Decatur Eagle, Volume 1, Number 51, Decatur, Adams County, 29 January 1858 — Page 2

"the ea gle H. L. PHILLIPS,} - ? MaPtt-HuneM W. G. INDIANA. J KItUY MORMIMG, JAN. 29, ISSS. DEaOCKATIC STATE TICKET. •rcr.tr s*t or run DANIEL McCLURE. of Morgan. xtrcr.T* er «?'n, JOHN W. DODD, of Grant. rarssrMs or stats, Nathaniel f. cunningham. • of Yijo. ist or rmw SAMUEL L RUGG, of Alien. ATTriXFT CEVTBJiI Joseph e. McDonald, es Montfcmerv, ret smuts. zrscxs. SAMUEL E. PERKINS, of Marion. ANDREW DAVISON, of Decatar. JAMES M. HANNA, of Vigo. JAMES L. WORDEN, of Whitley. Coots —The Court of Common Pleas for this county will commence the February termon MoUdaynext, Feb. Ist, and the Circuit Court on the Monday following, Feb. Btb. . > JT'-Ve learn from a reliable source that the Express Office in Fort Wayne was entered on lest Tuesday night, and

robbed of money to the amount of three thousand eight hundred dollars. /•TA- there has been an effort made to misconstrue the resolution offered in the State Convention, endorsing the great doctrine of “Popular Sovereignty,” we would direct attention to the speeches made in tne Senate of the United States, by sena’ors F, .': and D uglas, they place opposite constructions upon it.Great Excitement in Noble County— Whole-al; Arrest of Counterfeiters and Horse Thieves! The citizens of Noble county, having become wearied by the depredations and rascalities committed bv the hand nf nnt. I s a iso nave too I mg infested that county, have risen to tl.e number of several hundreds with the determination to rid i themselves of the scoundrels. They have arrested several of the most notorious offenders, ar. d keep them in custody. One named M dcomb Burnham or Barnum, a wholesa! counterfeit dealer, was induced, | under threat of hanging, to make a full confession, and gave up the names of Lis accomplices in that and adjoining counties. Twenty-eight of the accused are row in the hand? of the Regulators—2o al Ligonier and 8 at Albion. Serious tl ughts were at one time entertained ol executing summary punish- j mei.t on the offenders; but a vote being tr.ken at a meeting of several hundred ' citizen’, and a majority being oppo- ; sed to proceeding to such an extremity, 1 their lit eo were spared, and they will be handed over to the civil power, where it is to be hoped they will meet their deserts. Much as we deprecate such violent pro eeedings, and opposed as w« are to su- - .1-- 11 . -U.._ L__ l-.l --

perced;ng the legal tribunals by Judge, Linch’s speedy and severe code, we must admit that there are many circumstances to justify the people of Noble county. — They have long been cursed by the presence of a numerous and well organized — gang of scoundrels, who have set the laws at defiance, and whose numbers, power, •nd influence have enabled them to escape with impunity II Las been almost im- I possible to convict any who might be ar- i rested, and to break np the gang by lawful means was impracticable. The citizens have at length taken the matter into their twn hands, and we hope will make thorough work, and louteoutthe entire gang. Ti.e prosperity as well as the reputation of the ccunty demands it. Om lawyer who went from this ei’y to endeat . r to obtain the liberation of the accused. was looked upon «s an accomplice, or at least as an aider and abettor of the sewtmdreh, and was summarily arrested and cou’inerd with his supposed c wifedeatrs. Au-r being held in durance twoor *hri» -lay* he was liberated, and dodged bad at a 2 l'» «p*-ed. a «i«er and a better ma> . _ - ; lo fir ] hi* r.eck un<tr>-tcl;ed ri-n tj ugh minus Lis expected fee. 11 this r.ve hod of rre.t ing ell «lo give '•owfort *o the ra«cals is rigidly carried out. we Lave strong hopes t, at tie hand will be thoroughly roi’«-I, ar.d Noble con.itv be effectually cleared of those who hai»- ro’-ug • terror and annoyance tc ;•- / c i ci' z r.s —Ft Sen. Y.-jcszr. —Ti.e Consblulicmul boldly defends tie aysitw which the French GprtrtunsnJ Lfvg adopted. of purchasing on the coast <>l Africa, and carrung tl.etn coti pt-isory-sen ice io the French Artifl - *, *»f argues that in no other m inner can prosperity be restored ro’’iem, and ri.li-!’;• 'Tr*'-* ‘ j.-g. 1 pl.dw.tl r i -t- i

