Rensselaer Gazette, Volume 2, Number 25, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 October 1858 — Political. [ARTICLE]

Political.

XTHIO AIKE FIIK ABOLITIONISTS ! The Republicans of Indiana, in Mass Convention assembled, proclaimed the following: DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES. 1. That our National Government ought to be s.r adininist.e're<l as to promote] harmony between the different sections ot our country, seejire the affecions of all the people <>f the United States, and command the re-p.’c.t ot the Nations of the earth. ■ 2. That the people of a Territory when they come to form a constitution preparatory to their admission into the Union as a State have the right to adopt such a constitution, being Republican in form, as m<iy be accep-_ tably to themselves, and that no State ought -to be received into the; Union before the constitution tlierob has been fully and fairly submitted to the people for their adoption or rejection, and received the approval of the majority of its legal voters. 3. That the attempt now being so persistently made by t he present administrationI to impose upon Kansas.the Lecompton Constitution, notorionsty obnoxious to the throat majority of her citizens, and with no cither object than to force upon them institutions ' against which they have . repeatedly! and. : most earnestly protested, is a gross outrage upon the rights of the people <Ff thyt 'l'erritory., and calculated to disturb the pe'ace and. harmony of the country. 4. That Freedom is National aiid Slawerv sectional, and thtit we most earnest iv protest against, and denounce the dangerous and alarming doctrine first promulgated by the ilisuniouists and nullitiers of the Smith, that the Constiiutidn of the United States of itself carries slavery into, and protects it. in, all the terriljries of the United -States, and this doctrine and its supporters’ maintainers, and defenders whether in or out of; authority, we here pledge ourselves to re-' sist and oppose, as enemies of the peace and j welfai-e of the country. 5. That we disclaim any right to injterfere ' with slavery in the State where it exists ! under the shield of State Sovereignty, but we oppose now, as heretofore, its extension into any of the territories, and will use all proper and constitutional means to prevent such extension. 6. ’’[’hat we d > not struggle for a mere ' party triumph, but for the right and good' of our whole country, and that'we honor' those political opponants who have had the I manliness to place themselves in opposition j to the administration in its assault upon the I fundamental prnciples of American liberty. : 7. That Jesse D. Bright and Graham N. Fitch are not of right the representatives of: this State i n the Senate of the United States and ought to be immediately ousted therefrom. j 8. That w.e will always resist the scheiine ' of selfish and unscrupulous persons, high: in power, having for its object the retransfer i ot the Wabash and Erie Canal from the bond-holders ofthe State. i 9. That ,we re-alfirtn the doctrine, that < Congress has the constitutional power to Exclude slavery from the national territories' notwithstanding the extra judicial opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States; to the contrary. ‘ j 10. That we' are in favor, of granting to' actnal settlers on the public lands a homestead of at least one hundred-and sixty acres. Now contrast the above declaration of principles with the following letters and res olutions, which emanated from prominent Democrats of Indiana but eight or nine years ago: Plymouth, Aug. 4, 1849. Sir:—Will you if elected [to Congress,] vote for the unconditional repeal of slavery in the District ot Columbia! Will you vote for the abolition of the inter-State slave trade! Will you vote for the Wilmot proviso being extended over the Territory of California and New Mexico, and against any law authorizing slaves to be taken there as property! Grove Pomeroy. With pleasure I answer “yes” to the above questions. Graham N. Fitch. Entertaining the view indicated in my answer above, I shall not only vote “yes” on these measures, but if no older and abler

