."'' 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