Newspaper Page Text
JAMES GARDNER, JR., 1
asp ; Editors.
JAMES M. SMYTHE, )
Foreign Extracts.
The London Globe, government organ, of the
sth inst. says:—
“We have good reason to believe that there is
no truth in the assertion contained in a late nuin
lier of the Jssemblee Nalirmalr respecting instruc
tions supposed to have been addressed by Count
Nesselrode, after the meeting of the Emperors at ,
Olmutz, to the Russian representatives at Naples.
Rome, and Tuscany, acquainting them that
Rusia Prussia and Austria, had agreed to afford
assistance to those States for the suppression of
revolutionary movements. No commercial news
of importance.”
In the English House of Lords, on Friday, the
Ist inst., the royal assent was given by commis
sion to the Ecclesiastical Titles Assumption Bill.
This famous measure is now the law of the land;
and the question, whether it will be enforced or
not. has already given rise to much speculation.
I fit should be enforced in Ireland, the general
opinion seems to be that it will cause great ex
citement.
The ret urns of the Board of Trade for the
month ending on the sth of July, show that the
declared value of our manufactures exported in
the sixth month of the year was .£6,228,122,
against £5,750,526 in the corresponding month
of last year, being an increase 0f%477,596. For
the half year the exports show an increase over
1850 of £2,310,519, and over 1849 of £7,578,414.
Not only do the artisans appear to be well em
ployed, but to be consuming an increased quail
tit v of the principal articles of food imported.
The number of persons who have paid for ad
mission at the doors of the Crystal Palace, to the
31st ult., has been 2,574,008, and the entrance
fees have amounted to £193,150 4s. The esti
mated number of persons entering with season
tickets has been 578,295, giving a total of 3,152,-
303 visitors. The total number who have
entered, including staff and exibitors’ attendants,
as estimated by the police, is 3,182,074. The
largest number of visiters in any one day was on
the 15th of July, when 74,122 persons entered.
The largest number ot visiters in any one week
was from the I Ith to the 19th ult.. when 305,853
entered the building. The largest number pre
sent in the palace, at any one time, was 58,541.
This was at two o'clock in the afternoon of the
21st ult.
| From the Mum-hater (Eng.) Times 0/A iiut.]
The Release of Kossuth. —lt will be ob
served, we are quite sure, with pleasure, by all
parties r.nd classes of Englishmen, that Lord Pal
mes stem has announced to the House of Commons the
intention of the Turkish Porte to release Kossuth ami
the few renuiining Hungarians from their confine
ment in Mui Minor. We have never doubted the
sincerity of our Foreign Minister's frequent pro
fessions of concern for tin l harsh treatment of the
refugees, and more than the disapproval he ex
pressed, during the conflict, of the conduct of
Austria in violating the Hungarian constitution.
Indeed, the published correspondence of our di
plomacy during the few months that followed the
end of the war, is enough to prove that vulid ef
lorts were made by Lord Pousoiihy at Vienna,
and by Sir C. Canning at Constantinople, to pro
tect the fugitives tioiu being deliverer! up to the
C/.ar and to Haynau; which must have been the
case had not the Sultan of Turkey been barked
in his \efusal by the effectual support of Great
Britain, and secondly of France. Notwithstan
ding a menacing intimation, which is put forth
.n one oftlie Vienna journals, we do not appre
hend that the peace of the continent will risk
any fresh disturbance by the lilieratiou of these
objectaof tyrannical suspicion. The Austrian gov
ernment, which, besides, is financially incapaci
fated for a warlike undertaking, would surely not
venture, on grounds so trivial, to attempt to pun
ish Turkey for an act done at the urgent request
of this country. We should rather anticipate that
Austria might seek to dictate some conditions,
such ns u pledge on the part of Kossuth to ab
stain from any future action in the affairs of Hun
gary; and so endeavor to find a pretext lor a tar
dy and ungracious assent to his freedom.
I From the Lomhm Standard, nth inst. |
Tin: Harvest op England. —As the harvest
lias already partially commenced in some of the
more forward counties, the line weather which
now prevails tends to increase the confidence
that the crop will be (bund to lie a full average
one, both with respect to quantity and quality.
