New Orleans Daily Creole

The Slander True of Slanderers.

"This organization, calling itself American, proving its want of nationality by the votes of its 'professes' national principles, yet is continually Northern Representatives in Congress. For upon a recent proposition to restore the Missouri Compromise the most 'national' of its Northern supporters voted with the Black Republicans fast against the South and the Union & 'Democratic Senate' has thus far rendered its efforts innocuous." Democratic Address.

This is an unsustained assertion of the address to the Democracy of Louisiana, which is a slander upon the American party. Let us come to the record to test the truth of this assertion. When the present Congress assembled the Black Republicans were in a minority; the Democratic party had the balance of power. At any moment it could have decided the Speakership in favor of a South American or any other American whom it might have selected; or in favor of any Democrat but the man chosen in its private caucus; and yet it would not so decide, but let Mr. Banks attain that honorable and controlling position, and give the power of the nation into the hands of sectionalism in the House. The American party voted for a Democrat instead of a sectionalist. Which party, in this trial, was national? Which party placed the balance of power in the hands of the Black Republicans? The question needs no answer.

The Senate--the Democrats, who have "rendered the Northern factionists innocuous," have yielded to the clamors of sectionalism, and hastened to escape from the position assumed ostensibly in defense of the South. So near did they approach the doctrines of the Republicans, that Greeley exultingly exclaimed, "we have Douglas on the right track at last, and must keep him in motion. By the first of December he will be ready to report a bill admitting Kansas under the Topeka constitution. Now he votes for the repeal of some of the worst of the Kansas enactments." Why, this very Democratic Senate has absolutely by its votes abandoned the measures adopted, with the view of conciliating the South, in the Cincinnati Convention!

The American party not National! The glorious emblazonry of the Union everywhere irradiates its banners. Between the raging North and the angry South it stands the party of peace and reconciliation. Amidst the fury of a temporary popular insanity in the free States, it plants itself upon the Constitution and the Laws. It defies incipient treason to its very teeth. It spurns fusion to obtain power. It scorns all popular watchwords to win votes. It makes no doubtful promises to fanaticism; offers no bribes to local prejudice; presents no lures to section. In the very sanctuary of Freesoilism--at the foot of its altar, around which its high priests and powerful clans were gathered, Millard Fillmore, the leader of the American party, there threw down the gauntlet of defiance.

If, said he, with an earnestness rising to sublimity, there be those either North or South who desire an administration for the North as against the South, or for the South as against the North, they are not the men who should give their suffrages to me. For my own part, I know only my country, my whole country, and nothing but my country.

Where this frankness of opinion, this bold defiance of sectionalism on the part of the Democracy? Mark the position of this party which has survived its principles; which mouths high sounding words of patriotism while it nurses dissension and absolutely abets disunion. "Were we compelled," says the Fredericksburg Recorder--a leading Buchanan paper in Virginia--"were we compelled to choose between Seward and Fillmore for President, we should not hesitate a moment to prefer the former."

The Atlanta (Ga.) Intelligencer, another Democratic paper of the straitest sect, declares, "for our part we do not scruple to say it, that we would sooner see Fremont, traitor as he is to the home of his birth, the President of the United States than Millard Fillmore. Call you this national? It is the spirit which would exult in surveying the ruins of the most glorious fabric of the Union upon which the world ever gazed. It is the diabolism which prompted Nero to fiddle while Rome burned.

The Democracy fellowships Martin Van Buren and boasts of its nationality. It approves Gov. Wright of Indiana, who declares its platform "the best Wilmot Proviso ever enacted." It presumes to come before the people of the South for their support, when its central organ asserts, that the "Freesoil Democratic leaders of the North are a regular portion of the Democratic party," when it denies Mr. Appleton to be a noble Democrat, who affirms that "Democracy is the handmaid of Freesoilism."

But we will not multiply examples of the sectionalism of the Democracy--at the North, sectionalism in the rejection of the constitutional guarantees of the slave states--at the South sectionalists in its outcry for a dissolution of the Union. It is a house divided against itself. It has outlived its consistency and its power, and is now emphatically a heterogeneous multitude held together only by the cohesion of public plunder.