Eaton Democrat. [volume] (Eaton, Ohio) 1843-1856, 1856-09-11

Soliuo3-EI pR gahlVhhie-E suvs
iiy and Double Dealing Exposed,
The California papers are putting Fremont
through the aint mill with a strong hand.-
Out Of San francisco, where he will get the
vote Of the Frederick shOuIder.strikrrs and
the few aboliiionists in that city, he viii
hardly be heard OF. This shows how absurd
was bis nomination, beyond the mere prein-
dice and disunion sentiments Of The fauaiic
politicians. Who know nothing Of the man,
and care less. The following article strips
the wool from his hide, and exposes him to
the cerision Of The world. In California an
advocate Of the nsas-Nebrpska Bill, and
now the candidate Of those opposed 10 the
free exelciss Of The elective franchise Of the
Territories. Such is the man that would now
Try the experiment or dissolying the Union, or
use the power or Government to cover over
his frauds and speculations in that new
State;
From the San Francisco Globe.1
In lie Globe Of Yesterday, we referred TO
the anomalous position in which the Republi.
cans hpd placed themselves by the noInina.
tion or Coloue! Fremont. We propose TO- day,
to show 10 part, the position Of that gentle
mar 10 CaliIornih Personally we entertain a
very high respect for Col fremont, and we
DO mol believe flat he is capable OF proclaim
ing himself as having accomplished in Cali
fornia certain great deeds in which in fact he
had no hand iu, and 10 which he was known
10 be honesty and conscientiously opposed
Yet. STANCE TO say, he is made 10 appear, in
the New York Tribune and other Republican
and Free Soil papers OF the Atiaatic States, as
not only accomplishing these objects, but as
advocating principles in this Stale 10 which
he was known TO be uncompromisingly hos
tile.
Let us look al this subject in the plain light
Of history. In The biographical sketch OF his
life, as published in the New York Tribune,
he Is held up as The chief cause Of inducing
the Constitutional Convention Of this State 10
insert a clause IN the Convention olihe STA lie
excluding slavery This is not only 0 gross
Islander upon Col Fremont, but II is palpi-
bic peryersion of hisiory. We do not believe,
as we have before said, thatyCol. Fremont had
anything to d. with the publication of this
falsehood. Ne is 100 honorable TO be engaged
in such q fraud sstbis upon the public. Now
the facts are as follows:
nthst Convention there were two parties.
There was Que that Believed that slavery
should. be excluded from The Slate BY an ex,
press provision iu the Constitution. This par
fy included a majority OF The members of the
Convention. The other party desired to leave
the question Of slavery open--to be decided
soieiy by submitting The question 10 a dice
vote Of the people whether they would OF
would not establish slavery. Among those
who advocated this motion were Hon. VIM. H
Gwin and Capt. H. w. Halleck, The latte
gentleman submitted this proposition 10 The
Convention. They were, however, in the mi
nority, and The clause prohibiting slavery wa!
Therefore passed, and is now a part Of lht
Constitution Or this State.
The prominent men outside who advocated
Tie view laken by the minority i. e., to adop
Tie planso f lie NehIaska Kan, as Act am
submit the question whetherihe people woul,
or would not sanction slavery, as q domestic
institution of the State, were Gen. Riley
Gen. ~IeIcifer r.. Smith, Commodore Jones
Colonel John Charles Fremont and otters.-
For The correctness OF this statement we hav
made rs 10 Col. Ffemonf's position at tha
time, we refer TO Capt. II. w. lialleck, theI
a4memler Of that Convention and FIRST Secre
tafys Of Slase, end DOW The senior partner Q
The ffm Of Halleck, Peachy and Billings. H
moi only pgreed with Capt. igalleck, but h
considered that il any course was adopted w
had no hope OF expecting thai The State woul
be admitted into the Union; and yet in III