The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1879-10-30
LAMAR OH SHERMAN.
A Magnificent Arraignment of stupendous
Humbug.


Humbug.
Senator Lamar recently addressed
large audience at Winona, Miss, In tho
course of which he spoke at some length
in vihdicatioh of the Democratic party
and of the South, against the charges
made by John Sherman. We make the
extracts from his speech:
And now; feliow-eitizens, HAYS tusay some
thing upon subject which, II not grayer IN its
char .cter than that which have discussed, IS
moro difficult to treat with perfest tnreser7e;
A publld ofiicef, whose position ttiahes him
the representative Of the national interests,
and whose duty it is to respect and vird:cate
the character of the whole people whom he
b, 8 lately taken the field as an
open, and, believe, an avowed, candidate Tor
the Presidency. His immense patronage and
his necessary influence with the great money
corporations Of the country are all so many
forces operating 10 giys SUCCESS. TO his aspi.
rntions Indecorotls in my opinion, as Is this
attitude of q Cabinet officer holding such i'm
mense patronage; compromising to the
administration, of which he forms so con-
spicuous part, as is this open disregard OF
the patriotic professions as to clyn-service
feel called on to fellow him In his popular can
Vases, bat for one fact He has lately made,
published, and extensively circulated two
speeches Tone delivered at Portland, Me-; the
other at Bteubenville, 0hiol, which. are bitter
ard malignant Misrepresentation OF the whole
South misrepresentation utterednotin the heat
and passion of honest excitement, but cold,
calculating, venomous words, meant to stlmu-
late honest and ignorant people to the exercise
of sectional hatred.
Before read you what he Gays, especially
about the South, let me call your attention to
his charges against the national Democracy:
aIf felt at liberty to choose the theme most
important to you and to the whole people OF
the United States, would present the recent
revival by the Democratic party Of the South
ern doctrine of States Tights This doctrine
has been the evil genius Of American politics
1t was born of hostility to the Union. 1t was
the bulwark of American slavery. 1t poisoned
and estraDged large section of the country.
Under the name Of secession it led to the late
rebellion, and aimed to destroy tie Union by
an open-armed conflict with the National Gov
ernmenk Every life that was sacrificed and
the treasur, that was wasted In that va. we're
the bitter fruits of this doctrine.
Now It takes the form OF nulIihcation-nut
qualification by State officers as when Gen.
Jackson throttled it, but nullifcation by mem
bers of Congress, the sworn agents and officers
of the General Government. These officers
would surrender essential powers of
the National Government, nuliffy its law,
cripple il in executing its conceded powers,
and make it q Confederate instead of a Ma
tional Government
Here is q direct and a positive staten Mt
that the Democratic party has revived and
committed itself to the Southern doctrine Of
State rights-not using the phrase to convey
that meaning which is acceptable to the minds
Of AL the people of all the States, both North
and South, but using it to convey that meaning
which is repugnant to the Northern heart, and
which the people of the North regard as sub
versive of national security and the integrity
of the Union. He expressly says: "The
Southern doctrine of State rights," involving
secession and notification"
Now what was that Southern doctrine OF
State rights involving secession and nuIlifca-
ton, of which Mr.. Sherman speaks? The gen.
tleman knows we'll what the doctrine is, and he
knew equally well that neither the Democratic
party nor any member of Congress now main
tains it, or asserts it, or follows it
He knows that the doctrine of which he
spoke -was claim that every State of the
United States had reservedin its own hands the
right to judge of the constituGonahty of an act
CT Congress, and to pronounce it null and void
within its own limits. 5.t
Now, Mr. Sherman knows, and knows well.
that every Southern State has yielded up that
doctrine; yielded It up in good faith and for
ever; aye, more, has written its remuneration
in its organic law He knows that nowhere in
this great Union is there one State which sets
up any claim of right to determine the limits OF
Federal authority, or claims any power over
the Federal Government or any department OF
that Government. What, then, does the Secre-
tary mean by this reckless assertion? And
what is the impression which he in hie
high and responsible position intends to
produce? He knows what ideas and feelings
are associated with the ante belIun, Southern
doctrine of State rights in the mind of the
people before whom he made that charge; thai
is to cay, secession and slavery, rebellion
notification and dismemberment of the Union
Such are the impressions made upon theirminds
and such are the impressions which he knew
would inevitably be produced when he made
this charge against great national party which
at the last election gave to its candidate
for the Presidency an overwhelming ma
jority of the popular vote of the United
States. Is it true that this great party has done
. this thing? Not only is it not true, but Secre-
tary Sherman ought to know it to be not true.
Fellow -citizens, do not believe that in all the
annals of party war are to be found assertions
more reckless of consequences, more destitute
production of erroneous impressions on the
popular mind than are those of Mr.. Secretary
Sherman. Nowhere throughout the extent OF
the Union is there any conflict of State with
Federal authority, nor is there any possibility
of such conflict for the future. But, says the
Sc rotary, it takes the form of nulllfication,
not by State officers, as when Gen Jackson
throttled il, but by members of Congress, the
sworn agents and officers of the Federal Gov
eminent. =" Listening to this statement, would any
one OF acquainted with the Secretary's posi-
ton and Necessities imagine that, in making il
! aud 10 reiterating it, be meantto be eunderstood
as referring to au act of legislation by the Con-
gress of the UGi'ed States? Would he moi
rather imagine a Cronwellian dissolution Of
Congress by the pike of a Gen. DeTrobriand
| marching into legislative halls with fixed bayo-
nets? Was ever the passage of bill through
the House OF REPRESENTATIVES and the Senate
| characterized before this as notification OF 6
law of Congress? Is such language the utter
ance of statesman? Knowing the meaning o.
such language as we do know it, and seeing tht
| connection in which the Secretary has used it
| to what conclusion can we come save this
either that the Secretary is ignorant of that o.
which he speaks taud for such man so en-
gagged to be this ignoraut is crime), or that
net being ignorant, he has paraded before oul
Northern brethren an impertinent and sense
less phrase to lead them into delusion?
81, Does he mean to say that all or any of thi
| Democrats members of the last Congress!
either openly advanced or covertly relied OF
| the 0nte-beliuna doctrine of State rights as
foundation upon which to rest measures au
tagouistic to the perpetuity and glory of tn
Federal Government, or as an end to the at
taiument CT which such measures were to b.
presented and justified? If so, assert it i
not true, either in letter or spirit, and chal
lenge him to specify the MAJ, or the men, o
the tme or the measure, or the speeches, o
the votes
repeat, then, why did the Secretary use tn
word notification when speaking of an or
tierly, formal and ordinary act of Congress t
repeal an existing law? The word has but on
tue meaning in American politics, when use
in connection with State rights-thst is, the as
serted right of State to intsrpose its authorit
to invaIidate an act of Congress. This; is th
meaning which the honest masses VIII
listened to Mr. Sherman would attach to Ii
and he used the torn not for any pertinency
had to the matters at issue, but with th
knowledge that it would revive forgotte
prejudices, reawaken 1uieted alalm, reiufam
cooled passions ana remadden the extinguishe
animosities of sections. hope he may be dis
appointed in his purpose.
He repeats the charge in another form, an
in doing so makes statement equally unfoun(
ed and misleading. He says: when, by Il
frmness of the President, they fai ed in the
main object, they sought by conditions in al
preparation bills to compel him to agree
nullify laws 10 violation of his oath of office.
What are the exact facts of the proceeding
which he refers? The Congress passed all Il
appropriation bills, providing for. all the G,