The desperate struggles that have been made by
the British agriculturists since the passing of the
acts for the repeal of the duties on the imjxirtu
tior. of foreign torn, have undoubtedly tended to
induce a better system of cultivation, and conse
quently, on the average of seasons, an enlarged
production corn. This result, it must be borne
in mind, has been attained, hitherto, by the sacri
fice of an enormous amount of capital; it is now
to lie tested by the occurrence of a good season,
such as is promised by present apjiearanees,
whether the English farmer, aided by a bountiful
Providence, and by the exercise of all the ap
pliances of science can compete with the foreign
producer. It must be remembered also that the
accounts from some of the European corn grow
ing countries announce that their harvest is more
likely to be below than above an average, in
consequence of the unfavorable weather which
lias prevailed, and the exports of grain thence
may naturally be expected to fall short of those of
previous years, and therefore afford a better
chance of remunerative prices being obtained for
our own produce in the English markets. The
enormous yield, however, already ascertained in
the U. States and Canada, forbids the hope that
prices will maintain a remunerating level. It has
therefore liecame almost a matter of indifference
to the home producer, whether his crops turn out
well or otherwise, seeing that if the yield be
abundant,the unlimited competition depresses pri
ces to a point below that which can be made up
by the increase of quantity he has tor sale; and.
on the other hand, if the crops here prove a fail
ure, the imports from Europe and America would
effectually prevent the realization of a price that
would compensate for the diminished production.
Counterfeit South Carolina Money. —A traveller
passing through Russell Co., recently stopped at
a gentleman's house, and for the entertainment
of himself and horse, proffered a three dollar bill
on the Bank of South Carolina, and received the
necessary change. The bill is printed on poor
paper, its geneial appearance indicates that it is
a bad specimen of workmanship. It has a heavy
vignette on one end only, with a design of a
ship in full sail in the centre, and the words
“thiee"’ in countersunk letters across the top and
bottom of the vignette. Its No. is 452, and the
date reads “June 20th, 1851,’’ both across the top
of the bill. The signatures of the President and
Cashier are not written with a pen, but engrav
ed. The bill purports to be payable in Charles
ton. There are no doubt others of a like stamp
in circulation,and persons should be on their guard
in receiving a poor looking bill of this or any
other bank.— Columbus Enquirer, 1 9th inst.
Rain.—Alter a long spell of the very dryest
and hotest weather experienced in this section
for a long time, rain commeuced falling on Sun
day aiteruoon, continued during the night, and
we had an occasional shower yesterday—with a
prospect ot a continuance of wet weather for
some days to come.-Montzomery Advertiser If ■
Gazette, 1 9th mst. ’ ”
„ c Bivkalo .August 16. 1
T ? E S 'lu E Case ~s«r. Rust the t
agent of Mr. Moore, the owner of the fugitive
slave Daniels, has been under examination to a
day on a charge of assault and battery with’ in- (
tent to kill. The examination is adjourned till
Monday.
[second dispatch.] a
Buffalo, August 18.—Rust, the slave catcher. *
gave bail in 81,000 to answer the charge of as- •
saiilt and battery for striking the sU'y, ,
Alia NT A, GA.
FRIDAY MORNING, AUGUST 22.
For Governor.
CHARLES J. MCDONALD.
For Congress—Eighth District,
ROBERT McMILLAN, of Elbert.
THE LARGEST CIRCULATION IN THE STATE.
Appointments of 001. McMillan.
Col. McMillan will address his fellow-citizens
at Col. A. H. Anderson's, Burke co., Aug. 30th.
At Augusta, Tuesday, Sept. 2nd.
At Judge Neal's Mills, Warren co., Thursday,
Sept. 4th.
The Democratic Party of Georgia on the Terri
torial Question.
As efforts are being made by Mr. Cobb and
his supporters to mystify the Democrats on the
doctrine of non-intervention, as held by the
Democratic party of Georgia, we propose to show
what was the position of that party in 1847,
1848, and 1849, when Mr. Cobb was in full fel
lowship with it, and a prominent member in its
ranks.
For this purpose, we quote the following reso
lutions, being so much of the action of its con
ventions as relate to the subject.
Resolutions of the Denvxratie Parti/ in Convention,
at Milledgeville, June, 1847.
Resolved, That the Democratic party, while it
asserts the right of citizens of any state to settle
in any of the territories of the United States
with their property, yet in the spirit of mutual
“concession” in which our Union originated, and
by which alone it can be preserved, we arc still
willing to abide by the provisions and the geo
graphical line of the Missouri Compromise,
Resolved, That we adopt the four following re
solutions as passed by the General Assembly of
Virginia, as amended.
Resolved , That the Government of the United
States has no control, directly or indirectly,
mediately or immediately, over the Institution
of Slavery, and that in taking any such control
it transcends the limits of its legimale functions
by destroying the internal organization oftlie
sovereigns which formed it.
Resolved, That under no circumstances will this
Body recognise as binding any enactment of the
Federal Government, which has for its object the
prohibition of Slavery in any Territory to be
acquired either by conquest or Treaty, '‘south of
the line of the Missouri compromise.” holding it
to lie the natural and independent right of each
and every State of the confederacy, citizen of each
toreside with his property, of whatever descrip
tion, in any Territory which may be acquired
by the arms of the United States or yieldedby
Treaty with any foreign power.