Indiana Politics in the Senate. Personal Ec. Amotions of Senators Fitch nnd. Duxglai, Wednesday, Jan 13, 18 58. Mi Fitch If there is nothing be'ere the Senate. 1 desire to make txplvnstion, in par: political to my«elf. It is known that at, and immediately subsequent to. the period of the piesen ration ol the Preseident's annua! message to this body, an eminent Senator took issue with the President or, certain matters contained in that message. It is further known that that issue has excited considerable feeling and discussion throughout ' the country. On the Sth of this month a State convention of the party to which I belong assembled at the seat of government of my own State, the first State convention, at leas’, in any Northern State. ■of that political party since the delivery of the message. It is known, I presume, that the result of the deliberations of that convention was looked for with no little interest, not only by the immediate representatives of that State, but by others, the fist expression of public opinion w->ch would reach here relative to the merits of the case involved in the issue to which I have winded. While we were looking with no :;:!e anxiety for the resuit vs its action, a general telegraphic despatch was pub.ished by the newspapers, I believe of the East, stating that it had emphatically endorsed the administration. Before, however, any authentic detail o' its proceedings reached here, a special despatch wr,« published in the 7nteliigencer and Globe of this city, in the form of a resolution, purporting to have been adopted by that body, published under such circumstances as to induce the belief, indeed under such circumstances as showed a design to convey the impression that it was ti e only resolution passsd by the convention on the subjectmatter of the issue to w hich I have referred. A construction, furthermore, has been put on that resolution which has

* • * been industriously circulated by the letter writers for the republican press in several of the N.rthern States, a construct-' ■ion which made the resolution condemn the Administra'ion and the Senators of Indiana, who were sustaining its policy; and made it sustain and endorse the Senator who took issue with that policy, although no mention of, or allusion to, the Administration or that Senator is to be f>und in the resolution. Sir, I wou! i not remain on this floor a moment if I supposed that in any act or vote I was not reflecting the sentiment of a large majority of my political friends :in Indiana. Although the State conventions, yet it was an assemblage of my ’political fiiends, the representatives of that party to which I belong, and there- \ I fore a fair, reflex of the opinions of that, party; and of course its opinions, it they might not absolutely control, should and 1 would at least color my action here The impression which it has been industriously sought to create, that the convention adopted resolutions condemnatory of' my course, would, if it were a true conj struction, place me in the attitude of misrepresenting the Democratic oarty of my State. 1 will call attention to the resolutions as published in the Intelligencer and in the Globe, where it appeared by itself without any accompanying statemeat of i the fact that other resolutions had been ; adop’ed by the convention endorsing the Presidyitand the Senators from Indiana, without any accompanying reference as to any other action of convention, I leaving it, ns already said, to be inferred I that the resolution was the only expresision of opinion relative to the present unfortunate issue. Here it is: Resolved, That we are still in favor of the great doctrine of’he Kansas-Nebras-ka act; and that by a practical application i of that doctrine the people of a State or a Tenitorv are vestedJwith the right of rat-

living or rejecting at the ballot box any ■ Constitution that niav he framed for their government; and, therefore, no Teri ritory should be admitted into the Union as a State without a fair expression of the will of the people being first had upon lhe Constitution accompanying the application for admission. I grant that the language of the resolution, as thus published, especially when i accompanied with a positive declaration, as it was when it was exhibited in this city, that it was designed for the purpose, justifies the supposition that it was condemnatory of the administration, and supported the view mantained by the Sena- ( tor from Illinois in opposition to the President’s opinion that it may b? the lesser of evils, in view of all the circumstances, past and present in Kansas to admit that Territory as a Slate, under the Constitution which it was supposed was about to be presentee 1 . After reciting the acknowledged and correct Democratic doctrine, that the people of a State or Territory are invested with the right of ratifying or rejecting any Constimuon framed for their government, it proceeded to say that‘Mere fore’ no State shonld be admitted without a fair expression of the will of its people on their Constitution Such a ‘fair expression’ has been doubtless had in the case of Kansas, or at least an opportunity offered for it. The word •therefore’ would imply that the Conventatinn intended to apply the resolution to the pre sent as well as future cases. I am advieed such was not their intention. The language of the resoluiion as it passed is pewrted in the pretended copy I have read, by whom, or for what purpose, I know not, and care not. By some sort of telegraphic or other legerdemain, a word is inserted which is not in the <>rigrr. ! res'dutior., a word by which its mean

