Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-10-21
Judge Rrien,s Speech.

One Of the points enforced by Judge BRIEN in
his speech on Friday against BRECKNRIDGE and
LANE was that the Montgomery Jfaa supporter
Of our ticket, had advised d" the running OF three
candidates to insure the election Of LINCOLN " and
thus bring about n dissolution of the Union. The
Judge to sustain his charge, read an extract pur-
porting to be from the JElL We presume the
Judge had not read an article from the Mail Of Sep
TENDER 25th. in relation to the extract which the
Judge read and which extract appeared some weeks
ago in the Nashville Patriot. We published the en-
tire article of the Nal in our paper Of September
2Sth. For the Judges information We re-publsh a
portion of it. The 1fda says:
We never offered advice as to how to dissolve
the Union" We never advised the running of
three candidates to insure the election Of Lincoln :"
on the contrary, warned Douglas and Bell
men months ago, that by their running their cand-
dates who had little if any hopes in the South,
Uey were aiding the election OF Lincoln. We told
them their keeping in the field their candidates
would produce this result result which all
deprecate And we are constrained to believe that
the editors of the Patriot know that they were
grossly disappearing US, when they charged the
opposite.
The Judge in the course of his speech did himself
the grossest injustice by charging that Mr. BREcKIN-
RIDGE was not the owner of slave and hired free
negro to nurse his child. If the Judges state
nent were true it might prove that he BRECKENRIDGE,
was a poor man and that he could not hire a slave
to carry with his family to Washington for fear
that some Abotionist would steal her. If the Judge
were the owner Of thousand slaves would he hire
one of them to be taken to Washington without the
person to whom he hired her would be responsible
for her value in the event she abducted by AbO-
Htionists? And does not the Judge know that if he
hired slave to resident of Tennessee and the hirer
carried the slave to Washington without the consent
Of the owner and that the slave there stolen by
Abolitonists that the hrer would be responsible in
law for the value of the slave. Hence, if the Judge
were correct in his statement his argument against
Mr.. BRECkNRDGE, would prove more injurious to
him who made It than to Mr.. BRECKENRIDGE.
Another point in Judge B. speech Is well worthy
of notice We refer to his open advocacy Of the
duty of Congress to receive abolition petitions. He
said that the Constitution gave the people the right
to petition and the Representative is bound by his
oath of fidelity to the Constitution to admit the
right We regret to see any Southern man OF
prominence and position, taking such ground. Car
it be true that any petition must be received by Con
gress in conformity to the requirement of the Con
stitution Let the Constitution decide. The follow
ing is Article LIST of the Amendments to the Const
tuition:
Congress shall make no law respecting an estab.
ishment Of religion or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof: or abTidging the freedom of speech or OF
the press; the right of the people peaceably to
assemble ard TO petition the Government for q re-
dress Of grievances.
The specific object Of the right Of petition is here
stated clearly and explicitly and that object is "a
redress OF grievances Can it be fairly assumed
even by a Northern anti-slavery man. much less by
a Southern man. that slavery in the Southern States,
in the District Of Columbia in the Territories is
yyisrance to the citizens Of the Northern States
Such an assumption is necessary in order make it
binding on the conscience of a Southern Represen-
tative according to his oath support the Consttu-
ton TO vote for the reception of Abolition petitions
And if slavery in the South be not grievance to
the North. then citizens Of Massachusetts, have no
right to demand, under the Constitution that their
mischievous petitions should be received by Con-
cress If all petitions are bound to be received by
Congress-. then it is binding on the Representatives
n receive petition to DO the most outrageous and
unconstitutional acts-tO burn the capitol to desc
late the Southern States TO declare slavery piracy,
ard even 10 abolish the Constitution, neither Of which
Congress has the right to do, under the Constltu-
tioe and neither of which is - redress Of gricV-
aDces." From this argument we conclude that Hon.
JoVy BELL was not bound by enlightened con-
science to vote for the reception of Abolition peti-
tions. whose object was not clearly TO redress any
grievance of the petitioners.