Southern Argus

We presumed there was honesty in the Democrat, but on reading the following, our faith in it, we must confess is faint.

"Finding, however, that the Democratic candidate had fair prospects of success, they [the Whigs] attack his private character; they charge him with the blackest crime in the catalogue of human depravity; they even drag his innocent and accomplished wife before the public, and thus violate a sanctuary hitherto held sacred!"

Is it not known that Gen. Foote, the author of the "charges" was always an administration man, and that the charges were made from personal resentment only? The Democrat knows it, and if it has a conscience it will retract the slander.

The Columbus Democrat.

Such a mixing of oil and water as happened on Saturday last, was never before, in this mundane sphere, beheld. The Democrat, the Van Buren Democrat actually took to its warm embrace, a few of our party who believe with it on the question of the Sub-Treasury scheme. That veritable paper folds its arms with superlative dignity and politely tells the gentlemen that they have from the foundation of the Constitution, agreed on all points. It is a State Rights organ, always has been so.—they are State Rights men: the Sub-Treasury scheme is a State Rights scheme, and ergo, the Columbus Van Buren Democrat and the South Carolina Nullifiers are Van Buren men,—they agree and have always agreed, precisely in doctrine, except in one little particular (which we think our disaffected friends will deny) that they acted with the party, which the great Globe says supports "Biddle, the Barings, the British and the Banks."

The Democrat appears to be rejoiced after the signal defeat of Van Burenism in this State, even to catch at this slight ray of hope for the future; and we would not, for anything disturb its pleasant reveries. Notwithstanding we would simply make a short quotation, which is the groundwork of our political faith, and simply ask the Democrat if it believes with us. We expect an explicit answer.

"That in all cases of the abuses of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a NULLIFICATION of the act is the rightful remedy." "That every State has a natural right, in cases not within the compact, to NULLIFY, of their own authority all assumptions by powers of others within their limits; that without this they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whoever might exercise the right of judgment for them."

Now, if the Democrat believes the above to be both sound in theory and practice it is correct in saying that it, and State Rights men or Nullifiers, agree in principle.