Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

seized on Ihe slave torri’ory of Texas, and appropriated it to free soil. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The only direct effect resulting from this moo uto upon the rhvery question, was to temovo the prohibi tion upon slavery in that portion of the ced ed territory, boingj above 36, 30, which was put upon it in the nrticlcs of unnoxation, when Texas was admitted into the Un ion. This bill removes that prohibition, and submits to the decision of the people of the territory when they come to organize thoir Slate govi rninon*—the question whether or not slavery shall constitute a part of their so cial system. This bill, like the others which 1 liavo cans.dored, received the warm uni cordial support of a majority of Southern Ke Werehlatives, and encountered its bitler- c-l opposition from tho free soil Roprosontn- ■ves of the North. Tho only remaining bill affecting our terri torial acquisition, war the ono for the admis sion of California ns n State t ito the Union This measure was objectionublo to Southern men, though it finally received the support of nearly one : third of the Representatives of the South. In commun with a majority of the South, I entertained objections to this It'll j I preforrod that a territorial govern ment should have boun provided for Califor- nir, as was done for Utah and New Mexico. It would have boen the more regular and np- printe mode of disposing of that portion ol the territory ; but the failure to uo so, 1 do not regard as n violation of the Constitution, or 'ho tights of the South In tho admission of California, Congress exorcised a powor cxprossly conforrod upon it, by tho Constitu tion, “to admit new Stales into tho Union;’’ and though our judgments do not wholly ajt- provo of tho exorcise of that discretionary powor in this instnneo, it constitutes no such enuse of complaint against (ho government, ns would justify the rr istance which I® been Indicated by the enemies of the Com promise nnd the advocates of disunion. The principle upon which Cnlifornia was admittod into the Union, with her constitu tion prohibiting slavery, has ovor received the sanction of Southern statesmen. That principle denies to Congress the right to look into the constitution of n State asking for admission into tho Union, farther than to see that it is republican in its form of gov ernment. Whether slavery shall exist there is a question, not for the consideration of Congress; but to bo determined by the peo ple when they frame their Stnto coustilti- lion. This doctrine wns cloarly expressed in the following resolution, introduced by Mr. Cal houn into tho Senate of tho United States, in 1847. It wns the annunciation oi a sound constitution^ principle, and 1 am prepared to maintain its correctness : “llesolvail, Tlint ns a fuiidiiiieiilal princi ple in our political-creed, a people, in lorm- ing a constitution, have tho unconditional right to form and adopt the government which they may think best calculated to so- curo liberty, prosperity and happiness; and that in conformity thereto, no other condition is imposed by the federal constitution on a State, in order to her admission into this Union, except that its constitution bo repub lican, and that the Imposition of any other by Congress would not only be in violation of tho constitution, but in diroot conflict with tho principle on which our political system resists.” _<*♦ Lill-t..- *L- **f 1 la a ej...... lrndo in tho district ot Columbia, wns object- od to by Southern men, principally on the ground of tho penally which it provides.— Tfiot feature, is taken from tho laws of Ma ryland, and it will be reinoinborcd, that all that now remains of tho district, was origin- nlly a part of tho Slato of Maryland. In 1810 the Stale of Georgia prohibited the in troduction of slavery within this Stato for sale, under n penalty of a fine of five hundred dollurs, and imprisonment in tho penitentiary for four years, for each slavo brought into tho Stato for sale. This law was repealed in 1843, and re-cnocted in 1843, and ngain repealed at the session of 1840. The penal ty for the violation of the District law is tho liberation of the slave ; which is, as 1 have said, the same penally provided by tho Ma ryland law for a violation of their Act upon the same subject. There was, as far as 1 could learn, but one voice among tho people of the district on this subject. They all de sired it. The Fugitive Slave Dill, is the only rc iimining measuc of tho compromise to be con sidered. 