The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1854-06-29

A Few Plain Questions.

The Lafayette Courier, Democratic paper
contains the following:
Answers to the following plain questions,
are solicited through the columns of the Cour-
Ter;
Was not the ESQ called, if you please) Mis-.
souri, Compromise held sacred and bind
ing, BY oil political parties, until the introduce
ton of the Nebraska bill!
Did not that Missouri Compromise prohibit
slavery in all territory north Of sc. 80!
Is not the whole OF Nebraska and Kansas
north of that l'pe!
u so, what object could there be i'm passing
the Nebraska bill, but to give slave holders
the power 10 take their slaves into those ter
ritories, if they choose, and which they could
not do without the repeal of the Missouri
Compromised
Was il not the intention of the founders
Of this government, and should it not be the
I'm OF their sons, to the latest generation, to
make slavery a local, and not a national in :.
sttution!
Does not the repeBling of the only national
law OIL our statute books, localizing aLd re-
strictiDg slavery recognize the nationality OF
that institution
Is every man who is opposed to the prin-
ciples Of the Nebraska bill t. be excommuni.
Gated from the Democratic Church!
Did not the Washington Union-the organ
OF the Administration, and the State Senti-
nel-the organ Of the Democratic party in
Indiana, declare that the Nebraska measures
were not party test,
Is it true that the people Of the territories
are granted tho right of self-government, as
claimed in the Nebraska bill, while at the
same time. they have no voice in the selec-
ton of their Governor, their officers of State
or their Judges!
| II is not the duty Of the Territorial Cover
nors to order an election Immediately, to de-
termlne whether they shall be slave or free
territory!
Would not such an election determine the
character Of the territorial institutions until
the formation of State governments!
Ii there were but five votes given, and they
were in favor OF slavery, would not their votes
be binding SO long as they remained terrific
riesl
is there any justice in such proceeding.
was the vote on the passage of the Me-
braska bill, a party test!
Was not the northern Democrats equally
divided on that question, in the lower House!
Are the forty-tive Democrats who voted
against the bill, all abolitonists!
Did not the forty-five Democrats who vo.
ted for the bill, in SO doing, voted to abolish
freedom in the territories, and place slavery
Oh an equal footing with it-and are they not,
therefore, "Abolitionists!"
Did not John Petit vote for the Nebraska
bill, with the Clayton amendment attached
which prohibited all foreigners from voting
in the territories, until they were fully natu-
rallied.
Are not the American clergy as intelligent
men, as law-abiding citizens, as well ac-
quainted with the instructions of our own
country, as any other class of men-and have
they not just as much right to all political
privileges as any body else,
Is II Democratic TO make distinction in So
ciety, and deprive the clergy of the right of
speech, the right to vote, the right to hold
Office, or the right to do anything which 9th.
ers have right to dol
Is 1t necessary that the people should fol-
low political leaders, whether they are right
or wrong, in order to be considered Demo-
Gratis!
Is there any question dividing the Amer
lean people at the present time, but those in
relation to slavery and whisky,
Must man be in favor of both, in order to
be Democrat!
Were the resolutions read to the meeting
on Monday night, really "adoptedl"
The columns of the Courier are open to
any person who chooses, over his own sig.
nature, or who will give Us his name to re.
ply.