The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1852-10-07

: corded in the affirmative Had Mr.. Sumner
been present his vote would doubtless have
been in harmony with his speech. But what
right has the Post to hold Mr.. Hale up to rep
rotation on this question, when he made no
speech in support of the bill, and did not vote
for it,
Recollect that journal, in support oil the
charge of prohigacy against the Free Democ'
racy, in voting away the public lands, refers
only to the speech of Mr.. Sumner and the al
legged advocacy of Mr.. Hale, which it does not
prove the opposition of Mr.. Chase and Mr.
Wade it says nothing about, nor does 1t refer
to any votes by the Free Democratic members
of the House We challenge it to the proof,
that the Free Democracy in the House voted
to give away, during the last session of Con-
gress, territory enough to be the seat of an in
dependent empire Or to give away any por-
ton of the public lands to any kind of corpo-
ration We deny the statement We are not
able now to lay our hand upon any yea and
nay vote on this question in the House but
we know that majority of the Free Demo-
cratic members were opposed to the policy,
and not one of them ever made speech in
support of of it. At our leisure we shall look
up the record, and meanwhile call upon the
Post to produce the evidence in support of its
averment But let it not assume, as it has
done, that Mr.. Seward, and those who act
with him, belong TO the Free Democracy
The Post knows that he has nothing more to
do with them than has Martin Van Buren,
The Homestead BILL introduced by Andrew
Johnson, of Tennessee, protesting to give to
actual settlers limited portions of the public
lands, was supported by our friends, for this,
among many reasons that it would help to
arrest the prohigate waste of the public do
main by just such grants as the Post denoun-
ces. The bill was warmly advocated by the
Free Democratic members, and they ALL with
a single exception, recorded their votes in the
House in the affirmative, on its final passage.
In the Senate, Mr. Chase and Mr.. Hale both
labored earnestly to bring it up in that body,
but were bafiled by the Wing and Democratic
members Both these gentlemen and Mr..
Sumner were openly committed to its support,
and, if we mistake not, Mr.. Wade occupied the
same position.
In accordance with the action of the Free
Democracy in Congress, is the position taken
by the Pittsburgh Convention, in the following
resolve, which was unanimously adopted:
That the public lands of the United States
belong to the People, and should not be sold to
individuals nor granted to corporations but
should be held as sacred trust for the benefit
of the People, and should be granted in limited
quantities free of cost to landless settlers"
Does this look like voting away the public
domain to railroad corporations!
On the other hand, the Wing National Con-
venton abstained from any expression of opin-
ion on the subject, while the Democratic passed
the following antiquated and unmeaning reso-
luton
Resolued, That the proceeds of the public
lands ought to be sacredly applied to the ma
tional objects specified in the Constitution
and that we are opposed to any law for the
distribution of such proceeds among the States,
as alike inexpedient in policy and repugnant
to the Constitution"
We submit to the reader whether we have
not fully demonstrated that the charges of the
Post against the Free Democracy and its Rep
resentatives and Senators in Congress, are un-
supported and its representations partial and
unfair
Having disposed of the main topic of the
editorial in the Post there is another point we
must notice before concluding this article. Our
friend, while anxious to depreciate the De-
mooracy of the Anti-Slavery men, is at pains
to compliment the orthodoxy of the Southern
"The Southern members" it says, usually
strict in the construction Of the Constitution,
and faithful to the principles of republican de-
mocracy in the administration of the national
property, submitted to these exactiOns and IN
so doing have, in our judgment, given fatal
blow to their influence in the Government"
Submitted to these exactions when, as
the record shows, they were active in making
them
But this compliment to the strict construc-
ton of Southern members might have been
omitted without disparagement to the truth
of history. Were the acquisitions of Louisiana
in 1902. and of Florida in 1918, measures of
strict construction The Constitution con-
tanned no warrant of power authorizing such
acquisitions. Were the National Bank, the
Protective Tariff. and the schemes of Internal
Improvement of 1916, fathered and fostered by
Calhoun, Lowndes Jefferson, Madison, and
other Southern men, measures of strict con-
struction ~ Were the denial of the right of
petition, and the attempts to suppress freedom
of discussion in 1885, 1887, 1898, and 1899,
measures of strict construction :" Were the
annexation of Texas and the marching of the
army of Taylor to the Rio Grande, measures
of strict construction" Was the passage
of the Fugitive Slave Law, with its summary
process its denial of habeas corpus its abolition
of jury trial, measure of strict construc-
tiea an-Are the bills from time to time intro.
{ duced in Congress for the payment out of the
Public Treasury, for slaves az property meas
ures of strict construction Is the impris-
onment of certain citizens of Northern ports
in Southern States measure Of 81 strict con-
struction"
There is real Democracy in the South, as
i'm the North. but a true Democratic party has
yet to arise in the South. We deny that CAPT
talists who enslave labor, and seek to make
: their monopoly of Capital and Labor, the con-
trolling influence in all legislation, State or
National, can be true Democrats, Strict Con-
structionsts, or genuine Republicans.
The only principle Of oil such monopolies
must be self-interest; and their measures, Of
course, will vary according to its demands.