davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
Scrofula, or Kings Evil,

is constitutional disease, corruption of the
blood, by which this fluid becomes vitiated,
weak, and poor. Being in the circulation, it
pervades the whole body, and may burst out
in disease on any part of it, No organ is free
from its attacks, nor is there one which it may
not destroy The scrofulous taint is variously
caused by mercurial disease, low living, dis
ordered or unhealthy food, impure air, filth
and filthy habits, the depressing vices, and,
above all, by the venereal infection. What
ever be its origin, it is hereditary in the con-
stitution, descending " from parents to children
unto the third and fourth generation !" indeed,
it seems to be the rod of Him who says, "I
will visit the iniquities of the fathers upon
their children"
Its effects commence by deposition from the
blood of corrupt or ulcerous matter, which, in
the lungs, liver, and internal organs, is termed
tubercles; in the glands, swellings; and on
the surface, eruptions or sores. This foul cor
ruption, which genders in the blood, depresses
the energies of life, so that scrofulous consttu-
tions not only suffer from scrofulous COM
plants, but they have far less power to with
stand the attacks of other diseases; conse-
quently vast numbers perish by disorders
which, although not scrofulous in their nature,
are still rendered fatal by this taint in the
system. Most of the consumption which de-
climates the human family has its origin directly
in this scrofulous contamination and many
destructive diseases of the liver, kidneys, brain,
and, indeed, of all the organs, arise from or
are aggravated by the same cause.
One quarter of all our people are scrofulous |;
their persons are invaded by this lurking in
fection, and their health is undermined by it.
To cleanse it from the system we must renovate
the blood by an Alternative medicine, and in
vgorate it by healthy food and exercise.
Such medicine we supply in
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
REPLY OF LUCIAN J. EAsTIN.
Chillicothe, Mo, Sept. %,

Chillicothe, Mo-, Sept. %, 1860
Mr. FRED. EMORY, Chairman of Com
mittee-Dear Sir: The letter from yourself
and others, making certain inquiries con
cerning the course of Stephen A. Douglas,
in regard to the Lecompton Constitution,
has been received. In reply, have to
state:
That was member of the Lecompton
Constitutional Convention. There was at
one time majority of its members opposed
to any submission Of that instrument to the
people. 1t is useless to 90 into detail OF the
reasons that influenced them. Suffice it to
say, they justified themselves on the ground
that the free State men had refused to rec
ognizo the laws, and they were determined
now, so far as in their power, to get rid of
the Kansas question. A considerable feel
ing had gotten up between the antisub-
missionists and those in favor Of submission.
About this time, John Calhoun, President
of the Convention, and the known friend Of
Mr.. Douglas, declared to me and others,
he was authorized to say, if the slavery
clause was submitted, Mr.. Douglas would
sustain our action. He read from a speech
delivered by Mr.. Douglas think, at Spring
field, H., and also from letter written by
Douglas to John Calhoun.
The main points of the letter, as 1 now
remember, are substantially ms follows: That
the free State men of Kansas had refdsed
to vote, denouncing the laws as bogus; and
if they continue to refuse to vote, even
though they had majority, deserved to be
defeated. That if the Convention would
submit the slavery clause of the Constitu-
ton, which was the bone of contention, it
would be sustained, and the Constitution
carried through Congress, and he would
give it his support In this way the Con
sttution could not be voted down, and the
Democracy and the country would get rid Of
the Kansas question.
That Mr.. Douglas wrote the letter to Mr.
Calhoun, as above referred to, is certain in
my mind. Mr.. Calhoun urged the reasons
of Mr. Douglas with much earncstness.-
He said it was important to have the infu,
ence of Mr.. Douglas. His arguments pre-.
vailed. Enough of the members changed
to give majority to carry the plan of sub.
mission as adopted by the Convention. II
was owing mainly-.l might say entirely
to the letter of Douglas and the arguments
of Mr.. Calhoun, urged with much force, tina
the submission of the slavery clause wa
finally adopted.
have now given you what came unde
my own observation, without any coloring
| have aimed at simple narration of fact
as they occurred. Truly yours,
LUcIAN J. EAsTIN.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26

