Richmond Palladium (Weekly), Volume 30, Number 7, 26 January 1860 — Page 2

turn that msrb'e Id the qaarry; and then msh ' spoil us mod hide them ia our blood, but cot j til! tUo. He is the author of. that cornpro- , mise. and what is it? That north of 36 deg. and 3') roia., African slavery anall never ex-J tend, leaving H entirely ass matter of inferencaji Leiher auutk-oi that line or bo it (.ball r

extend. i tat is the Aiissoun wm promise. . N&w, wUWl admit that (kerf rj9-.no power in Congress to male strictly nliat. ii.ay be , called a compromise, because it has an unlimited and sovereign power bounded only by tie Constitution itself, so that no one Concress shall say what a succeeding Gon-,bL-be used? compact, and was elevated! and placed alongside the Constitution itselt A honest regislrer of the event, state that alter it passed, so grjat was the sanctity of that measure, that it became a part of the Constitution itself, the palladium cf ur liberty, nod be was afraid if ever it should go down, the Constitution would go down with it' It existed to the year 18S4. . " AU.SOATIONS ASJ3WERED. . , , Gentlemen, I utterly deny tl allegations that I hear made in this HalJ of Representatives, that the compromise of 1820 was repealed or intended tw.be repealed by the compromise of 1850, and upon this point 1 appeal to the country. No wonder that it is dark to-night no wonder that they have put aw at ri 4 1 1 tirL lit J. Ct lUv aou; cut the lights. Head the speeches or mat day. Why, Mr. Clay was alive ia 1S50. Mr. Clay was in the Congress of the United States he took part in the debates of IS.jO, and 1 am at a loss to find where the statement was, male. In 1854 was the very first time we are told that it was at all claimed that there was an intention, immediate or remote, direc or reflective, to affect ' the compromise ol , 120 by that of 150, How will I prove that? I prove it to you by the admission ol, Stephen A. Douglas himself. Yes, siis, that man who is held up here in Kentucky, that . by a certain kind of hocus poens is to be, foisted upon you and the Charleston Con-, vention, tells us in his first Senate report be-, fore the Kmsas Nebraska bill was offered, that no ruthless band shall dare to rise ag linst' tl at compromise. Go to the Congressional' 01 l c. I know it is now on record. I defy . th I)erooeratic parly or anybody to deny that ; whi-n they referred to the compromise, .il 1S20, that it was to be preserved f..r yerm after. It is said it was to bo repealed. Are. you not a-hamed of yourselves? It 3011 are not you, should be now to ventnrc- such an assertion as that. It is history, gentlemen. Yon may tear? n.n down from this stnnd; yon may oon-o-j crate the principles which I here to niuhtde-' fend, with my blood, if you please; but there j will stand the truth, and that truth says that your assertion is untrne, and that every 1moerat knows it to be untrue, that the com t prrmise of 120 was repealed by the compromise of 1S50. Is it not true? And-tha' it is not true has been avowed by the lending inan that brought in and carried that bill, and who based his claim for the Presidency upon ' his devotion to the South. Thank (iod foi Vcn, ink end paper, sometimes used in thi: Cmmonwealth and other, although it i cry nnti-democratic to use them, it seems. TUB G1MH OF UKAB. Lot iid g,.t along ft litt,, further. Why d' thy wan' . - -- compromise 01 icov ty I, is the matter, jr. J ..... Cuited States? You have had the power, you say, all the time or aimost all tho tiuit . from the foundation of the government to tin prseut day. You hav had possession o the , government slnco its fouadutiun, and. wheio is Iho necessity now of lepenling thv. Crrarromise? Wliy, although you had tin influence of the government, both in its lor eiijn and domestic policy, under pretense o subserving the rights ot the people, you havt used them to maintain the rights uf slavery, and aftera. race of nearly three quarters of 1.' century, you .are entirely- behind. Tin North has grown in population and materia and intellectual development far beyond your Srowth "the soi pito is about to depart from ' udea;" and what nnv? Why, we mus repeal the 'Missouri' Compromise, nod take , the start upon the progiesshe area of free I dom, and check this power of conllict tha. ; the L nisville Courier and Oov. Seward speak of, and thus we may maintain our supremacy. That was it! Why, although you have divided the territory between the North ; and the South, that territory, you say, wa ' purchased by the common blood and tieas ure, and therefore you have a right to go in to it and carry your slaves, whr u you do 11c allow the man who goes there from Ohio t.. carry them there. You have passed youlaws prohibiting the African slave traie;"yoi. monopolize the carrying of slaves Vimoii; yourselves. Although you divide that territory cedot to this government, .and make out of it L-u isiana, Atkansss and Missouri three slave -states and when the North comes to take possession of her port ion of the bargain, con j sisting of U the territory north f thirty-six 1 degrees thirty minutes, yon say, -.no. "gen t tlemen: that game is out, we. must have new deal." laughter. IWll. now mv ! houest friend, what do you mean I v a iitsw ; deal? Are you goitig"t, put up sukos and i begin new? Are you going to put up Loui t siana, Arkansas and Missouri, and m?s in th.. struggle whether freedom or sUverv i I the stronger? "Oh.no! nothing of that kindfj wc hold all we've got, and intend to pla ; tho game of snatch, and g-t all we can." I Laughter. UOCULAS 1KEAH. Come on again then! Mr. Douglas, for tli ; purpose of gaining political power, to th , loss of hie constituents and for the ynirpos ' ot maintaining the interests of slaverv am! slaveholders, against -the great veting'popu ! L-ttion of the country both North aud Soutl . ! and to make slavery predominant, tells u! that tin Missouri Compromise of 1 5. 20 is un constitutional. This man, who a few d.ij i ' before had come into the Senate of the Uni ted States, admitting that this compr.mi ! was sacred and must not be touched, sotn ' two or three days after had a dream and th' result is, that he finds out tliat he had bee mistaken, that our fathers were mistaken, ths. ! the act taken to 178 was a mistake, th: the action was the non-extension of slavery was re-enacted under the constitution ia ITS I and carried out under everr President froi i Washington to Monroe, in having declare .' , that they had a risht to restrara the sprca I of slavery, is a mistake. He suddenly founl out that our fathers did not know anythin uu u iuv uwwi, luru uriiuti wos uuvoiitii. tutional. it was nncnnstitutiooal to pass th great measure, and therefore, the De'mocrati party repealed it, and Dougl.is helped the., to do it. ' Well, what did the Northern men di What did the Republican party do? Why they said, gentlemen it is a lamentable thin that the declaration of the Constitution it elf. gives the power expressly to Congres to regulate the Territories that is the word to regulate", the Territories making n limitations. That giving ibsolule power, an yet yon deny the constitutionality of actio,"

