St. Charles City Republican intelligencer. [volume] (St. Charles City [Charles City], Iowa) 1857-1861, 1860-09-27

atcs profess to be Indifferent to the +
existence Of slavery, and "don't care '
whether it is voted up or down" We a
do care and it is because we believe
slavery is a great moral evil, that we Il
wish it excluded from the territories.
Are we therefore to be charged with p
disbeleving in mans capacity for self o
government? No, my friends! The
Republican party Of to-day stands on
the very principle Of sclf-sovernment.
1t is the corner stone of their organl-
cation. He accuses US of tending to
dsunionism, because Abraham Lin
coin has said, "This government can
not permanently endure half slave and
half free" But when We rccollect
that the Democratic party has intro
duced into the federal government the
policy of protecting and extending
slavery, instead Of freedom when 1t
is openly declared that without extern
sion slavery cannot exist when these
two systems of labor are at constant
warfare for the ascendency may we
not expect that the day is coming
when one or the other will be trium-
phant? If Abraham Lincoln is to be
charged with abolitionism and disun-
ion, because he believes that free la
Dor will eventually triumph, then may
George Washington be charged with
it, for he expressed an earnest desire
that this Union might become a con-
federacy of free States"
The Republican party of to-day oc-
cupy the same ground as did the Re-
i publican party Of old The early Re-
: publicaus enacted a statute for these
l. northwestern territories, excluding
/ slavery and involuntary scrvitude
+ from their boundaries forever. The
g Republicans of to-day, following in
IS their track, would exclude slavery
from all our territories. The very
he man who pcnned the ordinance OF
is 1881 penned also the Declaration Of
T. Independence had he become dcre-
n lict to the great principles he there
he avowed !?
= Mr.. Samuels admits that VIC have
IS precedent for Congressional intervcn'
1t ton in the practice of our fathers.
y Well, gentlemen, when there is any
&c disputed point in the doctrines OF
IS Christianity what do we do? Why
rs we go back to the fathers, to Poly
ri carp, Ausclmo, and those good old mel
or who lived away back near the daw'
of Christianity and if we I'm there al
ny authority on the subject, we adopt IT
t and give to the winds all modern dog
ct mas and theories. just SO with the
I'd Republican party. If there are dis.
y puted points of constitutional law, we
it go back to the fathers and adopt thci'
g practices, believing that the trainers
he of the constitution knew more ant
in better its intent and powers than mod
mt ern demagogues and politicians.
=; To the question Of his competitor
C. "What clause of the constitution
in gives Congress power to legislate fo
re the territories ?" Mr.. Vandcvcr tri
s, umphantly replied, "What clause o
Sc the constitution gives Congress the
a power to pass an organic act? None
re Sir. You are strict constructionist
ut | am not. By your Interpretation Of
n the constitution you cannot even or
~ ganizc territory, and yet you do de
te it, in spite of your principles while
by my construction Of the constitution
S, | find there ample power for both"
I'd Mr.. Vandevcr then took up the pop
'g ular sovereignty doctrine of the Doug
re- las party, and disscctcd it with mas
III terly hand, sho wing, beyond the pow
CT of contradiction, that there was NJ
lr- such doctrine, either in the platform
ty or practices of the Democratic party
he 1t was a close, wcll-knit argumcn,
it sustained by the most unimpeachabl
;e- evidence.
ad Mr.. Vandcver advocated the home
) stead measure, and closed with an az
b. peal to the people to sustain and pr'
in mote the great principle Of libert.
he Said he, Don't you believe that tn
sc millennium will come, and war an
,ir pcstilence will be known no more, an
that the oppressed of all lands sha
as go free? If you do, it is but par
ci- of your religion to vote for and sus
he tain the Republican principles.
Ia Mr.. Samuels began his rejoinder b.
lis stating that the homestead mcasur
tic was not party qucstion-that tn
ID Republicans had adopted it to the de
so riment of the measure. He promise
ry to knock hole through the misrepr,
&c sensations Of Mr.. Vandcver, in refc
ad encc to popular sovereignty. but ii
DIV only argument which he adduced [
prove that the people of the territ
on rics had the right to decide the que
Nv, ton of slavery for themselves was Il
css assertion in the Nebraska bill that j
and intent was to leave the people Of Il
uld territory free to form their own d
her mestic institutions. Said he, Don