The Davenport daily gazette. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1856-1869, 1857-10-08

the privilege, veto any banding bill which
NAV be offered FOR Lbs inspection II he 20
grossly misconceives che language and spir.
1t Of the New Constitution in other particu-
lars, how wilfhe not interpret that instru
mcnt when he wants an excuse to veto
Bank Bill 2 John Tyler always said be
would not veto a National Bank bill which
| did not conflict with his Interpretation Of
| the Constitution lie vetoed bill which
some Of tie wisest statesmen in the coun-
| try thought entirely Constitutional, and
then vetoed another bill which wa framed
To preci-el, suit his official and published
leas &c what Constitutional National
Bank bill should be just So il would lie
with Mr.. samucls. lie is opposed in prin-
ciple ia Banks, and he would find some
Constitutional scruple" for yetoing any
bill which might be presented To him.
Tat may be relied upon, more especially
a, the region Of Dubuque, whence he ex-
halcs his political existence, has BY his own
statements "no necessity" for Banks
R.ItRoAp-
Mr.. samucls devoted long time TO dec
lamaton on the utility Of railroads, and to
a defence of hi. course in the Legislature III
this subject. A. VIC have never published
al article making any accusations in respect
10 hi- course, we have nothing now TO say
But hi opponent proved very conclasiyely
| that this candidate labors in and about the
Legislature, have more favored Railroad
monopolics than the rights Of the people.
| There il, however, one little matter 10
which Mr.. samuc!s entirely forgot TO al
| Jude Ii may not he known that every Rail-
| road man in the State Is opposed 90 the
New Constitution and that they did their
utmost to defeat il last August. Yet such
Is the fact-and why is il 2 Because IL the
following Bill Of Rights
| Sac is Private property shall not be
taken for public use (for railroads) without
just compensation iirst being made, or Sc
'urcd to be made, to the owner thereof, a.
soon as tho damages shall be- assessed by n
jury, who shall not take into consideration
any advantage that may result To said own
or on account II the Improvement for which
Il il taken.
This section i, precisely what the peopl'
demand. II is supported by Judge Lowe
while all Mr.. Samuels' past history in con
nection with railroads, prove that he is op
,,osed 10 this section. lie dared not give Al
opinion on il, but passed the subject by IL
total silence, when he katg this very sectiol
had secured for the New Constitution th,
entire opposition Of the Railroad Compa
nies
EDUCATION.
In the discussion of this subject, MI
, Samuels proved that lac could stoop TO q
low and contemplate and disgusting dema
soguery as even Giliaspy himself Will
eulogizing education in the natural elc
= lnence which every good heart feels, thong
:, il may not command the tongue to cxpre'
= 1t, he descended to the lowest appeals to Il
lowest prcludices Of the lowest class repr
~ >cnted IN bis presence. The fact Is,
= found niger in the wood pile an
afterward. there were good many woo
: piles out Of which he ferretcd big and litt
''nigger..' la the language Of section
# Education, which says" The Board I
= Education shall provide for the education {
III the youths OF the State, through -y'
tem,n Sc.--he discovered direct intentio
of educating black and white children &c
gcther! lie charged this intention upo
: the Republican party, and made II th
-teund work tor nearly half an hour. NJ
= peals and wailngs in the finest style Of hl
y uratorv, In fact. the orator was only aws
! N.ned III him when lac had an opportun,t
~ rubbing himself against niggers. An
D vet this man kaogs that the Constitution
e MANY other States provide IN simils
manner Tor the education of all the youth
1t the respective States, and that IA no CAS-
! are black and white children commngled II
the Schools, except perhaps in Msssachn
sets, or certain parts Of that State-an,
he Sacxs that II was not the intention o
those " ho placed this section in the Consti
tuition that black and white children shout,
mingle together In our schools. The Who'll,
tone Of his first speech was against th'
: education Of colorcl children NJ all, bat .
. severely was he handled on this subject b
his opponent, that in his second speech b
came out plump for the education VI ne
> ,roe<, and said II was SANDER on his part,
: TO say they do not hold the same opinions
4 &........f.s AL
IN this Educational section, must have dis
, gustcd all the more intelligent q hi- owr
party. II was simply a dirty attempt I,
! deceive the people, aud TO pander 10 tn
: lowest passions Of the mob. lie was mos
j completely ovcrshrown by his opponent o.
this point, aud vet 1t was evidently intende'
10 be the great point of his speech w
!, ma. say in conclusion, that Mr.. Gillaspy
! his colleague on the Democratic ticket, vote,
] for the article ON Education, in the Consti
! tutional Convention, with Other Democrats
: WITNESSES.
e The speaker had much t. say on the sub
: rect of Indians and eolored persons testify
a ing in our courts. uc uasied much Of hi
time in discussing lni.an testimony, and il
giving particular illustration from the In
dian difficulties in the North, Of what, unde
; very remarkable condition Of things, Indi
! an testimony might be productive Of II,
J had very little to say on the subject Of Ne
gro testimony in comparison. II is enough
for us to merely say on this subject, that hl
} took decided stand against the testimony
being accepted of al persons not .rAsss-aa
much .. 10 say, yeraeity, even under the sol
emn obligation OF an oath, cannot exist in
any heart beating beneath a colored skin
lie taoKs that the testimony Of all credible
witnesss. 10 not asked As granting special
privilege 20 men of eolored skins, or in any
manner to elevate or equalize the Negro,
but for actual protection to tho ehites them
selves, and for the rescue Of the truth and