Bnder it. As I aaid before, the very first action under the Constitution in 179, was an exercise of that power to "make all needful "rules and regulations respecting the territory," and followine down as long as the Presidents that were alive at the signing of the Constitution lived, and eoming to own times as late as when Oregon was formed into a Territory, to a few days ago, this action has been deemed constitutional, when all at once (hese measures were found out to be based upen a falacy, and it was discovered we had no power to carry them out. What did we do? Because we loved the Union; because we, North and South had fought the common battles of the country, and joined in the love of a common liberty, standing shoulder to 6houlder, we will try the thing once more;

we believe free labor is competent to sustain itself; we will go into the Territory, apply j the test, and see whether or not it shall be , Free or Slave. j democracy as it was. ! DDon the subject of Slavery: "lhat Congress has no power under the j

UiKuUl ---v " paosion of the Union insured to rts utmost platforms to show how thtsthrng went along J it of emacillir, in peace and harmo I wrll red you the Democratic platform of 1 e' future American State that taarl 1852, two years before the passage of the . cnslhufeJ or antleIed wlth a republican

f-nr. i Is mrt 1r.t WA vtoil M C A OT T)amAAIellA

nuiUuuii, iu "0 v " with and desiring the co-operation of all wh domestic rnstitutious of the several States, ; rd the preservation of the Union, under and that such States are the sole and proper tbj Gonslitutionf a3 lbe pariltllount issue, and judges of every thing pertaining to their own , re resentins; 1 artie8 aad platforms conaffairs, not prohibited by the Constitution; cernin , dcineslic sl.aVerv. which seek to em- ; that all efforts of the Abolitionists or others broj, AatvBt and iuciie to treason and armmade to induce Congress to interfere with ed resistance to Uw m the Territories, and questions of Slavery, or to take incipient whose av0wed purpose if consummated, must steps m relation thereto, are calculated to enJ in citfil war and dissolution--the Amerlead to the most alarming and dangerous con- . 5canderi10Cracy reCognize and adopt the prin sequences.' eiplesinth organic laws tstablishincr Kti What say you to that, Democrats? Al- g d Nebraska Territories, and emlodvthough you declared in black and w hite that 1 . the on soand ar(, gafe ciaX-l(,a (,f ti..e it was dangerous to interfere with slavery. slaverv, qestion, upon which the great r:avvhat have you done? Did you not say it t:nil,-:,iH ,r tht or.lrtof this whole coun-

r . . . . . . 1 . . i .. . . v. .,if.-. .1 I 1 was dangerous to interfere? Answer me that and let me iro on! You are s iilent. 1 ou are condemned out of your own mouths. I pr ceed: "And that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people and endanger the stability and the permanency of the Union." You condemn yourselves again. -Resolved, that tho foregoing proposition coveis, and was intended to embrace the me WH01.K srnJECr of slavery agitation in Uongrcss. .Mark that the words "the whole subject" are in small caps ia their reported resolutions. "Ami therefore the Demoeratic party of the Union, standing upon their natioual platform, will abide by, and adhere to a faithful execution of the acts known as the compromise nieanres settled bv the last Congress the act for reclaiming of fugitives from service or labor included, which acts being de-si-ned to carry out tho express provision of the Constitution cannot bo repealed or so changed as to destroy or impair its efficienA' " ' -ltesolved. that the Democratic party will resist all attempts at renewing in Congress or out of it, the agitation of the slavery queslion under whatever shape or color the attempt may be made." ; Thee were the declarations and avowals ' - . -rvtaTtV IU "0J., , ' wial,eutytfRe'y do in 1854? Why. they go ; under the leader-ship of Stephen A. Dong- j las when lie had made a report saying, the law of IPfUwas sacredly conceived in the ' Compromise of 1S50, and repeal tho Missou - ri Compromise. Now, I believe, they stand condemned by their own language and by their own acts, and I have here accomplished what I proposed to do, THE llEUOCBACr selp-cosdkmkeo. What was the result of all this? The result was, that in obedience to tlie declaration that the people were to be fairly left to choose for themselves between liberty and slavery, they adopted another platform. Let me come to that. I will tell you what they did in 1S50, in that year the Cincinnati platform was adopted. In consequence of the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, the Northern eople interceded to get their own territory upon the avowal iu the Kansas Nebraska bill, that the people were to "be left free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." But notwithstanding that avowal it made, they immediately, as tha report of tho United States' Congress showed you. before a single Free Soiler or Republican had set his loot into the new territory, commenced on the border of Missouri the organization of the "bluo lodges," to invade Kansas, with the avowed design peaceably if you could, and forcibly if yon must to have that laud for a slave State, and "damn the Abolitionists, they would shoot them down as squirrels," as I heard a leading Democrat express himself in Lexington while that conflict was going on. I hey passed ! these resolutions in lod, and I want you to pay strict atieniioii to these, in comparison j with the oihfcr avowa:s: .v.- rurl-u.l ri -t.ia f t K. That alludts to tho former Democratic platform of 135, four vcars before. It goes " - , "1. That Congress has no power under the Constitution, to interfere with or CD. . trol the domestic institutions of the several States, and that alt such states are the sole : and proper judges of every thing pertaining to their own atlairs. not prohibited by the Constitution; that ail efloris of the abolitionists or others, made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or take incipient steps with relation thereto," (the very thing they have besu doing to day besides which we have heard them denouncing every man that does not come up to their standard, and calling cverv run that siands on the Squatter Sovereignty" platform outside the Democratic party,) are calculated to 1 lead to the most alarming and dangerous con- . swueuees: and that all such efforts have an iaeviiable tendency to diminish the happi - ness of the people and endanger the stability aud permaaaucy of tho Union, and ought not to be countenanced by aav friend of our nolitical institutions. 2. That the forejroio,r prapositi n covers. and Mis intended to embrace the whole subject oT slavery agitation in Congress; and therefore, the Democratic party of the Union standing en this national platform, wdl abide bv. and adhere to a faithful execution of the acts known as the Compromise Measures set tled by the Congress of 1S50; ' the act for reclaiming fugitives from service or labor; included, which act being designed lo carry out aa express provision of tha Constitution, cannot with fidelity thereto be repealed, or so changed as to destroy r impair iu efficiency. 3. That the Democratic party will resist all attempts at renewing in Congress or out of it, the agitation of the slavery question.

