if
5v
3V
c
m phi
THE BLESSINGS OF GOVERNMENT, LIKE THE DEWS OF HEAVEN, SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED ALIKE UPON THE HIGH AND THE LOW, THE RICH AND THE POOR. ,
NEW SERIES. EBENSBURG, AUGUST 24, 1854. VOL. 1. NO. 18
TMM
TBRM8:
THE DEMOCRAT & SENTINEL, is publish
ed every Thursday morning, in Ebensburg,
Cambria Co., l'a;, at $1 50 per annum, if paid
in advance, if not $2 will be charged.
ADVERTISEMENTS will be conspicuously in
serted at the following rates, vi :
1 square 3 insertions, $1 00
Every subsequent insertion, 25
1 square 3 months, 8 00
i " . 6 " 9 00
" " . 1 year, 12 00
. "col'n 1 year, 25 00
1 " " " SO 00
Business Cards with one copy of the
Democrat & Sentinel, per year, 5 00
ADDRESS
of the State Central Committee. No. 3.
To the People of Pennsylvania:
Fellow-Citizens : The wanner of organ
icing the territories of Nebraska and Kansas,
you will agree with us, is not necessarily an
issue in this contest it is not a subject con
nected with the duties of a State Executive.
It is scarcely possible that the election of a
iovernor, whoever may succeed, is to havo
ny practical bearing upon the future policy
of those territories and surely no man will
be so unreasonable as to hold the Governor of
Pennsylvania accountable in an official sense
for what Congress has already done on this
subject. It is a subject with which that of
ficer has had, and can have, officiallj-, nothing
whatever to do. As a member of the Demo
cratic party it must be presumed that he takes
an interest in public affairs, and has not been
an inattentive observer that there has existed
a diversity of opinion in relation to certain
features of this measure.
Since the origin of our government, with
occasional intervals, the question of slavery in
ome of its phases has been a subject of vio
lent and at times dangerous controversy in
Congress, menacing the peace of the people
and the existence of the national confederacy.
Its adjustment within the territories has led
to the most threatening struggles. These
were invariably renewed by every new acqui
sition of territory. In 120, the act of Con
gress fixing the Missouri line was adopted in
terdicting the extension of slavery north of
36 deg. 30 min., as a means of settling the
controversy growing out of the acquisition of
Louisiana from France "n 1803. In 1845
this line was extended over Texas, which had
just been annexed to the United States and
ecemed to answer the purpose of an adjust
ment. In 1818, however, when it was pro
posed to extend this parallel of 3C deg. 30
min. from the Rio del Norte to the Pacific, it
was defeated in the House of Representatives
after having passed the senate, by a majority
of ten votes. The agitation in the country
soon became general, and by 1850 it had as
sumed an alarming aspect. The good and
' great men of all parties, forgetting the former
differences and constrained by a nobler spirit
of patriotism, united in a common effort to al
lay the mighty surging of an excited public
nentiment. Foremost in this grer.t work was
the eloquent and patriotic Clay, sustained by
Cass, Webster, King and others. A series of
acts were passed, familiarly known as the
Compromise Measures, which were acceptable
to the people ar.d were ardently maintained
One of these acts organized the territories
of New Mexico and Utah, on the principles
of nou intervention on the plan of allowing
the people to decide for themselves whether
they would have the institution of slavery or
not. The whole country seemed satisfied
with the doctrine of Non-intervention by Con
gress, in the regulation of the domestic insti
tutions of the territories, including that of
slavery. Without stopping to inquire into
the constitutional power of Congress to legis
late on $he subject or to what extent that
power might be exercised, the people re
garded it as wise and politic to remove this
topic of angry and dangerous controversy out
of Congress and confide it to those who may
occupy the territories. We may, however,
remark, that the question of authority in the
passage of the Ordinance of 1787 under the
old confederation, is a very different one from
the passage of the Missouri Compromise or
any slavery restriction whatever, under our
present Constitution. Under the Confedera
tion the institution of slavery was not recogn
jzed under the - Constitution it is in three
several particulars :
1st. In fixing the Dasis of representation
and direct taxation.
2d. In tolerating the foreign slave trade
until 1808.
-3d. In providing for the rendition of fu
gitives from labor.
