."'' i.ii I'-fcMHi.r ' i iii i liini, rr mmam tm -- ' - - - ' ' - j .r-ir j: " : J i ... -1 f BY S. J. ROW. V CEEARFIELD;; WEDNESDAY, OGTOBER il i 1850 J : J; ! : " VOL; 3.-10.- 7: 1 . SPEECH OP JUDGE KELLEY: Delivered at Spring Garden Hall, Philadelphia, September 9A, 1856. ITavc you beard the news from Maine, boys ? (Great Applause). Such were the words with which I commenced an address to the friends of Polk, Dallas and Shunk, in 1844, -a bout this season of the year, in the district of Spring Garden; and the Democratic news that had come that day, the day succeeding a Gubernatorial and Congressional election was esteemed as the sure prestige of victory to the party, as we esteem the news to-dav. (Cheers.) . , , .- . - . " We live in curious times, politically, my friends. Why is it that the Democratic star of the East, and the young Democratic Giant of the West, have wheeled into line and put themselves on cither side of the Whig Gibral tar, Vermont 1 . Why stand Democratic Maine and Iowa supporting Whig Vermont t There is a significance in the fact. It tells, to those who uuderstand it, the whole secret of the up rising of the people which has made a party so far as Pennsylvania is concerned, but a few weeks old, the master of the destinies of the Commonwealth, and the party to settle the coming election. Immense applause. The Whigs of old and the Democrats of old, however they differed upon other questions, agreed upon one; indeed theiragreement was so entire that no question was made upon the subject. They diil'ered as to a National Bank; they differed as to a Tariil ; they differed as to the distribution of the public lands; they dif fered as to the improvement of rivers and har bors by the General Government ; but they a greed as the patriots who framed the Constitu tion and who gave our government consistency by the earliest action under it they agreed between themselves, and with the great men who had moved before them, that slavery was a local domestic institution ; that, being such, the General Government had no concern with It within the limits of any one of the States. They agreed, in esteeming it a great social and political evil. They held that the Terri tories, being the common property of the States and of the people, and having been con fided by the Constition of the United States to Congress, it having been made the duty of Congress to make all necessary regulations .for tho Territories, it was the business of Congress to legislate tor Territories, and to exclude from them so great a social and polit ical evil .as Slavery. There was no diversity of opinion on this subject among those who established the confederacy and governed the country during the existence of the confed eration. There was no disagreement among the earlier members of Congress during the Administration of George Washington, or be tween that great man and the great men who . made up his cabinets. I have stated the doc trine held by them all that tho States were sovereign and independent that over the in stitutions of the States Congress had no con trol that the Territories were the common property of the States, and that it was the du ty of Congress to legislate for the Territories ; and by alt their action they showed that they agreed in the opinion, that, it being the duty of Congress to legislate for the Territories, it was their duty to legislate in such a manner as should promote the welfare of tiic people, and therefore, to exclude Slavery from the com mon domain. Loud cheers. I shall not detain you by dwelling upon the circumstances of the great ordinance of 1787, .which gave trceWoni to Ohio, Indiana, Michi gan, Wisconsin and Illinois. That territory was the property d Virginia, a slave State, and, ha4 no confederation taken place, no Union been framed, it would have been slave territory, as the mother State was. It was ceded, I hough in the Southern portions of it "were contained considerable numbers of slaves, especially in Illinois. It was ceded first to the confederacy, and subsequently totheUni . ted States; Thomas Jefferson himself drafted the ordinance, by which "involuntary servi tude, except as punishment for crime," was prohibited from all that territory forever. i That was the dralt of the great Virginia states man. Quibblers tell you that that was the ac tion of the confederacy. tell you that it was the action of the confederacy, and that the first Congress assembled under our Constitution, -made that the law of Congress which had been , made the ordinance of the confederacy. It was re-enacted, in the very language of Jeffer son, as the sixth section of the act of the gov ernment of the Northwestern Territory. The territory oeded by North Carolina and by Kentucky, was ceded with stipulations, and Congress was not free to legislate beyond ' those stipulations; but there came a tine . when Congress was required to legislate for . the territories, and it came speedily. We ac quired the Louisiana Territory. We bought " It, Mr. Jefferson taking an active part In its purchase, be having succeeded Washington - and Adams in the Presidential chair. Now, ; what were the provisions f or the government ' of that territory, thus acquired by purchase ? It was slave territory. The French had ad