The globe. (Huntingdon, Pa.) 1856-1877, March 24, 1858, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

Per annum in advance $1 50
Six months 75
Three months 50
A failure to notify a discontinuance at the expiration of
the term subscribed for will be considered a now engage
1 insertion. 2 do. 3 do.
sour lines or less, $ 25 $ 37% $ 50
One square, (12 lines,) - 50 75 100
Two squares, 1 00 1 50 2 00
Three squares, 1 50 2 25 3 00
Over three week and less than threo months, 25 cents
per square for each insertion.
3 months: 6 months. 12 Months.
Six Mies or less, - •$1 50 $3 00 $5 00
• 3 00 5 00 7 00
Two squares, 5 00 8 00 .10 00
Three squares, 7 00 10 00 .15 00
Four squares, 9 00 13 00 "0 00
Half a column, 12 00 16 00 .24 00
Ono column, 20 00 30 00 50 00
Professional and Business Cards not exceeding four lines,
one year, $3 00
Administrators' and Executors' Notices, $1 75
Advertisements not marked with the number of inser
tions desired, will be continued till forbid and charged ac
cording to these terms.
In the Democratic State Convention, at
Harrisburg, 16larch 5 1858.
Mr. STOKES rose and. spoke as follows :
Mr. President : I have listened with great
pleasure to the remarks that have been made
by my friend from Schuylkill, [Mr. llnghes]
but I confess that I regret the mistake which
he made as to the resolutions which I modi
fied so far as the language was concerned.—
I refer to the resolutions which I had. the
honor to submit this morning.. I thought I
stated, at the time, so explicitly as to admit
of no mistake, that supposing from the out
rageous and tyrannical tone assumed yester
day by the majority of the Convention, that
we had determined to meet their defiance in
a tone equally defiant. But, finding that
maintaining, as they do, the position upon
which they stand, they have expressed them
selves, nevertheless, in terms of proper mild
ness. I thought it fit and decent, in order,
if possible, that we might come together to
make these modifications—or, if this were
impossible, that at least there might be some
perfectly good. feeling among us all—l
thought it fit and proper that I should take
my resolutions from the desk of the Secre
tary, and strike from them any expressions
which, by possibility, could be construed
into unnecsssary harshness. And this, sir,
shows the kindness which I intended to ex
ercise. I know now that people must obtain
a reward from their own consciences for
doing kind acts—[laughter]—a reward which
must always come from consciences that
have exercised a spirit of charity and kind
ness, such as I have shown in this matter.—
[Renewed laughter.] And with that lam
quite satisfied.
Now, sir, there is no use in attempting to
conceal the fact that the position of the Dem
ocratic party, to-day, is a position of great
difficulty and danger. And those who are
;,;-t difficulty and danger can escape only by
ibe exercise of prudnce and wisdom. I
suggest, therefore, to the majority of the
Convention, that although they have unques
tionably the power to do what they see fit,
yet I see plainly they will place the party in
such a position that they are bound to anti
cipate the most serious consequences.
They may triumph temporarily over the
feeble minority to which I belong, yet I sub
mit they should consider well the rights of
that minority. They should feel and know
that upon a union of all the elements compo
sing the great Democratic party of Pennsyl
vania depends the union of the Democratic
party of the Confederacy, and upon the
union of the latter delpends the maintenance
and perpetuation of the rights of man--a re
sult which far outweighs any paltry consid
erations involved in any mere temporary tri
umph. The majority may for a time tri
umph by the brute force of numbers indis
criminately applied in this case, Or directed
by the passions or interests of those who
vote. But the triumph will in the end be a
barren one, and it may lead to most disas
trous consequences, to results now the least
anticipated. I warn them to beware. Let
them pause ere it be too late to pause.
But let us look calmly at these matters.—
Let 14 recollect that we are brethren ; let us
not forget that we shall have to
meet our common foe in arms. We should
therefore do nothing, the tendency of which
might be to impair the power of the Demo
cratic party—its usefulness to the Constitu
tion, and the Union, and to mankind.—
Should hasty action or ill-advised counsels
prevail, we might have to regret it most
deeply. We might in the future be over
whelmed and disgraced, by consequences of
such action,or the prevalence of such counsels.
We are not to consider ourselves as ene
mies or antagonists, but as members of the
same great Democratic family; as having
differed in opinion upon one question only,
and as still bound together by charity and
kindness towards each other, and the desire
for a common triumph over a common foe !
A union thus based and cemented will
crown our efforts -with success and victory.
Mr. President, this is the first Convention
in which I was ever a delegate, or which I
ever saw ; and, sir, I assure you. it will be
the last. [Much applause.] Long retired
from politics, I was in Washington, on the
night of the 3d of July, 1856, and attended
the Senate of the United States on the occa
sion of the great debate of the session. The
question involved' in that debate was whether
Congress had a right to make laws for the
government of the people of the Territory of
Kansas. In favor of that proposition were
all the Black Republicans, and against it all
the Democrats of the Senate. I come here
now, sir, and find in favor of Congress hav
ing the power to make the laws for the gov
ernment of the Territory all the opposition
in the Convention. Sir, I find in the speech
delivered from that chair (pointing to the
president) the very position assumed by the
Republicans in the Senate of the United
States ; that, sir, is the position you assumed
in your inaugural address. [Laughter and
great applause.]
Now, sir, I intend to answer you. I stoop
not to a meaner foe 1 [Sensation and ap
plause.] If I understand the position which
is taken here—and I state it in this broad
and general way, because we have no time
for minute discussion—it is, sir, that Con
gress shall, by the irresponsible exercise of
its power, for the sake of a mere temporary
expediency, interfere with the rights of the
people of Kansas. What, sir, is proposed to
be done by the acceptance of this Lecompton
Constitution by Congress ? It is proposed
to drag Kansas into the Union contrary to
the will of a majority of her people, and to
add to the act admitting her a condition
precedent—a condition by which the whole
tenor and vitality of this Constitution is af
fected. The condition proposed, if inserted
by Congress, according to the arguments of
the majority of this Convention, becomes a
portion of the instrument itself, having as
much validity as any part thereof. Is not
this Congressional legislation in regard to
the rights of the people of the Territory ?
Is it not a flagrant constitutional usurpation;
intervention in its worst form ?
Why, sir, the doctrine of the majority
here to-day is the very doctrine advanced by
Messrs. Seward and Hale, and all the other
Republicans of the Senate of the United
States, upon the memorable occasion I have
referred to, and combatted - by Senators Ma
son, Douglas, and all the Democrats of that
[Here Mr. Hughes interrupted him, by as
king if he meant to assert that the doctrines
of Hale and Seward were those of the ma
jority here to day?]
Mr. Stokes, resuming. I mean to assert
that the majority of the Senate at that time,
and the majority of this body now have re
versed positions upon this question.
Mr. Hughes. "Is not the gentleman mis
taken ?"
I may be mistaken in the application.—
But I must confess that to my mind the idea
that their positions are identical is incompre
hensible. It may not be an unenviable po
sition for the majority here to occupy, but I
cannot see how they can esape from it.
Sir, after going home, I considered the sub
ject involved in that great disussion was a
very serious matter; not because it involved
any very considerable number of persons,
but because it touches the great right of the
people to make the laws under which they
lived. Although long retired from politics,
I did not rest; I felt myself impelled to take
the stump and explain to my fellow citizens
the nature of our Government, at the very
bottom of which lies the great principle that
" man is capable of self-govrnment"--that
he has a right to govern himself.
The assertion of this principle by the Dem
ocratic party of Pennsylvania, and its denial
by the Republicans, constituted the basis upon
which the campaign of 1856 was fought in
this State. Upon that position we elected
Mr. Buchanan ; and upon it, sir, I stand this
afternoon [Tremendous applause.] Talk
about men 1 Why, James Buchanan was
born but seventy years ago ; and he may die
to-morrow. Sir, in a few years every man
in this room may be in his grave ; but this
principle, committed to our keeping, is to live
or to die. As for me, sir, by no act of mine,
either in 1856, when I assisted to elect James
Buchanan, or by any act of mine in 1858,
will I do anything to falsify my principles,
or the consistency by which I have ever pro
fessed to be governed from that time to the
present day. Sir, the gentlemen here op
posed to us claim to be the particular friends
of James Buchanan, but when I look around
me, in this Convention, I find but two gentle
men who were his friends twenty years ago,
besides myself. I supported him then with
all the strength and power which nature had
bestowed upon me. Who, Mr. President, are
the real friends of Mr. Buchanan ? Those
who, like myself, twenty years ago, took an
active part in the support of his claims ? I
see before me the gentleman from Venango,
(Mr. Plumer,) who then with me, fought for
the favorite son of Pennsylvania. He, with
my friend from Somerset, (Mr. Hugus,) and
myself, if any, may justly claim to be the pe
culiar friends of Mr. Buchanan. What is it
Mr. Buchanan expects at the hands of those
who have ever been his friends ? Not a de
parture from what they conscientiously be
lieve to be right and just, in order to sustain
his course on any particular question; but
frankness and candor. I hesitate not to say
that he himself heartily despises the men who
make false professions of their support to his
Administration. Sir, in the reign of George
111, when a party—or rather a faction—sprang
up, having an existence only in deference to
the will of the reigning monarch, the 'Whigs
and Tories, the regularly organized parties
of England, recognized them not as the em
bodiment of a political principle. They were
known by the name of—the " King's friends."
Thus they were called, They were the most
wretched men that ever cringed and fawned
at the footstool of power, to eat the crumbs
that fell from their master's table. [Ap
plause.] History has recorded the past ;
past ages inform the present; but no meaner
or more despicable race have ever disgraced
any age, if history or experience is to be trus
ted. And I know, sir, of no parrallel more
feting or complete to the history and actions
of the "King's friends" in the reign of George
111, than that which is furnished by the con
duct of those who style themselves the "pe
culiar friends of James Buchanan. [lm.
mense applause.] If there is anything I des
pise more than all other things, it is this des
picable man-worship. [Applause.] Sir, when
you enunciated from that chair [pointing to
it] the doctrine you did yesterday—when you
gave us to understand contrary to the usage
of presiding officers, who are supposed to be
impartial as to the matters to be discussed—
I say, when you gave us to understand that
Congress, as a matter of expediency, might
make laws to bind the Territories, did it not
strike you that "all just powers derive their
authority from the consent of the govern
ment ? that when you declared that the actu
al will of the people of Kansas should be set
aside, and disregarded upon a mere pettifog
ging technical, and petty nation of the pre
servation of a right, and that Congress shall
have the power to impose laws upon Kansas,
without the consent of its people, did it not
occur to you, that in that very chair in which
you are now sitting, John Hancock signed
the Declaration of Independence, and de
clared to his compeers the radical principle
of the Revolution—that which gave birth to
the Revolution—which enables us to assem
ble here to-day—" that all Government derive
their just power from the consent of the gov
erned ;" that there can be no just Govern
ment except what is derived from the consent
of the governed? [Great sensation and ap
Now, Mr. President, let me draw your at
tention to this fact—and trust the inspiration
of the last two days, derived from the occu
pation of the chair, may enable you to cor
rect the error into which you temporarily and
unguardedly - fell. [A laugh.] But the true
friends of James Buchanan are those who
will tell him the truth. The position of the
President renders it very hard and difficult
for the truth to reach his ears. Power is
ever surrounded by parasites and flatterers,
and its ear is slow in hearing the voice of the
There are two classes who visit the Presi
dent—those who desire favors and those who
go merely to pay their respects to him. The
first class go to him to lie, and the last class
say nothing. They only are the true friends
of James Buchanan who tell him the truth.
And I tell you, sir, that if the Convention
has magnanimity enough to elevate itself
above the temporary position they hold, and
speak as members of the Democratic party,
and speak for the truth and the right, their
voice would be heard at Washington, and
listened to with the profoundest attention.
Mr. Stineman, of Lancaster, called the
gentleman to order for reflections on the
character of the body of which he was a
member, as it was contrary to parlimentary
Mr. Stokes resumed. Am Ito suppose the
Convention to be immaculate ? [Applause.]
The Convention, sir, may be immaculate, but
lam certain the members are not. [Loud
laughter.] I say, sir, if the members of the
Convention could have elevated themselves
beyond their temporary position, and have
spoken plainly to Mr. Buchanan, their voices
would have reached his ears in unmistaka
ble tones, and my word for it, after ages
would have assigned his name a much high
er position upon their records, had he listen
ed to the truth, than they will, should he—
deluded by this Convention telling him that
it speaks the voice of Pennsylvania—contin
ue on in the course of policy he seems now to
have chosen. I believe that if the members
of this convention would speak in the tones
in which the people of Pennsylvania would
have spoken, if assembled together, they
would declare most emphatically that a con
tinuous fraud has been practised upon the
people of Kansas which had its consummation
in this Lecompton Constitution. Sir, I des
pise chicanery and deceit, and would be the
last man to impose upon James Buchanan
in relation to - Kansas, or any other question.
Mr. President, I have been at Washington
twice. I.had not yet, read myself out of the
party, [laughter,] and when in that city I
did not go near him, just because I did not
choose to go near him, and thus add to the
number of those who are ever annoying
Now, sir, let us look at this matter in a
quiet, calm and dispassionate manner, (and,
gentlemen, you will, I trust, understand me
to speak in the most perfect kindness, and
with the utmost respect;) and permit me to
say, with all respect to the gentleman from
Lancaster, I said nothing of any human be
ing at which he should take offence. Well,
then, sir, what is the practical question before
Shall Kansas be admittted into the Union
in accordance with the will of the majority
of her people, or shall she be admitted con
trary to their will ? Shall the principles of
the Kansas Nebraska act be sustained ? Does
any gentleman present pretend to say that
the Lecompton Constitution embodies the ex
pression of that will, or that it conforms to
the declaration that "the people shall be left
free to form their own institution in their
own way ?"
The thing is simply this : The Lecompton
Constitution is presented to Congress for ac
ceptance. It is supported by about 2,500
votes. On the other hand, more than 12,000
votes were given in January last, protesting
against the admission of the Territory upon
the basii; of that Constitution.
Now, the fact is, that - the 2,500 persons of
that Territory who say they wish to come in
to the Union, and the 12,000 who do not, all
declare that the matter of settling their own
insitutions belongs to themselves. In this,
they all most heartily concur. To seek, then,
to thrust into that Constitution, by the ac
tion of Congress, a provision which would be
nugatory from the beginning—and all the
people of the Territory would so regard it—
would be a flagrant example of Congression
al intervention and usurpation. In the face of
so plain an expression of the popular will,
ought Congress to impose the provisions of
that instrument upon the people of Kansas
as their organic law ? The whole thing
should be left exclusively to the people, un
trammelled in their action by fraud, force, or
Now, sir, this proposition contains in itself
its own argument. It is a plain and simple
matter leaving it in that way, for, after all,
these should be so simplified as to be under
stood by all ; and when you so elaborate
and complicate them that they are not un
derstood by the whole people, you are guilty
of a fraud and. wrong. Sir, if ever there
were circumstances which will require the
full exercise of the ingenuity and ability of
my friend from Schuylkill, [Mr. llughes,]
if ever there were considerations urging the
strongest display of talent, to mystify and
distract the popular mind upon a plain ques
tion, the fact of that exercise and display is
fully shown in the various publications which
have been made in defence of this Lecompton
Is this question to be settled, one of expe
diency or principle If a mere matter of
policy, I would not this day raise my voice
against it. But I deem it essentially one of
principle—one which can neither be evaded
or overslaughed by any mere considerations
of a wretched, miserable expediency.
The whole question is, whether the voice
of 12,000 persons voting in January against
this Constitution shall be listened to by Con
gress, or whether that of the 2,500 voting in
December shall influence its action ? Shall
Congress disregard the plainly-expressed will
of an ascertained majority, or shall it accept
that of a minority ? Ido not see how any
one can hesitate in his decision upon so plain,
simple, and easy a proposition.
Now, Mr. President, let me say, that if it
were not for the desire of the expansion of
slavery into Territories otherwise free, this
proposition, so plain and simple, would be
universally acceded to. If a necessity exists,
as it is said there does, to secure new fields
of labor for slaves, or if other economical
considerations require that slavery should be
extended, let those who desire it attend to this
matter. If they evoke a phantom in doing
this which they cannot allay, I do hot per
ceive either the justice or necessity of trying
to drag the Democracy of Pennsylvania into
its support.
More especially am I opposed to such an
attempt because in asking us to do so, they
ask us to violate and disregard the basis upon
which we of Pennsylvania are in the habit
of determining such questions. That basis
is the will of the majority. If we, by our
action here at home, determine every ques
tion in this plain way, why should we not
recognize the fairness of the rule as applied
to Kansas ? It is an undeniable fact that five
times as many refuse to be governed by the
Lecompton Constitution as desire its adoption.
Is there greater validity in a Constitution
which has not gone into operation than in one
which has gone into operation? If the pop
ular power is competent to declare, after a
Constitution has been adopted and put into
action, that it shall be abrogated and repealed,
is not the same power fit to reject one framed
but not adopted? Can it not say that it shall
not be adopted? Is not that power which is
sufficient to do a greater thing capable of do
ing a lesser ? Now, sir, it appears to me clear
that it is.
If, then, Kansas should, after its admission
intoithe Union under a legitimate Constitu
tion, think proper to alter that Constitution,
the people have the power do it; or, if they
feel disposed to declare that they will not go
for freedom there, they can do it. All regu
lations they can make in regard to the one
thing they can make in relation to the other.
Now, sir, if there is a power in the Legisla
ture of Kansas to make a Constitution—to
have one of their own creation—why, the
right of rejection by a subsequent Territorial
Legislature seems to be of equal validity.—
They must fall or stand together.
There are provisions in the Constitution to
which I beg to call the attention of the Con
vention. In the first place, sir, Ido not see
how we can very well adopt the Lecompton
Constitution in the face of the Kansas-Ne
braska act, because no man, according to it,
would be eligible to be Governor, unless he
had been a citizen of the State for twenty
years. I object not to that; it is their right
to make laws to suit themselves. But, sir, if
we are going to adopt this Constitution, we
had better say nothing to the Know-Nothings.
[Laughter.] But the subject I was going to
call your attention to (and I derive my au
thority from a very high source) is, that this
Constitution was never adopted by the Con
vention. Sir, there is nothing, in the first
place, in the proceedings of the Convention,
or in the Constitution itself, whereby we are
shown that the Constitution was ever adopted.
12. the. second place, the people have never
adopted it. The people, sir, were never al
lowed to vote on the adoption or rejection of
the Constitution.
Again, Mr. President, let me call your at
tention to this clause. They were allowed to
vote on the question of adopting a Constitu
tion, with or without slavery. But its adop
tion or rejection, without that clause, is a
question that the people never had presented
to them. Here you have an instrument not
adopted by the Convention that framed it—
not adopted by the people for their Gov
ernment. And this instrument, endorsed by
neither, is to be made by the paramount pow
er of Congress the law of the land for the
people of that Territory for all time to come.
Sir, it follows that, not having been adopted
by the Convention—not having been adopted
by the people, who never had the power of
rejecting it, that if it is adopted, it will be by
an act of Congress alone—an act directly in
terfering with the Kansas-Nebraska act, and
against the rights of the people to self-gov
Now, Mr. President, I have just stated this
proposition, not having time to elaberate it,
and I call the attention of my professional
brethren to the question. It does not allow
of a denial. Sir, in their extreme anxiety
to adopt the fraud, they have made their in
strument invalid. But I object to this on
another ground : the unquestionable Demo
cratic ground; the ground that all Democrats
acknowledge—the right of the people to pass
upon all their domestic institutions, including
slavery. So that they have the power to re
move this in their own way, and not any law
passed by Congress, or adopted by any other
body, can prevent them. They can modify
it according to their own judgment, in their
own way, and at all times, provided the Le
compton fraud be not thrust down their own
Now, Mr. President, the Lecompton Con
stitution denies this doctrine. It denies the
right enjoyed by every State in the Union,
because it puts the right of property in slaves
before and higher than any constitutional sanc
tion, and therefore her people are forbidden
by the adoption of the Constitution to inter
fere with the rights of property in slaves.
Mr. Hughes, (interrupting.) I ask the
question of the gentleman whether, under
any constitutional form of Government in
these United States, there is any right or
power granted to take private property for
public use ?
Mr. Stokes. The gentleman is welcome to
my answer.
It is a distinction which has been drawn
in every State in the Union where slavery
has been abolished. Sir, there is a differ
ence in the right of property in human be
ings ; and in Pennsylvania that is the case,
she having passed laws for gradual abolition
of slavery; and so in every State where they
have abolished slavery, except Massachusetts.
Sir, I agree that the general proposition of
the gentleman from Schuylkill (Mr. Hughes)
is correct : but I deny its correctness as to a
particular species of property. But, I say,
it is a denial to Kansas of the right to do
what we did, and what every free State of the
Union has done—to pass laws for the eman
cipation of slaves.
Sir, I wish to call your attention to another
point, and then I will pass as rapidly as I
can. Now, my learned friend from Schuyl
kill has asked a question which is answered
fully by the history of Pennsylvania, and of
the Confederacy. There never has been an
alteration of the Constitution in this State,
or any other of the Union—nor has any Ter
ritory been formed into a State and admitted
into the Union without the consent fairly ex
pressed of an overwhelmingly power majori
ty of the inhabitants. The candor of my
friend will admit that fact.
Mr. Hughes, (interrugting.) I would ask
the gentleman if the amendments to the Con
stitution of Pennsylvania had not prevailed by
less than one-third of her legal voters ? Was
not that such a majority of votes as is neces
sary by the political arrangements of this
State to altar or amend its fundamental law?
Mr. Stokes replied, I would ask if the ma
jority did not sustain them ?
Mr. Hughes. A majority of the people of
Kansas sanctioned the Lecompton Constitu
tion just in the same way.
Mr. Stokes. Let me tell you that if the
amendments to the Constitution last fall had
been supported by 2,500 votes, and 12,000
votes had been cast against them, then the
gentleman would have found a parallel ease.
I take issue with not only my learned friend
from Schuylkill, for whom no man entertains
a higher respect than I, but I take issue also
with the law reported by the committee of
thirteen, composed, I suppose, altogether of
lawyers, but they have made an enormous le
gal. blunder, I think. [Laughter.] Sir, Ido
not think, speaking as a lawyer, that the peo
ple of Kansas have the power—if the Le
compton Constitution be adopted by Congress,
and it ever goes into effect—to alter any part
of it until the year 18G4. Why not, sir?—
Why, what is a Constitution ? What force
has it, unless it bind those whom it is intend
ed to govern ; unless its terms be complied
with and obeyed?
I agree that there are cases, such as that of
the Constitution of this State, in 1790, in
which no specific mode for a change is point
ed out in the instrument itself. In such cases,
the Legislature of the State is the only body
competent to take the initiatory steps to call
a Convention to frame a Constitution. I ad
mit such action is legal, and legal from the
necessity of the case. But when there is a
specific direction or limitation, you are bound
by that. What is the use of making a plan,
or Constitution, at all, if it does not bind ?
After the highest power has passed upon a
Constitution and adopted it in all its parts,
can any but that sovereign power annul any
provision it contains ? Can even that power
do it in any other way than that which it has
voluntarily imposed upon itself? If it does,
it resorts to revolution, and throws aside
peaceful constitutional chance.
Mr. President, take the case of the consti
tutional amendments adopted in this State
last fall. After two sessions, of the Legisla
ture have declared for a particular change,
and it has been ratified by a majority vote,
the Constitution is altered accordingly. But
supose it had not been so submitted, would
not the people—would not you and I say that
the Constitution had not been specifically fol
lowed? Would we not all agree in declaring
that these amendments had no binding force
because the specific mode pointed out in the
Constitution for its own amendment had not
been followed? So say I in regard to the
Constitution of Kansas. There being a rem
edy, and the time fixed, and the specification
made by the Constitution, they (the people
of Kansas) are bound by these things, and
there can be no change made until 1864.
Therefore, sir, I regard the proposed grant of
authority for the alteration of the Constitu
tion before the prescribed period as a snare
and a delusion too palpable to deceive the
most unwary. Those, therefore, who are en
snared by the delusion exhibited in the re
port of the committee of thirteen—and here
is one of their mistakes I would not have made
had I been on the committee, and which I
have stated, not as a lawyer, but in the plain
est possible manner—therefore, every man
who hears me can understand it.
Again : all admit that the Lecompton Con
stitution should be changed. No one is so
hardy as to risk his reputation in defence of
the provisions it contains. If all, therefore,
admit the allegation that it should be changed,
such admission is proof positive that it ought
to be changed. This very statement proves
that it is not right, that its provisions are ob
noxious, and therefore that Congress ought
not to force it upon Kansas.
While your committee proposes a change,
while they propose to insert a provision into
the Constitution, giving the people the right
to change the Constitution at pleasure, and
not to wait until 1864—the Constitution itself,
as it came from the hands of its makers, per
mits no such change. They, therefore not
only violate the true intent and meaning of
the instrument, but they then advise you to
accept of a Constitution containing provisions
which are radically wrong. They advise you
to do a wrong, and accept a bundle of wrongs,
because the fraud may be cured and the
wrongs righted, as they allege, in a short
time. But, sir, how can you or your party
go to the country upon such a record as that?
Can you appeal successfully, as in past times,
upon the purity and strength of Democratic
principles ? No, sir, the masses understand
this question well. It has been thoroughly
discussed, and they perceive at once the dif
ference between the great principle which un
derlies this whole question, and the series of
mere expediencies upon which the report of
the committee is based.
Are we to steal our neighb Dr's horse, and
after the wrong is accomplished endeavor to
cure it ? Had we better not steal the horse
in the first place, so that no wrong will have
been done which needs curing ? This is
precisely the condition of this question.—
We bad better commit no error in the first
place, and then we shall have no need to rec
tify the injustice of the original act.
Mr. President, I am heartily ashamed of
myself. I have already occupied too much
of your time. I must hasten on to a close.
But there is a radical principle which over
rides all questions of expediency. I think,
sir, that principle is the right of the majori
ty to rule, practically exhibited in popular
governments, and I think the Democratic
party is strong, and has achieved its past
triumphs, not by studied expediency, but by
principle ; and I think the instant we aban
don that glorious principle we are lost and
Editor and Proprietor.
NO. 40.
gone forever.
Mr. President, I desire that, in coming as
in past contests, we shall behold the success,
the glorious triumph, of our flag; and there
fore I am not to be controlled by your elo
quence, much less seduced by it from the
path which the clear convictions of duty and
principle point out. [Applause.]
In regard to the first four propositions in
the substitute for the report of the commit
tee which I had the honor to submit, I would
say they were taken from the works of Al
gernon Sydney; him whose head was cut off
for advocating the principles of English lib
erty. And I am told that I am to have
mine cut off. [Great laughter.]
Now, sir, we have changed the mode of
doing these things. lie was led to the scaf
fold in the light of day by the men of his
time, they having the manliness to dispose
of him in that way. But now, the descend
ants of those whose ancestors shed their
blood for you and the freedom of our com
mon country, are to have their heads cut off
in a meaner way. [Sensation and applause.]
But, whatever may be the result sir, I am
willing to live or die by that declaration of
principles which our fathers proclaimed and
endorsed as the great principles of liberty
and justice—those principles whose fragrant
incense are ever ascending to the throne of
the Eternal Father. [Loud and enthusiastic
The Overland - Route to California.
The disturbances in Utah have placed a
serious obstacle in the way of the overland
emigration to California, that has usually
passed through the Salt Lake Valley. For
the benefit and information of the public, we
re-publish to-day in our columns an article
from the Fort Smith (Ark.) Times, which
gives some valuable information with regard
to a direct and practicable route for the over
land traveler. The statements made in the
article copied below are vouched for in the
Washington Union of March 4, by Hon. A.
B. Greenwood, M. C. from Arkansas :
Nothing was known of the route from Al
buquerque to San Francisco, on the 35th
parallel, until 1853-4, when the intrepid
traveler Aubrey found a road to Albu
querque, which he made from San Francisco
to the latter place in about twenty-two days.
His journal was published ; and in 1854 he
was killed in Santa Fe, in about half an
hour after his arrival at that place. After
his death no one attempted to find the route
through until 1855, when Lieut. Whipple
was sent out to survey a route for a railroad'
on the 35th parallel. His report was sup
pressed until a few months ago, and no one
knew anything of the character of the coun
try through which he passed, nor have his
explorations been published so that the peo
ple of the United States could form an esti
mate of the country that he explored.
While things remained in this condition,
the letter of Lieut. Beale, who had been sent
out to explore and mark out the route' oe: the
35th parallel, appeared in the newspapers,
disclosing the fact that he had found a route
and marked a wagon road from New Mexico
to California. The country he describes as
the most beautiful he ever beheld, and the
road three hundred miles shorter from- the
western frontier than any other road across
the continent. He says :
" You have thus, sir, in a few words, a
short account of our journey on the road we
were sent to explore. Of its advantages in
detail I have not time in this letter' to speak,
except in general terms. I enumerate them.
"It is the shortest from our western fron
tier by three hundred miles, being nearly , di
rectly west. It is the most level—our wagons
only double-teaming once in the entire dis
tance, and that at a short bill and over a sur
face heretofore unbroken by wheels or travel
of any kind. It is well watered—our great
est distance without water at any time being
twenty miles. It is well timbered, and in
many places the growth is far beyond that of
any part of the world I have ever seen. It
is temperate in climate, passing for the most
part over an elevated region. It is salubrious
—not one of our party requiring the slight
est medical attendance from the time of our
leaving to our arrival. It is well grassed—
my command never having made a bad grass
camp during the entire distance, until near
the Colorado. It crosses the Great Desert
(which must be crossed by any road to Cali
fornia) as its narrowest point. It passes
through a country abounding in game, and
but little infested with Indians. On the en
tire road, until our arrival at the Mohave vil
lages, we did not see in all over a dozen In
dians, and those of a timid, inoffensive char
acter. At the point of the crossing of the
Colorado, grain, vegetables and: breadstuffs
may be obtained in any quantity froM the In
dians, who cultivate extensively, though rude
ly, the fertile bottom lands of the Colorado.
It is passible alike in winter and summer.—
These are the advantages which I claim for
the road which we have discovered, marked
and explored from New Mexico to this State.
"I mention one important fact, it leaves to
the option of the emigrant the choice of en
tering California either at the city of Los An
geles, by the regularly traveled road in the
most fertile part of the southern portion of
the State, or turning off from that river, and
by an easy road, frequently traveled, and
coming into the head of the great Tulare
valley, and by a good road through settle
ments all the way, extending to Stockton,
Sacramento, and the more northern parts of
the State.
" This road, being 300 miles the shortest,
will undoubtedly be the road over which the
overland mail will be carried. It must be so.
The land, the grass, the wood and the water
are all upon the 35th parallel, and the mail
must go through this route. The popula
tion will soon follow, and what is now a wil
derness will soon bud and blossom as the
rose.' "
THE TOOTHACHE.-" My dear friend," said
ll—, I can cure your toothache in ten
" How ? how 2" I inquired.
''lnstantly,i' said he.
alum ?"
" Bring it with some common salt."
" They were produced. My friend pulver
ized them, and mixed them in equal quanti
ties, then wet a small piece of cotton, caus
ing the mixed powder to adhere, and placed
it in my hollow tooth :
." There," said. he, "if that does not cure
you I will forfeit my head: You may tell
this to every one and publish it everywhere.
The remedy is infaillible."
It was as he predicted: On the introduc
tion of the mixed alum and salt, I experi
enced a sensation of coldnses which gradu
ally subsided, and with it—the alumn and
salt—lt cured the torment of the toothache.
Dar Poetr y should be an alterative, mod
ernplaywrights have converted it into a se
dative, which they administer in such unrea
sonable qualities, that, like an overdose of
opium, it makes one sick.
" Do in
" Have you any