1 wish it was practicable, without extending this communication to too great a length, to encorporate into it, the leading provisions of the bill. It must suffice, how ever, to state, that it was prepared by one of the most extreme advocates of Southern Rights in Congress. It contains every pro vision that was demanded by the South, and 1 have jwt to meet with the first man who claims more nt the hands of Congress on this subject, than this bill grants. Congress in the adoption of this bill, lias, in my judg ment, exhibited a willingness and determina tion, fully to discharge ihe obligation which the constitution imposes for tho delivery of our fugitive slaves. I hare now rapidly referred to each of the compromise measures, and you will see, that whilst in the language of the Georgia Con vention, 1 do not wholly approve of all these measures, yet 1 see in them no violation of our constitutional rights—nor is there, in my opinion, any thing which forbids on tho part of our people, an honorable acquiesence in these measures. Such was tho decision of the people of this State, Inst fall, ns recorded by their delegates in tho convention of last November. If I did not regard the settle ment as fair and honorable, 1 would not be found among the advocates of the Georgia Phtforin. It is not simply because Geoigin bos decided the question, that I maintain hor decision—but because she hns made a wise, just and patriotic decision. If 1 thought that Georgia hud made a decision which subjected her citizens to terms of inequality nnd degradation, i would, ns a loyal citizen, submit to her will, until I could induce her, if in my power, to abandon so humiliating n position ; and such, 1 presume, is the po sition of every honorable man within her limits ; it is, therefore, right and proper, that the people should know not only, who will submit to the decision of the State, but also, who approves and will sustain that de cision. V'our first interrogatory, directs my atten tion to the question of secession, and you liaye put the issue upon the right of n State secede from the Union without just cause, s right is claimed by many os const! ll right, nnd by all of those who advo ** "s modern acceptation, as consist. ’ iitmnal obligations, 1 shall When asked to concede the right of n Stato to socodo nt pleasure from the Union, with or w ithout just cause, we are called up on to admit that the fratnors of the constitu tion did that Which was never done by any other people, possessed of their good sense nnd intelligence—that is to provide in the ve ry organization oj the government for its own ilissolution. It seems to me, that such a coiirso would not only liavo boen an anom alous proceeding—but wlioly inconsistent with tho wisdom and sound judgement which marked the deliberations oi those wise and good men, who framed our Federal Govern ment. Whilst 1 fresly admit that such an opinion is entertained by many, for whoso judgement 1 entertain tho highest respect, 1 have no hesitation in declaring that the con victions of my own judgement are well sot- tied, that no such principle was contemplat ed in the adoption of our constitution.— If it wns the purpose of tho framers of the constitution, to subject the perpetuity of the Union to ibo will, and indeed 1 may add,— tho caprice of each Slate, it is a most re markable fact, (hut n principle of such vast importance, involving the r cry cxistenco of the republic, should liavo been left an open- question, to bo decided by inferences nnd metaphysical deductions of the must compli cated chnructer. When ono rises from n careful study of tho constitution of the United Stules, ho feels Impressed with its wonderful adaptation to the wants and inter ests of this growing people. Not only docs he find wise und judicious provisions mid guarantees for the stnto of tho country ns it then existed, but with prophetic wisdom its framers seem to have penetrated the future, accommodating tho government to the neces sities and requirements of its present in creased population and oxteuded resources. I nm not prepared .to admit that tho men who exhibited so much cure and foresight in reference to all the various parts of this com plicated mnehino—would have left to vaguo conjecture tho existence of tho important and vital power now claimed for each State, of dissolving at pleasure, tho Union which had costs them und their cotnpnlriuts so much toil, nr.d Inbor, nnd anxiety. If they hud intended to provide fur tho destruction of that noblo structure, which they wore then oroctiug with nil tho care and wisdom ofnblo Statesmen nnd dovoted patriots, by such sim ple mid obvious means, an the withdrawal of nny State from tho confederacy—they would liavo mmiifcslcd their intention by some plain and palpable provision of constitution. Such n course would hnvo been characteristic of tho honest practicul and enlightened states men of the convention. Their failure to do so carries tho strongest conviction to my mind, that no such principle wns recognized by tbom. In connection with this view of tho subject, tho inquiry forces itself upon our minds, if eacli Stale reserved tho right to withdraw at pleasure from the Union, why was there so much difficulty encounter ed by tho friends of tho constitution in ob taining its ratification by tho different States ? There were few, if nny, who were opposed to the formaliun of tho Union, after the con stitution bad been submitted to the Stales for ratification, provided they could engraft certain amendments upon it. Tho policy of a- doptiiigtlicjconstitution,conditioned that these amendments should bo ut-ceded to, was urg ed with grent earnestness in the conventions, und among the pcoplo of several of the States, hut wmt finally abandoned pn the around that it would be a conditional ratification, and therefore