The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1863-10-23
4 Noble speech by n marylsnd
linton MAN


Col. Cresswell, Union candidate for
Congress in the First Congressional Dis
trict of Maryland, made these remarks
to an immense crowd at GoldsborO,
lately. They are the views of the Union
men of Tennessee:
But Emancipation in Maryland has
another meaning to the men of Mary
land. Some gentlemen here who have
never owned a slave, and who never
would own a slave, contend, neverthe-
less, that they have an interest in that
question In years gone by there was
power here that ruled with q arod of
iron. / was under the influence Of i, /
admit, and 80 were you. We never dared
even TO dispute its supremacy. 4at
Slavery, then, was not question OF
political economy, it was q question of
political power; and we all, towards
that we were, shrunk before it. Thai
day has passed in Maryland. Great
applsuse.l The white men of Maryland
have been first emancipAted, and we dare
now say TO the world that our proud old
State, though bleeding and tom, shall
come out of this fearful contest like a
godd IS disenthralled, with the crown af
freedom upon her brow. er.
Now, away with all malice and bitter
ness of spirit, and let us look at the
question before US with calmness and
with due consideration.
Suppose we had no slavery in Mary
land, would any man here say we should
introduce it? ["NO, no." Would any
man, woman, or child in this Assemblage
say "let us have slavery in Maryland n
Not one. If there were such person,
should think that the first committee
of lunacy, 10 whose tender consideration
the unfortunate creature would be COM
mitted, would deem that declaration a
sufficient cause for sending him to the
asylum. Laughter. Why do l say soi
Not because / feel vindictive against
those who own slaves. My own father
and grandfather were shareholders, and
have for them the utmost respect. Many
of my relatives in Maryland have beer
slaveholdsrs, though have never occu.
pied that relation myself But l cay SO
because all unbiased minds will admit
that that community is most prosperouI
and most happy where slavery has nevel
existed.
Let US look at il as a question o
political economy. | have here SOM
statistics which prepared last night il
looking over the census returns Of 1860
Our first census was in 1890, and Texa
and Florida, and the whole Louisian'
region have been since added TO ou
slave territory. In 1860 all the TERRITORY
within the United States, regarded a
slave territory, contained population o
12210294, including white and black
slave aud free. In 1860 the Free Statas
exclusive of the District OF Oolumbi
and the Territories, contained IL. .907 20
people, an excess Of more than six mil
lions over the Slave States. We as
why is this? Why does popu alton il
the Free States increase 80 much NOR
rapidly tkan population in the Slay
S, ates |? Perhaps some one may sa
they have q great deal more territory
thew are a great deal larger" Are they
Let us look at that.
The Slave States contain an area Q
! 844,08l square miles the Free State
all told contain Q 2597 square mile
2O9 600 more square miles. Then, thi
I. is not the reasOn. There must be son
other. What other reason can there be
Another may say, "the Free States star
ed ahead they had agreat many mo-
people TO commence with" Was 10 90
0 In 1880 the Slave States had a popnli
ton of 1861, ,372; the Free States i
: 968. 455, showing an excess ofonly 2, ,le
!. in favor of the Free States over the Slay
\ That is not much start 10 make sey,
millions out Of In 1850 the Slave Stat
had population Of 6l2,769; the Fr
States 13,43l,92l. II is unnecessary I
ls me to give you again the bgures
10 1860.
is But another objeotor may say, y
or take the whole country over, these f
lows up North, have the best territo