1 P: BY S. J. KOV. CLEARFIELD, PA., WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1862. VOL. 8.-AT0. 3S. THE DEMOCRATIC ADDKESS. Below wc publish aa address to the Democ racy ot the United States, issued by 14 mem ersof the House of Representatives, (among whom is Vallandigham,) urging the reorgani zation of their party. Wo bespeak a careful pernsal or this extraordinary document, and ask the reader to note several of ite most re markable features, to wit : It does not say one word against tbo rebels who are trying to destroy the Government; It does not con gratulate the country upon the victories a thieved by the Union armies over the trait or It charges the Administration of Mr. Lincoln as one of continued usurpation, etc., Jt claims that the Democracy has always, and is now the party that fights for and upholds the Constitution, and the Union, and charges that the Republican party h responsible for the Rebellion, &c. .Bui read the address. ADDRESS 0 Democratic Members of Conjrc.-a to the De mocracy of the United Etatti Kti.Low CiTizt.N3 : The perilous condition of our country demand that we should coun sel togetHer. Party organization, restricted within proper limits, is a positive good, and indeed essential to the preservation of public liberty. Without it the best Government would soon degenerato ii to the worst ot tyran nies. In despotisms tho chief use of power Is In crushing out party opposition. In our own country the experience of tho last twelve months proves, more than any lesson in his tory, the necessity of party organization. The present Administrat ion was chosen by a party, and in all civil nets and appointments has recognised, and atill does, its fealty and obligations to that party. There rou?t and will be an opposition. The public satety and good demand it. Shall it be a new organiza tion or an old one 1 The Democratic party was founded more than sixty years ago. It has never been disbanded. To-day it numbers one tnillioh live hundred thousand electors in (he States still loyal to the Union. Its recent numerous victories in municipal elections in the Western and M iddle States prove its vi tality. Within the last ten months it has held State Conventions and nominated full Democratic tickets In every Free State in the Union. Ot no other party opposed to the Re publicans can the same be said. MULL THE JfEMOCRATIC PARTT BE NOW DI3- bandei ? Why should it? Arc its ancient i'Hi.vcPLKs wrong 1 What are they 1 Let its platlorms for thirty years speak : "Resolved, That tho American Democracy place their trust in the intelligence, tho pa triotism, and the discriminating justice of the American people. ' That we regard this as a distinctive fea ture in our political creed, which we arc proud to maintain before the world, as the preat moral element in a form of goverment spring ing from and upheld by the popular will ; and we contrast it with the creed and practice of Federalism, under whatever name or form, which seeks to palsy tho will of the constitu ent, and which conceives ho imposture too monstrous for tlie popular credulity. "Thi the Federal Government is one of limited power, derived solely from the Consti tution; and the grants of power made therein viight to bo strictly construed by all the de partments and agents of the Government ; and that it is inexpedient and dangerous to exer cise doubtful constitutional powers." And as explanatory of these the following from Mr. Jefferson's first inaugural : The support of tho State Governments in all their rights as the most competent ad ministrations of our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against anti-republican tendencies. "Tho preservation of the General Govern ment in its whole constitutional vigor as the sheet-anchor of our peace at homo and safety abroad. "A jealous care of the right of election by the people. "The scpremact of the civil over tub MItlTART AUTHORITY. "Economy in the public expense, that labor may bo lightly burdened. "The honest payment of our debts and sa cred preservation of the public faith. treedom or keligion, freedom of tue Tkess, and freedom of person under protec tion OF THE HABEAS CORPrfl. AND TRIAL ItT JU RIES IMPARTIALLY SELECTED." Such, Democrats, are the principles of your party, essential to public liberty and to the stability and wise administration of the Gov ernment, alike in peace and war. They are the principles upon which the Constitution and the Union were founded ; and, nnder tho control of a party which adheres to them, the Constitution would bo maintained and thi Union could not be dissolved. Is the roLtCY of the Democratic party wrong that it should be disbanded ? Its policy is consistent with its principles, and may be summed up, from the beginning, as follows ; The support of liberty as against power; of the people as against their agents and servants ; and of State rights as against consolidation and centralized despotism ; a simple government; no public debt; low taxes; no high protective tarilT; no general lutein of internal improvements by Federal authority; no .National Dank; bard money for the Federal public dues; no assumption of State debts ; expansion of territory ; self gov ernment for the territories, subject only to the Constitution; the absolute compatibility of a union of the States, "part slave and part free ;" the admission of new States, with or