inadmissible. On this point I must refer to the opinion expressed by Mr. Mad! son, who lias been callod “the father of the constitution,” nnd to whose exposition of that sacred instrument the republican parly have been accustomed to look with such im plicit coufidonce. Mr. Madison says : “My opinion is, that a reservation of a right to withdiaw, if amendments be not de cided on under the form of tho constitution within a corlain time, is n conditional ratifi cation ; that it docs not make Now York a member of tho new Union ; and consequent ly, that she would not bo roceived on tliut plan. Compacts must bo reciprocal; Ibis principle would not in such n case be pre set veil. The constitution requires an adop tion in tola and fobeveb." If the right was reserved to each State to withdraw, it would have beon an act of su pererogation on tho part of Now York, or any other State, to declare in advance, that she would withdraw or secede, if tlte amend ments sbo proposed to the constitution were not adopted If the right existed, it could be exorcised ns well without as with tho condition annexed to Iter ratification of the constitution, and tho assertion of it would hnve been n useless interpolation und a nulli ty. It was not so regarded however, at the time, by those who hud boen active partici pants in the framing of the constitution.— Mr. Madison considered the reservation of a right to withdraw from the Union as “a con dition that would vitiate the ratification.”— He says farther in writing to Mr. Hamilton on this subject: ,l 'The idea of reserving a right to withdraw was started at Richmond, and considered as n conditional ratification, which wns itself abandoned ns worse than a rejection.” If tho the opinion of Mr. Madison, which have here referred to be well founded, it puts an cud to this controversy. There can io no doubt about the fact, that he did not recognize the right ot each State to secede from the Union at iier own pleasure. In ad dition to the fuels which 1 hnve just consid ered, there is a strong illustration of the opinion that prevailed among the lrnmcrs of the constitution on this subject, in the action of tlic State of North Carolina and Rhode Island. These Stales refused to come into the Union for some lime after the ratification of tho Constitution. They were not oppos ed to the formation ot tho Federal Union, but like some of the other States, they were unwilling to adopt the constitution as it then stood. If it had been a recognized and un doubted principle that each State was bound to remain in the Union, only so long as it suited its own convenience, no one doubts that the re States, instead of withholding their assent to tho constitution, after it had been adopted by the requisite number, would have come at onco into the Union, with the intention of immediately withdrawing from it, upon the refusal of the other States to adopt such amendments as they desired, but regarding tho effect of their ratification of the constitution in an entirely different light, from the secessionists of the picsent day, they adopted quite a different policy. So far as we can gather light and information from the opinions nnd actions of the men who fiumcd nnd adopted the constitution, it all goes to strengthen nnd confirm tho con viction I have already expressed against the ielenco of any such right. • - .he country fi the time of the declaration ol indopondenco to tho udoption of the constitution, is con firmatory of the correctness of the opinion 1 have expressed. In the original artistes of confederation, it is moro than once declared that the object was to form a perpetual Un ion. Those articles ot confederation were found too weak, and inefficient, to carry out the groat purposes of tho people in tlie es tablishment of a general government, and henco it was, that in its own language, wns tlie present constitution adopted for the pur pose of forming “ a more perfect union ” It irottld be a reflection, both upon the integ rity and the wisdom of the framers of the constitution to say, that they abnndoned “a perpetual Union” to form n a mohe fehfect one, and in doing so, adopted a temporary, conditional Union. Such, however, is the construction placed by the secessionists up on the action of those great and good men, to whose energv, wisdom, and patriotism, we are indebted for our present noble and glorious Union. Tlie policy of our government during its wliolo existence, looks to the continuance nnd perpetuity of tlie Union. Its temporary and conditional existence, is uo where im pressed either upon its domestic or foreign policy. It lias for more than half n century pursued the even tenor of its way, growing in strength a id increasing in usefulness, tak ing deeper nnd deeper bold upon the hearts und affections of the jteoplo; illustrating the great American principle of free government, and reflecting upon its inspired founders tho highest nnd brightest honors. Whilst 1 do not propose to illustrate these views by a detailed review of tho action of tho govern ment, I cannot forbear to refer to one por tion of our history, which is strongly corrob orative of the correctness of (ho position I have assumed. When tlie