Indiana State Guard, Volume 1, Number 45, Indianapolis, Marion County, 30 October 1860 — Page 1

THE OIL

FT H A CONSTITUTION, THE UNION, AND THE EQUAL! TY 0 F T II E STATES! THE

IaIN

vol; i.

THE OLD LINE GUARD. IS I'UHI.ISHKI) rp XX I -.-WL33 EKLY?AT 1 N l I A IN A I'O MS, INDIA IMA, IIV ULUBB ; IIUIKSiKSS. 1" 33 XI 3VE S ,., until after Presidential Election. Ill advance, in all cases. Advertisements inserted at the usual rates. EXTRACTS FROM THE SPEECH OF THE Hon. R. H. GIL LET, Before the Jackson Association at Washington, D. C. October 1, 1860. : 3111. LINCOLN'S THEORY. Mr. Lincoln is an enemy of tho Democratic party and their principles. He is, in all matters of public policy, a whig of the bitterest kind, who never gave a bemoeratic vote or favored a Democratic measure. He now claims his election on sectional grounds and hostility to the interests and feelings of fifteen of our sister States, whom he seeks to degrade. He says Con.n-e.s5 can and ought so to legislate as to drive Southern men out of our common Territories, or to submit to the loss of one kind of their property, and that there is an irrepressible conflict between the free and slave States, which will make all free or all slave, and he and his party are the instruments which must accomplish this result. Knowing that no power on earth can compel the free States to adopt slavery, it follows that it is to be crushed out in the States, and that he is the chosen leader of this illegal enterprise. He claims that there is a law higher than the Constitution and those enated by the States, which forbids slavery being property, and therefore slavery can be extirpated under such higher law. He is entitled to the merit of boldness, but neither he nor his friends have yet ventured to suggest the practical measures liv which they propose to accomplish their objects. How they will carry on the irrepressible conflict on their side they dare not inform us. He satisfies his followers by namingr esults sought, but is too wily to specify the means of accomplishment, fearing that their impracticability and unconstitutionality will be too apparent to be approved by them. lie feeds them upon excitement and prejudice, and and avoids the test of reason and the Constitution. A candidate with such purposes can never receive the support of the majority of the American people. It elected, he could never carry his theories into effect. Even if enacted into laws, they would be condemned by the sober second thought of nearly every good citi- .. ... i, .,to,l n nnllitv under the Constitution, and be as much loathed as the alien and sedition laws of the last century. The Judiciary would declare them null and void. The authors of such measures would be promptly deprived of all power by an indignant people, and would sink too low for the hand of political resurrection to save them. That party whose acts are an aggression upon constitutional -rights can never survive an appeal to the people after their real purpose become apparent by indisputable overt, unconstitutional acts. The bare attempt to carry out his theories would raise a storm which he would not venture to encounter, and which would annihilate his .party. MR. DOUGLAS. Mr. Douglas claims to have received a nomination binding upon the Democratic conscience. The rule enacted by the Charleston Convention required twothirds of the electoral votes (203) to make a nomination, which number he never obtained, even if we count the bogus delegates from Alabama and Mississippi, and the forced minorities from New York, Indiana, and Ohio, given in his favor by the jugglery of two different rules of voting, which were so contrived as largely to increase his apparent vote.- Failing to get over 181$ votes, his friends proposed to vote by acclamation to avoid a count, and thereupon declared him nominated, when they knew he was not the choice of the requisite number. Such a nomination binds no one. It was made against the wishes of a majority of the States, and against the real wishes of a majority of the legal and rightful delegates, and almost exclusively by votes from States not expected to give him an electoral vote. It is under these irregular and wrongful proceedings, claimed to be a regular nomination, which brings him the great bulk of his support. . Mr. Douglas' present political principles are as objectionable "as the mode of his nomination. When the Kansas bill was up, there was an irreconcilable diversity of views concerning the power of Congress and of the Territorial Legislature over slavery, which resulted in so shaping the bill as to confine the latter within the authority of the Constitution, and providing prompt means of submitting questions to the Suliremc Court, all signifying a willingness to abide its decision, and, in the meantime, each was to entertain and act upon his own views, without the imputation of political heresy. Mr. Douglas says that the Court has not decided a case under this particular law, although the principles determined in the Died Scott case cover the same ground. But he now claims that the Cincinnati platform determined the principle the other way, and he and his friends sought at Charleston to re-adopt that platform with his interpretation, to which the whole South and the Pacific States objected, as well as delegates from other States ; and hence they sought to add an explanation which would leave the question of constitutional rights where that instrument left it. This effort of Mr. Douglas and his friends to prejudge what he has often avowed to be a judicial question and to make him the candidate of the Democratic party to carry out his construction, in violation of the Intention of those who voted for the Kansas act, occasioned a split in the Convention and in the Democratic party, which he is daily widening and confirming by his harangues to jiublic crowds. In violation of the understanding, and before the Court has decided, (as he savs,) Mr. Douglas condemns and denounces those who continue to hold their former opinions on this question, and refuse to adopt the one now dictatr ..,1 1... 1.:.,, u ,ti et:iT,.lnrrl nf li.ninciwv lentil tho t I 1 1 y i j 1 1 1 1 i. - mi. . , L. - -I. v, v., - - - . ' duly appointed tribunal shall have decided in favor of his theory, ins lormer political oreinren uave me same ri"ht to entertain their opinions as they had when the agreement was made. His attempt to read them out of the Democratic church is an aggravated insult by one assuming a right of dictation to which the Democracy will notTsubmit Cut we all know that the Court lias decided against Mr. Douglas' theory, and that he declines acquiescence, on the shallow pretence that the question, though adjudicated, did not arise under the right law, and he now prosecutes those who ad.here to their old opinions and recognize those of the Court, and he refuses to treat them as Democrats. The friends of equal constitutional rights not Wing able to discover in Mr. Douglas a representative of their principles, nor in his platform, as construed by him, any safety for their rights, selected Mr. Breckinridge as their standard-bearer. His nomination, like Mr. Douglas', was made by political friends, and entitles him to the votes of those who concur with him in his views. Whatever the vote may be, under the present circumstances. I hazard nothing in saying, that nearly the entire Democracy concur with him in his principles, while they condem those of Mr. Douglas. In mixing with the masses, I have talked with no Democrat, whether he sujiports the one or the other, who does not cowed e that Mr. Breckinridge is clearly ri?;ht on the constitutional questions, and that Mr. lViuglaa' " popular-squattr-sovereignty' doclrine is wrong, and mere moonhine, first resorted to for the

