Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-03-04
A LETTER FROM EX-GOVERNOR COLES.
To Messrs GALES & SEAToN,
Editors of the National Lnte0igencer


Editors of the National InteAigencer
Believing that all who read my communication
to Senator DOUGLAS, and his reply, as published IN
the National Intelligenccr, would see that ne had
avoided explaining or accounting for the principal
mistakes pointed out in his speech in the Senate,
and not liking the general tone of his publication,
| determined to take no notice Of it; but some
friends, having expressed the opinion that many
persons who read Mr.. DOUGLASS publication may be mis-
led by his mode of drawing up and his positive asser
ton that he had INDICATED every position in his speech
which had been assailed by me- and established the cor
recuess Of every material fact and allegation by ncon-
trovertble records" have advised call the public
attention. through your paper, to the fact that far
from doing he has neither explained replied to the
chief mistakes to which called his attention.
His two principal errors as mentioned by me, were
contained in his assertions that Congress had abolish
ed prohibited slavery from inch of American soil
and that the constitution of Illinois of 1918 made prov
sion that those persons who were then held slaves
should be thus held for fe and that their children should
become free at certain specified ages. LIZ
denied the accuracy of both of these assertions and
showed that Congress had abolished and prohibited slavery
by the ordinance of 1887, and contened that the
tinuance of slavery after that time not the fault of
Congress, but the result of omission the part of
those interested in carrying the ordinance into effect As
|
quent iegahty of the holding of slaves in Illinois, it
shown, by reference various judicial decisions, that
slavery had no legal existence in Illinois
also asserted in correction of Senator DOUGLASS that
the provisions he said in the constitutional his
own words "that all slaves then in the State should
main slaves for fe and that all persons born of slave
parents after certain day should be free at certain
age; and that all persons born in the State after
tain other day should be free from the time of their
nois so far from it, that the constitution did recog
Mise the existence of slavery These, the most striking
errors of his speech to which called his attention and
asked for explanation, not explained noticed by
him in his reply but nearly two and half of your
columns occupied in personal, and therefore rree
want reflections, and in quotations from the laws of
Illinois for the control and government of persons held to
service in that State With regard to his assertions and
insinuations derogatory to me- will only say they are
devoid of accuracy, foreign to the subject and wholly
| uncalled for. And to the numerous quotations he
makes Of the laws of Illinois, they useless unless
for the purpose of dvertng the attention of the reader
from the question at issue between did not call his
attention missatements Of the laws of Illinois, but Of
its constitution and of the ordinance Of 1887 admit
ted what his quotations show that serytude both nvo
untary and voluntary had continued to exist in Illinois
after the passage of the ordinance, and also after the
adoption of the constitution of the State but conended
that, however original remnant of slavery had negl
gently and illegally been permitted to linger for
siderable time the ordinance had had the effect of pre-
venting the introduction of slaves, (indened servants
could be slaves, slaves legally incompetent to
make contract of any kind) and was the immediate
cause OF making nonslavehoding States in all the terri
tory northwest of the Ohio river How them could it be
correctly said that Congress had not excluded slavery
from inch Of American soil
must again repeat that the main point at issue be-
Senator DOUGLAS and myself has not been touched
in his letter In his speech he asserts that the consu
ton of Illinois of 1918 repudiaes the ordinance Yet
have shown that it maintains and afrms it in almost
the very words of the ordinance In his speech he
that the constitution provides that all slaves then
in the State should remain slaves for fe,' &c., above
quoted Yet the constitution contains repeat, nothing
of the kind These positions of the speech stated
by me be erroneous and the words of the constitution
quoted to prove them In his letter he neither
questions the accuracy of my quotation its appica-
ton the of his speech. He leaves my ground
not only unshaken but unassaled. Yet he says in his
letter that he had vndcated every position of his speech
The Senator equally misapprehends his character and
position and my rights when he rails at for assuming
the responsibility, he calls it, of pointing out his
He chides me for having presumed" to do
The old Republican doctrine, to which subscribe,
is that every public is public servant or agent and
is Habe to be called to account for his public conduct
Apart therefore from my personal relations to Illinois at
former day. possess perfect right as citizen ofthe
United States, to do what have done. Hoping it will
have salutary effect the excabe Senator and will
at the time illustrate my opinion the subject,
will conclude with the noble and truly republican senti
ment of tie iusrious WASHINGTON who, when censured
for public conduct said Error is the portion Of huma
nifty: to censure it in this or that public is the
\ prerogatve of freemeu" EDWARD COLES.
PHILADELPHIA, FEBRUARY g. 1854.
| A correspondent resident at Sonora California;
having sent US statement complaining chat tho
mails in that State not run with due frequency,
in consequence of which the citizens obliged to
resort to the private expresses, at heavy cost for
the expeditions transmission of correspondence, we
referred his communication to the Post Office De-
partment, from which we learn that the service on
the inland routes in that State, independent of the
| IL, fl,n Don,