Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1856-08-20

lie campaign was tl'theu III hui- NhuHiN On
Monday week last by discussion between Maj
James Garland. the Democratic Elector for thi.
District, and John NJ Speed. Esq, in behalf of
Fillmore and Donelson.
The Major opened the discussion in speech
of an hour aud half. He commenced with the
declaration that he intended 10 canfne himself
to the principles involved in the contestant dep
recated any introduction of personal issues or a
husive demonstrations of the candidates before
paid high compliment to Mr.. Fillmore, whom
he had personally known whilst serving in the
House of Representatives, described him as "a
man Of the highest integrity, against whose char
acter as a mau Of honour and gentleman in
cry sense of the wordno breath of suspicion had
ever been beard" He then enumerated the par
ties who had successfully opposed the Democrat
io party, from the time of the Federalisis down
to the present and here the Maj. very strangely
omitted to mention that their present candidate,
Mr. Buchanan, was of this same Federal par.
ty who had opposed the Democrats so bitterly md
denounced them in no measured terms. He neat
reviewed the history of the Missouri Compromise.
and declared that in this measure the South
bandoned her constitutional rights and for the
sake Of Union Yielded privileges which should
never have been surrendered lie next went in
TO the history Of the Nilnot proviso, aud it, ap
plicatIon 10 Texas when that State came into the
Union AID described the tcrmrnt and trouble rN
cited hv that measure. The Compromise OF 1850
which Quoted these troubles lac dc cared gave
not hing To the South save the Fugitive slnye
Law aud to that they were entitled under the
Constitution.
He next proceeded TO consider the Utah aud
New Mexico bill. AID declared thai bv its pro
visions il reprdied tho Missouri Compromise jd,t
a. ,ffectualiy as the Kansas Bin docs-.tbe one
measure declaring that Congress has power 10
regulate slavery in the territories. aud the other
giving this power 10 the people. lie next direct
ed attention to the much talked # doctrine of
sSquatter Sovereignty" and declared that be did
not understand what II meant. for II The h0nsGS
Bill recognized thdt doctrine then the american
platform also recognized il. as The language 81
The tlco tcas almost Identical. As to Mr.. Bnch
anan's views this subject, he quoted from
his Sanford" letter to prove That he did not lie
lieve this power vested in the people of lhp
Terriiories-es 10 the charge brought against
Mr.. Buchanan Of being opposed 10 the extension
Of slavery. in the abstract, he said that the preu
dices of education would naturally lead TO such
a view: but thought thai he ought to be judged
by his acts and roies,rather than by any abstract
opinion. These acts and votes he alleged were
uniformly with the South, whilst MIR fmorr'-
were 10 be found recorded against US. After
some Illusions IN the nnmbtr and diversity Of
platforms adopted by the American party, he
Urged the people to support The candidate who
stood on the Cincinnati platform which conceded
everything claimed by the South. The Major
speech was throughout dgnhed, courteous. aud
argumentative. and was listened To with much ut
ten'ion both by his friends and opponents.
Mr.. John NJ Speed, IN old line Wing, com
menced by calling attention la the fact that the
Democratic party for four consecutive cectens
had brought the charge of abolition against their
opponents, and in each case the allegation proved
unfoundtd. and we should therefore hr exceed
ingly cautious If not suspicious when the
game is sought To he played again. 1he demo
cratic party claims TO be party Of principles
To these principles they say, they intieNltly nj
here and these are the same all over the Union.
Mr.. Speed then contrasted these declarations
with the practices of that purity, with regard IL
the question of Internal Improvement mud show
ed that whilst the southern Democracy, backed
by the President adhered To their declarations, n
large maoiity of the party ignored them com.
pletely, and passed every Internal Improvement
Bill asked for; aud that too over the veto of theiI
President, aud the solemn protest of the Virgin
la Senators This commentary of acts proves
concusively that their declarations are not 10 he
relied ON. He then reviewed the policy OF the
two parties with regard 10 the Distribution of the
public lands and showed that The Democratic
party, whilst denouncing the policy Of distrhu
ting the proceeds of these lands, had no scrupr~
in giving dray the lands themselves. In thu
eonnexion Mr. Speed alluded to the Wing party
and the policy by which had ever been guided
in reference to these questions, showed that il
directly antngonisfic to that of the ID umocrat-
and wound up by the declaration that he could
conceive reason why any wing should desire
TO vote for Mr.. buchanan, unless he either wished
to be on the strong Sjde in Jirginid or believed
the oft repeated. but never sustained charge ul
abolition. nganst Mr. Fillmore. to be true
Mr.. Speed next alluded to The statement of
Maj Garland, that the tompranise Il 1880 "a.
peaed ,he Missouri Compromise. He sand il was
strange that the Compromise of lSjo was now
claimed as a Democratic measure aud incorpora
ted into their platform, when it well known
fac. that it was opposed by large majority Of
the party in the South who even proposed 10 hold
Convention in Nashville TO take the grievances
OF the South into consideration and adopt some
measure of redress. If the Compromise Of lS50
repealed the Missouri Restrictions why was sach
a thing never said or limited at the time those
measures were discussed aud passed. If the Mis-
souri, Compromise were repealed, seemed
to know anything about it, and such thing wa,
not alluded to, by any speaker on either side, so
far as he knew.
Mr.. Speed answered Maj. G'sasscrtion that by
the Compromise of 1850 the South got nothing Ia
which they were not entitled under the Constitu
tien. by calling attention "a the fact that great
praise was claimed and awarded IA MIR Mason thu
Democratic Senator from Virginia for his agency
in the enactment of that law. bot no one knew or
dreamed that the Missouri Compromise was atfect-
ed thereby. Again, if the Utah und Kansas Hills
are the same, why it deemed ne &c ssarv in the
latter bill to specify that the Missouri Compromise
was repeale ed whilst nothing WAC said of If in III,