The freeman. (Parkersburg, W. Va.) 1886-18??, 1888-03-14

| dW6Io OF tQ0 IdCt tudG tuo oAAy 10
suit Of your third party movement
in this and other States, thus far,
has been to aid my Democratic
friends to elect their candidates to
office, which fact affords you inf
mite delight, while at the same
time you can't find language strong
enough to express your alleged alb
horrenoe of that party.
After these concessions, it seems
to me that argument on the mat
ters heretofore in issue between us
is at an end, if, indeed, you ever
INDUCED in anything amounting
to an argument in support of your
third party policy. But the fact
of the matter is that you have
made no argument, and you can't
make any argument in favor of
your third party programme as a
help to the adoption Of the Amend
ment; the absurdity of the propo.
sition being too plain to admit Of
an argument in its support. And
the further fact is that : have new
or found one who regarded any
thing you have written as an ar
gument except your aid-de-camp
at Parkersburg, and your Third
party henchmen. And this aid.
de-camp of yours seems to be Of the
opinion that you are incompetent
to tbs performance of the task you
have undertaken, and, therefore,
comes to your assistance as the &C.
casion, in his opinion, requires.
He is man of parts, and has made
two remarkable discoveries which
escaped your attention:
1. He says 1 admit "that the
early Abolition Party caused the
defeat of one of the old parties and
thus precipitated the issue and the
conflict between the opposers of
slavery on the side and its defend
ers on the other, which ended in
the final overthrow of the system"
2. That the Free Soil Party and
the Abolition Party were one and
the same.
But 1 have admitted nothing of
the kind, and if had, it would
not have been true, in the sense
claimed by him. I said that the
Abolition party caused the defeat
of Mr.. Clay in 1914, but this did
not destroy the Wing party, but on
the contrary that party elected
General Taylor, its candidate for
the Presidency, at the very next
election. And that party was not
the one which, in any sense, pre-
cipitated the conflict between
friends and enemies of slavery,
which resulted in its destruction.
Nor was the Free Soil party the
same as the Abolition party. That
party sought only to prevent the
introduction of slavery into free ter
ritory, but did rot purpose to inter
fere with slavery where it existed
Please explain this to your friend,
and ask him not to expose himself
to the ridicule Of persons who know
the political history of the country.
He won't believe me, but will be-
lieve you, and my regard for him
is such that I want you to save
him from further exposing his, 1
won't say ignorance, but lack of in
formation.
The Republican party adopted
this policy Of he Free Soil party,
in full, and ia defense of their al
legged right 10 carry slavery into
free territory the Southern States
seeded from the Union, and thus
precipitated the conflict which en-
ded in the overthrow of slavery.
And but for this, neither the Abo-
lition party, the Free Soil party,
nor the Republican party could
have destroyed slavery where it ex-
listed.
Coming back to your last reply
You have failed to respond to my
demand for the letters, or copies of
them, which you profess to have
received questioning my loyalty to
the pending Prohibition Amend
ment, and 1 can imagine but two
reasons for the failure. These let.
ters either fail to support you in
the construction you put upon