Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes County, Ohio) 1856-1865, 1859-09-22

Hocity anu LILO puiSuit, vi uoPPincSSs
Your constitution is based upon these
rights. If the negroes have no rights, ther
how can you prove that the white mar
has! God has given those rights to every
creature bearing his image, and so far as in
my power lies, will defend them subject
to the constitution and laws of the United
States of which / may be citizen.
He wants to know if I endorse the doc.
trines promulgated BY the Christian Anti
Slavery Convention at Columbus. To this
l reply as / have already done, that nv
opinions and views are those which have
been announced in the platform of the Re-
publican party. By them I am ready to
stand or fall. I do not hold myself re-
sponsible for the personal opinion of indi-
yidual members of the party with which ]
act, any more than I am responsible for the
opinion of persons outside of that organi-
zation, nor for those of every man, woman
and child in the State.
He wants to know what think of obeying
the fugitive slave law. I will here state
incidentally that the silly story about my
having declsred that II would use the bay
onet" to resist the EXECUTION of this law, is
utterly false, and without the slightest foun-
patton of truth. So long as the law, odi-
Gus as it is, stands upon the statute books
of the nation, I would not resist its
execution; but would do my duty under
the constitution as an officer of the State,.
should be elected, and would look for
my remedy in another direction.
The gentleman wants to know whether
/ do or do not stand on the Compromise
measures of 1850. stand where the fra
mers of the resolution indorsing those Com
promises stood, who under their interpre-
tation of those measures, had no idea that
slavery could be extended. But your Dred
Scott decision came in. 1t says we have
no free territory. 1t says slavery is now
the law in the territories everywhere,
The Supreme Court had no right To-
make that decision. 1t Was extra-ju-
dial-and the decision is not law. Now,
we say the territories are free; free, because
there is no law of slavery prevailing there:'
How does it come from these Democratic
gentlemen to ask us to stand upon the COM
promise measures of 1850, when they them
selves have violated them? Against those
1 entered my protest at an early
day. While they were pending in Con-
gress. offered as member of the Sem
ate of Ohio, resolutions protesting againss
them. But they were adoptedas thepoli~
cy of the government in relation 10 the
Slavery question, and were indorsed by
both political parties of the country. I
was not willing to leave the whig party,
because differed with the majority upon
this point, for there were other objects Of
public interest to be attained by that par
ty which valued highly. l therefore,
with thousands of Others, aequiesced in its
sanction of the compromises. The Demo-
cratic party itself was the FIRST to violate
them. The very first thing done under tbs
Pierce administration was to violate thsm-
The slaveholding interest bossted that it
would compel us to surrender, that it would
lriye slavery over all the territory. Then
i was that We determined to reinstal tha
doctrines of the fathers of the country.
My friend has been learning very fast,
recently. He tells you that be is in favor
,f non-interyention, but to leave it to the
people of the territories to have slavery or
,ot, as they please; and he says let the doc
.rine of the American revolution prevail
Was this the doctrine of the American
evolution! How was it that Jefferson, one
If the most powerful men in intellect and
most learned of his time, in 1854, eight
7ears after war was declared with Great
Britain, himself framed bill to prohibit
lavery in the territories forever! Why
vas it that the Colonial Congress in 1854
of the men OF the revolution,
men who sat down to write their laws with
he blood of their enemies dripping from
heir garments, sanctioned Jefersen's plan,
md made it law! How is it, that since
hat time, down to ls48, including Mr..
oolk's administration, almost every Presi-
lent has sanctioned the doctrine of pro-
libiting slavery in the territoriesa How
vas it that Mr.. Polk, then the Demoesatie
resident, himselfa slave holder, fixed his
ignature to an act organizing the territory
f Oregon, and which prohibited forever
lavery in that territoryi Call you this
octrine of non-intervention the doctrine Of
hose men who fought the battle of the
svolutioni 1t is not supported BY any
act that can be deducsd from the history
{ the past. Mr.. Douglas in his recent
nanifesto in Harper's Xdgazsss, argssa
bis whole question much more elaborate
: than my friend can do on an occasion
Ike this,-though not more ably than be
an do-yet he utterly fails to maintain
is position. The Jeffenonian Law 10
ILich I have referred, he disposes of with
single word, conscious that it upsets hia
hole argument.
The difference between the gentleman
nd myself is this: I regard slavery Is
reat moral, social and political evil 1Sls-
cry has existed by force, and is the great
st misfortune that can visit the people,
do not like it; / do not want to see it ex-
t here; / do not want to bring up my
aildren in the midst of its bsnefal infia-
noes; and say the great mission Of tho
party is to protect the country
ON the blasting curse Of its extensiou.-
Te intend that its power shall be arrested
' Congress, the same Is it was in Ohio,
,diaua, and the other States composing
10 territory embraced in the Jsfsrso-
an ordinance. We intend 10 take this