Newspaper Page Text
their'eafety. There is, again, only one way i
which that can be effected, and that is by re
moving the causes by which this belief has been
produced. Do that, and discontent will cease, j
harmony and kind feelings between the sections
be restored, and every apprehension of danger
to the Union be removed. The question, then,
is : By what can this be done ? But before 1
undertake to answer this question, 1 propose to
■how by what the Union cannot be saved.
It cannot, then, be saved by eulogies on the
Union, however splendid or numerous. The
cry of “Union, Union—the glorious Union!”
can no more prevent disunion than the cry of
“Health, health—glorious health !” on the part
of a physician, can save a patient lying danger- |
ously ill. So long as the Union, instead ol be
ing regarded as a protector, is regarded in the
opposite, by not much less than a majority of the
States, it will be in vain to attempt to conciliate
them by pronouncing eulogies on i‘.
Besides, this cry of Union comes commonly
from those whom we cannot believe to be sin
cere. It usually comes from our assailants.—
But we cannot believe them to be sincere ; for,!
if they loved the Union, they would necessarily j
bo devoted to the Constitution. It made the
Union, and to destroy the Constitution would be
(o destroy the Union. But the only reliable and
certain evidence of devotion to the Constitution,
is, to abstain on the one hand, from violating it,
•ixl to repel, on the other, all attempts to violate
it. It is only by faithfully performing these high
duties that the Constitution can be preserved,
and with it the Union.
But how stands the profession of devotion to
the Union by our assailants, when brought to
thatest? Let the many acts passed by the
Northern States to set aside and annul the clause
f the Constitution providing for the delivery of
fugitive slaves, answer. I cite this, not that it
is the only instance, (for there are many others,)
but because the violation, in this particular, of
the Constitution is too notorious and palpable to
be denied. Again : have they stood forth faith
fully to repel violations of the Constitution ? Let
their course in reference to agitation of the slave
ry question, which was commenced and carried
on for fifteen years, avowedly for the purpose of
abolishing slavery in the States—an object all
allow to he unconstitutional—answer. Let
them show a single instance, during this long
period, in which they have denounced the agita
tors or their attempts to effect what.is admitted
to be unconstitutional, ora single measure they
havo brought forward, for that purpose. llow
can we, with all these facts before us, believe
that they are sincere in their profession of devo
tion to the Union, or avoid believing their pro
fessixm is but intended to increase the vigor of
their assaults, and to weaken the force of our re
sistance 1
Nor can we regard the profession of devotion
to this Union, on the part of those who are not
our assailants, as sincere, when they pronounce
eulogies upon the Union, evidently with the in
tent of charging us with disunion, without utter
ing one word of denunciation against our assail
ant*. If friends of the Union, their course
should bo to unite with us in repelling these as
saults, and denouncing the authors as enemies of
the Union. Why they, avoid this, and pursue
the course they do, it is for them to explain.
Nor can the Union bo saved by invoking the
nwno of the illustrious Southerner whose mortal
remains repose on the Western bank of the
iVomac. He was one of us—a slaveholder and
a planter. We have studied his history, and
find nothing in it to justify submission to wrong.
On the contrary, his great fame rests on the sol
id foundation, while that he was careful to avoid
doing wrong to others, he was prompt and decided
in repelling wrong. I trust that, in this respect,
we have profited by his example. Nor can we find
any thing in his history to deter us from seceding
from the Union, should it fail to fulfil the objects
for which it was instituted, by being permanent
ly and hopelessly converted into the means of
oppressing instead of protecting us. On the
contrary, we find much in his example to en
courage us, should we be forced to the extremity
of deciding between submission and disunion.
There existed then, as well as now, a
union—that between the parent country and
her Ihen colonies. It was a union that had
much to endear it to the people *f the colonies.
Under its protecting and superintending care,
the colonies were planted and grew up and
prospered, through a long course of years, until
th*y became populous and wealthy. Its bene
fit# were not limited to them. Their extensive
Agricultural and other productions, gave birth
to the flourishing commerce, which richly re
warded the parent country for the trouble and
expenee of establishing and protecting them.
Washington was born and grew up to manhood
under that union. He acquired his early dis
tinction in its service, and there is every rea
son to believe that he was devotedly attached
to it. But this devotion was a rational one.—
was attached, not as an end, but as means
to an end. When it failed to fulfil its end, in
stead of affording protection, was converted in
to means of oppressing the colonies, he did not
heailate to draw his sword, and head the great
movement by which that union w as forever sev
er#H, and tho independence of these States es
tablished. This was the great and crown,
ing glory of his life, which has spread his fame
over the whole globe, and will transmit it to
the latest posterity.
