Year: 1861

NV w aNNAoNu VI tSONASui IL w A''''''' 49,
public that we have returned to our post, and
are now prepared to meet, as we trust We
shall always be, any man or any journal, OF


whatever character, upon the issues of the


day


We understand that the Express has been
greatly exercised, of late, in regard to the
position which we might take with respect
to the sentiments of Stephen A. Douglas, in
his speech, of the 81 Of January, in the nj
ted States Senate We submit, that the fact
that our absence from the tripod was duly
announced in the paper, should have preclu-
ded any direct interrogatories of the eharac-
ter alluded to. Men are expected to answer
when they hear the question, or have some
opportunity of replying, not before.


With regard to the interrogatory of the
Express, "what will the DEMOCRAT now do ?"
since the speech of Mr. Douglas, Tor some
query to the same effect,) we have to say,
that it is not for men, who have alternately
praised and alternately denounced Stephen
a. Doughs for the last three years, at the
least lauding him to the skies, when poll
ticai end was to be gained, by caiolcry Of
his friends, aud denouncing him with all the
bitterness of which they were capable when
the grand track Of his public career did not
happen to run parallel with the chance paths
of their own course recognizing him
Democrat at one time and repudiatng him
at another rejecting him, as the regular
nominee of the Democratic Party, after hav-
ing preached regularity through succession
of campaigns, and refusing to support him as
such nominee, Notwithstanding their thou
sand and one protestations that, no matter
what had been the principles he avowed
they would support him, if he were the
choice of the National Convention voting
against him and influencing Others to vote
against him-abusing him from the editorial
tripod-villifying him from the public stump,
and otherwise using all the means that were
in any sense available to defeat him, in full
view of the fact that his defeat would be the
election Of a Republican President seizing
upon every fabrication of his enemies and
circulating it abroad, each man in his several
capacity as a writer for the press or talker
Eupon the street; endorsing the sentiments OF
Eevery obscure correspondent at Washington
who, from the security of his retreat, gave
forth his opinion that the great leader of the
majority Of the Democratic Party in this
Union was ready to jump into the middle
of the ranks of the Republicans; it is not for
such men, we say, having found their track
accidentally falling in for brief period with
that of the great Senator, to ask rs, with an
air of anticipated triumph and smooth-faced
complacency, what wst think and what zoe are
going to do, no,c, with regard to the position
OF Stephen A. Douglas.


If panegyrics are to be passed upon Sena-
tor Douglas, We opine that they will come in
better taste from other lips and other pens
than those which have sought to backen his
character as a Democrat by accusing him o
a leaning to the Republicans and prophecy
ing his speedy fall into their ranks


But, enough Of this We are asked not
alone by the Express but Others, what we
think of MIR. Douglass speech. We would
ask them, in turn, before we proceed to an
swer, what Mey think of his speech :? Do
they endorse it in every particular? If they
do, they differ with certain of their Breckin-
ridge confreres ard leading lights at Sacra-
mento. We take it that Mr.. Douglas scarce
ly utters sentiment in his speech which is
at all satisfactory to the Express, unless it is
in that passage where he says that it is not
good policy to engage, at this time, in war
against the seeding States Why does the
Express agree with him there? Simply be-
cause the Express is opposed to coercion and
has been in any event, whatever But, how
does it arrive at this conclusion? By deny
ing the power of coercion at all How does
Douglas arrive at it2 By asserting broadly
and emphatically the power of coercion,-
first by enforcing authority against ndividu-
! ais and next by war against n governn ent
de facto-but questioning the policy of the
exercise of this power at a time when rebel
lion and resistance have become Revolu-
ton of such potency as to make the attempt
at the enforcement of the Federal authority,
either by civil process or war, equivalent to
bloody conflict of long duration, to end at
last in a severing of the bonds of the Union.


Now, it matters little to us, whether in en-
dOrsing the position of Douglas, we are alto
gether consistent with what we may have
said before, for we think, with Mr.. Douglas.
that the present is no time to study conssten-
cy merely, but a time for the exercise of
sound discretion and a lofty patriotism. To
quote his own words, in the speech we are
considering:


"There are several modes in which this ir-
ritating question may be withdrawn from
Congress, peace restored, the rights of the
States maintained, and the Union rendered
secure. One Of them-one to which can
cordially assent-has been presented by tho
venerable Senator from Kentucky TMr. Crit
tendenl The journal of the Committee of
Thirteen shows that | voted for it in the |
Committee. l am prepared to vote for it
again. l shall not occupy time, now, in dis |
cussing the question whether my vote to
make partition between the two sections
restoration of Missouri Line1 instead of re-
ferring the question tc the people, ,ciH be con,
sistent with my previous record or not Ihe
country has no Uery great interest in ma con-
S'stency The preservation of this Union. the
integrity of the Republic, is of more import
ance than party platforms or individual