Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1859-03-19

ITTy WTW WWWWT TWU bTTTWWW Ut 1T " TTF wv ="
slavery, and its d~ecaying limbs are constantly
threatening to fall upon their heads, and cannot
.ceusure them for taking such means as they see ut,
to protect themselves from imminent peril. ] am
not disposed to call In question the right or con-
stitutionality of their action.
Is there no apology, then, for the people OF
Oregon? Have they committed a wanton and un'
provoked outrage upon the rights Of negroes and
mulattoes, ia excluding them from that territory.
| say that there is an apology, and that it consists
in this they believe that they were obliged TO
Ghoose between n free State constitution with
this provision, and a slave state constitution without
it. There were three parties in the territory ut the
time this constitution was made and adopted.
There was the free State party, which was com
posed Of free State Democrats and Republicans.
There was the pre-. slavery party, in favor OF a
slave State. There was, between these two, n
very considerable party, supposed to hold the
balance of power, and that party | may charac'
terize as tho anti negro party. They said they
would sooner vote for a slave State, than Tor a
free State with q constitution admitting Tree
negroes and mulattoes. They preferred to have
slaves in Oregon, rather than free negroes and
it was for the purpose of securing their vote for a
free State. that the Republicans and free StateDem-
ocrats inserted and advocated this provision. The
lesding Republicans of that territory advocated,
on the stump, the adoption of the constitution with
this clause.
What was the vote? Why, sir, this clause of
the constitution had a majority of seven thousand
FIVE hundred and ffty-n;ne votes while the con-
~stitution itself had q majority of only four thous'
and votes. The Democratic majority in the Ter
ritory, as shown in the election of q Representa-
tive to this House, was only one thousand six
hundred and thirteen votes. Then it is proved by
the official record, that the Republican party
combined with the Free State Democratic party, to
sanction ard ratify this provision of the c%onstitu'
ton, which ia here called in question. There is
also abundant evidence, outside of the record, to
satisfy any one that such is the fact. This, then,
is the apology for the action of the people of Ore
gon on this question. What Republican. or what
friend of free States, lie justified under these circum-
stances in voting to,exclude the people of Oregon
from this Confederacy oniaccountof this provision,
which is only an expedient, and not q thing for
practical use
From the foregoing it appears that the Repub'
licans, and the Free State Democrats of Oregon
inserted in the Constitution, and advocated the
provision referred to that when the instrument
was submitted to the people for adoption or reiec'
ton, the leading Republicans advocated its adop-
zion, and the Republican candidate for Z. S. Sen
ator made stump speeches in favor of the Consti.
tuition for which Mr.. Tbayer voted in Congress
Now, as an outsider, we should like to know
why the Republicans of Oregon-the first trans
gressors in this case-aro permitted to 60 scot
iioei ulu AAi' iEoJNiJ "hO Oh'J OSOhNON NV nv
ton thoy had made, thus singled out for condem
nation.
The Republicans of Massachusetts, do not il
their own State, and as n question of State policy
endorse the doctrines of the bred Scott decision
either in whole or in part but how it is with mos
other Republican States? They do not, it is true
carry out the doctrine to quite so great an exten
as does the party in Oregon, but they 60 just as
far as they think policy demands. In New York
IA Republican State-a colored man is denied the
right to vote unless he is a freeholder to the
amount Of $3.50 test of fitness required of nc
white man. Ia most of the States of Republican
New England, his condition is even worse, for hi
has not the privilege Of buying a vote for $3.50.
In Ohio, and in several other Western States ht
is also refused access to the Ballot box, and denieC
a legal settlement. A year or two since when
proposition was made in this State to extend t.
him the elective franchise, a Republican Legisla
ture votel nay. We see it stated that this white,
a similar proposition was introduced into the
Michigan Legislature, and met with the same fate
a number of Republicans voting against it. The
Republicans of Iowa and Minnesota might have
given the elective franchise to the colOred man
there, but positively refused to do so. Here was
precedent-here was the example of almost the
entire party acting as State organizations upon
the same doctrine of policy by which Mr.. Thayer
Justified his vote. His policy ran in the same line
with theirs, but continued o tride further.
If MI. Thayer needed the sanction of the Repub,
lican party as a National organization, to justify
by precedent, his course, and to excuse any
amount of violation of principle when demanded
L. IL .-Il la-o c..nJ - II Io l., -o.o
to the Congressional record Of a few years since,
he would have found the names of every Republi.
can member of the Lower House, then present
save one-recorded in favor of Dunn's bill, which
provided for the legal establishment of slavery in
Kansas for two years. These votes, of course,
we're not given because slavery was desired there,
but upon the ground Of policy, just MS Mr.. Thayer
voted for the admission Of Oregon. At the sess
ion of last year, he would have found the party
representative endorsing the doctrine of Squatter
Sovereignty, and this too, when a short time be,
fore thoy had been battling the Democrats for ad'
vocating it. But this we are told, was q strategeE
perhaps it was, q mere measure of policy, the
doctrine of which Mr.. Thayer applied to Oregon
All through the campaign of 1856, the Republican
party said q great deal about the Topeka Constltu
ton and what was the complexion OF that Constl
tuition which was made the grand rallying point o
the party? 1t was white-as white as that of Or
egon-no negro was to be admitted upon The soil o
Kansas!
Now we not only admit, but insist that oil tn,
cases here referred to, were unquestionable viola
tions of the doctrines of human oquality-of th,
principles of Justice and of Right, but we q
strongly affirm that they were endorsed by tn
party as measures of the highest policy and t.
condemnMr Thayer for having applied to the ques
ton of the admission of Oregon, the same rule 0
policy, and the same principles of action by whicl
t the party at large had been governed in other cas-
es, is not warranted by any just ideas of politica
consistency.
STATE TREAsURY.-The political papers of OH
are filled to OVERLOOKING with matters pertaining t
the Treasury delalcation. First there is Breslin'