The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1856-10-08
lAlbright's Vote un Dunn's Bsl.

squirming and writhlng over the exposi-
ton of Albright's vote on Dunn's Bill.
Some of them knock the whole thing in
the head by claiming that there never
was such a bill. As the Bill cannot be
carried around and showed to everybody,
this Is hard argument to meet; but their
papers, have not the hardihood to take
this ground, and they have until very re-
Gently Smaintained profound silence on
the subject, knowing that the less that
was said about it the better.
], But the Guernsey Times starts the sill
liest and most shallow defence that could
be imagined and the Journal copies it.
The Times has no character to lose, and
the editor of the Journal will not risk
his reputation BY endorsing it, but simply
copies it without comment; both papers,
no doubt, thinking that as the election is
so close it may have the effect to dupe
some poor ignoramus, before it can be
exposed.
The article referred to contains the Sec
ton of Dunn's bill which we have, pub
lished, and which is in the following lam
guage; asa.
> Provided, however, That any person lawfully
ball of said hall
not be discharged from such service by reason
of such repeal and revival of said eighth sec
ton, if such person shall be permanently re-
moved from such Territory or Territories prior
to the first day of January, 1858; and any child
or children born, in either of said Territories,
of any female lawfully held to service, if in
like manner removed without said Territories
before the expiration of that date, shall not
be, by reason of anything in this act, emanci-
pated from any service it might have owed had
this act never been passed: find proUided fur
her, That any person lawfully held to service
in any other State or Territory of the United
States, and escaping into either the Territory,
of Kansas or Nebraska may be reclaimed and
removed to the person or place where such
service is due, under any law of the United
States which shall 10 in force upon the sub
,ject. sf9M ID 70 e ss
qai TheE1inaes as a defence says:
,s4s Upcs, Che irtroductiou of the bill the Re-
publican party Was shrewd enough to see at a
glance that in voting forit, they had everything
to gain and nothing to lose. The
proviso only relates to such persons as are
Iacfuliy held to service in said territories.
Now as no one was lawfully held in slavery in
the territories refarred to, as matter of course
the proviso, about which the opposition are
setting up such howl, just simply amounts
to nothing atsal.
Whatia defence for party protesting
to be honorable! Claiming that it was a
a mere trick Of the party to catch votes
and that it meant nothing! This is their
defence. No man with Eve grains Of COM
mon sense believes that the proyiso does
not mean and include the slaves who are
or may be in Kansas Every man who
reads i. knows that such is it's meaning
and will despise this pitiful attempt to
Fevade it, The Tribune and Herald, and
all the, other opposition papers, down to
the Times have been torturing their brains
for some excuse for the vote of the FIRE.
montcfs Oh this question, but none of
them'have had the dishonesty to make such
a shallow claim except the Times. Sup
pose it were true, what a predicament it
leaves them in? Why, tits confession
that they attempted toEpractice dsrep-
utable and dirty yarick on their opponents.
"A party is in an unenviable position that
will make such defence as this.