The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1861-05-31

Our plainness in denouneing the columns OF
the Democrat Of last week Us " brimming
with treason" subjects us to the charge OF
blackcuardom. Ii is an accusation OF easy
fabrication, but Of very little public import
ance. Our space is too valuable to waste in
replying to an assertion Of so trivial conse-
quence. Caring not for the imputation,
we proceed to answer seratim the questions
which the Democrat propounds in the arti-
Gle in which we are charged with black
guardism. Tho Democrat requests us "to
point out uud eorrcc, its falschOOds We
. proceed to the work in order.
lst. Its editor asserts this, 4" We say
the attempt in 1850 To enact in Congress
laws restrict0ry Of slavery in the New Ter
ri,ories was abandoned in lS5O-52 by Dem
ocrats and Wings rs dangerous to the I'M
ion, is not this true ~
No Sir, the two parties had something in
their platforms about suPpressins or dis
count cnancing &" the agitation Of the ques-
ton of slavery" in or out Of Congress and
the whiss generally did discountenancc its
agitation, but tho Democrats, though pro-
Tossing to be governed by the same policy,
were hardly established in power under
Pierce, when they opened the agitation
anew in a still more violent manner by
the introduction of the Nebraska Bill, and
this agitation was kept up by them by their
support of Lccompton's Consultation and
kindred measures during both Mr.. Picrce's
and Mr.. Buchanan's administrations. Th,
attempt of the Democratic party to make
slave territory of that solcmnly consecratcd
TO freedom in 1890 was the cause of the
trouble and not anything done or attempted
to be done in relation to the " Hclc terrifor-
ies." The policy adopted in the territorial
bills passed in 1850, which bills were in
cludod in the so-called compromise measures,
has never been charged or have there been
any attempts to change.
Falsehood No. is pointed out and cor
rected.
Assertion No. L." We say tho old All
clifton party aimed at the restriction or alb
rogation Of slavery in the union. Is not
that true p
Yes, no doubt of it. The old abolition
party no doubt desired to restrict or abro-
gate slavery in the Union, but they consti-
tuted but very small portion of the people.
The question is Of no importance ono way or
the other unless the Democrat contends that
the Z" Old Abolition Party" is one and the
same with the Republican, If this is its
meaning. the assertion is an unmitisated
falsehood.
Assertion No. is pointed out and prop
erly construed.
Falschood No. q" We say the Adolf
tionists, most of the Wings, and some Dem
ocr.ts, united in new party, in ls5l-6-
taking up, as its doctrine, the very policy
which had been abandoned by the old polIt-
ical parties in lS50-52, rs dangerous to tho
Union; is not that true p
No. There is plausibility not truth
in this. When tho people asccrtainod the
hollowness and insinccrity OF those who had
denounced the agitation of the slavery
question in Congress, and that there was no
reliance to b put in their professions, and
that they were determined to force upon the
people, through Congressional action and
corrupt judicial decision, the strange and
startling do,trino " that the Constitution by
its own inherent yigor carried slavery into
the territories" and that slave codes must DO
enacted by Congress for its protection, and
that Mr.. PierccIs administration first, and
Mr.. Buehauan's administration afterwards,
was endcayoring to force this hated doc
trino upon the people by their support Of
Nebraska Bills, Border Rufianism, LeeOmp-
ton Constitution, and barbaric violence in
the halls of Federal Legislation, thcydid form
a new party and adopting no other principle
Of action, but the constitution as interprcta-
ted by the fathers, diselaimins all intention
or desire to interfere with slavery in the
states, they at las. triumphed. They took
up no abandoned doctrines, and he who as
sorts they did is either ignorant OF the his
tory Of parties or deliberately falsi6es.
Falsehood No. . is pointed out and cor
rected.
ralsehood No. g." We say this new
party Republican, promised TliEPEoPLE
that they would put in force the policy OF
restricting slavery without damage to the
Union; is not that true!"
No. Sir, not word OF truth in this. This
now party made no promises OF the KIND
II, members discharged Constitutional du-
~, and the fact that seven OF the States
seeded before this new party had even the
opportunity of putting in force any policy
respecting slavery shows that II the Union
has bccn +" damaged" the damage has not
arisen from any promises Of the new party
The assertion is simply a disingenious, sneak
ing lie Of precisely such character as an
abettor Of treason would be likely to invent.
Falsehood No. ) is pointed out and cor
rected.
Fal.shood No. A." We say that this
nromise has utterly failed, and the fears
Of 1850 have been, realircd; that seven
states seeded from the Union before the I'M
aueura,ion the Administration thought it.
sell unsafe in Washington without the pres
cnce Of IS 900 armed men; are not these
thing, trueT'
II there were no promises made there
could have been no failure. For complete
refutation and answer to the concealed
treason contained in this and the falsehood