people of the United States determined upon the purchase of the liouisinna territory, nnd cffocted that desirable object at tlie cost of a considerable amount of money, and by tho excrciso of n questionable constitutional power, it will not be said, that they did so forbear (lie benefit of those who then inhabited tlie country, nor indeed for those who might subsequently re moved there. They were pomptea to the acquisition of that vast and valuable territo ry by considerations of public policy, iifiect- ing their interests nnd wclfurc ns citizens of ibo various States of tlie Union. The com mercial and military advantages to tho Unit ed Status, from tho possession of that coun try, wero so grent und important, that its ac quisition wns considered almost nn net of self-protection. Will it now bo said that the people of Louisiana, possess the right to deprive the remaining Stales ol the Union, of nil tho interests and advantages which they liavo bought nnd paid for, out of their own trensury, by withdrawing or seceding from tho Union at will ? Louisiana is ns free, sovereign, mid inde pendent as any oilier Sinte of the Union, and if this right exist in any one State, it ex ists in all, without reference to tho mode by which the territory wns acquirod, out of which tho State is formed. I apprehend that the people of the United States did not for a moment enteitain tho iden, that in ad mitting Louisiana into tho Union, they had thus perilled nil tho advantages of that im- poitnnt acquisition, by placing it in tho pow er of a single Stnto to deprive the Union ol commercial nnd military advantages and re- emtrppQ, of mootimnl’io raluo, purchnocd by tho joint treasure of ail tho States, and now held by them as beyond the reach of any prico or consideration that could he offered in exchange for them. These remarks apply with equal force to all the territorial acqui sitions made by the United States, where States have been or may herenftcr ho form ed and admitted into the Union, nnd the same principle might be forcibly illnstrated by reference to the action of the government on subjects of a kindred character, but it cannot bo necessary and I will not extend this view to nny great length. When the right of a Stato to secede from the Union at will is conceded, wo hnve put the existence of the government nt the dis posal of each State in tho Union. The withdrawal of one, is n' dissolution of the compact which holds the States together ; it is no longer the Union that the constitution formed, and the remaining States are absolv ed from all .moral obligation to abide longer by their compact. I say moral obligation, boenuso the argument of the secessionists denies tho existence of any binding legal ob ligation. By admitting the doctrine of the secessionists, wo are brought to the conclu sion that our Federal Government, the pride and boast of every American patriot, the wonder and Admiration of the civilized world, is nothing more than a voluntary as sociation] temporary in its character, weak and imbecile in the exorcise of its powers, incapable of self-preservation, claiming its citizens allegiance, and demanding annual tribute from their treasure—-nnd yet, desti tute of tho power of protecting their rights or preserving their liberties. If this he the true theory ol our government, what is the constitution of the United States, that we should estimate it so highly ? Where is its binding force, that we should hold to its provisions with such unyielding tenacity r Individuals cannot violato their compacts, or set aside at pleasure their mutual obligations, without the assent of the other parties. Na tions cannot recklessly disregard their treaty stipulations, without incurring the conse quences of violated faith. But our consti tution, the revered monument of revolution ary potriotism and wisdom, which we have been taught to regard with reverential feel ing is doomed to fall below tho standard of national treaties, and individual contracts. It has formed a Union founded upon mutual sacrifices and concessions—made by the sev eral component parts for the greater benefits to be derived bv each, from tho combined co-operation of all—and now we ore told that there is no obligation to observe that Union, beyond the ploasure of the parties to it—ond that tho constitution can be annulled by the act of any State in the confederacy. 1 do not so understand our goverment, I feel that 1 owe my allegiance to a goverment. could not complain of nny cousquence that should result from my avowal of doctrines which I have imbibed from the teachings of Mr. Madison, Gen. Jackson, Judge Craw ford, nnd their republican associates. It does not follow, however, ns a necessary conse quence of the principles which I hnvo laid aown, that military coercion is to he used against a State that may nttempt the exercise of this revolutionary right. Whilst I deny the right of a State to secede and thus dissolve the Union, I would not at tempt by the strong arm of military power to bring her citizens back to their allegiance, unless, compelled to do so in defence of the rights and interests of the remaining States ot the Union. We should not recognize separate