Saint Paul weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1858-1859, 1858-11-06

| the slave States, and counting its constituency
chiefly and almost exclusively there. OF al
| its representatives in Congress and in the ell
| ectOral colleges, two-thirds uniformly come
from these States. Its great element of strength
lies in the vote of the shareholders, augmented
by the representation of three-fifths of thu
Slaves. Deprive the Democratic party O
this strength, and it would be helpless and
hopeless minority, incapable of continued or
ganizatiOn. The Democratic party being thus
local and sectional, acquires new strength
from the admission of every new slave State
and loses relatively by the admission of every
new free State. A party is in one sense a
Joint stock association, in which those who
contribute most, direct the action and man
agement of the concern. The shareholders
contributing in an overwhelming proportion
to the capital strength of the Democratic par
ty, they necessarily dictate and prescribe its
policy. The inevitable caucus system enables
them to do so with a show of fairness and
justice. If it were possible to conceive for a
moment that the Democratic party should
dIsObcy the behestS of the Shareholders, we
should then see withdrawal of the slavehold
ers, which would leave the party to perish
The portion of the party which is found in the
modify its sectional character without impair
ing its sectional constitution, and is less effec
tive in regulating its movement than the neb-
ulous tail of the comet is in determining the
appoint d though apparently eccentric course
of the fiery sphere from which it emanates.-
10 expect-the Democratic party to resist slav-
cry and favor freedom is as unreasonable as to
look for Protestant missionaries to the Catho-
lie Propaganda of Rome.
The history of the Democratic party com
mits it to the policy of Slavery. 1t has been
the Democratic party and no other agency,
which has carried that policy up to its pres
ent alarming elimination. Without stopping
to ascertain, critically, the origin of the pres
ent Democratic party, we may cOncede its
claim to date from the era of good feeling
which occurred under the Administration Of
President Monroe. At that time in this State,
and about that time in many others of the
Free States, the Democratic party deliberately
dsfranchised the free colOred or African citi,
zen, and it has pertnaciOusly continued this
dsiranchisement ever since. This was an
effective aid to slavery; for while the slave
holder votes for his slaves against Freedom,
the freed slave, in the Free States, is prohib-
tied from voting against slavery. In 1924,
the Democracy resisted the election of John
Quincy Adams-himself before that time an
acceptable Democrat, and in 1923 it expelled
him from the Presidency and put slavehold-
er in his place, although the office had been
filled by shareholders thirty two out of forty
years. In 1886, Martin Van Buren, II the
first mons laveholding citizen of Free State,
to whose election the Democratic party ever
consented-signalized his Inauguration into
the Presidency by gratuitous announcement
that under no circumstances would he ever
approve bill for abolishing slavery in the
District of Columbia From 1888 to 1914,
the subject of abolshing slavery in the Dis
trict of Columbia and in the National dock
yards and arsenals, was brought before Con-
gress by repeated popular appeals. The
Democratic party thereupon promptly denied
the right of petition and ellectually suppressed
The freedom of speech in Congress, as far as
the institution of slavery was concerned.
From 1910 to 1913, good and wise men
counseled that Texas should remain outside
OF the Union until she should consent to re-
linquish her selfinstituted slavery; but the
Democratic party precipitated her admission
into the Union, not only without that condi-
ton, but even with covenant that the State
might be divided and re-organized so as to
constitute four Slave States instead of one
In 1916, when the United States became
involved in a war with Mexico, and it was ap-
parent that the struggle would end in the dis
memberment of that Republic, which was a
non-slaveholding hover, the Democratic party
rejected declaration that slavery should not
be established within the territory to be &C
CURED. When in 1850, governments were to
hn fo1 r.
and New Mexico, the fruits of that war, the
Democratic party refused to admit New Mex
leo as a free State, and only consented to ad-
NIT California as a free State on the condition,
as it has since explained the transaction, of
leaving all of New Mexico and Utah open to
slavery, to which was also added the cOnces-
sion of perpetual slavery in the District of
Columbia, and the passage OF an unconstitu-
tional, cruel and Illuminating law, for the re-
capture of fugitive slaves, with a further stip-
ulation that the subject Of slavery should new
er again be agitated in either chamber of Con-
gress. When in 1854, the shareholders were
contentedly reposinS on these great advanta-
ges, then so recently won, the Democratic
party unnecessarily, ofiiciously and with su-
pcrservicable liberality, awaked them from
their slumber, to offer and force On their ac-
ceptance the ahrOgation Of the law which de-
clared that neither slavery nor involuntary
servitude should ever exist within that part
of the ancient territory of Louisiana, which
lay outside of the State Of Missouri, and north
of the parallel of SO degrees 80 minutes of
north latitude, a law, which with the exception
of one other, was the only statute of freedom
then remaining in the Federal code.
In 1856, when the people of Kansas had or
ganized new State within the region thus
abandoned to slavery, and applied to be adj
mitted as free State into the Union, the
Democratic party contemptuously rejected
their petition and drove them with menaces
and intimidations from the halls of Congress,
and armed the President with military power
to enforce their submission to slave code, es-
tablished over them by fraud and usurpation
At every subsequent stage of the long contest
which has since ragged in Kansas, the Demo-
cratic party has lent its sympathies, its aid,
and all the powers of the Government which
it controlled to enforce slavery upon that I'M
willing and injured people. And now even at
this day, while it mocks us with the assurance
that Kansas is free, the Democratic party
keeps the State excluded from her Just and
proper place in the Union, under the hope
that she may yet be dragooned into the accep-
lance of slavery.
The Democratic party finally has procured
from Supreme Judiciary fixed in its interest,
decree that slavery exists by force of the
Constitution in every Territory Of the United
States, paramount to all legislative authority
either within the Territory or residing in Con
gress.
Such is the Democratic party. 1t has no
policy, State or Federal, for finance, or trade,
or manufacture, or commerce, or education, or
international improvements, or for the protec-
ton or even the security of civil or religious
liberty. 1t is positive and uncompromisingi in
the interest of slavery-negative, comproms-
ing and vascilating in regard to everything
else. 1t boasts its love of equality, and wastes
its strength and even its life in fortifying the
only aristocracy known in the land. 1t pro-
fesses fraternity, and SO often as slavery re-
quires, allies itself with prescription. Itmag
nifies itself for cOnquests in foreign lands. but
it sends the national eagle forth always with
chains and not the olive branch in his fangs
This dark record shows Won fellow -citiZenS