•ng really attached to it when it was pased the Convention. The resolution, s 1 passed, is a mere reiteration of the dotrine proclaimed in the President’s meaage. It will be remembered that in te message he expressed his regret that tie entire Constitution of Kansas had nit been submitted to the people, and saic ‘I trust however, th* example set ty the last Congress, requiring that th: Constitution of Minnesota should be subject to the approval and ratification of tie people of the proposed Suite, may be fd- . lowed on J'utwre occasions. The resolution as passed by the State Convention of Indiana on the Bth of January reiterated this doctrine. Here it is, from the the official proceedings of the Convention. ‘Resoirsd, That we are still in favor of the great doctrine of the Kansas-Nebras-ka act, and that, by apractical application of that doctrine, the people of a S;at< are vested with the right of ratifying o rejecting, at the ballot box. any Constitr tion that may be framed for their goverip ment; and that, hereafter, no Territu.-a should be admitted into the Union as a State without a fair expression of the wiL of the people being first had upon the Constitution accompanying the application for admission. This is the very doctrine advocated by the President, and there is no justification in the language of the resolution for the : attempt to so pervert its meaning and so misrepresent the sentiment of the Convention as to make them endorse any gentleman or any party who might choose to take a position in antagonism to the administration. The construction placed ion the resolution as it was published in the papers of this city, and the com ments of Republican letter writers, imply the existence of a faction within the Democratic organization of Indiana. There is no such thing. In that Stale the Democratic partv is now. as it has ever been, _ _ -ii ..... .t i

a unit upon all matters of political principle. It recognized no faction, none ex- 1 ists within it. Its members may differ upon questions of expediency, and relative to men; but there is little, if any,| difference upon principle. It was a unit in support of the nomination of the Pres-1 ident at Cincinnati, and in support of his election; and it will continue a unit in his support, unless in the very improbable event of Lis abandonment ofits principles. Mu. Douglas I have no disposition to interpose one word in a matter between the Senator from Indiana and his constituents. XS ha'.ever differences of opinion, if any, exist between that Senator and those whom he represents, they are matters with which 1 Lave nothing to do; upon which I have no comment to make; and with which I have no wish to Allusion, as I said before, has been 1 made to me in a manner which I thought required a word from me in reply or ex planation. A telegraphic dispatch, ol 'he exact purport of that to which the 1 Senator alludes as having been published in the Intc’.Hgen.-er and in the Globe— l have not seen the Globe, but I understand it was in that paper, was sent to tne several days ago. I read it, aud laid it on my table in my library. The day afterwards several gentlemen called upon me, and asked if I had received any information from Indiana, and I read the dis- 1 patch to then. Two of them asked me if I wa’ willing that they should take copies of it. I said, certainly; and they copied it on my table. It was not confidential. On the other band, I had no desire to have it published. I had had it one cr two days lying upen on my table, so that any one could see it. It is probable, though 1 have not the means of knowing, that the dispatch got into those papers from the one sent to me: hut it is possible that a similar one was

l ient to those papers On that, point I have no information. With regard to the in’imation that the dispatch conveyed a false or erroneous impression, Ido not think it is well founded. That dispatch, as I recollect it, I gave it word for word as nearly as I can, was dated al Indianapolis, and was signed by three gentlemen. It stated that the convention endorsed ! the Cincinnati Platform, and sustained the Administration. It also stated that the convention bad adopted the following 1 resolution: 'Resolved, That we are still in saver of the great doctrine of the Kansas-Nebras-ka act, and that by a practical application of that doctrine the people of a State or Territory are vested with the right of ratifying or rejecting at the ballot-box any Constitution that may be framed for their government; and, therefore, no Teri ritory should he admitted into the Union as a State without a fair expression of the will of the people being first had uplon the Constitution accompanying the application for admission. it seems that the telegraph substituted the word ‘therefore’ for ‘hereafter,’ and that is the only variation in the dispatch. But it is true that that dispatch conveyed ■ the idea that the Administration had • been condemned, when it stated in so • many words ‘Cincinnati Platform eu- ■ dorsed; Administration sustained; and also the following resolution adopted?’ That was the dispatch. There was no possibility of any misconstruction.— Whether the ‘following resolution’ was i any reflection on the Administration, every one could judge for himself; but certainly the dispatch did not say so. The only question is. whether the telegrapher, : in mistaking the word ‘hereafter’ for the i word ‘therefore,* has changed its sense at all. The resolution, as passed by the coni üß’.ioa, i»;

