Indiana State Guard, Volume 1, Number 23, Indianapolis, Marion County, 8 September 1860 — Page 2

THE OLD LOE GUARD.

A. B. CAKLTON, . WILLIAM CULLKV, SATURDAY,

editok

SEPTEMBER 8.

National Democratic Ticket. FOB PRESIDENT, , JOHN C. BRECKINRIDGE, . OF KENTUCKY. FOR VICE PRESIDENT, jose PH L.vN'E, ; OF OREGON.

ELECTORS FOR THE STATE AT LARGE: James Morrison, of Marion. Delana R. Eckels, of Putnam. DISTRICT ELECTORS, st District Dr. G. G. Barton, of Daviess county. 2d " Dr. William F. Sherrod, of Orange. 3d " David Sheeks, of Monroe. 4th '"', Ethelbert C. Hibben, of Rush, 5th " Sauiuol Orr, of Delaware. 6th " Franklin Hardin, of Johnson. 7th " James A. Scott, of Putnam. 8th "' .'" Col. William M. Jenners, of Tippecanoe. 9th " James Bradley, of Lanorte. 10th " - Kobert Breckinridge, jr., of Allen. 11th , John It. Coflroth, of Huntington. STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE. 1st District J. 15. Gardner,

Too Sound. We have a class of politicians in the North who are more sound upon the slavery question than, those who are decidedly interested in the matter in the Southern

States. They are terribly atraid that the rights of

tho south are going to be interiered with ; in tact, they express more alarm than do even the slaveholders themselves. These " pure " Democrats, as they claim to be, arc very much exercised by the political sentiments of

Mr. Douglas and the Democrats of the North who stand by liim. They denounce him and them as semiAbolitionists as not a bit better than Republicans. Now, if such men as Stephens, Johnson, Soule, Flournoy, Rust, Letcler, and a host of other leading Democrats we could name, all of whom are slaveholders, and unwavering champions of the rights of the South, feel no alarm about the sentiments of Mr, Douglas upon the slavery issue, and are willing to accept him for President, we cannot see any good reason why any

Northern Democrat should object to him. In tact we do not believe it necessary for the Democrats of the Northern States to be sounder, more ultra upon the

slavery issue than the Dcmocaats of the slaveholding

States. If such Democrats arc willing, nay, anxious,

j to accept Mr. Douglas, as heterodox as some Indiana

Democrats pronounce him to be upon the slavery issue, no Democrat north of Mason and Dixon's line has any reason to make even a wry face about the matter. - Slate Sentinel. '

pinched. What took you on a "trip down the Potomac," in the vicinity of Washington, " in April last?" Come now, let us know all about it Didn't you go, with the Washington paper containing tho "fat things" in your pocket, to several of tho Departments, which dispense such things? Didn't you also, with these "fat" things in your mind's eye, make a visit to our Senators? And didn't you come away with a " flea in your ear ?" And wasn't that the causo of the terrible buzzing against them which we have heard in the ledger since

your return home? Come, be candid.

Douglas in Virginia. The Front Royal (Warren county, Xa,.,) Gazette says : .. ', " ' '. .' '

SPEECH OF THE

HON. JOHN 0. BRECKINRIDGE.

Delivered at Ashland, Ky., September 5th.

2d 3d 4th 5th 0th

7th 8th 9th 10th 11th

Levi Sparks,

Geo. II. Kvlc, Dr. B. F. Mullen, Alex. White. John R. Elder, James M. Tonilinson, Julius Nicolai, James Johnson, James M. Oliver, Thomas Wood, Thomas I). Lemon, G: F. 11. Wadleigh, Dr. E. B. Thomas, W. II. TALBOTT, Chairman.

CHANGE OF TIME. .. In order to avoid conflicting with a mass meeting at Middletown, on the same day, by the Opposition, it has been thought advisable by the State Central Committee to change the day of the Democratic Mass Meeting at Anderson, from Monday, the 17th, to Tuesday, the 18th, at the same hour. Our friends will please notice this change. CHANGE OF PLACE I On the urgent solicitation of a large number, the place of holding the Mass Meeting has been changed, by the Central Committee, from Centreville, to Rich-inond.

MR, BRECKINRIDGE'S SPEECH. Wednesday last was a proud and glorious day for the true Democracy of old Kentucky. It was a triumphant day far their noble standard-bearer, John C. Breckinridge-. The masses were aroused at daylight by the loud booming of cannon in e very quarter. Early in the morning, the people were seen flocking towards Lexington from every direction, and before the sun had risen high, the roads in that vicinity were literally crowded all on the way to hear the favorite son of Kentucky defend himself against the charge of "disunion" brought against him by Stephen A. Douglas. And ably and unanswerably did he do it ably and unanswerably did he hurl back the base slander. As "little" politically, as was the author of the foul charge before 'Mr. Breckinridge commenced his reply, still smaller was he before Mr. B. finished it. He proved himself not only clear of the disunion charge brought against him, but be showed conclusively that the platform upon which he stood, as a candidate for the Presidency, was also clear of it. Ho demonstrated, to the entire satisfaction of the multitude before him, that neither he nor his party contended for any other principles than the plain principle? of the Constitution principles laid down by the founders of the Union, and clearly defined by the highest judicial tribunal of the country. Upon the Territorial question, which now agitates the whole Union, he was especially successful, for ho convinced all his hearers, not only that he and his friends in Congress had pursued an upright, honorable and consistent course upon that question, but that his detainer, Stephen A. Douglas, had pursued one directly the reverse. He proved this unprincipled calumniator guilty of perfidy and double-dealing towards the Democrats in the Senate, with whom he agreed to submit the vexed question to the Supreme Court for their decision, pledging himself, as he did to them, to abide by its decision ; and after that decision was made in favor of the South, basely violating his pledge ! Upon this point, the remarks of Mr. Breckinridge were scathing. He completely used up the little double-dealer. But we have no room for extended comments of our own upon Mr. B.'s speech. We devote our columns to abetter purpose, in giving the speech itself or rather a sketch of it; for tho telegraphic rejiorters, in their hurry to transmit the speech over the wires, for publication, have very imperfectly done so. But even as it is, our readers will find it highly interesting and conclusive.

If there is "a class of politicians in tho North" "too sound" upon the slavery question, there is also a class too mellow if not too rotten upon that question. Like their leader, the little Sucker, they are political prostitutes open to all parties, and all things to all men to-day in favor of the decision of the Supreme Court upon the Territorial question to-morrow opposed to it ; in the North strongly against it and when traveling in the South, brawling sticklers for it. The Sentinel thinks that because tho little Sucker

has found half a dozen mouldy office-seekers in the South to "accept" of him just enough to fill the

seats in his Cabinet, if God in his wrath should inflict

such a calamity upon the country as to permit him to become President that, therefore, " no Democrat north of Mason and Dixon's line has any reason to make even a wry face about the matter." Now, of what weight are such men as Stephens, Johnson, Soule, Flournoy, Letcher and Rust, or a

thousand of such rusty politicians in the South, in comparison to the entire delegations from that section of the Union in the Baltimore Convention, who opposed the nomination of the little Sucker, and presented Mr. Breckinridge to the country as the Demo.

cralic candidate for President? Can the half dozen of old stagers named by the Sentinel induce a single Democratic State in the South to give Douglas its

vote ? Can the Democrats in the North elect any man President without the aid of the Democratic masses in

the South, whose delegations at Baltimore unanimous

ly nominated John C. Breckinridge for that office?

These are the questions to be looked at, by every true Democrat, North or South. Even if there was no dispute about the Territorial question, the South is entitled to the candidate at

this time ; for the North had tho Presidential candi- ; dates at the three last elections in 1848, 1S52 and 56 j Cass, Pierce and Buchanan. True policy now dici tates to Northern democrats, that Douglas should igivo way, at all events, at this election. I But there is a question higher than this a constitutional question, involving the rights of the Southern States which the Democrats of those States demand!

shall be settled; and this questiou must be met. The highest judicial tribunal of the country, to which this question was submitted with the consent of Mr, Doug

las, has decided in their favor; and common justice dictates to all true Northern Democrats to all who desire the supremacy of the National Democracy to yield it, in accordance with that decision, and not to be ever backing and filling, like Douglas, about it. If we are true friends of the Constitution if we arc lawabiding men we will cheerfully do so. It will not answer for us, to say, with Douglas, that " we don't care whether slavery is voted up or voted down."

We are called upon, by our Democratic brethren of

the South, who have always stood shoulder to shoulder with us on every trying oacasion in peace and war-

to vote for the principles of the Constitution ; to vote to sustain the compact of Union, as agreed upon by all the States ; and nothing more or less than this will keep the great Democratic party of the Union together, and prevent the triumph of Black Republi

canism.

" Already have hundreds of Democrats, whose first choice was Douglas, seeing where the leaders of that party are driving them, declared for Breckinridge ; and before election we shall find hundreds more determined to save the State from the Opposition, and, by their aid, we cannot doubt that victory will perch upon our banner, and the glorious Old Dominion remain true, as heretofore, to Democracy and the Union."

The Woodstock Tenth Legion says: " Whatever others may do, the sterling Democracy of the gallant Tenth Legion Shenandoah, Page, and Warren are not prepared for any such fusion as that. No ! the unsullied banner that has so long and gloriously floated from her ramparts is still there ! and it will remain there through evil as well as good report, for weal or for woe, until the ides of November shall tell the tale." The Norfolk Argus remarks the fact that we have already noted, that Mr. Douglas has nothing to say against the anti-Democratic candidates, but directs all his bitterness upon the nominees of the true Democracy. The Argus says : " Senator Douglas, in his long speech the other

night, had not a word to say against Bell, but falsely denounced the Vice President of the United States as a secessionist." The effect of this and other things in the course of the squatter sovereignty partisans is somewhat different from their own anticipations, and is commented on by the Virginia Sentinel as follows : "Mr. Douglas and those who manage h's interests in Virginia have greatly mistaken tho temper of our De

mocracy, including those whose first choice would have been to vote for him. The orders came out from Washington to his friends to hold no conference with the Breckinridge men, and to treat even a suggestion from them as an insult. The order has not been obeyed. Mr. Rust, at Warrenton, on Monday,

followed up his Washington letter with a violent harangue which, aided by Whig applause, drove away from Douglas a large portion of the friends he had. Mr. Douglas himself, instead of leaving us to do our own voting in our own way, has seen fit to 'intervene,' and is traversing our State, according to accounts, saying not one word against Bell, but making charges against Breckinridge which that gentleman indignantly denounces as a slander. At the same time, we see his friends in many places ready to co-operate with those of Bell, while refusing to unite with their own brethren. "These things are bavins a powerful effect 1 Aided

by the shouts of tho Bell men, they are bringing our Democracy together, and closing up our ranks.".

Connecticut. Of the eight Democratic papers in Connecticut four have already hoisted the Breckinridge and Lane flag, viz: The New Haven Register, The Hartford Times, The Middletown Sentinel, and The New Loudon Slur. Two have LoL-tcd the Douglas and Johnson flag, viz : - The New Haven Netcs, and The Hartford Press. The Bridgeport Farmer is decidedly for Brf.ckinbidqe, but has as yet hoisted no names. The Norwich Aurora gives a quasi support to Douglas, under protest

ifcy We are under obligations to those of our exchanges that have published the notices of the Mass Congressional Meetings.

SZ" Hon. Robert Ocld will attend the Congressional Mass Conventions announced in this paper, and speak at all, or must of them.

The Plot of the Bell-Douglas Men in Indiana, The following extract of a letter is taken from the New York Express, the organ of the Bell K. N. party

in that city: " Vevay, Ind., August 22, 1860. To the Editors of the .V. Y. Express : The Union fires are burning brightly out here, and since the formation of our Electoral Ticket, large numbers are being added to our ranks. If we do no more, we may, at least, give the State to Douglas. Indiana."

There's the cloven foot, plain enough. ' If we do

no more, says tlio liell Ivnow Nothing, "we may at

least give the State to Douglas." That's the game which will be pWed in all the Northern States by the corrupt portion of the Bell men. And if the few Douglas men in the Southern States can "do no more," they will at least try to "give" those States to Bell. Never was there formed a more thorough coalition. It

behooves the honest men of the Douglas ranks to look j closely at the movements of their leaders. It behooves i them to do so, if they would avoid one of the most uni natural coalitions that ever disgraced the political hisI tory of the country. What ' is it come to this ? that a ! candidate for the Presidency, claiming to bo a Democrat, has s'ooped to receive the vote of a faction which I has no feeling in common with the Democrats?" He ! is now found joining hands wit h' a man whose followJ crs, a few years ago, sprinkled the streets of our cities and towns with the blood of adopted citizens, for no; i other reason than that of their voting the Democratic I ticket! If he is elected through the aid of the Bell:

men, will he not be under obligations to give this man of blood a seat in his cabinet ? Will he not be bound

I to give his followers a portion of the olfices throughout j the country-, to the exclusion of true Democrats V "To

this complexon, it has come at last T j Not Enough Treasury Pap. ! The editor of the rBreckinridsrel 'Wan" savs our

'eyc has beeu almost constantly fixed upon the Washington papers' tor " large advertisements of mail or army cont racts." Why, bless your soul, Am., the only copy of the Washington paper which contains these I' tat" thing.-- that we have seen for nearly three years, is one for which we paid five cents when starting on a trip down the Po'omac in April last. All

the "patronage" we hare received from the present administration would not suffice to pay the current expenses of the Lsdyr establishment ibr two weeks. New Albany Ledger.

The Position of Chief Justice Taney, The Douglas papers have frequently claimed Judge Taney, of the U. S. Supreme Court, as a friend of the

little Sucker.'. The Baltimore Republican puts an extinguisher upon this claim, in the folio wing paragraph .

Taney, like most of the eminent Democrats of the Union, will vote for Breckinridge, if he votes at all. So says the Republican which is published in the city where Judge Taney resides, and has a fair opportunity to learn his views: " The Washington States, now under the control and management of Miles Taylor & Co., has started the absurd story that Chief Justice Taney is "an earnest advocate of the election of Mr. Douglas." The story is utterly false. The venerable Chief Justice is not the ' earnest advocate of Mr. Douglas' election," nor even a quiet supporter of his pretensions. Judgo Taney, with that true dignity and propriety which has ever marked his course, has taken no active part in political affairs since he has accepted his present high position, and it would be utterly impossible for him to sustain Mr. Douglas in his direct opposition to the recorded opinions of the court, and to his individual opinion, as rendered in the Dred Scott case. Wo speak advisedly, when we emphatically contradict the assertion of the Douglas organ in this matter. If Chief Justice Taney votes at the Presidential election, it will not be for Mr. Douglas, but for that true Democrat and upholder of the Constitution, John C. Breckinridge.

Joe Lane Rangers, Indianapolis, Sept. 5th, 1860. The Club met pursuant to adjournment. On motion of Mr. Ferguson, Charles P. Baymiller was elected Secretary, in place of R. A. Taylor, jr. Mr. W. II. Steel ofTered the following resolution : Resolved, That the State Central Committee be re

quested to present to the National Democratic party,

candidates for State officers, or call a State Convention at once, so that the friends of Breckinridge and Lane may have candidates expressing their sentiments. Which resolution was laid on tho table until next Wednesday evening. On motion of Mr. Tomlinson, the Club adjourned to next Wednesday evening. L. DUN LAP, President T. B. Morrison, Secretary.

Senator Hunter on the Stump. This distin. guished man has taken the field in Virginia, in favor of Bkeckinuidge. His speech at Charlottesville the home of JefTerson in the better days of the Re" public was severe upon the little Sucker.

"Sot enough " patronage," eh ? That's it

j received enough to "pay your expenses

Dovglas in the South. The special telegraphic correspondent of the Cincinnati Gazette says: Douglas is expected here this afternoon. He will rest a day and then go to Baltimore and Frederick, Maryland. He has been mainhi received by Jirll men

South, who have furnished all the enthusiasm and all the receptions. All their demonstrations were of course insincere, as they intend to give him no vote. Douglas in New York. Lockport, N. Y., Sept 5. The Daily Advertiser, of Niagara, the only paper in this county at the masthead of which the names of Douglas and Johnson have hitherto appeared, this morning comes out for Breckinridge and Lane. The Syracuse, (N. Y.) Courier, says: With the full facts of the canvass as it now stands before us, we can sec nought to do but to summon, with drum and fife, every private that can be induced to enlist in the ranks of the National Democracy to draw the sword in defense of our principles, and throw away Uie scabbard. You who are the friends of the Democratic party and are disposed to support it and its candidates, and have been mesmerized, by the delusive cry of L'ninn or fusion, awake now, and ami for the battle ! You who have been resting on your

Had you

for the arms, rouse to the struggle for the representatives of

0"Mr. S. J. Stouehton. in wndimr an order for i rU iwir. wn Khmdrl nmhahlv hrrl nothing v ltne Constitution and the Union! You who have ten

Guards, neglected to pive us Lis po-t office. If he I the Udrr agamn the Admiration, or Senators 1 1 TrTT 'T r , . , . i i , r. , . . . . . . . i prepare to carry New York for Breckinridge and will furnish this, his order will be filled. j Bn-ht and Fitch either. There s where the shoe Lane. .

I beg you, my neighboi-s, friends, and old constituents, to be assured that I feel profoundly grateful for the cordial welcome you have extended to me. The circumstances under which I appear before you are novel and unusual. I do it in obedience to the request of friends whose intelligence I have been ac

customed to observe, and if it be an uncommon thing

lor a person in my position to address assemblies of

people, I can only sav I hone to discuss tonics which

are in a manner not altogether unworthy the attitude

which I occupy. I shall e-crtaiuly indulge in no lan

guage which in my opinion will fall below the dignity of political discussion. , The condition of my health and my position make it impossible that I can extend my voice over this vast assembly, but I trust I will become stronger as I proceed. I have been asked, fellow-citizens, to speak at my own home, because I, and the political organization with which I am connected, have been assailed ill all unusual manner, and charged with treason to my own country. I appear before you to-day, for the purpose, first, of repelling certain accusations which

nave been made against me personally and industriously through other States of the Union, and next, to show that the principles upon which I stand are the principles of both the Constitution and Union of our

country. (Great applause.) And surely, if at any time the justification could be found by any man for addressing the people in the position which I occupy, it will be found in my case. Anonymous writers and wandering orators have chosen to tell the people that I, individually, am a disunionist and a traitor to my

country, and they declare, and with much assurance

affirm, that I have exhibited a treason that makes by

comparison witii it, liurr a patriot, and the memory of Arnold respectable ; but, fellow citizens, before I come to these topics, I desire to make and prove a

cuuipiuiiuusivu suueuiein in regard to my position m connection with the Presidency of the United States. I have been charged with a premature ambition; I

nave Deen charged with intriguing for this nomination ; I have been charged with thrusting myself be-

fore the people for tho highest office in their gift. To that I answer, that it is wholly untrue. I have writ

ten to nobody soliciting support I have intrigued with nobody. I have promised nobody. To these

statements I challenge contradiction from any human beiii. (Cheers.')

I did not seek or desire to be placed before the

people tor ttie ollice ot J; resident by any Convention

or any part of any Convention.

When I returned to the State of Kentucky in the spring of 1859, and was informed that some partial friends were presenting my name to the public in that

connection, and a certain editor in this State, whose presence I see here, had hoisted my name for 'the Presidency, I said to him, " I am not in any sense a candidate for the Presidency, and I desire that my name may be taken down from the head of your columns." It was done. A very eminent citizen of the Commonwealth of Kentucky was presented for that ollice. I was gratified to see it, and as far as my own wishes were concerned, I united cordially in presenting him for the suffrages of the American people ; and at no time, in or out of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, did I do an act, or utter a word, which would bring my name :.. ii:... i . ' ...

in liunuici, wim ins, or any oiner American citizen who desired, or whose friends desired for him, that position ; and if you tako the trouble to read the proceedings of the Charleston Convention, you will re

member when I received the vote of Arkansas, one of my friends arose and withdrew my name, declaring

mat. i would not allow my name to come in opposition to this gentleman before the Convention; and when that Convention assembled at Baltimore, my feelings and my conduct were still unchanged. After the disruption which took place there, (when my name, without any solicitation on my part, was again presented to the Convention,) I said : " I did not desire to be presented to the American people, but I am content with the honors which have been heaped upon me by my State and my country, aud 'I look forward with pleasure to the prospects I have, of serving my country in the Senate of the United States, for the next six: years." My name, howevor, was presented, and I felt I could not refuse to accept the nomination, under the circumstances, without abandoning vital principles and betraying my friends. It is said I was not regularly nominated, and that

an eminent citizen of Illinois was regularly nominated for the Presidency. But that is a question I have not time to discuss to-day, and it has already been thor

oughly discoursed upon before the people. I refer you to the letter of your delegates from this Congres-

sionai district, x reter you to the masterly speech recently delivered by my friend on whose grounds we are met. I can only .ny that the Convention which assembled at Front" Street Theater, at Baltimore, in

my judgment, was devoid not onlv of the spirit of

justice, DUt ot tho torms ot regularity. (Cheers.) The

gentleman wnom it presented never received the vote required by the rules of Democratic organization. Whole States were excluded and disfranchised in that

Convention, not to speak of individuals. The most flagrant acts of injustice were perpetrated for the

purpose ot lorcing a particular dogma upon the Democratic organization, and the gentleman who is representative of that dogma of principles, which I will be

able to show is repugnant alike to reason and the Constitution. Owing to the impropriety of those pro-

ceeumgs, h uecioeci majority oi tne neiegates irom your own State withdrew from the Convention, declaring that it was not a National Convention of the real Democratic organization. The entire delegations from the fifteen Southern States and of California and Oregon, with large minorities from other States, making in whole or in part delegations from almost two-thirds of the States of the Confederacy, constituted the National Democratic Convention, which made me their nominee for the Presidency of the United States. But, after all. the

great question is, what are the principles which ought to commend themselves to the American people, at issue in this canvass.' These I will discuss before I am done; but before I proceed further, I will groupe together and answer a number of personal accusations.

some of which emanated in the State of Kentucky, and others elsewhere, by which, through me, it is attempted to strike down the organization with which I am connected. It begets in me almost a feeling of humiliation to answer some of them, but as I have imposed upon myself the task, I will go through them all as briefly as I can. (Cheers.) I believe it has been published in almost every Southern newspaper of the opposition party, that I j signed a petition tor the pardon of John Brown, the! Harper's Ferry murderer and traitor. This is wholly j untrue. So much for that CCries of "good.")

It has been extensively charged and circulated that j tion, as it was originally understood and engrafted into I was in favor of the election of General Taylor to the I the legislation of the country, (cheers,) as I will proPresidency, and opposed to tho election of Cass and j ceed to show more fully in another form of my speech. Buller. This also is wholly untrue. j But I assume that Mr. Douglas, in this statement, In tho year 184 7 there was a meeting in the i meant to declare in 1856, from the mime stump with city of Lexington, in which I participated, by which I me, he advocated the doctrine that Territorial LcgisGen. Taylor was recommended for the. Presidency of i latures had the power to exclude slave property under the United States. A difference of opinion existed at j tho Territorial condition, and I presume lie uses this that time as to the political sentiments of that distin-i expression in that sense, and that is the question that guished gentleman. I has been the whole point of dispute. I was assured, upon grounds satisfactory to me, that Well, at no time, cither before or after the passage

they coincided with my own political opinions, and 1 1 of the Kansas-Nebraska bill in Congress, did I ever united in the meeting. Pretty soon afterwards I went entertain or alter the opinion that a Territorial Legisto Mexico. When I returned, twelve months after- lature, prior to the formation of a State Constitution, wards, in 1848,''I found the campaign in full blast, had the power to exclude slave property from the with Taylor for the Whigs, and Cass and Butler in I common Territories of the Union, and no other advonomination by the. National Democracy. It is well catc of my doctrines can be found who will sulstanknown to thousands of those within the sound of my tiate the charge. Now, I am to entertain you briefly, voice, that as soon as I returned I took the stump in by as clear an exposition as I can, of the attitude of behalf of the Democracy, and maintained its doc- the parties in regard to the question at isene. In 1854, trines to the extent of my ability. (A voice, " All j we removed tho restriction of the Missouri line, and right") And I was not afraid to do it, because they ) pa-sed the Kansas-Nebraska bill through both Houses, were the representatives of my principles ; and you i and it became a law. and its friends, North and South, may judge of my zeal, as one of those gentlemen was j who were against the Compromise, raid it sliould be my old commander, and my friend. It was said I was removed. 1'hev argued that these Territories should not present and did not vote at the election in Lex-I be oik-u to settlement.

ington, in 1848, and that is true; but with that has; There was one point upon which the friends of the pone the exjJanation, which my opponents have never-bill diifered. Th Southern friends of the measure, published, which is entirely satisfactory, showing tliat ! and a few of the Northern friends of the measure, dit was my intention to be absent during the canvass ; ! nied the power eii her of Congress or the Territorial but it was not my intention to lose mr vote. You all Legislature to exclude any descrirtio of property ; know, at that time, as a citizen, I could vote anywhere the other party assumed the ground thai th Territo-

in the State, which was before the revision aud adoption of the present Constitution; but it so happened that there woro six or eight gentlemen who accompanied mo, all of them oulongW to the Whig party, and they proposed to me that if 1 would not return to mv

own town and vote, they would not. If they had ail voted there would have been six or seven votes cast for Taylor, and but one cast for Butler. (Cheers.) I accepted the proposition and wo went hunting, (laughter) and if every man had done as well as myself we would have carried tho State by 40,000 majority. (Applause.) Among those, I remember the names of my friends Thomas S. Kedd, Nelson Butler and Geo. C. Juwett. Tho charge which has been extensively circulated throughout the Southern States, asserts that 1 was an Emancipationist in 1849. or at least noted for an

Emancipationist at some time. Mr. B. read an extract from a letter from tho Hon. GcOI'ie - luibel'lsim. mililiJiml ; i .Cu.il.an.

having reference to his position on this question, and alluding to his private affairs, and commented on it at some length, and with much severity. I come to the fact. The only time I know of when the question of emancipation was ever raised in Kentucky in my day, was in 1849, when we were electing delegates to the Convention to form a new Constitution. Then Dr. Breckinridge and Mr. Shy were emancipationist candidates. Mr. Wickliife and I canvassed the county to the best of our abilities in opposition to emancipation, believing the interests of both races in

the commonweath would be promoted by the continuance of their present relation. At the polls, Dr. Breckinridge voted against me and I voted against him, (cheers) because we were representing opposite principles, and just so it would be again under similar circumstances. So much for that charge. But I have seen pamphlets published and circulated all over the Union for the purpose of proving that I was a Know Nothing in the year 1855,

iu uie ouite oi iventucKy. aughtcr.; 1 Have no doubt that a very considerable proportion of those listening to me were members of that order in that year, and it there is a man among you who belonged to the order, who ever saw me in one of your lodges, who did not know that I was recognized as one of the most uncompromising opponents, let him be good enough to say so now. A voice "He ain't here." I believe I was the first gentleman in Congress who took a position against the organization, When I returned home in the spring of 1855, it was making great progress in the Commonwealth, and although I was withdrawn from public life to attend to my private affairs, I opposed it in repeated speeches all over Kentucky. This statement may not be very acceptable to some gentlemen in the sound of my voice, but I do not want to deceive any man. I stand upon my principles, and am willing to view them without the slightest regard to consequences. I am represented this day as hav

ing said 1 would make a difference between one of my own religious belief, and between a naturalized and

an unnaturalized citizen, that I would make a political difference. I never uttered such a sentiment. (Great applause.) The underlying principle with me was this : that tho condition of citizenship being once obtained, no question, cither of religion or birth, should be allowed to commingle with political considerations. (Applause.)

i deem it only necessary to make these statements

here succinctly, and pass on, because lam speaking to

assembled thousands who know this injustice : but.

fellow-citizens, to come to more extended topics. It has been asserted that I, and the political organization with which I am connected, have abandoned the

ground on which we stood in regard to the Territorial question in 1854 and '50; that we then occupied a position which is now occupied by the friends and sup

porters of Mr. Douglas, and that eminent gentlemen

himself. I deny it, and shall now proceed to prove it, both as to myself and the party. You have heard the issue involved. There was a body to whom we could refer the question, and we thought it unnecessary further to debate, each party agreeing to acquiesce in the decision as rendered by said body. Survey the period between the passage of that bill and the deci- : sion of the Supreme Court. All persons on each side entertained their own opinions. We, in the South, held that the Territorial legislature did not have that power. Mr. Douglas and his friends held that the Territorial legislature did have that power. We suspended the question, and referred it to the Supreme Court of the United States to determine the constitutional question. A good deal has been said of what is called my Tippecanoe speech. AVell, gentlemen, I went over to the States of Indiana, Michigan, and Pennsylvania

to make political speeches in 185G. - No one of those speeches was ever written out, and no one of them prepared by me except by the briefest notes ; and the reports which various persons chose to make were never reviewed by me. I have been amused to see various portions of what they call the Tippecanoe speech, and the divers reports of the re porters, which they chose to make for the different papers at different times. I have now in my hands a report which reads as follows, in reference to the Territorial question : " The people of the Territories, under the KansasNebraska Act, have the full right to abolish or prohibit slavery, which principle is as old as the Republican Government itself." Not only did I never utter such a sentiment, but I have no reason to believe anybody ever thought I uttered it. I bad never seen it at the time when I mado my speech in any newspaper anywhere. But I have no time to waste on comments, on the propriety or

delicacy of a gent who is before the country for the office of President, in introducing the name of one who is also a candidate, and giving his personal testimony as to that gent's opinion. I shall waste no time

in the discussion of the speech which the Ilou. S. A. Douglas has been making iu various States, and re

cently in Concord, New Hampshire.- I give his own language. Savs Mr. Douglas :

" There is not an honest man in all America, that

will deny that James Buchanan and John C. Breckin-

ldge, in 1 85b, were pledged to the Koctnne ot non

intervention by Congress with slavery in the Territo

ries. Mark the word as it is there, 'non-intervention.' "I made speeches from the same stump with J. C. Breckinridge in 1856, when he was advocating his own claims for the Vice Presidency, and heard him go to the extreme length in favor of popular sovereignty in the Territories." Then in speaking of other gentlemen from the South, who had been expressing themselves in the North, he says : "In every one of their speeches they advocated squatter sovereignty in its loudest sense." Here, in the space of twelve lines, you see the words "non-intervention," "popular sovereignty 'and "squatter sovereignty," all evidently conveying the same meaning. I heid the doctrine of non-interven-