The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1858-09-22

slaves who had ab>cOndcd? Do You suppose
either, that those who regarded the nStitu-
t;OnOf slavery with disfaeor, would in the
have made such unreasonable demands? The
spirit OF our fathers indeed! Would Mr. Bing-
ham with his abolition supporters with their
principles, have been able to 90 with the mem
Lers of that Convention Of 17S7--with Wash
linSton and Madison and all those who in the
camp contributed to the revolutionary struggle,
to permit the slave States to carry on the slave
trade with Africa for twenty years after the
adoption of the Constitution? Would they
have loved the union of the States with love
like that of Roger Sherman,* Of Connecticut,
who when southern man declared "the real
question was whe ther the Southern States
should so into the Union at all,'' declared that
''it was better to let the Southern States import
slaves than to part with them, if they made that
Ia sine q'tt non? Would they have supported a
constitution which permitted these things which
this Constitution of ours permits, and did per-
nit to be done? 1t is in vain to invoke the name
of Mr.. Jefferson upon this subject Because he
disliked the institution of slavery, it does not
follow that he was an abolitionist. On this very
question Of the admission Of no more slave states
and the Interstate slave trade, we have his re-
corded opinions, directly against the present po-
sition Of the Abolition party and its candidate
Mr.. Bingham. God in the mystery of his prov
l..
idcnce has planted the black race upon this con-
tinent, and permitted it to occupy a servile
condition. When, where and how, or whether
at all or not, the hour of their redempt ton is
come, is for the present at least, yelled from
mortal eyes, Mr.. Jefferson so regarded it when
he said in 1920, that, ''as it is we have the wolf
by the ears, and we can neither hold him nor
safely let him 60" And again: 'Ofone thing |
am certain the passage Of sh1vcs from one state to
another would not make slave of single per-
son who would not be slave without it," In
this same letter to John Holmes, of April %,
1920, the writer OF the Declaration of Indepen-
dence expresses his disaproval OF emancipation
without Repatriation" thereby recognizing the
principle adopted by the Democratic party OF
to-day that, this government is one of tie ,oIgte
race. The practibilty Of getting rid of slavery,
is only easy to those who recognize the equali-
ty of the white and black races. While /
would not make single new slave, confess |
am not willing to SEE this principle of equality
recognized, as that, on the basis OF which, this
great social change is to take place. This Gov
ernment is the Government OF the white man,
and am in every way, shape and Gorm opposed
to the doctrine Of negro equality. cannot tell
| if he does not mean that this doctrine is true
what my opponent means by his course on the
admission OF the States ofOregon and Minnesota
The reason given by those of the opposition.
who gave reasons, was that the constitution OF
these states excluded free blacks from the priv
| ilege Of citizenship. Now | hold that each
state may adopt its own policy with reference
to the black race I should regard it my Gu'y
to give to that race the benefit Of every privilege
consistent with the interests of the white.
which infers that because do not want to recog-
nize the black man as my fellow citizen, there
fore want him for my slave. l want to subju-
gate no man. l simply plant myself upon tie
doctrine that this is government of white men
and that each state government may regulate its
relations to black men under the constitution Of
the United States to suit itself My opponent
holds to the contrary. He or at least the speak
ers voting on that side hold, that states orOregon
and Minesota,or any state applying for admis-
sion to the Union must not only suit itself in
this respect--not only to suit the Constitution
of the United States, which simply demands a
republican form Of Government, but must suit
us who do not reside in it, and have no interest
in it,-must suit us and adopt and present to
Congress such Constitution as Congress consid-
ers best for that people. That is not the doc,
trine of sclfgovcrnment. In the State Of Maine
we are told by its Senator, that the free black
man is as much citizen Of that State as the
free white man. In the state OF Massachusetts
VIC are told by its Senator, the same thing is al
so true. If the people of Maine and Massachu-
sets think so, they have right to think so.--
On the other hand the people of 1llnocs do not
permit the blacks to reside within its borders,
and l contend that they have as much right to
do that thing as the people Of Maine and Massa-
chusetts have to do the other. In the State OF
Ohio we take middle ground and hold the doc
trine that they may reside amongst us; but by
the insertion Of the word ",Uhfte" in our Const-
tuition, we declare to the world, that they can
not enjoy the privileges ofcitizcnship and share
in our state government.
This is what we understand by popular sover-
eighty and the sovereignty of the States. What
| power resides in the Congress of the United
States, under the Constitution to prevent the
| State o { Ohio to- morrow from recognizing the
institution Of slavery and tolerating its eXis,
tence within her borders? 1t is conceded that
there is none Ohio is as soyereignas Carolina.
| | wish TO be distinctly understood. favor
the clause which declares that we shall
have no involuntary seryitudc except in punish
tnent fcrinc, rs we'll az that which says. that
none but whites shall be citizens of the State -
There two together make what in my iudg---
mrnt the happisst coIdition Of things, free
tvlfite StlttS.
\ Oar opponents dislike, am told. the charge
of .4toittioiism. The easiest way TO get rid ol
the charge, is TO get rid Of the thing itself
suppose that Mr., Bingham represents the party
which nom nhol Lin. lls views are not new
and not disguised, as in lf5i when first candi-
date, he avowed hmselfin favor Of Of the doc
trines Of the abolition party. lie is in favor Of
the abolition ofslayerg inAtheDistiict OIL Cclum-
bia, and ID ils territories lie Is in iayor of the
repeal oflaws for the surrender Of fugitive slaves.
lleis in favor lof refusing 10 sdrnit any more
slave States Info the Union an1,ier any pretence
whatcverv lle'is IN iasor Of .fneHating com
Inence' so ~ TO pfohilsit the isuigWtion ofsaFes