‘That we are still in favor of the great doctrine of Kansis-Nebraska act, and that by a practical application of that loetrine the people of a State or Territory are vested with the right of ratifying or . rejecting, at the ballot b x any consticu- > Lon that may be framed for the r government; and that hereafter no Territory , should be admitted into the Union as a . State without a fair expression of the wi.l of its people being first had upon the Con- . solution accompanying the application for admission. That resolution deciares that the Kan- > -as-Nebraska bill required that the peoie should have an oportunity of voting br or against their constitution declares s that, by the Nebraska act, the right to vote for or against was a vested right. — (Does it propose, then, to take from the people of Kansas a right vested by the organic act, a right guaranteed by the Cincinnati Platform, a right endorsed and reaffirmed by the President’s inaugural address? No, sir; they declare that the right to vote for or against the constitution being vested by the Kansas-Nebras-ka act, hereafter no Territory should be admitted as a State unless that fair expression has been had and shall accompany the application for admission. The people of Kansas have not yet applied for admission. They have not yet sent up their constitution, though it is probable that during the present session they will send it here, it is probable that‘hereafter,’ to-wit; during this sess'on, they will send up that constitution; aid the Indiana convention say that that constitution should not be accepted u.Jess it be accompanied with evidence that it was adopted by the people on a fair vote, when they had a right to vote for or against that constitution. Sir, lake that resolution as it is; and if I understand it aright, it is a clear and unequivocal expression of opinion that when Kansas shall come with a constitution, if there is not the evidence that it has

been submitted to the people al the bal-lot-box fur ratiefiation or rej n, it 'should not be admitted into the Union. — ‘Hereafter’ implies that the appbcali “i is ’to be made ‘hereafter,’ in coiilra-distine ! , lion to the cases cited in debate where. . heretofore when there was uo opposition, we have admitted States without their constitution being first submitted to the peo- ' pie; for instance, the Fiori la case, and perhaps one or two others; but ‘hereafter’ it is not to be done. ‘Hereafter’ applies i to the applications to be made hereafter; I and to show that it meant Kansas, it says ; ; that the right to have it thus submitted I ■ for rejection or ratification was ga rran- | teed in the Kansas Nebraska act; that it : is a vested right under that bill; and consequently yon cannot take it away from .I. /u - XXT.« 1. t»nc, (licciilil- of i that convention that you should take from ■ i ti e people of Kansas, in regard to the ap- i plication which thev are about to make, a vested right—a right not only vested bv the Kaasas Nebraska act, but endorsed by the Cincinnati platform, and re-affirm i ••‘in the President’s inaugural? No, sir. jlt is clearly staled there that hereafter that thing must not be done. Thev approve of his course as they understand it I have shown you in my speeches that I approve of the President's course on this question as I understand it; but did not understand him as recommending the Lecompton Con-titution. Inis is all I have to say. I should not have said thus much but for my name being brought into the matter. I have never interfered, directly or indirectly, with Indiana politics, and I do not intend to interfere with them. I was surprised to find that my name was mentioned in the discussions or the letters that have been written. I have no desire at all to influence, directly or indirectly, the proceedings of their convention. Whether 1

the senator from Indiana has construed their resolutions rightly or not whether his action will be conformable in their wishes or not, is a matter into which I have no right to inquire, and do not desire to comment upon. It will be between him and his constituents; and whatever they shall say about it I shall take for granted is right. In other words, I propose to let him alone in his State, and propose that everybody shall let me alone in the State that I have the honor to represent. ———<>——— Wells County Murder. The examination of Dr. W. Freeman, charged with the murder of Mr. Murphy, which was progressing last Saturday as we went to press, was brought to a close late on Tuesday night last, and resulted in committing the Dr. to jail to await his trial before the Circuit Court. The examination was long and tedious—some forty witnesses were examined by the State. The evidence is entirely circumstantial, upon which, it is somewhat doubtful whether an impartial jury would convict. The excitement against the accused runs high, little doubt existing in minds of the people as to his guilt, and that the murder was committed solely to prevent Mr. M. from appearing as a witness, and disclosing facts relative to certain counterfeiting operations with which it is now more than probably the Dr. is connected. Yesterday the body of Murphy was raised and examined by a board of physicians but nothing new was elicited. The right ear appears to have been cut off, it is supposed by the murderer, to exhibit as a kind of trophey [sic]. The next term of the Circuit Court begins on the 1st day of February next—<Bluffton Press Jan. 23>. ———<>——— Why is a bank note like a fish? Became if you keep it two days, it is likely to spoil.

