Democrat and sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1853-1866, 1856-09-17
G,utbai,an an0 &lrctbinrjOQe.
LuDwrcK, WEsratoRELas Co. Pa. !
August 30, 1856.


August 80. 1886.
r. N BiDpLE, ESQ -Deur St. Il recog-
nize and appreciate your courteous notice Of
the speech recently delivered by me in Pitts
burg Its Admitted fairness, the result OF
confidence and conviction, IS 4 characteristic
Wfich it shares with numerous addresses by
4,y Democratic brethren, who, fer the tenn
perate utterance of undoubted truths, have
been assailed with fury of invoctive novel
inits Intensity and unknownt to Pennsylvania
politics until the recent attempt to subject our
good cid Commonwealth to subseryiency o the
ss'xaries Of New lsngiapd fanatics and the m
terests of New England spectators Your
impulses as gentleman have constrained your
columns to form an exception to'the common
course of the partisan press. | complain not,
however, even of the vilest vitupcration, for
SANDER Injuries only the slanderer and the
freedom Of the press concerns greater interests
than touch the private sensibilitles ofany man
You publicly put three questions, and di-
rect me as TO the manner of reply NOT being
candidate for any Office and asking no man 5
vote or voice, am not bound to answer: and
certainly If / waive my privilege and respond
to your interrogotaries, / am the proper judge
OF the mode of doing so. But I waive this
also, and agree to your strongly stated sug-
fairly, not by elaboration or evasion, or by
homilies on good breediagor metaphysical ab-
stractions or wire-drxwn law pieadipgs." We
shall then see g whether the results" Gas you
predict - differ widely from those which
seemed to follow what you are pleased~b
term 'specious speculations in regions too ex-
altcd for the practical subjects before the Ain
eriean people.
In NY Judgment, VII: tevcr is Incompetent
sible In politics, is false The extent Of pop
ular intelligence Is the limit OF legitimate pow
er for the servant cannot be greater than his
master, and those who administer The govern
nieut are servants Of the people.
Your questions are:
lst. :. Are YOU in favor of excluding Penn
sylyania white men from Kansas by filing the
Territory with shareholders and slaves =
TO which [ answer NO!
u. < Do you deny the assertion Of the De
claration Of Independence that, ali men are
created free and equal!' If not, how can you
interpose TO extend further the subjcction Of
one race to the cnsiayement by another :"
TO which | answer NOT assent to the
sentiment quoted, and also to the declaration
III the same instrument, that governments
~eFiye their just powers from the consent Of
the governed ! would net. therefore, inter
pose TO extend over a State or Territory, Of
which | am not q citizen, any law whatever,
bu. would leave the entire domestic code to
those who live under It.
81. = De you agree that the North SHOULD
be subduea in the sense Of Stephen a. Doug
las insolcnt threat"
To which answer NO. And deny that
Mr Douglas used the language imputed to
him
Having thus categorieally replied TO al
your enquiries, allow me to observe:
1st That | am not in favor Of excluding
Pennsylvanians from Kansas, because. as cit
izens Of the Republic, they have a right TO go
where they choose aud 90 what they please,
except so far as restrained by law. Ihe Con
Stitution- crovides that . the citizens Of each
State shall be cutitled to all the privileges and
isDmunitics ofthe citizens III the several States
and this absolute equality among the people OF
the Union, eoupcls Us to recognize the same
right Of emigration and settlement by those IN
the South as these III tne North. We hold
ty common title, and If We deny the right
of the South we admit the invalditY OF our
own claim. That a man IS aslaveholder does
not effect his character as citizen, and as 1t
IS IN his character Of citizen that he may Per
form any act which we can perform, he may,
Territory. He must sublait TO the local law,
whatever it may be, for when he selects his
abode, he must be assumed to accept all the
Consequences Of the act y STAKEHOLDER en-
tering any State or Territory may bring his
slaves with hinl-whether they remain sub
iects to his service depends on the law to
which he subjects himself This is the risk
which he must incur. But it is a hazard conf
ned to action of the people Of the community
into which he thus enters aud does not extend
beyond 1t is a submission to the sovereign
ty Of the people which is not conf ned to any
one subject, lut extcGdsto all matters of leg
islation.
A New Yorker, at home. may lawfully pass
one dollar balk notes. We cannot prevent
his coming into Pennsylvania, but We can for
bid his putting those notes into circulation
and any organized attempt in New York to
subvcrt our laws IL his particular. or to lin
it their application would be repelled and re-
sented as an insult to this Commonwealth. Ii
man comes into Pennsylvania his right of
property are dependent ON Pennsylvania law,
except under the special restraints of the Fed
eral Constitution. If his own notions, wish
es, or interests could make the law, we should
either have the despotism OF dictation of a SIN
gle man, or the anarchy of rules as various
and discordant as the men who make them. -
Do not these principles apply every where p
would not these fatal consequences follow from
like causes anywhere?
Suppose the Inhabitants Of Kansas were
unanimous in favor of the exclusion Of slaves,
would it not be monstfous for one immigrant
to assume that he could take slaves there and
keep them in defiance of the lawfully express
sed viii of the rest 1t would be monstrous,
l. y II 4 -