Page 1 of 20 Sep 1860 Issue of Indianapolis Old Line Guard in Indianapolis, Indiana

See the full image with a free trial.

Start for Free
Want a high-quality poster of this page? Add to Cart

Read an issue on 20 Sep 1860 in Indianapolis, Indiana and find what was happening, who was there, and other important and exciting news from the times. You can also check out other issues in The Indianapolis Old Line Guard.

Browse Indianapolis Old Line Guard

How to Find What You Are Looking for on This Page

We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology to make the text on a newspaper image searchable. Below is the OCR data for 20 Sep 1860 Indianapolis Old Line Guard in Indianapolis, Indiana. Because of the nature of the OCR technology, sometimes the language can appear to be nonsensical. The best way to see what’s on the page is to view the newspaper page.

Indianapolis Old Line Guard (Newspaper) - September 20, 1860, Indianapolis, Indiana The old Constitution the Union and the Equality of the states vol. , i.d., thursday september 20, 1860.thb old line published t jell a k Xii to at Indianapolis Indiana by i pc ii Akness. T e3 n. 3vr a �1.00, Neil Lwy ter Llic presidential . In Advance in All cases. Talvert sements inserted at the usual rates. Speech of theron. John 0. Bezok Ineide. Delivered at Lexington ky., sept. 5, 1860. Concluded gentlemen in answer to the accusation against me of first holding and then abandoning this doctrine and which i have disproved i have to say that it is not statesmanlike to agree to refer a controversy on a constitutional i Point to the supreme court of the country and alien the court has decided against you to say Quot no matter How it May decide i will find Means to evade it if against no. It is not for a statesman to Point out to a subordinate legislative tribunal some device whether it be non action or unfriendly legislation by which it May destroy a constitutional Rig lit. That looks almost As much like Quot higher Law Quot As some other Quot higher Law Quot we heard of further East. Laughter and applause and now if i were disposed to imitate an eminent but bad example i might say Quot there is not an honest Man in America Quot who can deny that when the friends of the Kansas Bill differed upon the question of the Power of Congress or a territory to exclude slave property during the territorial condition they agreed to refer this constitutional question to the supreme court that Junir Douglas was a party to this agreement that the court decided upon a Case properly arising Liat neither Congress nor a territory have the Power to exclude Southern property from the common Domain and finally that afr. Douglas notwithstanding the Agi element yet declares that the legislature May expel slave property from the Teri Ito Ries and carefully Points out the Mode by which he sup Josed the decision of the supreme court May be evaded. Loud applause but i am Content merely to state the facts and let the Public draw their own conclusions. Fellow citizens the serious illness under which i have suffered for some Days makes it almost impossible for me to address this vast assemblage so As to be fully heard and renders it necessary i should be Brief. I pass on to a View of this subject in another aspect of it. Now gentlemen How is this question met ? do not the constitutional democracy meet it by fair Manly appeals to the reason of the people and to the Constitution ? do we not state our principles fairly ? do we not state them in the Verj language of the supreme court of the United states itself do we not stand upon the Constitution As adjudicated by the court and do we not express our reasons in temperate Manly and respectful arguments ? the language in which the supreme court states the territorial question and decides it and the manner in which it is stated by the distinguished senator from Illinois How different Here Are questions upon which the highest intellects of the country Are exercised engaging the anxious attention of j our Wisest and Best men engaging the attention of your highest judicial tribunal debated in the Senate in the House of representatives before an anxious people who want to know the truth. The question should be discussed on the strictest principles of the Constitution divested of All prejudice and passion. Yet this is the style of Appeal commonly employed by in. Douglas and the most heated of his followers Quot you Liall not Force slavery Down the throats of an unwilling the argument consists of an Appeal to the passions of one Section of the Union against the other Section of the Union. Ill. Douglas himself has sometimes admitted that under our system slave property stands upon the same footing with other property. The supreme court of the United states has As i have shown decided that under the Constitution it stands upon tie same footing and has the same right to Protection and that All property alike must be guarded and protected in the common territories As other property. Yet we hear the accusation of Quot forcing slavery Down the throats of an unwilling this is