INDIANAPOLIS,

nnniose of defeatinu Lincoln in the race for the Sea ate, and now to secure Northern and Western votes for the Presidency. It is his mode of there avoiding the effect of his acts in the repeal of the Missouri Compromise instead of the manly i-ounljUkiejuy the Court of declaring it unconstitutional. " MR. DOUfiLAS' THEORIES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES. Mr. Douglas says that slaves aro property, and that Congress cannot prevent their being held in the Ter- . I..- 4l.. rr.. T nrnJlimia pan nfi1UUHCS, UUl lllill illU itiliuniai . , ,. , . . , ! .i f.. I!.. 1 tabiisn or exclude slavery witnin ineir mmis, mm in effectually jirevent it by unfriendly legislation, (what, he does not tell us,) and he affirms that this can be done whatever the Sujiremo Court may decide concerning their power to pass such laws. At first he claimed that the Kansas act authorized such legislation, but it was not in the act. He next assumed that it is an inherent Territorial right, and, lastly, that it was derived from " God Almighty." He has furnished no sufficient evidence that it was derived from the sources named. Under the Constitution, Congress cannot exercise these powers, nor delegate them to the Territorial Legislatures, but if the power exists, it must be derived from a source higher than that instrument. Mr. Douglas has often insisted that it was derived from " God Almighty," but has failed to furnish any evidence to sustain his assertion. If the question is determinable by human laws, the courts can declare those laws which are unconstitutional to be null and void; but if we recognize a higher law, supposed to bo derived frem " God Almighty," however it may conflict with tho Constitution, it must prevail. He and Lincoln agree in the existence and extent of this higher law, and concerning its controlling character. Although he assented during the Kansas discussions, that the courts might decide on the constitutionality of the questions involved, and so provi ded in that act, ho now introduces a new source of . . . 1 . ....... i i power winch may make an unconstitutional iaw nwu j and binding, although he can neither prove the exist- j enceof the law or its paternity, or the authority of the courts to execute it as a part of human laws. If Mr. Douglas is right, although Congress is limited to the exercise of certain specified powers, a Terri-j torial Legislature may enact whatever laws they choose, i whether authorized or forbidden by the Constitution i or not, provided it be within the assumed higher law, , which is as unlimited now as when Massachusetts hung i witches under it. If th's higher law prevails, every ! limitation of power specified in the Constitution must j be disregarded and set at defiance. . The owners of a j species of property four times recognized in the Con-j stitution, and once recognized in every colony, and in j all the States save one, after the revolution, and by 1 fifteen States at the juvsent time, can bo stripped of . it, without compensation, at the will of a Territorial j Legislature, and no human tribunal can prevent it, or j reverse or question their determination, because, ac-' cording to Mr. Douglas, tliey act unuer power ueriveu from ""tlod Almighty," which man is not authorized to resist or gainsay. Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Douglas agree in tracing pow er to this source for kindred, if not tor tho exact same purposes. If they are right, our Constitution is a dead etter, when they invoke their unseen and unwritten hitrher law. it is universally admitted, and by both Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Douglas, that tho Constitution extends over Territories when we acquire them, and, ot course, witn the same effect as in tho States. It follows that if there is a hiirherlaw derived from " God Almighty" in the Territories, it must, from necessity, extend over the Stales, which is the Lincoln theory. This would leave Congress unrestrained in the Slates, authorizing them to exterminate slavery in them by unfriend ly legislation, such as making discriminations agaiusL the commerce and ports of the slave States, and sup porting the