Mt. Vernon Democratic banner (Mount Vernon, Ohio : 1853), 1860-07-24

              -1 V. ' wrrrrr YOLUME . XXIV. MOUNT VERNON, OHIO : TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1860. NUMBER 14. t CHARLES F. BALDWIN, ATTORNEY AT 'LAW, Mount Vernon, Ohio. Prompt attention given o Collections and Seour-Bg all Claims entrusted to hi Care. XSfCTT. Baldwin, it also, a Notary. Public, and will lit tend to each business as is authorised by his commission, with promptness and despatch. ' April 10th, 1860-6mu. MARSHAL IIEAI, ATT' Y & COUSELLOR AT LAW, AND NOTARY PUBLIC, Mount' Vernon, Ohio. OFFICE-Jad son's Building, Main St., 2 floors South Knox County Bank. . march 27. IMKIT W. COTf J. WI. L. BASE. - COTTON A BANE, Attorneys and Counsellors at Law, MT. VERXON. O. VT7"ILL ATTEND to all business intrusted to Yv them, in any of the Court?. Orriee. N. E. corner of Main and Gabbier st., ver Pylo's Merchant Tailoring establishment. oc20 JOHN ADAMS, Atiarney at Law and Notary Public, ernes m ward's hsw bpildiso, Mount Vernon, Ohio. W .llrtf. W sonata. a. . bai.tisg. itMi4.n & rsAivxixG, A TT O it NT K V S A T Jj A W, - T. TtSVOK, (SOX COCHTT, OHIO. JflJee i j JRanninjr Building:. northwestcorner Warn and Vine streets, in the room formerly occupied by M. II. Mitchell. jcl4 tSamucl Iiracl. J-mrph C. Deri ISRAEL & DEVIN, Attorneys at Law & Solicitors in Chancery, MT. VERNON, OHIO. ' OFFICE. Three doors South of the Bank. Prampt attention given to all business en-trusted to them, and e? prcialjy to collecting and semiring claims in any part of the state of Ohio. Pee. 7:tf. .. ; ' j. 'iw. iocisio.v. HOUSE PAINTER AND GLAZIER, MT. VEUXOX. OHIO. SHOP Corner Norton and Frederick Streets. JpfT' All orders promptly attended to. Especial attention given to House Paiuting, Glazing' and Shwtter Puintinjr. . "sash, ioosis XijLirosT DEVOR vfc HURBELL, ANNOUNCE TO THE CITIZENS OF KNOX nd the sr.rroumVinjj counties, that theyare now prepared to inanufaeturc to order all kinds of Sah. Doors and-BUnds, Wimlow and Door Franios, and all work required in hous finishing. We shall vw the very best material, and will warrant all our work. , Shop on High street, opposite the Court ITour-e, Mount VernonOhio. frnarch20. - D C M T) N T t; o Y ATTO IIX i: Y AT I. UV, Banning Jluiftlinp nr?r?i. .VcGiffina tiUoc Store, MT." VERNON. OIHO. Specialattention given to the collection of claim.", and the purchase and 5a.Ie of Keal-Ettale. Ill AVE fur sale unimproved land? ns follows: filft acres in Csage county, Misouri. " rtn acres in Warren -county, Missouri. 2 acres in St. Francois county, Missouri. . .: 125 acres in Hardin county, Ohio. 40 acre lot in Hardin county. Ohio. 83 acres in Mercer county; Ohio, mnrl ... CITY DRUG STORE. S. W. LII'PITT, WhotctoU ad lletnil D-nlrr in -ruY, Medicines, Painls, Oils, G as? , 1 I'm street, opposite the henvon House, 1 .Ttoatil Vrtscn, Ohl. t-tf Pure Wiues and Li-iuors for mediiinnlpnr-rjs.-s. "P R p. c. LA1T.. JMKS A LA.1t. XEW S4SII FACTORY. PC. LANE & CO. having got their New Fae-a tory in operation, are now. prepared to manu facture all kinds of SASH. DOORS AND rI JN DS. Of the best material and in a superior stylo of workmanship.Ornamental, hchro::, i racry nni jsraeKor n orK manufactured to order, and all kinds of CUSTOM TURNING, done in the best manner, and -on short notice. All work warranted. Ortlers for every kind of woi'k are solicited and will he promptly attended to, Zfir- Shop at COOPERS A CLAKK'S Foun.lry. 2nd story in front. iz-y CAI1IXCT III .SIXCSS .TosotdIi S. Ma-tln flAKES pleasure in anunnnei,g t the i:tiiens ol I Mt. croon and vtciuil vthat he cox':nues to parry -on the CA HLXKT MA K A U li L SIX ft'.SN, rn all its branches, at his old stand, at the foot of Main street, opposite Buckingham's Foundry, where ill be found Bureaus, Tables, Chairs, Bedsteads, IVashstands, Capboards, Ac, Ac. IJNOF.TiTA KIXO. I have provided mysolf .with a new and splendid" Ilearsc, and will be ready to attend funerals when- krer called upon. Comus of all sizes kept on hand Vnd made to order. J. MARTIN. febSrtf BREAD FOR THE HUNGRY! " S. & II. JACKSOX' Y T AVE taken the well known Bakery "'of James JJ George's, and opened a Sale Room one door Louth of George Jt Fay'a Grocery, whero they will Weep on hand rreab lireaa, tsKensna .racxers, f all kinds, at wholesale and retail.. Alse, a fresh supply of FAMILY GROCERIES. W will .lao keerv on hand the best of COAL OIL j the improved Lamps for burning it, tbe cheap. stand best light in use, which we will sell cheap or cash. . FRESH TEAST AT ALL TIMES. Janl7,1860-tf. - Jit. Ternon Rope and Cordage Manufactory. TTTg are bow manufacturing ROPE, CORDAGE J and TWINES, of all sises, up to 500 feet in tonffth. and from 4 inches diameter down to a fish lae. The stock we shall work is the best article of Kentucky and Missouri liemp, Manilla, Jute, Flax ind Cetton. j We propose to make good work, and shall endear-f always to procure good stock, and we are confi- !ent we caa compete in quality end prices with any lantrfactory in Ohio. Wholesale orders from merchants and ethers in box and surrounding counties are respectfully so-elted. We ean ship by Railroad to each places as eenvenieot to a line; and oan deliver by our own 'agon to interior towns and viUiges.-Hope made to special order, ..ad on short notice! Depot at the store of Mr. Robert Thompson, Main treet, J4U Vernon. (-.ar29) G.