Illiberal.Milledgeville, Georgia, Federal Union [Democratic](14 March 1854)
It is truly gratifying to see the South
united upon the great question of Southern
Rights. There is no difference among her
representatives in Congress upon the
principles of the Nebraska and Kansas Bill --
each party appearing to be equally zealous
in asserting and defending the rights of the
South to an equal participation in the benefits
of the Territories. But why the
denunciation in Southern Whig papers, of those
men at the North, who have stepped forward
and took the leadership in the great contest
with fanaticism? Why is Mr. Douglas' bill
to be canonized and its author to be denounced?
Why cannot Southern Whigs give
credit to whom credit is due, without exhibiting
the narrow selfishness of the mere
partisan? Is it because Mr. Douglas is a
Democrat, and it is feared their praises may
add to his popularity and acceptability with
Southern men? The most liberal construction
of their motives will not afford any
more charitable conclusion. Why is it that
President Pierce is hooted at and his name
coupled with censure whenever it appears
in the columns of Southern Whig papers? --
Has he not from the inception of the
Nebraska question, steadily given it his hearty
support? -- has not his Cabinet been a unit
upon this question? The man who will deny
these facts has no regard for the truth, and
is the victim of prejudices too deep rooted
to be reached by reason or the soundings of
conscience. Side by side with the almost
unanimous vote of the South, stands recorded
the votes of the Senators from New Hampshire,
upon the passage of the Nebraska and
Kansas bill -- indeed the Democratic
Senators from the North all stood firm, while all
the Northern Whigs either dodged or voted
against the bill. The vote on the passage
of this bill, to be found in another column,
is a triumphant vindication of the soundness
of the great body of the Northern Democracy,
while it exposes the Whig party at the
North in all its deformity and rottenness.
It is to the Democratic party of the country
Southern men must look for protection
under the constitution and equality in the
Union. To such men at the North as Douglas
and Shields of Illinois, Cass and Stuart
of Michigan, Bright and Petit of Indiana,
Norris and Williams of New Hampshire,
Gwinn and Weller of California, Dodge and
Jones of Iowa, Toucey of Connecticut,
Brodhead of Pennsylvania, and Thompson
of New Jersey.
With such a showing as this, the Whig
paper at the South, that raises its voice
against Northern Democrats, should call up
on the mountains and the rocks to fall on
them and hide them forever from the
gaze of honest and patriotic men. To say
the least of it, the course of Southern Whig
papers is grossly illiberal.
[<<Previous Editorial][Next Editorial>>]
|
