Democratic Intolerance

The leaders of Northern Dernocracy arcdisposed as far os possible, to provont any discossion of the merils of Slnvery. Every Democrat is expected tobow down to ihe sotithcrn dcity at the word of command, as the Chnklcans did to the imnge set up by Nebuchadnezzer. They do nol, indeed, cast the obstinate ones into a literal furnace, scven times heated, hut those who persevere in sayingevil things about the Southern mastors are furthwitli cast out of the ranks of the Domocracy, and condemned to endless infamy among the Abolitionists and Federalisis. The case of John P. Halr, of Now Ilampshire, late member of Congress, is a striking illustration of this. We have watched with interest for some time, a similar process of excommunicaiion now progressing in fliis State, although upon a smaller scale. The Monroe Advocate, like Mr. Hale, has taken ground againsl the usurpations of slaveholdei-s, and against tkc'Annexation of Texas as fraught wïtn grelíí evil. A late number says:"As to the xolicy of the measure, as connected with íhe subject of slavery, we do not, and cannot view it but at best as doubt ful, and perhapscalamitous in itstendencies & consequences. For wo look upon thisinstitution of human slavery, com, menced by Great Britain, and subsequently legalized and confirmed by the Fath 1 ers of our Republic, as more threatenin to the cause of human liberty and the ultímate emancipation of the world from royal and despotic dominion, than all oth1 er mstitutions, causea and powers combined. But what can be doüe? The un1 holy and inhuman institution is fastened upon the Republic, big with national evils 1 ar.d threatened retribution- -the Soutli 1 clings to it with the grasp and tenacit) of desperation; and the north is not uní Itedagainst it. What eau we do then 1 but await the means which the evenls o j time may develope, or the interposition: t lof a befieficcent Providence may providí Y for the safety and extrication of humai s hberty from its vile nnd guilty unión wit c human slaverv?Such are our undisguised feelings nnd fears in relalion to this subject. We are a.ware, however, that there are those. probably for more competent to judge of Lliis matter correctly, who entertain the Dpinion that annexation wül tend to divide ind scatter the elements and means of slavery, nnd by gradually weakening, eventually to overthrow and annihilate the monstrous institution. We certainly hope their views may prove well founded and ours erronoous.' This and otber articles of a similar tenor, the offensiveness of which consists in a want of reverence for the Slavocracy, has Bkoited the attention of the inquisitors of the party, and they have now commenced putting the Editor on the rack. - The probabilily is that they will nol torture hitn to death for this first oflence; but if he will rêcant and do homnge tothe slaveholders for the future, hls life may be graciously spared. The very best terms he can hope for will be a shnrp rcprimand, with a pledge by him to remain profoundlv silent on ihat subject, forever. The following extract from the last Advocate shows how the case stands between him and the Democratie Inquisitors. It will bc seen that he now contends earnestly for F ree Discussion as a right: but if he remains au Editor of a puper of that party, his political brethren will cause him to practically rclinquish ir."MiSAvpnEHENSiox. - A good democratic friend said to us the other dny - tliat as we had now an opposition paper, nlluding to ihc Monroe Gazelte, liehoped :he Advocate would be more democratie tlian ii had been, and less abolition. üur reply to this was - and we nov repcat it- thut tve challenge that friend, or any other person.. to desígnate a sentence, oran expression ofours in the Advocate that is opposed to Democracy, or in favor of Abolition, as these terriis are corrcctly Jefincd- or, in the words of General Jackson, as tce undersland thern. W hile we would advocate the correct principies and the all-important couse of truc democracy, we would not become the mine applauder of any political act or mensuro, merely because such aci iiad been perforrnedj or such mensure adnpted, by the democratie party. Ñor wouM we sfabmit to the drudgery of a passive chroniclcr of democratic,or other politicnl transactions, but would claim and exercise the riB and privilege of commentingthereun, cither by way of approval brdisa proval, necording to our own individual views of propriety. A democrati.; Lditor is not to act the part of a feeed AUorney, who is requircd, in nll c.ises, to bc true to his cliënt, aiid lo advocate and defend hissideof thequestion, whether right or wrong, fint the Editor as we uuderstand hjduty, is first lo be true and l'uilhi'ul to the Public; and then, true and feothfuj to his party, so far as hecan be in accordance with hisgreater responsibility to the public. We are in principie and fee! ing, opposed to slavery as a great moral and nntionnl evil; nud we nre opposed to a.bolition except tfíth the consent audenceof the slave Sinten, by whum it is to e efiected, if at all, and not by mensures f coertion ón tlio part of Congrcss, of of. he free States."