Nor can the plan proposed by the distin
guished Senator from Kentucky, nor that of the
Administration, save the Union. I shall pass
by, without remark, the plan proposed by the
Senator, and proceed directly to the considera
tion of that of the Administration. I howerer
assure the distinguished and able Senator, that
in faking this course, no disrespect whatever is
intended for him or his plan. I have adopted
it because so many Senators of distinguished
abilities, who were present when he delivered
his speeeh and explained his plan, and who
were fully capable to do justice to the side they
support, have replied to him.
The plan of the Administration cannot save
the Union, because it can have no effect what
ever, towards satisfying the States composing
th Southern section of the Union, that they
can, consistently with safety and honor, remain
in the Union. It is in fact but a modification
of the Wilmot Proviso. It proposes to effect
the same object— to exclude the South from all
territory acquired by the Mexican treaty. It
is well known that the South is united against
the \\ ilmot Proviso, and has committed itself
by solemn resolutions, to resist, should it be
adopted. Its opposition is not to the name, but to
that which it proposes to effect. That, the
Southern States hold to be unconstitutional,
unjust, inconsistent with their equality as mem.
bers of the common Union, and calculated to de
stroy irretrievably the equilibrium between the
twe sections. I hese objections equally apply to
what, for brevity, I will call the Executive
Proviso. There is no difference between it and
the VVilmot, except in the inode of effecting the
object, and in that respect I must say, that the
latter is much the least objectionable. It goes
to its object, openly, boldly and distinctly.—
It claims for Congress unlimited power
over the Territories, and proposes to as
assert it over the Territories acquired from
Mexico, by a positive prohibition of slavery. —
Not so the Executive Pioviso. It takes an in
direct course, and in order to elude the YY ilmot
Proviso, and thereby avoid encountering the
united and determined resistance ol the South,
it denies, by implication, the authority of Con
gress to legislate for the Territories, and claims
the right as belonging exclusively to the inhab
itants of the Territories. But to effect the object
of excluding the South, it takes care, in the mean
time, of letting in emigrants freely, from the
Northern States and all other quarters, except
from the South,’ which it takes special cave to
exclude, by holding up to them the danger of
having their slaves liberated under the Mexican
laws. The necessary consequence is to ex
clude the South from the Territory, just as effec
tually as would the VV ilmot Proviso. The only
difference in this respect is, that what one pro
poses to effect directly and openly, the other
proposes to effect indirectly and covertly.
But the Executive Proviso is more objection
able than the VVilmot, in another and more im
portant particular. The latter, to effect its ob
ject, inflicts a dangerous wound upon the Con
stitution, by depriving the Southern States as
joint partners and owners of the Territories, of
their rights in them ; but it inflicts no greater
wound than is absolutely necessary to effect its
object, ‘l'he former, on the contrary, while it
inflicts the same wound, it inflicts others equal
ly as great, and, if possible, greater, as I shall
next proceed to explain.
In claiming the right for the inhabitants, in
stead of Congress, to legislate for the territo
ries, in the Executive Proviso, it assumes that
the sovereignty of the Territories is vested in
the former, or to express it in the language used
in a resolution offered by one of the Senators
from Texas, (Gen. Houston, now absent,) they
have “the same inherent right of self-govern
ment as the people in the States.” The as
sumption is utterly unfounded, unconstitutional,
without example, and contrary to the entire
practice of the Government, from the com
mencement to the. present time, as I shall pro
ceed to show.
The recent movements of individuals in Cal
ifornia to form a Constitution and a State Gov
ernment, and to appoint Senators and Repre
sentatives, is the first fruit of this monstrous as
sumption- If the individuals, who made this
movement, had gone into California as adven
turers, and if, as such,they had conquered the
Territory and established their independence,
the sovereignty of the country would have been
! vested in them, as a separate and independent
[ community, In that case, they would have
had the right to form a Constitution, and to es
tablish a government for themselves, and if, af
terwards, they thought proper to apply to Con
gress for admission into the Union as a sover
eign and independent State, all this would have
been regular, and according to established prin
ciples. But such is not the case. It was the
United States who conquered California, and
finally acquired it by treaty. The sovereignty,
of course, is vested in them, and not in the in
dividuals who have attempted to form a Con
stitution and a State without their consent. All
this is clear, beyond controversy, except it can
be shown that they have since lost or been di
vested of their sovereignty.