instead Of reading "For tho Constitution
with Slavery" and "For the Constitution
without Slavery" should read, "For the
Constitution" and against the Constitu-
ton" and, in support Of my amendment, l
denounced the "dodge submission" as l
termed it, saying that no friend of the I'm
ion, nor true democrat, could support what
was a cheat and swindle, designed to
split the Union, and that no statesman of
any foresight could couutenance it. and that
Congress could not approve it, but spurn it..
Mr. Calhoun again invited me, with one
or two others, to his room, and, knowing
that l was an admirorof the political course
and character of Mr.. Douglas, he said che
wished to convince me that l was mistaken
about the way statesmen regarded the plan
of partial submission" and thereupon read
letter which purported to be written by
Stephen A. Douglas, and which recon-
mended that precise plan. merely re-
piled that l might be deceived as to who
are great statesmen, but that that letter
could not convince me as to what was true
policy. heard that spoken of freely,
and frequently afterward, and am salts
fed that the plan of partial submission
would not have been adopted by the Con
ventiou, if it had not been for the influence
of that letter. G. r. MoBLEY.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
REPLY OF GREEN B. REDMoN.

Leavenworth, Sept. IA, 1860.
To Fred. Emory, Esq, Daniel Scully, Esq,
Hon. w. G. Matthias, John Henry, Esq,
and DR.. P. Dyer, Committee, DC.
Gentleman: Your favor of the 18th
inst. is Just received, and hasten to reply.
| was q member of the constitutional
Convention that framed and passed the
we'll known Lecompton Constitution.
During the tendency of the proposition
to submit tho slavery clause of that instru-
ment to the people, as it was submitted,
was shown letter by the Hon. John Cal
houn, addressed to him by Hon. Stephen
A. Douglas. That letter suggested and
urged the plan of submission adopted by
that Convention, approving the Consttn,
ton as then agreed upon, which had been
submitted to him, and pledging himself tc
pass the Constitution through Congress, il
we would insert the clause of submission
which we did insert. this letter was de-
clared by General John Calhoun to embody
the entire sentiments of Judge Stephen A
Douglas, and the entire plan of the Const
tuition was suggested in this letter. and tha
the plan of submission was all that wa,
wanting to mako the Constitution emphat
ically Douglas measure. On examina
tion of the letter, found it yerifcatior
of all that General Calhoun had told me
Up to the time of seeing this letter, l haC
opposed the plan of submission, but in view
of the pledge of Senator Douglas to put i
through Congress if submitted in the man
ner it was, then supported the Coustitu
tion, after the adjournment of the Conven
ton, with the submission clause and all.
Shortly after, Senator S, A. Douglas
took position on the Lecompton Constitu
ton. met Gen. Calhoun at Leavenwortl
City, and referred to Senator Douglas
course, and his letter above referred to-
Gen. Calhoun, in reply, said that Judg
Douglas had betrayed us, and if he ha,
been sworn to before he would not have be
lieved it, until he saw and read Senate
Douglas action in Congress.
/ lived in Illinois seventeen years. wa
personally acquainted with Judge s. A
Douglas, have received a great many con
! munications, documents, cot, from him vi
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
7NNEI IIN Ut WHV
o. G. STEWART.


Chillicothe, Mo, Sept. II, 1860.
To Messrs. Fred. Emory, VIM. G. Matthias,
Daniel Sculy, P. Dyer and j. w. Henry:
Gentlemen of the Committee: In reply
to your letter of inquiry, will state that l
was present during the sittings of the Le-
compton Constitutional Convention, and
that many of its members were my warm
personal and political friends. There was
much debate as to the manner of submis-
sion, and also upon the question of non
submission.
Mr.. Calhoun was the chief leader of the
submissionists, and it was owing to his in
fuence and management that the Constitu-
tion was submitted in the manner it was.
Most of the members, who were regarded
as true to the South, took the ground that
it was not incumbent upon the Convention
to refer the Constitution to the people, and
consequently voted to send the Constitution
direct to Congress, and carried the PROPOSE
ton by one vote. Upon that night there
was a meeting in Cahoun's office to devise
means to have the question reconsidered,
and adopt the plan which they did after
wards succeed in adopting.
Calhoun was bitterly denounced by many
of the members, and openly charged with
endeavoring to make Kansas free State,
in violation of the wishes of the party to
which he belonged, and by which he had
been chosen leader 1t was generally un-
derstood, and the information came from
Mr. Calhoun, that Mr.. Douglas was in ia.
vor of the plan which was adopted, and
would advocate its passage through Con.
gress; and | have heard some of the mem.
bcrs say that they voted for the plan which
was adopted, because they entertained such
belief. | never saw any letter from Mr.
Douglas to Mr.. Calhoun, in which any plan
was suggested for the Convention to pur
sue; neither did l see letter from Mr.
Douglas to any one.
Some time after the death of Mr.. Cal
houu, his brother-in-law, Oliver Diefendor
of Leavenworth, stated to me that the fami
ly of Mr.. Calhoun were in possession of q
letter, or letters, written by Mr.. Douglas tc
Calhoun, in which Douglas advised Mr.
Calhoun to pursue the course he did. He
also said to me that he intended to get pos
session of the letters and use them as he
saw proper.
was opposed to the plan of submission
would have preferred the Convention tc
have sent the Constitution direct to Con
gress. was a warm advocate of the lie
compton Constitution before the people, ad
vocated its adoption, and ran for Office un
der it, on the Democratic ticket, and voteC
as all true Southern men did vote, to max,
Kansas a Slave State Yours truly,
b. J. FRANKLIN.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
REPLY OF G. R. MoBLEY.
Ogden, Riley County, X. T,
September l3, 1860.