the Mode of treating questions of constitutional right and private property 1 substitute the word Quot property Quot for the word Quot slaves Quot since slave and other property have been shown to stand on the same footing and see How it would read Quot you shall not Force slavery Down the Thi Oats of an unwilling Quot you shall not Force property Down the throats of an unwilling laughter and wily the territorial authority is the creature of Congress Congress is the creature of the cons Titu tuition the Constitution is the creature of the states and Here Yon would have a Little territorial legislature three or four degrees removed from the original source of Power with the Rig lit to exclude All states of the Union with All their property from their own domains. Applause this is the irresistible conclusion. These Are not the doctrines of the constitutional democracy. Cheers. These Are not the doctrines of the Kentucky opposition or at least they were not last year. These Are not the doctrines of the Constitution itself. These Are sectional doctrines a these Are not the doctrines that make for the peace and Harmony of the Union of the states. Cheers and Forsooth because we will not take them and abandon the a Hole practice of the government and the decisions of the supreme court because we will not Bow Down to a doctrine that deprives us of our rights we Are boaters demagogues secessionists Dis unionists continued applause the distinguished senator of Illinois said at Norfolk we Are a Quot faction and must be when we Are destroyed they will have struck their daggers through and through the Constitution of their country. Immense applause just Here my friends i want to say a word about the doctrine of non intervention which is adroitly mixed up with the phrases Quot popular sovereignty Quot and Quot squatter sovereignty Quot with a View to confuse the people. The names of Clay Quot Webster and other eminent statesmen have been invoked to sustain this doctrine of ten Ito rial Power and the compromises of 1850 have been invoked for the same purpose. I assert that from 1848 Down to the period when Liis false doctrine repugnant alike to the Constitution and Riason was thrust upon the country no respectable political party held the opinion that a territorial leg is Aluie had the Light to define or exclude property pending the territorial condition. When did Clay Ever hold such doctrines ? when were such doctrines Ever embodied in the Compromise measures of 1850 ? the legislation of that period shows that non intervention was meant to apply equally to Congress and to the territorial government. The statesmen of that Day looked to the period when they should come into the Union As a state As the time when the territorial authorities might act on the subject of property and hold or exclude the slave property of the South. Applause time will not allow me to do much More than state these propositions but i will read Short extracts from the celebrated report made by the committee of thirteen of which or. Clay was chairman which resulted in the Compromise measures of 1850. It is Calm Lucid has no clap trap phrases and in its tone is like the Clear and elevated language of the supreme court Quot it is High time that the wounds which it has inflicted should be healed up and closed and that to avoid in All future time the agitation which must be produced by the conflict of opinion on the slavery questions existing As this institution does in some of the states and prohibited As it is in others the True principle which ought to regulate the action of Congress in forming territorial governments for each newly acquired Domain is to refrain from All legislation on the subject in the territory acquired so Long As it retains the territorial form of government leaving it to the people of such territory when they have attained to a condition which entitles them to admission As a state to decide for themselves the question of the allowance or prohibition of Domestic applause a voice Quot that is the Trae that gentlemen was non intervention in 1850. It was no interference to exclude by Congress or the territorial legislation but to leave the question to be decided by the people when they came to form their state Constitution. It is As much a violation of the doctrine of non intervention for a territorial legislature under or. Douglas bran new theory to exclude slave property As it would be for Congress to introduce it by positive Law. Here is the opinion of Webster uttered about the same time in the Senate upon the question of territorial Power Quot we have always gone upon the ground that these territorial governments were in a state of Pupillage under the Protection or patronage of the general government. The territorial legislature has a Constitution prescribed by Congress. They have no Power not Given by that Congress. They must act within the limits of the Constitution granted them by Congress or else their acts become void. The people under the territorial government Are not a sovereignty they do not constitute a sovereignty and do not possess