Marshall County Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1855-1859, 1858-09-16
AND WALKER


week--ridiculing among other things,
"Negro Equality" and also declaring that
Colisx is not in favor of such Equality
] We desire 20 say few words upon this
subject, and dismiss it forever.
We do not know, or care, what Mr.. Col
fax's private opinion may be upon this sub
iect, but from The position assumed by the
Republican party, he is forced from the
very necessity of such position to favor the
doctrine of Negro Equality. Why? Mr..
+ Colfax and the whole Republican party
denounce the Dred Scott Decision, and de-
clare IL is Infamous, contrary to the law OF
the land. and made for political purpose.
They make that decision an issue in the
present canvass. and spare no pains to de-
fame Judges that have long served their
country with distinction, and whose opin-
ions are quoted on both sides of the Al
lantic. as the best aud most authoritative
exposition of the common law. Now,
what does that case decide? 1t decides a
mong other things. that negro is not a
citizen Of the United States, and therefore,
not entitled to The rights and privileges OF
citizen.
Mr.. Colfax, and the party TO which he
belongs. declare that such is not tie faw.--
If that decision is not the correct inlerpre-
tatioa Of the Constitution upon the subject
of citizenship, then a negro is citizen oi
the United States; and therefore. eHitled
to adj the ''righ;s. privileges and immuni-
tles'' of a cItizen. Is this not So? How
can you escape the conclusion? You must
either submit, as all good citizens are
bound to. 10 the decisions of our Judicial
i, tribunals. or advocate the equality of the
negro with the white man.
Ii a negro is entitled to all rights OF the
citizen. does he not stand upon the same
equality with the white man? aud If you
say he is a citizen IF the United States, dc
you not adcovate Negro Equality? You
most certainly do. You cannot escape
this conclusion You declare that the o.
pinion of the Supreme Court is not Wand
entitled to no respect, and therefore ne
gro isa citizen of the United States; and
hence. entitled to all the rights of the
citizen. Is this not advocating Negro
Equality? According TO your construc.
! ZION, le possesses as many and the same
rights as you do;and whal is this but equal
]
ity in every respect?
Again: The Supreme Court OF CT,
decided twice after elaborate argument by
able counsel, that Negro was citizen OF
the United States. We suppose the Re-
publican party, if they are aware of this
fact, would couple these two decisions with
iha; of Dred Scott, and denounce them al
together, and SO save time. These
decisions were made a quarter ola century
since, and no person, lawyer, or politician
very denied their legality, until the Re-
ublican party came into existence. The
Democratic party submit to The decis-
ions Of the courts, as the law, until they
are reversed. This is the true and only
doctrine in a county like ours. where the
enforcement of law depends SO much on
public opinion.
ELI, also says. that Messers. ColEax
and Walker differ widely upon the Slavery
question. We suppose they do. Walker
belycs in the doctrine of ninding yorr
own baisness. while C,lfax believes the
other way. Walker belives that the peo-
pei among whom Slavery exists. are the
best judges of its good or evil effects that
, it is purely local institution. and no per-
son or persons, Congress or any body else
have it in aught to do with it, but those
who have it in their mids,, while ColIaS
belives that Congress is the best Judge OF
what distant people want for their dom
es.ic institutions. He persists in their
doctrine of the power of Congress to make
prehibi,ory laws upon the question of Slave
ry in the Territori s, when he well know
that the Supreme Court have decided tha
tional. Yet in the party. if they get int
power, are determined to pass an unconsti
tutional law. He and they must act upon
the ground. that if an unconstitutional law
passed BY Congress, it makes it constilu
iionall Is this your position? If it is
we admire your system Of logic.
u Again: Eli says that this question o
Slavery, Is vital one. dc. Ne do no
think So We think is it settled. The is
sue now sought to be raised is mere alb
s;iaclion. having on existence in practical
, facts. The laws of supply and demand,
and emigration have settled it beyond tho
power of political parties.
1t is question of the past, and If ever
raised agar. it will be Untitled upon com.
mercial principles-that is. if it is profiia-
bic for the people to have slavery, they will
have it, other wise not. 1t will soon resolve
itself into pecunisry question. We sup
pose Eli does no, believe lhis! Will he be
SO good as to inform US. where bis party
intend to make practical apPlieaion Of
the principles? Well he tell us what Ter
ri;ories they intend to draw lines around,oI
through upon this question of slavery
Can it be Kansas? That Territory Is free
: to-day. and will will always be. The Re.
publican party admit this. Is il Nebraska
Docotah, or Washington Territories? No,
slavery cannot live there.
Where then will they apply their prn-
ciples of prohibitaiion? 1t cannot be to New
Mexico, or Utah, because the question OF
slavery there, was settled in 1850, bv the
! measures, known as the compromise meas
ures, and settled too, by the powerful aid
of Webster and Clay. and precisely the way
that the Democratic party adopted with
Kansas and Nebraska. We suppose, no at
tempt will be made by either party to dis