The Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, Ohio) 1853-1861, 1859-09-29
For the Journal.
DcmOcracy-NO aud Then.

whether THESE tnlnRs De true--Wnttner Tue DOaSt
thus pu. forth is sustained aud justified by the
facts whether the Democracy o 1899 is the
same Democracy OF which we have read and
heard so much in days gone by, 1t would in.
| deed puzzle one to tell what is the doctrine oi
! the Democratic pnrty OF the present time, as re-
| CARDS the farther extension OF slavery; one
branch of the party claim the right, as well
us The duiy,of Congressional Intervention for thy
| protection of slavery IN the Tertltores the
other denying the right of Congress to interfere
I in any manner with the question OF Slavery in
the Territories, claim that it is solely within
| the jurisdcti of the actual residents of the
| Territory, and this doctrine Is digniicd with
| the name of squatter, or popular Sovereignty
| In one section of country the latter is claimed
| to be the Democratic doctrine, es is evidenced
| by the resolution passed at the late Senatorial
Convention Of that party held at Toledo on the
| 18th inst, one OF which, as il is expressive of
the views of The party on the subject OF the ex.
tension of slavery, aud appears TO have been
passed unanimously. we quote
"Rtsslutd, That the flght of the people are
secure while the doctrlne OF popular sovereignty,
proclaimed by the Democratic party is rigid
ly adhered to, and that we pledge ourselves to
use every excrtion TO promuiglte these senti-
menIs believing the people are entirely capable
of SELF government, whether in State or Terri.
tory Vide Pcrrysburg Peoples Press, Sept.
~, 1859.
Has this been the sentiment Of tho Democrat
ic pntty OF this section in years gone BY Let
us examine the record. On the 9Th day of Au.
gust lSiS the Democratic Convention for this
district met at WoodvIle aud amongst the
proceedings of that Convention we find the FOL.
lowing resolution, which appears to have been
UNANIMOUSLY adopted -
"RsSolpcd, That lUs are unaterdbly opposed
TO the iriroductioA OF SIdUsry into TeTrit0ru
f,ss 10 IN he .b,J
by the Missouri COMPROMISE, the more rcceHt
Compromise Of Clayton n Co, or any other de-
| Uicc- because Us 6siiepe % to be incompatible
Wlth national prosperity the rights Of the free
North and the dictates Of enlightened kumd.
nity."--Vide Toledo Herald, Aug. Ii, lS49.
| Among the prominent members of the D1mo.
| tic party present, and sustaining that resolu.
| ton, we find the names vi James B. Steedman
| f. d. Potter, Willi1m Jackson, John e. Hunt
james q. Haley, and Jarus Curtis Yet these
same men, this same party, is now to be found
the foremost and the loudest supporters Of the
doctrine OF squalter sovereignty. Will not some
| of these good Democrats explain how a man
can consistently support both of these resolu-
| tiuns-how he can reconcile pledge Of unal-
| teruble opposition to the extension of slavery
into Territory now free, to the admission of
| Slave States, with II doctrine which protects
slave property in tho Territories and admits
rlty Of the sqlatters resident IN Territory shall
so decide 7 Does the Democratic party OF 1889
! hold TO the same Vows, the same principles IN
regard to the extension of slavery, and the pro-
| tecuOn OF slave property, rs dId the Democratic
party OF 1857 No candid man eau read the
resolutions of the party, thea aud now, and
| lruthiully reply IN the 0li native. No honest
man. after Investigating the positions of the De-
mocratc party on this question, then end now
| ,.lnin, fan i,t ii ln ~
Then the Democratic pHrty claimed to DO the
tree party OF the North--then it was unaterably
opposed TO the spread OF slavery, to the admis-
sion OF any more Slave States, to tho protection
Of slavery in the Toutories--then it was loud
in its dcuuncintion OF the Whig party, because
of its nomination of Taylor tor the Presidency
the one great fault found with him by the D.
mocrauC parry being that he was STAKEHOLDER
Now, when the same doctrine ON the snbiacr
of the extension of slavery that was held by the
Democratic party in lSlo is made plank in
the Platform OF the Republican party, it is de-
nounced by the present Democratic party as an
abolition heresy Of the deepest. blacklist dye;
words are lacking with which TO paint their
horror aud delostauon OF principle, which, but
few short years ago, they themselves Were bat.
ting for with such unaugsing zeal Nor was
this opposition to the spread of slavery in 1913
confined alone to that portion of the Democratic
cratic National Convention which met at Bllti.
more during the month OF May in that year, re.
fused To deny the power aud duty of Congress
to prohibit slavery in the Territories Of the Unit-
ed States, and II minority ot the committee on
resolutions. to wlt Wv, L. Yancy, OF Aabama,
in. G. McGeehs', OF Florida, and ]. Nj. Comman.
der, OF South Carolina, presented the following
resolution hs expressive OF the views of the ultra
portion OF the Southt rn Democracy NJ that time,
| a. TN, nupqtnn ni ha ,,,rl l.,
late in regard to slavery in the Territories.
Resolved, That the doctrine OF non interference
with the rights of property of any portion of the
people OF this confederation BE- it in the States
| or IN the Territories, by any other than the
parties Interested in them, is the true Republi.
can doctrine recognized by this body.
The convention hy a large majority refused TO
adopt this resolution.
Yet this as now the doctrine of the Democratic
party in the North, while those who formerly
advocated this resolution, the Southern D mocra,
cy, now claim that il is tie right as well as the
duty OF Congress 10 interfere tor the protection
ul slave property in the Territories Verify
consistency is jewel. Would lhit the honest
potion OF the Democratic party could see them
selves and their party as is could realize the lu
enormity ot the hydraheaded monster could
view its manifold qurks aud lamS 10 save Itself
from defeat, its wlful disregard of the right, its
perversion OF truth, its sacrifice of honor aud
honesty, its violation Of pledges, its change OF
doctrine, its lack Of princlple--conSisteul o ly
in obeyng the old rule of "oil things to all men,
SO long as success is perched upon lis standard,
Is there to he found single voter who does
not believe The Democratlc party deserving oI
the charges have rung against it'll lHok at the
course OF the party on the slavery question Ion
| the last ten or eleven years, aud then tell m,
who is in error Yvuorl The Republican party
now occupies the same ground on the subj ct OF
party did in 1918. Let the men who now cry
OUT against IN, abolition doctrines of the Repub,
lican party enquire well whether, but few years
ago, they did not occupy the same position, ant
] AlNnrnIa Lh.-- q snIMn nrInuinlns Ii Nnn--lhnu