The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1856-07-28

for territory which solemn enactment had de-
clared forever free, he denounced the new law
which gave slavery the opportunity of enter
ing there, and more especially the wicked acts
of the Pierce Administration which sought to
force it into portion of this territory. The
South had received and was receiving her
share, the North but claimed her own. lie
did not object to slave States formed from ter
ritory South of the Missouri Compromise line
entering as slave States-but he did object to
new slave States North of that line. He was
for restoration of the Missouri Compromise,
believing that as all parties and sections had
lived peacefully under it for over thirty years,
we could do the same thing again, and that if
not restored, the strife in Kansas was but
beginning of civil war and turmoil the end of
which we could not see. With each new ter
ritory there would be another struggle.
He advocated the Pacific Railroad with
much zeal But the principal part of his
speech was devoted to exposing the princi-
Piles of fraud force and abuse, as illustrated
by the so-called Democratic party. Whatever
he might have been for, he showed himself a
most determined foe of the Old Line party
We are not sure but this is all the political
virtue we who are opposed to the Old Line
party, should ask of our candidate at this pc
culiar time. He cannot advocate much evil,
while he opposes all the corruptions and cor
rupt influences and designs and actions of that
party. He proved, that if maintaining the
views he did against the extension of slavery,
he were an Aboyitiozist, then were the Demo-
cratic party Abolitionists ofsF four or five
years ago. He read from the written opinions
of leading Democrats, showing that they up
held precisely the opinions he now advocates.
1t was unnecessary to offer any evidence to
illustrate this. No Democrat dare deny its
He denied that he, or those with whom he
affiliated, were for Disunion, or that the sue
cess of either Fremont or Fillmore would
bring disunion, but he charged that the Dem,
f ocratic party had made Dsunon familiar
word, and had set men to thinking about it as
possible or probable contingency. He emu
merated a number Of cases at different peri
ods where the South and the Democratic par
ty, had raised the cry Of Disunion to intimi
date the North or other parties and BROUGHT
to the present time when the cry was agar
! raised to alarm the timid. By continual,
prating of Disunion that party might somt
time bring it about. AT present there was NJ
! real danger If there was, Douglas, Pierce 6
: Co, were responsible for the danger, in havin!
1 originated this strife, and upon their head
be the consequences. He took up the charg
of FUSION and hurled it back upon those wh'
made it--pointing to JEFF Davis, disunionist
l. nulliher, a fire-eater, from the South sittin
side by side in Pierce's Cabinet with Gale
Gushing, whom that same party had formerl
T charged so bitterly with Abolitionism-ant
if giving many other instances.
: But we have not space for further details
J, M Vaa4ah,s s.,nAah quarre
I with him for any opinions he expressed. Hi
= opinions are very much the same as we hav
:, heard advocated here by kentucky speaker
> probably in no way different, excepting tina
; he is in favor of the restoration of the Mis-
souri, Compromise, while they were for lettn
" things be as they are, acknowledging at tn
same time the wrong committed. Mr. Veatch'
principles are so immeasurably better tina
those of Lockhart, and those advocated by al
who uphold Lockhart, that after hearing hi
speech we now as before give him our cordid
support. Between the men there is no com
: parison.