Ft deral Government by levying taxes exple than destroying it by direct legislation. Carry out these doctrines to their legitimate results, and we should no longer have an American Union, or Congress, or candidates stumping the States, soliciting votes for the Presidency. If the Constitution extends over the Territories, then the following restraints upon legislative power are in force as to Congress, and those, like Territorial Legislatures, acting under them ; forbidding laws establishing religion, abridging the freedom of speech, or prohibiting the assembling and petitioning Government for redress ; admitting the right to bear arms ; forbidding the quartering of soldiers in a house in time of peace, without the owner's consent, and during war, excent accordinir to law; forbidding general search warrants, or any other, except when supjwrtedby oath, specifying the place to "bo searched or the thing lo be seized; or requiring answer for crime without indictment by a grand jury; subjecting a party to a second trial for the same offence ; requiring a man to be a witness against himself; "or permitting a person to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law:" or taking private property for public use without just compensation; requiring the accused to be confronted with witnesses, and given process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the aid of counsel; forbidding excessive bail and cruel and unusual jmnishments. If there is a law higher than the Constitution, all tne provisions reieireu to are omau letter in the Territories, and the peojile are without the security they afford. General search warrants may be allowed by law authorizing search everywhere of everybody and everything. Men may be tried without "indictment or witness to confront them, and ten times over for the same offence, and they may be drawn in quarters or suspended by the heels unt il they die. or may be deprived of life, liberty, and property, without due process of law. Their title may he legislated awa v, and this, Mrs. Douglas says, may be done by direct or unfriendly legislation, as to slaves, notwithstanding the judiciary may decide such law to be unconstitutional and void. Are you prepared to blot out these portions of the Constitution, and admit the existence of a higher law from which such consequences may flow ? "Will any saue man say that our Constitution goes with our ships over the whole elobe, but not with our people into our Territories? "Shall they be beyond its protection, when it extends to our citizens and is their shield andprotection in the uttermost parts of the earth? These are onlv a portion of the sad consequences of Mr. Douglas"' new doctrines substituted in place of the Constitution and the wisdom and practice of our forefathers. They tend to the destruction of our glorious Confederacy without producing one beneficial result anywhere to anvbodv. This is the worst kind of intervention. It has iiot and cannot keep the slavery question out of Congress, but has brought anil continues it there. It has given the House to the Republicans, and is fast transferring the Senate. For all this Mr. Douglas is responsible to the Democratic party and to the country. By destroying the Democratic part v he paves the wav for the destruction of the Union. Carry out the theories of Mr. Douglas and Lincoln and the Union must perish it cannot survive their fatal effects. Cheering News. The Maysville Express, a leading paper in North Kentnekv. savs: From all parts of Kentucky, we continue to receive j the most cheering news of the return of Democrats j to their party, who had been cajoled tor a time mto the support "of Douglas. Finding out that the sole purpose of Douglas is to give to Bell and Everett Kentucky and the entire South, they are abandoning him in disgust, as one unworthy of their confidence or supjiort asr Democrats. Let every true Democrat go to his Democratic neighbor who has been misled 6y Douglas, and point out the deception that is being practiced upon him, and urge him to stand by the standard of his party. It is a shame that any honest Democrat should be" cajoled into the support of his political enemies.