without slavery, as they may elect; non interference 'y the Federal Government with slavery in State and Territory, or in the District of Co lumbia ; and, Anally, as set forth in the Cin cinnati Platform, in 185G, and reaffirmed in 1SG0, absolute and eternal "repudiation of all actional parties and platform3 concerning domestic slavery which seek to embroil the States and incite treason and armed resistance to law in the Territories, and whose avovied Purposes, if consumaled, must end in civil war Discnion." Such was the ancient and the recent policy f tl.e Democratic party, running through a period of sixty years a policy consistent with n principles of the Constitution, and abso lutely essential to the preservation of the Lnion. Coos the bistort of. the Democratic party rrrte that it or.ght to bo abandoned ? "By ihetr rruits shall ye know them." Sectional parties do not achieve Union triumphs. For sixty years from the inauguration of Jefferson on the 4th of March, 1801, the Democratic patry, wjth short intervals, controlled the power and the policy of the Federal Govern ment. For forty-eight year's out of theso six iy, democratic men ruled the countrv ; for fifty-lour years and eight months the Demo cratic policy prevailed. During this period Louisiana, Florida, Texas, New Mexico, and California were successively annexed to our territory, with an area more than twice as large as all the original Thirteen States to gether. Eight new States were admitted un der strictly Democratic Administration one nnder the Administration of Fillmore. From five millions, the population increased to thirty-one millions. The Revolutionary debt was extinguished. Two foreign wars were successfully prosecuted, with a moderate out lay and a small army and navy, and without the suspension of the habeas corpus ; without one infraction of tho Constitution; without one usurpation of power; without suppressing a single newspaper; without imprisoning a single editor; without limit to the freedom of the press, or of speech in or out of Congress, but in tho midst of the grossest abuse of both ; and without the arrest of a single "traitor," though tho Hartford Convention sat during ono of tho wars, and in tho other Senators invited the enemy to "greet our volunteers WITH BI.OODT HANDS AND WELCOME THEM TO IIOS TITABLE GRAVES." During all this time wealth increased, busi ness of all kinds multiplied, prosperity smiled on every side, taxns were low, wages wero high, tho North and the South furnished a market for each other's products at good pi ices; public liberty was secure, private rights undisturbed ; every man's bouse was hi3 castle; tho courts were open to all ; no passports for travel, no secret police, no spies, no informers, no bastiles; the right to assem blu peaceably, the right to petition ; freedom of religion, freedom of speech, a free ballot, and a free press; and all this timo tho Consti tution maintained and the Union of the States preserved Such were the choice fruits of Democratic principles and policy, carried out through the wholo period during which the Democratic party held the power and administered the Federal Government. Such has been tho his tory of that party. It is a Union party, for it preserved the Union, by wisdom, peace, and compromise, tor more than halt a century Then, neither the ancient principles, the policy, nor the past history of the Democratic party require tor would justify its disband ment. Is there anything in the present crisis which demands it 7 The more immediate issue is, TO MAINTAIN THE CONSTITUTION A3 IT 13, AND TO RESTORE THE UNION A3 IT WAS To maintain the Constitution is to respect tne rights ot tho States and the liberties of the citizens. It is to adhere faithtullv to the very principles and policy which the Demo cratic party has professed for more than half a century. Let its history, and the results, from tho beginning, prove whether it has practised thc:n. We appeal proudly to the record The first step towards a restoration of the U nion as it was is to maintain the Constitution as it is. So long as it was maintained in fact, and not threatened with infraction in spirit and in letter, actual or imminent, the Union was unbroken. To restore the Union, it is essential, first, to give assurance to every State and to the people of every section that their rights and liberties and property will be scure within the Union under the Constitution. What as surance so doubly sure as the restoration to power of that ancient organized consolidated Democratic party which tor sixty years did se cure the property, rights, and liberties of the States and of the people ; and thus did main tain the Constitution and preserve the Union, and with them the multiplied blessings which distinguish us above other nations ? To restore the Union is to crush out section alism North and South. To begin the great work of restoration through the ballot-box is to kill abolition. The bitter waters of seces sion flowed first and are fed still from the tin e'ean lountain of abolitionism. That fountain must be dried up. Armies may break down tho power of the Confederate Government in the South; but the work of restoration can enly be carried on through political organiza tion and the ballot in the .North and West. In this great work we cordially invite the co operation of all men of every party who are opposed to tho