Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1860-05-23
ORNING LEADER,
lHDNEsDAY nIoRNINe. We aa, ls00
THE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM,
HON. ABRAHAM LINCOLN.


large and highly intellectual assemblage on
the evening of February 2s, 1860. Ex-Gov.
KISs and other distinguished Republicans
were on the platform. wnLIAM CULLES
Bryant, editor of the Evening Post presi-
ded. On taking the Chair, Mr. BRYANT
spoke as follows:
ait is a grateful office that perform in
introducing 10 you an eminent citizen OF the
West hitherto known only to you by reputa-
ton, who has consented TO address a New
York assembly this evening. A powerful
auxiliary, my friends, is the great West in
that battle which we are fighting in behalf Of
freedom against slavery, and in behalf of
ilization against barbarism for the occupa-
ton of some Of the iairest regions of our
continent now open TO colonization. Ap-
plAuse. l recognize an agency higher and
wiser than that Of man in causing the broad
and fertile region which forms the northern
part Of the valley Of the Mississippi to be
filed with a population of hardy freemen,
who till their own acres with their own hands,
and who would be ashamed TO subsist by the
labor of slaves. [Applause. These children
Of the West form living bulwark against
the advance Of slavery, and from them is re-
recruited the vanguard Of the armies Of lib
erty. loud applause.1 One of them pre-
sent to you this evening, a gallant soldier Of
the political campaign Of 1886, Applause,
in which he rendered good service to the Re
publican cause, and the great champion Of
that cause in Illinois two years later when he
and his friends would have won the victory
but for the unjust apportionment law, by
which minority of the population are al
lowed to elect a majority of the legislature.
l need only to pronounce the name of Abra-
ham Lincoln, of Illinois loud cheers II
have only to pronounce his name, to secure
your profoundest attention
Address by Hon. Abraham Lincoln.
When the prolonged applause which greet
ed Mr.. LINCOLN had subsided, he said:
Mn. PRESIDENT AND FRLLow CITIZENS OF
New YoRK:-The facts with which | shall
deal this evening are mainly old and familiar;
nor is there anything new in the general use
1 shall make of them. If there shall be any
novelty it win be in the mode of pre-
senting the facts, and the inference and
observations following that presentation.
In his speech last autumn, at Columbus,
Ohio, as reported in the New York Times,
Senator Douglas said
.e Our fathers when they framed the govern
ment under which we live understood this ques
ton, just as well, and even better than We do
now"
fully endorse this, and adopt it as my
text for this discourse. / so adopt II because
it furnishes precise and an agreed starting
point between Republicans and that wing
of the democracy headed by Senator Doug
las. It simply leaves the inquiry: " What
was the understanding those fathers had of
the question mentioned p
What is the frame of government under
which we liver
The answer must be: The Constitution
of the United States" That Constitution
consists of the original framed in 1873, land
under which the present government first
went into operation and twelve subsequent
ly framed amendment, the first ten Of which
were framed in 1888.
The Fathers of the Consultation.
Who were our fathers that framed the con-
stitution suppose the thirty-nine' who
signed the original instrument may be fairly
called our fathers who framed that part of our
present government II is almost exactly
true to say they framed it, and it is altogeth-
er true to say they fairly represented the
opinion and sentiment of the whole nation
at that time Their names, being familiar TO
nearly all, and accessible 10 quite all, need
not now be repeated.
/ take these "thirty-nine, for the present,
as being our fathers who framed the gov
ernment under which we live
What IS the question which, according TO
the text, those fathers understood just as well
and even better than we do now?
It is this: Does the proper division of local
/ from federal authority, or anything in the
constitution forbid our federal government to
control as TO slavery in our federal terrific
ries
Douglas and the Fathers.
1 Upon this Douglas holds the affirmative,
and Republicans the negative. The afirma-
tive and denial form an issue and this issue
this questions precisely what the text
declares our fathers understood better than
We ..
Let US now inquire whether the thirty
nine or any of them ever acted upon this
question; and if they did, how they acted
upon it-hOw they expressed that better un-
| derstanding. ..
In l7s4-three years before the constitl-
tion-the United States then owning the
northwestern territory, and no other-the
Congress of the Confederacy had before them
the question Of prohibiting slavery in that
territory; and four of the 4" thirty-nine who
afterward framed the constitution were in that
Congress, and voted on that question. OF
these, Roger Sherman, Thomas Miffiin and
Hugh Williamson, voted for the prohibition
thus showing that, in their understanding,
no line dividing local from federal authority,
nor anything else, properly forbade the feder-
al government to control as to slavery in fed
eral territory. The other of the four-James
McHenry-yoted against the prohibition,
showing that, for some cause, he thought it
improper TO vote for it.
In 1857, still before the constitution, but
while the convention was in session framing
it, and while the northwestern territory still
was the only territory owned by the United
States-the same question of prohibiting
slavery in the territory again came before the
Congress Of the Confederation; and three
more of the 4" thirty-nine" who aflerward
signed the constitution were in that Congress
and voted on the question. They were Will
liam Blount, William Few and Abraham
Baldwin, and they all voted for the prohibi=
tion-thus showing that, in their understand
ing, no line dividing local from federal au-
thority, nor anything else, properly forbade
the federal government to control as to slave
ry in federal territory.
The Ordinance of I7s7.
This time the prohibition became law,
being part of what is now known as the Or
dinRnce of 1887. la
The question Of federal control Of slavery
in the territories seems not to have been di-
rectly before the convention which framed the
original constitution; and hence it is not re-
corded that the thirty-nine," or any Of them,
while engaged on that instrument expressed
any opinion on that precise question.
In 1889, by the first Congress which sat
under the constitution, an act was passed to
enforce the ordinance Of 81, including the
prohibition Of slavery in the northwestern
territory. The bill for this act was reported
oy one Of the " thirty-nine, Thomas Fitz-
simmons, then member of the House of
Representatives from Pennsylvania. 1t went