Northern Democrats and Coercion.
The speech of
Governor Seymour, delivered before the war, an extract from which we lately published, in which be denounced the coercive policy, might afford instructive reeling for himself and his party at the present moment, illustrated as it is by events which have since transpired.
If the
Northern Democracy will refresh their memory by reference to the arguments against coercive formerly need by their own leaders and approved by themselves, they cannot acquit their party of the grossest inconsistency if they continue to such on this infernal crusade.
Even Daniel Webster said that a compact was not binding on our party unless the other parties to it lived up to it and that a compact broken by one party could be broken by all, is there a Northern Democrat who does not know that his anti-slavery section had been breaking the
Federal compact for years before the
South exercised the right which Daniel Webster himself conceded — of breaking a compact no longer building upon her Is not every intelligent Democrat familiar with the fact that the members of the Convent on which framed the
Constitution of the United States deliberately reined every measure which was proposed provision for a way to the matter if the constitution was broken by any of the parties to it, and specially refused to give any power to coerce States, And are they not aware that the
Convention left the country without a remedy for the contingency of secession, is the fare of the fact that nine States receded from the old Confederation, (for the reason that the compact between there was not kept,) and fically all the States seceded but and
North Carolina.
Here was a precedent in the formation of the
United States Constitution, which the vain to aside by various preposition to rank the Senate the judge or to give the
President the power, and to give congress the power to negative State action — all of which were rejected.
No judge was left but the States themselves.
Let the
Northern Democrats look back to the old land marks.
Even John in a speech delivered in New York in 1878 that ‘"Nations must be the judge whether compacts are broken."’ And he uttered another statement which it is useless to censed to the consideration of the own party, but which surely the
Northern Democracy, who always protected to be the peculiar friends of the
South, might adopt without homage to cense or humanity.
He said that ‘"when the fraternity feeling was gone between the
State, then it was time to separate in peace and return to their original state."’ Is the
Northern Democracy less charitable and humane then the man whom they Used to call the Firebrand of Agitation and Fanaticism!