The VdksUdt, the German Democrat- t ie paper published in the city and which i is edited "w ith decided ability and energy, in its account of the Bth of January Con- c vention, regards it as one of the most memorable ever held in the State. Or. it,’ it says, ‘devolved the duty of construe- < ting a platform, by which the views held |by "the Democracy of Indiana were to be authoritatively expressed. It need hardly be remarked, that under the circum- < stances this was difficult as well as deli- I cate task.’ The Volhsblatl thus presents ’ its views of the action and results of the Convention: — State Sentinel. To attain a correct understanding 01 the Convention’s action, we have not looked at single resolutions or isolated votes taken during its session, but at the entire platform of resolutions adopted, a d at the proceedings taken as a whole; and in both ways we came to the conclusion, that the Convention has in as decided manner as proper, and by a decided vote declared in favor of the popular construction of the doctrine of popular sovereignty and against the narrow meaning, which was attempted to be given to chat doctrine by the admission of Kansas un ler the Lecompton Constitution, against the will of the people of the Territory. It will generally be admitted that the twelve first resolutions do not touch the point in issue at all. It is claimed by some Republicans that the fourth resoluis a sort of endorsement of the Lecompton Constitution and Convention. By > looking at the same it will be seen that it has no reference to Territories at all, and therefore is not at all in point, if it was less vague and unmeaning than it is. It further asserted that the endorsement of (he Administration and of our Senators, I Messrs. Bright and Fitch, and the nonendorsement of Mr. Douglas, is very significant on the point. We think not. Mr. Douglas himself cordially endorses the administration in a Generally way; yet he says wherein he

diffe-s and maintains his views. Sodoes ; the Convention endorse Mr. Buchanan, endorse our Senators, and says wherein it differs. As to Mr. Douglas not being I specially endorsed, we the think, that as he is not the representative of our State, there was no special propriety in Ids be- : im? endorsed; and besides, thank God. lie don’t need an endorsement, as his name in imbedded in the hearts of the people. The Convention, however, did pass a resolution on the point at issue, and that j reads as follows: ‘Resolved, That we are still in favor of j 'he great doctrine of the Kansas-Nebias- 1 ka bill; and that by a practical application ol the doctrine the people of a State or of a Territory are invested with the I right of rat.fiing or rejecting at the bali io? oox any Constitution that may be formed for their government; and that i hereafter no Territory should he admitted into the Union as a State with out a fair expression of the will of the people being | first had upon the Constitution accompany • ; i mg the application for admission.’ Now we believe that to be quite sufficient to cover the point. True, it is general in its language; but all resolutions, declaratory of a principle ought U? be so, and we regret that not all of the other | resolutions, some of which read like a stump speech, have the same merit. Os; . course as this resolution has reference to I Kansas, as well as other Territories. It; is objected, that because the resolution says, ‘hereafter no Territory should be admitted’ it had no reference to Kansas.— How so? was Kansas admitted at that time; is it now? And is not every minute from the time of the passage of the resolution embraced in the ‘hereafter}’ Thus wc view the resolution; let us now look at the proceedings. It cannot be denied. that, the friends of the last resolution and the principle expressed therein, la-

bored under great disadvantages. Th*-y ; had no great leader, around whom they could cluster, or whom they could follow. They bail the great leaders and shrewd politicians against them. In every contest, it is said, but the last ofte, which was the only direct one, they were beaten. But it hardly could be otherwise under the circumstances; yet their overwhelming strength WaS felt throughout the day. When the committeeof resolutions reported the original set, a large vote was cast against them, for the same reason that Mr Junes resigned his nomination; not for what was said in them, but what was not said. The struggle on Mr. Wallace’s resolution, lhe one adopted, was sublime. Fur the first lime, the question came in a direct shape before the Convention. For the first time those, who were in favor of that position, became united and acted together. And then nothing could defeat them They could neither be tired out by dull speeches, nor the extraordina ry prolongation of the session. The committee on resolutions, about i eleven o’clock, reported a substitute. It was voted down by a large majority, thougu a nttmoer of delegates voted against the clear instructions and well known wishes of their constituents for it. That was the only test question and test vote tn the Convention. The resolution was afterwards adopted by a still larger majority. ° ith that resolution and the above understanding, we accept the platform and the nominations of the Convention. But we shall further insist, that this resolution must be carried out. It speaks the will of the people, and as such ought to be regarded, respected an 1 carried out by our representative? in Congress. If any of our members shall disregard this instruc--wr., the vengeance of the people will be

