Jeffersonian Republican. [volume] (Stroudsburg, Pa.) 1840-1853, 1852-09-30

uon. Neltner VT. homaS, nor any 9TH
er Whig in the Convention, had said or
done anything which forced Judge Wood
ward to offer his resolution. He thrust
it upon the Convention of his own accord,
without any previous action having taken
place which made it either necessary or
proper to offer such proposition. He
embraced the opportunity to do what he
had, no doubt, long before he thought of
doing, and on which, it is apparent from
the speech which he made, he had rehec-
ted and intended to speak. But he would
have us now believe that he only offered
it to compel the Wings in the Convention
"to come to the mark or back out" and
that they having chosen the latter course
his object was accomplished, and there
fore his resolution Withdrawn. Here is
another attempt at explanation, which is
in the highest degree discreditable. He
only designed to make the Wings "come
to the mark or back out" Come to what
mark! The mark of the slavery question?
That was the subject embraced in the
original resolution, and as the course of
the Wings on that subject was known to
all, and needed no stratagem, to bring
them to the mark upon it, he cannot refer
to that subject. On what then was it
his object to make them "Come to the
mark or back out?" AS there were no
other subjects embraced in the original
proposition, or the amendments, but his
own to exclude foreigners from voting, he
must have reference to that. That sub
ject had not before been introduced or
agitated in the Convention No Wing
had expressed any such views, but, on the
contrary, when his own proposition was
brought forward, it was denounced by
one or two Whig members of the Conven-
ton, as the Debates will show, and by the
Wing press throughout the entire State
What then does he mean by saying that
his resolution having answered It's purpose
was withdrawn? His remark is either
unmeaning twaddle, or he must mean that
he only intended to sound the Wings, and
finding that they were all opposed to it,
he knew he could not carry it and there
fore withdrew it. Whether he was sin
cerely in favor OF such proposition at
that time we leave to those who will take
the trouble to read his speech to say
That he was honestly in favor of it, and
uttered the honest convictions Of his own
mind, no man in the Convention then for
moment doubted, nor do we now, not
withstanding the effort now made to repu-
diate his own offspring by assailiug the
motives and the integrity of the Repoter
of the Convention. But more Of this here
after.
As some evidence in support of his as
sertions, Judge Woodward refers to vol.
10, pages 33-4 of the Debates of the Con-
vention, to show that on the 9th of Janu-
airy, 1888, some months after the time he
offered the resolution, he disowned being
in favor of excluding foreigners from the
right of suffrage. BY reference to said
Debates, it will be found, at the pages
designated by him, that reference was
made to his resolution by Mr.. Earle, a
member of his own party, whereupon the
Judge interrupted Mr.. Earle and explain
ed, as he states. Admit all this, and We
have no disposition to deny it, what does
it prove? 1t only confirms the charge a
gainst him. Mr.. Earle, a member of his
own party, and we'll known in this COM
munity as an honest, upright, and fair
minded man, understood him to be In
earnest, and as having honestly and In
good faith offered the resolution, or he
would not have referred to it. True If is,
the Judge denied, when Mr.. Earle refer
red to it, that he was in favor of his own
resolution, or entertained the hostile views
to foreigners which were proclaimed in
his speech. But was there any other
member in the Convention who rose, as IS
the custom on such occasions, to corrobo
rate his statement! Not one in the Con-
vention did so. They knew that he had
been driven from his position by the out
burst of Indignation with which his prop
osition was received by the public press
in the State, and that he was skulking out
of the position then assumed by him. Glad
to get rid Of the subject, they let his ex-
PLANTATION pass for what it was worth, but
IOOh Soou NdiS aiiO6 ~ OOlAONNi"NN ~ ~
any endorsement Of theirs.
For the speech made by him, reported
by the official reporter Of the Convention,
aud published in the debates Of the Con-
vention, Judge Woodward now attempts
to say that he is not responsible. lie does
not dare to say that the speech was not
made by him, or that he did not utter the
sentiments therein contained; but would
have us to infer that he did not, by saying
that he never revised it, that it is not fair
report, and that he has never ceased to
condemn it. 10 give the coloring OF plau,
sibility to this vague explanation, and
show motive on the part of the reporter
of the Convention to misreprcsent him, he
shows himself not only mean enough to
assail the integrity of the reporter but re-
sorts to falsehood to fasten upon him
1