To the citizen who looks back with patriotic pride to the victory achieved through Mr. Jefferson in the year 1800, there is no difficulty in deciding upon his line of duty in the pending Presidential contest. From principle, he can entertain no other sentiment with respect to Squatter-Sovereigntyism, Abolitionism and Know-Nothingism, than that of unqualified abhorrence. He can discover nothing in either, however closely he may investigate, that is not in direct antagonism to the genius of our self-governing system -- in palpable conflict with the provisions of the Consititution.
Formally recognized, Squatter-Sovereigntyism would utterly preclude the admission into the Union of another slave State. New England Aid Societies, under its operations, would speedily and effectually secure the control of any new territorial government which may hereafter be established, even where the element was not unfriendly to the prosperous existence of the institution of the South. Such territory there is, already in the embraces of the Union, which, at a day not remote, may ask for admission as a sovereign State or States. Shall squatter sovereigntyism be made as formidable as to place it up on the side of the non-slaveholding States? -- Can Southern citizens reconcile it to their consciences to contribute to such a result by magnifying the importance of its avowed champion? It aims at nothing less than the end contemplated by the Wilmot Proviso, and is just as hostile to the interests of the slaveholding States as was that disgraceful proposition. It is, indeed, more so, because it affects territory which was acquired as slave territory, nearly a half a century before the annexation of Texas. Let the fact be disguised as it may, it sympathizes, in its inevitable tendencies, with Abolitionism -- making itself the willing instrument of that unscrupulous party which engendered the "irrepressible conflict" -- aiding and abetting the Lincolnites and Sewardites to all intents and purposes. Viewing it in this light as it assuredly should be viewed, the candidacy of Mr. Douglas is quite as objectionable to the true friends of constitutional union as was that of Mr. Van Buren in 1848. Was there a Southern voice raised, or a Southern pen wielded in support of Martin Van Buren? As true as he was to the Democracy for years, and as faithfully as he had previously served his country in the first office within its gift, and others, he was loathed by every disciple of the Jeffersonian school as the most arrant of traitors -- and justly so.
But for the fraternization of Squatter Sovereigntyism with Know- Nothingism, the latter for militant objects, would never have attempted to raise its head again in several of the slave-holding states. In Louisiana, Know-Nothingism was virtually lead, and was only resurrected by the strength which it promised to itself from divisions in the Democratic ranks. -- In Kentucky, Coombs, in a letter to Prentice, which was published about two weeks ago, acknowledges that Squatter Sovereigntyism enabled him to redeem the State from Democracy. That they are co-operating harmoniously, North and South, cannot be questioned. For practical attainments, adverse to the bone and sinew of the steadfast supporters of the political tenets which secured the ascendency in the inauguration of Mr. Jefferson in 1801, they are in active coalition. There is not a leading Squatter Sovereignty man anywhere, as far as our knowledge extends, who would not prefer the election of Bell to that of Breckinridge, nor a leading Know-Nothing man who would not prefer the election of Douglas to that of Breckenridge. This circumstance, alone, is sufficient to excite the fears of every Democrat who has been decoyed into the support of Squatter Sovereigntyism that he has been hopelessly betrayed -- just as thousands were decoyed into Know-Nothingism lodges in 1854 and 1855 and betrayed.
The three isms which head this article are like all the other isms which have been arrayed against the true Democratic creed since 1798 and, if the Union shall be preserved, destined to as inglorious renown. There is but one course for true-hearted patriots to pursue -- that course which has reflected so much merited lustre upon the name of Virginia -- and this is to resolutely army themselves against all new-fangled doctrines, from whatever source emanating, and walk steadily in the footsteps of their illustrious founders. For three score years the old mother of Presidents has never faltered in her onward course of devotion to constitutional principle. We shall be much mistaken, notwithstanding the machinations of adroit politicians, if she wavers now in the faithful discharge of her duty. We cannot believe that Squatter Sovereignty is potent enough within her limits to turn her over to resurrected Know-Nothingism.
The undersigned, citizens of the Southern States, accidentally assembled at the White Sulphur Springs, have read with much surprise the speech of Judge Douglas, recently delivered at Norfolk, and being many of them too remote from their homes to take part in any public expression of opinion there, deem it due to themselves to make known in this manner their dissent from its doctrines.