upon him, and we shall do our make him feel it. to The Sulivan Democrat, in its article un on the ticket and platform, says: ' The ticket put in nomination will t found at our mast bead It shall re- F ' our support. ' ' 5 *‘ * * ♦ * * The last resolution adop’ei by q Convention is a redeeming feature - ! one we heartily endorse. NVitlt it a pro ' nent plank, we stand on the platform The Lawrenceburgh Register j n lengthy review of the action of tiir Co/ vention says: No Convention of the Democruc, o f Indiana ever involved more importantj n . terests—none was ever so its progress, or more harmonious in it, conclusion. ****** This resolution (Wallace’s) expre SSM unequivocally the opinion of the Dem oc , racy of Indiana on the only question came before the Convention of real interlest... The ticket nominated is a good one, and we predict that on this and with this ticket, the Democracv nf I-. ' diana will gain a most signal and complete victory. Federalism versus State Rights. The Federal press is full of preparation for the war it intends to wage* on the State-Rights party in Congress during this session. We say Federalist, because it is the same old principle which has been Iso often defeated, but which, bcin-r #s immortal as its great antagonism—State Rights— takes a new name and looks up» new issue as fast as the old ones are battered and beaten out of the field. These I terms—Federalism and Stale Rights—define the nature of their respective creedi and the grounds of their undying contest; and why not accept them manfully, and go into the battle under their true name and colors? Federalism, in its full and distine’ive sense, represent! the srqoer COTisrrratirm of the country. It enlarges its ideas and expands away from its earlier prejudices as fast as its restless antagonist, drives it forward in its battles for the elevation of the masses. Federalism was, and is, and ever will be, a believer in i strong governments. Loyal to power, and tearing the masses, while it despises : and distrust them; it would clothe king or i Congress with supreme authority. Il would so interpret the Constitution ns to I give to tl.s Government the power tod :- tale the law to the people of tl.e Slates i and Territories, in every case of doubt, I rather than trust the solution of Cheques- . tion to the parties directly interested — , State Ri' , his claims that Government ir I D . but delegation of power from uie people I and that what they have not conceded'n I clear, unmistakable terms, remains with 1 them.

The Missouri Compromise was a triumph of Federal principles over th<- rights of the people; but the principle of State Rights, which is the life and soul of the compact of the Union, came at last to the rescue, and wrested back, after a biller struggle, the birth-right ol the people. — The great error of bargaining for shackless on the sovereignly of States will never be repegted while the Union remains. That much republican sense we have acquired by this strange effort to miko Congress greater than Ihe power wbicli gave it existence. As Federalism has no faith in the wisdom or morale of the masses, is addicted to centraliz (lion, and is no friend to the increase ol State strength, it is itivtiriabie. and strenuously opposed to the admission of new territory. It opposed thepurchase of Lou.-iana. although i* gave independence to our commerce, and a potential voice in the rule of the Gulf in giving us the outlet of the Mississippi. I ro ' gress and the people won a great victory lor the Union, and our national position at home and abroad in, the acquisition 0Louisiana and Frlorida. The same battle was fought over agon with a change of names in the annexaiion of Texas. California was accepted a bad grace, and the best half 01 1 10 Gadsden Purchase was rej'Cti I Marcy had half fallen into Rlack > v licanism. This is the last name of party, for after each defeat it undergoes a new baptism, and generally pays th» "c ,or the compliment of stealing a p art 0 13 definition. Thus, when Republican pnn ciples had driven the old Federalists in a renunciation of their name, they he pe themselves to the title of Republicans. The real Republicans then position as Democrats, but as soon as ,n had given their old antagonists ascurn., or two, the over-defeated came to the 1 n again, and were whitewashed into ocrats. They are now completing - I ‘' cycle of change, and having got so * back as Republican—though with H" ‘Black’ bar-sinister on their escutcheon-' they may close it up by ref*-< B i°» , l le ' own true and distintive title of ’ and may fight the decisive battle « them on State Rights issues, without -- sorting to false colors. — States. ° — p nr . Ought a Preacher to 2 s a 1 1) sicias.—This inquiry is answered i--“ affirmative by Dr. Cornell, a. Massacnu setts medical writer, and his o PJ,” 1O11 , a j ;1 sanctioned by the New York Advocate. ‘To heal the sick v ‘- of the duties imposed by the Saviour men upon his disciples Dr. Adam Clarke had e perfect abhorrence of pork and tobacco. He is repo* ed to have said:— , jj •If I were to offer saerflee to the e • it would be a roasted stuffed wild banco!’