Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1860-09-19


at the election in Lexington in 1913; and that is
true, but with that fact has gone the explanation,
which my opponents have never published, showing
that it was nv intention to be absent during the
canvass but it not my intention to lose my vote
You all know that at times, as citizen, that L
could vote any where in the State being before the
revision and adoption of our present consttntion,)
but it so happened that there were six eight gen.
tlemen accompanying me- all of whom belonged to
the Wing party, and they proposed to me that if
would not return to my own town and vote. they
would not If we had all voted there would have
been six or seven votes cast for Taylor, and only
one cast for Cass and Butler. lCheers.] accept
ed the proposition, and We went hunting Laugh
ter. And if every man had done as well as myself
we would have carried the State by forty thousand
majority TApplausel Among those with me- l
remember the names Of three of my frends-Thos.
j. Redd, Nelson Butler and George P. Jewett
Another charge has been extensively circulated
throughout the Southern States that was an eman-
cipaonist in 1S49 or at least voted for an emanci-
| pationst at some time.
[Mr. B. here read an extract from letter from
Hon. George Robertson published in Southern
paper having reference to his position on this ques
ton, and abiding to his private affairs, and com
mented on it at some length and with much severity
come to the fact that the only time knew OF
the question of emancipation being raised, was in
1s40 when we were electing delegates to the con-
vention to form a new constitution. Then Doctor
Breckenridge and Mr.. Shy were emancipationists.
Mr. Wcklife and canvassed the county TO the best
| of our abilities in opposition to emancpatlon be-
lieving that the interests of both races in the COM
monweath would be promoted by the continuance
of their present relation. At the polls, DR.. Brock
inridge voted against me- and voted against him,
| [cheers, because we were representing opposite
principles and lust so would it be again, under SINH
! lar circumstances. So much for that charge.
But have seen pamphlets published and circu-
lated all over the Union for the purpose of proving
that was know-nothing in the State of Kentucky,
Laughter have no doubt that very consider
able proportion of those listening to me were men,
bers of that order in that year. and if there is
man among you who belonged to the order, who
ever saw me in one of your lodges, who did not
know that l was recognized one Of the most I'M
! compromising opponents of that order-let him be
good enough to say so now. A voice: He amt
here believe was the first gentleman in Con-
gress who took position against the organization.
When l returned home in the spring of 1855, it
was making great progress in this commonwealth.
and although had withdrawn 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 do
not want to deceive any man. / stand upon my
principles and am willing to a:ow them without the
slightest regard to consequences. am represented
TO this day as having said that would make diff
ference between one of my religious belief and
another, and that between an unnaturalized and
naturazed citizen would make political differ
ence. | never uttered such sentiment Great
applause.
The underlying principle with me was this: that
the condition of citizenship being once obtained, no
question: either OF birth or religion, should be al
lowed to commngle with political considerations. -
[Applause.] deem it only necessary TO make these
statements here succinctly and pass on because I
this injustice.
But fellow-ctizens, to come to more extended
topics it has been asserted that and the political
organization with which am connected, have aban-
doncd the ground on which stood in regard to
the territorial question in 1854 and '56-that we
then occupied position which is now occupied by
the friends and supporters of Mr.. Douglas. and by
that eminent gentleman himself deny it, and
shall now proceed to prove my denial both as to
myself and as to the party therein involved
There was a body to whom we could refer the
question, and we thought it unnecessary further to
dobate, each party agreeing to acqucsce in the de-
cision rendered by the said body. believe that
none of my speeches in this connection were pre-.
pared by me, except by the briefest notes. Never
single report of these speeches revised by me
or written out in full. The reports of them are
been amused to various portions of what they
call the Tippecanoe speech, and the divers reports
of the reporters, which they chose to make for the
different papers at different times.
have in my hands report which reads as fol-
lows in reference to the territorial question: 1.-The
people of the Territories under the Kansas Nebraska
act. have the full right to abolish establish slav.
ery-which principle is as old as republican gov
ernmcnt ITSELF
Not only did I never utter such sentiment, but
have no reason to believe that anybody ever
thought | uttered it. | had never seen it in any
newspaper anywhere; but have no time to waste
in comments upon the propriety or delicacy of
gentleman who is before the country for the Office
of President, in introducing the of one who is
also candidate with me, and giving his persona
testimony. AS to that gentlemans opinions, shall
waste no time in the discussion of the propriety o
such course. wish to meet the accusation.
The Hon. S. A. Douglas, in a series of papers
which he has been reading in various States anC
even recently in Concord, N HI give his owl
language: "There is not an honest man in al
America" says Mr.. Douglas, that will deny tina
JAS. Buchanan and Jno. G. Breckenridge, in 1856
were pledged to the doctrine of non-interventon by
Congress with slavery in the Territories" Mark tn
word, it is there non-interventon. 81 made speech
eS from the same stump with j. c. Breckenridge il
1885, when he was advocating his own claims t
the vice-presidency, and heard him 90 to the ex
IRENE length in favor of popular sovereignty in tn
Territories" Then, speaking of other genteme,
from the South, who had Seen expressing themsel
yes in the North, he says: ain every one of tn
speeches they advocated squatter sovereignty in it
broadcast sense" Here, in the space of twelve lines
you see non-intervention, popular sovereignty.
evidently conveying the same meaning he'll
doctrines of non-intervention as it was original
understood and engrafted into the legislation of tn
country, [cheers, as / will proceed to show NOR
fully, in another part Of my speech But, presum
that Mr.. Douglas, in this statement meant to de
! clare that in 1856. from the same stump with INT
that he advocated the doctrine that Territoris
Legislature had the power to exclude slave propert
} under territorial conditions; and also presum
that he uses this expression In that sense, and th
is the question that has been the whole point {
dispute.
Well, at no time, either before or after the pass
age of the Kansas-Nebraska bill in Congress, did
ever entertain utter the opinion that Territor,
, 1apic 1ofn -, 80