Litchfield enquirer., 1859-09-29
The State of our Politics.
POSITION OF THE REPUBLICAN
 PARTY

PARTY.
 SPEECH OF HORACE GREELEY AT AUBURN, CALI
 FoRNIA. AUGUST 6.
 Concluded)
 We stand, then, unawed by denunciation unfearful of prescription, and say the doctrine was sound and good that slavery is the ere ation of local law, and cannot go any further than the local law extends that it is posi-, tive evil, and shall not be carried under the flag of this Union into Territories gained by the blood and treasure If the nation that it shall be restrained within the limits where the sovereign States have planted it, and be6ond that it shall not go. ''Well," say some, "sup' pose Territory should undertake to form 9 slave state, what are you going to dol" Well, say, suppose the white population all have black children, what arc you going to do about it? [Great laughter. It is about on par with the other proposition. There never was time when Territory formed free desired to come in slave. Keep the Territory free, and you never will have any more slave states If you simply keep slavery out of the Territo- ries, never, until the world grows gray, will you have any more slave states to admit. Simply keep the Territories Free, and they won't want to be slave. Even Indiana, that petitioned Congress two or three times for permission to hold slaves for a limited period in the Terrto- ", never thought or asked to be admitted with them They would not have had it for mil lions. They only asked for it for limited time, being thinly settled, thinking it might increase their population. l say there is no practical difficulty about admitting slave states, if you only keep it out of the Territories They won't want to be admitted, not one of them, as slave states.
 Look at the questions, correllatve, deman- ding solution. There is, first, the reopening of the African slave trade. do not know in the present time with the Republican party so formidable, and advancing as it is that it will be mooted in Congress- But this say: That the reopening of the slave trade is ovcrshad- owing you, provided for by the Democratic platform and by the Democratic doctrine of non-intervcntion :; so that any man wbo con- sistently affirms that doctrine dsarms himself from making any obj cton to that reopening Suppose, now, Jury of Democrats here i'll California were empanneled to try man for bringing slaves into some one of the slave states. We all know it is piracy by law, and punished by death. But the prisoner gets up aud goes behind the law He says: Gen tlemen, you believe ill popular sovereignty that the people may have slaves or not, as they see fit. You also admit. that the tropical sugar and cotton growing regions cannot be cultivated without slaves that it is, in fact, a very good thing there. Do you not admit this ? You know you do. Now, fit is right to hold slaves there, and the people are the proper judges whether they shall have slaves or not, why are you going to hang me up for supply ing them ?" l don't see how Democrat can surnlount this Of course he will have to re- treat, and plant himself on the law. "Yes, but the law condemns having slaves in Kansas and Nebraska. You upset the law to give Popular sovereignty fair chance. Why not allow the same? Apply to me the same prin- cples that you applied to the Kansas bill, and l am all right-not pirate, but vlrtuous, patriotic and inte gent citizen, doing the best can to extend the interests of the people of the South" say take away the Republican par ty, and the question of the slave-trade comes up vita irresistible force. As when we were talking of the Texas boundary. we said, "Why, you know Texas don't extend to the Rio Grande--hardly to the Nueces." "Stop,' says Texas, you are precluded. You accept us with our boundaries, Now, you cannot urge against us that our boundary did not extend there, for you have fought battle or war on the presumption that it does." So, let the Republican party drop out of sight, and you come and demand the punishment of African slave-traders. They say, Does not the doc Urine of popular Sovereignty prevail? Have not we been trying to blot out the Republi cans, who say the contrary? Now, we de nland the application of our Acts. w choose to have slaves I've want some w send to Africa for them, and what do you propose to do about it It is the principle O Popular Sovereignty"
 Now, the question of Cuba. Are we Re pubcans agitating the public mind on tha question :? Do we desire money paid, or wa made, for any acquisition whatever? On thu contrary, we do not On the contrary, tn people of the Slave States, or the leaders de mand that Cuba shall be annexed to this Uu ion-by purchase, if possible by force, if ne cessary-in order as Gov. Brown of Mississipp l said, "for the sake of extending slavery ."- That is the object as stated by him in a speecl at New York. "I want Cuba for the sak "of extending the power of slavery in thi "nation. You may want it for what 70, "please, but that is what I want. That the real want. Suppose Hayti asked ad
 mission, would We take her? She is bette
 and bigger. But we won't take her. Why
 Because her labcrers are free, while those o
 Cuba are slave We want Cuba becaus
 she would bring probably four Senators ant
 ten or eleven Representatives to vote fo
 Dred Scott decisions and against Freedom.
 When that purpose is entertained, no cues
 tions of money are allowed to stand in tn
 way. Why, one hundred and twenty million
 for the purchase of Cuba-'tis a mere fe
 bite A sum of money nearly equal to on,
 sixth of the entire expenditures of the Go, ernment from it's foundation to the preser time, they coolly talk of giving for that on island. They will give one hundred and twe'