elusively upon slaves, ana sucii articles as uiey muuu produce or consume. Taxing property so as to drive it out of a State or Territory, is not worse in princi

T

IND., TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1860.

Douglas' "Popular Sovereignty" and NonINTERVENTION" IN THE KANSAS -NEBRASKA BILL AGAINST HIS POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY" AND " NON-INTERVEN-"""TION" ON THE STUMP."" From the Cleveland Democrat. Mr. Douglas bases his"opular sovereignty" and his "non-intervention" creed upon the principles laid down in the Kansas-Nebraska bill of which lie is the author. Let us see how much sovereignty it gives to the people of the Territories, and how much nonintervention by Congress he gaurded against. Congress intervened, by ceding to the people the right, under certain restrictions, to have a Government of their own. Congress provided, that tho Governor of the Territorythe Secretary of the Territory the Judges of the Territory, who constitute the entire Judiciary, and the Marshal", who was to execute the process issued by the Court, should all be apjiointed by the President, "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,""and that their salaries should be paid by the United States, and that all these officers were removable by the President at his sovereign will and pleasure, and new officers to be appointed in their place, subject only to the restriction that the Senate of the United States agree thereto. . The jieople were allowed to elect a Territorial Legislature, but the Governor, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, had the power to veto any bill passed by the Legislature and to return it to the House in which it originated, with his objections. To make it a law, two-thirds of each House had to pass it a second time. The bill also reserved the right of Congress to repeal any law enacted by the Territorial Legislature and thus to declare it null and void. The Judge?, appointed by the President, had the power to pass judicially upon the laws thus enacted, and if in their opinion they conflicted with the Constitution, or the Kansas-Nebraska act, it was their duty to decide them inoperative, and when thus decided, this decision repealed them. The people of the State enjoy the power of electing their own Governor their own Judges, and their own Sherill's. They enjoy the right to nmke their own Constitution. This is Popular Sovereignty in the States. In the Territories, according to the Kansas-Nebraska bill, Popular Sovereignty consists in giving the President, who never was in "the Territory, the, power to appoint the Governor, and the Judges the one with power to veto the laws the others with power to declare them null and void. In the States Popular Sovereignty makes the Exec utive and the Judiciary amenable to the people the Territories these officers arc amenable only to President. In the States, Popular Sovereignty and "norf-inter vention" do not allow Congress to interfiyxf,. in any shape, form or manner, with the laws-5asscd by the Legislature in the Territories, Mr. Douglas allows Congress to rejieal all the laws that body sees proper. According to this plain statement, there is no such thing as popular sovereignty in the Territories Mr. Douglas, in his Kansas-Nebraska bill, gave no such power on its face the claim of Territorial popular sovereignty is a lie and a cheat, and yet Mr. Douglas prates about it as if it were founded in fad, and really was a great principle, to the preservation of which, the' Constitution and the Union were of but minor importance. The doctrine of non-intervention by Congress, which Mr. Douglas claims' as equal in importance with that of popular sovereignty, can easily be justified by his own Kansas-Nebraska bill. There it is put forth in a strong shape. It dictated the entire code of laws for the Government of the Territory at the outset it retained an absolute veto power over laws passed it prevented the people from electing a single officer in power over them. In short, it made Congress and the President absolute the people of the Territory it .gave but' tho rights of persona' under age it Used up popular sovereignty as effectually as the humbug popular sovereignty of Mr. Douglas has used up its author. ' The people of Kansas and Nebraska had no political rights, according to Mr. Douglas, until these rights were conferred upon them by the organic act which gave them a Territorial Government. When this power was conferred upon them by the Kansas-Nebraska bill, so far from giving the rights which belong to the peojile of the States, to fashion and to form their own Government in the manner that best suited them, they were divested of the right of choosing their own rulers divested of the right of electing their own Judges, and although they were graciously granted by Mr. Douglas, tho right to elect their own Territorial" Legislature, yet, this was but holding the word of promise to the ear, while breaking it to the hope, for the same organic act gave the Governor, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, the power to veto any laws he did not wish to have passed, and, if afterwards passed, by a two-thirds vote over the Governor's veto, C ongress had the right to intervene and to blot them from the statute book. The theory of Mr. Douglas is, that the people of a Territory are sovereign, as are the jieojile of the States. The practice of Mr. Douglas is, to divest them of all the attributes of sovereignty, and to place them, as the law plnces the child under age, under the pupilage of the parent, under the control of Congress and the Presidentr the one to appoint the officers, the other to exercise a supervision over the laws passed by the popular sovereignty (?) Legislature. Nav, more. When the people of the Territory acting under a law passed by the Territorial Legislature, which embodies all the pojnilar sovereignty granted to the Territory elect their delegates to form a State Constitutionj and that part of the Constitution in which alone there is a difference of opinion, is submitted to the people at an election, and a large majority of those voting, vote for its adojition, Mr. Douglas holds that Congress has not only the rigid, but it is the absolute duty of Congress to intervene, and to deny the inhabitants thereof the right of admission to the privileges of a popular sovereign in the States, if the Constitution, thus formed, does not meet the views of the majority in the Congress of the United States. The same right of Congress to intervene and to refuse the admission of Kansas or Nebraska, because the peojue choose to form a Constitution which allowed slavery, would give them the right to refuse the admittance of the people elected td make it a free State. As an excuse for Mr. Douglas, it may be claimed that, in the Kansas-Nebraska bill, which brought into form and effect his great princi)le of pojwlar sovereignty, he but followed th& precedent set by other laws, forming Territorial Governments, and that all the power he denied to the people, was denied them in the laws framed by Congress for the Government of other Territories. " Upon its face, there is a show of reason for this, yet it forms no excuse for his conduct, for Mr. Douglas is now traversing the country preaching up a great principle, which lie, under the solemity of his oath, as a Senator of the United States, refused' to give to the peojile of the Territories he professes to so much love, and for their rights, he professes a regard lo which his love lor the Constitution is but as the weight of a feather in the balance. The only real " Popular Sovereignty " in the Territories, ever adopted by Congress, was in the celebrated resolutions of Mr! Jefferson in 1 784, before the Constitution of the United States was formed, which were superceded by the ordinance of 187. The rcsolutions--we quote from memory provided that whenever the people in the Territory amounted to a given number of souls, Congress was pledged to pass a law allowing them to form a Territorial Government. That was all Congress had to do in the matter. The people were to meet and hold an election for delegates. These delegated were to meet at some central point, and there a'opt the Constitution of the State they deemed best iu-d to their interest, and to niodifv it as to make it conform to their