mitted slavery into Louisianna; it had its cx- . istencc there"; money was invested in slavery ; the habits of the people were adapted to slave labor. That territory, slave territory as it "'was. was acauired bv purchase in 1803 and in ; 1804, Thomas Jcflerson being President, the ' Congress of the United States legislated upon . the subject. Did they legislate upon the sub " je et of slavery in the territories for mark ' you, we arc now called ''traitors" and disu- Zionists," because we assort the doctrine that It is the duty of Congress to legislate upon tho subject of slavery in the Territories. Upon that one proposition all the grave charges are , based, and I propose to show you that if we are traitors and disnnionists, our great exem plar was George Washington; that tho next ' in rank, and perhaps even greater in efficiency in this work, was Thomas Jefferson; that we have had in the treasonable and disunion 'anks every President, beginning with Wash ington and ending with Millard Fillmore. If we are a set of traitors and disumonists, the . first great set were Washington and his cabi . net, and the Senate and Congress of his day ; and the last who legislated especially upon ' the subject were James K. Polk with his cab - lnet (ot whom James Buchanan was one) and thut if we are . traitors and disnnionists, we have a brilliant example and a bright array of patriotic names to lead us on. Great applause. But, my friends, if I were asked to sura up In a single phrase, from patriotic lips, tho sen timent that pre vades the Republican parly, I , ehould utter in the language of the Whig "Expounder" of the Constitution "Liberty ' urM Union, one and inseparable, noyv and for ever." Immense enthusiasm. If I were asked to express the one point upon which the opinions, the convictions, the. will of that party are more thoroughly settled and more vehemently active than any other, I would answer in tho language of the good old sige and statesman, the Democratic leader An drew Jackson "the Union it must and shall be preserved." Vociferous applause. Having, in brief terms, disposed of tho first legislation on the subject of Territories, I now come to that of the Territory of Louisiana, the first acquired after the establishment of the Constitution of the United States. What was the action of Congress with reference to that Territory ? What wa done may be found (United States Statutes, at large, vol. 2." page 238) in an Act approved March 26, 1804,: en titled ".tfn act erecting Louisiana into two Ter ritories and providing for the temporary govern ment thereof ." ; By this Act, all south of the parallel lines of thirty-three degrees, being the present State of Louisiana, was organized by itself un der the name of the Territory of Orleans." In respect to this Territory of Orleans, the 10th section prohibits the bringing in of slaves from a foreign country ; also the bringing in of slaves from any part of the United States, who may have been brought into the United States after the 1st of May, 1798 ; and finally provides as follows ; - 4iXo slave, or slaves, shall directly or indirectly be introduced into said Territory, except by a cit izen of the United States removing into said Ter ritory for actual settlement, and being at the time of such removal a bona file owner of such slave or slaves ; and every slave imported or brought into said Territory contrary to the provisions of this act. shall thereupon be entitled to, and receive bi or her freedom." It is said that slavery is a subject upon which Congress has no right to legislate. Here they did legislate, and said that nobody but a citi zen of the United States should bring a slave there ; that he must come for actual settle ment in other words, that no slave should be imported into that State, by the slave-dealer, whether he came frcm Cuba or Virginia whether he' came from Africa or the northern slave States. It allowed the citizen who own ed slaves, and who was going into Louisiana to settle, to take his slaves with him ; but it allowed no slave to enter the Territory by any other means than that ; and had a slave been taken into that Territory as they have been ta ken into Kansas, the habeas corpus would have been issued, and the great judge of that day, John Marshall, would have given the slave his freedom. Applause. The law of that day is the law of to-day ; and yet are not slaves carried into Kansas, and is there not there as Chief Justice a man whose infamies will re deem the character of Jeffries in history ? And yet, Democrats, you are asked to vote and sustain him ; and, Americans, you are asked to give a half vote, or not to vote against him. There is the position of the parties. The Republicans come up and say, "Kansas is free ; it is the land of freedom it is free by the law of God and the law ot man, and being free, we mean to exercise all the power with which, under God and the Constitution of our country, we are invested, to secure its freedom to the white man forever." We ask you to join us in the work. Now, my friends, from that time, down till near the close of Mr. Polk's administration, any other doctrine than that which I have as serted, had never been uttered in cither House of Congress. 