In this address, Mr. Douglas declares that if the Southern States (not a part but all) shall secede from the Union, upon the inauguration of Abraham Lincoln, it will be the duty of the President of the United States, who, in the case supposed, will be Lincoln, by arms to punish or subdue them, and that he will counsel him to do so and aid him to do so by all the means in his power.
Now as there is a large party at the North avowing the most implacable hostility to the institutions of the South; whose candidate for the Presidency is Mr. Lincoln, this declaration of Mr. Douglas is in effect -- that the election of a man to the Presidency of the U. States, by the votes alone of one section, who is pledged to use all the powers of the Government for the destruction of the rights and property of the other section, would not justify the weaker in resistance, but that if in such an event, the fifteen Southern States should assume to determine on the extent of their danger, and to quietly withdraw from it, he should regard their action as revolt, and as such to be punished with all the force of the Government. Than this we can conceive of no doctrine more dangerous to the South. It confounds resistance or established law, by individuals which it would be the duty of the Chief Magistrate to punish, with the peaceable Secession of States from a compact no longer consistent with the interest or existence of its constituents; but it treats the Union as a perpetual bond, exacting unconditional submission, forever, from a weaker to a stronger section. It strips the States of the chief attribute of Sovereignty, to wit: the right to determine when their existence is put to hazard as to the means necessary to their preservation, and affirms that, while it is legitimate in the people of the North having control of the General Government, through it, to inflict upon the States of the South whatever wrongs it may be consistent with their interest or feelings to impose, it would be treason in the people of the South to obey the orders of their States in opposition of Federal authority.
Fraught with error as this doctrine is, subversive of that constitutional theory, in which alone the rights of the States are to be found, it has, at this moment, and under the circumstances, a bloody significance. The enemies of the South, in the Northern States, have selected Abraham Lincoln to lead them in the "irrepressible conflict," which he has proclaimed. -- Mr. Seward, the most distinguished counsellor of Mr. Lincoln, declares at Boston that the election of Lincoln is sure -- that with it the power of slavery will end, and that the "irrepressible conflict" will be pressed to its infamous and bloody close.
At such a moment in the proclamation of such sentiments by Judge Douglas, (coming immediately after Seward's Boston Speech,) uttered here at the South, and addressed to the citizens of a State whose Executive declared to General Jackson, that Federal troops should only cross her borders over the bodies of her sons -- by a man from the North, from the neighborhood of Lincoln himself, a candidate for the Presidency, neighborhood of Lincoln himself, a candidate for the Presidency, volunteering his counsel to Lincoln, and, in the event of his election, his aid to wage war upon our people and to slay them on battle as rebels, or hang them in cold blood as traitors, if they shall render obedience to State rather than Federal authority, is repugnant to every sense of right, and merits from the people of the South, the severest rebuke. Such a rebuke, we sincerely hope will be given the doctrine and its author at the November elections.
Remember, that Virginia bears the brunt of the pending contest. Remember, that a full Democratic vote in Virginia, in November next, will effectually and permanently crush the twin serpents of Know-Nothingism and Free-Soilism throughout the Southern States.
Remember, that there are to-day about two hundred thousand legal voters in Virginia.
Remember, that with proper exertions more than 100,000 of these can be brought to the polls to vote for Breckinridge and Lane.
Let, then, the Democracy of every county appoint an ample committee, in every Magistrate's District, to canvas thoroughly every neighborhood, and bring every voter to the polls. Only let this be done and we will show a Democratic majority such as was never before polled in the State or out of it.
Not the least significant feature in the present canvass is the organization of Black Republican Clubs in the Northern States into military companies under command of marshals, captains, and sub-officers, some of whom have distinguished themselves in the Mexican war, and all of whom are selected with reference to superior qualifications as martial men. This organization, or chain of organizations, known as "Wide Awakes," are said to reach already four hundred thousand men, thoroughly drilled, and ready for any service which their leaders may demand at their hands. They had their origin in that traditional nest of traitors, Hartford, Connecticut, and, near the very coast where the blue lights of the second war of Independence were burnt as signals to a public enemy, the red torch-lights of Black Republican incendiarism are lit in the present canvass.