Resolved, that we reiterate wi.Ii renewed : K i-"'1- l" c.., ener-'v of purpose the well considered dec- i Vtjr' lalu lll(se lVrrUoues.-"vh, no! ot course j laratTons of former Conventions upon the i uo5 "uor u ?xtJaJe " tbere'rora w.ia j :. i nt nmatirt Sl.-r oj . i ire vou to !, then -but to have trie peo i

under whatever shapa or coljr the attempt may be mad." ; Oh yes! "Will reMst That is the Demo cratic doctrine in 1836 in Cincinnati did you allude to it to das? Yes, you voted the doctrine down, and yet, here it is, "that the Democratic party will resist all attempts at : renewing in Congress, or ont of it, the agitation f the slavery question, under whatever shape or color the attempt may be made." What do you say to that? There is the Cincinnati platform which yon eschewed to-day. You denounced' as treasonable aey attempt to, renew, that ag.taiion, under , any shape whatever; let me, however, turn to another clause. 4. "That by the uniform application of this Democratic principle to the organization of Territories, and to the admission oi

new State, with or without domestic sla very, as they may elect; the equal rights o all the Stales will be preserved intact; the original compacts of the Constitution main- ! tained inviolate; and the perpetuity and exgo But you omit: . 1 reDose iu its determined conervai8m ot- the jjnlon non-intervention by Congress in State or Territory, or iu the District of Columbia. 0, Mr. Craves, where are your resolutions? There, gentlemen, ia your declaration, and to it you would not even allude to-day. and j under the affectation of renewing the old demoeratia rtlatform ol 1N5G. vou entirelv over ,oolwd anJ j rored that clause which 'lv.und you not directly or tndiwcilv to intevf.-r.. with laverv in :l Stat r Terrttorv. What hav you declared to dav? That Mr. DougUs t not willing to go along with you, is outside j of the Democratic parly ; that he is guil'v ' of treason. That may b all right; they siy j a fool nevar changes bis opinion, and that a) wise man does, but you ought to tell it out j when vou make such a change as tbat. ! THE TJSMADE ISSUE. Well, now, gentlemen, I am going to ftive i . . . . .,1.1., you a clause.th.At it tney na.i aciopiea to-uay . , would have put tne mingso p.n, ma., you, gave us Douglas, wc would catch you, it yo. gave us Toombs, we would catch y,.u, and 1 3'0U offend Breckenndge, we would catel , you. You did not intend the Democratic i party to know then was such a clause As , a man by our way.a preacher.a man of great ,; good .enee but no education, would say - w hei . reading tho Bible: "W ell. brethren, tnat 1, . one of if you please this isthis is a bad r- - , .:il rl-i, at' VU r I l.i rr n t ra ( lc party to-day found it wts a hard place, anr , skipped it, (applause) so that it U no wonder : they did not want me to go into thai sum, . Hall, nd that the lights were out and it was , , . 1 1 , f 1 . .1 1 : j -: 1 . all oarK. Jiere is wiiai mev uiu. i ne iopublican, not Abolition party, nor tins old j Whi-r party, nor the American partv, noi the Democratic party have ever made an is , sue upon the resolution passed to-day, anc which was in the platform of 1S5G, it is Eirn , ply as to the power of the people when they j become a State. It is a self evident truth j and they intend you to go home with it, with i the thought that you bagged the game, bu j you will find that the lion has gone and yoi j have put but the ass's skin into your pouch, j "Resolved That we recognize the rights o j the people of the Territories, including Kan- j sas and Nebraska, acting through the legal j ly and fairly expressed will of a majority o actual residents, and whenever the number of their inhabitants justifies it, to form a Con stituiion, with or without domestic slavery, and be admitted into the Union upon terms of perfect equality with the other States." Lord how frank that is! ''with or without domestic slavery, and be admitted into tl Union upon terms of perfect equality with the other States." Who ever denied thai. I challenge Mr. Silvertooih, I challenge Os car Turner, or even Mr. Speaker, Merrrwether to point me out a single rt-solution fror the foundation of our Government to this day, in any portion of the United States where such has been deuied. If there i; such mv readinsr has been of no account. T!IK KASSA-s-SEBRASKA BILL, Take the case now. I have read th plat forms, and shown that they are inconsistent. But let m tell you what was the clause in ih Ksnsas-NebrRsli bid which they aflirmed again aud again. It states that the Democrat pie pertectlv tree to torui domestic invitations in their own way sub l' lhe Const.tution of the L nite States." Now, what do you think cf thai. n '"ud 'o leg Mate slavery in, o Kan sas. nor to exe.aae n. but intend to leave th PP!d Prflj tre to form and regu,a:ethei Wii3r-,1 llt ";,ur doctrine w-uay.-Editor ot thj; Yeoman, are you going to pub , lish it thai, way to-day, tuat the object ol th Nebraska bill was intended to leave the peo . pie perfectly free to regulate thiir own do : mestic iastitations in their own way? Yo say to day in the resolutions you have adopt- ; ed", thai tie people shall do no such thiug, and it Douglas goes for any such doctrine, we- will see hira damned if he remains in th.. ; Democratic party; and Mr. Siiveriooth d clares tUiit Ue ' ouc ?r le Pale M lu democratic vhurch. ( A voice "the whol Dwmocratic parly rs not responsible for him tuuw uuGod forbid thai thev sboul !bJ - (Laaghtor and applause ) The grea masi of llie Republican Pty is .mm the Dt , moerauc P--V. but they are ot the good ol , American gold with the stamp cf 76, not th ' ' , uogus uemocrauc s:amp oi r na iboe "y re with us now, and will be with d nerearser, ana iireiore a aua nere z hfBti re Put oaU The ever' iiL cl keP J"oa frm. taowing tin , thc7 ar lacompetent to administer the gov ! cramem nwr me wuous pariy is rsponioi ' for. I HE SSAEX ASD ITS SK.I3T. ; Let us trace the consequences like the snak -yearly tney shed their sliin, but they nevt ?o back into the old one; beautiful it is a ' first, but it immediately returns to dust an . ( ashes. Let us look at th consequences. j Here was the formation f.Le "blue lodges' ' in Mo., according to the Co gressionsl repor-, j (remember I don't intend to give yea an ! statements upon my own say so; i appeal t" j