fell 'spirit of abolition, and who, in sincerity, desire the Constitution as it is and the Union as it was. Let the dead past bury its dead. Rally, lovers of the Union, the Constitution, and of Liberty to the stand ard of the Democratic party, already in the field and confident of victory. That party is the natural and persistent enemy ci abolition. Upon this question, its record as a national organization, ho ever it may have been at times with particular men or in particular States, is clear and unquestionable. From the beginning of tho anti-slavery agitation to the period of the last Democratic National Convention it has held but ono language in re gaid to it. Let the record speak : " Resolved, That Congress has no power un der the Constitution to interfere with or con trol the domestic institutions of the several States, and that such States, are tho tole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own aflairs not prohibited by the Consti tution ; that all efforts of the Abolitionists or others made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous con sequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happi ness of the people and endanger the stability and permancy oi the Union, and ought not to be countenaced by any friend of our politlcaj institutions.'' Upon these principles alone, so far as relates to slavery, can the Union ns it was be restored ; and no other Union, except the Unity of Des potism, can be maintained in this couutry ; and this last we will resist, as our fathers did, with our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor. But it is said that you must disband the Democratic party "to support the Govern ment." We answer that the Democratic par ty has always supported the Govenment; and whilo it was in power preserved tho Govern ment in all its vigor and tntegrity, not by force and arms, but by wisdom, sound policy, and peace. But it never did admit, and nev ci win, mat mis Administration, or any Ad ministration, is "tbe Government." It holds ana ever has held, that the Federal Govern ment is the agent of th people of the several states composing the Union ; that it consists ot three distinct departments the Legislative tho Executive, and the Judicial each equal iy a pari oi tne government, and equally en tinea to the confidence and support of the States and the people ; and that it is the duty of every patriot to sustain the several depart ments of the Government in the exercise of all the constitutional powers of each which may be necessary ana proper Jor the preservation of the Government in its principles and in its vior arid integrity, and to stand by and defend to the ut most the flag which represents the Government the Union, and the country. In this sense the Democratic party has al ways sustained, and will now sustain, the government against all foes, at home or a broad, in the North or tho South, open or concealed, in office or out ef office, in peace or in war. If this is what the Republican party mean by supporting the Government, it is an idle thing to abandon the old and tried Democratic party, which for so many years and through so many trials supported, preserved, and main tamed the Government of the Union. But if their real purpose be to aid the ancient ene mies of tho Democracy in subverting our pres ent Constitution and form of government, 8nd, under pretence of saving the Union, to erect a strong centralized despotism on its ruins, the Democratic party will resist them as the worst enemy to the Constitution and the Union, ana to tree government everywhere. We do not purpose to consider now the causes which led to the present unhappy civil war. A titter time will come hereafter for such discussion. But we remind you now that compromise made your Union, and com- pronise fifteen months ago would" have saved it. Ilepeated efforts wero made at the last session or tho thirty-sixth Congress to this end. At every staee, the creat mass of tho South, with tho whole Democratic party, and thf whom IJonstitutional narfv nl fh Tnrth and West, united in favor f certain amend- ments to the Constirution and chief amonj them, the well-known "Crittenden. Froposi tions," which would have averted civil war and maintained the Union. At every stage, all proposed amendments inconsistent -with the sectional doctrines of the Chicago Plat form were strenuously resisted and defeat by the KepuDlican party. The" Jrittenden Prop ositious" never received a single Republican vote in either House. For the proof we ap peal to the Journals of Congress and to the Congressional Globe. Wo scorn to reply to the charge that the Democratic party is opposed to granting aid and support to the Federal Government in maintaining its safety, integrity, and constitu tional supremacy, and in tavor of disbanding our armies ana succumbing to tne South. The charge is libellous and false. No man has advocated any such proposition. Demo crats recognise it as their duty s patriots to support the Government in all constitutional, necessary, and proper effort to mamtian its safety, integrity, and constitutional authority; but at tho same time they are inflexibly oppos ed to waging war against any of the States or people of this Union in any spirit of oppres sion, or for any purpose of conquest or subju gation, or of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of anv State. Above