The Union and eastern journal. [volume] (Biddeford [Me.]) 1854-1858, 1857-01-02

party. because tho Republican party il due
time would take their position.
Mr.. Fessenden. / cannot deny that, bt
cause do not know that it is not 30 but ]
can say that, although reader Of tho New
York Tribune, never saw 1t. Whether II
is there or not cannot say. But even II II
were there, it by no means follows that il
is part or the creed Of the Republican
party. hold that no party is responsible
for oil that appears in all the newspaper,
which support its candidates. Do you hold
that the Democratic party in the North il
responsible for the doctrines Of the Charles.
ton Standard?
Mr.. Pugh. No.
Mr.. Fessenden. Why do you hold the
Republican party at the North, responsible
for tho doctrines Of the New York Tribune,
if 1t made such an announcement
Mr.. Pugh. wish to be fair with the
Senator. I understood him first to assert
that the Republican party disayowcd its
connection with these other gentlemen. ]
then asked him to show mo the place where
they disayowcd it. lie said ii was not in
the platform, but in the newspapers; tha!
every newspaper disavowed 1t. l named
one which did not.
Mr.. Fessenden. said nothing about its
connection. said it disavowed those prin.
ciples; and there is no paper Of the Repub-
lican party which has ever advocated the
doctrine Of the Observation-Disclosures. NoSen-
ator can cite me to one. If there DO such q
one. il il not an authoritative exponent ol
tho Republican party.
Mr.. Brown. II the Senator from Maine
will yield me the floor for moment, l will
ask him one question?
Mr.. Fessenden. With great pleasure.
Mr.. Brown. The Senator says the news.
papers of tho Republican party have moi
advocated the principles Of the ultra Abo'
litionists. Does he not know that the ultra
Abolition papers have advocated and sus
tained the principles Of The Republican
party?
Mr. Fcssendcn. Suppose they have, wha'
oft?
Mr.. Brown. A good deal oft. 1t shows
that sort Of affinity between the two partie,
which, it seems to me, on the basis lait
down by the Senator from Maine, ought u
be exceedingly Objectionable to him, ant
the objection hc ought to manifest. II ~
entertains principles so close to those OF the
Abolition party that they, seeing they have
no chance to elect man Of their own
readily fall into the support OF his party,
it not apparent that, whenever they haV'
gained sufficient ascendency in the party
they will control everything to their owr
advantage? Things having tendency II
that direction, we are left to conjecture no"
soon the time will come when the Abolition
element Of his party will DO the predomi
nant element.
Mr.. Fessenden. 1t is preeaely that kin'
of logic to which l object as altogether In
fair and inconclusiye. ask the honoraoi
Senator from Mississippi, in reply, does n
not we'll know that the Charleston Stand
ard supported the candidates of the Demo
cratic party? cite this as mere exam
pie. Is the Democratic party responsible
for IL! Arc we to take it that the Senato
from Mississippi and all his friends maintain
the doctrines of that paper-that they ar
in favor of disunion-hold that disunio'
would be the very best thing that could hap
pen for tho people Of the South, and that
party should be formed to accomplish it,
Does he endorse all those doctrines as tn
doctrines of the party?
Mr.. Brown. The Senator speaks OF th'
Charleston Standard. l suppose he mean
the Charleston Mercury. =,
Mr.. Fesscndcn. No, sir; mean tn
Charleston Standard.
| NJ Ia m M i never fplU
and do not know anything about 1t.
Mr.. Fessenden. 1t has had long series o
articles to the effect which have stated.
Mr.. Brown. Sentiments reflected by par
ticular newspapers are ono thing. TN
sentiments reflected by an organized politi
cal party are altogether q different thing
Now state that tho whole Abolition party
Of tho North, the Garrison and Gerrit Sriitl
and Fred Douglass party-.the party know
to the country as the Abolition party per Sc
went for John G. Fremont for President
and were invited to do 30 by tho leaders o
the Republican party.
Mr.. Fessenden. know nothing abou
the invitation, and do not know whethe
they were invited by leaders or not. Tha
q part of them voted for tho Republican
party, and that part did not, J am wei
aware. The Abolition party itself was mo-
sunk in the Republican party. That indi
viduals Of that party voted for the RePub
lican candidates may bc true but how doe
that prove that the more than one millioi
of men who voted for John q. Fremont ar'
actuated by the same principles2 lisa part,
responsible for tho principles Of every mar
who chooses to net with II rs matter o
choice? The reasoning is illogical. In m.
judgement it is unfair-I use the word in M
offensive sense. We do not hold ourselves
responsible for the private opinions of al
who choose to vote with US; nor do We holt
our fellow-citizens Of tho South responsible
for tho private opinions of oil men VIII
choose to vote with them; nor for all tn
opinions expressed in tho public newspaper
of the South, some Of which are unquestion
ably offensive to southern people-quito q
offensive to them as to us, for | believe ther'
are rs good friends to the Union in TIT
South as in the North.
What object to in the message, therefore
is this: the President well knew, well un
derstood, that there WAS wide distinction
between the small, powerlcss class Of ultra
Abolitlonists in the free States, and tn
great party which nominated John Q. Ere
mont US o candidate for the Presidency
and yet, throughout this message, he make
no distinction between these two parties, bu
endeavop to fasten on the country the idea
that they arc one and the same; that tn
same men who sustain the one set Of princi
pies sustain the other. Not only docs no d.
that, but he endeavors to prove the princi
pies themselves identical, although know
ing very well that there is wide distinction
between the doctrines Of those who main
tain that slavery should not be extended
and of those who maintain that this Unior
should be dissolved, or that tho rights Of Oh,
States should DO interfered with in reference
to slavery. lie makes the attempt, and
carries It through his message, TO show tina
the principles and objects themselves ar
one and the same and endeavos to blind th'
country TO the true distinction betweer
them. It may be supplementary to i'm
pute motives to anybody; but he imputc'
motives to US; he attacks the Republican
party, ana charges 1t distinctly with a dc
sign to overthrow the Constitution OF th'