, - l.. ! . I T ,

and lesruiate thei i

tLrtorv to substantiate all I say.) You march Now. gentlemen, these are allegations foruuder Your Missouri hordes so formed into j mally put forth. It U not for me t, qaestion the ter'ritorv ot Kansas, and although it is) j the motives of the mtu who makes them, but well k rown an! as historv has proven, that j I take the allegations as I find them, and I the Kepubiican partv was' in a clear majori- J shall attempt to answer f hem to detail, tv bv force of arms vou took down the judg-; i trst, of all. I appeal to the country and

cs of election that were apporoicu -s.. They were taken bv force, the Alissouriins poin oat with their oanners nyingr o colors disr-Iaved. aua me uutnuun not: "are you a judge according to the Con- . I taws." Nei "are von a judge of the election carrying out th declarations of the Cincinnati t platforms of lao2 and 18S6, that the people should determine upon their domestic institutions in their own way?" But are joa soucd on the goose?" That was what they asked them in mher words, "Are von tor slavery?" Not. "Are vou for the Constitution end the liws, and for the support of Republican institutions and principles as our Miners nanueo imn u-jwo to as?" If a man did not answer that way that pleased them, they cajght him by the oollarand ejected! im, any many who upheld the constitutional right of el-ction were compelled to fly for their lives, and many were wounded and killed. Where then stood the Democratic press of the United Slates ? Aiding and abetting all this treason. The free-soil citizen from the Sttte of Kentucky, as well as he from the free States, who had seen by nctual experiment the glorious benefits of 'free institutions, and others who had seen the woe of slavery, and who found that the pledges of the Democratic party had been kept in word and violated in fact, late in the day sent t their homes both in Kentucky, the slave and the free States, and took up arms, and upon every field and by the wholp nnwer that God and nature had bestowed upon them, they resisted the attempt . ....

to enslave them. What then did the Presi- j know any thir g about it that honorable and dent of these United Stages? All the time, I bigh toned gentleman has never made it he by the force of the United States, disarm- his study any man can see that who reads ed the Republican party, and left them at the j his inaugural address. John C. Breckenmecy of tnose inv.i lers of their rights ridgo does not understand it, or he is a great joiin brovvx asd hishaii. hypocrite. He is ignorant of the question Then sprung up this John Brown. I say al issue or hc is a hypocrite and intended he is the legitimate sou of the acts and i determinedly to deceive tho people of the avowals of the Democratic party, that they i United States, but of course m consequence intended to take possession of Kansas bv ! the respect I have for him, I believe that force of arms, "peaceably if they could. Imt j " uttlly tyrant of the questions at ish.ieiblv if thev must," and it was only when sae- 1,1 ttt: 1 t,u"k 1 present them

these descendants of revolutionary lathers took up arms in their own defence, e.nd 1 thank (5od thcie were Keutuc kiaiis ns well as Yankees fighting tlier- in that battle for ire.cdom, and they drove hick the iuvHders, and uow a great at:d overvv helming majority of the people of Kansas say that it slvall be free, uotwiihs'anding James Buchanan lifts un l.tj imri,,iis liinils. an.! tierhans nravinsr

that it may be so, says that Kansas ' Rtiikeu' the Circuit Court; the pleadings much a slave territory us South Carolina."- j were made to this extent, a plea of abatement

