Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1854-02-15
roo.otunrn taon sxcoxp PAGE, ]


Sir. 1 do not recognize the right Of the Aboli-
uoniits Of this country TO afraign me for being
fSlse tosacred pledges, as they have done 3 their
PROCLAMATION. Let them show when and where
have ever proposed to violate compact. have
pfoved that stood by the compact Of 1920 and
iSAb, and proposed its continuance and observance
IN IS4s. have proved that the Free Soilers and
Abolitionists were the guilty parties who violated
that compromise then. / should like to compare
notes with these Abolition coniederates about ad-
herence TO compromises. When did they stand
by or approve of any one that was ever made!
Did not every Abolitionist and Free Soller IN
America denounce the Missouri compromise in
1920! Did they not for years hunt down raven
ously for his blood every who assisted IN max
in0that compromise! Did they not in lS4E, when
Tefnz was annexed, denounce all of US who went
fofthe annexation of Texas and for the continu-
alton of the Missouri compromise line through it!
Did they not in lS4S denounce me as a slavery
propagandst for standing by the principles of the
Missouri compromise, and proposing to continue
the Missouri compromise line to the Pacific ocean!
Did they not themselves violate and repudiate 1t
thent Is not the charge of bad faith true as to
every Abolitionist in America, instead of being
true as to me and the committee, and those who
advocate this bill!
They talk about the bill being violation of the
compromise ulcuoutco VI lCVV' " hO SoH ouS"
me man in either House of Congress who was in
favor of the compromise measures of 1850, and
who is not now in favor of leaving the people ol
Nebraska and Kansas to do as they please upon
the subject of slavery according to to the provisions
Of my bill! Is there one! Ii so, | have not heard
of him. This tornado has been raised by Abo.i-
tionists and Abolitionists alone. They have made
an impression upon the public mind in the wey in
which have mentioned, by Justification of the
law and the facts; and this whole organization
against the compromise measures OF 1850 is an
Abolition movement. presume they had some
hopes of getting few tender-footed Democrats
into their plot; and, acting what they supposed
they might do they sent forth publicly to the world
the falsehood that their address was signed by the
Senators and majority of the Representatives
from the State of Ohio; but when we come to ex-
anime signatures, we find no one Wing there, no
one Democrat there; none but pure, unmitgated,
unadulterated Abolitionists.
Much effect, know, has been produced by this
circular, coming as it does with the imposing title
of a representation of majority of the Ohio del
egation. What was the reason fer its effect! Be-
cause the manner in which it was sent forth i'm
piled that all the Wing members of the State had
joined in it; that part of the Democrats had sign
ed it; and then that the two Abolitionists had
signed it, and that made majority of the delega-
ton. By this means it frighte ned the Wing party
and the Democracy in the State of Ohio, because
they supposed their own Representatives and
friends had gone into this negro movement, when
the fact turns out to be that it was not signed by
a single Wing or Democratic member from Ohio.
Now, ask the friends and the opponents of this
measure to look at it as it is. Is not the question
involved the simple one, whether the people of the
Territories shall be allowed to do as they please
upon the question of slavery, subject only to the
limitations of the Constitution! That is all the
bill provides; and it does in clear, explicit, and
unequvocal terms. know there are some men,
Wings and Democrats, who, not willing to repu-
diate the Baltimore platform of their own party
would be willing to vote for this pruciple, provi-
ded they could deny that it means what it was in
tended to mean in certain localities. do not wish
to deal in any equvocal language. If the princi-
pie is right, let it be avowed and maintained. If
tits wrong, let it be repudiated. Let all this quib
bling about the Missouri compromise, about the
territory acquired from France, about the act Of
1920, be cast behind you; for the simple question
is, will you allow the people to egislate for them
selves upon the subject of slavery! Why should
you not!
When you propose to give them a territorial
government do you not acknowledge that they
ought to be erected into political organization;
and when you give them Legislature do you not
acknowledge that they are capable Of self-gov.
ernment? Having made that acknowledgement
why should you not allow them to exercise the
rights of legislation! Oh, these Abolitionists
say they are entirely willing to concede all this,
with one exception. They say they are willing
to trust the Territorial Legislature, under the lin
itations of the Constitution, to legisate upon the
rights of inheritance to legslate in regard to rel
gon, education and morals, to legislate in regard
to the relations of husband and wife, of parent
and child, of guardian and ward, upon everything
pertaining to the dearest rights and interests OF
white men, but are not willing to trust them to
legislate in regard to a few miserable negroes.
That is their single exception. They acknowl-
edge that the people of the Territories are capa-
bic Of deciding for themselves concerning white
men, but not in relation to negroes. The real
gist Of the matter is this: Does it require any
higher degree of civilization, and in intelligence,
and learning, sagacity, to legislate for negroes
than for white men! Ifit does, we ought to adopt
the abolition doctrine, and 60 with them against
this bill. If it does motif we are willing to
trust the people with the great sacred, fudament-
al right of prescribing their own institutions, con-
sistent with the Constitution Of the country, we
must vote for this bill as reported by the Com
mittee on Territories. That is the only question
involved in the the bill. hope have been able
to strip it Of all the Misrepresentation, to wipe
away all of that mist and obscurity with which it
has been surrounded by this Abolition address.
/ have now said all have to say upon the
present occasion. For all, except the first ten
minutes of these remarks, the Abolition confed-
crates responible. My object, in the first place
was only to explain the provisions of the bill, SO
that they might be distinctly understood. Twas
willing to allow its assaiants to attack it as much
as they pleased, reserving to myself the right
when the time should approach for taking the vote
to answer, in concluding speech, all the argu
ments which might be urged against it. still
reserve-what / believe common courtesy ant
parliamentary usage awards to the chairman Of I
committee and the author of bill--the right o
summing up, after all shall have been said which
has to be said against the measure.
hope the compact which was made on las
Tuesday, at the suggestion of these Abolitionists
when the bill was proposed to be taken up, will
- AZ IA a. Al L.