The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1863-10-14

for bis virtues; this was scorned by the Gull
States. Why was it not passed. The par.
/ ~ opposed TO the Administrators had the
majority--the reason is, they did not want
peace unless they could have Independence"
! Now, sir, let US analyze this sem
tence, and see how much is true, and
how much is untrue.
That "Committees, formed Of the
best and wiSeSt men in the nation, la
bored long to allay the disturbing
elements, but in vain, is true, most
true,
But why in vain, let me inquired
Not, sir, as you would have your hear
ers believe, because the Democratic
party opposed the labors of that Cons
mittee. No, sir, But because your
own party-because the Abolition par
party lsbnred as long, and indefatiga-
tbly to defeat each and every one of
the efforts of those Committees to al
lay the "dsturbing elements" This
sir, shall substantiate, even to your
own satisfaction, before l have done.
"a compromise" you say, ''was
| drawn up by man venerable in years,
esteemed for his talents and beloved
for his virtues. By this you mean
of course the Crittenden compromise,
and with you, l say, that had this
compromise been adopted, this distrac-
ting, unnatural war woul have been
avoided. But you add, "this was
scorned by the Gulf States" and then
you further add. ''wby was it not
passed? The party opposed to the
Administration had the majority
the reason is, they did not want peace
unless they could have independence.
! Sir, the father of all lies never told
more untruths, and in fewer words,
than you have done in this sentence as
| will now demonstrate from the Con-
gressional record.
1t is not true that the Crittenden
compromise was "scorned by the Gulf
States
1t is not true that "the party oppo-
sed to the administrator had the ma
Ijority," that is, such a majority as it
required to pass the Crittenden com
promise.
1t is not true, as you charge, that
the reason why this compromise failed,
was because the majority, that is, the
Democracy, "did not want peace un-
less they they could have indepcn~
dence." ...
[ deny that the Gulf States scorned
the Crjttendcn compromise.
| According to the established rules
of evidence, it would be sufficient for
me to rest upon my simple denial and
challenge you to produce proof. But
am willing on thie occasion to depart
from this established rule, and will
proceed to prove the negative.
Understand me, sir, | do not pro,
duce this evidence as justifying the
South in secession, but, for the pur-
pose Of establishing the truth of histo-
ry.
Senator Bigler, from Pennsylvania,
who was q member of the e. S. Sen.
3 ate, in letter over his own signature,
says;
"All the Southern Senators, save Mr.
foombs and Mr.. Davis, were known to ia
t vor the Crittenden proposition
; Recollect, sir, that Mr.. Bigler wa:
r member of the Select Committee oi
} the Senate, to whom was referred
the Crittenden Resolutions. He.says
, "On the 10Th OF December this proposi
ton came up Tin commlttee) for considera-
ton, and it became necessary for Messrs
Toombs and Davis to take their position il
? regard to il; and shall never forget the sub
stance Of what both sald, lor regarded theil
course as involving the fae Of the compro
mise. Mr.. DAVIS sad that for himself The
proposition would be a bitter pill, for be helC
| that his constituents had an equal right with
r those Of any other Senator to 60 into the
: Territories and occupy and enjoy them with
whatever might he their property at tht
time; but nevertheless, in view Of the grea
: stake involved, if the Republican side woult
: 90 for it in good faith be would uHiIe will
them Mr.. Toombs expressed nearly tht
r same sentiment, and declared that his State
would accept the proposition as final set
: Element" .....
e This, sir, is the testimony of an eye
witness, and a particular in the actor
a of the committee.
: dn addition to this testimony, yo1
will find, sir, by reference to the Con
GREssIoNAL GLOBE, that on the 7th o
0 Jan. 1861, Mr.. Toombs, in oper
. Senate said ... D..
although Insist on this perfect equality
Y in the Territory, yet when it was proposed
: az now understand the Senator from Ken
y lucky TO propose, that the line of SO deg
80 min shall be extended, acknowledging
and protecting our property on the Soutl
r side Of that line, for the sake Of peace, sale
!: to the COMMITTEES Of thirteen; as / say here
It that with other satisfactory provisions
would accept it."-!sse page 27o, Congress
o ional Globe, vo!. l, for 1860-61.
U Again, sir, on the 9th of January
T. 1851, in open Senate, and in thhe pres
= y ence of Messrs. Toombs and Davis
y Mr.. Douglas used the following Ian
i guage, as you will see by referenc,
to the CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE of tina
c date:
"If you Of the Republican side are no
!, willing to accept this, nor the proposition o
b the Senator from Kentucky, pray tell u
what you will do. address the inquiry It
the Republicans alone, for the reason tina
; in the committee Of thirteen, few days age
! every member from the South, including thos
d from the Cotton States (Messrs. Toombs an
> Davis e1Wessed their yeaa,ness 10 accept d