Sugar planter. [volume] (West Baton Rouge [i.e. Port Allen, West Baton Rouge Parish, La.]) 1856-1925, 1860-09-15
is simply sufficient to say that there ie not
arA, IL. "a Ia: &. Q.H

is simply sufficient to say that there ie not
particle OF foundation for it. Mt Bell "as
not voted for in the Chicago Convention. nor
was his name mentioned in that body. Tie
whole story has not single circumstance OF
fact to sustain it. Mr.. Bell was nominated
at Baltimore before the Chicago Convention:
met, and he wa. nominated b. national men
from the extreme South and from the ex-
treme North by men who have been enga-
sed in fighting sectional!sts all their lives
and in the North have ever opposed Black
Republicanism with undaunted font. Ihls
charse, zoe think. is made in most cases by
persons who are simply ignorant OF The facts
of the case, and would not wiifully deceive
the people. We repeat that Mr.. Bell was
not voted for in the Chicago Convention, no!
was his name mentioned, if our recollection
serves US rightly, even indirectly during the
eutire session OF that Convention.
| In resnect of the other accusation, the off,
cial records show that Mr., Bell voted agu,nss
the proposition to abolish the slnve trade in
| the District OF Columbia He did express a
doubt we admit, whether the power to sbol-
| ish the slave-trade there existed in the Con-
stitution or not This doubt he held in COM
mon with SOME of the truest Southern men
that ever lived. Under that clause OF the
Constitution which gives Congress exclusive
jurisdiction over the District, he held that
Congress might have possibly the powet to
do this-but he steadily protested against the
exercise Of the power and voted against it
when it came to the test. In the name Of
common-sense and fairness, We appeal to the
people of the South to rebuke this unworthy
attempt to impeach Mr.. Bells fealty in re-.
gard to this matter.
More than this. There was clause in the
bill cohfscating slave if Southe rrer should
carry one into the District. Mr.. Bill moved
TO strike this clause out of the bill! Here was
an attempt not only to cast odium upon the
ownership of slaves. but to take away the
right OF property in them il Southerner
should carry them mo the District. Other
Southern Senators sat silently by, and oterei
,nained for John Bell. of Tennessee. to como
to the rescue Of the honor and inte..
ests of the South, and to protest, by prac.
teal proposition, against the outrage And
yet John Bell owning two hnndled slaves
himself, is an Aboflt,onist! How many Of
those bringing ftyls charge against him, own
one-half, one-tonrth. one-tenth as many -
Some of them do not own even a negro's
track in the sand
And yet this bill abolishins the slave. trade
in the District Of Columbia became part Of
the Compromise Measures OF 1880 The
Democratic party of the nation, in general
convention, two years afterwards endorsed
that Compromise, containing this very prop
ssifion abolishins the slave-trade! They
endorsed it in 1852, again in 1856, ana We
believe they re-endorsed it this very year.
They have given their solemn sanction to 4
series of measures, one Of which they COM
plain of John Bell for doubling the right Of
Congress to PASS, although he voted sgainst
of'-we will not say folly, but inconsisten.
cy-" further go!''
When John Bell does thing it il all
wrong. When they themselves do identic.
ally the same thing it is all right, Dat re.
man corvis, verat eens1va eolx",bas pm. O.
Crescent