Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1856-10-07
POLITICAL.
From the New York Daily News Oct
,yurysE DEMONSTRATION OF THE
DRMnrpkHy

tEron, the New York Daily News, OCT
,IuEysR DEMONSTRATION OF THE
DEMOCRACY
~, us O,sau and Rirer Counties, al Po"ghkecps'
~ ' Nec York.
ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND IN THE FIELD.
Tb. Democracy of New York City, Brooklyn. an
Staten Island gathered at the various poin,s Wnen
the boats were 10 iea'e luz 'he "'oN o
According to invitation. large number Of gentle
msn assembled at the Astor House by Clock a. ~
Others proceeded to the Hudson kver o'aton mme
cars we're in waiting to conduct them 10 inc pace
meeting The first Of the train was set part ~
the guests speakers and reporters Inc reinanoer
the cars being occupied by those who desired 10 lax
part in this great demonstration. ..,
In addition to those who went by The cars s"in
twenty steamboats, and barges were also Loaded Will
passengers. r., A.. .l ,o.t mn
derste calculations, were present al fougnAeePs,e
ground. Taking place in the middle ot tue day II wa
absolutely necessary tor the visitors to take recess
for refreshment, aud 80 it was Impossible al any on'
time to collect the whole multitude INTO one vas
Aftsr the Hon. David l.. Seymour had closed hi
address, az Chairman, he introduced the Hon. Il d.
Hunter, of Virginia, who delivered tho following
speech ,,,.>,r,,n
FgLLow.ClTIzENs In response to your invita-
tion appear before you this day to address, for the
first time in my life, popular assembly wh0ut Tue
borders of my own State. have retrained' hereto
fore, not from any want OF Interest IN w9aeHer Go
cerned sister State but from feeling that 1t might
seem an intrusion in TO offer counsel 10 those "no
had so many better advisers at home. but the pre-
sent is no ordinary occasion. we nave reatneu, ~
my opinion, solemn crisls'n pnoilc anas: ,Se
has been made which may involve the tate OF Inc
Union itself. The public mind may be hurried 10
conclusions which may prove in the last degree ibis
chievous and dangerous to all tdat American pa.rI
OTIS aud statesmen have been accustomed 10 ncu uea.
Under these circumstances had felt that It was
duty which the States of this Union owe TO- each
other to interchange opinions fully frankly ana can.
didly For one cir, should not be afraid to trust
the decision Of any question to the people, II coud
be fairly presented to them, and when they are tuy
Acquainted With the real state Of the facts. But
fear that the American people are not acquainted
with public sentiment IN other sections IMAM ueir
own. This, sir, is one of the considerations winch
has brought me here this day. wish to put you IN
a stand point from which you may zee the Southern
view Of this question: upon the other side OF whch you
have beard 80 much wish to make plea IN iavor OF
this mighty Union before it be further imperied and
endangered. (Cheers.) wish to speak III behalf OF
this rreat scheme of Government which has contrl
buted 80 much TO the Improvement and happiness
of the American people, ere yet 1t may be 100 late ior
ever.
In executing this task wish, as solemn duty not
ONLY TO you but to myself to speak out fuliy, truly
aud frankly If in speaking of this great question:
should handle topics land must touch theml which
are delicate and should perchance say anything hat
is unpalatable hope that much will be Pardoned 10
the great cause appear before you to advocate l
trnst tina. no man viii do me the injustice to assert
that anything which l may say will be said IN any
other but spirit Of perfect respect and kindness TO
Won all. Now. srs, need not say that TINS great
issue is arising out of the disturbed question OF Arr
can slavery upon this continent. But how and by
whom il has been formed is a matter OF serious IN
ouiry 1t commenced, sirs, a long time ago. 1t made
it's first appearance in 1920, when the question arose
in regard the admission Of Missouri as State into
this Union. :, 70. -.
We are all acquainted with the recruits OF that dis
pute but how and by whom these results were brought
about has been matter of much difference OF state
Inent and representation.
of procession which had just arrived on the grounds.