independence, nor could we allow our own interests to bo periled by sanction ing any alliance she miglit be disposed to make with nny foreign government. In our de sire to inflict no injury upon a wandering sister wo should not forget the duty which tho government owes to those who remain firm nnd true to thoir allegiance nnd whose claims upon its protection and support should not be lightly regurded. The laws of self protection would require at the hand of the government that due regard should ho had for the protec tion of the rights and interests of the other States, nnd to that demand, it would bo bound to respond. If one of tho States should in a mad hour attempt to secede from the Un ion, nnd that kind and indulgent policy which I have indicated should be resorted to 1 hnve no doubt that in a very short time such State would feel it to bo both her duly and interest to retrace her wandering steps, nnd return to the embrace of thejsisternood This opinion is founded upon the high estimate which 1 place upon the value of the Union to each atm nil of the Stales that compose it, which would require tho experience of only njshort ab sence, to tench the wanderer the benefits nnd advantages from which she lmd voluntarily exiled herself. Such nro the general views which I entertain on this subject, and I have l recly ex pressed them. I liavo discussed it as \ moro abstract question, and in that light I regard it. Whatever differences of opinion tuny exist among tho true friends of the Union on tho abstract question of tho right of seces sion, 1 apprehend thnt when it assumes n practical shape, there would be but slight shades of difference as to tlie policy and effect of our action. There many who hold to the doctrine of the right of a State to secede from thuUnion, with whom 1 do not dif fer practically. They grant the abstract right of cession, but claim for the remaining States the right to protect themselves from uny injurious consequen ce’s that might flow from tho exercise of that ab stract right by the seceding State, It is only neces sary to State the two propositions to show that,in tho end, tho practical operation of their principlss would fond to the same results that I would reach by tlie enforcement of tho doctrines which I have avowed 1 Our difference is theoretical, not prnclicul, nnd therefore constitutes no impediment in the way of our cordial co-operation. Wo all hold that just and wiso laws should be cn forced and executed, whilst we are prepared to op pose acts of injustice nnd oppression by all the means in our power, and to tho rupture of "very tie that binds us to uny governm’t. No govbnm’t however wisely and honestly administered,oun ho maintained in thcabscnceofbiuding obligations on its citizens to obey its laws, nnd power to enforce their execution on recusant parties. Hence; I cannot consent to the doctrine that our government is destitute of these powers essential tD its vitality nnd cxistenco. The cluiin which I have urged in behalf of tlie Federal Government cannot bo abandoned without endan gering tho whole frame work of our admirable sys tem—nor is there nny serious danger to be appre hended from its improper exercise. Its true strength, hosed upon tho existence of tlioso powers, is to bo found in the justice and wisdom of its legislation ; tlioso nro the true and only safe nTenues to tho hearts and affections ol tho people, wherein are found the strong pillars ofsupporttoa free government. I do not entertain tho iden, for a moment, that our gov ernment can be maintained by the strong aim ol military power, when it ceases to bestow tho bles sings upon tho people for which it was formed.— Whenever it becomes tlie instrument of wrong and oppression to any portion of tho people by unjust laws and degrading legislation, it will qenso to be tlie Union formed by our revolutionary fathers, and possessing no further claims upon oar alliance nnd support; should that period ever unfortunately ar rive, wo will not fail to prove ourselves as true to the principles of liberty and equal rights as our hon ored nnd venerated fathers; nor will wo stop to look to the provisions of a violated constitution for tho mode or measure for tho redress ol our grievan ces. I liavo so far considered the question in reference to the doctrine of tho constitutional right of a State to secede without just cuuse, at her own will und pleasure, and I think I have shown that it is unsup ported either by principle or authority, On tlie other hand, I admit tho right of a State to secede for just causes, to be determined by herself. Being a party mho compact,which the constitution forms, she bus the right, which nil other parties to a com pact possess, to determine'for herself when, where and how, tho provisions of that compact have boen violated. It is equally clear that tho oilier parties to tho compact possess n corresponding right to -udge for themselves, and there being no common arbiter to decide between them, each must depend for tlie justification ol their course upon the justice of their cause, the correctness of their judgment,and their power and ability to maintain their decision. The right of a Stnto to secede incase of