Year: 1860

was not IN lumau HabuIO nVU w ASSi inN S".
tion at the charges so profusely scattered
against me and my friends, and my State
but still, sir, after all, "more in sollow than
in anger" Up to the years 1857 and 1858,
no man in this nation had higher or more
exalted opinion of the character, the services
and the political integrity Of the SenatorI
from Illinois than bad. / can appeal tol
those who may have heard me in the last
Presidential canvass, in my State, where, for
months together, day aud night, was trav,
cling in support Of the Democratic party, and
helping, as far as my humble abilities would
admit, to break down the know-nothing
party, which then had decided majority of
the voters of our State inscribed in its lodges,
We succeeded 10 that contest. The canvass
was successful one; and it did so happen
that, in the course of that canvass, had
again and again to appeal to my democratic
fellow citizens of the State of louisiana to-
stand by the gallant. democracy of the North
who stood by Us IS HoEn down this new or
ganization, who's only effect could be to in
jure the demoeratie candidate and his sue,
cess; and then, in speaking, Of that bright
galaxy of democratic talent, democratic in,
tegrity, and democratic craftsmanship, that
| now see gathered and clustered around me,
the central figure was the honored portrait of
the Senator from Illinois


Sir, it has been with reluctance and sor.
row that | have been obliged to pluck down
my idol from his place on Ligh, and refuse
to him any more support OF confidence as
member of the party. | have done so,
trust, upon no light or unworthy ground. l
have not done SO alone. The causes that
have opefated on me have operated on the
democratic party of the United States, and
have operated an effect which The whole
future life of the Senator will be utterly
unable to obliterate. 1t is impossible chat
confidence thus lost can be restored On
what ground has that confidence been for.
fcited, and why is it that We now refuse him
our support and fellowship? I have stated
our reason to-day. l have appealed to the
record. have not followed him back to
the false issue or the feigned traverse that
he makes in relation to matters that are not
now in contest between him and the demo.
cratic party. The question IS not what we
all said or believed in 1910 or in 1856
How idle was it to search ancient precedcnts
and accumulate old quotations from CHAT
senators may have at different times said in
relation to their principles and views. The
precise point, the direct affaignment, the
pl in and explicit allegation made against
the senator from Eflinoisj is not touched by
him in all of his speech.


We accuse him for this, to Wit that,
having bargaincd with us upon point upon
whi:h we We're at issue, that it should be
considered judicial point; that we would
abide the decision; that We would act indcr
the decision, and consider it a doctrine of the
party; that having said that to us hare in
the Senate, Ire Went home, and, under tie
stress Of local election, his knees gave Way :;
his whole pctSon trombed. his adversary
stood upon principle and was beatcn'y and
10, he is the candidate of a mighty party
for The presidency of the United States The
senator from Illinois hhered. He got the
prize for which he faltered but,' loy the
grand prize of his ambition to-day slips from
his grasp because Of bis filtcfing in his for
.mer contest, and his success in the Canvass
for the Senate, purchased for an iguobc
price, has cost him. the loss Of the presiden,
cy of the United States


Here were two nen, struggling beforc The
people of State on two great sides of pos


itical controversy that was dividing the
Union, each for empire at home. One stood
on principle-was defeated, To day where
stands he !? The other faltered-rccoived


he prize but, to-day, Where Stands lie
Not at the head of the Democratic party of
these United States He is fallen star
We have separated from him. He is right
in saying We have separated from him. We
have separated from him, not because he
held principles in 1856 different from ours.
We have separated from him, not because
we are intolerant of opposition from any
body, for the Senator from Ohi6[Nf Pughl
is an honored member Of our organization.
We separated from him because ho has de-
MED the bargain that he made when he went
home because, after telling us here i'd the
Senate that he was willing that this Whole
MATTER Should be decided BY the Supreme
Court, in the face of his people, lie told them
that he had got us by the bill and that,
whether the decision was for US or against
us, the practical effect was to be against us !;
aud because be shows us now again that be
is ready to make use of black republican ar
guments used against himself at home, aud
to put them forth against the democratic
party in speeches here in the Senate.


Now, Mr. President, this will be repre-
sented as an attack on the honorable senator
from Illinois but finish my speech, as he
did his, by saying, 'the Senate will bear me
witness that L have not spoken on this sub.
ject Until attacked all I have said is in
self-defence attack mo- man; and the
world shall know if ever / speak again it
shall De in self defence" daughter. Mr..
President, the best defence is to carry the
war into tho enemy's country. I belong to
no school of politicians that stand on the
defensive. If attacked, / strike back, and
ever shall. If the senator from Illinois
wants the world to know that he spoke only
in selfdefence, let the same measure of lust.
ice be meted out to me, aud in answer to
any one who can by possibility consider