Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1858-03-06


where existed that in the very opening of the
canvass of 1855, Colonel Gentry did declare
in a public speech, at Murfreesboro, i think.
that if he had been a member of Congress
when that bill was before the body, he would
have voted against 1t. 1t is incredible to
me that he f1inched and shrank from the con-
test during tie canvass oil 1853 on that
point.
This statements made by my colleague af-
ter my declaration that did not feel called
upon by any opposition made to me through
out the State, to make single speech or ex-
PLANTATION of my course on that bill before the
people of Tennessee, during that whole can
vass. There were reasons that might have
restrained Colonel Gentry from setting forth
and explaining to the people the probable
mischiefs of that measure, and how wrong 1t
was to disturb this ancient compromise, which
had for thirty years been the bond of harmony
between the North and South. He might
have been restrained by the consideration that
two of my respected and honored Wing col
leagues in the House of Representatives voted
in favor of the bill; and they were still highly
esteemed and popular gentlemen, representing
two of the largest districts, one adjoining. aud
one including. my own residence-the town
of Nashville. | undertake TO say that my
lips would have been sealed even If there had
been attacks to a great extent on the subject;
and wherever | have spoken on the subject
since, L have always had to do 1t with the
greatest delicacy and forbearance In regard to
the course of my distinguished colleagues in
the House. Mr. Zollicoffer and Mr.. Ready are
the gentlemen to whom / allude; and Mr..
Gentry may have been restrained in their dis
tricts, or anywhere else in the State, from dis
cussing that question. But my colleague
speaks of its being one of the main issues be-
fore the people. / take il he did Eot discuss
it alone. If he found that his opponent could
L. 80 h.
would employ himself on more profitable top
ics as he had right to do.
do not know; cannot speak from per-
sonal knowledge; but l have inquired over
and over again at home have looked for
the speeches of my colleague, if he had print
ed any; have sought from his leading friends
to know what were his principles On the Kan
sas-Nebraska bill. which, he says, in 1855, was
one of the principal topics of debate in Ten
nessee l never heard from his lips his views
on the subject, until / heard him speak yes
terday and the drift of his remarks then can
be we'll understood. He then took a view of
the subj CT that, in 1855, would have been
very distasteful, know, to many of the lead
ing men of his party. i never could trace III
any speech or any Il tier of his, nor could |
hear from any resp, ctable gentleman with
whom associated. or in the Wing ranks. that
he had taken ground in favor of that bill, ex-
cept in his usual course of defamation in be-
half of the fundamental right of the people
always to govern themselves, and to ride
down and overslaugh all who should pretend
to smother their voice. and level all who
should have any pretensions as "aristocrats'
-''slaveholding aristocrats." In that way
he NAV, perhaps have sanctioned the bill. /
do not deny that he discussed the subject
sometimes by himself. He must have done it
alone, according to what he says in his speech
Yesterday, for Mr.. G. ntry does not seem To
have met him on that question, and made no
discussion about it. When | wanted to know
last year what had been the course of my col
league on the subject, found speech of his,
made in the canvass OF 1856, in the presiden-
tial elections speech written by himself /
understood and said to have been delivered at
a public meeting in Broad street, Nashville.
Nv colleague will understand me that as to
what lie said ON that occasion L have nothing
to say, except on the information of others,
for l was not there. | was directed to his
printed speech by a friend, when | desired to
see what Governor Johnson s course had been,
because Governor johnson has potent infu-
ence in Tennessee, even if you have not heard
Of him before and in his own party particu-
larly, He controls his party on many ques-
tons Ii their opinions and views do not
correspond with his generally, he lets them
understand that they shall conform to his
views. This is magnifying him greatly; but
not unduly.
Looking over that speech l found that his
own doctrine about popular sovereignty was
partly limited TO q State coming into the Gov
eminent, and he partly relied on the funda-
mental principle of the people having a right
to do as they pleased but in the very next
sentence he quoted clause from Mr.. Buchan-
ans letter of acceptance, or some letter he
had written connected with this subject, which
recognized the broad principle OF popular
sovereignty and the right of the people to
govern themselves, Independent not only of
Congress, but of all other authorities, on the
great principle that has been heralded forth
us the discovery of this very recent age. They
say it is rs old rs the Revolution, the right OF
selfgovernment existing in the people at all
times. which the President has ratified and
confirmed by his recent message in which he
says that no restrictions, no trainmels, no fet-
tiers, can be imposed even by an organic act
or constitution of a State which they cannot
override whenever they please, by amendment
or abrogation.
When | pointed TO my friends the result
of my labors, on looking over that strongly
written and plausible speech, said to them,
this does not furnish me the information. |
had been told that squatter sovereignty and
popular sovereignty WAS his hobby. They
said, "Well, then, that speech Is not written
out in conformity with what he sad at large
IL
street" | asked them if they could be salts
fed of that in any way. They replied that
probably hundreds could testify, If felt any
interest in prosecuting the subject, that he
illustrated the doctrine of the right of the
people before they came into the Union, and
while in the condition of Territory-the
doctrine of popular or squatter sovereignty
by asking, Does man that squats down
have any less right of self-goyernment and
sovereignty than when he is erect and stand
ing up"
Mr.. JOHNSON, OF Tennessee. BY permission
of my honorable colleague, l. will say that he
seems to be predicating position from which.
| presume, he expects to draw some couclu-
sions, OH q conversation that he had had with
some individuals. either Democrats or some
body else, in reference TO u speech made ut
Nashville. Ny views rs delivered at that
meeting are published and printed in that
speech, aud | am responsible for them as
there. | would prefer my colleague to make
a quotation from the speech, and not q quota
ton from his memory of what somebody said
about il. 1t is very easy, we all know, for
persons on both sides to misrepresent a speech.
Sometimes one understands it one way, and
sometimes another. A sentence is quoted,
and "A particular expression is left out Ny
fpeech was published in that same communi-
", and circulated by thousands. For that
speech am responsible.
Mr.. BELL. | understand, then, that speech
was a retrara of any former opinions he had,
If he bad any such former opinions. l mean
it war "a withdrawal, = change of opinion
from any he had entertained in the canvass of
1888.
Mr.. JOHNSON, of Tennessee. That speech
contained the opinions | expressed that night,
written out and published withdrawal no
alteration.
Mr.. BELL | will not on such an occasion
ask my colleague have mo- right to ask
whether he did not explain that the great priu-
selves, aud settle their own domestic insttu-
tious applied To their condition while Ter