Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1859-01-14
Dolitital.
SPEECH OF HON. JAS. HUGHES.

Below will be found an extract from a
speech of the Hon. JAMES HUGHES, of
Indiana, delivered on the 9th of No
vember last, in a Democratic meeting in
Indianapolis, which we publish by way
of exhibiting to our readers the marked
difference between the positions of the
Democracy of Indiana, and those in Iii
nois, claiming to be douglas Demo-
Gratis" 1t is eminently proper that ev-
cry Democrat should read this speech
carefully, that he may comprehend pre-
cisely what the true issues are which
exist between the Northwestern Demo-
Gratis whose sentiments are represented
by Mr.. Hughes, and those represented
by Mr.. Douglas. A careful reading Of
this speech by them will at once suggest
where their political sympathies justly
belong;
In 1856, We met together in this hall,
proclaimed our creed and went forth to
victory. Never was there a more devo-
ted, united, and gallant army than that
which Ashbel p Willard led in that
memorable contest Indiana achieved
laurels then that should live forever green
upon her brow.
had the honor to draft the State Plat
form of 1856. On the slavery ques-
ton, the leading issue of the State and
National elections, at that time, it was
broad and unequivocal. 1t endorsed
"the Compromise measures of 1850 and
their application as embodied in the Ne
braska bill" Upon the construction OF
that famous bill some difference of opin.
ion existed.
Some contended for Estate equality, -
a construction now established by the
bred Scott decision, others for squatter
sovereignty The former was more &C.
ceptable to the South, the latter to the
North. Our platform left that question
to judicial decision, by which it is need.
less to say, the Democratic party always
abides. The preference of our people
doubtless was for squatter sovereignty
We believe it the most expedient and
equitable mode of settling the question
Of slavery in the Territories. We would
most Of us been gratiied had the Su.
preme Court of the United States recog.
nizcd the legality of squatter sovereignty
yet even here in Indiana there were
those who denied it, and favored State
equality. The bred Scott decision has
settled that question. That decision has
been sanctioned and accepted by the
Democratic party everywhere. 1t is not
III conflict With the Cincinnati platform
1t will doubtless be approved by the
Charleston Convention. Let me remind
you Of the resolution adopted by our
State convention of the 9Th of January
last, a resolution which no one opposed
not even those shining lights that are
now subsiding into Republicanism, "as
kindred drops are mingled into ONE II
is the unanimous voice of the Democra-
cy of Indiana expressed in plain and
vigorous language:
| 7. Resolced, That in the late decision of toe
Supreme Court Of the United States, known rs
! the bred Scott decision, we recognize n Legal
exposition Of the doctrines Of the Constitution
Of the United States and Of the State Of Indi.
ana, and we hereby denounce and hold up &c
universal execration and scorn Of all loyal
| American citizens the loathsome doctrine Of
NEGRO equality" now sustained and endorsed
1 by the so-ealled Republican party of Indiana,
rs a natural and inevitable consequence Of
their opposition TO the decision Of the Supreme
Court above named.
This bred Scott decision disposes oil
the question of Slavery in the Terrific
RIGS forever, if faithfully adhered to, and
is National platform founded in justice
upon which the Democratic party Of the
whole Union can stand with an unbroken
front.
AS to the admission of Slave States
into the Union, the Republicans pro-
fess now to be divided among themselves.
We are united--we adhere to our doc
trine-that they may come in when, in
the language Of the Cincinnati platform,
'they have sufficient population" with
or without slavery. as their respective
constitutions may prescribe.
The Kansas question, temporary