Clarksville chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1857-1865, 1858-09-17

S<S~ We rarely pick up democratic
exchange that we do not see some para
graph, or lengthy article intended to fasten
upon the American party the charge of
lbolitionism. Our surprise, then, may
well be imagined when our eye fell upon
an article in the Washington Union, of the
29th ult,, which explicitly denies the truth
of that charge, and lays its whole weight
upon the shoulders of democracy. We
invite the attention of those who denounce
John Bell and John j. Crittenden for
their course on the Kansas question:
Here is what the Union says:
Had the State" (Kansas) 'been admit
ted, long ere this Goth of August, she
could have framed a new constitution, and
been free State de ,t;tcto ct de jure. The
Know-NOthings and Republicans were
fully advised of these matters, opposed
admission, and thus prevented the people
Of Kansas from making free State con
stitution. They did this, knowing all the
while that under the Federal Cons titution
slavery was permissible in the Territory"
Remember, We democratic libellers of
true southern men, that the Administra-
ton Organ, writing under the eye of its
master, declares that the Americans and
Republicans, knowingly, voted against the
admission of Kansas in order to make it
slave State, whilst the emocrats-North
and South--voted for its admission in
order to make it free State. Who then,
according to the Union, are the true friends
/ of the South? The democrats No, for
they voted TO make Kansas free. The
Americans? Yes, for they voted to make
Kansas a slave State. The central Organ
is explicit on this point, and its humble
followers ought to hang their heads, in
shame, when they remember how Ii ey have
reviled the true friends of the South when,
all the while, the democracy was its only
enemy. Do you want further proof? The
Union furnishes it in these words:
at is not fact that the admission of
Kansas under the Lecompton Constitution
would have resulted in favor of slavery
there. Not only was it impossible that
this was the operation of the bill, but il
was as impossible that this could have been
the intention of its authors"
There it is, from headquarters. The
admission of Kansas not only could not
have made it slave State, but it never
was the intention of the party that il
should be a slave State, And as if to
fastcn upon the American party the odum
of having labored hard to make Kansas a
slave State, the Union further says:
"The Know Nothing Council admit thai
the majority of the people of Kansas were
opposed to slavery, They know that
theoretically, under the bred Scott de-
cision, slavery existed in the Territory
and that admission into the Union under
the Lecompton constitution, was the
quickest process by which they could pro
hibit that relation in Kansas
The is a strange concession, from sucl
quarter The Americans---the URio,
tells us-knew that the people of Kansas
, were opposed to slavery, and knowing tina
slavery already existed there, under tn
: bred Scott decision, they-the American
voted against admission because admis
70 sion was the quickest way to abolish SLAYER,
in the Territory, and because to defeat ad
mission was the only way to fasten SLAYER,
0 spon it. Yet this party, struggling 81
p hard to make Kansas a slaye State, willis
c democracy was struggling just as hard t.
o make it free State, according to the in
t tentions of the authors of the Kansas bill
0 is denounced, in the South, as in allianc
p with northern abolitionists to defeat tn
{ extension Of slavery.
o Gentle sa democrats, tl,., "a no Gut