-.B. ARNOLD. DA1R AXD BEDSTEAD 1IAXTFACT0RY, woodwara block, xic. vernon, o. Ign of the Red Bedstead, and Golden Chair. .r dantel McDowell,. TAKES pleasure in announcing to the citizens of ML Vernon and vicinity, that having been in the business for 39 years, in this place, he eontinues to manufacture CHAIRSand BEDSTEADS of every description, at his stand in Wood ward Hall Block, where he hopes. by making good work, and selling at Ibw prices, to receive a eontinn- 0 of the liberal patroaage that nas Heretofore been jxtended to him. All bis worx u maae 01 me very lest material, aad will be warranted to give entire xtisfactioa. Toa patronage of the pubUo js res. MtTally soljeited. . jyl2:y I PATENT OFFICE AGCX CT. ppoiU tk Wtddtll Housep Cleveland, Ohio. r i r v ml 1 READ! READ! . From the Petersbnrg (Val) Index, Jojy 4. UNION OR DISUNION AN ADDRESS .- "" ' ' " TO THE. . Democracy of Virginia. ' The undersigned, a Committee appointed at a Democratic meetinir, recent! held in the city of Petersburg, to ratify the nominees of the late National Democratic Cinvention at Baltimore, deeply Impressed with the paramount ne cessity that Virginia should now, as in all times past, give the weight of her numerical strength and the greater weight of her mora influence to. the nominees of the National Democracy, be- leave to present to our fellow citizena of the State some of the reaions which constrain as to adhere to our ancient party organizations and support its ananimously accredited candidates. C jnceivin that our object can be attained by a candid exiintnati in of the arguments presented by those who have determined to adopt a different course, we shaU follow in the main, the address recently pjbli.hel by the seceding Vir ginia delegates, m vin J ic.v.i n of their action- and examine whether " thj '' 'assertions of fact therein will be ir tht test of scrutiny, and whether even if true, "they wju!d furnish the slihest excuse far thir unprecedented action, and the atte mpted lurupnViu of the National j rk i' .i tr r ir : - - ueiuutrutj 01 ine uuijn. we lOVOKe.lrom our fellow democrats an unbiasied consideration of the question, kn.v thtt they hive the inde pndence follo the dictates of duty, and the conclusions ot their i 1 1 me-nt to anv issu. the first aNearian of the "A 1 Iress refers to the condition of things at the opniu of the Charles ton Convention, and is conclude J in these terms: ti When the C. invention first assembled at Charlcston, about one thir l of its members were the Avowe 1 and eaer ptrtisan of a Northern candid ite who rpm iins the c vispicnous cham pro n of apolitical domv which has been condemned as unconsfitutiona! by the Supreme Curt. As now urged, it has defeneration into a mere anti slavery principle, tending to divide piirii3 by a geographical line. It is less candid bur not J- a-?cti:viaJ than the Jeadid tenet of the U pr.bl!in .-party. In or ler to sustnin the position of tht c mdidate, the Ia'er.s of his party iu the Convention were, obliged to organize his partissns up in the buis of an unconstitutional principle and a S'fvH ml semimjat ad verse ty thii ju'h." . Now, wh.if-vnrrrray" h ire ben the case elsewhere, it is a fct c ipi')!e of aavhentieati in by a h-mdrel witncs?.?3, thit bith of the deleo'ites - o snt fr)in the Petersburg D'.s'ricr to Ch irleston ! in terms nnd in wmon, pledged themselves to give to the tlaims of this "conspicuous champion of a lo-rm; "on lTne l as unconstitutional by thiS ipreme C rirt,"' a ontileratiou eq ial to that which tby would acord to any other Democrat, North or Souths after to-ir resp-ictive quivocal acts, declaring that up to th"i3 period favorites. As Mr. Hreckinri 1,'e wns not the fa- j there was no just cans-) for secession, let ns ex-virite of either, it follows that they were pledge 1 j amine their state nants of fact as to the Balli-vo the Democracy of the District to give I)ug- more meeting. " - la3 as fair a chance for the nomination as Breck- The first charge made by the Ad iress against iii.nd.ge. 4 the B kltimore Convention, is tlie attempt to ex- , .Again, -it is a fact capable of eq-ially cmicIu- elude the delegates from Mississippi, Texas and sive a ith fnticafjon, that both of thev treutle- ! Georgia. upon which the Address enlarges men. th. one in pr.s?n n 1 the otber by the j The seceders certainly do not mean to assert mouth -f a friend, disclaimed all desire to etr-ct , I hat the Convention showed any disposition to any alteration iu the "Cincinnati Platform, and j exclude the delegve.t from Afississippy and Tex-by obvious inference avowed their willinsness to as. No chargj couid b- more sratuitous The support ibis chvmpion of an unconstitutional committee reported in favor of their admission; dogma, wit fioat any repit lutfion of that dogma. And lastly, the imputation that we, and that large body ot Suthem Democrats who support Judge. Douglas, the Johnsons, Siules, Rusts Forsyths, '..Miller? are advocating "a mere anti- slavery principle, less caiidil bat not less sec tional than the leading tenet of the Republican party," is a slander that self respect demands as to repel at once and in unmistakable terme; the people of Virginia will not endorse it. The authors of the A Uress proceed to make their first specific charges of anfairness and we quote their language: ... "The new rule to which we allude was, 'that in any State which has not provided or directed by its State Convention how its vote may be given, the Convention will recognize the right of each delegate to cast his individual vote.' The artifice concealed in this rule will be presently explained. The