all, the Democratic party will not support tne Administration in any thins which looks or tends to the loss of our politi cal or personal rights and liberties, or a change of our present democratical form of govern ment. But no, Democrats, it is not the support of tho Government in restoring the Union which the party in power require of you. Ton are asjed to give up your principles, your policy, and your party, and to stand by the Adminis tration of the party in power, in all its acts. Above all it is demanded of you that yon yield atleast a silent support to their whole policy, and to withhold all scrunity into their public con duct of every kind, least you should "embar rass tho Administration." Ytu are thus ask ed to renounce one of the first principles and the chief security of a Democratic govern ment the right to hold public servants respon sible to their master tl.i people ; to render the rep resenlalive accountable to the constituent ; the an cient and undoubted prerngifive of Americans to canvass public measures and public men. It is this "high constitutional privilege" which Daniel Webster declared he would "defend and exercise within the House and out of the House, and in all places in rime of war, in time of peace, and at all times I" It is a right se cured by the constitution a right inestimable to tho people, and formidable to tyrants only. If ever there was a time when the existence and consolidation of the Democratic party upon its principles and policy was a vital ne cessity to public and private liberty, it is now. Unquestionably the Constitution gives am ple power to the several Departments of the Government to carry on war strictly subject to its provisions, and, in case of civil war, with perfect secuiity to citizens of the loyal States. Every act necessary for the safety and efiicency of the Government, and for a complete and most vigorous trial of its strengh, is yet wholly consistent with the ob servance of every provision of that instrument, and of the laws in pursuance of it, if the sole motives of those in power were the suppres sion of the "rebellion," and no more. And yet the history of the Administration for the twelve months past has been and continues to be a history of repeated usurpations of power and of violations of the Constitution, and of the public and private rights of the citizen. For the proof we appeal to facts too recent to need recital here, and too flagrant and heinous for the calm narrativo which we propose. Similar acts were done and a like policy pur sued in the threatened war with France in the time of John Adams, and with the same ulti mate purpose. But in two or three years the people forced them into an honorable peace with France, rebuked the excesses and abuses of power, vindicated the Constitution, and turned over the Federal Government to the principles and policy of the Democratic party. To the "sober second thought of the people," therefore, and to the ballot-box, wo now ap peal when agaiu in like peril with our fathers. But if every Democrat concHrred in the pol icy of prosecuting the war to the utter sub jugation of the South and'lor'the subversion ot ner otateiiovernmeni wiin ner msiuuwous, without a Convention of the States, and witl- out an overture for peace, wo should just a resolutely resist the disbanding of the Demo cratic party. It is tho only party capable of carrying on a war; it is the only party which has ever conducted a war to a successful issue, and the only party which has done it without abuse of power, without molestation to the rights of any class of citizens, and with due regard to economy. All this, if need be, it is able to do again. If success, then, in a military point of view be required, the Demo cratic party alono can command it. To conclude: Inviting all men, without dis tinction of State, section, or party, who are for the Constitution as it is and the Union as it wan, to unite with us in this great work up on terms of perfect equality, we insist that The restoration ol the Union, whether through peace or by war, demands the contin ued organization and success of the Democrat ic party ; - Tl. j preservation of the Coustitution de mands it ; The maintenance of liberty and free demo cratical government demands it; The restoration of a sound system of inter nal policy demads it; Economy and honesty in the public expen ditures, now at the rate of lour millious'of dollars a day, demands it; I he rapid accumulation of an enormous and permanent pubic debt demand it a public debt already one thousand millions of dollars, and equal at the present rate, in three years, to Englaud's debt of a century and a half in growth; The heavy taxation, direct and indirect, State and Federal, already more than two hun dred millions of dollars 4 year, eating out the substance of the people, augmenting every year, demands it ; Reduced wages, low prices, depression of trade, decay of business, scarcity of work, and impending ruin on every side demand it ; And, fiuHlly, the restoration of the concord, good feeling, and prosperity of former years, demands that the Democratic party shall be maintained and made victorious. W. A. RICHARDSON, of Illinois. A. L. KNAPP, of Illinois. J. C. ROBINSON, of Illinois. JOHN LAW, of Indiana. I). W. VOORHEES,ot Indiana. W. ALLEN, of Ohio. C. A. WHITE, of Ohio. WARREN P. NOBLE, of Ohio. GEO. II. PENDLETON, of