Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-09-16

may safely declare that no orthodox, or even
tainted Democratic journal at the North, has
ever claimed for the Northern Democratic party
a superiority over the Freesoilers in the matter
of Freesoilism. The quarrel between the
Northern Democrats and the Freesoilers grows
out of an entire and radical difference Of sen.
timent; the quarrel between the Northern
Wings and Freesoiers is as to which shall 60
farthest in their hostility to the South. But,
without further remarks, we subjoin the article
of the atlas:
This cry is being daily rung throughout
the commonwealth by the Freesoil organs, for
the purpose of throwing distrust upon the Wing
organization, and TO weaken and divide the OPP
ponents of slavery extension, unless the Wings
will consent to place themselves under Free.
soil task masters, and TO work in the Freesoil
harness. 1t may be well for the people OF
Massachusetts to look TO the power and the ac-
tual support given to the cause Of freedom and
against the extension of slavery in order to
determine which party, the Wing or Freesoil,
have been the most reliable, and able to array
the most powerful resistance whenever the
extension of slavery has been before the coun.
try. In order to determine this question prop
erly, we must look not only to the principles
of the party, but its relative power TO carry out
those principles. There have been but two
occasions since 1920, when the question of the
extension of slavery has been the direct issue.
The one was the admission of Texas, and the
other the abrogation Of the Missouri compro-
mise line. How stood the Wing party, which
we are daily told is not to be trusted, on the
admission of Texas as slave territory? Every
Wing representative, both North and South,
voted against it. There were two senators
who claimed to be Wing, but who were elected
by Democratic votes over the regular Wing
candidates, and for whose election the Wings
were not responsible, who voted in favor of the
measure.
snow by whose votes was that measure
passed? 1t will be recollected that bill passed
by one majority, and that Messrs. Niles, of
Connecticut, and Dix Of New York, both Of
whom have been leading and petted Freesoil-
ers, had the power, by their own vote, to defeat
1T, and yet those votes were given for its admis-
sion, and for the extension Of slavery. So much
for the practical efforts of the Wings and Free
soil parties upon that question.
How stood the Wing party on the passage
of the Nebraska and Kansas bill, the second
attempt to extend slavery? The Wings in the
House of Representatives cast 81 votes against
the bill, and in the Senate votes against it.
Of the votes A in the House were from the
free States, and from the slave States. Of
the votes in the Senate were from the free
States, and one from a slave State Every
Whigvote from the free States, in both branches,
was given against it. The Freesoil party cast
four in the House and two in the Senate against
it.
Now which is the most reliable power for
future action, the party which cast 81 votes or
the party that cast only 4 votes ? If we look
to the popular vote of the free States only we
find that while the Wing party cast more than
a million Of votes, the Free Soil party cast only
some 10000. The representatives of this
million of voters proved themselves as true to
the cause of freedom, as did the representatives
of the 10000, and the record shows that in
every case where the extension of slavery has
been the ISSUE the Wing party of the Free
States have received more aid from Southern
Wings than from Northern Free Sellers And
yet these men have the effrontery to ask the
Wing party, the only party possessing any relia-
BILE power on this question, to abandon their or
ganization and array themselves under the lead
of their corporal's guard" We ask the re-
hecting men of Massachusetts, and of the free
States, to consider these facts, and determine
for themselves whether party numbering
more than million of voters in the free States
alone, united and determined in their opposi.
ton to the extension Of slavery, is not safer
power to rely upon for all practical purposes,
than party of only $4,000"