Is that Democracy? Iu the name of that i ni whom he soimniouslv anneals, is it so

is it a slave State? Not at all. History ! him- also Hwritt Scott, his wife, and chiltells us that just there began John Brown. ' dren. To this, Sandford, who is also upon How is it I will state, as it comes to mo au- record aud admitted to be ; I know not it thenticated. To the best of my knowledge ;1" reality, a citizen of New York, pleaded in and belief, before he shed the blood of a sin- j abatement, that Died Scott aud his wife and gle nirn, one of his sons was chopped to pie- children were his slaves, and that being ces in cold blood, and another son was drag-, slaves, or rather to use the language as used ged in chaius by a vehicle, until by the heat, in the pleadings, that he was the descendant tne exposure, the iguominv, and the torture ' f African slaves, a man of color, a nero, of the moving chains, his "brain was crazed, an'1. therefore he, could not be a citizen of the and he went mad; and his sister looking up-. United States; and Sandford called upon on all thesa. sad calamities and scenes of hor- thu Court to throw the case out of Court, t ror, was also ciazeu. Tiiru una tuiu tvK;'1 t j a 4i. t,. up the knife and made a war of extermina-' (Sandford) should hold as master, Dred; tion upon the slaveholders and the invaders Scott. of tho soil. There is the secret of the whole i So far as the Dred Scott decision became a ;

matter; so help me, Uod, as 1 believe 1 am Cassius Clay, as I stand heie to-night, I say, . the beinnnicir of this raid on V rr.'inia. Johu ; rinnia. uouu , Brown felt that there was no protection for film ill mi; icuiuLiaiiv I j , ' i t i l i ill in a of Missouri and Kansas gave no protection .1... r. ., .1 ,l, 1, 1 protectron to him. and that he had once more to anneal , to the God of Hosts for defense, and ho car- :

ried that war on in Kansas, and ia Missouri f ted States, and therefore the Court having and Virginia. The whole story is told; it no jurisdiction, it was returned, with instrucwas nothing but the raid of a man injured 'lions to sustain the Circuit Court. That is by aggressions made upon him. and these j what they decided. Now I desire to state, proved to have been begun and compleied that in my humble judgment, Dred Scott was by the Democratic party themselves. There j not the slave of Sandford, and beeama a free fore, 1 hurl back the imputation, and history man and a man of color, according to the will stand by the record, and will record the j Constitution of the United States, when it unwelcome truth. That is all of it. . It was i was made, he had a right to sue and had a

no servile innrrartinn fit a I I t,a hatAiu me this night a man who committed John Brown in Virginia, and I hear from other sources, as Senator Mason, that there was not a slave ro,e in insurrection; it was a raid the fruit of Democratic action and injustice, and if it is the thing it is said to be, that will yet threaten the peculiar institution of the

South along the whole border; they, the De-: in all the. books ot judicial decisions. 1 have mocrats, are responsible for it by reas n of iit at home, and 1 declare that in my- judgtheir avowals and their acts, but the Repub- Lent there is no proposition in Euclid more

Jicans are not. 1 repuuiate the charge, and appeal to tne country lor a verdict. inE vice-president's allkoatioss. Gentlemen, bavin? said so much prelimin ary aud in explanation, I come to the declara-

tionof the Vice Tiesic'eut of the United Sutes, forded bylaw; that being a free roan, by as formally put forth by him, sent me under 'being carried first into a free State, and then his own hand, but which speech, I am told, !to thf Territory ceded to the United S;ates is distinctly- different from that Le made iu I 7 France.be had aright to sue and be. sued, this State House. j He never declared that Scott was entitled to You will pardon me for the length of this jail the privileges of a citizen, but the Consliargument, if it may be so called, embarrass- , tution says: ed' as I am by the" difficulty of my jKisitiou ' "The citizen of each Stite shall be enti here. It is rather more desultory than I had ', l'e t0 a'- the privileges of a citizen in the intended it should Le, but the importance of several States." the questions to be discussed wiil, I think,! And if Kentucky determines that the black plead my justification. ' man cannot hold office in the Commonwealth The Vice President of the United States'1 black man from Massachusetts cannot hold makes against the Republican party ten for- ; effiee ; he is but entitled to the protection oi n:al alleatLns. He savs: " ' the laws given for the protection of his own

I charge thai the present and nlteriorpurposes ot tne UepuDiican party, are: j "To introduce the doctrine'of negro equalrty into American politics, and to mate it the ground of positive legislation, hostile to the Southern States. , To exclude the slave pmpertv of the' South from all territory nowiu the Union or which hereafter may be acquired. m . - -v ... ? "lo prevent tho admission, in any latitade, of another siavsholding State. To repeal the Fugitive Slave Law ., ana . practically refuse lo obey the Constitution on lhat subject. "To ref ie to prevent or . . punis!i. bv State action, th

slave nropertv. buti10"

on thrt contrary, to make i: a criminal otfenae I iu their citizens, to obey the laws of th Union, in so lar as they protect property ia Af-j iican slaves. . 4To abolish slavery in the District of Co-j lumb'.a. ;

-To abolish slavery ia the Icnts, arsenals, . by the confIeration of States, and re-enac-dock yards aud ether places in the South, ted by the Hoo.se of Ilepresentatrve at iu vewhere Congress has exclusive jurisdiction. ry rst session nnder the Constitution in 17 "To abolish the inleroauoaal and coast- ? S9, was unconstitniional. Tbat is the dieta wise trade. 'of thee five Judges. Well, now, gentlemen. To limit, harass and frewa npon the in-1 just let me state one or two strong points thai stitation in every mode of pol:tical action and 'every man of common sense can understand by every form of publn: pimon. It is the practice of all courts courts of "And finally, by the Executive,' by Con- ; common law and courts of eqaity of the Uni-! gress, by the postal service, the press and ) ted States, and of all eouris of reasonable ail other accessible modes to agitate without -justice and common sense on God's earth.

