The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1854-09-27
iFor the Ashland Uuion.l
SPEECH OF HON. p. BLISS.

We attended the Fusion Meeting on
Saturday evening, last, under the i'm
preston that we were to hear something
new and pertinent to the issues which
are supposed to divide the Democratic
and Fusion parties. In this we were
sadly disappointed, for his whole effort
consisted of an imperfect re-hash of Nj.
Chase in the grove, only that it was
characterized by a greater amount of
illiberality and frothy school-boy decla-
nation, alike pointless and deficient of
wit, and Astounding in sophisms ahd gla-
ring absurdities.
In his exordium he stated las he did
in the grovel that the world had from
the remotest records of time, been di-
vided by two great warning elements,
which had always been a~ntagonistic in
their interests and ambitions-aristoc-
racy and money against freedom of per-
SON and speech. Yet in Rome a dis
tinguished candidate was defeated in
consequence of a thoughtless remark
concerning a citizens "hoofy hands /; "
and the Democracy of this country have
always placed a proper estimate upon
" Mic Biddle," the /" Galphins," Gard
ners, +" "Princely Bankers" and "Manu-
facturers," and that favorite sentiment of
Hamilton, 'legislate for the rich and
the well-born, and they will take care
of the poori"
He then adverted to the ordinance of
1887 to show that government had ex-
ercised a supervision over, and restrict
ed the onward march of slavery in the
northwestern territory-and then to the
acquisition Of the Territory of Louisiana.
&C., in 1919, and finally to that much
mooted bone of contention, the Missou-
ri act of 1920. There, in his opinion,
a final stop was put to the progress of
slavery, by the adoption of the Missou-
ri Compromise and the establishment of
Mason & Dixon's line and though such
men as CLAY and BENTON were the adj
vocates of that measure, he (Mr. b.
thought a great outrage was committed
by this administration in the repeal of
the same; yet he wa willing to pledge
himself to oppose the introduction of
any new slave State in the Union, in the
future, though it were south of that
line
Nj. Bliss, and every other abolition
ist, ever since the adoption of that line
have denounced it as an outrage, as a
league with hell and a compact with the
devil, and an arrangement too bad for
civilized men; and the moment the OBJ
~noxious line is removed, 10! a terrible
howl goes up at the bad faith of the
north and the south, in refusing to OBJ
serve a solemn compact
He then proceeded to denounce the
Compromise of 1850 in strong TERMS
did not wish freemen of the north to as
sist in returning fugitives to their mas
tersl Here, then, he stands in the
light of a violator of Compromises, and
in opposition to sacred cOnspacts !"
yet, no terms of billingsgate are suf6-
GENTLY strong to represent the bad faith
of Democrats
He (Mr. b. was not in favor of pop
ular sovereignty, that is, he was not in
favor of letting a few hundred persons
determine the introduction or rejection
of slavery into Nebraska and Kansas"
i" The popular sovereignty feature of the
bill was a humbug.n "He was in ia
vor of letting Congress decide that ques-
ton !; it should not be left to the people