Nor is it less clear, that the power of legis.
lating over the acquired territory is vested in
Congress, and not, as assumed, in the inhabi.
tants of the Territories. None can deny that
the Government of the United States have the
power to acquire Territories, either by war or
treaty ; but if the power to acquire exists, it
belongs to Congress to carry it into execution.
On this point there can be no doubt, for the
Constitution expressly provides, that Congress
shall have power “to make all laws which shall
be necessary and proper to cariy into execution
the foregoing powers,” (those vested in Con
gress,) “and all other powers vested by this
Constitution in the Government of the United
States, or in any department or office thereof.”
It matters not, then, where the power is vested ;
for, if vested at all in the Government of he
United States, or any of its departments, or
offices, the power of carrying it into execution
is clearly vested in Congress. But this
important provision, while it gives to
Congress the power of legislating over the
Territories, imposes important restrictions on
its exercise, by restricting Congress to passing
laws necessary and proper for carrying the
power into execution. The prohibition ex
tends, not only to all laws not suitable or ap
propriate to the object of the power, but also
to all that are unjust, unequal, or unfair; for
all such laws would be unnecassary and im
proper, and, therefore, unconstitutional.
Having now established, beyond controversy, that
the sovereignty over the Territories is vested in the
United States—that is, in the several States compos
ing the Union—and that the power of legislating
over them is expressly vested in Congress, it follows,
that the individuals in California who have under
taken to form a Constitution and a State, and to ex
ercise the power of legislating without the consent i
of Congress, have usurped the sovereignty of the >
States and the authority of Congress, and have acted {
in open defiance of both. In other words, what they !
have done is revolutionary and rebellious in its char- !
acier, anarchical in its tendency, and calculated to !
lead to the most dangerous consequences. Had they
acted from premeditation and design, it wmld have
been, in fact, actual rebellion ; but such is not the
case. The blame lies much less upon them than
upon those who have induced them to take a course
so unconstitutional and dangerous. They have been
led into it by language held here, and the course pur
sued by the Executive branch of the Government.
I have not seen the answer of the Executive to the
calls made by the two Houses of Congress, for infor
mation as to the course which it took, or the part
which it acted, in reference to what was done in Cal
ifornia. I understand the answers have not yet been
printed. But there is enough known to justify the
assertion, that those who profess to represent and act
under the authority of the Executive, have advised,
aided and encouraged the movement, which termi
nated in forming, what they called a Constitution and
afeiate. Gen. Riley, who professed to act as civil
Governor, called the Convention, determined on the
number and distribution of the delegates, appointed
time and place of its meeting, was present during the
session, and gave its proceedings his approbation and
sanction. If lie acted without authority, he ought
to have been tried, or at least reprimanded and disa
vowed. Neither having been done, the presumption
is, that his c#urse has been approved. This, of itself,
is sufficient to identify the Executive with his acts,
and to make it responsible for them. I touch not the
question, whether Gen. Riley was appointed, or re
ceived the instructions under which he professed to
g®ODTGOiKED § i GO T Q KD i H.
act, from the present Executive, or its predecessor,
if from the former, it would implicate the preceding
as well as the present Administration. If not, the
responsibility rests exclusively on the present.
It is manifest from this statement, that the Execu
tive Department has undertaken to perform acts pre
paratory to the meeting of the individuals to form
their so-called Constitution and Government, which
appertain exclusively to Congress. Indeed, they are
identical in many respects, with the provisions adopt
ed by Congress, when it gives permission to a Terri
tory to form a Constitution and Government, in order
to be admitted as a State into the Union.
Having now shown that the assumption upon
which the Executive and the individuals in California
acted throughout this whole affair, is unfounded, un
constitutional, and dangerous, it remains to make a
few remarks, in order to show that what has been
done is contrary to the entire practice of the Govern
ment from its commencement to the present time.
From its commencement until the time that Mich
igan was admitted, the practice was uniform. Terri
torial Governments were first organized by Congress.