an of the rights incident to sovereignty. They Are if you so please to denominate it in a state of inchoate government and sovereignty. If we Well consider this question upon the ground of our practice during the last half Century i think we will find one Way of disposing of it. It is our duty to Ltd Rovic for the people of a territory a government to keep the peace to secure their property to assign to them a subordinate legislative authority to see that the pro i Section of their persons and the Security of their pro-1 Perty Are All regularly provided for and to maintain them in Liat state until they grow into sufi Clent im-1 Ortance in Point of population to be admitted into the Union As a state upon the same footing with the j original j do you suppose that Daniel Webster after the opinion of the supreme court which i have read to you would have considered it becoming in him As an j american statesman to Point out some contrivance or i device by which the territorial legislature could Vio j late the constitutional rights of the states ? not he nor would or. Clay nor any of the great and Gootel men who illustrated the earlier Days of your history. Cheers Why How is it with these territorial governments.? from the beginning they have been regarded As subordinate and temporary without any of the attributes of sovereignty. Their judges and governors and most of the other officers Are appointed by the president and Senate and paid out of the Public Treasury and even the daily expenses of the legislature which they invoke to exclude your property from the territories Are paid out of the Treasury from Money to which that very property contributes by taxation a applause. The practice of the government never has warranted this new doctrine. Take an illustration which has always seemed to me to be conclusive. The theory is that the common Domain of the United states the states and their citizens Aie on a footing of Equality and entitled to the Protection of their persons and property. This sounds like a National and constitutional doctrine. Now suppose that a vessel were going out of the port of Norfolk for another port Laden with freight and having on Board also a number of slaves. It is said that property in slaves under our system is local and cannot get beyond the state limits without special legislation. This ship gets beyond one league from Shore and is in the open sea beyond the limits of any state. Can a British Cruiser come up and take these slaves from the deck of the vessel and say they Are free because slavery is local and they Are not within the limits of any state no. What then protects them nothing but the deck of an american ship and the Flag of the United states. The property is upon the common Domain of the Union and the Flag of America protects it and if it does it on the deck of a ship it does it in the territories which Are likewise the common Domain of the Union. Loud applause one other word on this general subject. I see in a speech made by the senator from Illinois in Peters-1 Burg va., he uses the following language to the people of that state Quot you have the same right under the Constitution to go and carry your property into the territories that i have mine. You have the same right to carry j your slaves or your cattle or your horses that i have to carry any property that i possess. Lieu j of get there you and i stand on a footing of exact Equality under the Law. You bring your property with you subject to the local Law and i bring mine with me subject to the same local observe. He says you have the same right under the Constitution to go and carry your pro Jurty into the territory that he has his and i have shown that i he declared previously in the Senate that if the Constitution carried it there no Power on Earth could j take it away. Now he says when you get there it is j subject to a local Law made by subordinate legislative authority and the sum of it is that the moment it gets there under the Constitution they can drive it out j against the Constitution. Laughter and applause j gentlemen what is this but the assertion of wholly inconsistent positions what is it but trifling wit i the intelligence of the people ? j again says that distinguished gentleman in the same speech Quot Congress never passed a Law for the Protection of any Man s property in a territory. Every Man who goes to a Tern tory with his wife his children his servants and his property is subject to the local Law and relies upon local Law for his let us see if that is so. Congress has done it in Many instances. I happened to meet the other Day with a striking Case in which it did so. In 1834, when great statesmen were in the Senate and House and Jackson was president of the United states the territory of Florida undertook to Lay a tax on the slaves of non residents higher than on the slaves of residents. The non residents of Virginia and other states appealed to Congress to oblige the territorial legislature to refrain from discriminating against their property. The committee of Congress say they Quot think that Congress