Litchfield enquirer., 1858-11-11
Whole No. l74 3

} the Democratic Party should disobey the be-
 he ts of the shareholders, we should then see
 withdrawal of the shareholders, which would
 leave the party to perish. The portion oi the
 party which is found in the Free States is d
 mere appeDdage, convenient to modify it's sec-
 tional character, without impairing it's section-
 al constitution, and is less effective in regnla-
 ting it's movement than the nebulous tail of the
 comet is in determining the appointed though
 apparently eccentric course of the fiery sphere from which it emanates. To expect the De-
 mocratic Party to resist Slavery and favor Freedom, is. as unreasonable as to look for Pro- testant missionaries to the Catholic Propagan-
 da of Rome. The history of the Democratic
 Party commits it to the policy of Slavery. It
 has been the Democratic Party, and no other l agency, which has carried that policy up to its present alarming culmination. Without stop ping to ascertain critically, the origin of the present Democratic Party we may concede it's
 claim to date from the era of good feeling which occurred under the Administration of Presi- dent MONROE At that time ill this State,
 and ahont this time in many others of the Free States, the Democratic Party deliberately dis franchised the free colored or African citizens, and it has pertinaciously continued this dis franchsement ever since. This was. an effec- tive aid to Slavery for while the shareholder votes for his slaves against Freedom, the freed slave in the Free States, is prohibited from vo ting against Slavery. In 1924, the Democra- cy resisted the election of JOHN QUINCY AD- AMs-himself before that time an accepted De- mocrat-and in 1928 it expelled him from the Presidency, and put shareholder in his place, although the office had been filled by slave holders thrty-two out of forty years. In 1886, i MARTIN VAN BUREN-the first noll-savehold- ing citizen of Free State, to whose election the Democratic Party ever consented-signal- ized his inauguration into the Presidency by u gratuitous announcement that under no cir cumstahces would he approve bill for abol- ishing Slavery ill the District of Columbia.-- From 1888 to lS44, the subject of publishing Slavery in the D strict of Columbia and in the national dotk-yards and arsenals, was brought beiore Congress by repeated popular appeals. The Dem, cratic Party thertupon promptly dc ned the right of pet tion and effectualy sup pressed the Freedom of Speech in Congress, as far as the institution of Slavery was concerned.
 From lS40 to l843 good and wise men coun- seled that Texas should remain out of the Un- tuu un, she should consent to relinquish her sett-lDstited Slavery but the Democratic Par ty precipitated her admission into the Union, not only without that condition, but even with Q covenant that the State might be divided and reorganized so as to constitute four Slave States instead of one.
 In l846, when the United States became involved in a war with Mexico, and it was ap- parent that the struggle would end in the dis nemberln nt of tat Republic, which was q noll-slayehotding power, the Democratic Party rejected declaration that Slavery should uot be tstablisled within the territory to be ac- quired. When in 1850, governments were to be instituted in the Territories of California i and New Mexico, the fruits of that War, the Democratic Party refused to admit New Mex leo as Free State, and only consented to ad- nit Calornia as Free State, on the cond- tion, as it has since explained the trausacton, of leaving all of New-Mexico aud Utah open to Slavery, to which also was added the con- cession of perpetual Slavery in the District of Columbia, and the passage of an unconstitu- tional, cruel and humiliatng law, for the re- capture of fugitive slaves, with further stip- ulation that the subject of Slavery should new CT again be agtated in either chamber of Con- gress. When, in 1854, the shareholders Were contentedy reposing OF these great advanta- ges, then so recently won, the Democratic Party, unnecessarily, oficously and with su- pcrscrvceable liberaty, awaked them from their s.umber, to offer and force on their ac- c, ptance the abroeatinn of the lew mhich de- cIared that neither Slavery nor involuntary ser vitude should ever exist within that part of the ancient Territory of Louisiana which lay outside of the State of Missouri and north of the parallel of 36 deg. 30 min of north lati- tude, law which, with the exception of one other, was the only statute of freedom then remaining in the Federal code.
 In 1856, when the people of Kansas had organized q new State within the region thus abandoned to Slavery, and applied to be ad- mitted as Free State into the Union, tho Democratic Party contemptuously rejected their petition, and drove them, with menaces and intimidations from the halls Of Congress- and armed the President with military power to enforce their submission to slave-code, es- tabshed over them by fraud and usurpation. At every subsequent stage of the long contest which has since ragged ill Kansas, the Demo- cratic Party has lent its sympathies, its aid, aud all the powers of the Government which it controlled, to enforce Slavery upon that uu- willing and injured people. And now, even to this day, while it mocks us with the assurance that Kansas is free, the Democratic Party | keeps the State excluded from her just and proper place III the Union, under the hope that she may yet be dragooned into tie acceptance of Slavery. The Democratic Party finally has pro. ured from supreme judiciary, fixed 1 in it's interest, decree that Slavery exists, by
 he iorce of the Constitution, in every Terrt- tory of the United States, paramount to all legislative authority, either with the Territory or residing ill Congress
 Such IS the Democratic Party. It has 10 policy, State or Federal, for finance, or trad,, or manufacture S. or commerce, or education, CT internal improvements, or for the protection, or even the security of. civil or religious hbtr-