As was about to say, fellow citizens, the Inoue III
which these results were brought about iurhlsheu
matter for much contradictory statement. IL was SET
tied upon two amendments which were sent DOWN
from the Senate one OF which proposed that MISSOURI
should be admitted by striking out the antl'siasery
restriction upon which condition alone had oeen
proposed to admit her State, and the other amenu
meut proposed to apply this anti.slavery RESTRICTION
to the territory North of &c 80, which had been &C.
ouired from the State of Louisiana. Upon the hrst
amendment in regard to striking out the restriction
the North voted than FIVE to one against it, while
the South voted in solid column for it. Upon the other
amendment the North voted ninety-fve to five IN
favor that it appears that the NOrth old NOT Fo'e
for the admission of Missouri in lS20 without th,s re-
stricon. Yet II has been represented that IN lo2o
there was compromise formed between the North
and tn. South by which the North consented to ad.
init her upon the condition that it should be applied
TO the Territories yet the record shows the North
did not vote for any such admission at all.
To show that the North has never been considered
exclusive friends Of that, We hnd that IN lS2l when
the question came up for the admission of Missouri
that Mr.. Mallory of Vermont proposed that they
should have this anti:savary restriction as the con
dition Of the admission of Missouri. The North
voted twelve to one in favor and upon the final vote
for its admission the North voted against IT, thus show
ing that there is nothing in the representation ey the
leaders Of this party that the South had violated
a compromise, because the facts show that It never
voted for the admission Of Missouri without this restrc
tom for in 1890 the North made this compromise, and
in 1921 it clearly violated and proposed TO impose
this restriction upon its admission But II you take
it upon the true representation which doubtless has
been mads to you before by the Democratic party
that they voted for ordinary act Of legislation
this Of 1921 consistent with that OF lso and
charge of breach OF faith can be brought aGans'
H. To maintain that they had made any such coupro
mise in 1920, those who ella to be- particular
friends confessed, would be to fix upon them The
charge of bad faith, when in the Congress Of 1921
they departed from any such compromise, if it had
been made But in truth no such cha gs can be fair
" made against them. They never did make such &
compromss they voted for it as an act of ordiuar,
legislation.
Fellow .citizens-for am endeavoring to show you
how this issue was made up-the next thing which
occurred in the sequence of events was the anntxs
ton of Texas. That can hardly have been conSider
ed as sectional measure whenw We come 10 look
the history, because the votes were gwen 10 io o
and West-and it is to be remarked, ana reter 70 !
in that connection that when it was annexed oy tne
votes Of all sections Of the United States provision
was made extending the line OF 50 81 to II; whet
shortly aterward the question came up III re!aoh II
the annexation of the territory acquired by them iron
Mexico, Southern men proposed to extend that Inc
The question had been settled heretofore by this man
ner of computation, and they were willing that II
should also be applied to the territory acquired FROM
Mexico. But the North refused upon this occasion
and new principle was inroduced-nameiy' ths' o.
non intervention. 1t was established by The Com
promise aud Adjustment Of 1850 and 1881. II war
established that this principle should be applied oy
which the North virtually got the whole ct the terri
tory which was acquired by the Mexican concession
and all that the South gained the declaration o
an abstract principle, that Congress would not inter
fere with the Territories. The North excluded slave
~ and it had no right to do co. hence the South fell
itself to have been aggreved by adjustment
which practically excluded them from the whole o
the territory, and which gave them nothing in e1
change but this abstract declaration.
After il has been acquesced III by the whole coun
trv, then the Kansas and Nebraska Territorial ques
ton came up. We, the South. said, whatever ruiz
You apply ought TO be uniform. We are willing t.
extend the line to the Pacific Ii it is right i'll reear
to the Mexican Territory also rgnt ~ fs,as "
sis;ent and uniform. II it be wrong, as you asser
to exclude a Southern institution from the Union b
law Of Congress, here is case in which Congree
has passed such law. To be consistent, you mus
repeal it, in other Words that the principle Of the Sol
Element of 1850 and 1851, should be ,fplied to th
Nebraska act. The moment this principles was ndop
ed it was denounced by the leaders of the new part
as a swndle upon the North 1t was said that til
South had violated compromise with the North; an
not oontented with that they denounced those nobl
Northern men who chose to stand up in the vindcs
ton Of the Constitution and the countrywide Inc
who indicated your reputation tor Justice and goo
fah who were not doing less in sustaining your il
terest than they we're in sustaining the Constitute
itself-those men we're denounced among you as b.
ing doughfsces and traitor. Statesmen, srs, an
patriots we're they all. and history will yet do the
Justice ard il will do justice to the great Democrat
party in having come forward to apply the principle