Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1863-10-29

could be found who would deliberately agree to
waive definite expression of their opinions, aud
content themselves with scattering ambiguous
words among the people We conceive that in
such grave matters there is right and a wrong
side, and the friends of truth cannot volunta-
rily come into confederaoy with the friends of
error without sacrifice Of principle as painful to
witness it is dangerous to the partners in such
coalition. We all know how the Democratic party
was ultimately rent in twain by the jugglers who
committed it to formula of words that paltered in
double sense where the issue was much less momen-
tous than that now joined between the adherents
Of the rival theories which obtain with regard to
the pacifcation of the country.
We were never backward in expressing our
when they we're practsed by Democrats in re-
gard to the political principles which the Terri
tories should be governed, and we cannot bring
ourselves to look with equanimity on evasons
practised by Republicans in regard to questions
vastly important, because relating to the very
existence of the Union, as well in its body, which
demands for its symmetry preservation of the in
tegrity of the national territory, as in its soul,
which demands for the perpetuation of its identity
that the Constitution shall be maintained in its
purity and power. La the name of both these high
sanctions we feel called to resist the revolutionary
dogmas propounded by class of political theorists
in the State of Massachusetts, and elsewhere.
Truth always deserves and sometimes she demands
brave services at the hands of her votaries, and we
conceive that her banners ingloriously trailed
in the dust whenever they ars lowered for the pur
pose of hiding the inscription they bear from fear
of giving umbrage to errorists. Men cannot pro-
perry walk together in the bonds Of political con-
federation unless they be at unity on things essen
tial. And what ought to be more essential in as
certaining the character of an intelligent loyalist
at this time than the inquiry, what does he think
Of the Republic on question as to which Wen
dell Phillips holds one view and Mr.. Postmaster
General Blair another? Can it be proper to Guilt
5ate political in,lifferentism as to such funda-
mental doctrines? And yet, if we understand the
Boston Advertiser, this is precisely what the Wor-
cester Convention has done, at least intended to
do, as far its purpose faithfully interpreted
by the trainers of the resolutions.
| Such being the fact, we of course excuse our
selves from the task of defending the analysis we
made of these resolutions Our Boston contempo-
rary admits, while explaining one of them, that
off the Convention could have had the benefit of
greater critical in considering the language
of the resolution, we feel justified in saying that
this phrase would have given place to one more
fecitous" And we feel little inclined to insist
on any particular Interpretation of these declara-
tions when we have the assurance of the Advert
ser that whatever they may seem to say, read by
one or another, they were meant to convey no
meaning at all the questions about which differ
ent members of the Convention entertained very
decided and very different convictions of right and
duty. But the Advertiser will pardon us if we
confess to only the greater surprise that there
should have been readiness ON the part of six
teen hundred men to iorego the candid and manly
avowal of their honest convictions on topics which
were uppermos. 10 their minds and first their
tongues; for the instant the Convention proceeded
from voting to talking, Mr.. Boutwell, took the
floor to expouud his peculiar dogmas, and Mr.. Dana
followed in complete dissent from Mr.. BoutwelPs
views. EacH seemed 10 attacn great importance
to his opinions, and they certainly treated on
weighty themes but, if we may credit the Ad-
vertiser, they were themes which the Conven-
ton studiousy sought o put out of its sight.
We cannot reconcile this procedure with any theory
of political duty which is conformable to our notions
of candid dealing, but we not so presumptu-
Gus to erect rules of duty into standard for
the reproof of those who do not condemn them
selves in that which their consciences allow
QUARREL BETWEEN GERMANY AND DENMARK.
new of alarm is agitating The Cabinets of Eu
rope growing out of the menacng attitude of the German
Federal Diet reference to Danish dutchies The Diet
with what is regarded the climax of assurance demands
Of Denmark common constitution for the whole mon
archy under threat Of Federal execution in Holsein
Denmark represents that only in March last liberal con-
cessons made, ia order TO dispose finally OF the
complaints Of the German Confederation which on all
sides regarded satisfactory. She therefore de-
cines to compromise her independence any further
extent explicitly declared in the royal speech just de-
versd at Copenhagen before the Danish Parliament At
the time solemn protest against the proposed exc