Messrs. Fred. Emory, w. G. Matthias
and others Gentlemen: In reply to your
circular, dated 18th inst, have to make
the following statement:
Having been sent from this county as a
member of the Lecompton Constitutional
Convention, attended its first meeting
The subject of submitting the Constitution
to the people was at once privately discuss
ed, and am satisfied that majority of
the members were opposed TO such course,
but before any vote was taken upon this
point an adjournment was had, and | was
absent for few days after tho reassem-
bling of the Convention.
Soon after my arrival the questson of
submission was again talked about. John
Calhoun, President of the Convention, ap-
preached with the remark that he under
stood that | was in favor of submitting the
Constitution to the people. told him l
was. He then invited me to a conference
of those favoring that measure, at his room,
in the evening. l attended the caucus, but
when the plan of partial Submission, the
plan finally adopted, was advocated and
generally sustained, informed them that |
could not support such a plan, and with
drow.
The question next arose in the Conven,
tion, and when the plan of partial subms
sion was on the floor, offered as an
amendment that the whole Constitution
should be submitted, and that the ballots
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
REPLY OF DANIEL sCULLY.

LeaVenWortn, Aug. II, 1850.
Sir: In reply to your note of yesterday,
1 cheorfully lay before you such information
as possess pertinent to the inquiry you
propose.
l was an officer of tho Lecompton Con-
yention-from my position, necessarily, a
watchful observer of its proceedings, and l
became somewhat conversant with the in
fuences brought to bear to sway its deter
limitations touching the questions of submis-
sion and non-suhmission of the Constitu-
tion.
The Convention first met early in Sep
tember, 1857, and having elected officers
and appointed committees, adjourned to the
latter part of October. 1t was given out
that the object was to await the result of
the Territorial elections, which were to take
place early in October and to shape the
conduct of the Convention accordingly, but
the main purpose of the recess was to allow
time to ascertain the views of Democrats
holding influential places in the councils of
the country.
When the reassemblage took place, and
the subject of the disposition of the Consti-
tuition, intormediately between the Conven-
ton and Congress came up, it was found
that the body was divided into three
parties: one in favor of sending the instru-
ment direct to Congress; the second in
favor Of submission of the whole instrument
to the people; and the third in favor of
submitting the slavery clause only.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
AYERS
Compound Extract Of SarsapariIla,

the most eifectual remedy which the medical
skill of our times can devise for this every
where prevailing and fatal malady. 1t is COM
bined from the most active remedials that have
been discovered for the expurgation of this foul
disorder from the blood, and the rescue of the
system from its destructive consequences.
Hence it should be employed for the cure of
not only Scrofula, but also those other affee-
tons which arise from it, such as ERUPTIvE
and SKIN DISEASES, ST. ANTHoNY's FIRE,
RosE, or ERYsIPELAs, PMpLEs, PUsTULEs,
BLoTcHEs, BLAINs and BoILs, TUMoRs, letter
and SALT RHEUM, SCALD HEAD, RINGwoRM,
RHEUMATISM, SYPHILITIo and MERcURIAL Dis
EASES, DRoPsY, DYSPEPSIA, DEBILITY, and,
indeed, ALL COMPLAINTS ARISING PROM Vita
TED OR IMPURE Bloom. The popular belief
in inpwity ofthe blood" is founded in truth,
for scrofula is degeneration Of the blood. The
particular purpose and virtue of this Sarsapa-
rila is to purify and regenerate this vital fluid,
without which sound health is impossible in
contaminated constitutions.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
CORRESPONDENTS BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT
AND MEMBERS OF THE ASSOCIATION.

