Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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.