cean, until tne soutbern rotates, without svmnathv or brotherhood m the TTnian

worn dowuby the unequal struggle. shallWide the main question, and that obiter

V llJ . J : i : oecompenea losarrenucr yuonuawusir ana r&umui,ww kueir lisvn,

,

uon, ana me miegruy or oar previous cortav - rci, pu eu".T iovu.f.-. -,j - vu, 1 plead nuilty EGRl JUJCAUTT SET AT KK5T. First, we are not guilty of the purpose 'to ; introduce the doctrine of nfgro equality into J American politics, and to make it the ground; of positive legislation, hostile to the Southern ' Slates." Mark, the crime is here that we, have been guilty ot "introducing." Now it is well known, so far as common rumor goes ; we cannot always judge of the motives of: men that the Dred Scott cae was gotten . up by agreement, in advance of legislation, but set-sequent to the declaration of the power of the Democratic party, to take possess- j ion of Kansas. We did not want any such subject introduced into politics. Why ? ; Because there was already odium enough at-j tached to us as being the defender of the rights of negro against the white man. We were called already "Negro lovers," and it was not to our interest to get up an issue ot this kind if we desired to. But an agreed case was made, as is reported in Howards. Reports. The ease came into the Supreme Court ot the United States trom the U. S. District.Court of Missouri, and although I am a follower of the plow, and although he has perhaps studied law all his life, I declare that Keriah MagorHn does not know anything about the case; there is not a common young lawyer that is not better posted un in this matter. Gov. Maofnn does not profess to so that, a man of the commonest understandinir cau comprehend them. 1 will state the substance of the thinj. It was a suit brought by a man of color, called JJfcd Scott, first 1 believe, in the State Courts of Missouri, where it was decided that Scott was free, then going up, I think to the Supreme Court of Missouri, where the decision was reversed and sent back. It was rea ouou oringn.g an acuou ueciarmg Ith1 vl et armis, one tsandlord bad a: Htidlord bad assaulted law oi tne united estates, u is simply thus I lhat alter the case was twice argued iu the Mipreme Lourt ot (be United States, oupremo -ouri oi me unnen rsraies, a majonty standing seven to two of the Justices, . . . - - .' scended from par ,I,ci,ImiI tha a man t.f AI,i,or K!.,.l man ot Atrican blood, descenueu irom j .arentsonca sKves rm.1,1 .l be citizens of il IT A -s a u foro could not sue hi the Courts of the Uni- - Ti " " 7 ' " v i TlvTnt LO nfl TP lPYRn T mm THIS AT1CTbniA dt rt et armis, aud that was the opinion of Justices McLean and Curtis, and every lawyer that has read the decision of the Court in Howard's Reports, that I have spoken to up on the subject, has invariably said to me that the opinion of Justice Curtis is the most con clusive piece of judicial logic ever presented iclearlv demonstrated than that. .t tW Dred Scott had a right to citizenship, to hold office and vote, rights which many white persons, as for instance women, have not, j but that ,ie had a right to the protection af raoe nnA condition. r""' ocou uecision was gotten up entirely by the Democratic party, aud itwa ma'le ln 1350, after the election ot President Buchanan, and intended to sustain the Kan sas Nebraska Bill. ln P"5'1. a,lovv me to ssy that we make rssue with the Supreme Court on thai sub ject. We acknowledge the Supreme Court r 1 ft I ' a i ! aecisiun 10 ue me supreme raw oi tiie laad, and deny the allegatiun that we intend il e gaily and faetiowsly lo resist the decision oi , - . , .. . - . - . . . . uiai coun, iuu lores a kidu or ciuzeiiaLip noon the coantrv with which we have with which we have noth'ina tr An Sv, (nr titan f.ir r Vi. Tl rA si i- tt A ..... . J" " " obiter dicta. Gentlemen, time passes quickly, and o course I cannot go elaborately into the ar-, lament udoq the olher nart of that which i claimed to be the decision iu the Dred Scott , case, that is. that the law of 17G7 firt Dassed from the earnest time to the latest dav. tbat vlt nnMtmi un nn Inr AUXr. ih . jiar..ai - . i- I. . - 3 . . Il aicia, mat rs. wora. Ppoaeu iDc.aen.aiiy, aun UUI w fcliC UiBUi Twemu, mm am w r AUCIVJ

are Democratic lawyers that hear me to sight and they will bear me oat in this statement, and it is right. There are just reasons for it because thi attention of judges being bound to the main issue, they must not be held responsible for the incidental questions of the case. Now, that is what Justices McLean and Curtis tell u. and they are. in my opinioa,, lk , ablest judges upon the bench. - 1 .think Justice Curtis the ablest judge I ever red aiter, and he tells us that when the Supreme Court decided in the case that it had

no jurisdiction there their whole power ceased. That i what this judge tell tu, that L what the Republicans say. that what every honest man, unbiassed by political associations and considerations, must say. I fay it. gentlemen, that in my humble judgment, the rest of the opinion is not law, and in this I am supported by some of the very ablest judicial minds iu the United States. Not onlv so, but Justice Curtis shows that the Court b.-;s decided again and again thai vb'ier dicta is not law, and rs not so to be considered. There are decisions in that report quoted, absolutely made to the effect that these incidental decisions that come in are not part of the law of the land. Therefore, we say in denial of what the Democratit party has said to-day. that it is not the law of the land. Therefore, we go npon that subject, for not changing, rather we deny ...... , .. . lual 11 ' 'aw, uu we appeal j iue country 10 ueciue ufiwwn uwr du aiirgmuce to it as a law of the United State?, that they may determine it under the Constitution of the United States. To so much we plead guilty. THE WORD KEG U LATE. Now, as that is an important question. let us dwell yet a little longer upon it. In the first place let us see what were the terms of the old Confederation, in connection with it. They declared, gentlemen, before they ceded these land from the United States, lhat these Territories should belong to the United and that the United States should have com plete control, both political and practical over them, that is to say that they yielded the entire jurisdiction of the Territory, and the United States under the act yielding these Territories to the United States, achieved as they were by the common blood and treasure. it was the determination 01 ail the States v ... 1 ii. ..,: 1 .r : , , 1 i 1 them, and therefore when tho buprcme ourt undertooK 10 say tnat ttiat clause ol the, . a A

Constitution which says, I he Congress ; property, without due process of Uw, it becomes shall have power to dispose of and make all i our d.i'.y to msiutain this provision of the Connetdful rules and regulations respecting the stitutiou against all attempts to violate it for the Teiritorv and other property of the United furP08e of establishing slavery in any territory of

Stales," does not mean what it says, they are forced to the absurd conclusion, not with standing the object had iu view in making the cession that when the land was given, the States giving did not mean what they said: look to what n forced construction they are driven. 'PI. .1 A I. a. M 1 x ny ueny ., puw r, gr.m o power to pnss , yj o..ngn-5 10 t" slavery :n the .territories, and the assertion that the word "tegulation" is not a common term used by legal men when they intend to confer a power. That is the argument of! the Supreme Court. T . f f'l.of 1 .; :. .1 ' nf,l .r.r,,Iut;I,n" nsd i tl.M Onn.tiruiinn ... n. . , , . with rega.d to grants of power, and thus so far from being an unusual term, it wis a usu. al one in the disposition of power in the United Oiates. Another clause says that Congress shall have power to 'regulate commercc. JJoes any Democrat deny that that - A IT I . t Wli.t nnJ., it hev done? Thev not onJv reulata commerce" under it, between foreign countries and this, regulating foreigo and domestic ra A t I, ill tiaucOil tlkjft .mKn.wi A7 1. 9 .'J. . . J' , .) ,1 c r IMPV :flll IllA rwiw.r t m alA a 1 f neeuiui ruies ana regniauons appertaining thereto, in tne iemtones tney have srmrlar power delegated in somewhat the same words. Not only had they the power to cherish commerce, bat they had a right to prohibit and destrov commerce itself. Certainly that is a legislative power; and it was exercised under this very term legnlate;" therefore it is absolutely absurd when the supreme uourt ana tne ueinocratic party .... - I . i uuueiia&c iu aj mai n ueu n was enaciea that Congress should have the power to make al! needful rules and regulations for the Territory, did not delegate legislative power. So thai the very language which they claim would debar a grant of power, is shown, by four clauses of the Constitution, to carry with it that very legislative power, it even extending to the taking of lile, liberty and property itself. Don't they say in the Constitution that they have the power? Such was the understanding of the old framers of the Federal Constitution of the confederation of the framers of the act of S7, and the Supreme Court are bound to acknowledge that all the territory acquired previous to the formation of the Constitution, were subject to the control of Congress, they come to the conclusion that the Constitution did not intend to confer the power at all, but that ita very exercise was prohibited by the Constitution. Gentlemen, there was a portion of those lands, when the Constitution was formed, intended to be ceded, and it was known by the framers of the Constitution lhat it was to be ceded. Georgia and North Carolina afterwards ceded therr territory for the same reason that Virginia ceded Illinois and Indiana, and therefore, bow absurd to say that the framers of the Constitution, when they allowed Congress to exclude slavery from the territory which is formed into the States of Illinois and India ia, did not give them the power (o exclude slavery from the whole. It is absurd 10 say that the power existed in one case, but did not iu another. What was the intent and design cf the Constitution? What did it do to carry out that des'gn ? The two most prominent cooc!uions on earth, that we cn have as to what it w intended to do, by what they said was to be done and intended to be done, ar;d by what they practically did. Eight and six. or fourteen times did this Congress carry out the power asserting that Congress Lad ail the power to make " all needful rules and regulations for the Territories." even to the prohibition or enactment of slavery. HOW HE CHASGED AJT OPIKIOI. I am going to own up myself. I confess that I always believed, until I read the optnicn of Justice Curtis. I always believed with the edd Free Sil partv. tliat under the Con stitution of the United States, yon could not establish Slavery ia any territory. I do now coofes-, that after reading the decision of Justice Curtis, that i: was so clear, and the argument so irresistible, that they could practice legislation either way, tbat I : wa bound to acknowledge tbat the power to prohibit also carried with it the power to establish, and the converse that the power to establish slavery aho gave the power to prohibit it. I therefore yielded op mj old opiatoo, i (I knom cot what others say do); beeaase ia ibi dcra or j aslioe Corns, U Coogres haa poWaa aliwa. omB,p0eet eovereigo power, althoegh thia ia ia general a i government of luftited pewers, isaeutaeb

as the Cooatituttoa doe not limit ConereM from stabtishioc or SotUh'ojr slavery. The power is ot tJemied by the Constitution, therefore it hs " it. There I am boaad to change my opinion nr00 that subject, mnd no 1 ajrreo that Congress bas lbe power to establish or prohibit slavery, because as I said, the acknowledgment of the 00a power compels as to acknowledge the poesioa ot the reverse. Weli now it is at last broaght to th'w: Conres has the riht la esUbiiah Slavery er to abolua slavery in the territories. It is then a matter npon whkV we appeal to vhecouatry tor ddcisi.vn Will you eft for Si very er fredom f I KM;-

