Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1852-02-05

this floor, by Wing "entlemen, because the gen.
tleman Mi. Geyerl who holds his seat in the
other branch OF this Congress, was elected BY a
coalition, as | understand 1t, of thUse who favor.
ed and those who were opposed to the fugitive
Save law, and the compromise measures, in the
State OF Missouri? Is it il the State OF Wis.
consln, where the gentleman nominated by a
Free SOIL Convention. and known to concur in
their views, was elected, and the Wing papers
from one end OF the country to the other, set up
a shout OF triumph at the " hig victory in the
State of Wisconsin ? The Fee Soil candidate
OF the Free Soil party was elected, and hence it
was, as one would suppose, a Free Soil vI.toiy.
But is a Wing victory a Free Soil victory p
Are they one and the same thing!
The gentleman says they are not the same,
but very different things but yet there is no
outcry OF Indignation against Missouri, or Wis
consin Tor these enormlties, but much applause,
because a coalition has given to the Wings a
share in the distribution of Office and power
There is little to be urged against Ohio, or New
York, or Georgia, but a great deal against Mas.
sachusetts, And why? do not know, unless
it is because her own sons contribute to heap
lmputatlons Of dlshonor on Massachusetts, on
this floor, because the stab from the paricidal
hand rankIes most sorely, and stimulates the
malignity of strangers TO follow up the blow
and add fresh venom to the wound. | do not
know why else she is made to bear the sins of
all The other States-why else she is to be the
" scape-goat" for all other coalitions in the UNI
ted States. Are not we in Massachusetts at
liberty to Judge Of our own political position,
and political course, as well as gentlemen in
Missouri, or Wisconsin, or Ohio, or New York.
or anywhere else 10 the United States--in Mis-.
slssippi, or Georgia, or any other State Is it
so clear that in any section of the Country
East, West, North. South, or central-ls it, |
say, so clear that gentlemen, who call them
selves by the same party name, agree upon these
very questions? ? It is SO clear that, IN South
Carolina, or Alabama, or Mlssissl ppl, the Demo.
Gratis all agree about this fugitive slave bill p
Do not some of them say that it is constitution
al, and others that it Is uncOnstltutlOna !? Do
not 50 ne propose one course Of action, and 9th
els precisely the opposite course Of action with
regard to it? Yet day after day, with an inso.
Ience countenanced by her own sons, Massachu
sets is denounced upon this floor, and in no
other State but Massachusetts, State having
a right equal to that Of any sovereign State in
this COnfedrary to determine what she Considers
right and proper, and what course she deems
brsl to persue IN her own domestic affiirs, and
for her own good government. Why, the gen.
tleman from North Carolina, (Mr. SlanIy) thinks
he would not 20 to Heaven with Democrats like
those of MaSsachusetts he could not bear to
tread the same path, Sir, he has not trod our
path heretofore, and therefore had no reason to
expect bis company IN the sttlght aud th0rny
way at this time but because he refuses to Jon
us, we shall not the less firmly press on, and not
the less safely arrive at our journeys end.
MASSACHUSETTS, | say, has the same right to
manage her own political affairs, in her own
way, with that ofany other State in this Union.
And she has not only The same right, but she
has the same ability, energy, and determination
to maintain that right with any other State,
and she will mainteln it, at home and abroad.
But | an not gong to make my stand behind
the dignity Of the State of Massachusetts, and
say that she does what she p%leases, and she will
not give all account of what she does. stand
ready here to d%ay--what | have never done be.
fore in public, and wh1t | would not do now, if |
did not feel particularly free from doubt that |
am doing right in what am doing-t0 endorse
The coalition in Massachusetts. believe | I'm.
derstand what 1t was, and what it did, though |
was not present at the time it was entered into.
was in the State of Illinois. But after Inv re-
tuIn 1 lGuIu "lhl Au Y ubiSs hllu ! dIl HUW
in the condition OF an %inpartial locker on and
being thus Tree to take my own course, | can
say, and do say, that think it was eminen;Iy
wise and patriotic in The majority OF the people
Of that State TO take The government of the
State out of the hands OF the minority, however
unpleasant to the majority that proceeding might
be.
Before proceeding to discuss the propricty of
.L.t ouo,,,n onJ of ,ho,~ooRoIu - :.:
by which it was made, let me however. inquire,
for a moment, who it is that makes the charge
of corruption against the coalition of Massa
chusetts My colleague from the 9th district,
Mr.. Davis, undertakes tn read letters to the
Democracy and Free Soil party because they
act together in Massachusetts. That is ALL
He has not impeached them for their acts, but
only for their concurrence in those acts. lie has
not singled out any enc act of those parties, ex.
cept that Of acting together. That he consid.
eTs a violation OF political principles. | have a
right to presume that all our great measures
were right, only that it was wrong for US first to
agree to do right, and then to do it. He ha>
not accused us OF voting for any law or any res
%olutinn, but has accused us Of appointing men
10 office. He has no: accused us OF appointing
bad men. He Inns not said that the Offices are
not better filled now than they were when the
Wings were in power. If he had, should take
issue with him upon that proposition. He has
not designated one single act of these parties,
but he has designated this coalition itself and
per Sc as offensive to his political senslblltles.
Aud now, what does my friend from the sixth
district mean by charging Upon the Democrats a
breach of political honesty in acting with those
who agree with them upon certain particular
points of action in eIecting the Governor,
Lieutenant Governor, and olher officers of State
administration, and in passing certain measures
Of reform, in VIII Oh the Democrats has been
engaged for Is or 20 years past in Massachusetts
but which they had not accomplished, and could
not have accomplished without the aid which he
thinks they ought not to hive received, when it
was rendered? Does he gentleman from the
9th district believe that It was was wong for a
Free Soller to act with Il Wig, or a Wing with
a Free Soller? To make my question more
definite and more pertinent to his own position
does he believe It wrong for an Abolllonlst and
a Wing to act together? He must have under
gone a transformation Of heart and character as
sudden, % entire, and as for beyond The reach
of natural causes as that Of Saul Of Tdrsus,
and that, too, quite recently, if he does not be
lleve such common action to be honorable and
iusliilble. Then why does he attack this Goa
lItion so fu%riously ? his is a new thing com
pared with the old standing coalition of the
State OF Massachusetts, IA virtue Of which the
Wing party has retained II. Lower for the last
20 or 80 years, by carrying with it the vote of
those whose feelings towards the institution OF
slavery were not OF a very favorable kind, They
are the gentlemen, those influenced by their
dislike OF slavery were The gentlemen who kept
the Wing party in power in Massachusetts,
from the time when it Ca ne in by the amalga.
motion or coalition of 1925, till the time when It
went out By the coalition Of November, 1850,
continued in January, 1851. 1t then, 1t be
wrong tor IA party opposed to the compromise to
~coalesce with u party in favor of The compro-
mise, and | tell the committee that such Il Goa.
litlon-such in principle, tor this coalition IN
MASSACHUSETTS does date only from the passage
OF that law-l say distinctly that such a clal
ton has kept the Wing party IN the State OF