Ohio. JAS. R. MORRIS, of Ohio. C. L. VALLANDIGHAM, of Ohio. PHILIP JOHNSON, of Penn. S. E. ANCONA, of Penn. GEO. K. SHIEL, of Oregon. BY REQUEST. "OCCASIONAL'S" REVIEW OF THE DEMO CRATIC ADDKESS. From the Philadelphia Press, of May Oth. Washington, May 8, 1862. , A document called the address of Democrat ic members of Congress to the Democracy of the United States appears in tho National In telhgencer this morning. It is signed by only fourteen members of the House. Not a single Democrat in the Senate and not a single Ren- O - ' resentativc from the Border States seems to have given it his sanction. And when its statements are examined, in the light of history and tested by fair argumentation, even those who havo endorsed it will be heartily ashamed of it. No more emphatic admonition of the purposes entertained by the leaders of the present Democratic organization could have been laid before the American people than this extraordinary production. 2sot a single word appears in this address in favor of the war for the maintenance of the Government, or in oppo sition to the rebels who are fighting for Us over throw. Is it not amazintr. in such a crisi no this, while nearly seven hundred thousand freemen are offering their lives as a sacrifice to the flag while hundred of families are mourning tbo loss of their husbands, fathers, sons, and brothers, and with the record before their eyes of the monstrous atrocities perpe trated upon the wounded who have fallen into the hands of the traitors, and even upon the dead bodies of those who died in honorable battle that distinguished gentlemen, profess ing to represent a large portion of the people of the United States, should deliberately and coldly refuse to say that the war in which we are now engaged is a just war, and that it is being conducted to preserve the freest and most generous Government in the world ? The bravery, and the skill, and the moderation which have extorted from hostile and foreign nationsexpressions of astonishment and praise, do not awaken a single throb in the breasts of theso fourteen "Democratic members of Con gress." Instead of this, wo find a studied ef fort to misrepresent the Administration of Mr. Lincoln, and the freshest and plainest events of the last two years. I have not timo now to point out more than one or two ot the most flagrant instances of this misrepresentation. The-address says : "We do not propose to consider now the causes which led to the present unhappy civil war. A fitter time will come hereafter for such discussion. But wo remind you now that compromise made your Union, and compro mise, fifteen months ago, would have saved it. Repeated efforts were made at the last session of the Thirty-sixth Congress to this end. At every stage, the great mass of the South, with ine whole Uemocratic party, and the whole I constitutional Union party, of the North and ! IV est, nnited in favor of certain amendments o tho Constitution and chief among them. I the well-known "Crittenden Propositions," which would have averted civil wr, and main tained the Union. At every stage, all propos ed amendments inconsistent with the sectional doctrines of the" Chicago platform were stren uously and unanimously resisted and defeated ! by the Republican party." Tho t8t witness to refute this astounding assertion is Andrew Johnson of Tennessee, who, in the Senate of the United States, on used, the following The Seuator told ns that the adoption of the Clark amendment to the Crittenden reso lutions defeated the settlement of tbe quta tions of controversy ; and that, but for that vote, all could have been peace and prosperity now. We were told that tbe Clark amend ment defeated the Crittendencompromi.se, and prevented a settlement of the controversy un tnis point I will read a portion of the speech of ray worthy and talanted friend from California, Mr. Latham, and when I speak of him thus, I do it in no unmeaning ense. I intend that he, not I shall answer the Sena tor from Delaware. I know that sometimes, when gentlemen are fixing np their pretty rhetorical flourishes, they do not take time to see all the sharp corners they may encounter. If -they can make a readable sentence, and float on in a smooth, easy stream, all goes well and they are satisfied. As I have said, tho Senator from Delaware told us that the Crark ureendment was the turning point In the whole matter; that from it bad flowed rebellion, revolution, war, the shooting and imprison ment of people indifferent States perhaps he meant to include my own. This was tho Pan dora's box that has beea opened, out of which all the evils that now aflect the land have flowed. Thank God I still have hove that all will yet be saved. My worthy friend from California, Mr. Latham') during the last ses sion of Congress, made one of tbe best speech es he ever made. I bought Ave thousand copies for distribution, but I had no constitu ents to send them to, laughter ; and they have been lying in your document room ever since, with , the exception of a tew, which I thought would do good in some quarters. In the course of that speech, upon this very point, be made use of these remarks : "Mr. President, being last winter a careful eye-witness of all that occurred. I soon became satisfied that it was a deliberate, wilful design, on the part of some Repiesentatives of Southern States, to seize upon the