1 take it that my democratic friends will receive the opinions of James Bu chanan as pretty sound, and I will quote from one of the last, if not the, very last speech which he made while representing the State of Pennsylvania in the Senate of the U. States. It was during the administration of John Ty ler, when the 'Texas bill' was under consider ation. It was proposed to admit Texas into the Union, and it was agreed in the resolution of the House, that so much of Texas as lay south of the line of 30 degrees GO minutes, should be admitted as States when the people thereof saw fit to divide it, and ask admission to the Union ; but that from so much of it as lay north of that line, slavery, or (to use the language of the ordinance of Jefferson) "in voluntary servitude except as punishment for crime, should be prohibited forever. Mr. Bu chanan was speaking upon those resolutions. 'Was it desirable." said he, "again to have the Missouri question brought home to the people to gond them to fury ?'' What was that Missouri question 1 . When Congress had prohibited the extension of sla very north of 36 deg. SO min., while the whole north has stood up almost as one man resist ing or, at any rate, when every man from the north.with a solitary exception, who had voted to give np one inch ot territory to slavery North ot South of that line had been left out of the succeeding Congress, the whole South had voted for it every Southern Senator and all the Southern Representatives except thir teenand it had been made. It was of that legislation excluding slavery from all the Ter ritories North of 30 deg. GO min., that Mr. Buchanan was now speaking. -Was it desirable," said he, "again to have tho Missouri question brought home to the people, to goad them into fury ? That question between tho two eroat interests in our country had been well discussed and well decided, and from that moment he hud set down his foot on the solid ground then established, and there he would let the question stand forever. Who eould complain of the terms of that compromise? "It was then settled that north of 3o degrees 30 minutes, slavery should bo forever prohibited. The same line was fixed npon in the resolutions re centlv received from the Ilouse of Representatives, now before ns. The bill from the House for the establishment of Territorial government in Ore gon excluded slavery altogether from that vast country." ' " . , Is our position treasonable ? Is it one cat culated to promote union ? If it is, James Buchanan was, I presume, of discreet age when he made that SDeech in the Senate of the Uni ted States, although in regard to some of his speeches it was said be was a boy when he made them, and therefore onght not to be held responsible. Laughter.. I have read a brief quotation to show you what the doetrino was when we were upon the threshold of the agitation that now disturbs the country. It was in l4o that Mr. Iuchan an made the speech from which I have quoted On the 10th of February, 1847, John C. Cal houn arose in the Senate of tho United States, and, without business before the Senate to which the resolutions referred, proposed these resolutions: . , . up.o.W. That the Territories of tho I. nited States belong to the several States composing the Union, and are lieiu vj mcui " jumt uu common property ..... . ' . .r. !.... That Cnncrress, as the joint agentand representatives of ih States of thjs Union, has no right to make anv law. or do anv act whatever that shall directly, or by its effects, make any discrimi nation between the .States of this Union, by which any of them shall be deprived of its full and equal rizht in anv territory f thn United Ktnton ac quired or to be acquired, i . "Aesotved. 1 bat the enactment of any law and here is the first germ of the present doctrine of the iouth, and the present agitation of the whole coun try "which should directly or by its effects, de prive the citizens of any of "tho States of this Uni on from erairratinr. with their rronertv into any of the Territories of the United .States, will make such discrimination, and would, therefore, be a vi olation of the constitution. ' and the rishts of the States from which such citizens emizrated. and in derogation of that perfect equality which belongs to them as members of this I nion. and would tend directly to subvert the Union itself." hen these resolutions were read, the Sena tor from Missouri, "Old Bullion" a Senator from a slave State denounced them as a "fire brand." ..The next day . Mr. Calhoun pressed them to a vote. Mr. Benton opposed the pro position.' Mr. Calhoun expressed his surprise mat Mr. lienton, as the representative from a Southern State, should oppose the resolutions, but added, "I shall know where to find the gentleman.". Yes, sir; yes, sir," said "Old Bullion," "always know where to find me by the side of my country and the Union always there." fJ-ood anplause.1 ' ' . Six years later, tho brave old man writing upon this subject, says : .. "Ostensibly the complaint (expressed in these res olutions) was that the emigrant from the slavcStates was not allowed tocarrv his slave with him : in re- ality it -, that Itr iras not allowed to carry tlie tntt taw a'.onsr with him to protect his stare. Plac ed in that light, which is the true one, thn complaint ft