thai to be the doctrine or the Republican party and that is the whole sum and sabsti ice or the controversy between 11 We y with Washing, ton, Jtfferson, Madison and Henry ajj L'a M( all the d.stinjrutshed fat he-9 of the Rpatlic, o.u that slavery is a bless in? and a Divine institution and ail that, but we admit it to be aa evil, moraliy. socially, ar.d politically, and a weakness U the corotoouwea'th. euwiar a wkak ikstttctiox. Well now, gentlemen it ha gone fjrth in this ComreoeweaUti tbat I should not ' be iblo to Speak to Frankfort. - Why is that T Why is it i nai loon mowo spreaa sacn consternation through all Yirgiuia ? Are we to believe that the V irginians are all cowan? No! There is ia Virginia just as gallant blood as flows ia the oIJ; it was simply becausa slavery was a weak institution from the beginning to this time; thtt it was what James Madisan told Sooth Carolina and Georgia; it is because slavery is what Mr Randolph told Mr Everett We tell yon tbat it ia a soarre of weakoesa ia the Stat, and therefor as patriots and lovers of oar country, we say to the several State, enjoy your institution as long as you choo.-e, but so'lar as we are respooni. b!e we go a aiust it all the time. There is the who'e front of our offending. Is it not right? THE ADMISSIOX OF SLAVE STATES. Another charge made is, that we purpose " to prcveut tie admission, iu any latitude, of another slaveholJicg State." I deny that that is the plat, form of the Republican party made op in 1856 or as it is to be made up in 1 8 GO, unj if you will allow me I will reter to the record. I cauuot read all of the Platform, but I give you my word there is no such clattse ia it. I will read oue clause however: Resolved, that with oar UepaMican fathers we hold is ta be a self-evident troth that ll mea are eudowaj with the inahaunble right to life, liberty wad the pursuit of happiness, and that the primary object and ulterior design of our Federal Cover. imeat wai to secure these rights to all persons under its eiclusive jurisdiction ; I'M ark are. cow, that does not apply to States, that our RepublieaB lathers, when they had abolished sla- ' : .n... v.,Li Trl,,. ,...i..;...i .w-. J aaa iia-ivuwi m t v t VlUttlllVli lltafe no persou should le deprived of life, liberty or United States rhite the present constitution shall be maiutained. In tbat part of the platform I have said, I believe we were in error. For that reason, in tho call of the present Convention we leave out all that which hea reference to the last sentence hich I read. I wiu reaJ that call to you: , A Natjonal republican Convention will meet at Chicago aifo, on Wednesday the 13ih day of June t 12 o'clock, noon, for the uouiinatian of 'next, at 12 o'clock, noon, for ! candidates to be supported for President and Vice President at the next election. . "The Republican electors of the several Slates, the members of the People's party of Pennsylvania, and tbe opposition party of .New Jersey and 1 otber 're wlU.io5 to cooperate with them - insupportot the candidate which shall there be J ,od who are opposed to the policy of tli0 we3pUt Adiniuistration, to federal corruption ; and usurpation, to the extension of slavery into : the Territories, to the new and daugcrous polili cal doctrine that the Constitution, of its own force, carnes Slavery into all the IVrnt jrms of . aUa t TaaaS a1 CsaIaa ft a ft ft A .kahIh. A A I. ft the United Stales, to the oneninsr of the African . o' trade, to an inequality r rights among citizeos and who are in favor of the immediate ad mission of Ksosas into the Union, under the constitution recently adopted by ita people, of restoring the federal adiniuistration to a system of ' I . 1 . . I . - rigiu ecouoray ...u ,o pnncipiee OI vvastnngton and JetTerson, or maintaining inviolate tho n ights of the States, and defending the soil of evei7 8te and Territory from lawless invasion, and ' ' pre"rving toe integrity or this union and the aPren,57 of the Ooostitution and laws passed ! " .OTr!!! 'l tha eo.Pi'-'J jorIt? pri.jciie as established "in this gov eVea at the expense of its existence, an . to send from each State two delegates f vernineot. are invited I'frates from each : uonsrressiouai aistrici, and tour delegates at lartre .1.- i' -;.. a . 6 to the Convention. To prevent tho extension of Slavery into the Territories. There is the matter at issue. Gentlemen, neither in the platform of 1 8.r)6, nor in the call of Convention for 1860, is there any such clause as tbat the Vice President alledges, that no more slave States shall be admitted into the Union there is nothing- of it. It is not a true allegation, and I appeal to the record. I appeal from the inferences aud allegation of the Vice President of the United States to the country npon lhat subject. THS SLAVS CODS CONSIDERED. Before I pass over this I will say a fewwords with regard to the power lhat the slaveholders claim for the protection of slave property under the Constitution of the United States, because that is a vital question. Gentlemen, with all the inconsistency of tho Democratic party in 18-32 and 1856, the never thought of this thing, that slavery want under the Constitution, and by virtue thereof into every Territory per se. Never was such an expression rnaaVe use of, but they all admitted that do such power existed iu or under the Constitution. Hence, of course, it was proper to enact that the people of a Territory were free to legislate slavery in or out of the Territory. Now, gentlemen, the Democratic party is placed in this attitude that they then knew that under the Constitution and according to what they now claim to be the decision of the Supreme Court, that every slaveholder has a right to go into the Territory with his properly, or deceived the people, to the detriment of the slaveholder, when ibey left the matter to be decided upon by the con-slaveholders. What right had the Democratic party to say that they should confiscate the property of all the slaveholders of a Territory, and leave their property to the tender mercies of the squatters, who make their way from Germany, Ireland, China. Massachusetts and Kentucky? Mr. Itreckeo ridge, or some of your friend, answer me, yes or no, did you intend when yoa stood in favor of "Popular Sovereignty," or "Squatter Sovereignty," to confiscate all the property f the slaveholders of the United Stale? No sir. You did not think tha you had the right to carry slavery into the x ci mories. x uai is me truth ol the matter. Id my opinion, that is what everr Uemnrn believed. We say that the belief was right. Why? Because all the dicta of all the jurist from time immemorial, from Grotius to Mane6eM; all j arista known to civilization and Came, from the earliest daye to this, declared that slaves were a peculiar property, unlike other property known to man. What does the beat EuglUh report tJI u? Before 17oO tkie was declared and by the highest courts of the crown, outside of the House of Lords. This was declared by Lord Msnefield, with this dicta, which I shall read K you, thai I may be understood, iu that ess when Carru grew so eloquent, when be declared thai whenever a maa stood on British soil bis chains fell from Lira: t"The state of slavery is of such a nature that it i incapable of beinr introduced am

I WJ moral or political, but only by