If it even be clear that Congress is posses
sed of ample power to legislate on the subject
(and this is stoutly denied by Gen Cass and
other eminent men of the country), it was
proper to forego its exer jise. The resort to this
mode of adjustment in 1850, seemed most
auspicious for the honor, the dignity and
peace of the States for the happiness and
prosperity of the people, and above all, for
the stability of our National Union.
And is not this policy right and just in it
self according to all our theories of govern
ment? Indeed we should never allow our
aclves to fear the consequences of trusting any
question of politics or morals with the people,
whether they be residents of a State or terri
tory. This mode of adjustment rests on great
principles, whicli in their application will be
co-extensive with all the territory we now
have or ever can have, and which arc as en
during as the race of man. It is a principle
in beautiful harmony with our republican in
stitutions the principle of self-government
the basis of our entire system. It was for
this doctrine that our forefathers perilled their
lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor in
ha Declaration of Independence that they
Ftruggled and bled, and left' their bones to
Mftch on the battle field of the devolution.
It was for this principle of self-government,
that they invoked the interposition of heaven
and accepted the proferred aid of the generous
stranger. For seven long years did they
labor to impress upon Lord North and George
III, the virtue and power of this great funda
mental truth in the science of government.
The attempt of that monarch to "bind the
Colonies in all things whatsoever," and to
impose taxes without representation, gave
this principle growth and vigor, and cost him
armies and an empire. Since that day to the
present time it has been gaining Btrength in
all civilized countries American experience
has fully solved and settled the problem of
man's ability for self government. Where
can be found the instance in which govern
mental affairs have been submitted to, or in
trusted with the people, that the results have
not been salutary ? Who will then at this
day doubt the fitness of the American people
to dispose of any question of governmental
policy found within the limits of the Constitu
tion ? Who will contend for the absurd idea,
that a man loses his capacity for self govern
ment by emigrating from a state to a territo
ry ? AVho will say that a man residing in
Massachusetts should, through his represen
tatives in Congress, be permitted to adopt and
regulate institutions of local government for
his fellow man in Utah, New Mexico, Minne
sota, Nebraska or Kansas? Will our Whig
or Abolition friends agree that when they
shall have emigrated to any of these territo
ries their Democratic lellow-citizens whom
they leave behind, shall decide for them what
kind of local institutions they shall have?
that their judgment and not that of the emi
grants themselves shall control as to the in
stitution of Slavery ? Or who will contend
that the people will be careless of their own
true interests? that their government will
be feeble or injudicious ? Whoever says these
things doubts all the principles of our republi
can institutions, and disregards the lessons of
experience and the teachings of the sages of
the revolution.
We have already intimated, that we will
not discuss the abstract and difficult questions
of Congressional power, which have grown
out of the slavery controversy, in the Halls of
the National Legislature. We care not to
decide, where so many have differed, whether
Centra s has the power to establish or abolish
the institution in the territories. lie that as
it may, we assert that it was wise in 1850,
as in 1854, to refer the whole question to the
sove:e"gn will of the people, to be settled
through the action of the local governments,
as all other questions of domestic policy are
settled. The rights of property, the relations
between husband and wife, parent and child,
guardian and ward, are so -confided, and we
can conceive none more sacred and important
in the social state, and we see of no good
reason why the question of domestic slavery,
the relation of master and servant, should
alone be withheld from the action of the
people.
It must not be forgotten, that we have not
the creation of circumstances for ourselves,
but that we must deal with existing facts . The
same difficulty occurred in the early history
of the countrj. We had the institution of
slavery entailed upon us, and the only matter
of enquiry has long been, how it was to be
managed to the greatest advantage of both
the white and black races. The latter number
several millions, and we arc forced to the di
lemma of retaining a large portion of them
in bondage, or make them our companions
and equals, and permit them to share the
honors of the State, and intermarry with our
daughters and friends. In the forcible lan
guage of Mr. Jefferson, "we have the wolf
by the cars, and we can neither hold him nor
safely let him go." ,
And yet much has been done in a legal and
constitutional way for the amelioration of this
unfortunate race of people. The men of the
revolution had to deal with the institution of
slavery as they found it, and they so acted in
the formation ot tne government. nen
these States were colonies of Great Britain,
every one was a slave-holding province. At
the time the Constitution was framed, twelve
out of the thirteen were slave-holding States.