should always protect the property of citizens of the United states when subject to the operations of unjust legislation by territorial governments Quot and they reported a Bill enacting that All such acts As they complained of should be Quot null and void Quot and further that an attempt by any one to enforce said acts passed by the legislative Council of the territory of Florida should be punished by Fine and imprisonment. This Bill passed Congress and was approved by president Jackson. Now would it not be an insult to your understandings to say that tins was not an interference by Congress to protect properly against the encroachments of the territorial legislature yet or. Douglas says that Congress Quot never yet passed a Law for the Protection of any Man s property in a territory Quot but that Quot he must always rely on the local of course not doubt that he believes the statement but i relieve his truth and integrity at the expense of his information. Laughter. A voice Quot i would t care to be so fellow citizens the principles i have tried feebly to vindicate Here Are the principles upon which the constitutional democracy stand to play and they Are the Only principles upon which any human being will pretend to charge them with purposes of disunion. If they Are the principles of the Constitution and the Union then we Are constitutional and Union men. Cries of Quot that s and yet for two or three months Back you have heard loud and incessant clamor that i and those democrats with whom i am concerned Are a disunion organization who seek to break up this confederacy of states. Ivy friends i hardly know so far As it is a personal charge against myself How to answer it. A voice Quot Tell them it s a the whole Stock in Trade of Many Anonymous writers and wandering orators All Over the country is Quot disunion Quot Quot this Man and his party attempt to break up the Union of the you May Appeal to them by reason in vain. You say these Are the principles of the Constitution As determined by the practice of the government. The answer is Quot you May say they Are the principles of the Constitution As determined by the highest judicial tribunal of the land. The answer is Quot disunion Quot you May say Quot we Are asserting principles thus sanctioned by Means of reason and the ballot Box and under the Constitution Quot the answer still is a Quot disunion Quot and no other answer. He who stands upon the Constitution can neither be sectional nor a disunion St. I have shown you that these principles Are taken almost word for word from the opinion of the supreme court of the United states and we find they Are supported by almost All the precedents and practice of the government. They Are principles upon which we May Well live and by which we May Well be willing to die. Cheers they Are important they Are vital. They concern the rights of person and property. They cannot be abstract they cannot be minute or unimportant for they concern the Honor and Equality of the states of this Broad Union. What has been the position of Kentucky upon that platform ? you remember the position taken by the candidates for governor of this state last year ? both held that territorial Legislatures have no Power to exclude our property and each contended that every department of government must protect it when it became necessary. Or. Joshua f. Bell i believe went a step further in thinking the time had now arrived when it was necessary for the government to interpose. The congressional conventions of both parties with scarcely an exception and their nominees for Congress endorsed these principles. The state democratic convention on the 8th of january last adopted by an overwhelming vote the following Resolution which embraces precisely the same principles "1. Resolved that the democratic party in Kentucky believe that the government of the United states holds the Public Domain in Trust for the Benefit and still the Large number of Young gentlemen of All the citizens of the respective states and that species of property from sources yet More eminent comes the accuse Congress of the United states nor any Lens native Ion that i and the optical organic atm with Winch i agent of Congress can by legislative enactments or Quot by unfriendly legislation Dep rive the owner of his property or restrict or restrain him in the use of the Tion am connected Are Labouring for the disruption of the confederacy. I do not reply now to what or. Douglas says All Over new England in Virginia and wherever he goes because it May be quite natural for a gentleman who feels As profound a personal interest As he does in pending questions to think that any Man who opposes him must be a disunion St. Laughter indeed by this declaration we must be All Dos Union its in Kentucky for he declares that those who assert that the territorial legislature has no Power to cd again the Senate of Kentucky last Winter by a Unal Fri a Quot Quot i a parties declared these principles to Ana important. Constitutional and True by the following Resolution which i must read it is so Apt so pertinent so