Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1856-08-08
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..


has been supposed that democracy meant
the largest liberty. 1t is this idea, more
than any other, that has led the masses to
sustain the party that has called itself dem
ocratic. But the history of democracy has
once more verified the maxim. Democra-
cy is now tho synonym of tyranny; the
terms are interchangeable. This is true
both in practice and theory Democracy,
which claims as its father Thos. Jefferson,
who wrote that "all men are endowed with
certain unalienable rights, among which are
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"
now gives its strength to the extension of
the most terrible form of human oppression
on which the sun ever shone. The denials
of demagogues who would fain cheat the
people, are useless. One fact shuts their
lying throats,-the slave drivers know their
friends, and they with one accord cling to
democracy.
The theory which justifes this betrayal
of liberty is more tyrannical than the act
itself The theory is that the majority
must govern; true enough, rightly under
stood; but with democratic definition it is
the most fearful tyranny When democra-
| cy at this day says the majority must gov
ern, it means that the majority is absolutely
supreme, that its will is restrained by no
higher law and knows no limit. Demoera-
cy says that if majority so decide slavery
shall go into Kansas, into Nebraska, into
Minnesota, into Utah, into Oregon, nay ev-
en-, if the majority will it, Ohio and every
free state may become slave states. Now
if the majority have the right to introduce
slavery anywhere, in Kansas, in Oregon, or
in Ohio, then they have right to make
slaves of somebody: and if they so deter
mine, the majority have right to make
slaves of the minority. If then they should
now decide to abrogate tho present state
constitution and make Ohio slave state,
and by law reduce every man who this fall
votes for Buchanan to slavery, they would
be doing no more than the majority doc
trine taught by the democracy authorizes
them to do; it would be fair if not Just
application of their own doctrine to them
selves. Thus we see that the majority doc
trine with democratic definition is the
most outrageous tyranny. No reader of
ours needs to be told that we also believe
that the majority must rule; but their right
to rule is confined within certain limits; it
is restrained within bounds which it may
not pass. The majority must never take
away the unalienable rights of men. They
must not take away life or liberty till these
have been forfeited by crime. If every vote
in Ohio but one, and he black man, shall
decide to reduce that one to slavery, their
act is null and void. It may have the form
Of law, but it's not law; it may be written
in constitution, but it is still unconstitu-
tional. The majority must indeed rule in
a republican government, but they must so
rule as to respect the rights of the minority.
If they do not, they are tyrants, and 'resist-
ance to tyrants is obedience to God"
Once more we say democracy and tyran-
ny are interchangeable terms. 1t matters
not that the objects of this tyranny are black
men; the act and the doctrine are as des-
pOtic as though the victims were white
Northern democrats may shuttle and evade,
but while they adopt the creed the slave
holders dictate, they can never escape the
charge of supporting tyranny.