The Government of the United States appointed the
Governors, Judges, Secretaries, Marshals, and other
officers, and the inhabitants of the Territory wer°
represented by legislative bodies, whose acts were
subject to the revisions of Congress. This state ol
things continued until the government of a Territory
applied to Congress to permit its inhabitants to form
a Constitution and Government, preparatory to ad
mission into the Union, ‘l'he preliminary act to
giving permission was, to ascertain whether the in
habitants were sufficiently numerous to authorize
them to be formed into a State. This was done by
taking a census. That being done, and the number
proving sufficient, permission was granted. The act
granting it fixed ail the preliminaries—the time and
j place of holding the convention, the qualification of
the voters, establishment of its boundaries, and all
other measures necessary to be settled previous to
admission. The act giving permission necessarily
withdraws the sovereignty of the United States, and
leaves the inhabitants of the incipient State as free
to form their Constitution and Government, as were
the original States of the Uhion after they had de
clared their independence. At this stage, the inhab
itants of the Territory became for tiie first time a
people, in legal and constitutional language. Prior
to this, they were, by the old acts of Congress, called
inhabitants, and not people. All this is perfectly
consistent with the sovereignty of the United States,
with the powers of Congress, and with the right ot a
people to self-government.
Michigan was the first case in which there was
any departure from the uniform rule of acting. Hers
was a very slight departure from established usage.
The ordinance of ’B7 secured to her the right of be
coming a State, when she should have 60,000 inhab
itants. Owing to some neglect Congress delayed
taking the census. In the meantim? her population
increased, until it clearly exceeded more than twice
the number which entitled her to admission. At this
stage she formed a Constitution and Government
without the census being taken by the United States,
and Congress waived the omission, as there was no
doubt she had more than a sufficient number to enti
tle her to admission. She was not admitted at the
first session she applied,’ owing to some difficulty
respecting the boundary between her and Ohio. The
great irregularity, as to her admission, took place at
the next session, but on a point which can have no
possible connection with the case of California.
! The irregularities in all other cases that have since
S occurred are of a similar nature. In all, there ex
isted Territorial Governments, established by Con
gress, with officers appointed by the United States.
In all, the Territorial Government took the lead in
calling Conventions, and fixing the preliminaries pre
paratory to the formation of a Constitution and ad
| mission into the Union. They all recognized the
j sovereignty of the United States, and the authority of
Congress over the Territories ; and wherever there
was any departure from established usage, it was
i done on the presumed consent of Congress, and not
| in defiance of its authority, or the sovereignty of the
| United States over the Territories. In this respect
California stands alone, without usage, or a single ex
ample to cover her case.
It belongs now, Senators, for you to decide what
part you will act in reference to this unprecedented
transaction. The Executive lias laid the paper pur
porting to be tbe Constitution of California before
you, and asks you to admit her into the Union as a
State; and the question is : will you or will you not
admit her? It is a grave question, and there rests
upon you a heavy responsibility. Much, very much,
will depend upon your decision. Il you admit her,
you endorse and give your sanction to ail that has
been done. Are you prepared to do so? Are you
prepared to surrender your power of legislation for
the Territories ; a power expressly vested in Congress
by the Constitution, as has been fully established ?
Can yon, consistently with your oath to support the
Constitution, surrender the power? Are you prepar
ed to admit that the inhabitants of the Territories
possess the sovereignty over them, and that any num
ber, more or less, may claim any extent of territory
they please; may from a Constitution and Govern
ment, and erect it into a State, without asking your
permission ? Are you prepared to surrender the'sov
ereignty of the United States over whatever territory
my be hereafter acquired to the first adventurers who
may rush into it ? Are you prepared to surrender
virtually to the Executive Department, all the powers
which you have heretofore exercised over the Terri
tories? If not, how can you consistently with your
duty and your oaths to support the Constitution, give
your assent to the admission of California as a State,
under a pretended Constitution and Government ?
Again: can you believe that the project of a Consti
tution which they have adopted, has the least validi
ty? Can you believe that there is such a State in re
ality as the State of California ? No ; there is no such
State. It has no legal or constitutional existence.
It has no validity, and can have none, without your
sanction. How, then, can you admit it as a State,
when, according to the provision ol the Constitution,
your power is limited to admitting new States. To
be admitted, it must be a State, an existing State, in
dependent of your sanction, before yon can admit it.
When you give your permission to the inhabitants of
a Territory to form a Constitution and a State, the
Constitution and State they form, derive their author
ity from the people, and not from you. The Stale
before admitted is actually a State, and does not be
come so by the act of admission , as would be the case
with California, should you admit her contrary to
constitutional provisions and established usage here
tofore.
