficulty.
If so, why did not the Convention of Maryland
suggest some more applicable plan? But the
Convention must have thought this the better
plan, else why suggest it to Virginia for her
proposal +? Then believing this to be the pro-
per, or most advisable plan, why did not Mary
land propose it !? Her Convention was in ses-
sion, acting upon Athe important topics which
claim our attention, and at the same time seems
to have had under consideration the "Border
State Convention" then why not propose it to
the Border States fol their adoption or rejection
Was it because Virginia probably would not
adopt it, or was it because, emanating from
Maryland, it would not command respect :? We
are for concert Of action in this crisis. We think
the times not only require promptness but con-
cert of action; yet while we are willing and de-
sirous of acting aoith other Border States, we
are too independent to consent to have other
States act for us. Virginia is large State, and
by her magnitude and weight, entitled to a hear
ing, but with all due Difference to her as SIS
ter we are unwilling to acknowledge that in
point of talent patriotism and independence, we
Of Maryland are one whit behind Virginia or
any other State in the Union. Virginia is our
sister, and as such we respect, we love her, but
AS a mistress or ruler, we acknowledge no such
and Virginia would no longer respect us if we did