The Union and eastern journal. [volume] (Biddeford [Me.]) 1854-1858, 1856-02-22


article, you announced the author a. ono
I" who had for long yean been q supporter
Of the democratic party" Then 20 much
the better, for the old maxim Is, "set q
rogue to catch rogue :" Having premis-
od thus much permit me, Mr.. Elitor, to call
the attention Of the people a-1in to the doc
trincs and sentiments contained in thoso
resolutions, and TO remind the democratic
party in particular Of the chicancry and
falseheartcdnes of their leaders, In rcpudi-
ating principles and sentiments, which they
one day proclaim as forming the true DEM
oentic creed, but the next, cast of a. an old
filthy garment too vile for further use. To
show them that the cxpodiency Of their lead
ers to-day, may be their inexpediency to-
morrow. They forake one set Of principles
and embrace another with Us much facility
and indifference, as the hircling changes his
dress according to his work.
This fact will appear when we compare
their principles on the subject Of slavery, as
ayowed in their resolutions Of lSi9 and pro-
fct~ed up to the repeal Of the Missouri Com
promise, with tile contrary principles which
now, and from that time, they have contin-
tinued to advocate. What sentiments the
leaders Of the democratic party now enter.
tain and preach every day, is well known.
What they protested and taught in 1919,
and large portion Of the time since, will
appear from their legislative, State and
county resolutions. First, then, our demo-
cratic legislature of that year passed the
following resolve among Others.
Z" Resolred, That we hereby declare for
ourselves and in behalf of the people Of this
State, our Incorporating opposition to
the extension of slavery into any new terri
tory of the United States which Is now free"
There were other resolutions, in one Of
which, the Gov. was requested to forward n
copy Of all to our Senator's and Representa-
tiyes in Congress, requesting and insiructing
them to vote against any net establishing
governments for said territories, that did not
contain an cypress prohibition Of sIdrery.-
And that the sentiments of our democratic
legislature on this subject might be as gen
orally and certainly known us possible
throughout ths length and breadth Of the
whole Union, the governor was also request
cd to send copy Of the resolutions to each
governor of the several States. That same
year, 1919, there was held in Portland
democratic State Convention ut which II
was - Resolved, That the institution Of slay-
cry isat variance with the theory of our
government abhorrcnt 10 tho common sem
timcnts of mankind; and fraught with dan
ger to all who come within the sphere Of It's
innuCncc-tlIat tie fedora! government pos
sessas adequate power to inhibtits existence
in the territories OF the Union, &C." And
at the same time, the convention enjoined
sour Senator's and Representatives in Con-
grcss to make every cxertion and employ all
their influence to procure the passage Of a
law torerer excluding slavery from the ter
ritories of California and New Mexico" IL
will be seen that the foregoing has reference
more particularly to California and New
Mexico, and does not by name, include Ne
braska and Kansas and ouropponents may
be fool.hariy enough TO cavil and bubble
ut the OMISSION but let them remember,
that at that moment, and hccnty-aine years
yl0ys lejs~s, Gonsr~s- had r,s-cd q law,
called the Missouri Compromise, and that
that law was then existing, prohibiting the
introduction of slavery into those territories,
then and :" forever" as WIS supposed and
intended, and shame on the government that
has recently repealed that venerable and
salutary law. Double shame on that party
who, contrary to their former ayowcd seuti-
mcnts and acts, now sanction the detestable
breach of the public faith. But to return.
Tho Missouri Compromise, then being In
force, il was not necessary that the Conyen-
ton should include Nebraska and Kansas,
by name, as well M California and New
Mexico in their rcsolyc-and yet, the intro
duction Of slavery into said territories is in
cludcd in the general expression Of the re-
solve, Z" that the federal government possess
es adequate power to inh!blt its existence in
the territories Of the Union" That is, aH
the territories belonging to the United
States, including, Of course, Nebraska and
Kansas. In my first communication in your
paper two weeks since, hastily expressed
my views on that clause of the constitution
which relates to slavery, according precisely
with the views and sentiments ~ expressed
in the several conventions already alluded to
and in which the editor proper Of tho Dem
ocrat, it appears, largely figured. Where
did he and his associates get their notions Of
the power Of the general government to re-
strain the extension Of slavery, but from tho
Constitution, and by an " exposition" SINH
lar to my own2 And yet he as much dis
likes my " silly exposition" as he docc the
blackguardarticleo Mr.. Holmes. "Though
in point Of argument it is quite as able, he
says, as the exposition Of Frederick Doug
lass" II il not 30 we'll expressed" The
manner then Of the expression is quite as
offensive to his classical taste as the polecat
article Is to his smell. But | will not quar-
rel with his criticisms, since whether my
exposition, arguments, and expressions arc
quite equal or not to Mr.. Douglass or his
own, IL is satisfactory 20 know that the
learned editor of the Democrat and myself
once agreed on the subject OF slavery, but
am sorry to learn he has 50 sadly departed
from his former faith. Perhaps he will
equally dislike my " exposition" of the re-
solves which once expressed his opinions, as
well as my own, and in which he had 80
conspicuous hand in passing and circulate
ing in his valuable paper. But, Mr.. Editor
a n Il n