Six of the original thirteen have now become
free, not by abolition agitation in Congress,
but by the action of the people of the several
States in their sovereign capacity at home.
This leaving the question to the people was
first adontcd bv Congress in 1850, and was
intended to be general in its application to all
. 1 1 il . ?l
territories thcreaiter to De organized mai n
was to be a finality as to the principle to be
invoked, but not a finality as to its application
for that would imply that no more territo
ries were to be organized. This position is
sustained by the fact, that in forming the
boundaries of Utah and New Mexico, no re
spect seems to have been paid to the act of
1820, fixing what is termed the Missouri line,
nor the act of 1845, extending that line to
the Rio Del Norte. The larger portion of ter
ritory included in these acts of organization
was taken from the Mexican acquisition, but
thev include also a portion of theTexas territo
ry north of 36 deg. 30 min., and a part of the
1-1 3 1
Louisiana purchase, wmcn was covered oy
that line This territory was taken from un
der the act of 1820, interdicting slavery,
north of 30 deg. 30 min., and subjected to
the action of the principles of the Compromise
of 1850, that the territory thus embraced
should be admitted into the Union as States
with or without slavery as the people thereof
might determine. These facts are claimed as
a prcdecent for the act organizing Nebraska
and Kansas.
; It is for'these reasons and in this sense also,
claimed that the principles of non-intervention
as adopted in 1850 should be regarded as a
finality.
As Pennsylvanians we arc not the advocates
of the extension of slavery, and wo deny that
the principles of the Nebraska and Kansas
bill produce that effect. It merely leaves it
to the people to determine ' this question for
themselves. Put the soil, climate and pro
ductions of that region are not adapted to
slave labor. It is our firm belief that slave
ry will not enter those territories. Those who
are sensitive on this point should not close
their eyes to the evidence that surrounds them.
The indications are all opposed to its exten
sion to that country. Such is the belief of
the ablest men in the nation, those who ad
vocated and voted for the Nebraska and Kan
sas bill, as well as those who voted against it.
Mr. Douglas said :
"I do not believe there is a man in Con
gress who thinks it would be permanently a
slave-holding country ; I have no idea that it
could "
Mr. Badger said :
"I Lave no more idea of seeing a 6lave po
pulation in either of them (Nebraska or Kan
sas) than I have of seeing it in the state of
Massachusetts."
Mr. Edward Everett said :
"I am quite sure everybody admits that
this is not to be a slave-holding region or
state."
Mr. Hunter said :
'Does ny man believe that you will have
a slave holding State in Kansas or Nebraska?
I confess that for a moment, I permitted such
an illusion to rest upon my mind."
Mr Bell said, that as respects the South,
"it was a contest for a mere abstraction."
Mr Benton said in his first speech against
the bill :
'The question of slavery in these territo
ries, if thrown open to territorial action, will
be a question of numbers a question of the
majority for or against slavery ; and what
chance would the slaveholders havo in such a
contest? No chance at all. The slave
emigrants will be outnumbered and compelled
to play at a most unequal game, not only in
point of numbers, butr also in point of the
States."
In his second speech, Mr. Benton again
said :
"I believe in the futility of this bill its
absolute futility in the slaveholding States,
and that not a single slave will ever be held
in Kansas or Nebraska under it, even admit
ting it to be passed."
Gen. Houston said :
'There was no more probability of slave
ry, being introduced into these territories
than into Illinois."
Mr. Seward said .
"I feel quite sure that slavery at most can
get nothing more than Kansas ; while Nebras
ka the wider region will escape, for the rea
son that its soil and climate are uncongenial
with the staples of slave culture rice.suggar,
cotton and tobacco. Moreover, since the pub
lic attention has been so well and so effectual
ly directed towards the subject, I cherish a
hope that slavery will not be able to gain a
foothold even in Kansas."
But to render assurance double sure, we
have even a strouger opinion from Judge Pol
lock himself, the Whig candidate for Gover
nor, who says in a letter dated June 19th,
1854: "Slavery can have no legal existence
in those territories, either by act of Congress,
or under the false pretence of popular sove
reignty." ' 'It may in fact be safely said that of all
the acquisitions of territory from Mexico,
there will not be a slave state added to the
Union, and that the territory embraced in the
Louisiana purchase not already admitted, will
come in as free States.