CORRESPONDENTS BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT
AND MEMBERS OF THE ASSOCIATION.
Lcavenworth City, Aug. 25, 1860.
Daniel Scully, Esq, Hon.,Wm. G. Matthias
ard Fred. Emory, Esq:
Gentlemen: The report has been cur
rent about here for long time that Mr..
Douglas course upon the Lecompton Con-
stitution was far from being such as repre-
sentod to the public eye. 1t seems to me
that if there has been duplicity or intrigue
on his part on this subject, the fact should
be known in this Territory and to citizens
in our neighborhood. If his conduct has
been such as persistent rumor AYERS it has
been, it is due to the Democratic party
nay, to the whole country, that his falseness
should be published to the world.
Understanding that you are possessed Of
some information touching this matter, !
beg that you will communicate to me, as
the President of the Democratic Associa-
ton of Lcavenworth, such knowledge as you
may have relating thereto. 1 have no hesi
tation in saying that my purpose in address
ing you is to procure more extended in
quiry, if the facts should warrant it, and
trust that, bearing this in mind, you will aid
me all in your power to direct the investi
cation. l am, very respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
LEWIS BURNEs.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26


and Secretary Stanton were in favor of an
entire submission. 1t was very naturally
supposed that they represented the views
or wishes of the Administration. The
partial submission party was led by Gen
eral Calhoun, the President of the Conven-
ton, reported to be favorite of Mr.. Doug
las, possessed of his confidence and in cor
respoudence with him, and the scheme was
generally known as the douglas plan"
After a protracted and acrimonious de-
bate, the question was put on the 5th or 9th
of November, and the non-submissionists
triumphed by one or two votes. BY ex-
traordinary exertions a reconsideration was
had on the 7th, the day of final adjourn
ment, and the plan of submission, through
which the Constitution went before Con-
gress, was carried by bare majority.
On the evening of the day on which the
non-submissionists were victorious Gen.
Calhoun requested me to endeavor to secure
for his side member, since dead, Mr..
Swift of Jefferson county, who had previous
ly voted against submission, and over whom
it was supposed could exercise some infu-
ence. In the course of our conversation,
Gen. Calhoun informed me that be had in
bis possession letter from Mr.. Douglas,
either suggesting the project of partial sub
mission, or giving assurance of his support
to it, l do not recolect which.
Since the death of Gen. Calhoun, l have
had several conversations with Mr. Oliver
Defendorf, his rother-n-law-who main
tanned with him and his family all the init
macy such as relationship bespeaks-on
the subject of that letter. and upon every
occasion Mr. Diefendorf referred to the let
ter as being among the papers Of the de-
ceased, in the possession of his family.
have more than ouce expressed my surprise
that man of spirit, as | supposed Gen.
Calhoun TO have been, should have silently
submitted to the gross indignity put upon
him in the Senate by Mr.. Douglas, and Mr..
Diefendorf has challenged my respect for
the deceased by answering that very few
knew the sense of honor he had; that he
considered the correspondence private, and
would have submitted to anything rather
than violate that privacy.
If formal investigation Of this affair
should be determined upon, permit me tc
suggest that you address every member O
the Convention, and particularly those who
voted with Gen. Calhoun on the submis
sion issue.
1 would also indicate, for your consider
alton, the propriety of communicating will
Col. Andrew J. Isacks of this city. Thougl
not member of the Convention, he wa
present during the whole struggle on sub
mission; he zealously labored with Gen
Calhoun for the form adopted, and, like
him, was an ardent friend of Mr.. Douglas
putatively representing his views.
Having thus laid before you all the
knowledge l have in this connection, re
main, Your obedient servant,
DANIEL ScULLY.
Louis Burnes, Esq, President of th'
Democratic Association of Lcavenworth.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
REPLY OF VIM. G. MATTHIAS.
Leavenworth City, X. T.,