abitirrl ; presented, as applying to a piece of pro perty, instead of the law of tho Rate, it becomes specious has deluded whole communities, and has led to rage and resentment, and hatred of theUnion.' ilr. lienton looked upon them as a "fire brand" when they were introduced, and writ ing quietly in his closet, six years thereafter, he expressed himself as I have just read. Who is the author of the Kansas-Nebraska bill ? Stephen A.Douglas I don't know what "A" stands for. I have heard it is for Arnold, but I dont believe he could have been so fitly named at his christening. Mephen A. Doug las is the author of that bill. But docs Ste phen A. Douglas believe, or did he believe, that Congress had no right to legislate on sla very in the Territories 1 Were these the doc trines in which he was reared in the bosom of the democratic party of Illinois and theUnion t No, my friends ; he was reared in the sound Constitutional doctrine which I have uttered here to-night, and I will prove it to you. . j In 1848, Congress was engaged in establish ing a government for the Territory of Oregon. A territorial bill had passed the lower Ilouse containing no provision on the subject of sla very. , It came up to the Senate, and Mr.IIale at once moved the "Jefierson Proviso ;" in o ther words, he moved to insert the clause that 'involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime, should be prohibited within theTer ritory forever." J)id Stephen A. Douglas rise in his seat and argue that that was unconstitu tional ? Did he rise and sav that Congress had no power under the Constitution to legislate upon the subject of slavery in the Territories T iS o, my iriends ; but he arose and ottered an amendment, to wit : the extension of the Mis souri Compromise line through the Territories of New Mexico, Utah and California, then re cently acquired, to the Pacific ocean. Now, mark you, I am upon the point, has Congress the right, and is it its duty to legislate upon the subject of slavery in the Territories ? Mr. Douglas moved as an amendment to Mr.Hale's proposition : , that tho line of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes of north latitude, known as the Missouri compromise line, aa defined by the eighth section of an act entitled "An act to authorize the people ol the Missouri Territory to form a constitution and State government, and for tho admission of such fc'tatc into the Union, on an equal footing with the original States, and prohibit niavery in certain ter ritories, approved .March 6. 182(1. be, and the same is herthy declared to extend to the Pacific ocean ; and the said 8th section, together with the compro mise therein effected, is hereby revived, and de clared to bo in full force and binding, for the future organization of the Territories of the United States. in the same sense, and with the same unaersiana injj. with which it was originally adopted." Mr. Douglas, having proposed the amend ment, voted for it. Now, is be not a pretty Senator? Laughter. Is there another such "artful dodger" in so criminal a matter, in this whole broad country, as this same Stephen A. Douglas, the author of the Kansas-Nebraska bill J Many voices, 'no, no.' No, there is not. There he was in 1848, ready to legislate upon the subject. What was done .Now, mark, Mr. t'ouc was President ; James Buchanan was Secretary of State. Mr.Douglas was willing to legislate on the subject of slavery ; there was no denial of the right. It was one year after the introduc tion of Calhoun's resolutions, but the "Jeffer son proviso" was applied to Oregon,and James K. Polk, by and with the advice and consent of his cabinet, signed the bill ; ana on signing it, he sent in a special message to theCongrcss ot the United States, assigning his reasons for doing so. I will take tho liberty of detaining you with a short extract from that message : . '-When Texas was admitted into our Union, tho same spirit of compromise which guided our pre- deccssors in tho admission oi Missouri, a quarter of a century before, prevailed without any serious opposition. The joint resolution lor annexing lex- as to. tho L nite.l Mates, approvcu junrcn iao isi, 1S45, provides that such States as may be formed out of that territory lying south of 3G deg. 30 min utes north latitude, commonly known as the Mis souri eomnroinise line, shall bo admitted into tho Union with or without slavery, as the people of each State asking admission, may desire , ana in such State or States as shall be formed out of the said territory north of tho Missouri compromise line, slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited The Territory of Ore gon was far north of 36 degrees 30 minutes the Missouri and Texas compromise line. Its southern boundary is the parallel of 42, leaving the inter mediate distance to be 3."0 geographical miles. And it is because the provisions of this bill aro not inconsistwit with tho tennsof the Missouri compro mise, if extended from the ltio Urando to the Paci fic Ocean, that I have not felt at liberty to withhold mv sanction." . ' "Now, gentlemen, did Mr. Buchanan believe i,f ; n-n TnTistitiition!v1 tri locislatc upon the subject of slavery t If so, pray why did he not make it known by his resignation from Vr. Polk's cabinet ? Why