rule was first submitted to a committee of the Convention, and rejected when the committee was full. Afterwards, in the absence of the delegates from Virginia and other members, a portion of the committee resolved to report it. Being unexpectedly sprung upon the Convention, it was hurried through without opportunity for discussion. None bat those who had studied some specific facts, not then generally known, could have foreseen its unfair effects and disastrous consequence. We opposed it as erroneous in principle and contrary to all former usage. Its special design was afterwards dis covered." . The assertions of this paragraph are substantially, first, that the "unit 1 ale" is unfair secondly, that it was harried through without opportunity for discussion. As the second "charge is not only inconsis tent with the statement ofhe authors of the Address that they opposed ihe ruZc, bat is flatly contradicted by the published report of the proceedings at Charleston. We quote from the Semi-Weekly Richmond Enquirer of April 20th: "The report of the Committee, on Organization, presented an additional rale providing that in every State Convention how iu vote mav he cast, the Convention will recognize the right of each delegate to cast his individual vote. a warm delegate arose on the rule, ia which Mr. Richardson, Jlr. McCook, Mr. Cessna, of Pa, Mr. Barry, of Mississippi, Josiah Randall and others took part, several Southern members earnestly opposing it." The charge of want of discussion is triumphantly refuted, and the charge of- undue haste is farther rebutted by the fact that the rule was not voted on at its first dis enssion, but lay over until the next session. Nor is the essential'jastice of the rate leas defensible than the mode ef its adoption. 'Several States regularly instructed their delegates to vote as a unit, and when this was true the Con vention assumed no right to disturb the arrangement; but lere no rale was prescribed, it ap. pears obviously fairest to the Delegates, fairest to the constituencies, and best calculated to elicit the honest perference of the people to permit each delegate to cast his vote for himself. For these reasons it cannot be a matter of sarprise that the motion to lay this role on the table was lost by a vote of tico to one, and the rule "adopted by acclamation." The case of Pennsylvania chosen by the authors of the Address to show the unfairness of the rale, is particularly unfortunate, as the ruling of the Convention was in accordance with the uniform practico ia Pennsylvania, whose dele gates have never in any instance cast a united vote, save when they were united in sentiment. There was, in short, no violation of principle in the rule, and it is. as fair to assume that those who opposed it, were actuated by the hope of some undue advantage which its rejection would secure to them, as a charge the advocates of it with a similar motive. . The Address proeeeds: 'It was by force of the contrivance we have explained that a minority rejected the platform supported by the majority. Its rejection caused several Southern State to withdraw from the Convention at Charleston. Our conduct in that crisis has already been vindicated before you, and has received yonr approval." What was the. conduct thus vindicated and approved by the people of Virginia? It was this: the unanimous and deliberate rc.solce of the Virginia delegations not to secede, and the re solve equally deliberate as we shall show directly to accept the minority platform so called with what property may be seen from the fact that its first resolution passed the Convention by a vote of 237 ayes, to 6 j nays, and the rema ning resolutions, "by acclamation." . To have seeded at Charleston, in view of the fact that their constituencies had clothed them with no discretion to that -effect, would have been a monstrous assumption of authority. How much more unjustifiable was their secession at Baltimore after they had gathered the sentiment of their constituencies approving their refusal to secede at Charleston I . The address here concludes its account of the Charleston Convention, and if any evidence in addition to the facts just detailed were wanting to establish the fact that up to this time there was no plausible excuse fr; secession, it is furnished in the act of the Virginia delegates who rint only declined to spcede, but took their full share in the acts of the Convention for three days subsequent to the adoption of the nev oh. n o x.i o u s p 'at for m , endea rorinr fi fr-sercn oll6!s top-it th'lr jforilc oi I hit p?,t'f,,rm as a candi-diSefor the Presidency! The conclusion is ir-r sist able either that they and Mr. Hunter fn-lorseJ the Piatfjrin, or that thy were engaged in the attempt to launch the Nitional Democracy into a campaign ' with a p'atfjrm looking one way and a candidate the other." The Address now pr'ocepds to give an account of the aljourned Convention at B iltiroore, and keeping in mind the fct that the Virginia dele gates by the. most solemn, unanimous, and une- and the C mvention : confirmed the report -in each case admitting the delegates from those States by a vote of 250 to 2i. Five hundred delegates, voted aye, "and only five nay." And in the case of Georgia, the Convention, as the Address admits, also decided the question in accordance with justice and with the wiahea"of the South admitting the seceders and excluding their contestants by a vote of 1 45 to 16J. Indeed, the Address itself having devoted more space to the cases of Mississippi Texas and Georgia, than it bestows upon the entire proceedings at Charleston, obviously with the attempt to create the impression that the Convention was bent upon "'injustice, concludes by affirming that the Convention ''waived all the objections which were suggested, and properly reduced the inquiry 1n such cases to the simple question, who were the regular representatives of the Democracy of the South?'' There remained the cases of Alabama and Louisiana; in which there were full sets of delegates competing Arkansas, where there was a partial competition, and ia the cases of Missouri and Massachusetts, one contested seat in each of the delegations. - The Address does not pretend to enter into any argument to show that the Convention made an erroneous decision as to these cases, bat contents itself with a mere sweeping affirmance ef that charge. We shall therefore dismiss it with a" few reflections which mast suggest themselves to any fair-minded man. . 1st. No principle can be ; clearer than the right of representatives assembled to judge of the qualifications of their members. Dictates of obvious propriety and necessity commend the general adoption of this rale in all deliberative bodies. The Constitution of the Union and the organic law of every State in the Confederacy, contain provisions similar to that in our Own Constitution (Art. IV.Section 9.) 'Each House shall judge of the election, qualification, and re turn of its members - To recognize the right and object to its exercise, except in accordance with oox wishes or interests, is a position too puerile to merit dis cussion, and hence we find tbe most unwarran table acts borne under its operation. It was under the force of this, identical rule that Frank Blair, a Black Republican, was a few weeks since admitted to a seat in Congress from St. Louis, over a Democratic, competitor who bad beatea him 600 votes.; -This clear outrage, though perpetrated by a strict party -rote, was not thought by the Virginia delegation ia Con gress a just ground for a secession. 2. In tha caaaw In iTvsachasetta and Missouri the Con vention decided that when delegate fails from any cause to accept his trust, and his alternate takes his place, the latter is forthwith invested with full powers as delegate Any other coarse would, it appears to us, lead to perpetual conflicts, to confusion and uncer tainty as to the limits of the power of the alternate, and to the waste of tbe time of the Conven tion in pretty personal squabbles as it would be competent for a principal to appear at any mo ment and oust a substitute who mtfht have been so connected with the action of tbe body as com mittee man, author of resolutions or otherwise that the substitution of a new loan would eeri oasly retard the business of thJ body. By no fair construction can the refusal ftf the principal to attend the Convention be regarded otherwise than as a surrender of his ofSce and as the al ternate is always no less the choia of the people than the principal, it is obvfous tiat no injustice t cn be done to the constituericieexcept by the appointing power, the people thelnselses . 3d. In the case of Arkansas all the contestants were admitted ' and 'authorized to cast in conjunction the vote of the State a decision for which abundant precedent my be found in the pst history of Democratic (jonvention, as, for example, in the case of Georgia in the Baltimore Convention of 1852. ? v 4th. There remain only the case of Alabama and Louisiana, in each of which j were two sets of delegates the Seceders, and delegations appointed subsequent to the. secession by State Conventions representing the anti seceders. The Convention was called on to choose between them;, there was no room for compromise for the parties refused compromise. Oo ihe one side was a party prepared to abide the decision of the Convention, on the other a party instructed to withdraw if they did not obtain their desires, a party which had demonstrated its purpose of secession by a previous consummation of that act. Both claimed to represent the people, and it cannot be thought a matter of wonder that the Convention in each case admitted that .tola. lion wLich came prepared to act hi good faith for the common interest of all. ; B it admitting for the sake of argument that the decision was erroneous, is it not the extreme of absurdity to pretend that such an objection furnished a shadaw of a reason for the rapture of the Dinijcratic party? Imagine, the storm of indignant rebuke with which the State Demo, critic Convention in Virginia would have received a resolution instructing the Virginia delegates to with-lrAw from a National Convention unless their wishes as to the deciaiok of contes ted seats were complied with! This was not the contingency provided for even in the Alabama resolutions. Such an act of filly would Al promptly scouted there as here. Still on the aloption of the majority report the representa tion of several Sjutheru States abandoned their seats, and twenty five Virginia delegates who could not be driven out at Charleston on a que?, lion of fundamental principle seceded at Baltu more on a qnestion of' org iriiz it ion .'an act we venture t- alHrm unwarranted by "any express or implied i.istructions, justified by no, considera-tion of principle or true policy, condemned in ad- i-vauoe by the en lo.rseraent by their, constituents of the opposite course as they themselves admit and unauthorized by the precedent in the history, of Virginia Di'inocray. .'"