Resolved, That this Assembly hold it to be the
duty of every man in every section of this con
federacy, if tnis Union is dear to him, to oppose
the passage of any law, for whatever purpose, by
which Territory to be acquired may lie subject
to such a [restriction.
Resolutions of the Demorratic Party in Convention,
at Milledgeville, December, 1847.
Resolved, That Congress possesses no power
under the constitution, to legislate in any way
or manner, in relation to the institution of slave
ry. It is the constitutional right of every citi
zen. to remove and settle with his property in
any of the Territories of the United States.
Resolved, That the people of the South do not
ask of Congress to establish the institution of
slavery in any of the territory that may be ac
quired by the United States. They simply re
quire that the inhabitants of each territory shall
be left free to determine for themselves, whether
the institution of slaveiy shall or shall not form
’ a part of their social system.”
t Resolution of the Democratii- Party in Convention,
at Milled geville, June. 1848.
I [6. Resolved, That the opinions ofthe democracy
. of Georgia on the question of slavery in the ter
. ritories were correctly set forth in the resolution
ofthe late Democratic Convention at Milledge
ville, in December last, which declares that “the
lieople of the South do not ask of Congress to es
tablish the institution of slavery in any of the
territories (hat may he acquired by the United
States. They simply reouire that the inhabi
tants of such territory shall he left free so deter
mine for themselves whether the institution of
slavery shall or shall not form a part of their so
cial system.”
Resolutions of the Demorratic Party in Convention,
June, 1819.
Resolved, That in reference to the subject of
slavery in our newly acquired Territories, we
hold the doctrine of non-intervention, which
doctrine denies to Congress the power to legislate,
' either originally or by ratification of the action
of the Territorial Legislatures either for or against
> the introduction of slavery into such territories,
j and holding such doctrine, we should regard the
_ adoption of the Wilmot Proviso as unjust and
unconstitutional, and are prepared to eo-oper
) ate with our friends in resisting its enactment
‘ and enforcement on the basis of the resolutions
[ adopted by the at its last
session: which we hereby adopt, and which read
1 as follows.
1 Be it resolved unanimously, by the General As
’ sembly of Virginia, That the government of the
1 United States has no control, directly or indirect*
1 ly, mediately or immediately over the institution
J of slavery, so as to impair the rights of the slave
holder, and that, in taking any such control, it
! transcends the limits of its legitimate functions
; by destroying the internal organization of the
* sovereignties who created it.
’ Resolved unanimously, That all territory which
J may be acquired by the arms of the United
“ States, or yielded by treaty with any foreign
power, belongs to the several States of this Union.
as their joint ami common property, in which each
ami all have equal rights; amt that the cnactnu-nt,
by the federal govenwwnt, of any law which shotdd
directly, or by its effects, prevent the citizens of
any State from emigrating, with their property ,
of whatever description , into such territory
would make a discrimination unwarranted by,
and in violation of the compromises of the con
stitution and the rights ofthe State from which
such citizens emigrated, and in derogation, of that
perfect equality that belongs to the several States
as members of this Union, and would tend di
rectly to subvert the Union itself.
Here is apparent, at a glance—lst. What the
Democratic party claimed for the South. 2nd.
What it meant to assert in proclaiming the doc
trine of non-intervention. 3d. The entire com
patibility of its position then with the position
of the Convention of 1851, which nominated
Charles J. McDonald.
First.—The Democratic party claimed the
right of the Southern people to an equal par
ticipation in the territories acquired, or to be
acquired, by the joint arms and treasure of all the
States. It claimed for Southern men the equal
right with citizens of other sections, to carry
their property, slaves and all, into the territories,
and enjoy the use thereof as fully as under the
laws and customs ot the Southern States from
which they should emigrate. It claimed for
them the right to reside, with their slave proper
ty, in such territory. This necessarily involved
the claim for the protection of the Constitution
and flag of their country, by means of organized
Governments and Courts of justice.
The great doctrine of equality of rights was
asserted in these positions. It was claimed that
Congress should do nothing to disturb this equal
ity of rights existing among the citizens of this
common Government—that it should enact no
law—that it should organize no form of territo
rial government in such away as to prevent the
enjoyment of equality of rights.
It will be perceived that all the thunders of
Southern denunciation were hurled against the
Wilmot Proviso. This was the great and mon
strous wrong threatened the South. It was the
obstacle which was threatened to be interposed
by the North to the equal participation by
! the South in the territories. The Southern
; Democrats universally, and the Southern Whigs
j generally, believed that unless Congress inter
posed this prohibition, there would be no obsta
cle to this equal participation. They believed
the Constitution secured this equal participation,
and that the laws of the conquered race could
not override that instrument, and be enforced to
the deprivation of the constitutional rights and
equality of the Southern people.