election of Mr. Lincoln merely as an excuse to precipitate this revolution upon the country. One evidence, to my mind, is the fact that South. Carolina never sent Senators here.'' Then they certainly were not influenced by the Clark amendment. "An additional evidence is, that when gen tlemen on this floor, by their votes, could have controlled legislation, they refused to cast them from fear that the very proposition sub mitted to this body might Lave an.influence in changing the opinions of their constituen cies. Wby, sir, when the resolutions submit ted by the Senator from New Hampshire, Mr. Clark, J were offered as an amendment to tbe Crittenden propositions, for the manifest pur pose of embarrassing the latter, and the vote taken on the ICth of January, 1861, 1 ask.what did we see 1 There were fifty-five Senators at that time upon this floor In person. The Globe of the secoud session, Thirty-sixth Congress, part 1, page 499, Miows that upon the call of the yeas and nays immediately preceeding the vote on the substitute of Mr. Clark's amend ment, there were fifty-five votes cast. I will read the vote from the Globe : "Yeas Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bineham, Cameroo, Chandler, Clark, CuUamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlin, King, Seward, Sim mons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, and Wilson 25. Nays Messrs. Bayard, Benjamin, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Clingman, Crittenden, Dong las, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hemphill, Hunter, Iverson, Johnson of Arkansas, John.son of Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice. Sanlsbury,Sebastian, Slidell, and Wigfa'.l 30. "The vote being taken immediately after on the Clark proposition, was as follows : "Yeas Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Binaham, Cameron, Chandler, Clark", Coll imer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wad, Wilkin son, and Wilson 23. "Nays: Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Clingman, Crittenden, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kenne dy, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury, and Sebastian 23. "Six Senators retained their seats and re fused to vote, thus themselves allowing the Clark proposition to supplant the Crittenden resolutions by a voto of 23 to 23. Mr. Benj i min, of Louisiana, Mr. Hemphill and Mr. Wig- fall, of Texas, Mr. Iverson, of Georgia, Mr Johnson, of Arkansas, and Mr. Slidell, of Louisiana, were in their seats, but refused to cast their votes." I sat right behind Mr. Benjamin, and lam not sure that my worthy friend was not close by, when he refused to vote, and I said to him, "Mr. Benjamin, why do you not voto ? Why not save this proposition and see if we cannot bring the country to it ?" lie gave me rather an abrupt answer, and said he would control his own action without consulting me or any body else. Said I, "vote and show yourself an honest man." As soon as tho vote was taken, he and others telegraphed South, "We cannot get any compromise." Here wore six Southern men refusing to vote, when the amendment would have been rejected by fonr majority if they had voted- Who, then, has brought these evils on the country 1 Was it Mr. Clark ? He was acting out his own policy; but with tho help we had from the other side of tho Chamber, it all those on this side had been true to the Constitution and faithful to their constituents, and had acted with fidelity to the country, the amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire could have been voted down, the defeat of w hich the Senator from Delaware says, would have saved the country. Whose fault was it 7 Who is responsible for it.? I think that is not only getting the nail through, but clenching it on the other side, and the whole staple commodity is taken out of tbe speech. Who did it? Southern traitors, as was said in the speech of the Senator from California. They did it. They wanted no compromise. They accomplished their object by withholding their votes; and hence' the country has been involved in the present diffi culty. Let mo read another extract from this speech of the Senator from California : "I recollect full well the joy that pervaded the faces of some of those gentlemen at the re mit, and the sorrow, manifested by the vener able Senator from Kentucky, (Mr. Crittenden) Tbe record shows that Mr. Pugh, from Ohio, despairing of any compromise between the ex tremes ef ultra Republicans and DisuoiODists, the 81st of January last language : working manifestly for tbe same end, moved, immediately after tbe vote was announced, to lay the whole Mil ject on the table. If yea will turn to page 443, me same volume, yea will find, when, at a late ueriod. Mr. Cameron. from Pennsylvania, moved to reconsider the v-':, appeals having been made to sCstin those who were struggling to preserve the peace of the country, that the vote was recon sidered ; and when, at last, the Crittenden propositions were submitted on the 2d daj of March, these Southern States having nearly all secedfd ; they were then lost by but one vote. Here is the vote : "Yeas Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bright. Crittenden, Douglas, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of Tennes.see, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Ma