Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1860-09-11
c,nv.ss Int that il was not my intention to

You all know that at times, as q citizen, that
could vote anywhere in the State, (be'ng DC.
fore the revision and adoption Of our present
Constitution1 but it so happened that there
were six or eight gentlemen accompanying me,
all of whom belonged to the Wing party, and
,hev nronosed to me that if / would not return
to nv own town and vote, they would not. If
,ve had all voted, there would have been six Or
seven votes cast for Taylor, and only one
cast for Cass and Butler. [Cheers.l accept
cd the proposition and we went hunting
Laughter. And if every man had done as
we'll as myself we would have carried the State
by forty thousand majority. Applause j
Among those with me ! remember the names
Of three Of my fricnds-Thomas j. Redd, Mel
son Butler and GeorgcP. Jewett.
Another charge has been extensively circu.
lated throughout the Southern States that i
was an cmancipationiSt in lS40, Or ut least w.
ted for an emancipaticnist at some time.
Here Mr.. b. read an extract from a letter
from Hon. George Robertson, published in a
Southern paper, having reference to ms posi-
ton on this question, and abiding to his pr
vate affairs, and commented on it at some length
and much severity.
come to the fact that the only time knew
Of the question Of emancipation being raised,
was in lS49, when we were clectlng delegates
to the Convention TO form 4 new Constitution.
Then DR.. Breckenridge and Mr.. Shy were
emancipationists. Mr.. Wickliile and | canvas
sed the county to the best of our abilities, in
opposition to emancipation, believing that the
interests of both races in the Commonwealth
would be promoted by the continuance of their
present relation. At the polls, DR.. Breckin-
ridge voted against me. and ] voted against
him, [cheers, because We wcrc representing
opposite principles, and just so would it be
again, under similar circumstances. So much
for that charge.
But | have seen pamphlets published aud
circulated all over the Union for the purpose
of proving that | was q know-Nothing in the
State OF kentucky. Laughter. | have no
doubt that 4 very considerable proportion Of
those listening to me were members Of that Or
der in that year, and if there is u mar among
YOU who belonged to the order, who ever saw
me in one Of your lodges, who did not know
that | was recognized as one Of the most I'M
compromising opponents of that ordcr-lct him
be good enough to say so now. \ voice: ale
amt here.l | believe | was the first gentleman
in Congress who took a position against the or
ganizstion. When I returned home in the
Spring of 1855, it was making great progress in
this Commonwealth, and although | had with
drawn from public life, to attend to my private
affairs, | opposed it in repeated speeches all
over Kentucky.
The statement may not be very acceptable
to some gentlemen within the sound of my
voice, but I do not want to deceive any man.
I stand upon my principles, and nm willing to
view them without the slightest regard TO con-
sequences. I M represented 10 this day as
having said that | would make 4 difference be-
tween one of my own religious belief and anoth-
err, and that between an unnaturallzed and natu-
ralized citizen | would make n political differ.
ence. | never uttered such 4 sentiment. IGreat
applause.
The underlying principle with me was this:
that the condition Of citizenship being once
obtained, no question, either Of birth or rcli-
gion, should be allowed to ~commingle with po-
lit,cal considerations lApplause. | deem it
only necessary to make these statements here
succinc,ly and pass on. because l am speak
ing to assembled thousands who know this in
justice.
But, fellow citizens, to come to more extend
ed topics, it has been asserted that | and the
political organization with which | am connect
ed, have abandoned the ground on which VIC
stood in regard 10 the territorial question in
1851 and '56-that we then occupied a posi-
ton which is now occupied by the friends and
supporters Of Mr.. Douglas, and by that emf.
ncnt gentleman himself. deny il, and | shall
now proceed to prove my denial, both as to
myself and as to the party therein involved.
There WAS q body to whom we could refer
the question, and We thought it unnecessary
further to debate, each party agreeing to nc
u~uicsce in the decision rs rendered by the said
body. ! believe that none Of my speeches in
this connection were prepared ny me-, except
by the briefest notes. Never was u single report
OF these speeches revised by Inc or written out
in full. The reports of them are those which
various persons chose TO make. I have becu
amused to see various portions Of what they
call the Tippecanoc speech, and the divers re-
ports of the reporters, which they chose Ia make
for the different pancrs nj different times.
| have in my hand q report which reads as
follows in reference to the territorial question ::
''The people Of the Territories Under the Kan
sas. Nebraska act, have the full right to abolish
or prohibit slavery-which principle is as old Ds
the Republican Government ITSELF"
Not only did | never utter such a sentiment,
but | have no reason to believe that anybody
even thought | uttered it. had never seen it
in any newspaper anywhere; butt have no time
to waste in comments upon the propriety or
4 uGlCICS Vi u EClllCudl W lO u bSINES kHS NNNiii
try for the office of President, in introducing
the name Of one who is also a candidate with
me, and giving his personal testimony. AS TO
that gentleman's opinions, | shall waste no time
in discussion of the propriety Of such Il course.
| wish to meet the accusation.
The Hon. S. A. Douglas, in q series of papers
which he has been reading in various States,
and even recently in Concord, y. HI give
his own language: "There is not an honest
man in all America" says Mr.. Douglas, " that
will deny that james Buchanan and John {.
Breckenridge, in 1856, were pledged to the doc.
trinc Of non.intcrvention by Congress with
slavery in the Territories. Mark the word, it
is there non-intcrvention. I made speeches
from the same stump with J. c.. Breckinridge,
in 1856, when he was advocating his own
claims to the Vice Presidency, and heard him
20 to the extreme length in favor Of popular
sovereignty in the Territories" Then, speak
ing Of other gentlemen from the South, who
had been expressing themselves in the North,
he SAYS: 'In every one Of the speeches they
advocated squatter sovereignty in its broadest
sense" Here, in the space of twelve lines, you
see non-intervention. popular-sovereignty-all
evidently conveying the same meaning-that |
held doctrines Of non,interrention us it was
originally understood and engrafted into the
legislation Of the country, Icheers, as | will
proceed to show more fully in another part Of
my speech. But l presume that Mr.. Douglas,
in this statement, meant to declare that in 1856,
from the same stump with me, he advoca-
ted the doctrine that u Territorial Legislature
had the power to exclude slave property under
territorial conditions; and | also presume that
he uses this expression in that sense, and this
is the question that has been the whole point
Of dispute.
Well, at no time, either before Or after the
passage Of the Kansas Nebraska bill in Con.
grcss, did | ever entertain or utter the opinion
that Il Territorial Legislature, prior to the for
nation Of u State Constitution, had the power
To rNrlnde slayn nrnnrrtr frnn the common