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

public, and sanctioned by succeeding years
of experience.
l have one advantage over my friend
he is exceedingly disturbed at what may
be the conquences of the success of the
Republican party. Now, my fellow citi
zens, am not disturbed at all. It may
be l have an advantage over the gentleman
in the way of temperament; but certain
ly have this great advantage over him, that
the principles l advocate are the principles
lie advocated in his earlier and more vigor.
Gus days. do not mean to say that my
friend is any the less able, adroit or acute
than in the days 10 which refer, but that
he had not then, as now schooled himself
to tue repression of individual convictions
at the demand of inexorable party necessi-
ty. The principle which-I advocate now,
and which he once so ably advocated, is
the prohibition of slavery in the territories.
Will the gentleman say he did not ad-
vocate this doctrine! A voice in the
crowd-"That's sop Mr.. Ranney-"It is
not so, never did, The proof is on re
cord and cannot be disputed. In his let
ter to Mr.. Huffman, in 1s4s, he goes to
the full extent of his doctrine, as advocat-
ed by the Republican party.
What are we, as Republicans, trying to
do! We are trying to prohibit, by con-
gressional action, slavery from going into
the erritories.-Tbe right to do this was
once the doctriae of my friend; it is the
doctrine of the Republican party now, and
it will be the triumphant doctrine in 1860.
T A voice-"That's SOL
put certain questions to the gentle
man, but he has not answered one of them;
and instead of answering my questions, he
has put certain questions to me. l asked
him if the constitution carries slavery into
the territories? He replies, slavery only
exists by law. By law! How does the
territory get its law! Under the constitu-
ton, according to the decision in the Dred
Scott case. l asked him to say whether
the Dred Scott decision gives to the terri
tories the law. He has not answered the
question. The South says the constitution
carries slavery into the territories, and the
Democratic party dare not deny it. "SlaYe-
ny exists by law By what lawa
l asked him whether be was in favor OF,
or against the law of 1857, "to prevent
holding and kidnapping in Ohio."-
He answered me by saying that when
member of the constitutional convention,
he voted in favor of clause in the state
constitution prohibiting slavery in Ohio
Did that answer my question? Southern
ers claim the right to move their slaves
through this State, and hold them upon
our free soil while an transitu. The pro-
vision to which he refers me, concerns a
matter entirely distinct from the object of
my question.
L asked him whether the fugitive slave
law was constitutional or unconstitutional
He replies by asking me what l think
about it.
l have put to him several other ques-
tions relating to State issues; and he an
swers by saying that he is in favor of the
Treasury law. He says he is in favor of
the safe keeping of the public money, but
he does not answer me upon the specific |
points to which l directed his attention.
Having passed over all my questions, l |
find l cannot get him down to the point
In endeavoring to escape them, he turns |
around and eulogizes the Democratic par
ty. He says that the Democratic party |
stands like rock in mid-ccean. In the |
black mid-ocean of slavery, he should have
said, for it does not stand at all in the
free States.
My friend has depicted the horrors that
are the result from the continued agitation
of the slavery question. That agitation |
seems 10 fill bis party friends with ominous
forebodihgs. Very well, who are the au-
thors of this agitationl Who annexed
Texas with its two hundred and thirty thou
sand miles Of slave territory to be hereafter
cut up into slave states? Who repealed |
the Missouri Compromise? Did the Re-
publican party do these things9 Is the
party advocating the reopen
ing of the slave trade? Who denied the
right of petition to the freemen of this
Union! Who instituted, and who defend,
and where exists the despotic practice of
rifling the mails. suppressing the issues of
q Free Press, and violating the sancity of
private correspondence? Was it us in the
North? Was it the Republican party p
No sir! 1t was the Democratic party, un-
der the control of the party of the South.
They have kept up this agitation. This
party Of the South wants to
make Presidents, and finds the Democratic
party of the North the willing and subser-
sient tool by which 10 accomplish its OBJ
ect. This power keeps up the agitation.
naLs rSaa ,n..s no. you. sSfy Ia Iests ;, st me-
For myself, i fear not agitation, when a
great truth is to be developed. 1t was
agitation that emancipated Europe from
he paralyzing thraldom of the dark ages.
Il was agitation that extorted the Bill of
Rights from the miserable hand of Charles
he First. 1t was agitation that laid deep
he foundations of our own glorious insti-
.utions. | am for agitation when il is d.
ected to proper end, and not for agita-
ion when it to promote despotism-
when it looks to the building up of
he power and the glory of freedom, l fear
nothing from it; but with all my heart bid
God spead. i
My frieI.d has seen proper to evade or to
lecline altogether answering my questions.
shall treat his interrogatories in differ I
mt manuer. l shall not hesitate to reply Ia