We have often remarked thai it is nc counted an unpardonable sin by the mod ern Dcmocrats for a paper of that part) to express any views upon Slavery othe than those implying the most abject sub mission and servility to ihe great SlavÃ Power that rules the party. Any de viation from this rule invariably cause trouble to the ofiender, and ofien a loss o confidence and patronage ; and iflhe of ence he persisied in, it resulfs n expulsiÃ³n from the party. We mentioned nn in stance last ) ear in the case of the Indiana Tocsin. In our own State, the Monroe Advocate is the only paper of the party that has freely expressed its dislike of Slavery. The paper, generally wel] conducted, has published candij articles in opposition to Slavery in the abstract, some of which we have copied ; at the same time it has supported Polk and his proslavery war. But this is not enough o wash away thestain. The Democrats of Monroe seem to ihink that their papers, ikeCicsar's wife, must noteven be susiccted. Henee, as thero is nnother democratie paper in the city, the Advocate is obliged to come out in i's own deence as iollows : From the Monroe AdvocÃ³te. 'One of our office holders,as we undcrtand, said, a few days since, that he vished to patronize the Advocate portion of the party, and would do so but for its Abolition principies and doctrines. Now we challenge the man to rcfer to i single sentence or sentiment published n the Advocate, in support or approval f Abolilionism, in the political party ccupation of that term. No ; that is but a feigned cause, to o keep 'he real cause out of sight, knowng that t could not be supported, and mt its avowal would exposÃ© and defcat ie very purpose soughtto be eftected. - o we infer.It is irue thnt we have ofien expressed our nbhorrenee nnd condemnation of slavery. But is that anÃ¼-democratic 1 - Is a freo state democratie office-holder in favor of slavery Ã¯ lf not, why should he withhold his patronage, even if we weroan Abolhionist ? Monroo is ccrtninly in astrange political latitude. In Ohio, a Democratie paper is neither abandoned, or opposed, be cause of its opposition to slavery. Read the following f rom the Cleveland "Plaindealer," an able nnd fullv accredited Democratie Journal : - The North aoainstT tub South. - The Empire State hns spoken, nndlhat loudly, through one of her most talented sons and f'earless of Representatives, Preston King, against the ('uriliPi acquisitions of Slaveierritory to this Republic. He speaks as a free man and as the representative of free men. He takes the tr'je position on this subject, - a posilion which every true-hearted lover of freedom ought to take, and ihe very position too contemplnted by the framers of the Constitution should be tnken ere this by their degenerate posterity. Ãt has long been the motto, and of l?ite the batile cry of the late Republicans to "enlarge the nrea oÃ¯frecdom" but the South are now demauding the ireasureand the best blood of the nation to enlarge the borders of slavery. It is fur the freemen of the North to say which policy shall now prevail. Mr. Kingto bis honor, and perhaps immortal fame, be it said, has now presented this question unequivocnlly before Congiess. We hope to see no dodging il among Ihe Representatives of ihe people. And now, while we hve a Southern Administration in the full tide of power and patronage, is the time to demÃ³nstrate thesirongfeelingand determinationof the free States on this subject.