oppres sion, or “ a gross nnd palpable violation” of lier constitutional rights, ns derived from tlie reserved sovereignty of tlie States, I am prepared to recognize. In such case, each State, in tlie language of the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1798—’O'J, is to bo the judge, not only of tlie “ infractions,” but “ tlie mode nnd measure of redress.” It is tlie just right of tho people to change their form of govern ment when, in their opinion, it Jins bccomo tyrun- cal, in a mode not provided lor in tho consti tution nnd is therefore revolutionary in its character, nnd leponds for its maintenance upon tho stout hearts nnd strong arms of a free poopie In connection with tills brar.eh of tlie subject, a question arises, which, in the opinion of some, of considerable importance. It is. whether or not the citizens of a Stnto thus resuming her sovereign powers would be liable to the charge of treason ii conforming to the requirements of their Stato gov may become a practicul ono—I sincerely trust and hopo it nover will. Under tho existing laws of tho* United States, tho President has no power to order out tho militia to coerce a seceding State. Neither the Act of 1700 nor the Act of IS07 Would apply in such nn emergency. Tnaso Act* nppiy to cases where individuals, acting without tho authority of any State government, resist, by force, tho laws of tho United Suites—to riots and insurrections—to such cases ns we wero apprehensive a few mouths inee might bo manifested In opposition to tiro Fu gitive Slave Law in portions of the Northern States* That this is tho true construction to bo placed up- these Acts, will be apparent from tlie conduct of Gen. Jackson In a former period of our history; when tlie State of South Carolina threatened to se cede from tlie union. Ilo then found it necessary to invoko the aid ol additional legislation by Congress, ills appeal to tho then Congress resulted in tho pas sage of tho law familiarly known ns " tho Force Bill;” but Unit net being temporary in its object and character, has lost nil ol its vitality, nnd long sinco ceased to be of force, having expired by its own limitation. In the contingency involved In your question, it Would be necessary tlmt tho President, if his views of right and policy led him to coercion, should ask of Congress additional legLIution, nnd it would be for them to determine whether or not they would grant It. Ifa State should secede, nnd tho President should recommend to Congress sueh legis. hition and Congress should grant it, then your ques tion would become practical, nnd lain prepared to answer it fully, freely, nnd frankly. It would be the most fearful issue that over tlie people of tills coun try have been called on to decide sinco the dnysof tho revolution—so momentous, so vital to the Inter ests of the people of Georgia, that I should feel bound to ascertain tlie will of tlmt people before I acted. I should endeavor to be the Executive of the wilt of the people of Georgia. To ascertain that will, I should convene tho Legislature of tho State, nnd recom mend to them to call a convention of the poopie,and it would be for tlmt convention, representing the people upon that nnked Issue, to determine whether Georgia would go out of tho Union, nnd ally herself nnd peril hor destinies with tho seceding State, or whether shejwould remain in tho Union and abide the fortunes of her othor sisters. And ns Georgia spoke, so would 1 endeavor, if her Executive, to give power and effect to hor voice. But if a collision of arms botweon tho States posing our glorious confederacy should over come, it requires no prophet to predict tho result. The Un ion would fall beneath the weight of revolution nnd blood, nnd fall, I fear, to rise uo more. It was form ed in the hearts of tho American people—it can on ly ho preserved in thoir bouts When nny hug portion of its inhabitants look upon it as npprettive ami degrading to them—when they cease to revere it as the legacy of Washington am! the inheritance of the blood of the revolution, its vitality wi 1 be gone, nnd empty parchments, though aided by mil itary force, can never hold it together. lienee, wo sec the abolitionists of tho North denouncing it covenant with hell,” nnd hence wo hear tho disun- ionists ol the South iulluming the boa its of tho peo ple against it, announcing thn* they have been de graded and oppressed by it, and preparing to over throw it. They are wise men,.they understand tin workings of the human heart, and they well know that when the heart feels that Wrong, Indignity and insult have been heaped upon a man, unless he be indeed a craven spirit, u blow will follow. Prepai tho hearts oftlie people to hate tlie Union ot their fathers, and the buttle js won—they are ready to tight ngninst it* lienee believing as 1 do, that the late compromise is such, in the lungunge of the Georgia Platform, ** ns she can in honor abide by,* I liavo used every effort rn my power to stay this ceaseless and ruinous agitation North nnd South, and to keep tho constitution and the Union win re our fathers erected them—firmly on tho foundation of the people's, hearts. I am, very respectfully, your ob't serv’t. HOWELL