did he let the re sponsibility rest upon him of sanctioning, as o i,int minister, an unconstitutional act f He did not doubt either the right or the duly ; nor do I believe that in Ms tnmosi ueari no uuuuu either now ; but ambition nas misiea mm "Vaulting ambition, which o'erleaps itself, And falls on the other side." Applause. Vm. let me . leave Congress and Senators and the doings of our legitimate government, and take a peep at the illegitimate , govern ment of the country that organization which establishes platforms of party, by which to over-ride all law and even the Constitution it self. Let me carry you to the Baltimore Con vention of 1848, at which Lewis Cass was nom inated for the Presidency, and Wm. O. Butler tor the Vice Presidency. I have shown you that Congress had not a bandoned the safe and constitutional doctrine given ns in the example ot Washington, Jef ferson and Jackson ; and I have shown you by Mr. Polk's action that be and Mr. Buchanan had not yet abandoned it. ' That Convention had been at work four days. It had succeeded in making its nominations, and was adopting its platform, when Mr. Yan cj', of Alabama, following in the wake of his great master, John C Calhoun, introduced this resolution : " ; ' 'Resolved, That tho doctrine of non-interference with the rights of property of any portion of this confederation, be it in the States or in the Territo ries, by any other than the parties interested in them, is the true republican doctrine recognized by this body." . That is, that Congress has no right to inter fere ; that the slave-owner had a right to take his slaves, and Congress had no right to inter fere. Did the Democratic Convention of 1848 accept that doctrine f Were they willing to go before the people upon that issue ? . No; they tabled that resolution. They did more t they negatived it by a vote of 249 against it, to 39 for it. Now we have seen "squatter sovereignty" rejected in the Senate of the United States, when first introduced by Mr. Calhoun, in 1847. In May, 1848, we find it excluded from the doctrines of the Democratic party by the great political Sanhedrim, assembled at Baltimore, in a slave State. Now I go on a little farther in that year, and I come to that time, near its close, when James K. Polk, Mr. Buchanan's great chieftain, as he then was presented his last message to the United States, nad he yielded to Mr. Calhoun, or to Mr. Yancy, or did he still stand by. the experience of the past 1 The following extract from that mes sage will show what his sentiments were at that time : - "Upon a great cracrzcncy, however, and under menacing dangers to the Union, the Missouri com promise line in respect to slavery was adopted. The snme lino was extended further west on the acquisition" of Texas. After an acquiescence of nearly thirty years in the principle of compromise recognized and established by these acts, and to avoid the danger to tho Union which might follow if it were now disregarded. I have heretofore ex pressed the opinion thut that line of compromise should be extended on the parallel of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes from tho western boundary of Texas, where it now terminates, to tho Pacific Ocean. This is tho middle line of compromise, upon which the different sections of the Union may meet, as they have hitherto met " Here is Mr. Buchanan, as a member of Mr. Polk's cabinet, presenting Mr. Polk's annual message, with a recommendation to Congress to legislate upon the subject of slavery to de clare that all territory north of 36 deg. 30 m. shall be forever free, and that all south of it may take its chance,and be slave territory if the people want it, or be free territory if the peo ple want it not to declare that one-half shall be slave territory and one-half free, but that all north of that line shall be forever free, and the other may take its chance of being made Ireo or slav.j as may bo determined. No, no, gentlemen ; the doctrines of to-day as yet had no existence, save in the plotting brains of three or four southern disnnionists; they were yet to be made so-called "national" doctrines.. Let us now go one step further. When I went out of politics I was a partisan Democrat, and I stand to-day, so far as slavery is con cerned, upon the doctrines which I then rest ed upon, and, as I have shown you, they were the doctrines of the administration ot 1 oik and Dallas the last administration which I helped to elect. They continued to be the doctrines f the State of Pennsylvania thro'- out the existence of that great man at whose hands I received my first appointment Fran cis R. Shunk. He died just after his election to a second term. A convention was called, which nominated Morris Longstreth for the gubernatorial chair. At that time nothing was said upon the subject of slavery, for it was not then a subject of agitation. But during that year there was agitation. ' The doctrines of Calhoun and Yancy were brought before the people ; Southern conventions were, being held; Calhoun resolutions were. being sent from State Legislature to State Legislature in tho South ; disunion conventions were being held in the Southern States, and it became the duty of the Democrats, as of the other parties of the .North, to speak their