The weekly north Iowa times. [volume] (McGregor, Iowa) 1857-1867, 1859-10-05
WHOLE NO. 155.

the Ordinance of 1887. That Indiana was
a free State was owing to the fact that slave
ry had been prohibited here by Congress,
and had been in nowise dependent upon the
will or the choice of her citizens Ken.
tucky, he said, with a soil and climate SIM
liar to Indiana, was \ slave State, because
slavery had not been prohibited by Congress
while She was in Territorial condition.
He insisted that slavery would 60 into all
Territories and would mould the character
of their State Constitution, unless prohibit
ed by Congress In this view Congression-
al intervention for freedom" was the
only panacca for the eradication or rcstric-
ton of slavery.
Notwithstanding the ordinance Of 1887,
Indiana Territory gave slave code to the
territory now included in the State of Mich
igan, Illinois and Indiana. The same au-
thoritics also prepared a slave code for Lou
isiana Territory. Slavery, too, by Terrific
rial legislative permission and protection,
was one Of the domestic institutions Of In
diana and Illinois, and slaves were held in
them until late period by the protection
of local laws. When the constitution Of
Indiana was adopted, in 1920, the people
''in the free exercise of the right to choose
their own form of government" ordained
that "thcre shall be neither slavery nor in
voluntary servitude within the State other
wise than for the punishment Of crimes"
Here was an exercise of unquestioned pop
ular sovereignty. 1t was the choice of the
people who ordained the constitution of
1920, and again in 1850, not to have slave
| rv. If they had desired that domestic in
stitution they could have had it, and Con
gress would have admitted Indiana into the
confederacy with constitution permitting
slavery. -.
| But Hon. Abe Lincoln says that no Ter
ritory was ever admitted as State with
constitution prohil ting Slauery hy the free
choice of her people. In oth-r words pop
ular sovereignty never made free State or
extended slavery, in the adoption of State
constitution. How was it with California
and with Oregon9 Before admission, slave
ry was not prohibited in those Territories
by Congressional Intervention; yet they
came into the Union free States by the vol
untary choice of their rinhabitants. How is
it with Kansas? The free choice Of her
| people makes her free State. The same
will it b, with Nebraska, unaffected by the
overshadowing influence of Congressional
action. In Kansas can be rs proftably
| employed as in Missouri; yetaccording to
Hon. Abe Lincoln's Republican logic, in
the absence of Congressional prohibition
|, Kansas must come into the Union as a
r slave State. And the same argument will
| apply to California and Oregon. The idea
e which prevails with Mr.. Lincoln and the
G party he represents is, that the people o
/, the Territories are incapable of judging
;, whether their climate and soil better adapt!
g them to free or slave labor.
b The diluted and fimsy arguments Of Mr.
= Lincoln may appear sound and satisfactory
to weak headed Republicans, but they can
not he accepted by an intelligent auditory
IF Mr. Lincoln is one Of the great guns o
RepuH,icanism, and if that party depenf
upon the arguments he made in his speech
e here to sustain their cause, there is less ir
;, Republicanism as little as we have hereto
= fore estimated it, than we had supposed
With all rejecting men, Mr.. Lincoln's Ma
sonic Hall speech damaged the Republican
0 cause, and the same speech made over th'
State would do more to confirm Democrat
{ ic principles than any other agency w
c know of. His plausibility was too transpa
y rent to deceive the most credulous, withou
, possessing even skim milk substance
o Such food may, howvver, do for such ol,
; line Wing babies as Hon. John D. Defree
l. and Hon. CalebB Smith, whose weak stom
s achs seemed we'll adapted for it.-Indidn
!, |, aa,olis Sentinel Sept. %.
q -----------.---------
], From the Indiana State Sentinel.
: Self-Government.
a In Ohio the Democratic nominees ar
Is making the same issues as were made b
.. the Democracy in the Presidential canvas
of 1856. The broad ground taken is tina
,f the people have the right to the exercise
a self-govcrnment wherever they may b.
h whether in Territories or States-that tn
i. removal of the citizens from the States
=. the Territories does not disfranchise ther
r of any of their political rights. In a II
> cent speech in Ohio Judge RANNEy, tn
Democratic nominee for Governor, thu
states the issue most forcibly:
And now that we are upon the subje'
let me ask where, in the nam, of God, hav
the people ever extended slavery one inch
~ defy any man on the face Of the globe
:. point me out an instance in which they hay
of done it. Look over our country and yo
7 will find that in majority Of the State
,t slavery has already been abolished, II
~ slave laws kave been abrogated; and fir
v. States and free laws occupy their place
while slavery has not grown one foot in o,
territory. And all this has resulted fro
the operation of the principle of selfgo
ernment by the people. Take that ava
and you strike at the very root of all fir
=, government Upon what is that COVER
~ ~ ment founded? Upon the idea of man
he capacity to govern himself. These gentl
% nf men who oppose this idea distrust the C
to m pacity of the people for selfgovernment
he % the Territories. Do they not consider tn
M at they are able to govern themselves in Il
,,t State of Ohio, and are not the people
w the Territories just as intelligent and cap
n BILE of distinguishing between right al
at wrong as they are? If they would JUST
N. feet fora single moment, they would
n n willing to concede to others all that tn
"a claim for themselves. The old Pharise
aS who stood on the corners of the streets
~ Jerusalem, and thanked God that th'
w. were made better than other men, have
no type in these very men, and they are II
- merous They were not confined to Jud
W. W. alone You will find them scattered
~ over this country. The truth is, that if +,
ad propose to maintain free government
ad all, we mnst maintain it by allowing all t
th people to have those rights that we clai
" for ourselves. =.
Il These positions coincide most striking
mt with those taken by the prominent Dem
70. m cratic speakers in the last Presidential ca
n,t vass. We quote a few extracts from Il
~. M speeches then made, to show that Jud
,"t % RANNEY occupies the same ground nc
"S which was advocated then-that the majt
na ns ity Of the people Of the Territory will prs
"s tically determine the character of their q
~ mestic institutions, which is nothing me
20 or less than the exercise Of the right Of Sc
government. Hon. HOWELL CoBB said ::
Those who hold that the Territorial I
gislature cannot pass law prohibiting sla,