The Senators on the other side of the Chamber
must permit me to make a few remarks, in this con
nection particularly applicable to them, with the ex
ception of a few Senators from the South, sittirm on
that side of the Chamber. When the Oregon ques
tion was before this body, not two years since, you
took (if I mistake not) universally the ground, that
Congress had the sole and absolute power of legisla
ting for the Territories. How, then, can you now,
after the short interval which lias elapsed, abandon
the ground which you took, and thereby virtually ad
mit that the power of legislating, instead of being in
Congress, is in the inhabitants of the Territories?
How ran you justify and sanction by your votes, the
acts of the Executive, which are in direct derogation
to what you then contended for ? But to approach
still nearer to the present time, how can you, after
condemning, little more than a year since, the grounds
taken by the party which you defeated at the last
election, wheel round and support by your votes the
grounds which, as explained recently on this floor bv
the candidate of the party in the last election, are
identical with those on which the Executive has act
ed in reference to California ? What are we to under
stand by all this? Must we conclude that there is no
sincerity, no faith, in the acts and declarations of
public men, and that all is mere acting or hollow pro
fession ? Or are we to conclude that the exclusion of
the South from the Territory acquired from Mexico
is an object of so paramount a character in your es
timation, that Right. Justice, Constitution, and Con
sistency, must all yield, when they stand in the way
of our exclusion ?
But, it rnay be asked, what is to be done with Cal
ifornia, should she not be admitted ? I answer, re
mand her back to the Territorial condition, as was
done in the case of Tennessee, in the early stage of
the Government. Congress, in her case, had estab-;
lished a Territorial Government in the usual form,
with a Governor, Judges, and other officers, appoint
ed by the United States. She was entitled, under
the deed of cession, to be admitted into the Union as
a State as soon as she had sixty thousand inhabitants;
The Territorial Government, believing it had that
number, took a census, by which it appeared it ex
ceeded it. She then formed a Constitution, and ap
plied for admission. Congress refused to admit her,
on the ground’ that the census should be taken by
the United States, and that Congress had not deter
mined whether the Territory should be formed iiuo
one or two States, as it was authorized to do under
the cession. She returned ijuietly to her Territorial
condition. An act was passed to take a census bv
the United States, containing a provision that the
Territory should form one State. All afterwards was
regularly conducted, and the Territory admitted as a
State in due form. The irregularities in the case of
California are immeasurably greater, and offer much
stronger reasons for pursuing the same course. But,
it may be said, California may not submit. That is
not probable : but if she should not, when she refuses,
it will then be time lor us to decide what is to be
done.
Having now shown what cannot save the Union,
I return to the question with which I commenced:
Mow can the Union be saved ? There is but one way
by which it can with any certainty, and that is, by a
full and final settlement, on the principle of justice,
of all the questions at issue between the two sections.
The South asks for justice, simple justice, and less
she ought not to take. She has no compromise to
offer, but the Constitution; and no concession or
surrender to make. She has already surrendered so
much that she lias little left to surrender. Such a
settlement would go to the root of the evil, and re
move all cause of discontent. By satisfying the
Soi th, she could remain honorably and safely in the
Union, and thereby restore the harmony and fraternal
feelings between the sections, which existed anterior
to the Missouri agitation. Nothing else can, with
r.ny certainty, finally and forever, settle the question
at issue, terminate agitation, and save the Union.
But can this be done? Yes, easily : not by the
weaker party, for it can of itself do nothing—not even
protect itself—but by the stronger. The North has
i only to will it to accomplish it—to do justice by con
ceding to the Southan equal right in the acquired
territory, and to do her duty by causing the stipula
tions relative to fugitive slaves to be faithfully fulfill
■ ed—to cease the agitation of the slave question, and
i to provide for the :nsertion of a provision in the con
| stitution, by an amendment, which will restore in sub
| stance the power she possessed of protecting herself,
I before the equilibrium between the sections was de
| stroyed by the action of this Government. There
; will be no difficulty in devising such a provision.
I One that will protect the South, and which, at the
! same time, will improve and strengthen the Govern
’ ment, instead of impairing and weakening it.
! But will the North agree to do this ?It is for her
!to answer this question. But, J will sav she cannot
j refuse, if she has half the love lor the Union which
j she prolesses to have, or without justly exposing her
| seif to the charge that her love of power and aggran
dizement is far greater than her love of the Union.
At all events, the responsibility of saving the Union
rests on the North, and not the South. ‘"'The South
cannot save it by any act of hers, and the North may
save it without any sacrifice whatever, unless to do
justice, and to perform her duties under the Constitu
tion, should be regarded by her as a sacrifice.