conclusive a resolved that the territories Are the common elude slave property and that Congress should inter property of the Union and As a Field for the expand Fere for its Protection when necessary Are in effect i institutions and the development of the disunion its and that is what the whole legislature j energies of an advancing and progressive people Are and All the people of Kentucky said last year. A citizens of All the states and that there Plause j exists no Power in the general government or in the fellow citizens even in our own state where cer i government of a territory during its continuance As mainly thought my character and antecedents were having attained sufi Clent population connected with an organization whose Bone and body any species of property which May be recognized by is disunion. I refer to or. Crittenden and to a speech to Quot to Quot a the states but that this right recently made by him at Louisville. I having been solemnly affirmed by the decision of our gentlemen i have known and admired or. Crit i judicial tribunals should be guarded by Suita Tenden since i avas a boy. He also has known me we Laws faithfully administered and if in any Case towards him and his i live Ever cherished and sex Ern tonal government should assail that right by pet to cherish relations of the most respectful and Quot Friendly legislation or experience should show that cordial esteem. There Are reasons not care to existing Laws Are inadequate for its Protection it will allude to in Public which even if i had grounds for then be the duty of the general government in the an opposite course would prevent any but the most exercise of its Powers legislative judicial and exec Quot a it ivc each acting within its appropriate sphere to provide such Security and Protection As the exigencies of the occasion May a similar Resolution was unanimously agreed to in the House of representatives of the legislature. What is All this but adopting in principle and Lan effect Courtesy in reply. After speaking of or. Lincoln in terms fully As Compline Pitary As his principles Merit and of or. Douglas in terms of Savarin Eulogy he comes to speak of his own fellow citizen in the language Fol leaving Quot we Are Noav left Only to compare or. Bell with the third candidate Avo stands in opposition Ivor. Breckinridge. And Here again As in respect to or. Poui is my objection is nor to the candidate As an individual. 1 s Nokia nope that or. J5reckinridge avas not a disunion Man. A voice yes he is he ought not to be. He belongs to a tribe of faithful Dea noted men the tribe of kentuckians. Great applause he must have been seduced away from the path of his duty far from the path in Avrich All the impulses of his blood ought to carry him if he has Guage the opinion of the supreme court and the resolutions i have read of the National democratic com mention ? both parties in Kentucky at the polls Taa Elve ago by unanimous uts in both branches of the a Epsia Fure Nave dec Larch Inai Turuc principles Are constitutional and vital to the interests and Honor of the state. Surely i might pause Here but i want in support of these principles the individual authority of one of our most venerable statesmen. I want the authority become a disunion St. But or. Breckinridge has of or. Crittenden himself. Applause gentlemen made himself the head of a party and As in the Case of or. Lincoln ave must judge of his Public course by the party that he consents to Fel Loav citizens i thank my venerable and distinguished Friend for the lingering Hope he yet entertains that i am not a disunion St. Laughter and applause like a humane Lavayer he gives me personally the Benefit of a doubt and for this too i thank him. Rene aved cheers As to my connection Avii principles or a party which tends in that direction i May speak of it presently. My object is now to relieve myself personally from the imputation of being a Dalsun Lonist and in this Case i Avold greatly prefer to receive a Strong and direct blow than to have it sound As it does like the reluctant confession of a Sorro awful Friend. Applause and laughter in passing i May say in regard to the distinguished gentleman associated Avith me a candidate for the vice presidency that his whole life is a refutation of the charge made against him. Born in North Carolina reared in Kentucky Long la a ing in Indiana More recently from far Oft Oregon he 1 As been in All parts of his country tried in All honoured in All. He has served his county Avith High distinction in peace and avar and bears on his person enduring memorials of his patriotism and courage. His last act of treason was to add another Star to the Galaxy of the Union. Loud applause when a Man is before the people for Public Trust a great Deal depends on his personal character and antecedents. Much then depends on the fact whether i am a disunion St. Cries of Quot you re born whatever doubts he May have As to it Fidelity to the Constitution and the Union of these states not hesitate to say that in my opinion that eminent gentleman is devoted to the Union. I do not believe