Indiana State Guard, Volume 1, Number 23, Indianapolis, Marion County, 8 September 1860 — Page 3

rial Legislature had a right to exclude it. It was a constitutional question, and they agreed not to make it a matter of legislative dispute, but to make a provision in the bill to refer it to the Supreme Court 1'or a decision, and all the parties were bound to abide by the decision made by that august tribunal upon- this constitutional question. Let nie now prove that there was such an agreement. Ordinarily, a bill cannot be taken from a Territorial Court, through the Supreme Court of the United States until the matter in controversy amounts to $1,000; and in order that this question might be tried before the Supreme Court, a clause was inserted to meet the contingency. Now, during the passage of that bill and the decision of the Supremo Court, all persons on each side entertained their owu opinions. We in the South held that the Territorial Legislature did not have the power. Mr. Douglas and his friends -held that the. Territorial Legislature ..did have- the power. We suspended that question, and referred it by abill to the Supreme Court todetcrmine the constitutional question therein involved. That 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 the Court. I think this is a pretty plain statement on that point, and I make it to show that there was a vow taken by the Southern friends of the measure in Congress, and among them, a vow taken by your humble speaker to support the decision. Mr. 15. here read some extracts from his speech, delivered in the House of Representatives in 1854. We were willing, ho continued, to have the question decided by the Courts of the United States. Again, I say it is contended, upon the one hand, upon the idea of the equality of the States under the Constitution, that the citizens of the slavcholding States may remove to the Territories with their slaves, and there legally hold thorn until the Territory is resolved into a State. On the other hand, it is said that slavery being in conflict with a common right, it can only exist biTfbrce of positive law, and it is denied that the Constitution ever sanctioned the law. I said, we demand that all citizens of the United States be allowed to enter the common Territory with the Constitution alone in their hands, for that instrument protects the title of the master to the slave. If it does not protect his title, we ask no help from Congress. If difficulties occurred, we were to let them be submitted to the Court. Now, upon my own personal vindication, the doctrines announced by me in that speech were just such as I have ever declared in the commonwealth of Kentucky, such as I have ever declared in every public address which I have made in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Afterwards, it was understood that I had been charged, or I had been reported to have admitted this power belonged to the Territorial Legislature. In the months of September and October, '56, the editor ofthe Kentucky Statesman, published in this city, alluding to this charge, made the

following statement, to winch 1 beg leave to reter you. Mark you, this was before the Presidential election of 185G. , , (Mr. Breckinridge then read from an editorial in the Kentucky Statesman of October, 1856, in which it was stated that during his tour through Indiana and Illinois, he (Mr. B.) avowed the sentiments he had often proclaimed in Kentucky, and which are clearly embodied in the Cincinnati Platform, that he denied that the Democratic party was, in its federal relations, a pro-slavery party; that it was neither such a party nor an anti-slavery party; that it rejected the interference of the Federal Government, whether to introduce or exclude slavery, and left the Territories open to common settlement from all the States; that each State was entitled, from its own Constitution, to enter the Union, without discrimination by Longrcss on account of its allowance or prohibition of slavery; and that the statement that Mr. Breckinridge advocated squatter sovereignty was untrue.) Mr. Breckinridge continued: "In the autumn of the same year I received aLouisia.nn naner. containinz remarks made by General Miles, who heard my speech, in which he denied that I admitted the doctrine ot 1 erntonal power. Jtic sunt me a slin containing his speech in the same month, before the Presidential election. I answered him saying: " Hands off the whole subject by the Federal Gov. nvnmpnt. nxcent for one or two protective purposes mentioned in the Constitution; the equal rights of all sections in the common .lerritones, and the abso lute power of each new State to sottfe the question m its Constitution." These are my doctrines and those of our platform, and, what is more, of the Constitution. (Cheers.) Now, fellow-citizens, against the statement of that distinguished Senator, in which he undertakes to prove allegations against myself by himself, I thus op pose my owu statement, x-sow, in pruui, i uavu irauw you from my speech in 1854 in Congress, the article in the Lexington paper before the Presidential election, the testimony of .Gen. Miles, who heard that speech at Tippecanoe, my own letter in answer to the latter gentleman's, containing my opinion of the question at that time and what has ever since been my Opinion. I think I have proven, as fully as could be expected in the limitations of a speech, that the charge is un-.-minded iii fact. and.I will add that the position as sumed was that taken by all the Southern friends of the Nebraska Bill and by a portion ot its Northern friends. These were our private opinions. These wore opinions we expressed on all proper occasions, but we did not undertake to force others to agree to them. We had agreed to refer that to the highest tribunal in the Union. . Now, gentlemen, having vindicated myself and the Constitutional Democracy from the charge of having abandoned the position they took in 1854 and 1856, 1 turn upon my accuser and undertake to show that Mr. Douglas himself abandoned the agreement he solemnly made at the time the Kansas-Nebraska Bill passed the Congress of the United States. (Great applause.) I do not make myself a witness against him to do it, I will prove it by himself. (Voices "Good, good," and applause.) On the second day f July, 1856, in debate upon a bill to authorize the people of Kansas to form a Constitution preparatory to admission into the Union as a State, when the question arose as to what was the true meaning of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and the limitation of the power of the Territorial Government, Mr. ..Trumbull offered the following amendment as an additional section of the bill: " And be it further enacted, that the provision in the Act to organize the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas, which declares it to be the true intent and meaning of said Act, not to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof, perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, was intended to, and does confer upon, or leave to the people of the Territory of Kansas, full xwcr at any time, through its Territorial Legislature, to exclude slavery from said Territory, or to re-organize and regulate it therein." .That was Mr. Trumbull's amendment, against which an overwhelming majority of the Senate voted, including Gen. Cass and Senator Douglas. Let nie, however, do Mr. Douglas the justice to say that he voted against the amendment, not because he did not believe" the Territorial Legislature had the power to exclude slavery from the Territory, but because he did not believe it wa consistent to decide the. question legislatively, which they had agreed to, leave to the Court. - G.-neral Cas says : J ( Mr. Breckinridge here quoted from Gen. Cass to show that the South and North differed about the power tht might be given a Territorial Legislature, J and that the Kansas bill left that to lie adjudicated by the Court, by whirh, alone, tho Constitutional question ronld lx settled finally.) Mr. Breckinridge continued : Mr. Douglas, in the snme debate, ncd the following language, in speaking of the attempt of his coUVague to coerce an opinion out of him upon the question whether the Territorial Legislature had the power to exclude slave property before they became a Stat : (Mr. Breckinridge read from Douglas' speech, an extract concluding with the assertion We aeroed to refer it to the judiciary; we agreed to abide by their decision.") I thiok I have shown that upon the point of dispute between the friendi of the Kali sag bill as to the power of Territorial Legislature to exclude slave property it was aTtrd to refer it to the Supreme Court, and

when it had been judicially determined, we should abide by the decision. Now, bear with me while I read a very little from the decision of the Supremo Court of the United

States in the Ureil Scott case. L.et us tor a muiumi turn to tho calm',' enlightened, judicious utterance of the most august tribunal upon the earth. (Appiau.se.; The opinion was concurred in by all the Judges except two, and uttered by tho illustrious Chief Justice of tho United States. Tho Court says : . . ( The language of the Court upon this point is familiar to the public.) , They all looked to the period when a lerritory should come into the Union as a State, as the time when the Territorial authorities might act on the subject of property, and to hold or exclude tho slave property of the South. (Applause.) Timo will not allow me to do much more than state the propositions, but I will read short abstracts from the celebrated report made by the committee of thirteen, of which Mr. Clay was Chairman, which resulted in the compromise measures of 1850. It is calm, lucid, has no clap-trap phrases, and puts me in mind of the language used by the Supreme Court. ( Mr. B. here quoted from vol. 21, Globe, part 1, page 945.) That was non-intervention m 1850. It was no interference to exclude slavery by Congress or tho Territorial Legislatures, but to leave the question to be decided by the people when they come to form their State Constitution. ( Mr. B. here read from a speech of Daniel Webster, where the position was taken that Territorial Governments were in a state of pupilage under the protection of the General Government; that they have no power not given by Congress, and that it is our duty to provide for the "people of the Territory a Government to keep the peace, to secure their property, to assign to them a subordinate legislative authority, to see that the protection of their persons and the security of their property are all regularly provided for, and to maintain them in that state until they grow into sufficient importance in point of population, to be admitted in the Union as a State upon the same footing as the original States.) Mr. B. continued: Do you suppose that Daniel Webster,' after the opinion of the Supreme Court that I have read toyou, would have considered it becoming him to point out some contrivance or device by which the Territorial Legislature could violate the constitutional rights of thc Southern States? Not he, nor would Clay, nor any of the great and good men whofigured in the earlier days of your history. (Cheers.) Judges and Governors of these Territorial governments are appointed by the President and Senate of the United States, and paid out of the public treasury, so that the very legislation which they invoke to exclude your propertyCfrom the Territories, is one whose daily expenses are paid out of the common treasury, out of the money rr, which that verv property contributes by taxation. (Applause.) The practice of the Government have always been different. Here Mr. B. entered into an argument to show that Congress has power to protect property in the .Territories, and if refutation of the position recently taken by the Senator from Illinois, that Congress had never j exercised this power. The principles I have tried feebly to vindicate here are the principles upon which the Constitutional Democracy stands to-day, and they are the only principles upon which any human being will pretend to charge them with purposes of disunion. If they are the principles of the Constitution and the Union, then we are Constitutional and Union men, (cries of "that's so,") and yet for two or three months you have heard loud and incessant clamor, that I, and those Democrats with whom I am connected, are a disunion organization, who seek to break up the confederacy of the States. I hardly know, so far as it is apersonal charge against myself, how to answer it. (A vo;ce "teU'em it's a'lie.") As repeated by anonymous writers and wandering orators over the country, their whole stock of trade is: Disunion, disunion; this man and his party attempt to break up the Union of the States." We say, how can principles be sectional or of a disunion tendency, which are based upon the Constitution? A large number of young gentlemen, who are engaged in ringing with tongues as long, and heads as empty, as the bells which they ring, cry disunion. (Prolonged laughter and cheers.) From sources yet more eminent, comes the information that I, and the political organization with which I am connected, are laboring for the disruption of the confederacy. I do not reply now to what Mr. Douglas says all over New England, in Virginia, and wherever he goes, because it is quite natural for a gentleman as much interested as he is to think any man who opposes his principles must be a disunionist. (Cheers and laughter.) inaeea, Dy ins declaration, we must be all disunionists in Kentucky, for he de clares that those who assert that a .territorial Legislature has no power to exclude slave property, and that Crinrrp.ss should interfere for its protection, are dis unionists, and that is what the whole Legislature of Kentucky said last year. (Applause.) In our own State, where I certainly thought my character and antecedents were known, one of the oldest and most eminent of our public men has not said tliat I was a disunionist, but intimated that 1 am connected with an organization whose bone and body is disunion. I refer to Mr. Crittenden to a speech which he made at Louisville. I have known and admired him. He has known me. Towards him I have cherished and expect to cherish, relations of respectful and cordial esteem. There are reasons which, even if I had grounds for it, would prevent any but perfect courtesy in reply. After speaking of Mr. Lincoln in terms as complimentary as his principles merit, and the Senator of Illinois in terms of eulogy, he speaks of his fellow-citizen. Here Mr. Breckin ridge quoted the reference to himself in JUr. Crittenden's speech, and continued as follows : I thank my venerable and distinguished friend for the hope he yet entertains that I am not a disunionist (Laughter and applause. Like a humane lawyer he gives me the benefit of a doubt, and for this I thank hiin. (Renewed cheers.) As to my connection with principles or a party which tends that way, I may speak presently. My object now is to relieve myself from the imputations of being a disunionist, and in this I would prefer to receive a direct blow, than to have it sound like the reluctant confession of a sorrowfut friend. (Applause and laughter.) Mr. B., in passing, paid an eloquent tribute to Gen. Joe Lane, and continued to speak of the charge against himself. Born within sight of this spot: known to you for nearly forty years; your Representative in the Legislature, in Congress, and other situations of trust, I in vite any one to point to anything in my record which would sanction such a charge or such an imputation. fCheers.1 I will not degrade the dignity of my declara tion by epithets, but I proudly challenge my bitterest enemy to point out an act, to disclose an utterance, or reveal a thought of mine, hostile to the Constitution or the union ot the Mates. (loua cneers.; ( a voice: He couldn't do it." The man does not live who can couple my name successfully with the slightest . . . . i. . .i . r, i it taint ot uisiovaity to me vuusmuuuu gnu umuu. (Applause.) ' But if there be nothing in my character to iustif'v this accusation, what is there in the plat form and principles upon which I stand? It must, if anywhere, De in the resolutions as to property in me lerritones. I will read inese, ami you can judge, whether they accord with the position ofthe. Supreme Court and the Government as I have shown it to day. After reading the resolutions he continued: That is the platform and these are the principles avowed. Jf they are constitutional thev are not sec tional, for the Constitution is broad rnongh to cover tho whole Union. (Cheers.) He who stands upon the Constitution can neither be sectional nor a disu nionist. The principles are taken almost verbatim from the opinion of the Supreme Court They are supported by the precedents and practice of the Government; they are the principles upon which we may well live, and by which we may well be willing to die. (Cheers.) They are vitally important and they concern rights of person and property ; they cannot be abstract minute or unimportant, for they concern the honor and ennality of the States. What has been the position of Kentucky npon that platform ? The candidates for Governor of this State last year both held that Territorial Legislatures have no power to exclude our property, and each contended that every depart-' ment of government must protect it when it became necessary. Mr. Joshua Bell, I believe, went a step

further by thinking the timo had now arrived when the government should interpose. Your Conventions endorsed these principles, and the Senate and.Conimon wealth of Kentucky, by unanimous vote of both parties, endorsed them as being

constitutional and true, by the following resolution, which I must read, it is so apt, so pertinent, so conciu sive ' ' '' The resolution of tho last Legislature of Kentucky, here read, is necessarily omitted. 1 That is word for word the opinion of the Supremo Court, and the resolution ot the JSational Democratic Convention on which I stand to-day. Both parties in Kentucky, at the polls, and by unanimous vote in the Legislature, have declared that these principles are those of the Constitution. I might pause here ; but in support of these principles I want tho authority of Mr. Crittenden himself. (Applause.) W hatever doubts ho -may- have as to my fidelity to the Constitution and Union, I do not hesitate to say that that eminent gentleman is devoted to the Union. I do not believe he would advocato orinciules which he believed were unconstitutional or calculated to destroy the union of this country, and if I can have his sanction and endorsement tor the principles I advocate, it will go a great way in proving that they are constitutional and not disunion. Mr. B. here read the 3d, 4th and 5th of Mr. Davis' resolutions, and referred to Mr. Crittenden's vote for them, and said : I have the vote of my distinguished friend, declaring that these questions are not minute nor unimportant; that the union ofthe States rests upon an equality of rights among them ; that neither Congress nor the Territorial Legislature, has power to infringe'the constitutionat rights ot any, and that it becomes necessary for Congress to interfere to protect that right. These are precisely the principles upon which we stand today. (Cheers.) My distinguished friend followed the resolutions by a speech, which I find in the Daily Globe. It is true, he expressed a hope that the time min-ht not come when it would be necessary for Con gress to intervene to protect these rights. I trust that the time will never come when any Territorial authority will be so reckless of its constitutional obligations as to make it necessary for Congress to declare its acts void. (Cheers.) But, in his speech he sus tained the position on which we stand, m language which compares well with the decision of the Supreme Court. He said : ("The extract read from Mr. Crittenden's speech declares that a Territorial government is a creation of Congress, endowed only with the powers conferred upon it by its creator, and with no particle of sovereignty. Further on, in the same speech, Mr. Crittenden used the following language : "As the Territorial government has no sovereign or independent right to act on this subject, the Supreme Court of the United States having determined that every citizen of the United States may go into the Territory, carrying his slaves with him anil holding them there, my opinion is that the Constitution is to protect that property, which it has authorized to go there; therefore, when the proper or extreme case occurs, when property going there under the Supremo Court of the United States shall require such interposition, that it is the duty of Congress to interpose and grant protection." Mr. Breckinridge said of this : " Nobly and well said, in language worthy of his exalted character and refutation." Mr. Douglas says, and to-day stands upon it, and claims your votes upon it, that " a Territorial Legis- . . ' .. , . .1 1 .PiL. C lature, no matter what tne decision oi me ouprcine Court may be," has the right to exclude slave property from a Territory; that you may take it there, but it must be held subject to such laws as the local Legislature may make. The Supreme Court says the Territorial Legislature cannot exclude it, and Mr. Crittenden says that nothing can strike him as more inconsistent and contradictory than to say that, while you may go there, there is somebody stronger or mightier than the Constitution, that can take away that which the Constitution says you may hold and enjoy. I derive some satisfaction from the fact, that the Hon. John J. Crittenden, whose name and authority will go far in this Union, has declared in the Senate, and recognized by his oath as Senator, the principles upon which we stand as the principles of the Constitution. Cheers. I cannot enlarge ; I appeal to you if I have not with reasonable certainty, I may, conclusively, repelled the accusations against me ? If I have not shown that it is neither I, nor the party which nominated me, but Mr. Douglas who has broken faith ; tha t by the agreement at the time of the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the constitutional point was to be left to the Supreme Court, have I not shown that the Supreme Court sustained our construction of the Constitution ? Have I not shown that the agreement thus made has been violated by the declaration that a subordinate authority may have the constitutional right to exclude slave property when the court says it has the power ? Who has abandoned the ground, or violated the agreement? I have shown that the principles upon which we stand, have been sanctioned by the practice, of the Government; affirmed by the highest judicial tribunal in the world ; voted to be true by two political parties in 1859 ; unanimously asserted by both branches of the Legislature, by an overwhelming majority of the whole Democratic party in Kentucky, and declared by Mr. Crittenden to be souud and true. (Cheers.) I think I have piled up a pyramid of fact and argument in support of these principles, which ought to commend itself to the grave consideration of every intelligent man. I have tried to do it by legitimate facts and arguments. I am not conscious of having appealed to any prejudice. Fellow-citizens can you bear with me a little longer ? (A voice " Yes, a week ; go on.") I know of but one political organization before the United States which asserts the principles I have undertaken to expound. . The Republican organization has taken recisely opposite principles. They say we have no rights in the Territories with our property. They say Congress has a right to exclude it, and it is its duty to do so, and they are willing to see the Territorial Legislature do it if Congress does 'not. : In regard to the Platform adopted by the Convention which nominated Mr. Bell, of Tenn., and Mr. Everett, of Mass., I have only to say, that certainly it announce! no principles at all upon the subject; none whatever, Gentlemen tell us they are advocating the claims of these distinguished gentlemen upon the principles of the Constitution, the Union, and the enforcement of the laws. I presume that there is scarcely a man in this assembly, perhaps no one North or South, who will admit that he is against the Union, the Constitution, and the enforcement of the laws ; but yet they entertain the most diverse and opposite opinions as to the best mode of sustaining the Constitution, ana me cnaraeter of the laws to be enforced. Mr. Seward, Mr. Burlinrame. and Mr. Giddings, will tell you that they are for the Union ; but it is their own sort of Union that thev want. Thev sav thev are for the Constitution, but thev construe" the" Constitution so as to take away all our rights. Thev tell vou thev are for the enforcement of the laws, but thev are for laws which would take away our property. (Cheers.') For the Union, the Constitu tion, and the laws, they shaTce hands with you on that, but you cannot agree on a single thing under heaven, afterwards. (Laughter and cheers.) Their platform, gentlemen, declares practically nothing, and I have nothing further to say about it. (" Good, good") But the platform I have read to vou does contain a distinct enunciation ot certain principles wnicn louiu nilrights of property and persons in the Territories, ftnd what we regard to be the equal rights of the States, and we want to know if the people of Kentucky are ready to meet the issue. t e appeal to yon, not in behalf of any individual, but to stand by our own principles, founded on the Constitution of our country. (Cries of " good.") "Now, if it be true that I am not a disunionist, and if it be trne that the political principles I advocate are not disunion principles, but are the principles of me i onstitution, is u not iiaru iu tjiauisu mruuiy" Vu sound men, with Constitutional principles? (Cries ot " that's so.") That gentlemen, would seem to exhaust the subject Sound men, with Constitutional principles which principles I have announced in the form recognized in American politics, to be asserted bv the means of the ballot box.

But a word on another subject. It is said, although I am not a disunionist, and the principles I assert are not, yet tho object of the organization by which. I have been nominated is to break up this confederacy, and I suppose they have selected me as the tool with which to execute that scheme !; (A voice "A bad instrument." Cheers.) I have no doubt a great many gentlemen in the Southern States of the Union, think their constitutional rights will never be recognized. A few arc perhaps per se disunionists, though I doubt if there are fifty such in the Union. Undoubtedly a number of gentlemen who were dissatisfied with the compromise measures of 1850, now prefer me for the Presidency and sustain mo on this platform; and if I were disposed to count noses, I doubt not there are many of the same character who sustain other gentlemen upon platforms not so constitutional and desirable as miner (Cheers.) - : : 1 What is the charge ? Nearly entire delegations of all the Southern States and parts of the delegations o( some Northern States, supported by the mass of the Democracy in all the Southern States, made the nomination. Do they say the whole, of this mass were disunionists? Why, gentlemen, the country is in a bad way if this be so; but the charge is a reckless one. How as to the State of Kentucky, which is going to vote in accordance1 with these principles ? Is the State of Kentucky a disunion State ? The delegations from California and Oregon were in the Convention. . They reside thousands of miles away from our private strifes. What have they said that would lead a man to suppose that they would break up the Union of the States?1 They are impartial arbitrators of this dispute, and they tell our Northern brethren they must do justice and give equality in the Union, and that on such principles they can maintain the Union and Constitution. That is what California and Oregon say, as well as large minorities from the delegations from other States of the Union. Senators and mem

bers of the House of Representatives from both sec tions of the country, men who have filled the highest stations in public councils, but have now withdrawn from public lite. All concur in uecianng mat. inese are the principles of tho Constitution, and they are . ! ' 1- .1 1... not niram to execute iiieiii. m-cioy Gentlemen, the charge of disunion is baseless. Advantage has been taken of the cordial loyality of the people of Kentucky, and equally to the surprise and dplioht. nf the (rpiitlemen encaged in it, the scheme took better than they expected, but I am satisfied that the sober second thought of the people will recall them to the assertion of their principles. Kentucky will never abandon a principle which she has declared to be the principle of the Constitution and the Union. (Loud applause.) DEMOCRATIC STATE TICKET FOB GOVERNOR, THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, of Shelby. FOR LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, DAVID TURPI K, of White. FOR SECRETARY OF STATE, WILLIAM H. SCHLATER, of Wayne. FOR AUDITOR OF STATE, JOSEPH RISTINE, of Fountain. FOR TREASURER OF STATE, NATHANIEL F. CUNNINGHAM, of Vigo. FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL, OSCAR B. HORD, of Decatur. FOR SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION. SAMUEL L. RUGG, of Allen. FOR CLERK OF SUPREME COURT, CORNELIUS O'BRIEN, of Dearborn. FOR REPORTER OF SUPREME COURT, : M. C. KERR, of Floyd. Congressional Mass Meetings OK THE NATIONAL DEMOCRACY, FAVORABLE TO THE ELECTION OF BE ECKI NEID GE AND LANE. Hon. Hon. Hon. Hon. JESSE D. BRIGHT, GRAHAM N. FITCH, W. II. ENGLISH, JAMES MORRISON, Hon. DEL AN A R. ECKELS, And the Electors for the District in which the meetings are held, will address their fellow citizens at the following limes and places, commencing at one o'clock P. M.: Anderson, Tuesday, Sept. 18. Wabash, Wednesday, Sept. 19. Fort Wayne, Thursday, Sept. 20. Laporte, Friday, Sept. 21. Lafayette, Saturday, Sept. 22. Greencastle, Monday, Sept. 24. Vincennes, Tuesday, Sept. 25. New Albany, Wednesday, Sept. 26. Seymour, Thursday, Sept. 27. Napoleon, Friday, Sept. 28. Franklin, Saturday, Sept. 29. Richmond, Monday, Oct. 1. Connersville, Tuesday, Oct. 2. Brookville, Wednesday, Oct. 3. Distinguished speakers from other States have been invited, and it is confidently expected will attend, of which due notice will be given hereafter. Public Speaking. HON. JESSE IX BRIGHT Will address liis fellow-citizens at the following times and places, at 1 P. SI. : Patriot, Switzerland county, Monday, Sept. 10. Vevay, Switzerland county, Tuesday, Sept. 11. Vernon, Jennings county, Wednesday, Sept. 12. riiarWnr,. Clark countv. Thursday, Sept. 13. Madison, Jefferson county, Saturday, Sept. 15. dTHon. G. N. Fitch will address the lcmoeracy of West Point, Tippecanoe county, on the 11th of September next From Hamilton County. Westfiki.i, Hamilton county, August 27. Mr. Editor: 1 send you a line to let you know how the fight is going on in this county. The Douglas part' ias 'eft tll3 iu,t'' am the cou" test is now between the Republicans and the Breckinridge party. The Breckinridge men are making a gallant fight AVc have a majority of the Democratic voters of the county for our ticket, and if wc had out a good State ticket, we could redeem this Congressional District from tho rule of Black Republicanism. I will ask yon what arv we to do about our State ticket? I will gay that the Breckinridge men will not vote for the present Democratic ticket ; we will not j vote the Republican ticket : we will not vote at all, if j we do not have a sound Democratic (Brf.ckiskiige and Lakk) ticket If we have to be defeated, kt it be by the Republicans. Wc go for principles, and not men. If the Old Line Democrats cannot rule this State and nation, then let the Douglas men give it to! the Republicans. We will then have a party that has

some principles to fight. The Douglas party has no principles at all. I say, let us have a State Convention as soon as possible, to bring out a true Democratic State ticket, and then we will bring out candidates for Congress in every district in the State, that are in fa vor of the principles we advocate ; and we will also bring out candidates for the Senate, and for State Representatives, and then we will make such a demonstration in favor of onr principles that will make the Douglas party tremble. Yes, give us a good State ticket, and my word for it, we will poll one hundred thousand votes this fall. Our party will be well organized, and ready for the fight for 1864. Let us show to the world that the old Jackson Democrats are not to be bought and sold, like cattle in the shambles.

" Our party tkmanih a State ticket The great principles that we advocate demand it, and shall we not have it? We arc called bolters by the Douglasites. Give us a State ticket, and we will bolt every door to office in the State of Indiana against them. J. L. B. p. S. On last Friday the Republicans of Westfield raised a pole. They formed a procession in front of Arnett's blacksmith's shop, and put John Bardwell and Oliver Wood in front of the procession. Bardwell and Wood are coal black Africans as black as night and they marched at the head of the procesr sion to where the pole was to be raised, and they both took as active a part in the ceremonies as any two white men that were on the grounds. Now, this is the truth, and I defy any man to deny it. Comment is unnecessary. This shows that the Republicans put the negro on an equality with the white man.' John Green, from Tipton, was here, and made a speech that night. He saw it all. Judge Gore was also here. He saw it too. Gore is the candidate for Representative from Hamilton and Tipton counties. May God save this country from falling into the hands of such men. From Wayne County. Waynk County, Ind., Sept 3, 18(10. I have been a careful looker-on, in politics, ever since the Charleston-Baltimore Conventions. A year or two previous to the Conventions, I was a Douglas man, bnt when I saw the dictatorial course pursued by him and his friends, I bid farewell to him forever, and now consider him responsible, before God, for all of our divisions and disruptions. Had he withdrawn when he saw he could notobtain a regular nomination; harmony would have reigned once more, and Guthrie, Brhckinkidgk, or any other prominent gentleman could have been easily elected. It is my candid opinion that after November ho will enter his political grave, or will again enter a caucus with Greeley, Colfax and Burlingame, and seek to cause new difficulties to arise, by which his vaulting ambition may be gratified, and our time-honored organization be ruined. .. I support Mr. BuKCKisnilKiE because I see in his person a young and rising statesmen, one who I believe has the good of his country at heart, and not mere personal aggrandizement . We arc in the minority here, but there are men here that cannot be led away to worship strange gods; and since we commenced counting noses, 1 find more than I expected, who will stand true to their colore. Wni. H. Schlater, the Democratic candidate for Secretary of State, resides in this county, and was once a good Democrat, but is now one of the most loud-mouthed and most obnoxious worshipers of Douglas in the Couuty. I, as well as many others, will not vote for him or Oscar B. Hoitl, until they learn to quit their abuse, IwouldvoteastraightoutBKECKmiudge State Ticket, as then! could vote my sentiments. If we have none, I will remain on my farm, at work, and will not go to the polls at the State election at all. I see that Hon. J. D. Bright, G. N. Fitch, W. II. English and others are to speak at the county scat, on October 1st, and the Douglas men say that Bright ' will not come, dare not come, &c. I hope ho will, and when ho does he will meet the disorganizes face to face, and give them a sermon they will not soon forget. Yours, &c, AN OLD LINER. From Eush County. Mr. Editor : When here on the 31st of Julylast,it was, as I comprehended, positively understood that no nominations for Congress were to be made, independent of the regular Conventions, and no candidates of our faith were to so run in opposition. Something interested in the question at that time, I the more readIy yielded my own judgment to what I then regarded as but " half-way measures," in consideralion of the pressed opinions of the majority of our friends, and in view of the fact that many of us were already in honor bound to abide the nominations in which national Democrats participated. We profess to be a contract people, and with the understanding or agreement I have narrated, do we not violate, at least, an implied contract in an exception, no matter how the thing is done ? Good taith with each other, and with those whom we then represented, demands our universal compliance with this agreement In no district shall we either win or deserve the public confidence by such violations of public pledges. ELECTOR. For the Old Line Gunril. The Journal of the 5th inst, alluding to the recent nominations in Rush county, says that on the first ballot for Senator, " the box was stuffed for the. benefit of Judge Porter." This is a grand error. Upon the first ballot Judge Porter, (w ho is a sound National Democrat of the Breckinridge school, and a man of as high reputation and character as any other man in the county) was fairly nominated. The Douglasite cabal however, knowing Judge Porter would not accept the nomination, and desirous of going as far as possible in another direction to the nomination of a reverse claw of men, stated that there was one too many ballots, when the fact was that there was not enough to fill the bill, Noble township having refused to send up delegates. A full-blooded Douglasite was thus nominated; but one also so far from commanding the votes of sound National Democrats, cannot get the more respectable portion of Douglas-policy men. Mr. DouffiAS Explains His Objects. In two or three of his numerous stump speeches Mr. Douglas declared tliat he did not want to be President of the United States, but had rather remain Senator from Illinois. This is a very remarkable confession, and, if true, convicts him out of liis own mouth of being a candidate only in order to defeat Mr. Breckinridge and elect Mr. "Abe" Lincoln. We have no doubt that such are his objects. Washington Constitution. NOTICE. niO ALL TO WHOM IT MAY COSCKRN jo re kereby 1 warned B"t to ie or Mil tnr imoxkiiin liqsort lo my huband, I harlM Swhir. Mr,l 3w MARY 8. gVBA!B. Vox BUtltnd Tn Prewcopy, S wk. ;i