The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-10-14
NO CHANGE.

Slavery?"
The answer, repeated in the Tribune, is as
follows:
Mr.. Smith said that no other party held to
the doctrine, but what was it worth? Gov.
Chase had cried out originally, No more Slave
States; and in short time they moderated
the tone, and the cry was, No more Slave ter
ritory; and at last the Republican party was
found lying in confused heap of squstter SOW
ereignty with all other parties and while this
cry was pending, the bred Scott decision cul-
minated, recognising property in slaves, and
soon, based upon that decision, the Supreme
Court of the United States would decide logi-
cally in the Lennon case that the STAKEHOLDER
could dwell bis whole lifetime with his property
in the North"
If Mr.. Smith be reported correctly, he has
done greet injustice to the Republican Party.
The first time it spoke for itself authoritatvely
was through its delegates in Convention assem-
bled at Philadelphia, June 18th, 18th, and 9 b,
when it passed unanimously the following reso.
lutions in relation to Slavery
"Resolced, That the maintenance of the
principles promulgated in the Declaration of
Independence, and embodied in the Federal
Constitution, are essential to the presersalion
of our Republican institutions, and that the
Federal Constitution, the rig hts of the States,
and the union of the States, must and shall be
preserved
"Resol0e6, That with our Republican fathers
we hold it to be selfevident truth, that all
men are endowed with the inalienable right to
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and
that the primary object and Interior design of
our Federal Government were to secure these
rights to all persons under its exclusive iuris.
diction; that as our Republican fathers, when
they had abolished Slavery in all our National
Territory, ordained that no person shall be de-
prived OF life, liberty, or property, without due
process Of law, it becomes our duty to maintain
this provision of the Constitution against all at
tempts to violate it for the purpose of establish.
ing Slavery in the Territories of the United
States by positive legislation, prohibiting its
existence or extension therein. That we deny
the authority of Congress, of Territorial Leg
islature, Of any individual, or association of in
dividuals, to give legal existence TO Slavery in
any Territory of the United States while the
present Constitution shall be maintained.
" Resolvcd, That the Coz stitution confers
upon Congress sovereign power over the Terri
tories of the United States, for their govern
ment; and that, in the exercise of this power,
it is both the right and the imperative duty of
Congress to prohibit in the Territories those
twin relics of barbarsm, Polygamy and Sa
very"
The other resolutions relate to Kansas, Fill
clustering, the Pacific Railroad, River and Har
Dor Improvements, Liberty of Conscience, and
Proscriptive Legislation.
The three resolves quoted define its position
in relation to Slavery. 1t never put forth the
motto, No more Slave States,'' so that the
charge of apostacy on that point falls to the
ground. Nor did it ever proclaim, No more
Slave territory" Mr.. Smith oug ht not to quote
the sayings of any individual, however distin-
gushed, and make Party responsible for
them, when that Party has spoken in express
terms for itself.
If he had fairly presented the position of the
Republican Party, taken at Philadelphia, he
could not with The slightest show of reason
have charged it with changing or compromi.
sing it. We boldly aver that it has done mel
Their. No National Republican Convention has
been held since that at Philadelphia, so that
the Philadelphia Platform remains unaltered.
This is not all. No man in the Republican
ranks, recognised as an authority, has by pub
lie word or act, placed himself in opposition to
single Principle of that Platform in relation
to Slavery: so far from this, the leading men
have steadily united TO embody it in practical
legislation.
This is not all. The Republican Conventions
of the several States have generally reaffirmed
it and in the beginning of the last session of
Congress, months after the opinions of the
Judges of the Supreme Court in the bred Scott
case had heen given to the public, the Repub-
lican members of Congress, on motion of Mr..
Sherman, of Ohio, also reaffrmed that same
Platform. |E
And their words have been made good by
deeds. In not single instance, even in voting
for the Crittenden- Montgomery Amendment if
you concede fair construction of their action
in that case, have they violated its Principles.
After having labored with all their power to
bring in Kansas as Free State, under the
Constitution OF its choice, after having resisted
successfully every scheme for forcing Slavery
and Slave State Constitution upon it, finding
that the conspiracy against it was about to be
consumated, and could only be defeated by con-
senting to give the People of Kansas the pow
er to do, what they in Congress could not do,
and what everybody knew those People would
do-vote down that Slave Constitution-they
gave their consent, and the result, now a mat
ter of official record, shows that their policy
was right, and that their confidence has not been
abused. The base thing stands repudiated by
an overwhelming majority. And is such
Party as this to be misrepresented as apostate,
and wallowing " in a confused heap of squatter
sovereignty with all other parties 2" How is
it that go good man as Gerrit Smith can be
misled by the fervors of political canvass into
so gross msconception of the Republican
Party?
He may take exception to its Principles, or
to its ON ission of certain Principles, if he
choose; t,at is fair, and legitimate subject
for argument. But, when be arragns it for
apostacy, that is question of fact he must
prove his accusation By first showing from its
record thet it held certain Principles, and then
showing, ly its acts words, that it has falsi-
fed or abb ,ndoned them. We aver that he can
| do, and b, done, neither.
AS to TIE Anti'Slavery Principles of the Par
ty, they 4re embodied in the three resolves
| above qucsed. Are they not sufficient? Car
ried to thsir logical consequences, in consti.u.
sional moses, will they not make this Union the
home anG the bulwark of Liberty7 Do they
not contemplate action against Slavery to the
full extern of the political responsibilities sus
tanned toFards it by the Union, as understood