COUP. Mesirs. John Rutherford, N. Bass, 11. A. L. Atkin son and others. ^THURSDAY MORNINOAUa 31,1851 ~ Jr KNO YVLES, EDITOR . ^ M Should Congress at ang time exhibit its purpose to war upon our property, or withhold our just constitutional rights, we stand ready to vindicate those rights, in the Union as long as possible, and out of the Union when we are left no other alternative, }> possessed of more vitality and strength, than that which is drawn from a voluntary obedi ence to its laws. I hold that no goverment is entitled to my allegiance that docs ‘ not pass wise and just laws, and does not pos sess the power to enforce and executo them I am fully aware of the fact that the effort is now being made to render the denial of the right of a btate to dissolve the Union, odious in tho public estimation, by present ing to tho public mind, in connection with it, a frightful picture of an armed soldiery and a military despotism. I have no fears of the haLqur/ enlightened countrymen ^tra^r^^mdsurelyl eminent. I refer to this particularly, only in consi deration of the impottance attached to it by others, From what 1 have said, it will cloarly appear that I hold thn, theyjwould not be. In my opinion,[no man commits treason who nets in obedienco to the laws and authorities of a regular organized government, such as wo recognise our Stnto governments to be. But there is u question, gentlemen, involved in, your interrogatories, which rises in magnitude far above any which I have yet considered. It Involves the important inquiry, whether in the event of a State seceding from the Union, and the Executive of tho United States making a requisition for troops to cocrco hor back, I, if elected Governor of Geor gia, woujd, o|?cy that requisition. This question fejLjuu Till COURIER. nominations of tub constitutional union party. For Governor- HON. HOWELL COBB. Fob Congress. COL. E. W. CHASTAIN, Of Gilmer. For Senator. COL. JOSEPH WATTERS. .For Representative. WILLIAM T. PRICE. AUBNTS FOR TUB COURIER. Dan’i. Hix, Summerville. Judge Wooten, Dirt Town. J. T. Fini.f.y, Chnttoognvillo. HON. HOWELL COBB Will address the people nt the following places, at the times designated Marietta, Cassville, Rome, Summerville, LaFayette, Trenton, Ringgold, Calhoun, Spring Placo, Ellijay, Blairsville, Dahlonega, Cumining, Canton, ~ - Wo nro authorised by Mr, Cobb to say that Judge McDonald is invited to attend these appointments, and to participate in the discussion upon equal terms. QZ7* Wo nro compelled to omit several editorials for want ot room. IO* We oro requested to say thnt the exercises of the Female Academy will bo resumed on the first dny of September. Snttirdn3’ August 23d. Mondny “ 25th. Wednesday “ 27lh. Friday “ 29th. Saturday “ 30th. Tuesday Sept. 2d. Thursday “ 4th. Saturday 11 0th. Monday “ 8th. Wednesday “ Friday “ 10th. 12th. Monday “ 15th. Wednesday “ 17th. Friday/ “ 19lh, Misr.AlD.—Some weeks SI—,. a subscriber to the Courier at tho -•Alpine Post Office," w-ii 0 oga, Bent ua two new s'ubsoribere, but the letter was misiai.i... fore their nenics were recorded. Will our friend please send us-their names again 1 .. ... «-» -. n~. wr*-~r~ The Fablic Is' cdutloitcd' against exaggerated rumora or sickness In-Rome. There buvd Been Mine' cases of Dysentery, nrrU' onb death from' Fever. But' tlie general hcuflli of the plh'oo Will compare favors^ bly with thnt of nnyoihereltyin tbeUnioe.- Tennessee—As wc nmlopnted, Campbell, Ihe Un- >? ion candidate for Governor, has been elected in- this 1 State by a large mnjority, Alabama.—The Union Party in this Slute have' achieved a glorious vi story. Five out of seven mem-' bora id Congress are Union men, urtd In tho Legisla ture they have an overwhelming tfmjbrlfy; Three thousand cheers for patriotic Alabama. , Macon Business. By reference to our advertising columns. It will' be aeon that, in Hotels, In Manufactures, in commerce' In short, in every thing that conduces to permanent prosperity nnd influence, lids flourishing city Is stead ily an the advance. Her central position, and acces sibility from every point by railroads, in connection' with her various Industrial enterprises, will always* give to Macon a hnndsomp business, We understand* her foundries nnd machine-shops, ore doing excellent' work, nt moderntu ptieeo. Her Hotels we have fn!-- qucntly tried, and can cordially recommend. Success' sny we to M-,con. Direct Importation- Our renders nro referred to tlie advertisement oi Mil. Betts, by which they will perceive thnt some of our enterprising Southern Merchants arc moving in tho right direction to secure Southern independence- and prosperity. This should have been done years ogo, but it is better to commence a good work lute than never. We enn very cordially recommend tlie House ol Mr. Bctta, nnd hope our upcouulry merchant* will give him a cnll. A Hioh Repast. Wc nro indebted to our worthy young fiiond Mb.