-: The Platform was not an ' insuperable objec tion, for it must never be forgotten they, tried at Charleston for three days to place Mr, Hunter upon it as the National Democratic candidate for the Presidency. .Hostility to Judge Douglas, with all his known . opiuions, the Address in terms denies a. d disclaims as a reasou for this act. I ho rulinfr as to contested seats could not have been the reason, however it was made the occasion ; for the cause is absurdly inadequate to the effeet. What was the cause ? A d termina tion to have Mr. Hunter or nobody?. A desire to spite the friends of Judge Douglas ? A resolve to rule or ruin? . A. tame enbserviance to the traitor spirit of disunion ? We trust it was none ol these. What then ? The Address is fatally silent. But it proceeds : " Those who remained in the Northern Sec tional Convention made nominations of candi dates for the otiices of President and Vice Pres- dent. The former is reported to have received only 181 J votes less that two-thirds of a fuH Convention.'' This is an error of fact : Judge Douglas re ceived the unanimous vote of the Convention, (which "is reported" to have contained over 200 votes,) and considering how many more states were represented in that body than in the Sece ders Convention, we are at a loss to see the pro priety of the term "sectional" as applied thereto. If the number of States or the number of dele gates determine tbe question of nationality, no one can be at a loss to decide to which body this term applies. ; The secession having.. been effected, the Na tional Convention proceeded to Dominate their candidate, which being accomplished, the fol lowing resolution was adopted as part of the platform : "Eesolced, That it is in accordance with the true interpretation: of the Cincinnati platform, tbat daring the -existence of Territorial Govern ment, the measure of restriction, whatever it may be, imposed bv the Federal Constitution on the powers of the Territorial Legislature over the subject ot domestic relations as the same has been, or shall hereafter be, finally determined bv the Supreme Court of the United States, should be respected by all good citizens, and enforced with promtness and fidelity by every branch of .1. - r n- - . A resolution which removes the last shadow of excuse for Southern opposition to the platform. .'"-. -- - Hitherto we have confined ourselves to consid. erations grpwkg out of the facta of the late Convention, abstaining from any reference to the characters or purposes of the w&on of eecer sion, and we make bold to claim that there is not the semblance of a reasonable pretext in those acts, for the disruption of that histone pan ty which for many years has controlled the aits, shaped the fortnne, and worked out the destiny or tais great republic. The Address which we have briefly reviewed studiously avoids all discussion, or indeed affirm ance of the principle which it is elsewhere avow ed constitutes this issue. The silence is ominous. If the authors of the Address imagine that the reflecting, patriotic people of Virginia,, can be wielded at any time by any man or body of men, they have, we appehend, greatly underrated their intelligence and publio virtue. Before they will abandon their party ties, and disrupt that politi cal organization which they have proudly claim ed to be only conservative power in this republic, adequate to the maintenance of constitutional liberty and State Rights, they will demand some higher motive than the mere will of any body of men, however respectable lor their talents or in fluence of numbers. The attempt of the " lead ers," to swerve the Democratic masses of Virginia from their political -" faith has been often tried, ith a uniform result the political destruction of evil counsellors. What then is the issue of principle upon which the secessionists seek to divide the Democratic party? They contend that it is the duty of Congress to provide for the protection of Slave property in the Territories by special legislation, if the Territorial legislatures fail to make such provi sion. - . The objections of this doctrine are numerous, and as it appears to ns. unanswerable. And firstly, we contend that the power and duty claim ed for Congress are anomalous. It is not pretended that it is the daty of Con gress to intervene for the protection of any other description of property. A billiard table for ex ample is as obviously a subject of property as a slave; yet the beneficial use of a billiard table may be prevented in a Territory, as in a State, by a tax so high as to amount to a prohibition; yet it is not pretended that it is the right or duty of Congress to intervene for the protection of this property. The same is true of spirituous qaors, and is generally true of all property, the use of or traffic in which involves considerations or sentiment or morality, however misguided. n accordance with this view the Democratic party and th South have hitherto denied the urisdictioo of Congress on the subject, claim-ng that slaves be placed upon a footing of pre cise equality with all other property. The asaer-; tion of the South has been in entire accordance with the deliberately expressed opinion of Gen. ane, the secession candidate for the Vice-Presi dency, who in a speech delivered in the : Senate on the 19th of December, 1859, three years af ter the Dred Scott decision, said: "Congress has NO POWER over the the question of slavery; they cannot under the Constitution