he would advocate principles which he believed were unconstitutional or Caln ated to destroy the Union and if i can have his Sanction and endorsement for the principles i advocate surely it will go a great Way in proving that they Are constitutional and the True Union principles. I hold in my hand the journal of the United states Senate for the month of May last when the following Resolution was adopted by an overwhelming vote a resolved that the Union of these states rests on the Equality of rights and pan Leges among its members and that it is especially the duty of the Senate Avrich represents the states in their Sovereign capacity to resist All attempts to discriminate either in relation to Pei sons or property in the territories Avrich Are the common possessions of the United states so As to give advantages to the citizens of one state which Are not equally assured to those of every other or. Crittenden s vote is on record in the affirmative on that Resolution. On the same Day the Fol leaving Resolution passed the Senate a resolved that neither Congress nor a territorial legislature. A Hether by direct legislation or legislation of an indirect or unfriendly character possess Pola or to annul or impair the constitutional right of citizen of the United states to take his slave Tive in the legislature of Kentucky in the Congress of the United states and other stations of Public Trust i invite any one to Point to anything in my character or antecedents Avrich would Sanction such a charge or such an imputation. Cheers i Avill not degrade the dignity of my declaration on this subject by epithets but i proudly Challenge the bitterest enemy i May have on Earth to Point out an act to disclose an utterance to reveal a thought of mine hostile to the Constitution and Union of the states. Loud cheers. A voice Quot he could t do no my friends the Man does not live in or out of the common health of Kentucky no matter How exalted his station or , Avaio has Coaver enough to connect my name successfully with the slightest taint of disloyalty to the Constitution and Union of my country. Applause. A voice Quot no you d die but fellow citizens if there be nothing in my character or antecedents to justify this accusation Arhat is there in the principles upon which i stand it is not pretended that the resolutions which relate to the acquisition of Cuba the Pacific Railroad the rights of naturalized citizens &c., contain disunion sentiments. It must then be if anywhere in the resolutions As to property in territories and its Protection. I Avill read these two resolutions and you can judge whether they Accord Avith the Constitution the decision of the supreme court and the practice of the government As i have shown it to Day Quot 1. Resolved that the government of a territory organized by an act of Congress is provisional and temporary and during its existence All citizens of the United states have an equal right to Settle with their property in the territory without their rights of either person or property being destroyed or impaired by congressional or territorial legislation. Quot 2. Resolved that it is the duty of the Federal government in All its departments to protect when necessary the rights of persons and property in the territories and wherever else its constitutional authority these Are the principles we avow. Are they constitutional Are they just arc they sectional ? if they Are constitutional they Are not sectional for the Constitution covers tie a Hole Union. Cheers Why any property into the common territories and there hold within sight of this spot where we Are met known to Giov the same while the territorial condition re Many of you for nearly forty years j our represent Njang or. Crittenden s vote is recorded in favor of this Resolution. On the same Day the following Resolution passed the Senate Quot resolved thut if experience should at any time prove that the judicial and executive authority do not possess Means to ensure adequate Protection to constitutional rights in a territory and if the territorial government should fail or refuse to provide the necessary remedies for that purpose it will be the duty of Congress to Supply such deficiency Avi thin the limits of its constitutional or. Crittenden s name is recorded in Faa or of this Resolution. Then i have the a ote of my respected Friend declaring that these questions Are not minute or unimportant that the Union of the states rests upon Equality of rights among its member that neither Congress nor a territorial legislature has the Bovyer to annul or impair the constitutional right of any citizen of the United states to take his slave property into the common territories and there enjoy the same awhile the territorial condition remains and that if such rights be assailed by the territorial legislature it becomes necessary for Congress to interfere to protect it precisely upon the same principle upon which we stand to Day. Cheers or. Crittenden a Cav Days after Follo aved these resolutions by a speech in the Senate which i find reported in the daily Globe the official