The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1860-03-22
-- -
For the Courier.

the editorial of the Union, published the 9Th
inst We are assured that moments re-
Election would convince those most prejudiced
against us, that no reply was called for
Experience. however, teaches us that that
moments reflection nay not be given, the
controversy having assumed the complexion
it has.
Our ignorant friend (for he seems not to
understand the use of irony) seeing the sad
dilemma in which he is placed, endeavors to
turn the matter into ridfcule, hoping thus 10
divert the mind of the public from the real
question at issue. But kc shall not escape
us thus; we are resolved that for once, the
public shall see the position he occupies, and
pass upon him the Judgment he so richly
deserves.
The question, as originally propounded,
stands thns-"ls the. Democratic party pro-
slaveryY' To establish this proposition in
the negative, he adopts the following argu-
ment: when this Government was founded
there was bnt one, free State" "Three-
fourths of the Federal Administrations have
been Democratic ~ and "now instead
ofone, thereare eighteen free States" There
fore, he infers, the Democratic party is not
pro slavery. We showed the fallacy of this
argument tif argument it can he calledD by
reminding the gentleman GU that the ques-
ton was not. acds the Democratic party pro-
slavery, but is the Democratic party, at the
present time prc-slavery
The object of his laborcd article, which he
does not deny, was to prove that the Demo
cratic party as not pro-slaoery. In this, as
we have most conclusively shown, he failed.
What more had we to do! Nothing.
We did, however, go further and assert
tina. the Democratic party was prn-slavery in
its character-that this was matter ofhistory,
denied by none who were candid and honest
It is complained that in proof Of this assertion
we brought no ''rebutting proof Is it pos
lieve what has been ten times proven, unless
forsooth ID be substantiated anew, by ere
butting proof?" Our incredulous friend
shall not plead this longer, since the proof
exists that will, ere long, butt both himself
and his party so far up. Salt River that nei-
ther will again return.
The sition taken by the Democratic
party in 1850 and 1854, with reference to
federal Legislation in the Territories, was
such as hopelessly to fix on it the crime with
which we charge it. From that time to this,
the people of the southern States and vast
majority of those of the northern States, have
regarded the Democratic party as pro-slave-
~ and the conclusion arrived at by the
people of the southern States, and vast
majority of those of the northern States, was
substantiated by the testimony of thousands
of northern Democrats, who at that time de-
serted its ranks. Are there any who still
doubt the truth of our assertion? If there
be, let them read the following Speaking Of
slave property in the territories.)
'But it is the duty of the Federal Govern
ment there to afford for that as for other spe-
cies of property the needful protection, and
| if experience shall at any time prove the Ju-
dietary does not possess power to insure
adequate protection, it will then become the
duty of Congress to supply such deficiency.
Can such language as this be misintapre
ted or misconstrued ? And is not the par
ty which indorses it, pro-slavery There
can be but one answer.
| But again-will it be said that this con
fession did not come from the Democratic
party? From what party then did it comet
Was not the resolution above quoted, adop
ted at Washington by Democratic caucus
and was it not sanctioned by every northern
and southern Democratic Senator in Con
gress, with the exception of two? Under
our government, does not 'the majority
rule ?" The above resolution then, being
sanctioned by thirty or more Senators, and
repudiated by only two, does it not become
the voice Of the Democratic party. These
interrogatorics can be answered only in the
affirmative.
But still again-Will it be said that the
little baldy legged champion of Squattel
Sovereignty is the soul and body of Northern
Democracy? That the Democratic party OF
all the Northern States will think only as he
thinks, act only as he acts, and vote only as
h, votes? What now, are the opinions OF
this wonderful man 1t is indeed, hard to
tell but, ju lying from his acts and his dec,
larations, we can form some calculation
On being Intercepted in the Senate Of the
United States, whether he would vote for 9
ID .mocrat for President, who stood on plat
FORM sanctioning "a slave code for the Ter
ritories' or for a Republican, who stood on 9
platform prohibiting the extension of slavery
in the Territories, he repliel-of the t,ot
egHs ImOuM choose the least and cote til,
d m0cratic ticket
If now, under any circumstances, he adj
mits that the Constitution of the United
States carries slavery into the free Territorie.
and protects it there-if under any circum
stances, he can be induced to aid in ingraft
ing such principle in our Federal Govern
ment, would he not, if, in the future, h,
should be induced to the same extremitie:
as James Buchanan, be as false to his coun
try as has been that old Reprobate In hi
''letter Of acceptance, Jam IS Buchanan de
clared that people of a Territory SHOULD