- W. Daniel, for ono of dm largest nnd most luscious Wntoimcllona that it hns ever been onr good fortune todiscuBs. It weighed between thirty nnd forty pounds^ Its ruby and saclinrincmoot was altogether delightful, to the eye nnd taste. Mr. Daniel will ptcaso accept our thnnks for this magnificent specimen of Ids sxlll in mellnn-culturc. If nny of our friends can heat it, we- should like to know it,by personal attestation. Many cm to doubt the practicability of raising fine elicits in this latitude. Wu hnve occasionally met with ns fine Ones III Flnyd county, as in any part of the Union. Wc should he glad if Mr. Daniel'would favor the pul,lie with a statement of liia mode of cul ture. Whilst upon tills subject we would suggest thnt our forthcoming agricultural Pic Nic might bo rendered, more interesting und useful if our friends would bring to it specimens of fine fruit, Vegetables, grain, .-cc.— We should like pnrticuiatly to sec some choice speci mens of wheat, rye, barley and rice, grown in Chero kee, Georgia. What We Want* There lms not been probably, within the last hull ci ntury n more critical period in tho histoiy of Geor gia than the present. Besides those great national questions which for the lust two years have divided the country, nnd shaken the very foundations of tho government, there are others of a local character oftlie highest interest andmoment, and wliich involve to a % large extent the reputution and future welfare of our State. At this particular juncture then, wo ne;d in. the Executive Chair, not only a mnn of undoubted pa triotism and profound statesmanship, but one of prac tical information and business habit*. First and foremast, \ve want a man whoso dcvotioi* to the Union J-* ardent and umvQvering—otto who* Ipves his country, his whole country. Believing that J i there can be no security to life or property; no guar- 1 antee of civil or religious liberty and blessing, excep,u under the broad shield of (he Constitution, we want. J* a man who will, con umoie, defend tlmt 'instrumenti J from all external and internal aessaultsj one who will boldly and cordially maintain the proud und dignified* \ attitude assumed by Georgia in December lost. In the second place we want in tlie Gubernatorial} Chair, a man who will wisely,prudently and efficient* ly, administer the affairs of our local governnient-*- one who will devLe nnd execute liberal things for the- welfare of our beloved State. One who, instead oC plotting against the General Government, wi^l devise* measures for a more full development of the resources- of Georgia; increasing its wealth nt home and Us in-* fluence abroad. Wc want a man who will taks-n» i eniighted supervision of our public works, and place them in tho bands of competent and faithful agents.— The State Road; the Penitentiary; the Deaf and Dumb ^ and Lunatic Asylums—our Institutions of Learning —all these greut interests a;.d others which might bo named, need the fostering caro of .the tflato. We want, therefore, a man in the Executive Chair who will attend faithfully to the duties of his high and re sponsible office—who will study to promote tho wel fare oftlie whole State and country, and not labor merely to build up n party. Such a man wc believe Howell Cord to be ; and we can, therefore, cordially commend him to the peo ple. lie has been tried in the most difficult stations in public life, and has discharged with honor to him self and his State, every trust heretofore confided to his care. What say you, followedtlzen*, -aball wo not try him farther 1 Evidence Still Acoamulatea*, Almost every mail and overy passing hour brings . to light some new and startling fact, proving beyond* a doubt tlmt n collusion exists between the McDon* „ aid party In Georgia ond the disunionists of South Carolina. Read the following from the Charfeafoi Mercury of the 7th, nnd then tell us, good friends! what you think of tho signs of the imes. Mr. Stilrsl said the Constitution is patting away. This writer says' it is dead. How similar tho langudgefT DNtfoionisinJ after all, liavo the same dialect every where.' From Georgia* Extract of n letter from a Carolinian, now in Geod gia : It is with extreme regret, and pain,.that I observe) through the Charleston papers, wknt I regard, nr.d whiitis regarded by Southern Rights men in this stateS ns symptoms ota retreat from the elevated, oncllinn.1 position wu alt think South Carolina is standing updf on, by a portion of the citizens of Charleston* I aj n Charlestonian by birth, aud it is only within Jhc pi year that I came into our sister Stato of Georgia wlJ business prospects. Being still as deeply interested/ the cauBj in which South Carolina is engaged) wns still her citizen, and tlje same cause being noil ded for hero,it seems to me that my opinioht WiJ titled, opart from their perfect sincerity, to bo 'r ed ns without the least degree of prejudice. You cannot calculate, peihaps, the Injury wlH cause of State Rights, Southern Righls, opd tb Constitutional Remedy for Southern Wrongs, will tain by the formation of two parties among ; 'South Carolina waits for co-operation, mean in by, that at least two States shall simultunec by pre-concert, secede from tho Union, she had j give up the contest at once, nnd acquiesce; thing is going to occur in Virginia, No, pardon. Virginia's lust Legislature havi made their last, will and testament*pn*th She may, or she may not hereafter '’'"•destroy that decision, or At> Tho South*... n{.