son, Nicholson. Polk, Pugb, Rice, Sebastian, Thomson, and Wigfall 19. "Nays Messrs. Anthony, Bingham. Chan dler, Clark, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessen den, Foot, Foster. Grirae3, Harlan, Kie, Morrill, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wad. Wilkinson, and Wilson 20. "If these seceding Southern Senators had remained, they would have passed, by a Urg vote, (a3 it did without them.) an amendment, by a two-third vote, forbidding Congress ever interfering with Slavery in the Sute3. Tea Crittenden propositions would have been en dorsed by a majority vote, tho subject finallj going belore the people, who have never yet, after consideration, refused jus'ice, for any length of time, to any portion of the country. "I believe more, Mr. President, that these gentlemen were acting in pursuance cf a tcttiei and fixed plan 'to break up and destroy this Got crnment." When we had it in our power to voto down fhe amendment of tho Senator from New Hampshire, and adopt the Crittenden resolu tions, certain Southern Senators prevented ft; and yet, at a late day of the session, after they had seceded, th-j Crittenden proposition w only lost by one vote. If rebellion and blood shed and murder have followed, to whosa skirts does the responsibility attach ? I sum med up all these facts myself in a speech du ring the last session ; but I have preferred to read the speech of the Senator from Califor nia, he being better authority, and having pre sented the facts better than I cu'.d. It may be alleged by Mr. ValUn Jingham, whose name is ot course attached to this ad dress, and who was probably its antfcor, tint because the Rebublicans did not vote for tt Crittenden Compromisa, therefore this formal declaration of the "Democratic members cf Congress" stand uncontradicted ; but Andrew Johnson in the same speech from which I hava quoted, shows that the Republicans gave th9 strongest assurances of their disposition ami determination to do everything to convince the people of the South that they intended no violation of tbe Constitntion, and no infrac tion of the rights of any State of tbe Union. He says : "What else was done at tbe very sime ses sion ? The House of Representatives passed, and sent to this body, a proposition to amend the Constitution of tbe United States, so aa to prohibit Congress from ever hereafter interfe ring with the institution of slavery in tho States, making that restriction a part of the or ganic law of the land. That constitutional amendment came here after the Senators from seven States had seceded ; and yet it was ps--ed by a two-third vote in tbe Senate. Havo you ever hcinl of any cno of tho States which bad thvn seceded, or whicli has since seceded, taking up that amendment to the Constitution, and saying they would ratify it, and make it part of that instrument I No. Does not the whole historv of this rebellion tell you that it was revolution that the leaders wanted, that they started lor, that they intended to have? Tho facts to which I have referred show how the Crittenden proposition might have been carried ; and when the Senators from tbe slava States were reduced to one-fourth ot the mem bers of this body, the two Houses passed a proposition to amer.d the Constitution, to aa to guaranty to the States perfect security in regard to the institution ot slavery in all fu ture time, and prohibiting Congress from legis lating on the subject." It is in the face of such a record an this that these "Democratic members of Congress' now come forward and "appeal to tbe journal of Congress and to the Congressional Globe1' to establish the deliberate allegation that, during th? last session of the'Thirty-sixth Congress, repeated ef.'orts at compromise were made, "and at every stage all proposed amendmeota inconMStent with the sectional doctrines of tho Chicago platform were streuously and unanimously resisted and defeated by the re publican party." But these fourteen Demo cratic members of Congress arc met ty other evidence equally overwhelming. Oa tne 17th. of December, 1860, shortly after the election of Mr. Lincoln, and before Secession had taken place, the House of Representatives of tb United States adopted the following preamb'.o and resolution : "Whereas, the Constitution of the United Statf s is the supreme law of the laud, and its ready and liithtul observance the duty of all good and law-abiding citizens : Therefore, "Resolved, That we deprecate the spirit ef disobedience ta that Constitution wherever manifested, and that we earnestly recommend the repeal of all statutes, including personal liberty bills, so-called, enacted by State Le gislatures, conflicting with, and In violation of that sacred instrument, and the Uwa of Congress made in pursuance thereof." This resolutian, calling npon the States to repeal their personal-liberty bills, was passed by a unanimous tote ; and the States, acting in the tamo spirit, did proceed to reconsider them, although they were si:own to be totally ineffective ;. and for tun year9 tbey bad never caused the escape of a single fugitive slave. And again, on the motion of tue Hvn. John Sherman, of Ohio, at a later day.the following resolution was partsed by the same body : -. "Resolved, That neither Congress nor tbo people or Governments of tbe non-slaveholi- ecyctcTED e.v rontTH tam ' 11
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers