201231b

ReadAboutContentsHelp

Pages

1
Complete

1

DAILY SENTINEL. TUESDAY.... ..........SEPTEMBER 20 Twaddle-Abe Lincoln's Speech. The Hon. Ass LINCOLN, the great Ajax of Republicanism, in his speech at Masonic Hall, asserted that slavery or freedom in both Territories and new States, depended entirely upon Congressional action. In his view, if slavery was prohibited by Congressional intervention in the Territories they would come into the Union as free States; if not, they would come in as slave States. He stated that neither soil or climate would influence the determination of the question, but the result as to whether they wuold be free or slave depended entirely upon Congressional restriction or non-actin. This theory he attempted to illustrate by the history of the North-Western Territory, and the Ordinance of 1787. That Indiana was a free State was owing to the fact that slavery had been prohibited here by Congress, and had been in nowise dependent upon the will or the choice of her citizens. Kentucky, he said, with a soil and climate similar to Indiana, was a slave State, because slavery had not been prohibited by Congress while she was in a Territorial condition. He insisted that slavery would go into all Territories and would mould the character of their State constitutions, unless prohibited by Congress. In this view Congressional intervention for "freedom" was the only panacea for the eradication or restriction of slavery. Notwithstanding the ordinance of 1787, Indiana Territory gave a slave code to the territory now included in the States of Michigan, Illinois and Indiana. The same authorities also prepared a slave code for Louisiana Terrtory. Slavery, too, by Territorial legislative permission and protection, was one of the domestic institutions of Indiana and Illinois, and slaves were held in them until a late period by the protection of local laws. When the constitution of Indiana was adopted, in 1820, the people "in the free exercise of the right to choose their own form of government" ordained that "there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude within the State otherwise than for the punishment of crimes." Here was an exercise of unquestioned popular sovereignty. It was the choice of the people who ordained the constitution of 1820, and again in 1850, not to have slavery. If they had desired that domestic institution they could have had it, and Congress would have admitted Indiana into the confederacy with a constitution permitting slavery. But Hon. ABE LINCOLN says that no Territory was ever admitted as a State with a constitution prohibiting slavery by the free choice of her people. In other words, popular sovereignty never made a free State, or extended slavery, in the adoption of a State constitution. How was it with California and with Oregon? Before admission slavery was not prohibited in those Territories by Congresdsional intervention; yet they came into the Union free States by the voluntary choice of their inhabitants. How is it with Kansas? The free choice of her people makes her a free State. The same will it be with Nebraska, unaffected by the overshadowing influence of congressional action. In Kansas slaves can be as profitably employed as in Missouri; yet according to Hon. ABE LINCOLN's Republican logic, in the absence of Congressional prohibition Kansas must come into the Union as a slave State. And the same argument will apply to California and Oregon. The idea which prevails with Mr. LINCOLN and the party he represents is, that the people of the Territories are incapable of judging whether their climate and soil better adapts them to free or slave labor. The diluted and flimsy arguments of Mr. LINCOLN may appear sound and satisfactory to weak headed Republicans, but they can be accepted by an intelligent auditory. If Mr. LINCOLN is one of the great guns of Republicanism, and if that party depend upon the arguments he made in his speech here to sustain their cause, there is less in Republicanism, as little as we have heretofore estimated it, than we had supposed. With all reflecting men, Mr. LINCOLN's Masonic Hall speech damaged the Republican cause, and the same speech made over the State would do more to confirm Democratic principles than any other agency we know of. His plausibility was too transparent to deceive the most credulous, without possessing even skim milk substance. Such food may, however, do for such old line Whig babies as Hon. JOHN D. DEFREES and Hon. CALEB B. SMITH, whose weak stomachs seemed well adapted for it.

Southern Opposition and Slavery, WILLIAM C. SMEDE, of Vicksburg, Mississippi, a prominent member of the Opposition, has given his views of parties, in a long letter. His main suggestion is "that the friends of the Union, of harmony, of the Government, shall resolve on this vexed question, that in all Territorial acts it shall be hereafter inserted that no laws shall be passed by the Legislatures of the Territories prohibiting or interfering with the existence of slavery in them;" and this basis is indorsed by the National Intelligencer. Now, see how the New york Tribune comes down upon its Opposition brother. "What?" it says, "consent to see the people of the Territories tied hand and foot for ten, twenty, forty years, by act of Congress, utterly helpless against the inroads of slavery; while that institution, despite their remonstances can strike its roots permanently into their soil!" And so the Tribune falls to and denounces its Mississippi brother se little better than an infidel, and his suggestion even worse than the Democratic doctrine of non-intervention! Then it improves the occasion to renounce that "the only practicable basis for a union in the next presidential election, that which we have so often expounded, vix., the co-operation of all such as agree substantially upon the slavery issues involved in that contest--holding, in the meanwhile, minor questions, on which there is no agreement, in obeyance." In other words, it falls back on united North--on a purely sectional basis, which must, necessarily, be repudiated by fiteen of the States of this Union. Mr. SNEDE talks very patriotically; but it will be all talk, so long as he refuses to join the only national party that is right on the great question of standing by the Constitution. WHAT IS REPUBLICANISM?--The juvenile organ of Republicanism, the Atlas, inquires "what is Democracy? That is a pretty question for an indiviedual to ask, whose entire political platform is summed up in "opposition to Democracy." We judge there must be a great deal in Democracy, the way the Atals spends his strength against it, but we don't think it will hurt much. ATTEMPT TO ROS.--On last Saturday evening, about eight o'clock, Mr. John King, merchant ---

Last edit 12 months ago by frogbaby0129
Displaying 1 page