sparse- population. This gave the people of the Territory, all the rights of the people of a State. They could elect their own Governor, their own Judges and other officers, and to provide by law for their removal for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office. When tho population .of tlie Territory was sufficiently larire to entitle it to a representation in Congress, then the Territorial Legislature was to call a new Convention, form a new Constitution, or to modify the old one, and when the Constitution so formed was sent to the President, the Territory threw off its chrysalis form and came into the Union as a sovereign State, upon the same footing and with the same privileges as the other Slates of the confederacy. These resolutions embrace the real Popular Sovereignty not such as is in the Kansas-Nebraska bill of Mr. Douglas, and vet, the arch-agitator, who thus denounces "the very doctrine ho advocates before the peojile, is now on the stump as the Popular Sovereignty candidate for the very principle he so solemnly repudiated in his Kansas Nebraska bill. A Voice from California. EXTRACT FROM THE SPEECH OF SENATOR OWIN, OF CALIFORNIA, DEUVEBfcD AT STOCKTON, AC fit' ST 29th, 18G0. T took mv position so soon as I read Mr. Douglas' Frceport speech. I denounced the principles that lie there for the first time, to my knowledge, avowed. I have continued to denounce them ever since, on all proper occasions. I brought them to the notice of my associates in tho Senate at the meeting of the session of Congress, following the delivery of that speech. The doctrines contained in it were condemned by the Democratic Senators in Congress, and Judge Douglas was removed by a vote of those Senators from the position of Chairman of the Committee on Territories because of the enunciation of those doctrines. . Subsequently an exciting discussion took place in the Senate between Judge Douglas and other Senators. I participated in that discussion. I denounced the doctrine, of his Freeport speech. My then colleague (Broderick) in the Senate, as well as Judge Douglas himself, took issue with me. The gauntlet was thrown down to me in this State, during the last canvass. I took it uj). I met the issue even-where; discussed the question at large; and was one of' the humble instruments in securing the condemnation by the Democratic party of California of the doctrines of Judge Douglas, as enunciated in his Freeport speech. One of the speeches delivered by me during that campaign was made the occasion of Judge Douglas addressing an elaborate letter to the editor of one of the Democratiep'aiiers in this State, commenting upon my views verTmuch at largo. To that I replied through the

irubhc press, and to my reply he responded, ami i L.l 1iq urinal wrt nfrnm met in the Senate XltlU IIU UUUwU Fill. ,-, - this controversy would be continued on a much more protracted scale, it was men iaKt11 U mvic, m absence, by his great champion Senator Pugh, ot B.wt' t'i,. .iv.utiiwr (llw'iiinn between that VIUU nun ttiiiri an i-vuiiiji, - . Senator and myself, I forced him to acknowledge that j he differed with Judge Douglas in the views he ex.i ,- i.: V,.,..w,..t !,...i.l that, he fPmdil did not believe in his (Douglas') doctrine of non-action i and hostile legislation by a Territorial Legislature, to exclude slavery. lie aueinpieu u ;"- Douglas therein, by saying that that was a private opinion of his; lo which I replied that it was a " private opinion " expressed in 1 20 speeches delivered m Illinois, which resulted in his re-elecliou to the. Senate. And thus, fellow-citizens, the remarkable fact was brought to light by this discussion in the Senate, and exposed to the country, that not one member of that body agreed with Judge Douglas in the doctrine enunciated in his Freejiort speech. Of the 65 members of the Senate, but one solitary individual entertained those views, and that was Judge Douglas himself. Now, I do not consider myself called upon to enter at large into this question. It will be ably and triumphantly presented to the people of California. There has "been thrown broadcast from one end of the State to the other, the views of the most distinguished among American statesmen, which, in my ojiinion, entirely annihilates the position taken by Judge Douglas, his friends, and the Convention that nominated him.As to the nominees presented to you for your suffrages, I have no concealment. There is no regular nominee of the Democratic' party. : This cry about the regularity of Judge Douglas' nomination is intended to deceive the people. There was no nomination made at Baltimore. The Convention was disrupted and destroyed. Two disjointed fragments met. Each presented a different platform of principles, and each recommended a ticket to be supported by the jieojile of the United States. I support Breckinridge and Lane because they represent my principles. 1 oppose Douglas and Johnson because 1 am ojiposeil to the principles upon which thev are presented to the country. I oppose Bell and" Everett, and Lincoln and Hamlin, for the same reason. I have no second choice in the contest. I am for Breckinridge and Lane first, last, and all the time. I am willing to sink or swim, survive or jicrish with them and the party they represent. I know them both intimately. They are worthy of the great honor that has been conferred on them bv the Democracy of the Union. Our standard bearer, John C. Breckinridge, is one of the great men of the earth, lie has every quality to constitute the great statesman and the jiatiiot. Let the result of this contest be what it may, place hiin in the Presidential chair, or leave him in the position in the Senate to which he has been elevated by the State of Kentucky, he is the great leader of the Democracy of this nation. If he is elected President he will serve his term with honor and distinction. He will advance the greatness and glory of the country. If he is defeated, he will be our standard bearer in future contents. Again and again he will be presented as the representative of Democratic principles in this Republic; and I have no doubt of his future ele-.--.iinn in tin. l'l Psidi-nev. even if he is not elected now. if God should preserve his life to his country. ! His associate on the ticket, General Lane, is well; known to you all. As a soldier and a patriot he has! no superior. As my worthy colleague in legislating ; for this Pacific coast" for many years, I honor him. lj know him to be able, equal to the jwsition for which j he has been nominated, and that he will honor it if j elected to fill it. He is the friend of California and of I California's interests and measures. I may say, he j has been as much the representative of California as j he has been of Oregon. We have acted together, j shoulder to shoulder, in jiressing measures for our mu-j tual constituencies, through good and through evil re-1 port So far as the contest in this State is concerned,! p;;,-n4 1 lmve no doubt of the result We have lost some of the leaders w ho were with us last year; but the masses will stand firm. We can well ;..a.. ;l. ! loader. Wp have alwavs had too manv of them in our party. In this Slate leaders do! not control the masses. The people understand these j questions, and they decide for themselves. They de-j t ided in 1852, in 1856, and in 1859, in favor of the j Democratic princijiles that are embodied in the nom- j ination of Breckinridge and Lane. They will decide the same way in 1860, in mv judgment, and by so de-j cisive a majority that hereafter we may look upon the; political feeling of this State as so firmly fixed in favor' of those principles, that while we may be in the future annoyed by opposition, we may always anticipate success if we are true to those princijiles ourselves. We are, fellow citizens, making a great cxperimont in our government It is the second great experiment we have made since the Constitution was formed, to! gee whether it can exist and be perjietual. The first j nortein ISOO. between the then federal and Dem-; ocratic-Kepublican parties the one in favor of a strong Central Coveromdnt; iLe othi r in favor of Stite rights and a restricted Central Government. The State Richts tiartv succeeded, and under its rule we have, within the la?t sixty years progressed as no nation ev ea anu jHTj'iiirtieu. n p iiwic w irsiuii uwun-, tie and prefect minorities. The question is now to

er progressed txlorc, in au i:ie elements oi greatness and pro?jerity. We are now mking another experiment as to whether the Constitution can be jueserv-

NO. 45

be decided, whether the co-equal rights of all the States of this confederacy, in the common property of all of the States, Bhall be protected; or whether a numerical majority shall break down and destroy the rights of a minority, although those rights are guaranteed by tho Constitution of the United States. If the constitution cannot protect tne lite, noeny, anu property of all the citizens of the United States, then it has ceased to realize the great object which it was made to accomplish. If this question is decided, that the rights of property shall be protec, according to the Constitution, as interpreted by the tribunal created for its interpretation, then this government would last forever. If it is decided otherwise, then there is a dark gloom in front of us; and the future no man can foretell. I have an abiding confidence in the wisdom and patriotism, and intellighnce of the American people. I believe thev will elect to the Presidency and Vice Presidency men who will strictly enforce the obligations of the Constitution, and to the extent of the powers placed in their hands to protect the rights of the people of all the States. The Stampede from the Bell-Douglas Oamp. Our exchanges are fall of notices of important changes from both Bell and Douglas to Breckinridge. The stampede commenced some time ago, but has been more active in the last two weeks, and our friends are now sanguine of carrying Kentucky. It is noticeable that not a single individual of any prominence, indeed, nobody, so far as we have heard, has left Breckinridge for the support of either of the Opposition tickets, while numbers who have heretofore opposed us aro now flocking to the Democratic standard. We have already mentioned the names of Hon. Joshua W. Jewel t, last Representative of the Fifth Congressional District, Colonel Oscar Turner, Anderson Gray, Esq., Evan 1). Southgate, and other gentlemen of prominence and ability. We have now to welcome Major Ilallam of Newport, into the Democratic churcii as a late but valuable acquisition to the Democratic cause. He finds there is nothing but an "empty sound" in the Bell movement, and publicly renounces any further connection with the Belt ringers, for what will be found to be the best of reasons. On Monday evening he addressed a Democratic meeting in his town, and we find his remarks reported by both the Enquirer and Courier, of Cincinnati. Major Dallam said he had attended the meeting for the purpose of listening to his friend, Mr. Carlisle, whom he expected there, and by whom, lie was confident, the meeting would be highly entertained and edified. The partiality of those present had induced them to callujion him (Major II.) to occupy the time until Mr, B.'s arrival, and he would endeavor lo gratifv them. " Since he had had the pleasure of addressing the people of Newport before, a great change had taken place in the appearance of the political sky. Then thev were cheered with ajipearances which indicated the defeat of the sectional organization of the North; now a black cloud, threatening a destructive storm, spread over the whole broad expanse of the Northern horizon. He was for the Union! He loved it, and hail stood by it, and would continue to stand by it as the hojie of the world; but that Union can only be maintained in usefulness by a strict adherence to the principles of tlie 'Constitution!,. Loud Applause. The course of the Black Rejiublican party that Jiarty, purelv sectional in all its characteristics and organization whenever it had the power in the Northern States, was a practical invasion .of the, rights of the Southern States, in defiance of the federal compact, and the people; had a right to expect from its antecedents that such would be the case if it should obtiiin National power in the election of a President of the United States. The great statesman and constitutional lawyer, Daniel Webster, said in 1851, that if the North refused to execute, the fugitive slave law, the South would no longer be bound by the compact. "A bargain broken on one side is a bargain broken on , all sides." Major II. was for maintaining the rights of the South in the Union, if possible..: Should Mr. Lincoln be elected, he, as an individual, was willing to try him and his party until the commission of some overt act, and then he was for trying the remedy of impeachment, and would only look to secession as a remedy when all constitutional and legal means had failed. Great ajq lanse. :. The speaker then went into an argument of some length as to the right of a State to secede, and against the"power of Federal coercion upon the States. The case of South Carolina, in 1832, was referred to, and Major II. said the history of that case was but imperfectly understood in this" day. South Carolina did not attempt secession, but to nullify a law of Congres, constitutionally made, just as the Black Republican States of the North have done in the case of the Fugitive Slave Law, and the osereivc power threatened by General Jackson was against those who refused to execute the law in good faith. But no coercion was used; the matter was compromised. It is not in the 'power of the General Government to force a sovereign State, when she see fit, in her sovereign capacity, to secede, to remain in the Union ; and if it were, it would be injudicious and productive of a bloody civil war to attempt to use that jiower. A voice, " Treason !" Well, said Major II., it is fashionable, in these days, to apply such epithets to those who stand by the Constitution "and laws of the country. But, thank God, there is no treason in words here. In the despotic governments of Europe there is such a thing as constructive treason, but in this country treason is defined to consist in levying war against the United States, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Were he not inclined to regard treason in its American sense, he might say that those who gave aid and comfort to the Black Republicans, in their crusade against the rights of the States and the Federal compact, were guilty of treason. Immense applause. : Major H. said that his first choice in this canvass always had been Breckinridge, but some weeks ago, haviii" reason to believe that the Conservative old AVhigs of the North were willing, for the sake of their ancient nationality, to support Bell and Everett, he felt it his duty, as a National and Union-loving man, to ally himself with them. But finding that it was not so, and that they, from their habit of opposing Democracy, would vote for Lincoln upon the false hypothesis proclaimed by Thomas Ewing, that by voting for Bell they would throw away their votes; he saw no faf'ety but in combining the Southern States uixm Breckinridge. Loud ajIause. In so doing they would present a moral strength which would, in the end, preserve the Constitution and the Union of these States. He, for one, believing that this united front can best be presented by the names of Breckinridge and Lane, would return "to his first love, and give his voice, his influence, and his entire energies to the acconiplishmeiit of this great end. The sjeaker left the stand amid rapturous ajilause. The Fusion in Oregon. Every Southern man, whether friend or foe of Mr. Douglas, must have been jiaincd by the intelligence contained in our dutches yesterday morning, that a complete fusion had taken jilace iu the Legislature of Oregon, between the Black Republicans and Douglas Democrats. When the partisans of Mr. Douglas in the North carry their animosity to the friends ot Breckinridge and Lane so far as to unite with the Black Republicans, and aid them in sending to the I . S. Senate one of the most ultra Black Republicans, it, lodes no good to the South. Mr. Douglas Northern friends having taken such a step it should not astonish us it the Southern leaders of his party should prefer the election of Bell to Breckinridge. Although the conjoint forces of Lincoln and Douglas mar have defeated the re-election of Gen. Lane to the Senate, we have a lively hope that the Toice of the people of the United States will call hiin to preside over the deliberations of that body after the 4th of March next. Xasbrille (7Vn.) I won. ,