opinions upon the subject of slavery. And when, on the 4th of July, 1849, the Democratic party assembled in Stat Convention at Pittsburg, the question oi slavery was agitated. , Among the regular set of resolutions submitted to that convention, there was none touching the question of sla very. Gentlemen rose and objected to the re solutions ; gentlemen upon the committee in sisted that the opinion of the convention should be expressed ujn the subject of slavery ; and at length Col. Samuel W. Black, a delegate from Allegheny county, proposed the follow ing resolution, which was unanimously adopt ed s the doctrine of the Democratic party of Pennsylvania, by that State Convention, as sembled on tho 4th of July, 1849 : ; - : Resolved, That tha Democratic party adheres now, as it ever has done to the Constitution of the country. Its letter and spirit they will neither weaken and destroy, and they re-declare" they announce no new doctrine ; they do not declare for the first time "that slavery is a local, domestic in stitution of tho South, subject to State law alone, and with which the General Government has noth ing to do. Wherever tho State law extends its ju risdiction, the local institution can continue to ex ist..' Esteeming it a violation of State rights to carry it beyond State limits, we deny the power of any citizen to exteud the area of bondage beyond its present dominion : nor do we consider it a part of the compromise of the Constitution, that slave ry should forever travel with tho advancing col umn of our territorial progress." Gentlemen, do I not stand to-night upon what was the doctrine of the Democratic party on the 4th of July, 1849 1 Applause. Stand ing upon that doctrine, I stand npon what has been from tho formation of the government down to the present time, the doctrine ot the Whig party, north and south. I stand npon what was the doctrine, of the country. It knew no party division upon this subject until Mr. Calhoun hatched the treasonable doctrines. The south not the southern people not even the southern slave-owners, but the traders in politics at the south seized npon the doctrine and made the south a unit upon the question of slavery extension. Then cam bidding for the Presidential nomination; then came the Kansas-Nebraska act by which that great com promise line was repealed, and by which it is asserted that slavery may walk all over the ter ritories of the Union. . - Were you Whigs, or were you Democrats for at the time of which I have been speaking, you were all one side or the other; jour sym pathies lay with oue or the other of those great parties. -.1 care not what you were, I have in culcated your doctrines. ' And will' you now' abandon them J W hy will you now fiiil to sus-. tain them I .Why will you not now stand up for what was your doctrine, as it bad been the doctrine of. the Adamses, of Harrison, and of Taylor, on the one hand, and of Jefierson, of Jackson, of Madisonj 'of Van Buren, and of Polk, on, the other as it had been the doctrine of the great Washington too great to belong toacither, but belonging to all parties and to all countries t Unbounded applause. Why, I say, will you abandon the doctrine in which you were reared, and which has the sanction of all the great patriots and statesmen, whose names you revere, whoso memories you love ? I ask it, whether you be Buchanan men, or Fillmore men, for in the one case you are ask ed to oppose the doctrine, and in the other you arc asked to vote for a man who does not tell you on uhich side of the great issue he stands. Applause. ' : - . Now, my friends, shall slavery be permitted to go beyond the line 1 : A general response from the audience of "no, no."J No. , Let Pennsylvania answer, as with one voice "no.' Deafeningapplause for several minutes. The power is in our hands. : Maine - and Vermont give us the voice of New England ; Iowa gives us the voice ot the West; and let the great old "Wheel-horse of the Union," Pennsylva nia, stand firm, and freedom will be establish ed forever in those Territories, large enough to make thirty-one l'ennsjivanias. Long continued cheering. We are to settle the question. It is feared by the friends of free dom that we will settle it npou a side issue ; it is hoped by the friends of slavery that we will settle it upon a side issue. I have had handed to me since I came upon the stand, by a gentleman who sits beside me, a copy of the Madison Journal, published in Richmond, Louisiana, which lias at its bead the names of James Buchanan, of Pennsylva nia, for President, and John C. Breckinridge, of Kentucky, for Vice President. He has cal led my attention to a paragraph, which I will read : . . "Ma.Flf.LVORE NOT TO BE WITHDRAW. The XcW Orleans Picattvne has a dispatch from Washington, dated the 18th, to the effect that Mr. Fillmore is not to bo withdrawn. We are glad to hear it. Mr. Fillmore may, by continuing a candidate, yet save the cause of conservatism, hy preventing the con centration of the entire opposition in tho iorth upon Fremont. Xo one has the least idea that he can carry a single State, but he may. possibly, pre vent the success of Fremont in a single one. and thus give a wider margin to the Jialionulity of Mr. Buchanan's election." Men of Pennsylvania, are