The weekly Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1861, 1859-12-07
More Of tic Kansas History.

MORE Oh TIC 1ANNSAS kzEStOFy'
Since George w. Brown, the editor OF
the Kansas Herald # Freedom, has been in
dependent enough 10 publish the history and
conduct of old John Brown in Kansas, his
political integrity and Repub!icanism have
been questioned and impeOched by many
Republican papers in the States. That he
gave q fSir and honest exposure of the
crimes of Brown there can be no doubt, end
hence the assaults OF the Republicans. We
append letter addressed by him to the ed
itor Of the N. Y. TriJans:
To the Editor ofthe ~ Y. Tribune SIR
| observe 10 your issue OF the 7th inst, an
editorial in which you speak of The Herald
of Freedom as "one OF the organs of the Free
State party, but now the open tool and sti.
pendiary Of the Pro Slavery Democracy"
Do me the favor to say to the readers OF
the Tribune that most positively deny the
charge made against me and my per. The
Herald of F'retdom was established In Kan
sas in the tall OF 1854, the avowed object OF
which WIS 10 make Kansas o Free State
1t profeseed to be nd pendent Of all parties,
and laborrg so ely tor the end for which it
was called into being. had formerly been
connected with the Free Soil party of ls4S,
and the Free Democracy of 1862, In 1856
the Herald Of Freedom was the first paper IN
the Republic to run up the name oi John c.
| Fremont for the Preslde Dcy, and hid the
honor Of sustaining him until presses and
! loe,.orol soIF
charged with high treason Tor sentiments oI
! Freedom promuI gated in my paper.
When the Herald Of Freedom was revived
or the lst day OF November, 1856 | agar
wrote an article defending tn" position o
JOHN c. Fremont, nd urging every friend o
Kausas in the States to give HIM their vote
On tie 5lh day OF September, 1855, the
| Free State party of Kansas was organized
1t wos composed of "Whiss, Democrats
| Free Soilprs, native aud najuraliz4d citi.
zens," in the language o. one OF the rcsolu
tons of the Convention and the member:
of it pledged themselves together that they
would discard oil minor is,urs, and that The
only test OF membership should be deter
min1liun 10 make Kansas a Free State
| The organization was to be preserved unit
Kansas maS Stute IN the Union. ! pIInted
myself on the platform with nv j2urna, and
exerted what little huerce | possessed to
maintain that purity intact until the end for
which it was orgoniz d had been fully attain
ed hence | opposed the organz ,tion of @
Democratic party, Us we'll as q RepubicIn
| party, in Kansas, desirous Of keeping the is
sue distinct oae between Freedom and
Slavery, until we had taken our place in the
Union, and had voice in NATIONAL politics,
at which time frequently declared in my
pnpor should take position with that party
VIII ch promised the most for Freedon. Nv
own opinion was that il we could prevent the
organic ItioD Of Nati nl parties in Kansas
unti after the Republican party was reor.
ganiz2d in the States in 1860, we could in
duce nearly every Fgee.S State man in the
Territory to 60 into the support o. that or.
garizs stion, and thus mike it q tower O.
strength to the country while, ii premature
ly organized, hundreds, ard probably thou
sands, would be forced into the Democratic
party, because Of past affinity, and hence cur
strength would be materially Iessened.
The parties hive been organrz d. I Ia.
bored ulcrward TO rally the old Free. State
party at Big Springs, tut it proved a failure.
During the last Summer resolved 10 keep
aloot from both p rites, which hqye done
until recently. opposed the Wysndotl
Constitution because it was detective in nsDy
important textures, and because / thought it
unnecessarily and toolishly parliz in. urg
ed my objections to it. After taking position
against II, the Democrats, il their Conven
ton at Tecumseh, also took position against
it; snd the Republican,, in their Conven.
lion, took p .s'iOn in t4yor ol it. d.d'no,
see p;orer 10 change trout because thi state
OF things existed, thouga ! exceedingly re.
gretted il. Had the Democrats possessed
sense enough to have lett tn question TO the
people, independent Of party, the result would
huve been very different rom what II j. bu'
by making it party issue the Republican
sustained it in body, with many Douglas
Democrats; while the strGight-out Demo.
Gratis, and the few who had not Identlf ID
themselves with either o. the parties as then
organic d, with mysel;, wh) felt it was very
objections bic, voted II Gnst it.
The Constitution was adopted by the peo.
pie, and The Herald Of Freed0Da took its po
sition on the Republic II pl1trorm in support
Of all the nominees OF the r publican State
Convention ur uticers under it. Martin f.
Conway receives my support merely because
he is nominee Of The purity, not because |
like the man, or his past political history in
Kansas, and because | cannot consistently,
with my Anti Slavery views, sustain his op.
ponent, Judge HaIderman.
did not sustain Marcus J. Psrrott for re-
election, because believed him intemperate
in his habits, which disqualified him, in my
estimation, for Delegate to Congress-.
sustained Judge Johnson, not because he was
Democrat, but because he had formerly been
identified with the Free State parry, enter
tanning precisely thu sumo views on ell na.
tional questions with Mr.. Parrott, and less
Objectionable than Mr.. Z. on account OF in
temperance. turther believe his energy oil
character would euabe him to do more for
the material interests of Kansas than Mr..
Parrott could do.
In raising the names of Salmon P. Chase
and Nathaniel P. Banks as candidates for the
two highest Offices 10 the nation, "subjsct 10
the decision of REPUBLICAN National Con.
Uention,"I only expressed my honest wishea
in the premises.
Thought up by the Federal Administra
tion, am unconscious of it, although it ha,