Daily national Democrat., 1861-02-26
Where does it Stand now z

We have been trying for some days to pin
down the Express to some definite position,
but II has lodged around so nimbly that the
task las been a little difficult, although anus
ing. 1t seems to be afraid that it may say
something which will come up in judgment
against il, hereafter. Whenever we get it, as
we think, fastened to a certain proposition,
"why, no" it exclaims, CHATS not our posi-
tion at ALL" We claimed that its whole
course showed that it justified secession. 1t
Indignantly denied that it justified secession,
and fell back on the word "sympathize.I !,
Well, then, said We, how can you sympathize
with an act which you yourself say you can
not justify? "Why," it answered, eve don't
sympathize with the act of secession, we only
sympathize with the persons who are engaged
in secession Tired of this kind Of dodgng,
we then put the question point-blank,-Do
you think the States which have passed Sc
ccssion ordinances have done right? To
which the Express replies:
ave think they have acted too hastily.
! We think they would have acted more wise
| ly had they first met their sister Southern
States in Conv ention and come to a common
understanding with them as to what their
interests and honor demanded They should
have made out their bill Of grievances and
unitedly presented them to Congress and il
they could not obtain what they conceived tc
be their constitutional rights then, in th'
last resort, they could have unitedly taker
such action as seemed to them best"
1t thinks they have acted "too hastily
They would have acted 'morc wisely, haC
they first met their sister Southern States,
DC. The inference then is that they hav'
acted "wiscly" in acting "too hastily" bu
they would have acted more wisely, had the.
not acted quite so hastily. And this mean
ing is borne out by the conclusion of th
lines quoted-"then, IN tie last resort the,
could have untedly taken such action a
seemed to them best" That is, secession
= right, in case the dissatisfied cannot get wha
i they want, and the only point in doubt is a
? to the time when the act of secession shoul
= take place.
+ Very well, unless the Express can expla
? and still take another tack, we understand
TO be distinctly IN tdoor Of secession, if th
efforts at IA peaceable solution of the presen
difficulties fails. We understand it to den,
l any power in the Government to preven
secession, or to use any force to protect it,
own forts or public property, or to collect it
own customs.
This, then, is one of dispositions. Anothe
, one is-and we had some difficulty in gettn
it to define itself there, too--that it is en-
phatically n. favor Of Pac!fc Republic,
case Of certain contingency. That contir
y gency is dependent upon secession at Il
n South.
y Now, lest we mistakenly wrong the f!
is press in this Pacific Republic matter, we a:
, it, and hope it will answer, fairly and squar
,e ly-Ip case a separation takes place betwe'
$. the North and South, all attempts at compr
v mise having failed, and there are two col
d federacies only, the Northern and the Soutl
ern, are you in favor, then, of establishing
Pacific Republic or will you advocate Il
u loyalty of California to the Union as it sha
> then stand; or, in other words, will yC
= claim that California is bound by the FEEDER
- Constitution, and should remain under
C notwithstanding the secession Of the Southe
States2