The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1860-07-16
The Unfortunate Records.


The Enquirer of Saturday, as is its Gus
tom, evades the conclusions irresistibly fol-
lowing from the resolutions of the Indiana
Democratic Convention of l849, that if
the Republican party of to-day is an Abo-
lition party, so was the entire Democratic
party of Indiana in 1849. That paper
wants US to admit that in l849 its party
was National one. No man who remem-
bsrs the Congress of 1880 can admit
any such thing. 1t was national only in
this, that it had an existence all over the
country, held together by hope of spoils and
offices, but it was not National and united
in its principles. True, the National Con-
vention in I848 passed no free soil resolu-
tions, but the leaders in the North and the
South were advocating principles on the
slavery question in positive and direct anita
gonism. While in the South, Calhoun the
sOcessionist, Yancey the fire-eater, Herschel
V. johnson of Georgia, and Davis the
Mississippi disunionist, were advocating the
and the equality of rights attaching to slave
property, in the North all the leaders of
the party, bidding for the free soil vote,
ID were affirming the Poa0er and duty Of Con-
gress to prohibit slavery in the Territories
loudly proclaiming from every stump, the
sentiment of the Democratic Senator from
Indiana, uttered in the Senate chamber of
the United States, who said YOU ARE
COMPELLED TO PROHIBIT IT. YOU
CANNOT AUTHORIZE IT." One Of the
leaders OF the party, then prominent can
didate for speaker of the House of Repre-
Fentatives, lacking only one vote of cleo
ton to the third Office III the American ma
ton, wrote on the 18th of December, l849,
the following: " We are literally oveIrun
by Southern chivalry. For one 1 can't
stand it any longer. Pass the WiInot Pro-
Oiso and ace aoiU stick TO Old Zack."
The Enquirer says, alt is not honest to
say that the Democratic party of the Union
ever was free soil party We were not
40 silly as to charge that the Democratic
party of the South was ever free soil par.
ty, but we do affirm that the Democratic
party of the North ever was until 1854
free soil party, if the Republican party o
to-day is free soil party-at least in 81
far as to advocate the power of Congress t.
legislate for the Territories. We affirm
further. that in ls48 that party in the NORTH
was more strongly free soihsh than the Re
publican party is now. According to The
Republican Platform adopted at Chicago
that party recognizes the power and advo
Gates the duty of Congress to prohibit slave
ry in the Territories 1chenerer such Legislation
IS necessary.
To snbstantiate our charge against thu
Democratic party, we call the attention o
tie Enquirer and all candid Democrats t.
the following facts. We gave on Friday
the resolutions Of the Democratic State Con
yention of Indiana in l849. This certainly
rs the authoritative declaration of the Indi
ana Democracy. But the following actor
may be recognized as a more solemn avOwa
of the party. In 1916 the Democratic
party had a handsome majority in boil
branches of the Legislature of Indiana anC
upon the recommendation of Gov. Whit
comb, the following joint resolution wa
passed, all the Democratic members rotinq 70
e.:
Be il ordained By The General AssenbL
of the State Of Indiana, That our Senator
be, instructed, and our Representatives il
Congress be requested, so to cast their vote
and exert their influence as to have engraft
ed upon any law that may be passed for tn
organization of the territory recently &C
CURED from Mexico, provision .foreVer ca
sJuding from such territory slarery and IN
voluntary serpitude"
The Enquirer says q not a State Conven
ton 10 hardly any State ever endorsed
(Free-soilism) except the democracy of In
diana" We say that this sentence convict