It is time, Senators, that there should be an open
and manly avowal on all sides, as to what is intended
to be done. Il tlie question is not. now settled, it is
uncertain whether it ever can hereafter be: and we,
as the Representatives of the States of this Union, re
garded as Governments, should come to a distinct
understanding as to our respective views, in order to
ascertain whether the great questions at issue can
be settled or not. It you, who represent the stronger
portion, cannot agree to settle them on the broad
principle ol justice and duty, say so ; and let the States
we both represent agree to separate and part in peace.
If you are unwilling we should part in peace, tell us
so, ams we shall know what to do, when yon reduce
the question to submission or resistance. If you re
main silent, you will compel us to infer what von in
tend. In that case California will become the test
question. It you admit her. under all the difficulties
that oppose her admission, you compel us to inter
that you intend to exclude us from the whole of the
acquired Territories, with tiie intention of destroying,
irretrievably, the equilibrium between the two sec
tions. We would be blind not to perceive in that
case, that your real objects are power and aggran
dizement, and infatuated not to act accordingly.”
1 have now, Senators, done mv duty, in expressing
my opinions tally, freely, and candidly, on this solemn
occasion. In doing so, 1 have been governed by the
motives which have governed me in all the stages of
the agitation of the Slavery question, since its com
mencement. 1 have exerted myself during the whole
period, to arrest it, with the intention the
Union, if it could be done; and if it could not, to save
the section where it has pleased Providence to cast
my lot, and which, I sincerely believe, has justice and
ciie Constitution on its side. Having faithfully done
my duty, to the best of my ability, both to the Union
and mv section, throughout this agitation, 1 shall
have the consolation, let what will come, that I am
free from all responsibility.
THE SOUTHERN SENTINEL
COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, MARCH 14, 1830.
CO” Being about to remove our office, we
offer for rent, the Room which wo have here
tofore occupied. Apply at this Office.
OO* We have employed anew Carrier this
week. If any of our city patrons should be
overlooked, they will confer a favor by making
it known to us.
The Remington Bridge. —An article which
we had prepared on thus wonderful invention,
is unavoidably postponed till next week, as in
deed were several others, intended for this
paper.
Pun. Doc.—We are indebted to Hon. J. M.
Berrien and Hon. M. J. Wellborn for valuable
public documents.
Mr. Calhoun’s Speech.
c have published this document at full
length, to the exclusion of our usual variety of!
outside miscellany. Asa general thing, we i
think we can satisfy ourselves and our readers 1
by confining political matters to the inside of the j
paper ; but our own preference, and a regard for 1
what we knew to be a general curiosity, have
prompted a departure from that rule in this I
instance.
Pomarede’s Panorama. —We promise our i
friends in Macon, a rich treat in this magnifi- j
cent work of art, which has just left for that j
place, after a successful exhibition of six nights
in this city. Such exhibitions richly deserve the
patronage of the public, and we think it speaks
well for the taste of onr citizens, that during i
its stay here, the Hall in which it was ex- j
hibited was nightly thronged with delighted |
crowds of spectators.
Awful Casualty l—Burning of the Online
St. John. —The Montgomery papers bring the
awful intelligence of the burning of the Steamer
Orline St. John, on the Alabama River, two miles
above Bridgeport, at 9 P. M. the sth instant.
Every ladj on board was lost! All the officers
escaped, but the 2d mate. The total number of
lives lost *s estimated at thirty. The boat was
an entire loss.
Mr. Calhoun.
Public attention has, from a variety of consid
erations, been unusually directed to the position,
which would be assumed by the great Caro
linian, in the contest now so warmly waged at
Washington- As much as Mr. Calhoun may
have been maligned by party, there is ho other
living man who so entirely possesses the confi.
deuce of the Southern people, on this question,
as he does. This great, man has been the sub.
ject of almost every charge known to the politi
cal code, but a want of devotion to the South,
has never been one of them, He has been
called ambitious ; it may be that he is, but the
want of ambition such as his, is sure always to
mark the traitor to his country. He has been
called a visionary; he may be, but dreams like
his, are only known to 1 the statesman, who is
profound enough to look into the arcana of polit
ical philosophy, and wise enough, to discern
amid the secrets of the future, the results of caus
es which he now sees in operation. Ho has
been charged with inconsistency ; the charge
may be true, but such inconsistency fails alone
to distinguish the history of that man, who is
weak enough to persist in ascertained error,
through fear of being thought a changeling. But
as we said before, indifference to Southern hon
or and Southern lights, lias never been classed
among the political sins of Mr. Calhoun. So
far from it, his uniform and unfaltering devotion
to the South, has been made the basis of an ac
cusation more foul and more false than all the
other devices of his enemies. -He has been de
nounced as a Disunionist; as an enemy to his
country ! We apprehend that his recent mani
festo will not have the effect of removing this im
pression, though to our mind, it furnishes indubi
table evidences of that deep seated devotion to
the Union, which every act of his life has de
monstrated, has always been second only, to his
devotion to honor and to justice. Why should
Mr. Calhoun bethought to be a disunionist?
Is it because he takes extreme ground in defence
ot the South ? But what if it should be made to
appear that it is thus alone that the Union can
be preserved ? Such is exactly the view which
Mr. Calhoun takes of this question, and we con
ceive that the reasoning of his speech fully sus- ;
tains him in this conclusion. What are we to 1
understand by preserving the Union? Is it
meant merely that such an adjustment of the is.
sues immediately before the country, as will
serve to allay for the present, the feverish sec
tional excitement by which the Union is distrac
ted, is to secure the integrity of the Union?
When we a e told that the Union must be ‘pre
served, are we to understand that danger is mere
ly to be postponed by a temporary settlement of
| the immediate causes of discord, or is it meant
that this glorious confederacy of States is to lie
secured in that stability, so sincerely invoked by
i those who framed it ? In short, is the Union to
jbe preserved for a day, or for all time? If the
I former, then the temporizing policy of compro
mise and concession may be sufficient ; but if
the latter, then we confess our only hope for the
future, is in the adoption of Mr. Calhoun’s sug
gestion. ‘What is it that endangers this Union 1
Is it the question of the Wilmot Proviso merely,
or is it the admission of California merely? If
it were so, then indeed we might laugh at the
idle croakings of those who would anticipate the
disseverance of the bonds of Union, for a cause
so trifling ; so easily accommodated. These
are, however, but the accidental manifestations
j a cause, long anterior in its operation to, and
far behind, the particular measures in discus
j W hat then is the disturbing element in
the political union of these States? It is, the
solemn and fixed determination of the Northern
States, to extirpate slavery from the confines of
the American Union. Who can read the histo
r) of the slavery agitation, without being forced
to this conviction ? How else can we rationally
account for the constant pertinacity, and the in
creasing presumption of those, by whom this ag
itation has been conducted. Each particular
measure which has, at different times, seemed to
constitute the end ot their exertions, has, as soon
| as it has been secured, been converted into a
I stepping stone to still farther aggressions upon j
: our rights. Such is unquestionably the design
| in the agitation now so fearfully waged in the |
Halls of Congress. Is the Wilmot Proviso, or
the admission of California, prosecuted with such
! unprecedented assiduity because those measures ■
embrace the ultima, tliule of their design, or is it
| not because, in the accomplishment of these, the
- agitators will have secured a more advantageous j
1 position, from which to recommence their exer
; lions? It we are correct in attributing this cri- 1
j sis to the cause suggested, then the momentous
j question presented to the South, aye, and to the
North likewise, is, how is the Union to be res
j cued from its tendencies ? Eloquent appeals to
the Union will not do it; soul stirring recur
rences to the circumstances attending its forma,
tion, will not do it; resolutions will not do it;
legislation will not do it. What will ? We an
swer, nothing can, but a constitutional guar
anty ofthe rights, the equality and the honor of
the South. But Southern men tell us that such
a guaranty is already afforded by the constitu
tion. This wo believe to be true, but on this
point even the entire South is not agreed, while
the almost unanimous sentiment of the North is
against us. Os what avail, then, are our present
constitutional guaranties, when a tyrannical ma
jority is able, by a system of false construction, to I
deprive us of all their benefits ?
While we admit, therefore, that by a fair
construction ofthe constitution, we are already
secured, the North interprets it differently; we
demand, therefore, the incorporation of a pro
vision into that instrument, which shall require i
n o interpretation ; which is so plain that even j
our enemies may understand it ; and we ask j
also that this security may be placed beyond
the altering power of any numerical majority,
by requiring the unanimous voice of all the
States before it can be changed. But it is said
that such a plan is impracticable; that the
North will never agree to it. We answer, if
the North intends to recognize the South as
equals ; if her object is not to deprive us of our
rights, she will not hesitate in giving her con
sent to a measure which proposes merely to se
cure that equality and those rights. On the
other hand, if the North designs to degrade us
into inferiority, and to disregard, nay, to out.
rage our rights, then of course she will not
consent to the proposition, nor will wo consent
longer to a Union, preserved on such terms.
W ho is the craven that would desire to contin
ue a L nion, in which he was degraded to tl*o
condition of an interior, and in which hi rights
| were not respected ? Then, if this plan propos
es nothing more than a security against ucb a
disgrace, why not make it- adoption a test for
continuing the Union ? For one. wo are pre
pared to instruct our delegates to the Southern
convention, to stand upon this proposition. If
it is accepted, let them return to their constitu
ents, honored and blessed ns the instruments
by which the Union has been perpetuated ; if it
is rejected, let them come back to aid us in
forming another Union, or to assist us in tho
vindication ol our reserved rights.
There is one view of this question which w
must not pass over, although we have already
protracted this article much beyond the limits
we intended for it. It is this : We arc belter
:
able to settle this question now, than ire ever
trill be iikukavtkr. If we ever intend to
make a stand, therefore, let us do it while we
have tho ability to make ourselves heard. If
we are to rely upon argument in the settlement
of this issue, let it be made before we have, by
continued submission, precluded ourselves from
tho use of all the strong points in our case ; or
if it is to be arbitrated by theiirord, let the ap.
peal be made while there is reason to hope that
it will be successful. In either event, now is
the auspicious time. Dangers double by delay.
FOR THE SENTINEL.
Tlic Nashville Convention.
Wo are proposing to settle grave and momen
tous questions, and ought to approach our object
with the thought and deliberation which its im
portance demands. No position should be taken
lait such as is tenable, and such as would hnr
j monize and unite the whole South ; none but
such as we are determined to sustain and defend
at all hazards. Our thoughts and our calcula
tions should be cast far into the future, where we
might scan well the consequences of any action
bad at that Convention. 1 his is no child’s plnv,
no demonstration to be seen upon paper, and
then to pass away as a mere flourish of resolu
tions and purposes. Wc are proposing to be
sincere, and to carry out what we propose ; any
lalse Step, or wrong assumption, will serve but to
distract and divide—defeating our object, dis
gi.icing us before the world,.and ruining our en
terprise leaving us in a worse condition than
when we began. We have grievances, many,
and these may he continued and multiplied until
forbearance ceases to be a virtue, or our love of
the Union to be equal to our Jove of right. Thru
there would be but one sentiment, but one voice
at the South—“ Let it come ! let it coine ! We
will resist, though fortune, and home, and our
selves, should be the sacrifice —ire will resist
This is the language that I am willing to instruct
those who may represent me, to hold in that
Convention, and to publish to the world. Yea,
I want that they should say to fanatics everr
uhere “ 1 luts lar inayst thou come, and no fur
ther. But, sir, I want not to cast away this
Union, the glory of our own land and the illustri
ous example of the world—a Union cemented
by the blood ot our fathers, and whose blessings
I have enjoyed for half a century. No man can
represent me, nor do I think the people of this
District, who takes the dissolution of this Union
as his first choice. I will go further, and say,
that I do not want one, who will do more than
adopt this, as his last and only honorable alterna
tive. He who thinks that it is desirable to dis
solve it, has not properly appreciated its benefits,
nor correctly estimated the consequences of the
change. In the selection of representatives, wo
are not, in this case, to look to personal popular,
ify or availability. “Principles and not men,”
should certainly be the controlling sentiment.
If harmony and union are to prevail, let the opin
ions and policy of those who arc selected as
candidates, be fully and freely expressed, and let
that selection fall upon no ultraist.
• Muscogee.
Important to Travellers. The South
Plank Road Company from Montgomery to Clai
borne, Ala. is organized, with capital sufficient to
complete the Road in twelve to fifteen months*
the Engineer employed and survey commenced.
; This route will place the Northern traveller irv
New Orleans two days sooner than the route’
from Montgomery by the River Boats, and rice
versa, place the Orleans traveller in New York
two days earlier. It will expedite the mail be
tween the two cities one day.
(fT Solomon Coiien, Esq. has been ap
pointed Cashier ofthe Central Railroad Bank*
vice Bullock resigned , and Andrew Low, Esq_
elected a Director in the place of Mr. Cohen.. *
Ihe Republican says—at an auction sale on.
the sth inst., 25 shares of Central Railroad’
stock sold at 90 cts., which is the highest sale
at auction for several years. This indicates
that the stock will not be much affected by the
“financial” operations of the late Cashier.
(£r We learn that Gen. Twiggs had hi*
arm broke recently* by a fall from, his horse, in,
Florida.