The globe. (Huntingdon, Pa.) 1856-1877, March 24, 1858, Image 1
TERM OF THE GLOBE. 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 ment. TERMS OF ADVERTISING. 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 One Two • 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. SPEECH, OP WM. A. STOKES, Esq., 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 ..by-and-by 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 ? WILLIAi LEWIS, VOL. XIII. 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 body. [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 plause.] 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 people. 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 usage. 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 him. 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 us? 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 intervention. 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 Constitution. 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 -PERSEVERE.- HUNTINGDON, PA., MARCH 24, 1858. 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 ernment. 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 throats. 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 applause.] 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 minutes." " How ? how 2" I inquired. pity." ''lnstantly,i' said he. alum ?" yes.,, " 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