Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes County, Ohio) 1856-1865, 1858-09-30
From the Columbus Journal.
The Meeting Last Nisht...'sDe.
mOcracy as 10 was, and rs it ID.

The Meeting Last Nisht....sDe.
mOcracy as it was, and rs it il.
! A meeting was held last night at th'
Civ Hall, to hear Mr.. Milton NJ. Power.
on "Democracy What it once was, anc
what it now is" On motion, A Moan
gewer was called to the chair. He intro
duced Mr.. Powers to the meeting.
Mr.. Powers said that probably the great
er portion of those who were then present
were aware of the fact that he had acted
with the Democratic party from The veal
1888 until 1854; that the principles ap
vocated by the party during that time had
commended themselves to his judgment
and received his hearty approval and that
the policy of Thomas Jefferson towards the
Territories was then advocated by the party
The party then claimed that slavery was
an evil, contrary to the spirit aud unfavor.
able to the full development of free insti-
tutions, and that entertaining such belief
the Democracy would at all times feel i,
to be their duty to use all power clearly
given by the terms Of the CONSTITUTION tO
prevent its increase, TO mitigate, and tinal-
ly to eradicate the evil.
Throughout the whole of the free States
the Democracy entertained similar views,
and by the resolutions of their Legislature
the resolutions of their State platforms, by
the speeches of their orators, and though
the public presses of the party, these views
were promulgated; and, in order to estab-
lish the fact he read the resolution of the
Legislature of the State of New Hamp-
shire, as representing the sentiments of the
Democracy of the Northeast, the rssolu-
tion of the Democratic Senate of Iowa in
the West and the resolutions of the Leg
islalure of the State of Ohio in the winter
of 1918. -.-.. .-..,.
He also read the resolutions of the State
Democatc Conventions of Maine, PensyL
wanna aud OHIO, which advocated similar
sentiments and referred to the position OF
all the Democratic newspapers, and the
former position of Judge fancy and Pres
ident Buchanan, and the message Of Cover
nor Reuben Wood in 1852 and the letter
of Judge Thomas w. Barlly in ls47 to Mr..
Brihkerhoff. .-5.--
He also showed that the power of Congress
over the subject of Slavery in the terrific
ries had been recognized and acted upon
in one form or another, by every admins
lration fiom the commencement of the
Government, until the closo of James K.
Folks Administration, and referred to the
act of Congress for the Government of the
territories OF Indidiana Michigan, Loulsi-
ana, Orleans, illinois, Missouri, Florida,
Wisconsin, Iowa, Oregon, and also to the
act of March 9Th 1920, prohibiting Slavery
in the territory acquired from France, being
Northwest of Missouri and north of SO deg.
80 min. north latitude, these being acts of
legislation between the years 1900 and
Is4s, which recognized and asserted the
power of Congress over the cubject of Sla-
very in the territories.
He also referred to decisions of the Su-
preme Court of The United States, the
court of appeals of Kentucky, the court of
appeals of South Carolina, and the common
law maxim of England, Blackstone, page
127, that slavery could legally exist only
by the force of some local law.
Having thus shown the portion. which
the Democratic party occupied few years
since, when they claimed the power of
Congress over the subject of slavery in the
the territories and having shown that the
constitutionality of this power had been
settled by judicial construction, and by CO.
temporareous and repeated acts of Legisla-
ton, he then proceeded to show that in
the adoption of the Kansas Nebraska act,
the democracy had taken one step from
their old and established principles. They
then felt the position which they formerly
occupied, which that Congress could and
should exercise power over the territories,
and they assumed the position that it
would he better policy to delegate to the
people of the territories the power to pro-
hibst slavery in their own midst, and there.
BY localize the agitation on the subject OF
slavery. Experience had shown that this
was a mistake, and that agitation has been
increased; but the great objection to the
Kansas Nebraska Bill was that it repeal
ed the Missouri prohibition against slavery
in the compromise act of 1920, by which
slavery light be permitted to go into ter
ritory then free, equal in extent to twelve
States like Ohio.
II was violation of d sacred compro-
mise which had been observed for thirty
four years, and it was violation Of the ex-
press conditions on which Missouri had
been admitted into the Union. 1t was Il
direct and palpable reputation of the dem
ocra:ic sentiment that the Democracy OF
Ohio would at all times feel it to be their
duty to use all power, clearly given by the
Constitution to prevent the increase of sla-
very, and TO mitigate aud finally to eradi
safe the evil, .-r 800
He was opposed 10 the Nebraska Bill
and had approved of the sentiments OF the
Ohio Statesman of May Oath, 1854, wher
it said :-"The Nebraska Bill in form
which frankness, consistency and love o.
country compel us to say is repugnant te
our sense of right, has passed the House o
Representatives. and will doubtless soor
become law"
He showed that all honest democracy
supposed that The true intent and meanin.
Of that Bill was not to legisste slavery in
to any territory or State, or TO execute il
there from, but to leave the people perfect
ly free 10 regulate their own affairs 10 sui
themselves. He referred to the speech o
John w. Forney at Tarytown, to shov
that Mr.. Buchanan had, by every means il
his power, endesycred to satisfy the peopl
of the United States that he would strictl
.dhara 70 tho d.,,,, r;na which was noihin