The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1860-02-10


tween them rs States. Sir, in no speech ever
put forth by republican, in nothing ,nas
the Senator has read even from the sPsech u
the honorable Seuator from New iorA' can
be found any such idea.
I have heard this iteration ana reiteration
about the .irrepressible connict time ana
apain. Ifmy friend from New York was
t5rtuna,c In saying that, he was unfortunate
~ bsing the author Ola phrase; and shy
here to-day publicly, what have said pri-
Ystely. that IL he diiiuscd that idea over half
n page instead of COMPRISING il into asingle
sentence, nothing would ever have come of
IL. Sir, in my judgment. il is only BY mis-
representation thatanything can be made out
OF il as ,itstands.
1.-THE Senator asks me whether think
that there is an irrepressibls conflict between
freedom and slavery answer, in the sense
in which | understand those gentlemen, that
If YOU nut free labor and slave labor upon n
soil together, they do antagonize; the in
terests are not the same and the character
Of the labor is not the same, and they neces-
arily antagonize. IL the honorable Senator
from New York said anything more. am
not aware Of il but am not here TO defend
him ; he can defend himself; but where will
you find the doctrine, anywhere. from any
speaker, any member Of the Republican party,
that free States and Slave States cannot live
together in this Union, and live as friends ?
Sir, il either OF those gentlemen meant to
say that, dissent altogher. History has
proved il Others. For over halfa century
we have lived rs friends. Slave States and
free States have existed together, and can be
friends. But, us said before, If you ask
me is there disagreement between the
character of the two kinds Of labor? do they
antagonize when they come together, and
necessarily conflict with each other in in
terestg answer, yes: and YOU mnst
answer in the same way.
Mr.. Davis. VIII the Senator permit me
to interrupt him? | did not quite under
stand the phrase us he expressed it; and as
do not know of any antasonisin, will ask
him TO explain what he means by the state
ment that these two kinds of labor antagoniZC
when they come together?
Mr.. Fcsscnden. | mean, in very few
words, simply this that one is in its charac'
ter independent; tends toeleyate the laborer
tends to promote the comfort, the happines
the wealth, the manliness, of the laborei
himself; the other tends necessarily to de
grade the aborer to diminish his comfort.
10 diminish his independence, of course, fol
no has none to belittlc his character. Tha
is, in brief, 'the distinction of the two. the,
are necessarily opposed to each other. In
other words, where slave labor exists, il
tendency Is to degrade free labor Of the samt
description not only 10 degrade IL, bu
render il ofvastly less value and importance
Does the Senator understand me?
agree with the Senator from Illinois tina
the General Government has no right to in
terfcre with slavery in the States; and | 20
further, and say to-day, "a have said here
tofore in the speeches ! have made in THU
body, that the General Government has moi
only no right whatever TO Interfere directly
but that in nv system of morals, what Z
man has no right TO do directly he has NC
right TO do indirectly and therefore we hay,
right to Interfere in any way whatever il
relation to that matter. agree with hiu
there. But the Senator will see, and tn,
country will see, that he is assuming, in his
charge upon the Republican party, that Their,
is n desire that the General Government
should interfere by force with this matter Of
of Slavery in the Satcs.-Sir, there never
has been such desire; there has been nc
doctrine advanced by the Republican party
in this Chamber, or in any chamber, in it,
Conventions, or in private, that could lead
TO any such conclusion; and the allegation
is entirely unfOundcd in fact.
Sir, the Senator lays il down as our doc
trine, in his attack on the Republican party,
not only that we desire TO prevent the ex-
tension of slavery, but that we intend 20
make war upon slavery for its abolition every
wherein the States OF this Union as well
as elsewhere. Dad understand him rightly,
| DENY the charge. The Senator has said
said nothing 10 prove il. lie can say moth
ing TO establish il. Grant, for the sake of
argument. that the gentleman from Illinois
referred to. grant that the honorable Senator
from New York, have. in speeches, said all
that has been imputed to them, and that
what they have said bears the construction
the Senator put on it is the party responsible
for it? In what party platform, in what
resolution, where, authoritatively, 10y any
member Of il, has any such doctrine been ad-
yanced? understand the object.
Sir, we formed our party, grant, with
the express intention to prevent, IL possible,
the extension of slavery into the free Terrific
ries of this Union-to prevent il by COngres-
sional action five could; il We could not by
Congressional action, to prevent il By our
own f6rcc-not by armed force, but by the
force Of public opinion and priyat, action.
That ! grant. But, sir, where will you
find, in the doctrines OF that party US a party
where will YOU find in the action of that
party. in anything that they have proposed
ANYTHING to Justify YOU in the assertion that
they have proclaimed war upon the iustitu-
tons of the States as they exist, or wish TO
interfere with them?
We deny the allegation, IA we always have
denied il, that therc is any right whatever
in a citizen Ola SLAVE Slave State 10 hold
slaves in II Territory, unless there isa law
already in cSisGnce tpprutcct slavery IN that
Territory our object has bcen a. prevent
the existence OF such "a law. know that
your party newspapers, know that your
leading men, have seizeG upon that simple
ground which We have taken, and represent
cd il Us exhibiting hostility to the Institution
wherever itexistcd, wherever il WAS protected
bv Law in the States. say now, here in my
place, that that allegation, as made against
the Republican party. is uniounded entirely.
There never has been the slightest movement
in that direction byany membersol il. There
never has been the slightest encouri cement
20 such an idea from ANY PARTON OF IL, under
any circumstances. Why then, do YOU re-
itrrate IL? When | say 'yoa,' | mean
Northern Democrats. Why do your party
news papers az the North continually
charge this upon the Republican party, when
Won can find no authority anywhere for the