The North Carolina Standard

THE ABOLITION MEMORIAL.

If the Editor of the Register and other Federal papers were disposed to deal fairly with us, they would quote the language of a Correspondent, as such, and charge us with our Editorial remarks. From a Correspondent comes the "Abolition deed," of which the "Whigs" think to "make their Jack." To suppose that an Editor adopts the sentiments, in every case, of his Correspondent, or that he should insert nothing but what accords with his own views, would be to set up one man as the umpire and dictator of public opinion, so far as his paper extends its influence. We care but little about these deviations from fair dealing, as the readers of the Standard recollect the language we have used, and know the position we have taken. But we feel unwilling to let the matter pass without notice.

We do not know why the Editor of the Register should suppose we would refuse to publish the memorials presented by Judge Saunders at the request of the Federal Whigs of Guilford. The people will certainly distinguish between the innocence of a man who presented memorials at the request of a portion of his constituents, and the guilt of the authors of those memorials, who promulgated sentiments hostile to the nearest and dearest interests of the South.

The time when these petitions were presented by Judge Saunders were quite different from the present, and even from those when Mr. Sheppard presented a similar memorial. Then, no Southern Whiggery was in political league with Northern Abolitionism. No political control had marked the progress of Fanaticism, and no danger to the Union or peace of the South was apprehended by any party. But when Mr. Sheppard presented his memorial the aspect of things was materially changed—the time had arrived when the South demanded that every citizen should do his duty, in arresting the progress of doctrines dangerous to her peace, and in opposing "abolition acts" hostile to the principles of the Constitution—for, what formerly was inefficient for any purposes of the Northern abolitionists, is now a help to their misdeeds, and calculated to promote their influence and extend their power to do mischief.

The Register says we have "relieved him from his dilemma, as he was "afraid to publish the memorials." He is welcome to any service we may have rendered him in this way. We do not ponder the question when we are required to speak the truth to the people—our communication in such cases is "Yea" only, and we reject doubt and avoid delay. It is no "dilemma" for us, and it would be absurd to conjure up an incident, when truth and truth only will answer the purposes of our party.

There is one point connected with this discussion, that should not escape notice. In this we do not allude to the Register, but to his brother "Whig" Editors. These persons denounced the Editor of the Standard for discussing the abolition question at all. Our language does not furnish epithets and terms more bitter and insulting than have been heaped upon us for the course we have pursued, under a conviction of our duty to the public. But lo! the Whiggery having found a "mare's nest," which they vainly and foolishly imagine will tell against Judge Saunders, and their papers are crowded with matter on the same subject. What was forbidden to us in the inculcation of truth, is quite lawful in the circulation of Federal falsehood and slander!