Decatur Eagle, Volume 2, Number 43, Decatur, Adams County, 3 December 1858 — Page 1

rjn Tir I H h’ Irpi nn mr —i—^t = t === f; = ~ = 141 .si uEj L A ' in hi A i [ L

VOL. ?,

THE I AGLE. FffBLtSnED EVKRy FRIDA? MORNIND, fly PHILLIPS & SPENCER, Offloe.on Mini Street, in the old School House one Square North of J. & ? Crabs' Store. ’ Terms of Subscription : For one year, $1 ;>•) in advance; $1 75, within Jl>e year, ami $2 011 after the year has expired (EFNo paper will be discontinued until all arrerajes are paid, except at the option of the Publishers. Terms «.r i,ivne square, (ten lines) three insertions, $1 00] Each subsequent insertion, 25 ] U"No advertisement, will be considered less than one square: over one square will be counted and charged as two; over two, as three, etc. ; JOB PRINTING: We are prepared to do all kinds of job-work, j n a neat and workmanlike nianner, on the most reasonable terms. Our material for the coniple- I tion of Job Work, being new and of the latest ; styles, and we feel coufidei t that satisfaction can be given.

From the Chicago Times. The Question of Sovereignty In the Territories. The country has been startled by an editorial article in the Washington Union, of Nov. 7, under the above caption. We propose, in this article, to reply to the Union, while hastily considering the distinguishing principle of the Democratic party, and briefly reviewing the course of events inspired by or connected with that principle. We will endeavor to be less dull than the Union— though the reader must submit with grace if he can, to the 1 infliction, of too lengthy an article. The aim of the Union, in its utterances of Nov. 7, was to lead or drive the Democracy from (he Democratic platfform. And indeed its aim is so apparent, that, for this one effort of treason alone, it needs nothing to counteract its influence but the so-

ber sense and honest attachment of the masses of our countrymen to the principU * orn.«. tn — »:- 4_. n.-« the U.,ion claims to be the organ of the Administration—and the world knows it is the organ of desperate clique of Presidential aspirants. Shall we regard its 7ih November article as ti e pronuncui* tniento of this set? If so. Vt ' e have toretokened a base attempt to ignore a leading and great principle of the Democratic party; an attempt which deserves prompt repudiation and denunciation at the hands of every man in the land whose heart slid pulsates to the flow of Dr ratio blood. It may be safely ,>a i it should be said here—that if lh< v -<on had stood in a position of nominal, as it has in one of real isolation, during the last ten months, —instead of an attitude of quasi organ-

ship of the A dminis'.ration, —it would have been avoided by evey public •man, and its utterances scouted by every intelligent and honest citizen. Even in its present real or pretended character of spokesman of Mr Buchanan, the Union has in no section of the confederacy any considerable consideration with mote than a handful of adherents. We do not like to Ba y it—we have said it before when we did not like to,—that among all the array of Abolitionist papers in the whole country, not one can be found which has been so effective in impairing the strength and damaging the prospects of the National Democracy as the Union. But heretofore, for and in the name of the Illinois Democracy, we have repudiated its counsels, and defied its menaces. We now, unless we misconceive the temper of the people, can repudiate and defy this same ‘great central organ’ for and in the name of the Democracy of the Union. By the recent splendkl triumph for the principle of Popular Sovereignty and of its great champion, Douglas, the Democracy everywhere are reassured in their position, inspired with new confidence in the justice of their cause, and the wisdom and integrity of the -Leader of the West’ and, consequently, are not in any mood at present to abate cne jot of their zeal, or modify the platform of States and Territorial Rights. Os that much we feel firm assurance. But what will become of the Union?— what of the politicians who profess to ap prove the tone of its editorials? We for bear to inquire as to where the Administration will go or what will become of il —not because we feel no interest in the question but for the reason that we sup

| it can take of and shape its own for- *' ,IHS ,na(^e * tß or ’g’ n! ‘l friends Illinois to know that it wan-s none of tlieir assistance or sympathy Nevertheess, the Illinois Democracy have of late been doing very well, and are in a fair to thrive and flourish in the future They stand square and fair, and firm on the solid platform erected for the pautv At Cincinnati.

i . The question,of ajr." l -‘ ' > noi les entered largely into considerations th it controlled the national delegates assembled in Cincinnati when they construci .eu the platform. lor the two years previ- I j ous to 1856, this question was the engros- } j sing one in federal politics. Itisnotnec- . essarry to expand our article at this point; , but the position taken on the question of territorial rights, was that of popular sovereignty. The opposition rallied to | the side of Congressional domination —and then came the ‘tug ot war.’ Adventurous politicians, fanatics, and conscientious boobies, came together and, forming a close alliance for offensive operations, attempted to batter down the Administration of Gen. Pierce in consequence i

ol its having endorsed and embraced the great principle embodied and presented in the Nebraska-Kansas bill bv Senator Douglas. The result was, that the Administration was not battered down the Nebraska-Kansas bill became a law — and, though Mr. Buchanan was nominated for the Presidency, who bad not been immediately identified with the distinguishing legislation of 1354—though, we say. Gen. Pierce failed to receive the nomination of the Cincinnati Convention, and Senator Douglas, the most powerful leader of the Democracy, then and now, was passed by and Mr. Buchanan given the candidacy, the piinciple of popular sovmanner as for the States, was adopted by tb.at convention—tb.us endorsing both the preceeding Administration and Senator

Douglas. Nay, more; the convention boldly sent its candidates to the people on that principle, with an authoritative exposition of that principle in their hands. What m-x ? Why Mr Buchanan’s letter accepting the nomination came out; and not only was the principle now under consideration adopted by him, but he commended it to the whole country. The principle triumphed. It carried Mr. Buchanan into the Presidency. And then followed his inaugural, which was but the Presidents endorsement of a doctrine and policy to which, as candidate, he was i already unequivocally committed. So far, very good —all was right. From this accumulation of evidence.it is plain that, whatever the principle of the Kansas-Nebraska bill was, it had the approval, at the beginning of the present Administration, of the President; and the same, with other evidences, show conclusively that the present cabinet was in agreement with the President on this subject. As for the Washington Union.il

stands committed on every page to popular sovereignty as expounded by Senator Douglas and understood by the Democracy of the country. Os course, we do not pretend to bring this committal down to a date subsequent to the advent of the Lecompton-Kansas constitution in t! e 1 United States Senate; for in advocating ’ that bogus constitution.it attempted to i ignore the letter and spirit of the law or- ■ ganizing Kansas as a territory. ’ 11 follows now, of course, that if any difference of opinion on this subject hon- ! estly arose between members of the Dem-

ocratie party, it must ha*e sprung from a diversity of sentiment as to the intentions ofthe authors of the Nebraska-Kansas bill, and as to the scope of the bill itself. Now we ask, was it possible that such a mis* undeistnndiug could exist? We do not believe so. Not one in one hundred of all the men of the republic believe so. The conviction of ninety-nine in every hundred of American citizens, then, is, that the advocates of the Lecompton constitution took their course, not by notions of fancied expediency, which since have ■ proved false and mischievous. The Washington Union led on the Lecompton- > j j tes> which act signalized first wide di- ■ | vergence from Democratic truth. Since

“Our Country's Good shall ever be our Aim-V’-v- 1 —■•■ii.ui .ij.0.., , ” A to Praise and not afraid to Blame.”

ADAMS COUNTY, INDIANA. DEC. 3. 185 S.

that rush downward step, its headlong decent into the darkness of sporty hat >een n.elancholly to every fai hful Dem-ocrat-to all men, whether Democrats or not save and except the wild abolitionists , of the north and the east. But Wilde the Lecompton question was undecided in the United States Senate, neither the Union nor any of its etfadjutors - e,ll '?. r finally the principle of popular sovereignty—

the great priciple the present Administration was planed in power to carry out in I fairness and good faith; that principle) was, us we have seen, named and placed I foremost among the articles of the Dem- j ocratic creed; thus leaving to the Admin-’ istration no moral right, if it had the.dis- 1 position, to disregard entirely, or in any manner to hamper the natural workings of that, principle in its application to Kansas. So far from it, the Administration ' was authoritatively instructed and solem-j

nly pledged, not only to see that Kansas have a free and unrestrained exercise of

all her franchises under the Nebraska Kansas law, but also to apply the identiI cal principle of that law to all other cases that might arise during Mr. Buchanan’s . presidency. Can this proposition be dis- • puted? Will the Washington Union take issue with us on this point? We opine that it will not venture. And yet, the “great central organ”--thc capitolian paper that boas of “being in position to understand the viewsof the Administration” —is now out for a change of the issue be- I tween the Democratic and Republican parties, and repudiates the doctrine of sovereignty in the territories! This is rank treason. It is worse: it is parricide—for the word describes as well the butcher of his party as him who destroys his country that the “supreme ultimate autnorttylV j I sides outside of and not within the territo-

ries”—which phrase we, perhaps, do not accurately comprehend; but as we construe it, we deny its truth inloto. According to the heretofore preaching of the Union, the primary and not the ultimate authority in the territories resides outside —that is, in the federal Congress. The Nebraska Kansas bill declared that the people of that territory had the right to flame their own laws, to modify their own statutes at pleasure, and to recognise and adopt such forms ol domestic institutions as might please them. The right of Congress to do this for the people of Kansas, or of any other territory, was flatly denied; and instead of federal ■ intervention was placed the sovereignty o f 1 the people. Popular sovereignty has triumphantly vindicated itself in Kansas. — As a principle it has come into favor in every section of ths Union—indeed, it so pervades and animates all our institutions—that it cannot suffer without dis-

aster following to all sections and all interests. It cannot be crushed out with-

! out at the same time the Constitution is > i torn in pieces and cast away. But the j Washington Union argues differently. It insultingly declares that the glorious faith of the Democratic party is extravagant sentimentalism—that the political doctrine esteemed by Democrats nbove all otliei doctrines—that of Popular Sovereignty in the territories,—“is derived fiom a set o( , very vicious notions in regard to personal freedom and personal sovereignty!” And the Union goes on to argue in support of its treasonable proposition that the ulti-

mate authority over a territory belongs • not in the territory, but elsewhere, with i the Federal Congress.

i However, in the whole column-and-a- , half of lugubrious argumentation, which r the Union spreads out for the edification -of its readers, the idea seems never to t have entered the apparently disfurnished I 1 skull of its editor, that he was announcing 3 a doctrine that the country has once con- - demned, as well as repudiating others t which the country but lately endorsed - and loves still as it does its very life. f We will not go back and argue over e again for the thousandth time the quese lion of non-intervention by Congres with - slavery in the territories; no man is igno- - rant of the matters involved in il; no man c but has opinion one way or the other up-

on it; but we would like the Union to ans- ’ wer us how it hopes to get along with ' either the North or the South in its new position? The South justly clamored for a Congressional recognition of her Con-stitutional-rights in the and it I was granted her in the repeal of the MisjSouti restriction of the organization of! I Kan§as J yno lk nw 4 fedracy is no longer doubted by the most jealous southerner; and no northerner, at least no powetful northern party, desires to restore sovereign authority in the territories to Congress-t’nus reducing once

more the South to her former condition of inferiority in respect of rights in the federal teiritories. The Democracy of the north are pledged to the South on this platform of equality. While the South ’tands on that platform, and keeps faith with her northern ally, she is safe; and while this patriotic alliance is maintained I the possiblity of her own institutions, chosen of her own Gee will and regulated by her own laws and customs, and the institutions of the north, existing an d flourishing together side by side, will be proven

and exemplified in the steady prosperity and wonderful (levelopement of both sections. Will the South, therefore, abandon the ground of the Constitution and its own safety—break away from the Democracy of the north and west—and embrace the degrading conditions now ienidered to her by the Union, and which, ! only four years ago, they struggled so heloically to rise abnve? To suppose the South would do this foolish thing, would be to believe her citiz-ns capable of treason to the National Democracy under whose shelter they are secure. It woul 1 | be denouncing them as intent <yv, I Strncfino .Will the advocating its new vamped Black K-pub-ilican cieed? And the Union will, it is to be apprehended, find lull or much difficulty in bringing the north upon its new platform las it will in reconciling the States Rights Democracy of the south to a change of policy in the government of the territories. It is true, the north, at one time, did not approve of the repeal of the Missouri restriction; but that time is gone by. We ! ara not speaking for the Abolitionists or radical men of any sort. We express the ; opinions of all patriotic fair-minded men in the non-slaveholding States. There is

no party in this section who expect that Popular Sovereignty as a rule for the settlement of the slavery question will ever be abandoned. Thepiinciple is seen to be just; the rule is found to work well.— All that will be reeded hereafter, is fair play and above-board management. This they will insist on and look for. We might speak here, more particularily than we have done, a few words for the western and northern Democracy.— But their position is taken, their views are

known. If the Union asks the western Democracy to give up their platform—that on which we have just achieved the most brilliant victory of modern times —j for the one it held out in its issue of Nov. 7, it will receive an answer that it will not be in doubt about. We in the north- ; west are sure of our footing. Each man who has faith in Democratic principles, when he is informed of the recreancy of the Union —th- perfidy of the sentif nel at the central post —will set his feet ’ firmer than ever, raise himself to a ful--5 ler, prouder height than ever, and defy

the machinators against the unity and ascendency of tho party. To all enemies, whether within the party organization or outside, he will answer boldly in the defiant wordsof Fitzjames to Roderick Dhu—“Come one, c-idc ail! this rock shall fly From its firm base as soon as I.” Thus we have made such comments on ! tho opinions of the Washington Union, as foreshadowed in its leading editorial of Nov. 7, as it seems to us to merit. We did not intend, at the outset, to make, at ! this lime, an arg'imentthat would exhaust the grave subject involved. Our purpose was to show to the people that the Union, a paper which wears the title of ‘mouthpiece to the Administration,’ is uttering i doctrines at war with every principle held

sacred by the Democratic party; and to ■ i warn the country, in time, of the danger j that menaces. We must maintain our principles, or fall before the enemy. The IHystcry Clenred Vp. A few days ago. Joseph Davis comIraenced a prosecution in the Police Court

in Cleveland against John We(idyH,_p;i witness for the prosecution, and made the ease strong against (be defendant. Mr. C . the attorney for the defendant,! took him in hand for cross-examination] as follows: Jir. C Are you in any manner related to the prosecuting wittness? Witness.—Yes. Mr. C.—How?

Witness.—We are brothers-in-law. Mr. C.—You can godown, sir. Mr. C then called up and examined about a dozen witnesses, who swore that William Davis and the prosecuting witness were father and son. This was clinching testimony, but Mr. C was calling another witness yet, when the Judge said: •Mr. C -, there is no use in calling any more witnesses to that point. It is abundantly proved.’ Mr. C. replied: ‘lf y O ur honor is satisfied, I am; I only wish to show that the witness is a liar, and not to be believed;’ and he tilted himself back in his ehair, ran his fingers through his hair, and looked around upon the crowd, while a triumphant grin covered his (ace. The City Attorney then recalled WilHam Davis. Attorney— A dozen witnesses swear you and the prosecuting witness are fail,.' er s?(orhet— Why, then, did you say, a)

.s.. unuui.es ago, that you were brothers-in-law? Witness—Because we married sisters, j Here all hands became convulsed with ! laughter, and Mr. C ’s triumphant grin I passed into the ‘reflection of despair,’ and bis client into the county jail. A man who was out west and had been chased by an Indian, makes the following matter-of-fact observations: ‘Much has been said by poets and romantic young ladies about the picturesque aspects and

the noble form of an untamed, untamable | warrior of the prairie, and far be it from ' me to gainsay them. An Indian is a no-1 ble spectacle —in a picture, or at a safe distance—but when this noble spectacle is ■ moving in your direction and you have to! do some tall walking in order to keep the ■ capillary substance on the summit of your cranium, all his ‘nobility’ vanishes, and ' you see in him only a painted greasy miscreant, who will, if you give him a chance, lift your hair with the same Christian spirit.

composed and most serene, with which he would a-k another ‘spectacle’ for a little more of that ‘baked dog.’ I used to think like the poets; now the sight of the Indian gives me a cramp in the stomach.’ There is an Eastern story of a person I who taught his parrot to repeat only these words: ‘What doubt is thereof that?’ — He carried it to the market for sale, fixing the price at 100 rupees. A Mogul asked the parrot: ‘Are vou worth 100 rupees?’ The parrot answered: ‘What doubt is there of that?’ The Mogul was delighted, and bought tho bird. He soon found out this was all it could sav. Ashamed now of his bargain, he said to himself: ‘I was a fool tc buy this bird.’ The parrot exclaimed, as usual: ‘XS hat

doubt is there of that?’ ‘Johnny,’ said a mother to ber son, nine years old, ‘go wash your face; lam 1 ashamed to «ee you coming to dinner with so dirty a mouth.’ ‘I did wash it. mamma,’ and felling his upper lip, he added gravely. ‘I ihiuk it must be a moustache coming!, s Ex-Gov. Bebb, formerly of Ohio, but , more recently of Winnebago county, lilt- - nois, has become the possessor of large r landed estates and negroes near KnoxJ ville, Tenn . and is about, to remove there

- - —rry-nrr t , u . A Negro Dieussion About Eggs. ; Geneva, the lovc.’y village on Seneca Lake, furnishes the following specimen of parliamentary ruling:— •Li the fairest village of Western New York, the‘culled ptissons.’iu emulation of their while brethren, formed a debating society , for the purpose of imDJrosilWjlvjr Naming topics. TJle dehberations of

the society were presided over by a ven jerable darkey, performed I,is duties with j the utmost dignity peculiar to his color. I he subject lor discussion on the occasion of which we write was ‘which r.m de mudder of de chicken—de ben wot lay de egg, or de hen wot hatches de chick?’ The i question was warmly debated, and many ; reasons pro and con were urged and com'- | bated by the excited disputants. Those ; in favor of the latter proposition were evipleiely in the majority, and the president made no attempt to conceal that his sym-

pathies were with the dominant partv. 'At length an intelligent darkey arose I from the minority side, and begged leave to state a proposition to this effect:— ’Spose,’ said he, ‘dat you sot one dozen duck’s eggs under a hen, and dey hatch, which am de mudder— de duck or de hen? 1 his was a poser, was well put, and non-

. plused the other side, even staggering the president, who plainly saw the force i of the argument, but had Committed himself too far to yield without a struggle; so after cogitating and scratching his wool a few moments, a bright idea struck him. Rising from his chair in all the pride of ! conscious superiority, he announced: ‘Ducks am not before de house; chickens i am de question: d ere. fore I tuje de ducks The Detroit Advertiser gtvet> i method of computing interest on any number of dollars at 6 per cent., which appears simple. Seperate the right hand ! figure by a point, and the figures on tho

I left hand of this seperating point wil. be I the interest in cents for six days—the ; figure on the right of the point decimals of a cent. Multiply' the whole amount by five to find the interest for thirty days, and this sum by two for sixty days, three for ninety days, <fcc. For any number of days less than six, take the fractional part lof the interest for six. Care must be tai ken to seperate the right band figure of

the dollars, whether there be cents and mills in the given sum or not. A Verdict as is a \ erdict. — A mobile ( Ala.) paper says that an inquest was recently held in that city, on the body of a man who died from taking an over dose of vegetable pills, On opening the body the interior was found to be one huge cabbage, but dead to its core from confinement and want ol water—-a beverage which the patient, unfortunately, never drank. The jury returned a verdict of quits- ‘QuUs, gentlemen!’ exc.la'me.d the dismayed Coroner. ‘Never heard such a thing —what do you mean?’ hy replied the foreman, ‘we find that, if the cabbage Ril'-d the man, the man most certainly killed the cabbage, and if that ain’t quits, blow me’.’ j Goinu After a Comforter.—The Ma- ' eliias Republican is responsible for the i following:— ! ‘A young clergymen, not one hundred I miles from Machias, intending to leave his parish the next day, (or the purpose of gelling married, announced as I.is text on”a late Sabbath the following appropriate passage; — It is necessary tor you that Igo away, for if Igo not awuy, the Comforter will not come ’ The Burlington (Iowa) Hawkeye tells of a lady in that vicinity, who, by 1 marriage, has got heiself into the following distressing situation in regard to her own family. She is sister-in-law to her I father, aunt to her brothers, risti rto her ! j uncle, daughter to her grandfather, and great aunt to her own children. t A ladv wished a seat. A portly, hand•l some gentleman brought one, anil seated i i the lady. *O, you’re a jewel ’ ‘O, no,' •! replied he, ‘l’m a jeweller. I have just set th a jewel.

NO. 43.