Sept 90, 1860.
Col. LEWIS BURNEs-Dear Sir: In re-
ply to your letter of the 25th inst, | can
state thatI was well acquainted with Gen
eral John Calhoun, President of the Le-
compton Constitutional Convention, in his
lifetime, and we wero warm personal and
political friends. We stood together in the
Lecompton struggle. l have been cili-
zen of Kansas for nearly six years, and hav-
ing been member of three several Legis-
latures in Kansas, am somewhat conversant
with the history of politics therein.
Some time before the Lecompton Con-
stitutional Convention assembled at its ad-
iourned session, Mr.. Calhoun showed me n
letter. which he told me had been written
by Hon. Stephen A. Douglas, and sent to
him for the purpose of influencing members
of the Convention to adopt particular
form of submitting the Constitution. In
that letter, Mr.. Douglas advised plan Of
submission, which plan was finally adopted
by the Convention. And it was further
stated by Mr.. Douglas, in the letter before
spoken of, that if the plan which he
(Douglas) had advised should be approved
by the Convention, that he (Douglas) would
pledge its passage through Congress. And,
in order that what little | could do towards
bringing this plan about might be done,
Mr.. Calhoun invited my cooperation, but l
did not go to Lecompton during the sitting
of tho Convention.
After the Lecompton Constitution had
been framed, the Democratic party assem-
bled in Convention at Lecompton for the
purpose of nominating State ticket. Dur
ing the sitting of that Convention, General
Calhoun, desiring me, against my wishes,
to accept the nomination for Lieutenant
Governor, and, seeming to suppose that my
indisposition to accept arose from doubts as
to ultimate success, frequently and emphat-
ically assured me that Mr.. Douglas would
stand by the Constitution in Congress, and
would in no event abandon Gus" Hence
we made the canvass with strong hopes
A short time before the meeting of the
Charleston Convention, saw Mr.. Calhoun's
eldest son in Leavenworth City, and asked
him whether his mother was in possession
Of the letter referred to, and he replied that
she was. l then suggested to him my in,
tention of addressing her letter, request
ing it of her, for the purpose of using it in
the present political contest, if necessary.
He said | could get it. did address a let
ter to Mrs. Calhoun, and in response let
ter was addressed to Oliver Diefendorf
ESQ, of Leavenworth City, by one of her
children.
This letter / saw and had in my own
hands, and in substance it stated that Mrs
Calhoun lad already been offered the sum
of two thousand dollars for the letter in
question, aud that she hesitated to part
with it, on account of reasons of her own
which shall not repeat | suggested tc
Mr.. Diefendorf (Mrs. Calhoun's brother-in
law) to advise her to hold on to it, as it hat
become an important political document.
What became of the letter am not pre-
pared to say. Yours truly, DC,
WIN. G. MATTHIAS.
Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-10-26
REPLY OF JAMES DoNIPHAN.
Weston, Mo, Sept. II, 1860


To Messrs. Emory, Matthias and others:
Gents: Your catechism of the 18th is
before me, aud in reply will say that never
saw, at or about the time of which you
speak, any letter from Douglas to any one !;
but at the time when the question was be-
fore the Convention, as to whether the Con-
stimtion should be submitted to the people
or sent directly to Congress, Mr.. Calhoun
informed me, together with others, that he
had authority from Mr., Douglas to say, that
unless the Constitution was submitted to
the people of the Territory 1t would have
no support in the North, and had no chance
to be adopted.
In answer to your second question, state
above that Calhoun informed me that he
had received letter from Mr.. Douglas, but
he never spoke Of there being any plan fore
shadowed in it for submission; only said
at the time | refer to above, when the ques-
tion was submission or non-submission, that
Douglas said it would have to 90 to the
people and get their Endorsement, before it
would have any chance in Congress. By
way of explanation, l will state that at
tended the caucus held with closed doors,
at the office of John Calhoun three nights,
when this momentous question of plan or
form of submission was canvassed during
those three evenings. saw no letter from
Mr. Douglas with a plan in it, or sugges-
tions of a plan, or, indeed, any letter from
Douglas. This plan, if it had been sug-
gested by Mr.. Douglas certainly coming
from so high an authority, would have been
spoken of at the opening of the meeting,
whereas the plan that was finally adopted
by the Convention did not present itself, ]
think, till the third evening. Where il
came from know not, perhaps from the
Administration itself maybe from the fer
tile imagination of tho General" When
that proposition was fairly before tho eau
! Gus l left ii, and knew nothing more of il