Organ of that body. It is True that or. Crittenden expressed a Hope that the time might never come when it would be necessary for Congress to intervene to protect these rights in the territories. I also Trust that the time May never come when any Tempo rial authority will be so reckless of its constitutional obligations As to make it necessary for Congress or the other branches of the government to interfere for the Protection of personal rights and private property. Cheers but in the speech to which 1 refer he sustains the position i occupy in language which compares Avell with that of the supreme court itself. He says Quot my idea upon that subject or. President without a Shadow of doubt is that a territorial government is the Mere creature of Congress made and fashioned by no. 28. Congress As it pleases Avith what functions it pleases with a hat Power it thinks proper to Confer that All these Powers Are liable to be resumed at any time or to be fashioned and controlled and changed at the pleasure of Congress and according to its discretion. Of course there is no sovereignty or Power in the territory All is a Mere delegation of a a aver and is in subordination at All times to the Congress of the United states. I know of no sovereignty in this country no supreme political Coaver except that originally vested in the people of the United states. They Are the natural depositories they Are the natural owners of every Liing like supreme Power or sovereignty. They have to form this government delegated a certain portion of that sovereignty to the Congress of the United states. The whole then of this sovereignty exists As to that part not delegated in the people. A As to that part Avrich they have delegated that is in can Grep and Here is the disposition of the whole Sovereign supreme Power of this country. None has been delegated to any one else. None certainly has been delegated to the territorial further on in the same speech or. Crittenden employs the Fol leaving language Quot As the territorial government has no Sovereign or Independent right to act on this subject the supreme court of the United states having determined that every citizen of the United states May go into that territory carrying his slaves with him and holding them there my opinion is that the Constitution is to protect that property Avrich it has Authon Zed to go there. Of course that is a logical conclusion. It seems to me it is unquestionable. To assert my right to go there to carry Iny property there and to Quot enjoy that property and then to Siy there is anybody stronger or mightier or More Sove Reiton than the Constitution that can take from me that Avrich the con Victory. I say theret Bre. Ashen the proper or extreme Case Oce i a. Ashen property going there under the Sanction of the Constitution As interpreted by the supreme court of the United states shall require such interposition that it is the Sluty of Congress to interpose and Grant Protection. Jive it and give it adequately. That is my nobly and Well said in language worthy of his exalted diameter and reputation. Or. Douglas says he Arili b Content to administer the government and makes the acceptance of it on the condition that a territorial legislature no matter Arhat the decision of the supreme court May be can lawfully exclude property from a territory that you May take it there under the Constitution but that the local legislature can not exclude it and or. Crittenden says that he can Quot imagine nothing of inconsistent and contradictory Quot As to say that a ii ii Ian take a our property there by virtue of the Constitution and then to say that there is something stronger or mightier than the Constitution that can take away that which the Constitution says you May hold and enjoy and yet unless or. Douglas can Torce half the states to accept this surrender of their rights he Tiu rend and destroy As lie goes. Applause 1 derive some satisfaction from the fact that the Ion. John j. Crittenden a Hose name and authority Viii go far in this Union has declared by his so leeches and votes in the Senate that the principles upon Avrich ave stand Are constitutional and True. Fel Loav citizens i cannot enlarge. I Appeal to you if i have not con Lusla Ely repelled the accusations against me and if i have not shown that it is neither i nor the constitutional democracy but in. Douglas who departed from the agreement of the Kansas Bill then passing to a More extended a new we have seen that these Prii icicles have been sanctioned by the highest judicial tribunal in the world a noted to be Tnie Mousey Assen by own dry i i Eso Quot Iii a Egi stature and by an Overa whelming majority of the a Hole democratic party in state convention and declared by or. Crittenden himself in the most solemn form to be not Only constitutional but to be sound and True essential to the rights and Equality of the states. Cheers surely these things make a Pyramid of authority and argument in their support which ought to commend them if not to the adoption certainly to the grave and candid consideration of All men Avo wish to Noav the truth. And i have tried to sustain them by legitimate facts and arguments. I am not conscious Ohia ving appealed to any prejudice. Fellow citizens these principles Ai ill give us peace and Prosperity they Avill preserve the Equality and restore the Harmony of the states. They will make every Man feel that in his personal rights and right of property he stands on a footing of Equality in the Domain common to All the states. Cheers they have their Root in the Constitution and no party can be sectional Avrich maintains constitutional principles. And Are we to be driven from their maintenance ? is our state to be Tav isted around the fingers of politicians As they Avold twist a gum elastic thread ? Are the people of Kentucky to be made to turn their backs to Day upon principles they thought True and constitutional last year by loud and unreasonable clamor ? Are they to be driven terrified staggered and bewildered by Idle cries of Quot disunion Quot from maintaining their constitutional rights and Ashen Kentucky is asked to express her Avn opinion of her Avn rights in this confederacy has the spirit of the Commonwealth sunk so Loav that she dare not do it ? cries of Quot no no Quot and cheers such were not the men Avo Laid the foundation of this state. Such a Ere not those Avo maintained our Independence in 1798. Noav the question is one of the equal n gets of persons and property in the territories though indeed just behind this outpost lie All our constitutional rights. Then it was a fair question of the Freedom of speech and whether the friendless foreigner might be driven from the country for reasons to be locked up in the breast of the president. Need i recite the glorious part Virginia and Kentucky played in that great drama Many states replied to their resolutions by stigmatizing them As disunion its but undeterred by threats and Falso principles they inaugurated a Jwj Lotical revolution Avrich saved your Constitution and your liberties. Cheers Noav in 1860, does Kentucky dare to defend the Constitution against senseless outcries does she dare to assert the Equality of the states and her own rights in the confederacy they Are hers by the current of our history hers by the practice of the government hers by the Sanction of judicial authority then will she Fly from them driven by the clamor of Bells and noisy orators or will she stand upon them Brave and self posted and maintain alike her right the Constitution and the Union cheers and cries of Quot Well stand by fellow citizens if Ray strength Avill last can you Bear Avith me a Little longer a voice Quot yes a week go on Quot i know of but one political organization which asserts the principles i have attempted to defend. The Republican organization holds precisely Opp the principles. Uliey say we have no rights in the territories Avith our property. They say Congress has a right to exclude it and it is its duty to do so but they Are some that indifferent on this Point As Long As they Are quite sure it Avill be done by the territorial legislature. In regard to the platform adopted by the convention Avrich nominated i. Bell of Tennessee and Imp. Everett of Massachusetts i have Only to say that certainly it announces no principle at All upon this subject gentlemen Tell us they Are advocating the claims of these distinguished men upon the principles of the Constitution the Union and the enforcement of the Laws. I presume that there is scarcely a Man in this Assembly perhaps very few. North or South who will admit that they Are opposed to the Union the Constitution and the enforcement of the Laws but Thev entert iun the most diverse and opposite opinions As to the Best Mode of sustaining the Constitution and the character of the Laws to be enforced. Imp. Seward of new York or. Burlingame of Mas

Search All Newspapers in Indianapolis, Indiana

Advanced Search

Search Courier

Search the Indianapolis Old Line Guard Today with a Free Trial

We want people to find what they are looking for at NewspaperArchive. We are confident that we have the newspapers that will increase the value of your family history or other historical research. With our 7-day free trial, you can view the documents you find for free.

Not Finding What You Were Looking for on This Page of The Indianapolis Old Line Guard?

People find the most success using advanced search. Try plugging in keywords, names, dates, and locations, and get matched with results from the entire collection of newspapers at NewspaperArchive!

Looking Courier

Browse Newspapers

You can also successfully find newspapers by these browse options. Explore our archives on your own!

By Location

By Location

Browse by location and discover newspapers from all across the world.

Browse by Location
By Date

By Date

Browse by date and find publications for a specific day or era.

Browse by Date
By Publication

By Publication

Browse old newspaper publications to find specific newspapers.

Browse by Publication
By Collection

By Collection

Browse our newspaper collections to learn about historical topics.

Browse by Collection