Is there no significancy in these things? Our Northern friends are men of action, not of words; they organize, drill, march, and die, while we speak and talk -- they do privately and by voluntary associations, what we debate in deliberative bodies, and hesitatingly perform, if at all, by legislative action. Their organizations are not yet armed, it is true, at least not that outsiders are aware of, but they are drilled, uniformed, and provided with rails, overcoats, and torches ready for marching!
It will be remembered that the front-door of John Allstadt, of Jefferson, was broken open by Brown's party with a rail, hence we learn to interpret the peculiar equipment of these abolition cohorts -- they parade at midnight, carry rails to break open our doors, torches to fire our dwellings, and beneath their long black capes the knife to cut our throats.
There can be no mistaking the meaning of military organizations, nor does it need any suspicious acuteness to point a moral to such names as "Zouare Wide Awakes," and "Rail-Splitters battalion." Are there no "Brown Avengers," or "Harper's Ferry Raiders" among them? Of the Presidential candidates three are agreed that a State has no right to secede, and on that issue occupy the same platform; and the "Wide Awakes" have their authority for believing that in the event of secession of Alabama or South Carolina it will be not only a pretext but a duty to march into Southern territory. -- Now these contingencies, of Lincoln's election and State secession, are imminent, and why, in the day of trial and danger, should we be distracted in council and paralyzed in action by division among ourselves? We hope and trust that no Virginian can reconcile himself to the thought of an armed invasion of Southern States through her territory; and yet this is the crisis to which affairs are tending, and which we shall have to meet. What we will do in such a contingency is a question outweighing in importance all considerations of mere party triumph, and it will be too late to respond to it effectively when the crisis is upon us. -- Our only hope is to unite and present an undivided front now. As far as Virginia is concerned, the contest will be fought not out of the Union but for States rights and State sovereignty in the Union. She will have to stand between the power of the Central Government and the assertion of sovereign authority by some sister State. Let th efirst armed invader, whether a Federal minion or an abolition drilled incendiary, who violates the sanctity of her territory, find her citizens not only wide awake, but prepared to meet him.
There are various forms of "Irrepressible Conflict" doctrine, or rather various methods proposed to accomplish the same result, and upon a variety of grounds. The advocates of the doctrine may be clasified according to the modes in which they propose to effect, or according to the motives which lead them to advocate the extinction of slavery.
First. There are the Philanthropists, including a large number of honest, earnest men and women, whose professions and habits oflife incline them towards general and abstract views of questions, without reference to practical difficulties which lie between them and the accomplishment of their utopian schemes of moral or religious good. A great many sincere religious fanatics are to be found in this class, as headstrong, as impracticable, and quite as honest as John Balfour, or any monk of the age of the Crusades. They lay down the proposition that, slavery is a sin and should be abolished, and are ready to follow this maxim into any extremes to which it may lead them. But the religious is by no means the only, perhaps not even the preponderating element among the Philanthropists, Infidels, Lunatics, Socialists, Spiritualists, and a thousands other species of impracticabilities; all affiliated under a common bond of fanaticism -- all equally honest, and all equally crazy -- which make war upon slavery. This class operates at an immense loss of practical power, because they have no method or reason sufficient for an economical application of means; yet the lever with which they operate -- Philanthropy -- the common property of religion and philosophy, of Christianity and morality, is too powerful and one not to effect results; and, in this instance most lamentable ones, sinking fair islands in the ocean, dividing national Churches, stirring up civil convulsions, and destroying the peace and happiness of nations.
Secondly -- the Agrarians are actively engaged in a war upon slavery. It would be a great mistake to suppose honest fanaticism to constitute either the largest, most earnest, or most dangerous description of Abolitionists. -- We were gravely told by the abolition organ of New York, upon the occasion of a recent invasion of our state, that it was the "voice of Free Labor knocking at the door of the Southern States." Now it is well understood that, at the South, free labor is the main support and stay of the institution, because where the two races approximate equality in numbers, slavery is the only protection of th elaboring classes against the evils of amalgamation and moral degradation. But when the eye of the Northern agrarian rests upon the fair fields of the South, appropriated, as he is taught to believe, by an aristocratic few, living in palaces and surrounded by slaves, what more natural than to knock, and knock loudly, for admittance? Thus while the Philanthropist is actuated by real love for the slave, he secures the co-operation of the Agrarian, who is no less earnest in his hatred of the master.
Thirdly -- there is a class of Political Economists, who look to the extinction of slavery as the inevitable result of the quiet workings of the laws of trade, commerce and exchange. -- The anti-slavery political economist is a man of science, and looks forward to the substitution of the white by the black race in the Southern tier of States, as the result of fixed natural laws, and with the same scientific eagerness with which the Astronomer awaits the transit or culmination of some bright star. He examines each, and eery census return, makes and compares notes, competes ratios of increase and decrease and quarrels with the laws of God because they do not verify his computations. -- The bonds of color, and blood, and race, are nothing to him, and like the English Metaphysician, nothing affects him but an abstract idea. He is rather passive in his opposition to slavery, and only demands that the laws of Nature be not interfered with by any attempts on the part of the white man to arrest the progress of his own extinction, and the concentration of the black race in a region in every way propitious for their civilization and advancement.
Finally, overlooking and moulding all these elements to suit his own purposes, comes in the Irrepressible Conflict Demagogue. The representative-man of this class in a single sentence announces the doctrine so artfully and comprehensively as to appeal at the same moment for the particular prejudice of every other class. He says:
"It is an irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces; and it means that the United States must and will, sooner or later, become either entirely a slaveholding nation, or entirely a free-labor nation. Either the cotton and rice fields of South Carolina, and the sugar plantations of Louisiana, will ultimately be killed by free labor, and Charleston and New Orleans become marts for legitimate merchandise alone, or else the rye fields and wheat fields of Massachusetts and New York must again be surrendered by their farmers to slave culture and to the production of slaves, and Boston and New York become once more markets for trade in the bodies and souls of men."
The first sentence here contains something more than a bare enunciation of the general doctrine that slavery must and will be abolished; the politico-economical abolitionist finds himself excelled in the enunciation of his own dogma by the point and terseness of Seward's. In the second sentence the fields of the South are held up to the eye of the agrarian, warm and purple with the rich bounty of her own sun; and in its conclusion, the philanthropist of every hue finds a heart-appeal which he cannot resist. Thus does the demagogue seat himself, as it were, at the head of sensation, and thrill the nerve of every faction at the same moment. He acts, thinks, and feels for them, points their efforts, and centralizes their forces. He heals their dissensions about means, in uniting them upon the end -- the ultimate extinction of slavery. The war upon its extension is but one development of the deep seated hostility to its existence, and it is in this view that the present issues assume an importance to which intrinsically they may not be entitled. If the Northern mind could be brought to look at the point to which their great political organization tends, rather than that at which it professes to aim, there might be some hope of returning conservatism. But as there seems to be little hope of this, and as, in the language of Mr. Lincoln, this "agitation will not cease until a crisis has been reached and passed," or until as he says, "either the opponents of slavery will arrest the farther spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest, in the belief that it is in th ecourse of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North as well as South." If this be the issue made up, why not meet it now as well as any other time?"
"The Constitution of the United States is a written instrument -- a recorded fundamental law; it is the BOND, and the ONLY BOND, of the Union of these States: it is all that gives us a National character. -- Daniel Webster
Is this BOND--this ONLY bond--now practically in existence? Let the eleven non-slaveholding States which obstinately refuse to execute the following provision contained in it, answer:
"No person held to service or labor in one State under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."
Is there any "Bond of the Union of these States," while the above "fundamental law" is daily shamelessly violated by the traitorous advocates of the "Higher Law?" Has the "written instrument," as far as concerns the rights and interests of the citizens of the slaveholding States, more strength for their protection, than if it was a mere rope of sand?
Mr. Webster also asserted that, "a contract broken on one side is a contract broken on all sides." What oblicgation is imposed upon the South to observe a contract which has been broken by the North? Will any friend of Judge Douglas -- the champion of coercion, of employing force against sovereign States -- in Virginia explain?
The enemies of the South may cry Union! Union! as much as they choose, but there is no Union, when the ONLY BOND is wilfully and outrageously violated -- disregarded as much as if such bond had never been created.
Duty requires that the slaveholding States should begin to prepare for the worst. The election of Lincoln is almost as certain as though it were a fait accompli.
The sentiment which secures his election is the sentiment which has trodden the Constitution under foot -- which has wantonly, tantalizingly, sported with the rights of these States.
Are other "overt acts" necessary to convince Southern citizens that selfpreservation imperatively commands them to announce to the world their purpose to resist encroachments?
No patriot, south of Mason and Dixon's line, must hold an office under the administration of Lincoln, any more than he would hold an office under a foreign potentate who was open hostility to our cherished institutions.
If such shall be the case, the operations of an administration inaugurated upon a broken Constitution cannot affect the South, nor would the South contribute a dollar to its support. The North would then speedily determine whether the continuance of a constitutional Union was desirable or not.
In the event of her deciding affirmatively, she would have to give unquestionable guarantees that, thenceforth and forever, there should be perfect equality for the South in the Union.
The election of Lincoln is to decide the destiny of the slaveholding States. If, as the avowed author of the "irrepressible conflict," and as potter's clay in the hands of the "base ?," he can employ in the public offices RESPECTIBLE Southern citizens, then those States are so fallen that it matters not at what time they unresistingly lay their heads upon the executioner's block.
Lincoln regards his election as so certain, that his private agent is already engaged, it is said, in arranging his cabinet. The post of Secretary of State, according to one account we have heard, is to be offered to a Virginian, whose acceptance has been implicitly if not positively received, while th eAttorney Generalship will be bestowed upon a South Carolinian. This, if it be true, is arranged in the spirit of a peace-offering, as th emost effective policy for accomplishing th efinal subjugation of th eslaveholding States. Does Mr. Botts, or Mr. Rives, or Mr. Etheridge, or Mr. Anybody-else, who is not the merest of political adventurers, accept? Will either consent to so outrage the public opinion of their fellow-citizens?--to so dishonor the fair fame of their respective Commonwealths?
Let every man in the slaveholding States, who has within his bosom a patriotic heart, rally to the support of Breckinridge and lane. They are the only representatives in the "irrepressible" conflict canvas of that noble old Jeffersonian party which so triumphantly overpowered Federalism in 1800. Bell and Everett and Douglas and Johnson are alike hostile with Lincoln and Hamlin, to the salutary principles which called it into administrative being. To vote for Bell or Douglas now, is a sinexcusable in a Southern Democrat as it would have been inexcusable in a Southern Democrat in 1800 to vote for John Adams. Any one who may have the temerity to do so must consider himself as formally and flagrantly separating forever from the State Rights Democracy.
The availability of Judge Douglas can no longer be pleaded as an excuse for supporting him. It is quite certain, from what has transpired, that if he had been in the field alone as the regular nominee of Charleston, he could not have carried a non-slaveholding State, and yet it has been strenuously attempted to commit slaveholding States to him upon the rabid principles of non-slaveholding States -- upon squatter sovereignty and non-intervention.
We would call the attention of our readers to the editorial of the New York "Herald," copied into this mornings "Enquirer." However much we may deprecate the many harsh phrases with which the "Herald," at times has stigmatized Southern men, States and politics, yet, impartial justice demands the need of Southern gratitde for its manly and bold assaults upon the sectional enemies of the Union with which the "Herald" is surrounded.
Justly appreciating the importance of the Union to New York city, and fully aware how distructive to all National greatness would be its dissolution, the "Herald" has, for months, devoted the best energies of its talents, influence and power to open the eyes of the North to the impending danger which now threatens alike the North and the South. The same facts and arguments with which the "Herald" plies the Northern States, address themselves with peculiar force to the people of Virginia, at this time. As the "Herald" invokes men of all parties, at the North, to unite for the preservation of the Union, so we call upon all men at the South to concentrate their votes upon Mr. Breckrinridge as the best means of defeating Lincoln -- if that be possible -- and if not, then, as the surest way to protect the Union from the aggressions of successful Black Republicanism on the one hand, and from the too hasty action of the extreme Southern States on the other.
Should Virginia vote for John Bell at the approaching election, as she will by so doing, disconnect herself from the Southern States and deprive her influence of all its power, so she will invite aggression by inducing the belief that she is already semi-abolitionised. -- The Southern States, seeing their cause deserted by Virginia, and alarmed at the near approach of abolitionism upon their own borders, will nto hesitate a moment to dissolve their connection with the Union that has subsidised Virginia from her ancient States Rights faith, to the revived and re-modeled Federalism of 1860. The Northern fanatics, encouraged by the victory won by the defeat of Breckinridge in Virginia, will not delay the "overact," conscious that Botts and his ? , from the countenance that has been given to him, will be able to bring allies from the ranks of their enemies. And what will be Virginia's prospects when the great power of the Southern States has been withdrawn from her support, and unrestrained fanaticism turns all its power upon the institution of slavery in the few remaining border States.
There will be no remaining border States when Virginia has broken up the union by voting for John Bell. The Southern States having once dissolved their connection with the Union, Virginia will join them, or civil war will deluge her hills and valleys with the blood of her best citizens.
The "Herald" misunderstands us in saying that "the Richmond Enquirer," on the contrary, declares that if Virginia should go for Bell, the Cotton States will regard this as a casus belli." What we said was, that Virginia's desertion of the South, by voting for John Bell, would be regarded by those Sates as prognostic of a future abandonment of the cause of constitutional rights, and that this would creates such an apprehension throughout those States, that they would instantly abandon the Union and form a Southern Confederacy, in which, by diplomacy and arms, they would hope to find the protection denied them in the Federal Union.
This is the last issue of the "Enquirer" that can reach all of our readers before the important sixth of November. That day is admitted by men of all parties to be the most important that has ever dawned upon the Federal Union, and the duty discharged by each voter on that day incurs a responsibility greater that ever was before involved in the elective franchise.
It is the duty of every Democrat to be at the polls and to personally see that none of his friends and acquaintances are absent. If this be done, Virginia will be safe, as far as her citizens can influence the result. But should absence from the polls, indifference to the result, apathy from any cause, keep the Democrats of Virginia from voting, Virginia may be lost to the cause of the Constitution in failing to vote for John C. Breckinridge. Such a result would be attended with consequences to the State more injurious and ruinous than a dissolution of the Union; for while the vote of Virginia for Bell would eventuate in dissolution, it would also divide the people of Virginia into a Northern and Southern faction, which, beginning with crimination, would end in civil war. The man who votes for Bell is ready to submit to Lincoln, and if a majority of Virginia so votes, it will be regarded by the Southern States as an authoritative declaration on the part of the voters of Virginia of a determination to abandon the institution of slavery to the rapacity of Black Republicanism, and to trust to the Union for her safety.
It will be regarded by the Southern States as a direct barter of Constitutional rights and privileges, and infamous sale of their rights as well as our own, and will induce a resentment towards Virginia almost as bitter as they now have for the New England States. Such a result of the popular vote in Virginia would do more to precipitate revolution and accession than a similar result in any State in the Union; and while it would strike down the last hope of the Union, unless we are very much mistaken, it would inaugurate civil war from the outset in Virginia. Men who at this crisis of public affairs are willing to vote for John Bell, will not be unwilling to take up arms to sustain Lincoln.
A rumor is now in circulation, that Mr. Alex Rives, in a late speech at the Club House, advised, what he called the Union men (meaning the Bell and Everett men,) to take up arms against the disunionists, (by which he meant the Democrats,) and should the State of Virginia be so unfortunate as to vote for John Bell, Mr. Rives may have an opportunity of testing his fire-arms.
Thus the approaching election becomes in every aspect of view the most important that ever took place in this country and calls upon every Democrat to be at the polls, and to be active in procuring the attendance of every Democrat. By one day devoted to Virginia, the State may be saved from civil war, even if the Union cannot be preserved.
But the election of Lincoln is by no means certain; for it will be sean reliable calculations in this issue of the "Enquirer," from the New York "Journal of Commerce," that the Union ticket has a very bright prospect in New York. And with a united South Mr. Breckinridge may yet be our next President, the Union be preserved and peace continue throughout the country.
Then let every Democrat be at the polls on the sixth, and, exerting all his influence and energy for his country, swell the majority for Breckinridge to those figures which shall intimidate Northern aggressors and shame Southern submissionists.