member, whose influence would be greater than mine introduces them into Congress I shall do so myself, if I h-ave the honor of holding a seat there. G. N. Fitch. [From Hon. Jos. E. McDonald, present I Democratic candidate for Attorney General.] Attica, July 2, 1849. Gfntlemen:—Having seen your circular to the candidates of the district invtne public press, and not wishing to conceal any opinion held by me in regard to the political I questions now agitating the public mind, j I hasten to reply to vour interrogations: I Ist. I do admit and believe that Congress has the right to legislate on the slavery question for all the Territories of the United States and District of Columbia inclusive. 2d. I am in favor of the adoption of the Wihrot.proviso in all the territorial organizations; ( 3d. I am in favor of the prohibition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia. I ; am in favor of the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, the citizens of the District expressing a wish to Cpngires.* ; thereof. If not be done I shbnld then be in favor of the removal of the sedt oj Government to free soil. 4th. 1 am opposed to the admission of any. tnore slave States from any Territory not properly included in the Texas compromise. Ido not believe that Congress ought, to disturb the compact entered into with Texas on that subject. . Yours rcspectfullv. J. E. MIjDoNA’ t D. '/ z ’ [From Hon,. John Law, Dec. 1848, at presj ent stumping the First District for Nib- ; lack and Lecompton.] ; “Were I in the Congress of the United Status, I should most assuredly give my vote ! and influence in favor of every proposition I for excluding slavery from any territory. ac- ! qoired or hereafter to be acquired by the I United States. I should deem any prospecti ive action of Congress on the subject both legal and Constitutional.” [From Hon. E. M. Chamberlain, Decem- . her. 1849.]“Our new 1 v-aequired territories are now free from f/ie blighting curse of negro slavery. It is admitted o.n all hands, : n the free States, that they should be kept so; If legislation by Congress is necessary, I, for one, am satii'Ulied that it; is too late to question its right to exercise a power it has already so often and uniformly exercised/’ '/[From Hon. James Whitcomb. Dec. 18 18.] i “Congress, can,-in my judgment, Constitutionally prevent the introduction of slavery into these Territories.” . [From Hon. E. A. Hannegan, Dee. 18 19.] i “I have no hesitation in saying . gress does possess the power, under the Constitution, of prohibiting slavery in the Terri- ' tories of New Mexico and California, or in j any other Territory.” ! [From Hon. Robert Dale Owen, Dec. 1848.] ] “Congress, in niy opinion, possesses the I . power to legislate on 'the subject of slavery I .in the Territories throughout the term of: their Territorial existence.” ''[From Hon. Wm: J. Brown, Dec. 1849.] “Pass the Wilmot Proviso and we will stick to it, Old Zack.” " “ I [From Hon. John Pettit, in 1850.] “I have always held that the Congress of the United States has’the sole and exclusive power to legislate lor the Territories. Congress can prohibit or create slavery in the Territories. This is the language that I ever have used. It is now a conceded question, notwithstanding the Nicholson letter, that , Congress has this power.” [From Hon. Cyrus L. Dunham, June 5, 1850.] “1 am well convinced that slavery is wrong; that it is detrimental to the prosperity of any country where it exists, and that its wrongs and evils are .apparent to every one who can look upon it with tinprejudicial eyes. * * * This is the prevading sentiment of the North, and hence they cannot consent that it shall be extended where Congress may rightfully prevent it, lor they would be in part responsible for such extension.” [From Hoji, John L. Robinson, present United Slates Marshal lor Indiana.] '‘ Washington, Jan. 18, 1851. “Bear Sir: I thank you for your complimentary remarks as to my course in Congress. “So far as the question of free soil or the extension of slavery over the Territories we acquired of Mexico is concerned, 1 think the North gained all in the final settlement,'notwithstanding we failed to get a positive prohibition as to Utah and Mew Mexico, we did as to all the Pacific coast. The passage of the fugitive slave bill was unfortunate for the peace of the country; but I think it best, now it is passed, to let the question rest.till the public mind can have a little repose; if its operation shall prove inimical to the rights of free blacks, it must and will be repealed. ! Very trul yours, “J no. L. Robinson. “8. S. Harding, Esq., Milan, Ind.” ' [Resolution adopted at Democratic State Convention at Indianapolis, Jan. 8, 1849, presented by A. P. Willard. • “Resolved, That the institution of slavery ought not to he introduced into any Territory where it docs not now exist; that, inasmuch as California and New Mexico are in fact and in law free Territories, it is the duty of Congress to prevent the introduction of slavery within their limits.”

[Resolution adopted by the Democratic Convention in the Eighth District which nominated Hon. Jos. E. McDonald for Congress in 1849.] “Resolved, That Congress has undoubted power to legislate for all our Territories, whether newly-acquired or not, upon the question of skwery—to permit or prohibit its exhistence therein—and that it is its imperative duty to pass such laws as will effectually prevent the introduction of the “peculiar ■ institution” into any Territory now free.” i [Resolution passed in January, 1850, by the Legislature of Indiana, both Houses being largely Democratic.] “Be it Resolved, <)''«■, That our Senators be instructed and our Representatives requested so to cast their votes and extend their influence to have engrafted upon any law that may be passed for the organization of the territory recently acquired Ir.omMexico a provision -FOREVER EXCLUDING FROM sIuCIC TERRITORY SLAVERY AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE, otherwise than tor the punishment of cri'nes whereof the party has been duly convicted.” To this latter resolution Mr. Jas. Elder, the present Lecompton editor of the Richmond Jeffersonian, offered the following amendment: “And that they be further instructed to oppose the admission of any new State, the Constitution of which does not, contain a clause prohibiting slavery therein.”