Secondly.—What did the Democratic party
mean by the assertion that non-intervention
was the duty of the Federal Government? What
was this doctrine of non-intervention as under
stood by the South? It meant—lst. That Con
gress, in forming territorial governments, had no
right to enact the Wilmot Proviso, or other kin
dred measure, to prohibit the introduction of
slavery into the territories. 2nd. That it had no
right to enact that slavery should form a part of
the social system of the people of the territories,
thus introducing and establishing, by its own
mere will and authority, the institution of slave
ry among that people. .Ird. That in establish
ing territorial governments, this equal participa
tion in them, claimed by the Southern people,
should be recognized and secured to them, and
the people, thus made equal, left free to determine.
for themselves whether slavery thmM or should
not form a part of their social system.
This was the sort of territorial government the
Democratic party wanted and were entitled to
claim, and did claim for the South. They ex
pected, and had a right to expect that territorial
governments, when formed, would be in con
formity to this equitable principle of equal par
ticipation, and that this principle would be
stamped upon the face of the bill creating such
governments.
The Democratic party of Georgia and the
South, looked upon Gen. Cass's Nicholson’s let
ter as recognizing this principle, and for that
reason supported him with zeal. In that letter,
while coinciding in and endorsing the opinion of
other leading statesmen, that slaves would not go
there, as it would not be to the interest of the in
habitants already there, or of the citizens of the
States going there, to introduce it, he distinctly re
cognized the right, as was universally considered
among us, of the slaveholder to take and keep
his slaves there. He even contemplated the
possibility of this being done, and thus, in that
letter, argued with the Northern people against
opposing territorial governments on the non-in
tervention principle.
‘•The question that presents itself is not a
question of increase, but of the diffusion of slave
ry. Whether its sphere be stationary or pro
gressive, its amount will be the same. The re
jection of this restriction will not add one to the
class ofservitude, nor will its adoption give free
dom to a single being who is now placed there
in. The same numbers will be spread over great
er territory; and so far as comparison, with less
abundance of the necessaries of life, is an evil, so
far will that evil be mitigated by transporting
slaves to a new country, and giving them a larger
space to occupy.”
It was not till after the Presidential election
that Gen. Cass elaborated from that letter the
squatter sovereignty doctrine, which empower
ed the sovereign squatters who should first settle
on the common soil, and in advance of the action
of Congress giving a territorial government, to set
up for themselves a government with full right
to establish or prohibit slavery—a doctrine which
was intended, by free soil intervention, to oust
the people of the South of their constitutional
right of equal participation.
Thirdly.—The demand of the Southern mem
bers of Congress, that this right of equal par
ticipation should lie recognized by a declaration
to that effect incorporated in the territorial bills
was entirely compatible with the doctrine of
non-intervention, as held by the Democratic par
ty of Georgia, and is entirely compatible with
the position of the Convention which nominated
Charles J. McDonald.
When the Democratic party declared that Con
gress had no right to legislate, either originally
or by ratification of the acts of territorial legis
latures, for or against the introduction of slavery
in the territories, but should preserve the policy
of non-intervention, it proclaimed the just and
constitutional principle that Congress should
maintain on this question a position of impar
tiality. It should not act the partizan, either to
introduce and establish slavery by its arbitrary
legislative will and maintain it there—whether
agreeable to the people of the territory c not:
neither should it in like arbitrary and unwar
ranted manner interpose and prohibit its intro
duction. It should not stand at the boundary
line and there meeting the emigrating slavehold
er with his slaves, drive him back with the Wil
mot Proviso stretched as a flaming sword across
his path. Its duty was to give the Urritories
such a government as opened the path wide and
tree for every citizen to go in with his property of
every description,and when assembled there from
every section of the Union, upon the principle of
equality, they could determine for themselves in
forming a State government, whether slavery
should or should not form a part of their social
institutions.
This Congress failed to do. This Congress
pertinaciously refused to do. It was, in this,
derelict to its duty and to the just claims
the South. In refusing to acknowledge this
right of equal participation it played the parti
zan against the South and in favor of the North.
It did this in refusing so long to give territorial
governments unless the South would permit the
Wilmot Proviso to be attached, and preferring to
have the territones without government, rather
than acknowledge the right of equal partici
patiox. It did this in voting down, in the House,
Mr. Toombs's amendment aiming (in an indirect
manner) to secure this right Sept. sth, 1850, and
which that gentleman once said “he would
never surrender.** It did this in voting down,
on the 7th September, 1850, the following a
mendment of Mr. Seddon, which aimed to pro
cure a direct acknowledgement of this right.
“ And that prior to the formation of State Con
stitutions there shall be no prohibition by reason
of any law or usage existing in said territories,
or by the action of the territorial legislature of
the emigration of all citizens of the V. States
with any kind of property recognized as such in
any of the States of the Union. This was re- |
jected—ayes 50, noes 80.”
The Noith thus triumphed over the South.
And on the same day it did this by rejecting
the following amendment of Mr. Millson.
"Provided, That no law or usage existing in the
said territory, at or before the time when the
same was acquired by the United States shall be
held to destroy or impair, within the said territo
ry, any rights of property or relations of persons
that may be now recognized and allowed in any
of the United States.”
Among other things forcibly said by Mr. Mill
son in support of his amendment was the follow
ing.
11 My object is to test the strength of the doc
trine of non-intervention—the true doctrine of
non-intervention, which leaves the rights of cit
izens of the South where the Constitution has
placed them, and removes every obstruction that
has been put in their way by a foreign govern
ment as well as their own. If gentlemen, then,
you are really in favor of that non-intervention
of which they speak so much, they will not con
tent themselves with simply forbearing to insert
a positive prohibition of slavery, believing it un
necessary to do so, but they will also take ca;e
that the rights of Southern citizens shall not be
destroyed or impaired by the legislation of the
power that formerly owned the territory.”
‘•What excuse can there be for refusing to in
sert such a provision in the bill except that it is
really expected and intended that the bill as it
now stands shall secure our exclusion from this
territory. Is this non-intervention ? Is this a re
su/t which Congress may lawfully accomplish, di
rectly or indirectly?”
Mr. Millson's amendment was rejected,—ayes
49, noes 92.
Mr. Wellborn, (of Geo.) offered the following
amendment.
“Provided further, that the people of said ter
ritory be allowed to pass all laws necessary for
the protection of slavery within said territory,
should slaves be introduced there.”
Which Mr. Seddon moved to amend by add
ing the following:
“ And to remove all restrictions to the free
emigration of persons with their property.”
These were also rejected.
In the Senate similar amendments had been
rejected.
Should it be said that the enactment of such
amendments would have been legislation on sla
very by Congress, and would have been in con
travention of the doctrines held by the Georgia
Democratic Conventions,which denied the right,
this conclusive reply is at hand
It was never intended to deny to Congress au
thority to pass laws necessary to secure the con
stitutional rights of the people, whether in refer
ence to slavery or any other subject. The passage
of the fugitve slave law was legislation on slavery.
It was to secure constitutional rights appertain
ing to the slave holder. The passage of Mr.
Seddon’s, Mr. Millson's, and Mr. Wellborn's
amendments would have been doing no more.
If the one would have been violative of the
doctrines of non-intervention, so was the other.
One word as to the District of Columbia Bill,
which was also legislation on slavery. It was legis
lation considered in 1849 to be so adverse to sla
very, that the Democratic Convention which as
sembled that year at Milledgeville. adopted as
its own the following Resolutions of the Vir
ginia Legislature.
Resolved, That we regard the passage ofa law
by the Congress of the United States, abolishing
slavery or the slave trade in the District of Co
lumbia. as a direct attack upon the institution of
the Southern States, to be resisted at every haz
ard.
Resolved, That in the event of the passage by
Congress olt he‘Wilmot Proviso,” or any law
abolishing slavery or the slave trade in the Dis
trict ot Columbia, the Governor ot this Common
wealth is requested immediately to convene the
Legislature of this State (if it shall have adjourn
ed) to consider the mode and measure of re
dress.”
Mr. Cobb was a member of that Convention,
and voted for and advocated those resolutions.
He now justifies the act of Congress which does
abolish the slave trade in thc\DUtrict of Columbia.—
Instead of protesting against he advocated it at
Washington, and signed the bill as speaker.
This is one of the series of bills which gave, as
is claimed byJMessrs. Cobb, Toombs and Ste
phens, a triumph to the South. The votes we
have quoted above on the Utah territorial bill
are aduitional evidences of Southern triumphs.
When Southern members of Congress come
home after such votes and tell their constituents
that these are Southern triumphs, it is time for
the people to change their Representatives.
In the language ot Judge Berrien, we may
truly exclaim.
“ If these Ik triumphs what would be a defeat ?”
Violators of the Fugitive Slave Law.
[ The Constitutional Union papers and speak
i ers are constantly harping upon the gain to the
South, of the Fugitive Slave law. We have said
. a hundred times that it was no gain to the South.
It was our constitutional right. We now chal
lenge any one of those papers, or speakers, to
show that it was a gain to the South. If any
one will undertake to show it, we will publish
his article if he will insure the publication of our
■ reply in any opposition paper in the State that
I has one half, or even one third, of the subscribers
that we have. If no one will take up this pro
position, we ask the people beforehand to note
it. It will be proof positive that they know it
is not a gain to us.
1 hey tell us, also, that its provisions are am
ple to secure its enforcement. Well they know
better, and it is one of the ominous signs of the
times, that men in our midst, at home, seekers of
office and political partizans , will constantly de
clare, before the people, that the penaltie's at
tached to the violation of the law are ample and
efficient.
Now we beg all of our political opponents
who have the least candor in the world, and the’
least regard for facts and truth, to decide for
themselves whether that declaration is worthy
of belief. Have you not seen the people of the
North, in fits of frantic passion, swearing before
high Heaven that the law should not be execu
ted ? In a few cases the law has been enforced I
at heavy expense, and at losses greater than the i
value of the slaves. In one case, (that of Shad- j
rach's,) the lawless miscreants who rescued him, ■
in open day, in utter violation of the lav, were’ I
indicted and brought to trial. The proof of the 1
guilt of these abolition thieves was ample and
overwhelming. Why, then, were they not con
victed? Yes, that is the question. Everybody
knows that these thieves and violators of the
law, have been acquitted and discharged. Now
we ask all candid men (and our question is put
to our Constitutional Union fellow-citizens as
well as Southern Rights men,) do not the lead
ers of the opposit ion require too great an exercise of
faith, on the part of the people, when they ask
them to believe that the guarantees of the execu
tion of the law are ample and efficient ? Can an
honest man say this in the face of well known
and established facts ? He cannot, and when a
man utters it, in the hearing of the people, it is
proof conclusive that he is unworthy of public
confidence.
There can be no charity for such a man, un
less you esteem him an idiot, or politically de
ranged. Os course he could not be worthy of
your confidence, if you had to doubt his crimi
nality at the expense of his intellect.
A Native Artist of Merit.
We enjoyed the gratification two day ago of vi
siting, for the first time, the Room of Mr. R.
Boggs, and examining specimens of his Land
scape and Portrait Painting. Terms of the warm
est compliment are due this young and rising
Artist for the taste and genius he thus early dis
plays in his beautiful art. Already has he at
tained a degree of excellence, particularly in
Portrait Painting,which has not often been equal
led by Artists visiting us of established reputa
tion.
This visit was a pleasing surprize to us, for we
were not prepared to see in one so young, such
full acquaintance with his art, and such skill in
carrying out the promptings of his mind and
taste. His portraits stand out with life-like
distinctness from the canvas, and assume the
natural attitude of the living being—the eyes
beam with intelligent light, and every feature
glows with animation. The coloring, a severe
test of skill, will bear a favorable comparison
with productions of established Artists of credi
table standing.
We predict for Mr. Boggs distinguished suc
cess. He is a native of this city, and returns
among us, after devoting some time to his im
provement in the Academy of Design and schools
of Painting in New York city.
We hope his claims on the patronage of our ci
tizens will not be overlooked.
His Room is on Broad-st., 2nd floor, a tew doors
below the Bank of Augusta.
, Grov McDonald's reply to the Macon Committee.
Mr. Cobb wrote five columns and a half for
. the Athcnt Bantur, in reply to the aforesaid Com
v mittee, in which he evidently labored to conceal,
as much as possible, his real sentiments, and
wltieh were no doubt clearly expressed in that
tupprtssed letter. But the cloven foot of anti
state secession and Consolidation would stick
out. Governor McDonald, with the strait for
, ward manliness that characterizes every thing
from him, declares his belief in the right of a
. State peaceably to secede, and that the General
Government has no constitutional right to co
s erce her to remain in the Union. He says, em
phatically, that he would not obey a call upo n
j him (if Governor) for troops thus to coerce
a State. These are the sentiments of a true
I State Bights and Southern Rights man. They
. are the sentiments of a patriot, and should bear
. him on triumphantly to victory. We hope, and
. believe, that Georgia will give] a splendid tri
s umph to these noble and patriotic sentiments.
Marietta, Aug. 1851.
Gexti.kmex:—Accident has prevented an ear
lier reply to the enijuiries propounded by you on
• doth June last, to the Hon. Howell Cobb and
5 myself. I did not, in fact, receive them for
- some time, after they were addressed to the par
t ties whose opinions were sought.
- You will perceive that I have already given
my opinion on many of the subjects of enquiry,
r’ in letters which I have written, and which have
f been published and extensively circulated in the,
- newspapers. Upon reference to these letters.
• you will find that 1 believe, that the late acts of
J Congress are not just and equitable, and that
- some of them, acting most injuriously on the
• South, are violative ot the fundamental princi
ples of the Constitution.
, 1 have also given it as my opinion, that the
people of a State, in their sovereign capacity,
have the right to secede ]>eaceably from the U
' nion whenever in their judgment their safety
and happiness requires it; and that the General
Government, has no constitutional authority to
coerce her to remain in the Union. In my judg- !
ment, then a requisition upon a State to furnish
’ a military force to coerce a State to remain in
the Union, or to enforce against its citizens the
, laws ot the United States, after it has seceded !
from the Union, would be without warrant in !
the Constitution, and no Executive officer sworn j
to support the Constitution, and entertaining!
these opinions, could conscientiously obey it. 1 I
should not. But no State ought to be encoura o '- !
ed to secede from the Union by the hope of aid
from the public authorities of one of the States
remaining in the Confederacy. Such succor l
could notjbe afforded without a violation of the i
Constitution.
It a State secede, she converts herself into a
foreign nation, “an enemy in war, in peace a i
friend. ’ I have the honor to be,
Respectfully your obedient servent.
Charles j. McDonald.
Samuel B. Hunter,John Rutherford Esqrs. and '
others.
Letter from Mr. Stell.
We copy from the Chronicle <s■ Sentinel the fol
lowing letter from Mr. Stell. As Mr. Cobb, in
his speech in this city, stated that a Southern
Rights candidate for Congress had expressed
himself in favor of, and willing to vote for a re
peal of the Fugitive Slave law, it is to be hoped
that gentleman will take the earliest opportunity
of noticing this denial by Mr. Stell, of having
occupied any such position.
Fayetteville, 18th Aug. 1851.
Mr. Jones — Dear Sir: I see an article in the
Weekly Chronicle & Sentinel of the 13th inst
over the signature of “Henry/’ giving] an ac
count of a discussion at McDonough oil the sth
inst., between Col. Murphy and myself, which
does me great injustice in many particulars. You
have also bestowed an editorial upon me. rep
resenting me as being shoulder to shoulder with
Seward, Hale. Giddings, & Co. Those who are
familiar with such articles and editorials, know
their worth, as well as the purposes for which
they are written and heralded forth. I shall not,
therefore, pretend to notice but one paragraph of
Henry’s epistle, which is in the following
words: "For he told the people that he had said
—and he presumed Col. Murphy alluded to him
—that it he \yere in Congress, he would vote to
repeal the fugitive slave law,” &c. I said no
such thing: but to the contrary, did say, that the
charge, so far as it might be intended to apply to
me, was untrue. I have never said that I would
vote to repeal that law, and so stated at the time
of the discussion alluded to, as those who were
present will doubtless remember.
Now, sir, I know that you entertain no per
sonal prejudice against me, therefore I doubt not,
you will readily give this note an insertion in
your columns as an act of sheer justice to a poli
tical opponent. Very respectfully,
John D. Stell.
We regret that the letter of our esteemed cor
respondent from Marietta, came to hand too late
for insertion in to-day's paper. We make one ■
extract. The writer says:— Federal Union. ,
“I have mingled extensively with men of both
parties in this Congressional District. Every
where I find the opinion entertained by their I
friends, that McDonald and Stiles will carry the
District.’’ ’ ,
(communicated.)
Southern Rights Meeting in Morgan Count;-.
On Saturday, the 16th of August, a large and
enthusiastic meeting of the Southern Rights
party of Morgan county assembled at the Court
House, in Madison, and was organized by call
ing Rev. Wm. V. Burney to the Chair, and ap
pointing J. C. Butts as Secretary.
1 hos. J. Blimey then offered the following pre
amble and resolutions, to-wit:
The people of Morgan county have assembled
being deeply impressed with the importance of
the present crisis in the affairs of the country
and believing it to be the duty of all good citi
zens to raise a warning voice against the exten
sion of doctrines dangerous and destructive in
their tendency, and which if carried into prac
tice wouhl eventually place the Southern States
of this Confederacy at the feet of a Northern
majority; do hereby make the declaration of
principles contained in the following resolutions
-Ist, We acquiesce in the Compromise measures
not because we approve them fully, nor believe
in the language attributed to Mr. Cobb, that they
are “wise, liberal and just,’’ but for the sake of
Union and harmony among the States.
2nd, We approve, in the main, the principles
embodied in the action of our State Convention,
and hereby declare our determination to abide by
that action, according to a lair and common sense
construction of it.
3rd, We believe that the States of this Union
are sovereign, that as such, they went into the
Confederacy, and that they have the right, re
sulting from the nature and character of our gov
ernment, to secede, or withdraw from the U
nion. for causes to be judged of by the State sece
ding.
4th, We believe that the admission of the
right of a State to secede, presupposes a corres
ponding obligation on the part of her co-States
to allow her peacefully to do so, and as a conse
quence, force cannot rightfully be used by the
b ederal Government to punish or bring her back
again.
f»th, We believe that all “States worth
contending for, depend upon the great para
mount right of secession, and that to surrender
this, would be to t.e ourselves “ hand and footc*
as an offering to abolition fanaticism.
6th, We believe there is a manifest and pal
pable difference between the right of secession
and revolution, the former, growing out of the
sovereignty of the States: whilst the latter only
contemplates what would be regarded as revo
lution and traitorous resistance.
Revolved, That the Chairman of this meeting
appoint a Central Committee of twenty-one,
hose duty it shall be to procure and dissemi
nate polical information among the people—and
to promote by all honorable means the success
of the principles above set forth.
The foregoing preamble and resolutions were
advocated by the mover at some length, in which
he contrasted the principles of the two candidates
for Governor, successfully showing that accord
ing to Mr. Cobb's position, the right of a State
to secede is entirely worthless—and that to
make it of any value, there must be, in the lan
guage of one of the resolutions, a corresponding
obligation on the jiart of the other States to ad
mit its exercise, and as a necessary consequence,
no right can exist any where to punish, or bring
i a seceding State back into the Union.
Col. John B. Walker then followed and made
j a ,ew forcible remarks, happily illustrating the
position ol the two parties: one contending for
those principles which have always been held
dear by State Rights men of the South, whilst
the other, by a surrender of those principles had
J become engulphed in the shoals and quicksands
| of Federalism and Consolidation.
Wm. J. Vason, Esq., formerly a citizen of
Morgan, but who for eighteen months has been
a resident ot California, being present, was call
ed on to address the meeting, to which he res
jxmded by making one of his happiest efforts—
no attempt is here made to present even an epi
tome of Mr. Vason's remarks, but there was one
of his statements, that ought not to be passed
over in silence—lie said that for the year 1850,
and for Ist quarter of 1851, more than 75 mil
lions of gold has been shipped from the port of
San Francisco alone, and that if the people of
the South valued their slaves because they would
command money,they have given upmore by sur
i rendering their right to the mineral wealth of
California than all the slaves in the South are
worth.
1 he preamble and resolutions were then unaui
; mously adopted.
j The Chairman then proceeded to appoint as
the Committee of twenty-one, the following
! gentlemen, to-wit: Wm. Woods, Wm. M. Day!
Wm. O. Saffold, W. D. Snellings, John Durden,
j Charles W. Thompson, Wm. Stallings, W. H. c!
Lane, Jackson Cheney, Albert Partee, Wmi
Brooks, A lad iso n B. Snellings, Seaborn Clark,
John W. Stark, J. C. Butts, Thos. Lonnias, Thos-
Swift, Robert Harris, Wm. Bonner, Carter
Shepperd, and William Ballard. Authority was
confered upon the Committee to call a meeting
ol the party at a future time, to nominate can
didates for county officers.
On motion of Col. John B. Walker, prefaced,
j by a few remarks, the meeting proceeded to no-’
| minate by acclamation, Simeon N. Brown,
i Esq., as the Southern Rights candidate for the
! Legislature. Mr. Brown being present, was
called on. and in few remarks accepted the no
mination.
On motion, the Chairman appointed Hiram
Harris and Wm. M. Day, as delegates to the
Convention to nominate a candidate for Con
gress from the 7th District, with power to fill va
cancies.
On motion of Thos. S. Brown, Esq., the fore
going proceedings were ordered to be sent for
publication to the Constitutionalist tis Republic, and
the Federal Union.
The meeting then adjourned.
WM. V. BURNEY. Chairman.
J. C. Butts, Sec’y.
(cOMMU.N ICATF.D.)
CRAWFORDVILLE, Aug. 16th, 1851.
According to previous notice, a respectable
portion of the Southern Rights Party of Talia
ferro county, met at the Court House this day.
On motion of Wm. Bell, Esq., Judge Rhome
was called to the Chair, and Jefferson Roland re
quested to act as Secretary.
On motion, a committee, consisting of Seaborn
Moore, William Bell, Esq., A. S. W. Rhodes, S.
R. Crenshaw and L. E. Moore were appointed
by the chairman to report business for the con
sideration of the meeting.
The committee retired, and on their return re
ported the names of William Elfett, William
Bell, Esq., and Solomon H. Perkins as delegates
to the Convention to be held in Sparta on the
20th inst., to nominate a candidate to represent
the 7th Congressional District.
After which, William Bell, Esq., offered the
following Resolutions:
Ist. Resolved, That we approve of the nomi
nation of the Hon. Chas J. McDonald for P jV '