The northern galaxy. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1844-1848, 1847-08-24
TRICKS OF THIRD PARTYISM-LOCO
FOCOISM SEEN BY THE LIGHT
OF HISTORY

"The National Era" Liberty" or Third par
ty organ recently established at the civ of Wash
mgton. contained, a few weeks since. letter from
4 correspondent, dated Brandon, VT. july Isr.
ls47, over the signature of "R. V. NJ" The ar
iicle is preceded by an editorial head "The APP
proaching Election in Vermont" and the main
design of 10th the-editoria and letter appears to
he TO produce the false impression that ''ihe old
parties" in this State have equally professed TO be
thoroughly antiSlavery, so far as voting and talk
ing go, and that both the Wing and Locofoco par
ties have equally beiied their professions And to
prove this, the Brandon correspondent copies res
olutions of the Vermont Legislature, passed in
1912. These resolutions protest against the adj
mission of Texas into the Union, or of any terri
tory in which Slavery exists; they declare that
Congress have power under the Constitution to
abolish Slavery in the District of Columbia and
in the territories, and 10 prohibit the slave-trade
between the several States, RI. V. NJ" says: -.by
turning to the House Journal for 1912 page 1856
we find that the foregoing resolutions passed H.
unanimously, every Democrat and Wing voting for
ihem." On turning to the page cited, we find the
first Of the resolutions omitted, which reads as fol-
lows:
Resolrcd, That as the representatives of the
people of the State of Vermont, we do protest a.
gainst the admission into the Union of any State
whose constitution tolerates domestic slavery or
the annexation of Texas, or any other territory in
which slavery exists
Now why was this resolution omitted The
reason is obvious. These Third-party editors arc
af aid to let the people the whole truth Their
whole chance of success in building up Third
party, independent of two old parties, rests upon
their success IN creating a belief among the peo-
pie that there is no difference as to the consistency
Of the two parties on the subject of slavery, and of
annexing slave territory. To the creating of this
belief they increasingly devote themselves On
every occasion, when they think their party pur-
poses can be subserved they hesitate not to gar
bic the records of history or to msrepresent the
Wing party. Had the National Era, and the
Montpelier Freeman and other Liberty" party
presses that copied from the Era" published the
FIRST resolution their readers would have seen that
in Vermont the Wings OF 1872, and the Wings of
ls4G and ls47, were the same-denouncing, on all
suitable occasions, the principles of slavery. and
srenuously resisting ali attempts TO annex more
slave territory; while they would also have heen
reminded of the abandonment by the self STYLED
Democratic party ofopposition to the annexation
OF slave territory. and of resistance to the en-
croachments of slave power Here would have
been most glaring difference between the two
parties the Wings have unifor1 ", consistently
opposed all attempts 10 fisten more slave terrific
nv upon the country. This is known TO these
Liberty" party writers. That the Locofocos, who
in SAP and lS43 voted against admitting Texas
and Slavery into the Union, subsequently wheel
ed entirely round and strongly advocated Texan
annexation in 1874 and in ls45 is equally we'll
known. "The next year" saws r. M "boih
parties in the Legislature adopted, unanimously.
another batch of resolutions of similar import
&c. True. But II. V. NJ. sees fit to copy but one
of them, which reads follows =
Resolred. That we desire the speedy abolition
ofslavery throughout the whole land and that we
will use all just and lawful means within our pow
er to accomplish that end.
This resolution merely processes hostility to sa-
verv This profession Northern Locofocos have
always been willing to make. In 1912 and ls43
they were also willing to make professions against
admitting any more slave territory in general and
of hostility 10 Ieron admission IN particular The
first of the series of Resolutions passed bv our
Legislature in 1913, alluded to by .R V. NJ but
which r. V. NJ" saw fit to omit reads as follows
Resoired, That we protest against any attempt
for the annexation of Texas to this Union. as un-
constitutional and dangerous to the stability of the
Union itself.
This is the last effort of VT. locofocoism against
the annexation Texas. Why did rot "R. Y. NJ
,opvtais Resolution For the same reason. doubt-
less, which prompted him 10 omit the first of the
series passed in 1912
In spite of the tricks Of third partyism. the peo-
pie well know the history OF their own Represen-
tdllNeS- Inc w HIS VI OcfuDV the same
ground now they did in 1912 and lS43. On the
question of slavery, and on the principle of admit
ting no more slave territory, they have pursued
one uniform and consistent course-that Of unfiin-
ching opposition. This has been their course ever
since the idea of annexing Texas was first moot
ed. The locofocos have always professed to be
opposed to slavery-in the abstract at least after
the manner of Mr.. Folks Kane letter on the Tariff
But as soon as the Baltimore Convention had
made Texas annexation an item in the party's
creed the same locofocos, who voted annexation
so unconstitutional and so dangerous to the sta
bty of the Union ITSELF" in 1912 and 1913 wheel
ed right about; and in 1874. when Reso utions
were brought forward in our Legislature dcnounc-
ing the further extension of slavery, in general
terms, and paricularly opposing the then contem-
plated scheme of annexing Texas, nearly the en-
tire body of the locofoco members N the House
opposed them, and roted accordingly See House
journal for 1874, pages l52-i54. Why did not
Mr.. r. V. NJ, and these oonsisent Liberty" party