yon willing to be the cat in the hands of the monkey to pull so great a chestnut as that out of the tire Laugh ter, and cries of "no, no." Wnrkingmcn of Pennsylvania, merchants of Pennsylvania, far mers of Pennsylvania, are you willing to be used by the trading politicians of the South, and induced to vote for a man who, they say, has not a chance to carry a single State, in or der that Kansas first, and then all the territory through to the Pacific, may be shut against the free white laborer against wages against the hopes, the enterprise, the prospects of the poor man of the world? Many voices, "no, never." Stand npon theConstitution ; stand firm for freedom ; plant your feet were Wash ington and Jelferson stood;' plant your feet were Polk stood, with Buchanan beside him, in 1848, and say, "Thus, far, accursed institu tion, thou shalt come; tlrus far thou art pro tected by State institutions, and as we are loy al to the Constitution, we will defend you there ourselves ; but beyond that, by the grace of God, and by the power of a freemen's vote, you never shall go." Great applause. What is it, my fellow-citizens, that they ask of us What have we not lone for that fret ful, peevish, boasting lazy South 1 Why, we have bought thein Florida , we have bought them the Louisana territory ; we have bought them the Missouri territory. We have bought them, not by our money and our labor alone, but by best blood of our sons and brothers,the territory capable of making four l.irge States known as Texas. We have expended between I viiiu cilia iiiiiv uuuuiu . uuiiiriia . ui uvii4ia in interest and all, very ncarlv a thousand millions of dollars in acquiring territory which has all ' been made into slave States; freedom has'obtained no foot of it. TheStates thns acquired are Florida, Louisiana, Arkan sas, Missouri and Texas. They send to the House of Representatives sixteen members, while they send to the Senate ten ! Think of it, my fellow-citizens ; it takes over ninety thousand of you to get a representative in Congress, while twenty-seven thousand white people in Florida get one representative and two members of the United States Senate. Those five States, with people enough to give them sixteen representatives have ten mem bers of the Senate, while New York, which has thirty-three members of the lower House, and more than twice the number of people than all these States contain, black and white, has but two Senators. Pennsylvania, with her large population, almost doubling that of thoso States, has but two Senators. ' ' Now, my friends, shall Kansas be made a slave State, in order that with a few thousand people there and their slaves, she shall have as many votes in the Senate as New York or Pennsylvania. I say "with but a few people and their slaves," because, let slavery get footing there, and Kansas will be no more largely peopled in proportion to the square mile, than Texas, or Louisiana, or Florida is now. Why 1 The reason ia a very simple one. There is no law on the statute book to prevent you, my overworked working men, from emigrating to the South. There is no law of that country which forbids you, poor men, who feel that you are working for inade quate wages, from making yonr home in the South, where the climate is genial, the soil better, the season for fuel shorter, and where there are a thousand advantages which we do not possess here in the cold North. Why do you not go T You cannot, though there is no law to prevent you. J am mistaken ; I should have said, there is no law upon the statute book ; but when the Great Creator gave law to this universe, be provided that injustice and wroni? should not be inflicted without a penal ty. He provided that those who do wrong ahall anfier misery; that those who 'erind the faces of the poor," t4 apri the !ot er of his wages, shall have a enrso In some form entailed upon 'them; and; we-find H there. It is the existence of slavery .in the Southern States that excludes the white labor-, ing man. , . ' . Compare the statistics of a free State with those of a slave State. Take- the census ,of 1850, Table 1.) and compare New York, witli, Virgiuia cold New .York, with her upper boundry at 4o sunny Virginia with her lower" boundry at 50 winter "lingering" long "in the lap of spring," at the Northern line of -New lorkj winter scarcely existing at tno southern line of Virginia. I find that they were admitted into the Union together in 17S9. They are of the old States. New Yoifc has 47 ,000 square miles of territory, and Vir-., ginia Q1.oj2. Mark the difference in size. The population of Virginia is as 23 to a square' mile, whilo that of New York is as 66 to a square mil. In 1790 the' population of New York was 340,120 ; that of Virginia was 74S, G08 more than twice, largely more. than twice that of New York. How do thoy stand now? The free "white population of Virginia is now 891.800 ; the free white population of New York is 3,044,325. Just think of it. . Little New York lor little she is in compari son with Virginia, has 3,048,32o white inhabi-' tants, while the old mother of commonwealths and statesmen has but 894,800. . i - But, working men, do you value the priv ileges of free schools and institutions of learn ing ' While you are at labor in the work