Year: 1859

D,e assembled in front of Hocker's building, head
Of Main street. to listen to the speeches of Milton
c Latham, Lecompton candidate for Governor,
and John Curry, Anti-Lecompton nominee for
the same office. The meeting organized by call
ing James Gallagher to the chair. Mr. Latham
then took the stand and addressed the audience
for half an hour, condensed report of which
here follows:


He believed the assembled multitude proved
that the Democratic fire was burning bright in
these regions that whatever personal fanatical
or other feeling might divide the Democratic
marty, to. night the people were aroused 10 the
Importance of the struggle pending In 1850 he
had the pleasure Of being member of one of the
first conventions held in the State previous to its
admission. From that time he had been, if not
member, at least participant in the deliberations
of the dominant party. He was elected to Con-
gress and while there the Kansas question came
up The late convention at Sacramento had
presented him as the standard-beare of the reGu-
lar Democratic party in this State-he was nomi-
mated by the regular Democratic organization,
according to the usages and principles of that
party He asked the meaning of popular sover-
eighty, and said that scarcely a man could be
found who would not affirm that he stood on that
platform. Ask the teamster on the mountain
road care-worn and laden with dust, who he
voted for for President and he will respond, Mil
lard Fillmore! Are you i'll favor of popular
sovereignty? Yes, sir ee, you betW Ask the
MINER from Pennsylvania, who was his choice
for President, and he answers, James Buchanan
Are you in favor of popular sovereignty? He
responds" If you suppose l voted for James
Buchanan and am not in favor of popular sove-
reignty, you'd better git up and gt!" Meet
the emigrant, and be responds that he voted for
Fremont and is in favor of popular sovereignty.
He said the foundations OF the government had
been laid broad and deep, and that popular sover
eighty was at the base, but now it was attempted
to make it direct issue. AS to the question of
slavery in the Territories, the United States
possessed large territory, extending from the
Atlantic 10 the Pacific coasts, which must soon
be settled that this territory was obtained by
the common blood treasure Of the country, and
was common property, and was to be held by the
people as tenants in common. If the Legislature
should see fit, in a spirit OF fanatcism, to pass
laws interfering with these rights, unless Congress
should pass law confirming it, it would be in
operative and void. He did not cOncedc the
right of Congress to pass slave code (as charg-
ed), but maintained that Congress has the right
to pass laws to protect slave property the DEM
ocratic party does not lean to repeal of the
slave trade restrictions. Mr. Orr introduced into
Congress that it was inexpedient to repeal said
laws and a Democratic majority passed the reso-
lution that he had searched diligently, and
could not find that the party in any manner ad-
vocated such measures if it did, if this was made
plank in the platform, he should dissolve his
connection with it at once that parties speak
through platforms, and the Democratic party had
no principles not embodied in the Cincinnati
platform that the Democratic party was neither
tyrannical or wavering in the cnunciaton OF its
general principles. He wished to call the atten
tion of Judge Curry to two or three important
questions. He says do not belong TO the simon
pure Democracy. What constitutes the simon
pure Democracy How is it, why was it he
4 Ill. 4 t,,r y fsI Fnr Rno,
If he voted for Mr. Fillmore, is it not extraordi-
nary that he should now claim to be Democrat?
How can he ask the Democratic party to rally
round hm--he never voted a straight Democratic
ticket? | should like TO hear his views on the
slavery question. The Republican party are as
much pleased at our little family quarrel on this
subject as an ancient citizen of Rome would be
at the coliseum while witnessing combat with
a lion, or citizen of Madrid at a bear and bull
fight There are other issues to speak of, aud as
Judge Curry will follow me in this discussion,
shall respond to him and give my views Oh slavery
and Kansas.


John Curry, Anti-Lccompton Gubernatorial
nominee, was then introduced, aud said


The people of a Democratic or Republican
government are free to net they are the source
Of power the rulers are the servants of the peo-
pie ; they have no right or authority to lay down
rules for the people, but the people themselves,
in their intelligence. have the right to say what
shall. be the paramount law, and what shall be
their government. Principles of liberty, and the
sacred right of self-governm"nt, is and always
will be-, maintained by intelligent men. My
friend and opponent, Mr.. Latham has declared
in favor of popular sovereignty and nOnnterven-
ton but has unfortunately coupled these dccla
rations with one in favor Of the policy and gov
ernment of James Buchanan. ! differ from him
in his d. Gntion Of popular sovereignty. Mr..
Douglas is not alone in his opposition to the Ad-
,ninistraton other great lights of the Opposition
have a right TO be heard, and they, as well as Mr..
Douglas, have declared what Interpretation of
popular rights and liberty should be presented.
Before Mr.. Latham was nominated they looked
for explanation and Interpretation Of this doc
trine. If my opponent has got on the wrong
platform, am not esponsible if he claims non
intervention and popular sovereignty, when the
balance of his party gives a different interpreta-
ton, am not responsible. few days since our
United States Senator, (Mr. Gwiu) in a speech
made at Grass Valley, asserted and promulged
very different doctrine from that OF Stephen a.
Douglas, and from that declared by my worthy
friend on this stand to night l shall call atten-
tion to portion of his speech, as also to what he
said the 23d day OF February last Mr.. Gwin
declared, in reply to Mr.. Douglas, that had the
Interpretation that Mr.. Douglas gave been under
stood in 1854 to be the intent and meaning OF the
as-Nebraska act, he would not have voted
for its passage and no other Senator on that floor
coming from Tue southern FecllOn. contend
that in 1854 the construction given to these mea
sures was the same as that given now. Mr.. Cass
at that time, did not deny that the people of a
Territory possessed the power to legisate for the
Territory as might be for their advantage and
interests. No doubt these opinions of Mr.. Cass
will be received as Democratic. Mr.. Clay was
always opposed to Intervention, and in favor of
leaving the people free on this question. The
principles We contend for are, that the people of
Territory have right and possess the power.
as sovereign people, to form and regulate their
institutions in their own way, and for their own
interests, so long as they are guilty of no const
tutional infractons My opponent differs some
what on this point he limits the power of the
people of Territory to the point of time at
which they meet to form a State Constitution
with view to admission into the Union. Why
shonld they be thus limited The Territories
have power 10 make their own police regulations
1t is upon these questions that the party has di-
vided, ont of which has grown this resistance
against the Federal Executive.


He then went on to recount the proceedings in