establish it in a Territory or prohibit it.' Se;ondly?we contend that the exercise of Iy impracticable. No observation is more common or more true than this: that no law can be executed which is not upheld by local public sentiment. A duelist cannot be convicted of murder in Virginia; a Charleston jury will not proclaim the slave trade piracy ; a Mobile jury refused to condemn filibustering ; American juries will not punish the murderer of a seducer and the list might be greatly extended. For analagous reasons it is absurd to hope for the enforcement of a slave code in a free soil Territory, more especially when we remember that the law sought to be enforced is the distateful mandate of a foreign legislature.Thirdly, thoughthe power claimed were regu-lar and practicable, its exercise in contravention of the popular will, would be a fatal snare to the South. ' '.. ' It being generally conceded that it is the duty of Congress to admit a State with or without slavery as the people may determine, tbe intervention of Congress could have no other effect than to induce slaveholders to take their property into a. Territory where, at period more or less remote, it would be destroyed with a certainly and a rnthlessness propertionate"to the opposition of the people to the intervention of Congress. And moreover, if intervention is to last no longer than during the territorial condition, the proper ty of the slaveholder will beceme valoelese pre cisely at the instant that it rises into political in-fluence as an element of representation in Con' gress. So that both in a political and in ape cuniary sense we hold " intervention" as a snare to the South. Fourthly, the establishment of this doctrine would inevitably perpetuate the slavery agitation in Congress. To avert this fatal and constant agitation has long been the aspiration of every patriot's heart. Conservation parties have in terms proclaimed it a paramount consideration of policy, and conservative men -have often shaped their political relations with exclusive reference to this object-But the doctrine of intervention opens the door to infinite controversy. Not only will the framing of each new territorial bill be a signal for renewing -the battle, but Congress will be constantly sssailed with petitions on the one hand affirming the protection to be inadequate, and 00 the other uneceesarily great. One party will continually demand more protection ; the other continually asking more restriction." Which party will be most likely to obtain a favorable hearing in an abolition Congress, it is not difficult to surmise; for Congress being sovereign and independent within its sphere, no earthly power can force it to pass a law obnoxious to the will of the msjority. Fifthly,. Though the principle were normal, and practicable, and advantageous to cs, and fraught with no danger to the pnblie peace, is a question purely of legal construction of powers, and most be settled by the Judiciary to whose decision all Democrats, and none more willingly than Judge Douglas, will cheerfully bow. We are aware that it is claimed by some that the Supreme Caurt has decided the question, but surely Judge Douglas may be permitted to doubt the fact when such a constitutional lawyer as Hon. Reverdy Johnson denies it, and each a political model as the candidate of the aeoders for the Vice President, as we have above seen, denies all authority of Congress in terms no leas unequivocal. When the Supreme Court has decided it, or if that tribunal has already decided it, Judge Douglas openly and on all suitable occasions avows his resolves to acqniesce at once. Sixthly. We contend that the principle sweeps away the last bulwark of Southern safety "On the slavery question. If the jurisdiction of Congress be once admitted on this subject, the gate is at once opened for the largest license. It is idle to hope that the action of Congress will be limited to favorable legislation idle in fact to hope that a Congress notoriously Black Republican, ever will legislate for the benefit of slavery, and none feel the truth of this more clearly than the leaders of the Seceders. They know that a Black Repablican Congress will not pass laws protecting slavery, and their insisting on making this dogma a party test can only be explained on the supposition that the disruption of the Union being with them a foregone conclusion, they have organized their party on a demand which they know cannot be complied with that there may be no delay or doubt in precipitating the issue of revolution. No, if Congress undertakes to legislate on this subject, History is not without instructive warning as to the probable character of such legisla tion. The Spanish Court once claimed the same right to legislate on slavery in Cuba, and the an nals of the island inform us that one of the pro tective laws permitted any negro who was dissatisfied with his master to go before a Notary, who should assess his value, which price the master was bound to accept from any person whom the slave chose as a new owner. Nor are we with out admonition nearer home. Our own Congress has in four memorable occasions assumed jurisdiction as to the question of slavery. Tn the first case it swept slavery forever from the Northwest Territory ; in the second it made the slave trade trade piracy ; in the third it established the Mis souri Compromise line ; in the fourth it abolished the slave trade in the District of Columbia. And this is the banquet to which the Secessionists invite the Soajh. - Lastly, if the principle were right, and expedi ent, and practicable, and useful in its nature, it is at this period unnecessary. On this subject we shall content ourselves with quoting the language of an able advocate of "intervention," an ultra Southern man, and one of the earliest minds in the Sooth, Judge Reagan, of Texas. In a speech delivered in Congress, a few weeks before the meeting of the Charleston Convention, he used the following language. See Cong. GTo&s, March 1, 1360 : M As I have spoken of the power of Congress to protect slavery in tbe Territories, I must say a word more to avoid being misundersood. I have said Congress has the power, and that circumstances may render tbe exercise of that power now, and do not wish to be understood assaying there is any necessity for its exercise at this time. Slavery is not expected to go into Washington or Nebraska or Kansas Territories ; and hence no laws are necessary for its protection there. It now exists to a limited extent in New Mexico and Utah. In New Mexico the Territorial Legislature has passed the necessary laws for its protection ; and in Utah there is no complaint of a want of additional protection. This covers all onr Territories, and shows that no legislation is necessary on the subject." Fellow Democrats of Virginia, can such a barren abstraction as this jastify the disruption of your party, nan eh less the overthrow of your country. To this latter consummation we solemnly believe the secession movement inevitably tends. ; Many of the supporters of secession would shrink with horror from the catastrophe, bat that such is the object of its leaders, their character and antecedents conclusively establish. We do these leaders the justice to suppose that they are in earnest, tbat they have resolved to secure this assumed right, and they cannot be suspected of the child's play of quietly acquies cing in defeat, when tbe principle involved is of such transcendent eonseqaence. Every one concedes that they vnZf be defeated before the people, and what then t Will they tamely submit for fowr more years to this lawless oppression, with no certainty of deliverance, even then? The idea is preposterous ; revelations never go backward. If any considerable portion of the people strpport them, the balletin of their defeat will be the signal of revolt. The cotton States, to use the language of the bead of the movement, "will be precipitated into Tevofotxoo,'' and Virginia, with other Southern States, will be invited to mutate the dignified example set at Baltimore, and follow the wake of the more determined States, out of the Union. Let ns sell ourselves to no such fatal and wicked scheme. No, fellow Democrats of Virginia, let 09 rally under the an cient banner of out party, loyal to the creed of our fathers, . faithful to the Union, that nobles monument and guaranty of natural rights and political freedom. Let ns rede m onr pledge, observe oar compacts, keep oor faith, happy ia the conviction that this patriotic course is entirely consistent with that paramount allegiance to 8tate Rights which the Democracy of Virginia have ever cherished with more than oriental devotion.' ' . ; ;-.. " - Already intimations reach ns on every hand, that the sober second thought' of many who at Erst lent their countenace to this parricidal blow at Democracy and Union, haa led to the retracing of their steps. Still, the cohorts cf sectionalism thunder at our gates, and now as in every day of gloom, to the " old guard of Virginia, is committed the noble office of standing in the deadly breach, and summoning the scattered legions to the walls. Accept the danger and the daty your glorious history proclaims yon capable ofthe sacrifice and worthy cf the post. Let ns unite as we did in the memorable canvass of 1856, and the proud record may be ours, that twice ia s single decade we saved the Republic . : Fxakcis E. Brvcs, r - "" Thomas Wallacx, Thomas Beavch, A. M. KkXxt. Petersburg, July 3d, 1850- Committee. , Ji faxes Lxxexalxtt. Before leaving the coentry, the Japanese Jeft .the snm of $20,000( to be distributed among the Folic of the vari oas cities U which they had been entertained. From the Pittsburgh Feat. "THE DOUGLAS IS C031IXG." - am "the civrisus ill COU." - A POPULAR SOXQ DEDICATED TO THE MCStOX CLS1! CU7B." The Douglas is coming, make way, make way,-The Douglas is coming, make way, make way, . He ha struck up the tone that we're going to play, Tis the new "II ail Colombia," make way, make way. . Then fling your banner to the fcd. Leave feuds and discords far behind This constellation flag shall be Our oriflame of victory. For Douglas is coming, make way, make way. ror JougiM is coming, make way, make way,- Oh, please Mr. Lincoln get out of the way Best "ride rail" to Boston, make way, make way. Tread proudly for we earry here : The noblest flag that floats in air; And well we kaow the trash to ber Just laws alone make liberty. . And we're going to have them make way, make way. And we're going to have them make way make way, The Douglas is sere, so get rot of tbe way. . You'd best go to Boston, make. way, make way. No JTorth, bo Sonth, no East, no West,' Onr own wide land tbe loved the best- . . Shame to tbe traitor who woo Id sever Our Union may it last for ever. And DouIs will save it, make way make way, And Douglas will save it, make way, make way. Til he bears our flag, and heU shows u the way. And we're all for the Union, make way, make way. Confession of Hicks, the Pirate. Hicks, the pirate murderer executed 00 Bed- low's Island, near New York, last week, for thy murder of Capt. Burr and the two- yotmg Watts on the. sloop E, A. Johnson, on the 2 1st, of March last, according to his own confession wa one of the bloodiest of modern monsters. He-had been a sort of "Red Avenger of the Spaeisb Main," having perpetrated a majority of hi crimes on the Pacific Coast, among the Span iards and Mexicans. Hicks was born at Foster, Rhode Island, its 1820, ran away from home at IS, and commen ced his career as a thief. Having been arrested for crimes he made his escape and shipped on a. whaler. He landed at San Francisco, and be came a daring robber at the mines and amonsr emigrant trains. Hicks fioally shipped to Rio, ana wim outers loos to tbe road between Kio and Monteviedo, where they robbed all worth robbing, and murdered all who resisted. He aiso confessed to numerous murders committed by himself and comrade between Santiaeo and TT1 ww . - . . rmipanaso. ne was on board the slaver Anne Mills, and being in danger of a capture, he sayav the slaves were tied to a cable, and the anehnr thrown overboard, dragging then after it. .clicks conressea to knifing fjapU Borr and theV two Watts with an axe, cutting them down as coolly as he would knock a dog on the head, and all to obtain $1,000 ia money, which he sup posed was on board the sloop. The gallowa never swung up a more deserving demon. HcZTaion, King of Ireland. A pamphfet-with-ihie-title has made its appearance in Paris, the writer ie bitterly anti-English. He condodes tins? "There is wanting at this moment rn Ireland but one man, and this man ProvidAnn v. have specially marked out. This man has valiV antly gained his spurs in, Algeria, at .the Mala-koff bastion, and in '.the plains of Lombardy; and, if need be, he would not be embarrassed to-cut out a crown for himself on th green Erin. This man is one of those whom sv people are always happy to dnl nnA wkn kings wilTrngly salute with the title of brother tbis man is AlcLtahon. When it is considered how vigorowly the government of Napoleon III exercises a censorship over the press, the above seeme almost to have the odor of official sanction. At any rat, it i winked at, if not endorsed. "It i Better to Save- tliaa to Destroy :f History tells us of a conqueror who dipd from pestilence caused by the dead bodies of the vanquished. As a set-of against such a libel oa humanity we point to a philanthropist whose sola aim it is to overcome disease, and rob the grave of victims. The man to whom we refer U a for-eigner,an Englishman, bat can nowhere be looked upon as an alien, for he knows no distinction of race or creed in in bis efforts to Jeecne his fellow . creatures form the grasp of death. Our readers will readily surmise that we refer to THOMAS HOLLOWAY, a name well known in this country and wherever the English language hi spoken. The popularity which bis marvelloew remedies have attained in all parts of Europe and America, is without a parallel in the annals of medicare. Here, in the United States, they are recognized as indispensable household earai fives. All classes resort to H0llowayTs Pills ia those diseases of the climate, and excretive or gans, so prevalent ia this climate, and no "prep aration is so exienarveiy nsea as a dressing tor wounds, bruises, ulcers, leprosy, cancers, tamora. and other external injuries and diseases, as Holiday's Ointment. If a world-wide reputation, foonded oa the successful issees of twenty years' warfare with dts ease, is any compensation for the labors of tbe physician, Holloway has unquestionably achieved it. The patronage of monarch, tbe grathode ofthe million, the honors ofscience, the eulogiea of the press all are h is. If be ponseeed the power ofthe prince in the farry tale.of traversing the the earth invisible, there are few portions of it where he would find himself a stranger. He would meet with his remedies among the aborigines of America, the luxurious races of Asia, the blacks of Africa. Not only are they standard medicaments of civilization ia its old domains. bt th seem to be the companions of iu march toward every porat of the compass. It.'is no easy matter for any product of Europe to peoerrat into the interior of China; yet Holloway's Pills and Oint- ment are there. Nay, more.'.they are actually advertised ia the heart of that exclusive, emrn're- To deny the intrinsic value of articles that bave been recognized as specifics tor innumerable dis orders in all parts of the globe; woolJ be ridica ' tons. A community nay be deluded, but tbe whole world eannot be received for twenty years in a matter of such vast moment to every ho man being, as the preservation of health and liie Chicago "Journal. . TTnxt Democrat Faron it T It Is certainly to be much regretted that eonni eels more wise did not prevail at Charleston aa4 Baltimore that iftere was not a perfect agreement on one candidate for the Presidsnrv. Ber cause the Delegates at Charleston and at BalU- more acted unwisely it Is no reason why Demo. ' crats here ia Ohio should act easaTIy anwiselr. and that farnith the Hepi.b'icaBs an easy victory This most be the case if Democrats divide if few go for BatcxrxaiDca. The Republicans ara exceedingly anxious that such a divtvion should be kept up. They well kaow that if a tolerably fair diversion can be made ia the free States for BaBcuxaimsc. Ltxcol wlU de elected before the people. - - What B reck ridge man is in OaTcr of thkl GiZUcoihs Jdccriua: .