THE STAR OF THE NORTH.
B. W, Weaver, ProprleUr.]
VOLUME 9.
THE STAR OF THE NORTH
IS PUBLISHED EVERT WEDNESDAY MORNING BT
R. XV. WEAVER,
OFFICE—Up ttairi, in Ike new brick build
ing, on tke south tid* oj Main Street, tkird
dquare below Market.
VERMS >—Two Dollars per annum, if
f>aid within six months from tbe time of sub
scribing ; two dollars and fifty cents if not
paid within the year. No subscription re
ceived for a lesa period than six months; no
discontinuance permitted until all arrearages
*re paid, unless at tbe option of the editor.
ADVERTISEMENTS not exceeding one square
will be inserted three times for One Dollar,
end twenty-five cents for eacb additional in
peition. A liberal discount will be made to
those who advertise by the year.
Choice floetrß.
SOBOIIVS SONG.
Swift never wrote anything better in verse
than the following lines from an unknown
correspondent:
I.
I'm thinking just now of Nobody,
And all that Nobody's done,
For I've a passion for Nobody,
That Nobody else would own;
I bear the name of Nobody,
For from Nobody I sprang;
And I sing the praise of Nobody,
Ae Nobody, mine has sang.
11.
In life's young morning Nobody
To rae was tender and dear,
And my cradle was rocked by Nobody,
And Nobody was ever near;
I was petted and praised by Nobody,
And Nobody brought me up,
And when 1 was hungry, Nobody
Gave me to dine or to sup.
" 111. '
I went to school to Nobody,
And Nobody taught me to read;
I played in the street with Nobody,
And to Nobody ever gave heed;
1 recounted my tale to Nobody,
For Nobody was willing to hear;
And my heart it clung to Nobody,
And Nobody shed a tear.
1111.
And when I grew older, Nobody
Gave me a helping turn;
And by the good aid of Nobody
I began my living to earn;
And hence 1 courted Nobody,
And said Nobody's I'd be,
And asked me to marry Nobody,
And Nobody married me.
V.
Thus I trudge along with Nobody,
And 'Nobody cheers my life,
And I have a love for Nobody
Which Nobody has for his wife;
So here's a health to Nobody,
For Nobody's now in "town,"
And I've a passion for Nobody,
That Nobody else would own.
New York Evening Post.
From Ike Pennsy'.VLman.
HON EY.
Coin and bank noia* are commonly called |
money. Yel the difference between the two '
commodities is very great. Tbeir character-!
■slic distinctions not being clearly understood j
by ibe people, ie a source of incalculable
mischief. lMnay dgb said, that we, as a na
tion, overrate the value of bank notes, which,
of course, proportionally diminishes in our
eyes, tbat of coin. Relying upon our abund
ant supply of paper-money, we look with sto
ic indifference upon the exports of the pre
cious metals. Some eight or nine years ago
we had the good fortune to disoover the j
California gold deposits. When Ytleir rich
yield was fairly ascertained, it was confi- ;
dently expected by many intelligent persons,
that we should soon be relieved from Ibe
dependence on European money lenders;
we shonld be enabled to pay
for necessary improvements, the construc
tion of railroads, canals, etc., withont being
compelled to borrow abroad; and that we
ebonld no longer be inbjeot to the prostrating
influences of strictures in the money market.
Bnt Ibe finanotal millenium did not arrive.
Notwithstanding fbe large consignment# of
California gold doat, onr monetary resources
•re, at this moment, at ■ low ebb, as the un
usually high rates of interest indicate. Sev
eral causey, may have co-operated to prod oca
tbat effeot,'bnt the main reason, will be found
in Ibe drain ol precious metals. No sooner
was the prospetity, consequent upon the gold
productions of California feh here, than we
doubled and trebled the importation of foreign
fabrics and luxuries, to be paid in domeetio
produce, tod this* not sufficing, tbe balance
bad to be made op in bullion and ooin. Pre
vious to 1851 that balaoce never exceeded
9,600,000 for any one year. Tbe total excess
of asportations over importations of precious
metals, for a period of thirty years, I ram 1831
lo 1850 inclusive, was according to official
statistics,.s42,B6s,76B; whereas, for tbe six
years, from 1851 to 1856 inclusive, it amounts
to no leas than 8213,087,841. *
Tbe excess of exportation of Coin overly,
portal ion, bra*
In 1861 824,019,160
1852 37,169,091
1858 23,285,493
1854 84,438,718
1856 52,1)87,531
1858 41,687,853
This drain is beyond all doubt, the princi
pal canae of the present scaroity of mooey.
Had tbe national mind been more deeply
impressed with flip real, intrinsio value of
gold, we should havh Husbanded the precious
acquisition, and tbe advantages of California
would not have been lost to ibe conntty;
money won Id now be plenty, interests low,
and buutress flourishing. We frequently
hear tbe opinion expressed that gold and sil
ver ooin represent value. Not so: they do
not merely represent, but are, in tbe atrieieet
sense of the word, value or property,tut mnnh
BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA PA., WEDNESDAY. SEPTEMBER 23. 1857.
as iron, coal, capper, laid, Irorjr, fornitare or
land. The prioe of all these things is deter
mined by tbeir utility in the first instance,
and in tbe second, by tbe qaantity in which
tbey exist; or, in a few words, by demand
and supply. Tbe uses to which iron can be
pnt are multifarious. They determine its
absolute value, which is equally great, here,
in England and Russia; but iron-on being
mors scarce in Russia, tbe relative value of
iron ore is higher there than in England or
America ; that is to say, tbu same weight of
iron will fetch the greatest weight of silver
or gold or other marketable goods, in Russia.
Now, gold and silver, like other metals, are
of the greatest importance in tbe arts. Tbey
are on account of certain properties, such as
incorrosiveness, great maleablliiy and divisi
bility, etc., indispensable, and no-eubs'iiute)
has yet been found for them. Without them
chemistry would probably up to this day
have remained a mere speculative scieooe;
and the practical arts could not have advanc
ed lo tbeir present eminence of utility. Were
gold more abundantly found in the crevioes
of Ihe roeks and the sands of the rivers, its
utility would remain tbe same ; only its rela
tive price would diminish, and such has been
to a certain, but inconsiderable extent, the
consequence of the supplies from Australia
and California. Silver has risen as gold went
down ; which effect, partly owing to Ihe
oause jnst assigned, was increased by the
large shipments to China. The same excel
lent properties, on account of wbich gold and
silver are so useful in the arts, pre-eminently
fit tbem to serve as a circulating medium.—
Capable of infinite subdivision, incorrosive
and easily trsnsporlable, they are, besides
platina, the only metals fully answering the
purpose of money. Tbeir particular adapt
edness for specie, however, only enhances
their intrinsio value, as the prioe of iron
would be enbsnced should a new extensive
use for it be discovered. The stamp on gold
and silver coin is but a convenience in ex- ,
change, indicating its weight or value. Tbe :
stamp wholly obliisrated, the coin would re
lain the same value, only lesa tbe trifling ex
pense of coinage, provided the weight has
not keen diminished. Gold and silver there
fore have an intrinsic, universally recognized
worth. In all parta of the world they are
readily and at the shortest notice convertible
into every description of services or properly,
simply because tbey are Ibemselvea the most
usefnl,the most desirable kind of property, :
of all things least subject to depreciation and
fluctuation. Tbey do not ropressot, but aro
actually property; whereas bank notes hav
ing no intrinsio value, are in fact, nothing
more than its representatives. The credit of
the parlies who issue them not being univer
sal!) known, they cannot have but a limited
scope of circulation. Every note must be
backed by security, or else it is worthless,
hence the amount of security offered by a
company determines its credit, or capacity
for issuing notes. Gold and silver coin is se
curity iu itself aud as it forms the basis of all
! banking operations, expanding or contracting
' them, according as it is plentiful or scarce,
thus re-acting either beneficially or injuri
ously upon every department of business, it
is of the utmost importance, that we should
always be adequately supplied with it. In
Ihe United States the necessity for national
activity is infinitely greatep than in the coun
tries of tne Old World, where past ages hsve
to a great extent anticipated tbe wants of the
living generation. For every addition to the
population, we have to make new provisions,
which requires money, and money being
therefore of a much higher valne here than
elsewhere, we should adopt such measures
as will prevent effectually the excessive ex
portation of tbe precious metals—which sloue
ate money.
The Philosopher and Ibe Child.
"Have yon a soul!" a philosopher once
enquired of a little girl. She looked up into
his face with an nir of astonishment and of
fended dignity and replied:
"To be sure I have."
"What makes you think yon have 1 "
"Because I have," she promptly answered.
"Bnt how do yon know you here a souj t"
"Because I do know," tbe answered again.
It was a child'* reason, bnt the philoso
pher oonld haidly have given a better one.
'-Well then," said be, after a moment's
consideration, "if you know you hava a soul,-
can you tell ma what your soul is!"
"Why," said she, "I am six years old,
and don't you suppose tbat I know what my
soul is!"
"Perhaps you do. If you will tell me; I
shall find out whether yon do or not."
"Then yon think I don't know," ahe re
plied, "bnt I do—it it my think."
"Your think!" said the philosopher, as
tonished in his torn; "who told you sot"
''Nobody. I should be ashamed if I did
not koow that without being told."
. Tbe philosopher bad puxzled his brain e
great deal abont tba soul, but he oonld not
have given a belter definition of it in to few
words.
BP* A newly married couple took up their
residence in Poplar street. At breakfast
next morning the gentleman said to the
lady: "My dear, this is Poplar etreet, and
by putting u (you) in it becomes popular."
"And by putting oua (ne) in it," promptly
replied his better half, "wilt very rihturally
become populous."
"How is it," said a man to his neighbor,
"that our parson, the laziest man in the
world, can preach such long sermons?"—
"Why," laid the neighbor, "he ie too lazy
to stop."
SPEECH OF lENATOR BIGI.EK,
, • *T CLXUOR, on THE BTH HUT.
In rtphf to Ike address of Ik* Hon. David Wil
mot, delivered at Philadtlpkia, 24tk ult.
After giving a brief history of the Demo
cratic party, showing how eminently wise
and successful Its policy ht<l been iu the
paat, and bow it bad uniformly, in all exi
gencies, in wsr or peace, stood by the trne |
interests of tbe country, and had advanced i
its growth and prosperity, and elevated the
dignity and prowess of tbe nation, claiming
lor that parly a higher degree of purity,
wisdom and patriotism than were possessed
by any similar association of men in modern
times; and having also paid a compliment to
the character and qualifications of General
Packer and his associates on Ihe Democratic
tieket, he proceeded as follow*: *
Judge Wilmot, the Republican candidate,
has evinced bit entire willingness to make
bia view* known to the people, and seems
quite unhappy that the State Committee
wonld not agree that the Democratic candi
date should waste hie time with him in per
sonal controversy, and alill more displeased
that the Committee should have suggested
that tbe discussion of the slavery question
is not essential in ■ Gubernatorial contest.—
Failing to secure the attractions of General
Packer to get op large meeting* and excite
ment for him, be has bravely dashed ioto
the field alone. lam in possession of a copy
of his first address delivered at Philadelphia
on the 24tb ultimo, and published in. tbe
Evening Bulletin, lo the leading features of
which I shall ask you attention before 1 take
my seat. I find no fauli in Mr. Wilmot for
appearing before tbe publio to make known
bis viewsi I tbinkpa oondidate for any officej
may properly do so. I see no want of dig-'
nity or propriety in the practice, if pursued
in the proper spirit. In doing ibis, no candi
date properly appreciating his position will
solicit votes; he will simply declare his views
on pending questions, foreshadowing as best
be can tbe policy he will maintain if elected,
o the intelligent elector may vote for or
against him, as may seem proper. But I
have searched in vain for any such fore
shadowing in the late speech of Mr. Wilmot.
It is devoted exclusively to tbe subject of
slavery, except only a brief reference to his
letter on Americanism. State affair* seam
to have had no attractions for him. Il l* an
almost inoredibls fact that in a long speech
occupying columns of the Bulletin, he should
not have alluded lo any one of the meny in
terests which woutd come under tne cnat ß o,
were he elected Governor, nor discussed a
single question connected with the duties of
ihe office for which he is a candidate, or over
which the political authority of the Bt*te
Goverument could in any way be exerted.—
From beginning lo end he has talked out
side of the true purpose ol bis appearing be
fore the publio, and has failed, therefore, to
give the people tbe means lo decide wheth
er he would make a good Governor or not.
He has talked about Slavery, and questions
incidental and collateral; but not a word
about State affairs. He should certainly have
given us bia view on tbe question of more
Banks and paper currency. Many of the
people would be glad to know whether he
intends to maintain to the policy of the
present incumber!, his political friend, on
these vital question*. What doe* he think
of the policy of giving away the largest
share of the Public Works for sn inadequate
compensation, payable to the next generation;
and if elected, will he favor a disposition of
; the remainder on tbe same condition 1 Why
■ not give the people his views on these State
questions, as also on the suhjeot of paying
the public debt, maintaining and, extending
our system ol free schools; on tbe granting
of special privileges lo facilitate tbe ends of
private gain, and especially on the pending
amendments to the Constitution, embracing
question* of grave concern for the people.—
All these subjects, vitally important, and
within tbe range of the legitimate duties of
tbe Executive, seem to have been lost sight
of in the smoke and dust of a kind of Quiz
otic onslaught upon Slavery and the Slave
power.
Bnt another faot, equally singular, is, that
althongh hia address abounds with graphic
descriptions of the evils of slavery, end
coarse imputations upon the motives of its
advocates, it does not contain a single prac
tical suggestion a* to a remedy for tbe evils
it laments. Mr. Wilmot declares it lo be a
"question of vital practical importance whioh
lies at the foundation of everything valuable
to ne as freemen," and yet be has not at
tempted to show the people of Pennsylva
nia in what way they can apply tbe remedy.
Not only this, but I shall prove to you tbat,
•ocording to hia own showing, tbe people of
a free Slate have no Constitutional right lo
interfere for or against tbe evils he affects lo
deplore, whether in a Stale or Territory. If
Mr. Wilmot found it necessary to make bie
address on national issues entirely foreign to
the Executive duties, it is to be regretted tbat
he did not devote a portion of bit time to
hia favorite topic, the tariff. Tbe old friends
oi "protection for- tbe sske of protection,"
whom be expect* to rally under bis flag,
would doubtlaae be delighted to hear from
the man whom tbay need to designate as tbe
advooate of "British free trade," tbe success
ful betrayer of Pennsylvania's beet interests,
end ee a' "vile traitor to the State of hia
birth." Poaeibly he eoaid here convinced
tbe meenfaotnrere of iron in Clarion and
elsewhere, that they are specially his debtor,
and permitting the dead past to bury Its dead,
they ehoqfd come to hie rescue in Ihis hie
konr of noed. Perhaps then were among
hie anditom at Philadelphia, those who had
aaeisted to give Mr. Dallas to the flame* in
Trath Hi Bight
effigy, for following the Wilmot lead OD the
Tariff in 1846, and he could have induced
them to repeat that great wrong on Mr. Dal
las, a* also their oft repeated imputations up
on hie own motives and conduct. He cer
tainly could hdtre shown those who abased
myeelf and other*, last epring, for agreeing
to a modification of the tariff when we had
no power left to resist it, that they were un
reasonable in hat compWnt, or ara now
mistaken in their anpport of the distinguish'
ed advoette of "British free trade." Bullet
that pass; we will leave the distinguished
advocate of free trade in Ihe embraoe of the
protectionists, and the protectionists under
the leadership of the distinguished fiee tra
der. The new alliance only famished an
other verification of tha hqsnely adage, that
political neoeeaity makesgfetous bad tek
lows. ' Tf
But to the speeeh, art I will give you its
best sentiment first, so that bis friends may
not complain. It reads as follows:
"I bold that under the Coostiiation of tbe
United States we have no right to meddle
directly with tbe question of Slavery in the
States where it already exists; it is a State
institution, and can only be controlled by
Slate laws, and we in Pennsylvania have no
more right to legislate for Virginia upon the
subject of Slavery than Virginia has the right
to legislate for Pennsylvania on the subject
of our Public Schools. But in tbe territories
the question is different. The territories are
the common of the Union, end we
have the common right to control them.
Then again, speaking of Slavery, he says:
"Tbe question is no mere abstraction, nor is
it simply a question ol right and wrong, a
question of morals; it is aiyliflion of vital
practical importance, whifflflWfWtbe foun
dation or everything valuable to ua as free
men."
Touching (be Dred Scott decision he re
marks:
"And as 1 am on this point, I with to say
that I bow to tbe Dred Scott decision as a
matter of law. I raise no arm against the
law, and I would never advise any one to
do so; bnt there is no law on esrth which
can bind my reason or my conscience. I
can, sntl will think, and vote for what I be
lieve right."
Now let ns consider the doctrines of these
quotations for a few minutes. In the first
be says we have "no right to meddle with
Slavery in the States where it already ex
ists," but that "the Territories are the com
mon prooertv of the t!ninn.\ar)JJ|*<i have
ihe common right to cootrol them. In the
second be presents the effects of Slavery as
"vital practical questions, involving every
thing valuable to us as free men." And in
the third he informs us that be "bows to the
Dred Scott decision as g matter of law."
Of coutse I agree that we have no right to
interfere with {Slavery in the States, but
"bowing to the Dred Seott decision," how
does Mr. Wilmot propose to reach the insti
tution in tbe Territories ! What becomes of
Ihe "common right" of the State* to control
its existence ! How can that right ha brongbt
to bear! That decirion defines the Constitu
tion lo mean that Congress bos no right to
legislate on the subject for: the Territories;
that * Congressional imerttclion against its
extension is and Mr. Wil
mot agrees that that dect<i(Mfciff-law; then
what dt his common rigtft to conlroilt ill
the Territories; and of the "vital praolical
questions" be has presented for our consider
ation.
Now thi* ia the point to which I wish your
special attention. Though acknowledging
in hie own peculiar pbraaa tba binding ef
fecte of the decision of tbe Supreme Court,
Mr. Wilmot ia very careful to control the
influence of that deoieion upon his position
and arguments; he has not told the people
frankly that by virtue of he so
reluctantly recognizes as binding, slavery is
a territory is almost as completely out of the
reach of the people of the government of a
free State, ae it is in the State of Virgioia.—
He dare not be explicit on this point; for he
would thereby illustrate the utter impractica
bility oi his doctrines on the subject. In
deed, his whole theory goes to pieces at this
point, and he most necessarily conceal as
much as possible, theeffecpof this decision,
or the deceptive character of bis speeches
would become so transparent that he would
be obliged to abandon the discussion entire
ly-
Bowing to tba Dred Scott Hecision as mat
ter of law, it will not do ti say only that
"Pennsylvania has no mareiright to legislate
for Virginia, on tbe subject;of Slavery, than
Virginia has to legislate for /Pennsylvania on
the subject of Publio Schools." Mr. Wil
; mot oaonot stop at this potkt; he must, and
does virtually agree by that "bow" that
neither Penmylvania nor' Virginia has any
right to legislate fer Kan* or Nebraska, on
either subject and they ; bavs uo power to
interfere for or agaihet tbsjioatitutious of the
Territories directly o indirectly. Tbeoiti
zena of each may go V Kansas, and when
bona fide residents, tbey can give effect to
their will. He or I can do the; bnt sa citi
zens of this State we cams*? influence the
question in either Kansas <j Virginia. Prior
to the Dred Scott decision j the Rspoblican
party contended for the pt""' °' Congress
over the subject in tbe T rritoriee; but that
deoieion has settled tbe qneetion against
ibem, and has closed the la ebaonel through
which the' free State* ooul reach the ques
tion. It has swept away • entire stock in
trade of the Republican i ;iiators; the Mis
souri line, the Wilmot and every
other scheme of CoDgreufonat interference.
Tbay have no occasion linger to seek even
the election of anti-Slavery men to Congress,
| for that body cannot toueh the question.—
Tbeir lmg cbefished business of agitation is
therefore gone—gone forever. Wherein, then
is the fitness of Mr. Wilmot'* inflammatory
address about Slavery to the exclusion ol
every other topic. Having no power over
Ihe sabjeel, it cannot be of vital practioal im
portance in Pennsylvania, unless, Indeed)
Mr. Wilmot in his feverish sensitiveness, bss
allowed himself to conclude that aome dough-,
faced Democrat, in obedience to tbe Slave
powers, is about to propose to re establish
the instilution in this State. Until this be
done the question cannot be so practical as
he alleges. But is it not singular that Mr.
Wilmot should seek lo agitate the public
mind in behalf of measnsea wbich have
been declared unconstitutional and to which
decision he agrees? Wh*t can b'e accom-,
plished by such efforts! Though tie could
convinoe a majority of the people that the
measure would work practical good to tbe
country, ihe constitution, until cbangsd, is
an insurmountable barrier to their adoption.
Would it not be wiser to accept the philoso
phy of the trite saying; that "it is useless lo
ory over spilt milk." When tke election is
over he will need the benefit of some such
reflection, for I think his chances are better
to become the suoeeaeor of Judge Bullock,
thau of Gov. Pollock.
1 do not mean to say that Ihe candidate for
Governor may not properly allude to Slavery;
but Mr. Wilmot insists that measures which
have been declared unconstitutional shall
be recognized issues in the Gubernatorial
contest, and continues to discuss these
measures as though they could be made
available to the country, and insists that the
people should lake one side or the other.—
He says slavery is the only question involv
ed, and has so far declined to speak on
State questions at all.
He saye that Virginia has the same right
to interfere with our public schools, that
Pennsylvania has with Slavery in Virginia;
and that is true; but did it not occur to his
mind, at the same time, that it would be a
most singular, if not ludicrous spectacle, to
witness a candidate for Governor in Vir
ginia, resting his claims to popular favor
solely on his views about public schools in
Pennsylvania, and confiding his discussions
to that topic alone I Why the people of the
Old Dominion would get a straight jacket
for any man who might attempt to play
such a trick before high heaven. And what
would Pennsylvanians think of such impu
cjpnt interference! They would most cer
lt.it.ly i—it* Um Virginia ••J.imnt ftO IRtiO
care of his slaves and leave the public
! schools to them. Mr. Wilmot would be
sure to do this, and yet he talked for hours
about Virginia negroes, and said not one
word about Pennsylvania schools; so deter
mined does he seem to rest his claims oil
questions belonging to other States and over
which his has no control. Perhaps his
frieuds can explain all this, but I think I
can safely assure them of one thing, if he
does not get more votes in States where his
address would be appropriate, than in his
own, he will be badly beaten. He will be
almost convinced that he has not only been
speaking for other States, but running for
Governor some where else than at home.
Mr. Wilmot's prompt recognition of the
binding effect of the Dred Scott decision
has certainly surprised and disappointed
some of bis fanatical adherents. But ih®y
should notice that he dare not raise his voice
against the Constitution, when asking to be
permitted to take an oath to support it.— i
That he has yielded reluctantly, and with
exceeding bad grace, is evident from the
low terms in which he impugns the motives
of the Court. He says "it is easy enough
for the Executive to find corrupt Judges to
carry out corrupt designs." This is coarse,
exceedingly coarse, scarcely a lowable in a
common place politician, and utterly inad
missible in a candidate for Governor. Very
many who intend to vote for the author of
the base allegation, will despise his foul as
persions. Even they will not agree that it
is becoming in David Wilmot to warn the
country against the corruptions of James
Buchanan and Roger B. Taney. But in his
anger at courts, he has gone out of his way
still further to make an onslaught upon the
integrity of the Supreme Court of his own
State, and broadly alleges that its decisions
are often contradictory, and it is common
talk among the bar, that a decision must be
revived every five years to have binding
effect. The courts should take warning, for
failing to be Governor, as this gentleman
certainly will, he may still retain the office
of Judicial Censqrian.
Fearing to repudiate the decision of the
Supreme Court in express lerrasf many of
Mr. WilmotVechool of politicians are indus
triously engaged in efforts to destroy the con
fidence of the people in its integrity. As a
means of doing ibis, they are in the habit of
expatiating on the extraordinary circumstance
that the ordinance of 1787 should have been
deolared unconstitutional at the end of sixty
years after its adoption, and the Missouri
Compromise so deolared after having stood
for nearly forty years. They certainly know
that the Ordinance of 1787 did not derive its
authority from (be present Constitution—that
it was the work of the Congress of the old
Confederation, and was agreed to by the
States, and was merely perpetuated under the
present Constitution as a measure to which
| the Slates had agreed to. This-item of his
tory they prefer to suppress, so that the action
of the Court may seem more strange. They
know, too, that the Missouri Compromise
was an arbitrary arrangement between tbe
North and (be Sontb, forced by an exigency
I that andangered the peace of the couutry,nd
that ite Constitutional authority, though eon-
stonily denied by many wise statesmen, bad
not been directly tested prior to the late de
cision.
The history of Ihn renowned Proviso is
re-written in this speech, and Mr. W. bas
manifested special delight in exhibiting what
be considers tbe inconsistencies oi the Dem-
ocratic party on thia subject, and rnoie espe
cially tboae of Gen. Cass, Hon. Richard Brod
head'aod myself. He atlegee in substance,
that if the General had voted before he re
flected, he wonld have gone for the Proviso,
and that Mr. Brodhead had said he wuold
vote for it if offered to tbe proper bill, and
that I had been very careful to record my
name in the affirmative, when a similar sen
timent passed tbe S'ale Legislature. The
course of General Cast and Mr. Brodbead
needs no explanation or defence at my hands.
Thair sentiments are too welK, known to the
country to be successfully misrepresented.—
And, indeed,admitting all that Mr. W. alleges,
I do not see that be makes oat any man's de
struction. The wisest men in tbe nation have
often been wrong in their first impresaicr.s as
to tbe expedienoy of suddenly proposed
measures, and to be mistaken on a constitu
tional question la no uncommon thing among |
ablo lawyers. As to the Pennsylvania reso
lution, it certainly did not receive that con
sideration to which it was entitled. Ido not
believe it was nnder consideration in tbe
Senate, exceeding e half hour before it pass
ed fiaally. For myeelt I knew bnt little about
it until it came from the House of Represent
atives, the day it passed the Senate,and bad
only thonght of it as an abstract sentiment
against the acquisition of territory, with the
view to the extension of Slavery and as ef
fecting the question of peace with Mexioo.—
As a proposition involving die right* of tbe
States, and the powers of Congress, I bad at
that time given it no thought. Reflection
upon these things soon after, and long before
I knew that Mr. Wilmot Intended to press
the principle as admissible when applied lo
Territory which had been long previously ao
quired by the common blood and treasure of
all ths States, without any such original con
dition, convinced my mind that its practical
operation would do injustice lo the slave
holding States, and I discarded its doctrines
entirely. Four years after Ihe advent of tbe
proviso, when the Democratic nominee for
Governor, I certainly was not charged with
a want of sympathy for the South. The re.
verse was Ihe constant allegations of my po
litical enemies. The execution of the fugi
tive slave law and the doctrine of noil-inter
▼antioa were topics in that contest, and I ad
vocated the affirmative of both on all occa
sions. Mr. Wilmot himself publicly dissent
ed from my views on these points at a meet
ing in his own town where we stood face to
face. But it is of little moment whether I
have been consistent or not. 1 trust I may
always be more ambitious to be right, and
never vain enough to pretend to great wis
dom or forethought. If I did not mistake the
' meaning of the proviso, when first proposed,
\ I certainly misunderstood its author, for I
! thonght him n Democrat, and he has turned
out to be anything else. But has Mr. W. re
lieved his position by what be bas said on
the point I If it even be true that certain
Democrats inclined to favor tbe proviso be
fore they discovered tbeir wrong, he was not
thereby warranted in sustaining it when the
injustice of the practical working had become
apparaul by discussion, and especially since
it has been shown to be unconstitutional.
But the candidate and his party are great
on consistency. They are in the habit of ar
raigning Mr. Buchanan, Judge Douglaa, and
other Democratic Statesmen, on the charge
of inconsistency, because at one time they
sustained the policy of settling the slavery
question by a geographical division, and have
since embraced <he policy of referring the
question to the people of the territories, to be
settled as they may deem best. There is very
little sense and less patriotism in snch criti
cisms. The whole history of the subjeol
shows that the controversy, at the different
periods when the excitement attained to a
dangerous height, was treated as a subject of
compromise, implying at once the concession
of principle and peculiar views. Statesmen
and patriots felt required to yield much in
the way of opinion, to secure the peace of
the country. Mr. Buchanan favored the Mis
souri line so long as the policy of settling the
qnestion by territorial division was maintain
ed ; and Mr. Douglas, in 1848, proposed to
extend the parallel o( that line to Pacific
Ocean as a final adjustment of the dangerous
feud. But the vary men who now, and since
1854, have not ceased to bewail the aban
donment of this policy, were united in their
opposition to its extension and perpetuity on
hat occasion. Tbey repudiated it; seouted
and reviled it. Another mode of settlement
became absolutely necessary to save the
country fiom civil war, aod that of non-inter
vention, as now found in the Kansas law, was
wisely adopted in 1850; and is maintained
by the statesmen I have named. What in
consistency is there in snch action t And
what is to be said for lbs insincerity of those
who continued to denounco the Miasonri
line up to the lime of its repeal. The party
who in Connecticut burnt James Lanman in
effigy for voting for it, and Isaac Toucy near
the same spot, for voting to repeal it, and who
labored to reject the principle In 1848. They
are not in a condition to talk about consisten
cy. Having so oonspired against this mode
of sdjustmant, aod secured ite overthrow,
they now'have Mf- Wllmot engaged in a
clumsy imitation of Mark Antony with the
dead body of Caesar, by toting ibe- iifcisa*
remains of the unconstitutioaal measure from
place to piece over the State,gqgjpg uttsraneu
to hie deep grief in pathetic afPhais to the
passion* end prejudice* of the people, draw
[Two Dollara por A a now.
NUMBER 37.
down their vengeance on the deetrojrere of
thie one* favorite echeme.
On Kaneas affaire Mr. Wilmot beoomee
quite belligerent, and hnrle vindictive asper
aions on the Natiooai Adminietration. He
talke aa though be did not know that the odt
oca tett lawa enacted by the firet Legislature
had been repealed by the latt; that hie party
friend* in Kansas are daily availing them
selves of these bogus laws; that Mr. Robin
son, the Topeka Governor, had petitioned
Mr. S|anton, when acting Governor, to confer
the appointment of commissioner to acknowl
edge deeds on bis friend, by virtne of the
territorial laws. He seems determined to
give the version of affairs that will best suit
hi* purpose. Haviog presented a startling
picture of the wrongs and outrages whiob,
according to his story, have been wantonly
ititflioied upon the free State party'of that
unhappy Territory, be makes the following
sweeping declamation:
" I affirm that the Administrate know alt
about these outrages, and yet they upheld
them. They sustain the Missourian usurpa
tion, and they dare not be just, because they
are the slaves of the slave power who crea
ted them and upholds them."
This is terriffio indeed, coming from a
candidate for Governor, but Mr. Wilmot's
language is tame and feeble compared with
the sparkling rhetoric of Col. Keitt, of Sonth
Carolina, on the other side of the question.
The Colonel, in his letter dated at White
Solphnr Springs, imputes to the Administra
tion altogether different action and purpose.
He alleges that its first act was to appoint a
Governor to "debauch Kansas from allalle
giauce to the South and deliver her into the
hands of Free Soil fanatics," and that, "to
say that the cause of the South was lost in
Kansas prior to the appointment of Walker,
is to palliate frand by falsehood." Here is
a wide difference between big doctors. Bnt
the Southerner seems to have the best of the
contest Indeed the best attempts of Wil
mot and bis school of orators, to show the
subserviency of the Administration to the
slave power, fall far below the most ordinary
efforts of Col. Keitt, the Charleston Mercury
and the New Orleans Delta, to demonstrate
its Free Soil tendencies and its treachery to
the South. With such fire in front and rear
who will say that Col. Keitt may not reason
ably imagine the iiantasticß to be hereafter
played by "shivering Cabinets," and "con
vulsive Administrations."
Then, again, Mr. Wilmot and his party
seem to be in great tribulation lest the slave
power should deprive so me of the citizens
of Kansas of the opportunity of raising their
voices against the institution at the ballot
box, lest some be deprived of that high and
sacred prerogative, the right of suffrage.—
They decant eloquently on the sacrednesa
of this right, and hurl destructive anathemas
upon the heads of all who shall attempt to
restrict or usurp this proud function of
American freemen. The people and the
whole people mnst be heard. Now this is
all very well, and they cannot go furthecon
this point than will the Democracy; but does
not this a ickly concern for the rights of the
people who come with exceeding bad grace
from Mr. Wilmot and his party, who in the
convention that nominated Col. Fremont,
laid it down as a principle, that not only a
portion, but a/2 theoitizens of Kansas should
be deprived of the right of saying whether
they would have slavery or not. They claim
ed that right for Congress; and virtually held
that though nine-tertts of the people might
desire slavery, the interdiction of Congress
should be conclusive. It was no half way
bnsiness with them. It was a part of their
faith to deprive all the people of the sacred
opportunity which they falsely allegs the
D emocracy are attempting to take from some.
They execrate the interference of Missouri
in the settlement of the Slavery question in
Kansas, and yet according to their own doc
trine not only Missouri, but Massachusetts
and all the North and South are invited to
j interfere through their representatives in
Congress. The pratical effect of their doo
trine being that the power to decide the
question for Kansas is to be found every
where else in the United States except in
that and the other territories—that the peo
ple of the States who do not go to Kansas
shall have a voice on the subject, but those
who do, shall not. How absurd, then, their
affected distress lest by design or accident
some citizen of Kansas may be deprived of
the opportunity of giving effect to his will
on the subject. Why even now Mr. Wil
mot and his party will not say that they will
be content with the decision of the people,
and admit Kansasjas a State unless that deci
sion be against slavery. They will agree to
take her into the Union when die obeys their
dictation and not till then. It was in this
connection, in the contest last Fajl, that we
ridiculed their pretensions to exclusive
friendship for freedom in Kansas, whilst
holding that the people should not b* first to
select their own institutions. We claimed
that the Democracy were more friends of
"Free Kansas," because they wished to
have the people perfectly free to seleot all
their domestic institutions. They holding
that Kansas should not come into the Union
unless she adopted their views, and the De*
mocracy maintaining that she should come
in, no matter how she might decide as to
Slavery. The question in the Presidential
issue was not whether she should be free or
slave, but simply whether her own bona
fide oitisene should be permitted to decide
foe themselves. That question was affirmed
by the people at the polls, and Mr. Buchan
an andhis advisers, in my jadgment, axe
honestly endeavoring to cany out that de
cision, in gaud faith, regardless of denunci
ation from the North or South, end so peg