The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1860-08-31

lority OF the electOrS OF tnn Son6tossphsiD b-
trct, to follow the quiet pursuits Of private life
In the future, as he has done In the past, d en-
gagged In making speeches, under democratic
auspices, In various portions Of the district.
He has spoken In York. Limington, Waterloo
ro', and In other places In the District. and the
universal testimony Is that his speeches are do
ing the republican cause more service than
they do for the cause Of Sham Democracy. A
friend who heard him at York sends US the sub
joined report Of his remarks there. to which We
have appended some editorial notes which seem
called for to set the Democrats candidate for
Congress right before the people:
r. M. Hayes at York.
This gentleman. the nominee Of the Demo-
cratic party for Congress, spoke to the ''assem-
bled Democracy" Of York on the Wednesday
P. NJ, the 2ist inst. His audience consisted Of
i02 voters-6i Democrats and 50 Republicans.
He commenced his speech by referring to the
monarchies and miseries Of the old countries.
upon which subject he was very pathetic, and
contrasted the condition Of the people Of those
countries with the happy condition Of the peo-
pie Of this country-then spoke Of our noble
ancestors who fed from these monarchial per-
solutions, came to this country and formed the
noble Democratic party-said they were real
squstter sovereigns! Then turned his attention
to the Republican party; spoke ,neeringly Of
Its age, said It was but four years old, six years
at the most; said that party had stole the livery
Of heaven, &C.; that Il had proved false to
every trust, and had been corrupt beyond q
parallel. Il asked myself how old Mr.. Hayes
Democracy was. and could not find II to exceed
the age Of eight years last June.)
He then referred to the Missouri Compromise
Of 1890; said that 1t forbid slavery North Of
36s 3o'; said emphatically that It was des-
yotic measure, or, to use his own words, a dss-
potie act; ny that In 1854 II was repealed. and
the Nebraska bill adopted In Its stead, and ar
gued that the Kansas-Nebra bill embraced
the only true principles and theory Of gov
eminent. he said that great excitement fol-.
lowed its passage, and that the Democratic par
ty in the Free States had been In minority
ever since. He said the National Democratic
Convention Of 1885 declared the abrogation OF
the Compromise, and the adoption Ut the Ne
braska bill, to be one Of the fundamental prin-
ciples Of the Democratic party; to wit-that
every organization should have the power to
form and regulate their domestic institutions,
subject to the Constitution Of the United States
He said that, In consequence, many, high In the
Democratic party, event of" and organized
themselves as party at Philadelphia, and de.
clared that Congress had sovereign power over
slavery in the Territories. and that II was the
duty Of Congress to prohibit slavery therein |;
that "Yaneey, Rsitis, Somes and Sumner held
this power" and upon this despotic doctrine
the Democratic party was declared to be dead
and defunct; the Democratic party did succeed
in the election Of 1885, because the candidates
declared themselves true to these fundamental
principles. 1t was not q triumph over FIRE.
mont, but over that de,poiic party that deeiares
that Congress has porer orer siarery IN the
Territories, and II now stands, though some
who stood high proved recreant; the Democrat
ic party goes for principles, not men; great
men may desert it, but 80 long rs there is q
pure Constitution and little company Of men
the party will survive. There never was peri
cd when the party occupied higher position
than now. II is in conflict with enemies on all
sides. which may be compared with and like
unto our imperious mother country; our forc-
fathers declared the right to govern themselves
tories Of the old world sneered at II, tories In
Congress sneer at Il. The Revolutionary War
was the consequence. We claim the right to
regulate our own domestis afairs-a naughty
head Of the government and dsspotic party
South and North refuse the right. The Demo-
cratic party stand on the principle upon which
our fathers stood In the conflict with Great
Britain; the Republican party stands in thepo-
sition Of the British Government in the time Of
our forefathers.
Mr.. Hayes then said the british Government
passed the stamp act" lie read from the de
AIRY Of John Adams, whom he called q pure pa
triot, showing that parliament claimed the
"right of kings, lords and Commons to make
Iaus for the colonies" and said, 81 challenge
any Republican to show any difference between
that resolve of the British Parliament and the
resolves of the Republicans in 1885," He SAID
that in l774 the Democrats Of those days came
together and formed declaration Of grievances
and rights, and declared that the foundations
Of pure government gave them the right TO
participate in legislation, and that therefore
they were entitled to Legislature.
He then said /: "I read this to show the iden-
tity between the Republican party OF to-day
and that Republican party who denied their
rights, and challenge any Republican to show
any difference. Republicans declare they have
supreme power over the Territories; the Demo-
cratic doctrine Is that the people shall have
right to form their own policy. l cannot per
ceive the slightest difference between Republic
can principles and those tyrants, nor between
the Democratic party and those who claimed
redress Of their grievances" (0
He then said "when the Democratic party
had abandoned the policy OF the fathers, the
Republican party was formed" "a precious
confession lie said at was not departure
Il was return: the adoption Of the Kansas
and Nebraska act was q return to the princi-
Piles Of the foretathers. Policies always change
Who thinks Of following the policy OF the
fathers In agriculture, and why should We fol-
low the policy Of the fathers II in conflict with
rightt They 1.-THE fathers) desired to put an
end to slavery. but He who moves In mystic
rious way had baffled every effort. (3) In spite
OF their every effort we have gone farther and
farther from the desired result-and now why
should not the people Of the Territories be per-
United to regulate their own affairs! Why
should dteen States be prevented nom going