Pomeroy weekly telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy, Meigs County, Ohio) 1860-1866, 1860-03-27
JUDGE BATES, LETTER.


Below is the reply of Hon. Edward
Bates to certain interrogatories propoun-
ded by Missouri delegates to the Chicago
Conventions: .<
GENTLEMEN: I have received your
letter propounding to me certain ques-
tions, seven in number, which you sup
pose will cover most, if not all of the
grounds of controversy in the approach
ing Presidential election.
| Preliminary Explanation.
With pleasure I will answer your
questions. Before doing so, allow me
to glance at the peculiar circumstances in
which l am placed, and the strangeness
of the fact that |, a mere private man,
am called upon to make avowals and ex-
plantations with any view to take me
from the shades of private life, and place
me at the head of the Nation. l came
'to this frontier in my youth and. settled
in St. Louis when it was mere village
All my manhood has been spent in
Missouri, and during all this time, I
have followed profession which left
my character and conduct open to the
observation of society, and while it has
been my constant habit freely to express
my opinion of public measures and pub
lie men, the people of. Missouri, Of all
parties, will bear me witness that have
never obtrusively thrust myself forward
in pursuit of official honors. I have
held no political Office, and sought none
for more than twenty five years. Under
thero eirr urustuntes, I Cunfess the grati-
6cation which feel in receiving the re-
cent manifestations of the respect and
confidence of my fellow citizens. First,
the Opposition members Of the Missouri
Legislature declared their preference for
me as candidate. Then followed my
nomination by Convention composed
of all the elements of the Opposition in
this State. And now, the Republicans
of Missouri, in their separate Conven-
tion just held in ST. Louis. have re-i
firmed the nomination, and proposed, by
their delegates, to present me to the
National Convention, soon to be held at
Chicago, as a candidate for the first
Office in the nation. .-,.--.
These various demonstrations in my
own State are doubly gratifying to me,
because they afford the strongest proof
that my name has been put forward only
in spirit Of harmony and peace, and
with hope of preventing all division
and controversy among those who, for
their own safety and the public good,
ought to be united in their action.
For all this am deeply grateful and
as far assconcerns me personally, must
declare, in simple truth, that if the
movement go no farther, and produce
no personal results, still I am paid and
overpaid for life of labor, and for what
ever of jealous effort and patient watch
ing I have been able to bestow in sup
port ofa line of governmental policy
which I believe to be for the present
and permanent good of the country.
Now, gentlemen, I proceed to answer
your questions, briefly indeed. but fully,
plainly, and with all possible frankness;
and I do this the more, willingly, be-
cause l have received from individuals
many letters-too many to be separately
answered-and have seen in many public
journals articles making urgent calls
upon me for such statement of my
views. .....-
1st-Slarery and us Extension IN the
Territories.
On this subject, in the States and in
the Territories, l have no new opinions
no opinions formed in relation to the
present array of parties. I am coeval
with the Missouri question of 1920,
having begun my political life in the
midst Of that struggle.
At that time my position required me
to seek all the means of knowledge
within my reach, and to study, the prin-
ciples involved with all the powers of
my mind, and | arrived at the conclu-
sions which no subsequent events have
induced me to change. The existence
of negro slavery in our country had it's
beginning in the early time of the col
ony, and was imposed by the mother
country, against the will of most of the
colonists. At the time of the Revolu-
ton, and long after, it was commonly
regarded as an evil, temporary, in its ma
ture, and likely to disappear in the course
of time; yet, while it continued, a misfor-
tune to the country, socially and polit-
ically. Thus was | taught by those who
made our Government, and neither the
new light of modern civilization nor the
discovery of a new system of constitu-
tional law and social philosophy has en-
abled me to detect the error of their
teaching.
|. Slavery is social relation, domestic
institution. Within the States it exists
by the local law, and the Federal Gov
ernment has no control over it there
The Territories, whether acquired by
conquest or peaceable purchase, are sub
ject and subordinate; not sovereign, like
the States. The nation is supreme over
them, and the National Government has
the power to permit or forbid slavery
within them. Entertaining these views,
l am opposed to the extension of slavery,
and in my opinion the. spirit and the
policy Of the Government ought to be
against its extension. = -ai -.
2d-Does the Constitution carry Slavery
into the Territories
I answer no? The Constitution of the
United States does not carry slavery into
the Territories. With much more show
Of reason, may it be said that it carries
Slavery into all the States. But it does
not carry Slavery anywhere. It only
acts upon it where it finds it established
by the local law. In connection with
this point, l am asked to state my view
OF the bred Scott case, and what was
really determined by the Supreme Court
in that case. 1t is my opinion, carefully
considered, that the Court determined
l.