It should also lfi borne in mind, that any
territory that the United States may hereafter
acquire must be South of 3Gd. 30m., and that
this principle" of popular sovereignty may
drive the institution farther south than any
positive act of Congress could. Nor should it
be forgotten that the interdiction of slavery
north of 3Gd 30 min. is a virtual dedication
of the territory south of that line for slave pur
poses. This has been the moral influence of
such legislation, and it would no doubt con
tinue to have that effect. It would in all prob
ability have been a happy event for the coun
try, had this doctrine of popular sovereignty
in the territories been adopted in 1820. We
should most likely have had a larger propor
tion of free states than wc now have.
The Missouri line was never a favorite
measure with the old Democratic statesmen.
It suited a temporary purpose, and quieted
agitation for a time, but it was manifestly
wrong in principle, and legislation of a dang
erous character, calculated to divide the
country into geographical sections, and create
dissensions and divisions among the States
and the people.
Thomas Jefferson once said :
"This Missouri question, by a geographical
line of division, is the most portentous one
that I ever have contemplated."
In 1820 he wrote to John Holmes the
following :
"A geographical line coinciding with a
a marked principle, moral and political, once
conceived and held up to the angry passions
of men, will never be obliterated." .
James Madison said,:
"I must own that I bave always leaned to
the belief, that the restriction was not within
the true scope of the Constitution."
James Monroe said :
"The proposed restriction as to the terri
tories which are to be admitted into the
Union, if not hi direct violation of the Con
stitution, is repugnant to its principles."
We might swell the list of authorities on
this same point, from eminent American
statesmen, living and deal.
It is difficult to force from the mind the
belief that this whole subject of slavery in the
territories is greatly magnified. The right of
a sovereign state to control this subject is not
disputed even by abolitionists. The right to
establish or abolish the institution is admitted.
The only effect that the legislation of Congress
can possibly have must be confined to the ter
ritorial probation of a State, during which
time it can exercise but a limited influence
upon the social or political affairs of the
country. When once admitted into the Union
with slavery, a State can aboliFh it or ad
mitted without it, she can establish it. Should
the people north of 30d 30m in Nebraska be
come numerous enougu to do admitted as a
ftfree State, they could afterwards establish the
institution, even if the Missouri line or the
act of lc20 had not been disturbed. Sup
pose, for example, that any of the States
covered by the ordinance of 1787, were at
this time to establish slavery, where would
be the remedy ? There would be none. If
the peetple f a territory should desire to have
the institution, but perceiving that Congress
might object to their admission into the Union
they could forbear to establish it until after
their admission, and k,u ao as they might
detTvleet Hence the wisdom of allowing
that power to control in the beginning, that
will most certaly control in the end, or at
a subsequent period.
It is not to be denied that there is a most
violent and unwarrantable spirit evoked by
this slavery conflict, that should te discounte
nanced by the good men of all. parties. It is
one oftlie enigmas of .human nature, that it
can become so unreasonable in some. of its
manifestations. Our .ii-Nebraska friends
should ( take care lest cue mania of a wild
and ungovernable fanaticism should possess
them as it has already possessed many others.
The inflammatory and treasonable proceedings
of an abolition convention in the city of New
York, not long since, calls for the earnest
condemnation of every lover of our national
Union.
Wendell Phillips said :
"The Union sentiment is the great vortex
which swallows up the great minds, and they
have power enough for the time being to in
fluence the people. The only remedy for
the slave is th e destruction of the govern
ment. I challenge any man to tell me what
the Union has done for us."
Wm. Garrison proposed the following reso
lution :
llesolved, That the one grand vital issue
to be made with the slave power, is the disso
lution of the American Union."
Henry C. 'Wright spoke to the resolution
and said :
"I like tjat resolution very much. This
country denies God, or if it believes in God,
I do not. The Christian God is the most ac
cursed of demons. No man's right can be
ascertained by reference to a Bible, a law,
or a Constitution. I don't care that (snapping
his fingers) for any such book or Constitution,
when the question of liberty or slavery is to
be considered. The only thing of importance
is that the mass of the people venerata the
Constitution. We should endeavor to do away
with this. .1 thank God that I am a traitor to
that Constitution. I thank God also that I
am an infidel to the popular religion of this
country and of all Christendom."
The Hon. Edmund QuiDcy said :
"The Constitution displayed the ingenuity
of the very devil; and that the Union ought
to be dissolved."
This was during the pendency of the Ne
braska and Kansas bill before Congress. At
the same time the leading Abolition journals
were loud in their denunciations of the bill it
self; and treasonable in their opposition to
the action of the Government.
Horace Greeley said in reference to the
passage of the bill :
''Better that confusion should ensue better,
that discord should reign in the National
Councils better that Congress should break
up in wild disorder, nay, better that the capi
tal itself should blaze by the torch of the in
cendiary, or fall and bury all its inmates be
neath its crumbling ruins, than that this per
fidy and wrong be finally accomplished."
There were many treasonable exhibitions
also, by the same class of men, during the
recent Anniversary of American Indepen
dence. At some places the bells were tolled,
as if mourning for some great calamity. At
Farmingham , Massachusetts , treasonable
speeches were delivered, after which Garri
son, above named, , burned the Constitution
of the United States and the Fugitive Slave
Law, amid the applause of men of as little pa
triotism Benedict Arnold or himself
Such are the incendiary and inflammatory
sentiments with which despicable fanatics are
endeavoring to indoctrinate the minds of the
Northern people. Such sentiments are the fit
precursors of the recent riots and murder iu
Boston, trampling the Constitution and Laws
under the foot of violence.
Let us therefore, fellow citizens, discard the
doctrines of the Abolitionists and anti-slavery
agitators, and look upon the opinions which
they have promulgated and are now promul
gating, as the fake lights thrown out by the
ancient Federalists, during the Missouri con
troversy, to mystify the people and regain lost
power
We have great confidence in the doctrine of
popular sovereignty, and in the justice and
wisdom of the people. They have saved the
country in many important crises in our affairs.
It was the people that settled the government
upon the republican platform after the Fede
ralists of 1798 were driven from power It
was the people who sustained Jackson against
the mammoth bank. It was the mass of the
people that have always nphe Id the country
in time of war. It is to the people that we
must look for protection against the miserable
treason and despicable wiles of the enemies of
the republic. The people' of Pennsylvania will
bo true to their constitutioual obligations, and
their triumph in 1851 and 1852, arc eviden
ces, that they are not only willing to be so,
but also that they have the power to be so.
The day of wild fanaticism and stolid bigotry
on the question of slavery bas passed by in
this State, and ber Democracy and her people
erenerallv have nlanted themselves upon the
principles of the Compromise of 1850, and
there they will continue to stand, wnctner vie
tory or defeat awaits them. They arc willing
to see the citizens of the territories determine
in their primary assemblages, the question
of domestic slavery for themselves, without the
control or dictation of the Central Government,
whihmay by a usurpation of power pretend
to define the lines of freedom and slavery by
degrees of latitude and longitude, or by geog
raphical boundaries. The Democracy of Penn
sylvania guarding the destinies of the great
central Commonwealth of this Union, will ad
here faithfully to the principles of the Cen-
stitution, the sovereignty of the States and of
the people, and the stability and repose of the
nation. The people of Pennsylvania arc unsel
fish and unambitious, but they arc just vthey
are modest and unpretending, and slow at ar
riving at conclusions, but they are powerful
for good. The people of JA-nnsylvania are pat
riotic by instinct, and will crush to atoms all
the feeble barriers to a healthy flow of public
sentiment. Pcnnsj-lvania has always been a
patriotic, unionloving State. She has always
stood by the flag of our common country. She
is the Keystone of the Federal Arch, and stan
ding midway between" the North and the South,
she constitutes the great breakwater, against
which the waves of northern fanaticism and
southern folly, have long surged and will con
tinue to surge in vain.
J. ELLIS BONnAM, Chairman:
George C. Welkek, Secretary.
Judge Black's Letter to the Temperance
State Committee.
Charles Louis Loos, a member of the Com
mittee appointed by the State Temperance
Convention to interrogate the various candi
dates as to their views of a Prohibitory Li
quor Law, has communicated to the Somerset
Democrat the reply of Hon. J. S. Black. Mr.
Loos accompanies the judge's letter by some
explanatory remarks, acknowledging the cor
rectness of his surmise that " the committee
misunderstood its instructions when the can
didates for Judge were addressed "
To the President of the Prohibitory fttate
Convention:
Sir, It appears that the friends of a pro
hibitory liquor law, who met here some months
ago, appointed a committee to interrogate the
several candidates and lay their replies before
the body over which you preside. The Chair
man of that Committee has addressed me, in
quiring whether I believe, that a law pro
hibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxica
ting drinks, except for certain specified pur
poses, is constitutional.
1 suppose 1 cannot mistake the meaning of
this interrogation. It is, of course, not prompt
ed by motives of mere curiosity. My private
sentiments are not worth to you the trouble
of ascertaining them. But you desire to be
informed how far my judicial decisions may be
counted on, as favorable to your views of the
subject If I reply in the affirmative, you will
regard it as a promise to be with you when
the cpicstion comes before me; and if I break
the promise, after being elected by j-oor votes,
I will be justly exposed to the charge of ob
taining the olfice by means of false pretences.
If my answer be the other way, you will know
how to disarm an avowed opponent of the
power which he might use to your disadvant
age. These, I think, are the only reasons that
could induce you to question me on such a
subject.
I know the value of your votes. I do not
underate the power you will probably exert
in the next election. And even if 1 were not
a candidate at all I would feel a natural anxie
ty to win your respect, and escape j our cen
sure; for no man is better assured than I am,
that some of the best hearts and soundest heads
in the country are engaged in the present
movement for a prohibitory liquor law. Nev
ertheless, I cannot answer j our question con
sistently with my sense of propriety; and I am
not without the hope, that my reasons for dec
lining will be entirely satisfactory.
When jou speak of a law to prohibit the
manufacture and sale of liquors, I take it for
grante-d you do not mean so senseless a thing
as a mere naked prohibition, without affixing
a penalty, or providing the means for its exe
cution. The law passed iu Maine Is the mod
el, on which the other States have generally
framed theirs. I believe the one proposed at
thcast session of our Legislature was almost
a literal copy of the Maine law.
Its constitutionality did not seem to be
doubted by one of its numerous and able ad
vocates. But it was violently opposed, on con
stitutional grounds, by others, who are as in
telligent and conscientious men as anj-1 know
in the Cemimou wealth. In some of the States,
the power to pass it was not challenged. In
New York, on the other hand, the Governor
declared it to be wholly inconsistent with the
principles of a free government, and for that
reason refused it his signature. Sueh, also,
was the unanimous opinion of the Supreme
Judicial Court of Massachusetts; and the high
est tribunal in Michigan, composed of eight
iudees. stands at this moment equally divid-
Cel. X Oil prUUiluljr luum t ui v. h-uj . juu
you must not forget, that three arc others,
who think it equally clear against you It is,
at least, doubtful enough to have procured
conflicts and divisions among statesmen, jud
ges and lawyers, as well as among the mas
ses of the people. It is, moreover, a question
of great magnitude. Everything is important
which touches the Constitution. A judge nev
er acts uuder responsibilities so high, as when
he deals with the great charter by which a
free State holds its liberties; and if any part
of the Constitution is more sacred than anoth
er it is that which marks the boundaries be-
tween legislative authority ana tne reserved
rights of the people: Besides the law on which
vou ask my opinion, is one which will direct-
lv effect the character, morals, property and
business of the whole population of the Com
monwealth.
Here, then, is a much debated and vexed
ouestion of constitutional law important in
every aspect which must come before the
Stmreme Court for final adjudication; and I
a candidate for a scat in that court, am asked
to determine it in advance, without notice
to the parties interested, without hearing the
arciments on eiMivr sH"; without oven see
ing th
materials from which a judgment ought t
be made up If I would do this thing 1 would
render myself utterly unworthy ef your con
fidence. It the precedent set by you were submitted
to and generally followed, it is easy to 6ec,
that many disastrous evils would rush into
the State by that example. The success of
all political parties may depend sometimes on
judicial decisions Religious sects, corjora
tions, and other large bodl s of men are often
suitors in court All th 'se have an equal
reason to expect pledges. InteTeibted indi
viduals also stand on the same platform. Shall
candidates for judicial offices commit them
selves to all these ? If not, whore shall the stop
ping place be found after the custom is onc
begun, - or the right to interrogate them
acknowledged ? The election of every judga
would depend on the accordance of his answer
with the wishes of the most numerous or
jowerful classes--Courts would cease to be
"places where justice is judicially Administer
ed," and become a mere ministerial organism
for registering the" foregone decrees of con
ventions and other public assemblies. What,
then, would become of the weak and unpopu
lar for whose protection the law was made ?
When the Constitution was amended, so as
to give the election of Judges to the people, it
was feared, by many, that candidates would
sell their integrity for votes, and conciliate
one portion of the people by promises incon
sistent with the just rights of others 1 am
glad to say that the letter of jour committto
was the hrst demand ever made upon me for
a pledge of any kind the first question that
was ever asked me concerning any matter,
which I might be called on to dec ide. Up to
the time when I received that letter, no mem
ber of either convention by which I was no
minated, nor no private citizen of my own po
litical partj-, or any other, ever hinted a de
sire to bind me by a promise in advance of
his vote. I feel warranted in saj'ing that this
is the experience of all mj brethren ; aud i do
not doubt that the candidates who opposed
us, including the honorable and talented gent
leman who is my competitor, have been treat
ed with equal forbearance.
I acknowlelge the obligation of a candidate
for political or representative office to make
his opinions known. But it is the duty of a
judge to keep himself uncommitted until he
hears all that can be said on both sides. I
will promise nothing at present, except to de
cide it honestlj- and according to my best
judgment, when it arises. If I should be elec-
tea, i win tune a soimen ainriuauon (equival
ent by the laws of l'ennsjlvania to an oath)
that I will support the constitution. This vow
I mean to keep, and that I may keep it the
better I will make no other, which can by
any possibility, interfere with it.
It has struck me as possible that the com
mittee misunderstood its instructions when
the candidates for judge were addressed If
such instructions were given, it was probably
done without thinking how improper it would
be for us to repljr in the manner expected.
At all events, 1 have faith enough in this re
republican sj-stcm of ours to believe, that no
State Convention ever did, or ever will assem
ble, in which a majority of members can bo
found, who will delibcratelj' insist upon their
right todemand pledges of judicial candidates,
on questions of law.
I am with great respect, yours. c.
J. S. Black.
Keep him down
All keep him down. What business has a
poor man to attempt to rise, without a naino
without friends, without honorable blood in
his veins? We have known In in ever since
he was a boy wo knew his father before him
and he was but a mechanic : and what merit
can there be in the j oung stripling ? Such
is the cry of the world when a man of sterling
character attempts to break away from the
cords of poverty and ignorance and rise to a
position of truth and honor. The multitude
are excited by envy ; tli cy cannot endure te
be outstripped by those who grew up with
them or their children side by side, and hence
the opposition a man encounters in his native
place. Despite of their feelings many uoblo
minds have arisen from obscurity and lived
down their opponents ; but others j-iclded to
the discouragements, lived in obscuritj', and
"died and made no sign." Let it not bo bo
with j-ou, joung man. Persevere, mount
up and startle the world.
Disasters on the Western, Rivers.
Few persons are aware of the great numler
of steamboat disasters that occur on the West
ern rivers, and the immense amount of proper
ty destroyed. The number of casualties for
the last six months exceeds anj-thing of the
kind on record. The following is condensed
from a statement occupying three columns of
the St . Louis Republican:
In January there were as manj' aocidenta as
there are days in the month. Eighteen steam
ers were lost, and twelve injured more or less.
The destruction of propertv, including boat
and cargo, involved a loss of upwards of half-
a million ot dollars. -Nineteen persons io.-i.
their lives. In February, twelve steamers and
four barges were destroj-ed; total loss amount
ing to $1,000,000. About eighty lives ra
lost. In March twelve steamers were lost,,
valued with the cargoes at 250,003. One
hundred and twenty persons erisbed. Dur
ing the three f-ujeediDg months we have
twenty-eight steamers reported an Wing to
tally destroyed, the value of which with the
cargoes is estimated at half-a-million. About
thirty lives were lest So that for the la t sit
months, there were seventy steamers sunk or
dcstroj'ed by fire, besides upwards of one hun
dred and fifty barces, coal boats, c , valued
at 2,000,000. lhelossot hie is estimated
at two hundred and fifty souls, though in
many instances, the exact number lost by
these ace-ilcnts i unttainbl'