shop, do yo not feel that, though you have to toil hard for a beggarly subsistence, your children, by the aid of our public schools and public libraries, shall stand the peers of tho proudest in the I md," and may rise, like-the "Natick cobbler," to be the great man of tho UnitedStates Senate ? (Enthusiastic applause) Yes, such feelings are in all your hearts. Let us take a glimpse at Virginia and New Tork," as compared in that respect, in New York? the native free population, over twenty years age, that, in 1800, could not read or write, was one iu every 79 ; while iu Virginia it was as one in every 10. Why should they teach "the poor white trash" to read f They do not want to use them. The slaves do tho work, and rich men only are worthy of con sideration Why should they keep public schools, to put fanciful notions into the heada of people that do not own property in slaves, and are of no use in the community, but only an incumbrance T Now, let me compare briefly Kentucky and Ohio. Kentucky was admitted into the Union in 1792 ; Ohio was admitted ten years there after, in 1802; she is the younger sister of Kentucky. Ten years difference in the age of States is really a difference worthy of con sideration. Ohio contains about twenty-five millions of acres and Kentucky twenty-four millions. The difference between them is about a million of acres, or about two thou sand square miles. Ohio is rather the largest. At this time the population to the squarci mile is twenty six in Kentucky and forty-nine and a half iu her younger sister, Ohio. In 1S00 Ohio-had ioity-five thousand inhabitants, and Kentucky two hundred and twenty thous and. Iu 1850 the free white population of Kentucky was 761,413, while her sister, Ohio h id 1,135.050, exceeding that of Kentucky by about 1,200,000. Let us again examine the question as to who could read and write. In 1850 the native free population over twenty years of age unable to read and write, was in Ohio 1 in 31, in Kentucky 1 in 11 nearly as bad as iu Virginia. Between Michigan and Arkansas the same relations prevail. Michigan was admitted in to the Union in 1837, Arkansas in 1830. Mi chigan has about 50,343 square miles of terri tory. Arkansas 52,198. In 1820 Arkansas had 14,273 inhabitants, Michigan 8,S96. In 1850 the free population of Michigan was 395, 071 ; that of Arkansas, her elder sister, was 162,189. In -Michigan for those over 20 years of age, 1 in 05 cannot read or write; in 'Ar kansas 1 in 9 worse than Virginia; "poor white trash," again. Laughter- i Now let us come to the States of Brooks and Sumner South Carolina and Massachusetts. They came into the Union at the same time. We see Massachusetts a mere speck, lying be tween New Hampshire and Vermont on the north and Connecticut on tho south ; we see South Carolina a large body of land, nearly four times' as large as Massachusetts. Massa chusetts has 7,230 square miles; South Caro lina has 28,000 square miles. They came into the Union together. Their population in 1790 was 378,717 in Massachusetts, and 249,037 in South .Carolina. Of free white population Massachusetts has now 985.4M) 100,000 moro than Virginia. While Massachusetts has now 985,450 South Carolina has 274,503 about one quarter as many. And that is the Stale that is going to thrash the U"nion, langhter and on the 4th March, at a quarter to twelve, or a quarter after, (I forget which ; I hope I may get right in regard to it when the time comes,) they are to take possession of the archives and Treasury of the Union, and the north is to be no where That's the programme. Great laughter. There arc 273,000 white inhabi tants to take care of 381,000 "niggers" as. she calls them ; and I think that while they are away taking care of the Treasury an the ar chives, the "niggers" upon tho principle whon the cat's away the mice will play," will have some fun. Shouts of laughter. Now look at these two States as to reading and writing. In Massachusetts, of those over 20 years of age there are but 1,861 who cannot read and write, or one in every 446, great ap plause, while in South Carolina there is ona in seventeen ! And do you wonder that in a State where one in every seventeen cannot read or write they lavish silver pitchers and. gold -headed canes upon a man who .tells them himself what be has been doing ; they don't hear of it in any other way than he choosas to let them know. And Arkansas what an idea to indict a man for sending incendiary docu ments," into that State, when, ooe in every nine is not able to read! And I suppose those who can read, do it very much after the fashion of the boys that we have here ia the. Ilouse of Refuge. You say to one ot them can you read and write? "Yes sir I can read," is the reply. "You giro the fellew soma simple book and be begins, "A c-a-t 'cat, saw-no, vr-a-B, 'was;' loud laughter, and eo he gets along with words of oue sylable by spelling the longer ones. Where one in ev ery nine cannot read at all, we may take it for granted that tho majority read tfter the fashion four Ilouse of Refuge boys, and not much better. Laughter. I do not mean to say thut that is trae as to all, for the Southern slaveholder and plant ktdia ltralyWe; atmfc'af f tmnXtkM
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers