Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

whom you lore * telrtES which hare bee. written in favor ofihe Sr*t redemption of damned spirits, but I ha-e nerer avr an answer to the ar- SSnent against that doctnne-drawn from verse but what sound learning and cnt id#m should be ashamed to acknowledge.” Before dismissing this passage, I wish to re mark that Universalists quibble about the term A olasin, rendered punishment in the passage we are discussing. They say that it means corrective punishment, designed to reform the offender. I shall only now reply that Kolasin occurs but in one other place m the Greek Testament, Ist John, and there our translators have rendered it torment— rather an ugly word, Mr. Clayton. I shall refer to but one other passage in proof of endless punishment. You will find it 2 Pe ter 2; 4. ‘‘For if God spared not the angels that sinned,bat cast them down to Hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness to be reserved unto Judgment.” That the punish ment of these fallen angels is eternal in the strictest sense, will appear from the Greek term Tartar osas, here translated Hell. Tar tarns, was, according to Greek writers, a pia'e of darkness and misery, in which the souls of the wicked were confined. And it, is evident from what they have told us of Syphus and Ixion. aud the sieve-drawing liauaides. that the punishment was eternal. Tnis passage, then, furnishes us with a Scrip tural example of endless punishment, inflict ed on finite beings like ourselves, for it is probable a single act of rebellion against God. For this sin they are. says Peter, “cast down to Hell ,” and says Jude, “bound in everlasting chains.” Both Apostles employ thefact as a warning to ungodly men, for no reason that we can discover, unless because tbev are liable to a similar fate. In the face of this Bible fad what becomes of the Um versaiist assertion that God is too merciful to punish his creatures with everlasting misery. This is a favorite theme with all these sapi ent divines of Universalism with whom “natural theology is father to revealed.”— They hammer this one proposition w:th as much assiduity as ever the Knight or’ La Mancha belabo ed a wind-mill. But their paper-bullets make no impression on the Zion of our God —strong with bulwarks and beau tiful with banners. In concluding this branch of the argu ment, I wish to notice some objections which you have urged against the doctrine of end less punishment Firet—You have contend ed that if endless punishment be the doom of the wicked, then all must suffer the same penalty. You st em at a loss to conceive of any other diversity in punishment, except in its duration. lam unable to account for the singular opacity of your mental vision,which prevents you from seeing the fallacy of that opinion. During your visits to the State Prisons, you might have seen two men, each imprisoned for twenty years: one of them, however, was allowed free access to the prison-yard—a plenty of wholesome food, and occasional intercourse with his fellow co evict-. The other was shut up in a nar row cell, with a diet of bread and water, and a weekly or daily flogging. Their term of imprisonment was the same, but their mishment was very different. The latter, we doubt not, was guilty of the greater of fence and had as a consequence the greater damnation. Again, two men may both sut ler during the same period of three days.but one is racked with gout or tooth ache, and the other suffers with a sore finger or a bruised eve. These homely illustrations may help you out of your present strait. But we add that year argument strikes as well at degrees of glory in the heavenly world.— The righteous are all eternally happy, but they differ in the grade of happ-ness. There are those who are ‘■'‘least in the Kingdom of Heaven,” who worship in the outer court, while there are others who stand nighest to the eternal throne. If the latter proposition is reasonable, the former cannot be unreason able. Another objection to the doctrine of end less punishment is that the design of God in the punishment of the sinner is merely to re form him, and that it is really a great bless ing. As it is sometimes phrased, Divine pun i-hment is a sort of Medicine for the sick soul. We reply, that if this be the sole design of the punishment of the wicked, it is strange that when the prescription so generally fails, the treatment should not be altered. But who, we ask, ever heard of a physician kill ing his patient in order to cure him? Yet God by his Judgmenls has been known to consume and destroy incorrigible sinners, and threatens ail the finally impenitent with the second death. But let us compare the 1 mversalist view of punishment with Bible teachings. Hear the “two voices:” Hihle —Depart ye cursed into everlasting are prepared for the Devil and his angels. I niversalism —Depart ye blessed into ever lasting prescribed originally for the Devil and his angels. Ihble —But the fearful and unbelieving, Ac , have their part in the lake that bumeth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. I niversalism —The fearful and unbelieving, Ac., sha'l have their part in the lake which is l >ssed with medicine and brimstone.which is the second dose. So this last prop fails you, and future pun ishment involves, of necessity, endless pun ishment. You, however, call that an mlsidt issue. In this you differ with Father Bal- Lor. I find in his writings the following questions, which I want you to answer or say no more upon that point. Speaking ol those, who allowed of a limited future pun ishment, he says: “State the punishment, say a thousand years, for a sinner who dies in unbelief. Well, does he commit sin dur ing these thousand years? Screly, or he could not be miserable. T ien I ask,’it takes a thousand years of punishment to reward a sinner for fifty years in this, now long must he be punished afterwards for the sin he commits during the thousand years?” Here by Ballou s own admission, any future pun ishment involves endless punishment. lie will surely continue to tin, says Father Ballou, and as long as he sins God must punish.— VV ill Mr. Clayton cipher out this sum for his “rather in Israel?” I propose now to speak of the influence of his system on Religion and morals. I object then, to I'niversalism, Efcrnmv—Because it is of no practical benefit to the world, or in plain parlance, it is doing no good. In this country, reckon ing irom the arrival of John Murray, it has existed more than eighty years, and yet it numbered barely 650 ministers only four years ago. Its membership we infer was proportionally small. In one of its former strongholds there is reported a considerable ‘•ecrease in its ministry, and it is probable there has been alike decrease in its member ship. At its former rate of progression it would Evangelize the world in about fifty thousand years, always provided, it does not previously die out. One of its leading min isters, Mr. George, admits that “there is an unwillingness among them to make any sac rifice for the intellectual or moral improve ment of others.” Another of their preachers, L. C. Todd, says he has never known the doctrine “to reform a gambler, a profane swearer, or a drunkard.” It has projected no great Religious enterprise—its ministry has produced no great awakenings, and its genuine converts might be counted on your ingers. uis want of a success is attributa e, ° ’ f e ) l ignores the distinctive rU )f vp'rovc T * le s J stem l*cks ZiZ ZZ i h* h f“ no of life in it, and it must therefore, without a thorough remodeling, become nearly or quite extinct in another generation. We object to it ” Ninthly—Because it is positively hurtful to Religion and morals. We write this “more in sorrow than in anger.” We cheerfully ac _ knowledge some good citizens amongst its adherents but its general influence is perni cious to an alarming degree. We are far from supposing that a mere belief in endless punishment will make men pious or even always restrain them from crime. It must be admitted, however, that it is a powerful motive. Lord Bolingbroke, an infidel pro fessed, said that the doctrine ought to be upheld as a matter of State policy, and for the sake of public order. Montesquieu says that it exercises such a control over the mas ses that without it the laws are of no force. This last remark was verified when the doc trine of no future rewards or punishment, produced that horrible tragedy—the Reign of Terror. However, this may be, it is cer tain that a system which encourages the sin ner to believe that he may sin on — on — on, ( “do you catch my meaning?") until death, and then go to Heaven, must exert a demoral- i jzing influence. This. we charge, Universalism does, and hence its influence when not counteracted by • education, and Sabbath Schools and eyan- ■ gehcal preaching, must be to foster crime and promote immortality- The state of its membership, if correctly set forth in the fol lowing extract is a startling proof of the proposition. It is an extract from an old number of the Boston Trumpet It is giv ing the resolves of the Mam Convention of Universalists, amongst these is a recommen dation to the Societies in Maine not appoint any gambler , or drunkard or pr!) ■ sane swearer, or unbeliever in Christianity, to office in tlie Societies.” The moral condi tion of these societies must have been de plorable. If such be its influence within its own pale, what effect must it have upon the outside masses. But I must not overlook your statements upon this point. You tell us of a town in Maine of 1,500 inhabitants, where there is neither a rum hole nor a pauper. Will you tell us in your next, how I much of the credit of that state of things is due to the Maine liquor law, and how much to the Gospel of Universalism? In regard to your distrust in Dooly, I have two ques tions to propound.—lst. What proportion of the population are Methodist and Bap tist? 2nd. Did not horse-racing, cock-fight-j ing, and drain-drinking follow very closely the introduction of Universalism ? Before commenting on your prison statistics, I want to know when, by whom, and how they were compiled. The fate of the Universal lst Crawford who hanged himself in the jail at Lowell, may shed some light on your inquiry. Being in danger of the Stale prison, he committed suicide, assigning as a reason in a written memorandum, “that he had got into trouble for life, and thought he would get out of trouble by the shortest way.” In this way he cheated the Massa chusetts Penitentiary, and many others of like faith may have done likewise. Indeed, if Universalism be true. Crawford only im itated “the conduct of Saint Judas Iscariot, who went to heaven on a rope ladder.” And my friend M-Ciure whose prose you 11 fancy as little as Peck's poetiy, advises all Universalists to ioork out Iheir salvation by a similar process. Then, he adds, it may be said of you “thy faith hath saved thee,” and upon your tombstone be inscribed to your everlasting memory—“ Behold a Umversal ist indeed in whom there is no guile.” Respectfully, yours, W. J. SCOTT. Opposition Platform. PREAMBLE. The Opposition Party of Georgia plants it self upon the principles of State Rights: equal privileges in the Union, and equal distribution of its burthens, and the exerc.se by Congress only of such powers as are specifically delega ted in the Constitution, and those clearly in ferrable from, and incident to, the granted pow ers, and necessary to carry out such granted powers. , 1. Resolved , That the Union, as establish i ed by the Fede.-al Constitution, if the latter be r faithfully carried out, is the surest guaranty of the rights and iuteiosts of all sections of the . country, and should be preserved, j 2. Resolved, That as the institution of Slavery existed in the States of the confed t eraey prior to the adoption of the Constitu- I tion of the United States, and the right te k hold slaves as property was conceded by tho , framers of the Constitution aud fully recog nized therein, therefore, Slavery exists inde f pendently of the Constitution : and, as slave . ry is recognized and sanctioned by the Constitution, Congress, which derives all , : its powers from that instrument. canDOt leg islate on the subject of slavery, except for its protection where it legally exists ; that the , Territories are the common property of all | the States, and therefore, the people have the right to enter upon and occupy any Territory with their slaves, as well as other property, and are protected by the Consti tution and Fla e of the country ; that Con gress has no right to legislate slavery into, nor exclude it from a Territory, and that we hold that the doctrine of “non intervention” with the institution of slavery in the States, j- Territories, or the District of Columbia, does not, nor was it intended to conflict with the assertion of the power of CoDgress to pro ’ tect the properly of the citizens of the sev eral States who may choose to settle in the t several Territories. We believe also that the further agitation of the subject of slavery will tend to no ( practical good to any portion of the coun ( try, and should therefore cease, regarding | the principle as settled, both by legislative enactment and judicial interpretation, that the people of the Territories, when they come ’ to form a State Constitution, and at no othe) time, (by unfriendly legislation or otherwise ; shall decide the question for themselves. We furthermore repudiate the doctrine of ‘squatter sovereignty” in all its forms as an ’ invidious and certain mode of excluding the ‘j South lrom the common territory of the Union, and stand ready to oppose sternly and uncompromisingly all who advocate ’ that doctrine. 3. Resolved, That the reckless extrava -1 ganee of the preceding and present Admin istration of the Federal Government, and especially the unblushing corruption which e has marked the latter, by which the public , expenditures hat e been increased from fifty y to near one hundred millions of dollars per annum, is a deep wrong that should be re- I buked and must be corrected. We hold Congress equally responsible with the Ad ministration for this extravagance, j 4. Resolved, That tho recommendation of the Fresident that Congress should confer , upon him the war-making power, and sub j ject the army and navy to his control, ” coupled with the demand for enormous ap , propriations of the public money to carry , out his views, call for and deserve the most ! unequivocal and unqualified condemnation j of the whole country. 5. Resolved, The present representation in the State Legislature we regard as cumfirous, an unnecessary tax upon the people and in- j irnical to wise and prudent legislation. We j advocate a decided ieduction and at theeatli- 1 est day practicable. Gov. Brown'* D<*iiiaso*sii*i*iii. In his acceptance of the nomination, I last June, Gov. Brown used the follow- ‘ ing language, viz: “It is my duty to say to you, that I cannot undertake to canvass the State. * * While in office, I could not can vass the State without frequently neg lecting important official duties ; and I j am unwilling to neglect the duties of the j important official trust confided to aie by the people for the purpose of canvassing for another term of office.” < >h, no! he cannot canvass the State for a second term of his office. He could not doit “without frequently neglecting important official duties. I>ut Gov. Brown can come to Atlanta once every week or two and stay a day or two with ihe editors of the “Intelligencer,” and at j the State Depot, to aid in fixing up edi torials in defence of himself, or attacking Gov. Akin ! From the frequency of his 1 visits to Atlanta, something must be very wrong on the Western & Atlantic Ilailroad—or else the Governor must be neglecting his official duties to canvass for his re-election in a most cowardly and skulking manner. He cannot be ; guilty of “frequently neglecting impor- j tant official duties” for the purpose of j renting “another term of office,’ but he W >ll help the party editors gather mat- i ter m support of his re-election. He i will not appear in person before the people, but he will write articles about i and in and fence of himself, and suggest matter against his opponent. He will make the people believe he is too honest to spend their time in traveling over the State to make speeches—but, under ‘ • ■ pretence of looking after the State Road, he can canvass and thus serve the party 1 and himself! Ilis health is too poor to 1 ’ travel about and make speeches, but it , is not too poor to write or suggest edi- j t torials ! Gov. Brown's thirty thousand is going glimmering—growing smaller ! b y degrees and beautifully less every ‘ , day. He feels it; hence his anxiety.— j 1 j Atlanta American. j > From the Rome Courier. B,eep It Before the People That the following statements are taken from Official Documents, and no intelligent and honest man can deny them. Keep il before the People. —That for the en tire four years of Gov. Johnson's ad nia ra tion, the net income of the State Road was, on an average, Thuty-fire thousand eight hun- I dnd and ninety-four dollars and seventy seven cents, per month. Keep it before the People.— That Governor Brown brags about his management of the State Road, and rests his hope of election upon his success in this enterprise. Keep it before the People, —That Governor Brown has, on an average, only paid into the Treasury from the State Road Twenty-eight thousand fire hundred and sixty-two dollars and fifty cents. Keep it before the People, —That the net income, of the State Road, under Johnson, was seven thousand three hundred and twenty-tux) dollars and twenty cents per month, more than it has been under Brown. Keep it before the People, —That Governor Johnson, in his last Message said : “I fully concur with the Superintendent, that hence forth, under proper management, it [ihe State Road] will pay into the State Treasury, three hundred and forty-three thousand seven hun dred and fifty dollars, annually, and yet he has the impudence, to btutg about his Railroad management ! ! ! Keep it before the People, —That the gross earnings of the State Road are oti hundred thousand dollars a year less under Governor Brown’s Administration than they were under that of Gov. Johnson. Keep it before the People,— That before the election of Gov. Brown, the gross earnings of the State Road had beeu for five years, steadi ly increasing at the rate, on an average, of one hundred thousand dollars a year, but since his election, it has fallen off that amount, mak ing an annual loss to the Stale, by his man. agement of two hundred thousand dollars. Keep it before the People, —That Governor Brown's boast of paying into the Treasury thirty-six thousand dollars a month, is a de ception—he having paid, on an average, only twenty-eight thousand five hundred and sixty two dollars and fifty cents per mouth, and this too, after leaving out of the calculation the first two months of his administration, wherein he paid nothing into the Treasury. Keep it before the People That by gome trick Gov. Brown paid into the Treasury, for July,/orb/ thousand dollars ; whereas, for De cember, a month in which the business was nearly twice as large, he only paid twenty-five thousand dollars into the Treasury. ’ Keep it before the People, —That Governor Brown said in bis Inaugural : “In my judg ment tho stock of the [State] Road in the hands of a private company, would be the best paying stock in Georgia.” When the fact is, that under his management the Road has paid 1 less than one-half the per centage that other Roads of a similar length have paid during the same year. Keep it before the People ,—That there is not now in the State, an intelligent Democratic I orator or edltfrr, who will pretend even, that Gov. Brown has made the State Road pay as well as did his predecessor. Keep it before the jteople, —That Governor Brown, by vainly boasting of his own manage ment of the State Road indirectly accuses his predecessors of gross mismanagement, when they, in fact, made its net earnings one hun dred thousand dollars a year more than he has done. Keep it before the people, —That a statement of all the above named facts may be found in Gov. Johnson’s last Message, the official re ports of the State Road for 1857 and 1858, and 1859, and other public documents. Keep it before the people, —That notwith standing all these overwhelming facts. Gov. Brown has the insulting impudence to boost of his Railroad management—to dare the Oppo sition to bring out their strongest man against him. The following arc the words he used in his speech accepting tho nomination : “I do not know who my opponent is to te. I hope he may be the best and the strongest man of the party, for there is some credit in beating their best man thirty thousand rotes, which I expert to do, if I live. I do not feel that I could be very well satisfied with less. ’ ’ Ciov. Brown’s Single Plank Platform—a Banc Humbug. Gov. Brown, in accepting the renomination for Governor, stated that he stands on a plat form of ‘-hard dollars.” That “S3t,(XH) a month” was an argument that the Opposition could not overcome, and dared the Opposition to bring out their strongest man against him. Now let us look at this Platform and com pare Brown’s management of the State Road with that of Gov. Johnson’s, which was noto riously had. We take the figures float Gov. Johnson’s last Message which may be found in every Court House in the State, (in the proceedings <f the Legislature of 1857.) Gov. Johnson there states that t're net earniDgs of the State Road during his administration, ! were: * j For the entire four years,... .$1,722,949 31 That is per year 430,737 32 Or per month 35,894 78 According to Mr. Peterson Thwentt’s recent showing. Gov. Brown hns paid into the Treas ury for lfi months, endiDgJune 30th, 1859, $457,000 00 , That is on an average per month 28,502 50 I Now from what Johnson made per month $35,894 70 Deduct what Brown made per month, 28,502 50 i And we have in Johnson's favor $7,332 27 These figures are taken from official docu ments and no msn will dare to deny or dispute I one single item.— Rome Courier. Taking it Coolly.—The Houston Tele egraph, which bitterly opposed Gen. Hous ton, takes the result of the election in a very : philosophical spirit. Hear it: “We were going along smoothly as we thought—had made our State officers for a | couple of years ahead, as we fondly antici. pated, and supposed the country was all 1 right, when all at once we “heard something drap,” and the next thing we felt “as though we had been sent for and couldn’t go.” It is of no use to try to account for the busi ness. There is just this one thing about it: j the opposition outnumbered us, and we had to knock under. We are now pleasantly located on the banks of Salt River, that famous place for retrieving broken political fortunes. The fact is, old Sam is elected, and he can’t be euchred out of his Gover norship in any way hut by sending him to the IT. S. Senate. The Americans ot New York State, •in Council, have determined to have nothing to do with the Republicans. They will hold their State Convention at Ttica on the 25th of September. Hon. Erastus Brooks and lion. Lo renzo Burrows were appointed Dele gates at Large to the next National Con vention. <<♦> Free Trade in France. — Foreign journals say that the French Emperor intends to open the ports of France to the free introduction of cotton, coal, iron and other articles largely consumed in the country. The third Annual Fair of the Cass County Agricultural Society will be held at the grounds of the Society, near Lass Station, commencing on the 26th of Sept next . GEORGIA. CITIZEN. L- F. W. ANDREWS, Editor. MACON, aA., SEPT. 2, 1859. FOR GOVERNOR ! COL WARREN AKIN, Os Cass. FOR CONGRESS, THOS. HARDEMAN, jr„ Os Bibb. Our Campaign Daily. We this morning “throw our Banner to 1 the Breeze,” in the form of a Daily messen ger of sound political truth, to the people of Georgia, and especially of the 3d District. In this we are actuated, solely, by a desire to aid in the overthrow of a set of political demagogues and spoilsmen that have fasten ed themselves upon the places and avenues of Government, with a view to their own j selfish aggrandizement, without any regard to the prosperity and well-being of the jcountry. For the month of September, the Daily Citizen will be sent to our present Semi i Weekly subscribers, in lieu of the latter pub lication, without extra charge to those who have paid for the same. To all others 50 j cts. for the month will be charged. The main object of the Daily Citizen be ing the diffusion of correct political informa | tiou among the masses, it is hoped that our !■ friends in every county adjacent will at once send us the means to enable us to “cir culate the documents.” For Five Dollars i we will send Ten copies of the Daily to any | one address which may be designated. We j have “put the ball in motion,” and must depend upon those who are interested in the j success of our principles and our candidates, ; to keep it rjlling till the final triumph of ; both, on the Ist Monday of October. The “Weekly Citizen” will be published as usual, on Friday morning of each week. ’ To this edition we would be glad also, to I have a large accession of cash paying sub scribers. There is yet room for a thousand or two more customers. The Census of Bibb. In yesterday’s Journal & Messenger, we find a report of Mr. Burnett, Census taker for Bibb county, which set down the popula tion of the city at 7,543, and city and county’ at 14,990 —which is an increase of only 2,291 in ten years ! A friend, in looking over the tables of this Report, points out the following discrepancies and singular errors : First, we have reported 792 males over 16 and 1,296 females over 15 in the city. This is contrary to all the natual laws as to the number of each sex—making the females double tho number of males. Again, we have over 800 voters in the city, as proven by tho last two city elections, yet Mr. Burnet reports only 792 males over the age of 16. Allowing some two hundred for the young men between the ages of 16 and 21, we ought, then, to have only about 600 voters in the city ! In the county, according to the report, there are only 1,121 males, which every body knows we can vote about 1,7001 And what is still worse, the Census Taker puts down 2,278 Females over 15 years of age, in the country, while there are only 1,121 Males over 16, thus making the number of Females more than double that of the Males. Accor ding to this, Mr. Burnet,every male in Bibb would be entitled to two wives and a fraction, to equalize the circulation, properly. This will never do, “Jeeins,” unless xve turn Mormons ! Tlic Demoeratie fleeting oil Saturday. The Democracy of Bibb had a meeting on Saturday and nominated an out and out Ticket for the Legislature, notwithstanding the known wishes of many of our most res pectable citizens, of all parties, to have a j compromise ticket. A proposition to this ; effect originated with the Democrats, and ; was, through courtesy, acquiesced in by the Opposition at a meeting held on Friday previous. But not so, thought the Fire eaters, Fillibusters and other busters of the party. They determined to put up a ticket, which should be ultra, in every thing, and treated with contempt the assent of the Op position to the proposal for a compromise which was extended by some of their best men. It, therefore, only remains for the Opposition to meet the gentlemen on their own ground and whip them to a frazzle, which can be done, in our judgment, quite easily. The Ticket presented by the Democracy is one “not fit to lie made.” There are grave, moral considerations why it should be beaten. Some of these considerations we shall take occasion to point out, before the canvass is over, in order to save the people of Bibb from the humiliation necessarily attendant upon sending such a delegation to Milledge ville, to represent the interests of our city and county, in the General Assembly. It is a clique ticket—and not one at all accepta ble to the substantial and law-abiding mem bers of the Democracy. How much less acceptable to the Opposition, we need not further say. And all the extra puffing usque ad nauseam, of the State Press, from now to the day of election, cannot make the people believe it right for the great interests at stuke to be confided to such incompetent and in experienced hands. To our lriends, we would say, select your best men on Tuesday ■ next, and if, on consultation, you deem it expedient to place Col. Bass, Judge Gresh am. or any other solid and able Democrat on your ticket, do not allow any feelings of J spite against the “subterranean” democracy ! to prevent you so acting for the good of your county and city. The Fiftli District. It will be recollected that the Democratic Congressional Convention which met recently at CalhouD, dropped Hon. Augustus R. Wright. As the Judge did not think himself fairly dealt with, he has been considering for sometime whether he should not appeal directly to the people, for a verdict in the matter. In such an event, it appears that Gov. Brown had mis givings that it might be the means of curtailing his boasted 30,000 majority, if not •‘embairaes his election” and “earnestly desires” that Mr. Wright would not run. Whereupon that gen tlemun writes a letter “to the people of the Fifth Congressional District” dated at Rome, Aug. 24, 1859, in which he says he will not be a candidate. Gov. Brown is getting uneasy. That boast of beating the best man the Oppo sition could briDg against him, 30,000 votes, was a most foolish and unnecessary infla tion on the part of Gov. Brown, and will be the means of losing him, aDd very properly, many thousand votes. Under the circum stances, any majority less than 30,000, would be a humiliation both to him and his party. Defeat will consign him forever to rayless ob scurity, “Unwept, unhonored and unsung.” Our Book Table. The Messrs. Richards have placed upon our table two more volumes of Sir Walter Scott’s novels, ‘The Black Dwarf,’ and ‘Peveril of the Peak,” being a continuation of the ‘Li brary of Select Novels,’ from the Press of Mr. T. B. Peterson & Brothers, Philadelphia. Col. Akin in Maron. There was a large crowd of anxious citi zens to henr Col. Akin, at Concert Hall, on Wednesday night, composed of all parties. A few minutes after 8 o’clock, the meeting came to order, by calling Judge Asa Holt to the chair, and requesting Chas. H. llogers. Esq., to act as Secretary. A few minutes after. Col. Akin entered amidst thundering applause, and the strains of martial music from the Macon Brass Band, and ascending the stage, was introduced to the audience by Judge Holt. To a large portion of our citizens, Col. Akin was an entire stranger, in person, though favorably known bv reputation, as one among the gifted sons of Georgia, who had raised himself from the humblest walks of life to his present high position, by well directed design and unremitting effort, gui ded by inherent greatness of mind. Such men are not only the most valuable in any community, but the most admired and res pected by all classes. Col. Akin commenced by stating that the position which he occupied before his fellow citizens, was not of his seeking, but tender ed to him by a Convention of the people of Georgia, in such a manner, as precluded a refusal of it on his part. He was no politi cian—no voluntary seeker of office—but when a noble-hearted, gallant body of his fellow-citizens called upon him to lead them in a contest against the corrupt rulers of his State and country, he could not find it in his heart to deny them—sympathizing, as he did, in their generous effort to stay the tide of profligacy and corruption which marked the career of our public officers, wbo had grown bold and unscrupulous by long in dulgence. He had many years ago, ceased to mingle actively, in politics, but as every citizen should, he had watched with interest the events transpiring before him. He belong ed to no party—but sustained, in his humble manner, such principles and measures as he believed to be conducive to the welfare of his country. He was an old Whig of 1840— and it had pleased his fellow citizens to place him upon the Electoral ticket of Taylorand Filmore in 1848, which, as every body knew, was successful in Georgia. Since then, he had made but one political speech, and had hoard but very few. He did not present him self as a politician—he never wished to be a politician—but simply a plain, unpretending citizen, willing only to meddle in public af fairs, when his fellow-citizens believed that he could do good. But, he continued, the Presidential can vass of 1848, developed a doctrine, which has since overshadowed the South ; he meant the doctrine of Squatter Sovereignty. Gen. Cass’ Nicholson letter placed it before the country. The Whigs charged the nominee of the Democratic party, (Mr. Cass,) with that abominable doctrine. The Democrats denied the imputation. They would have then elevated the advocate, as they have since done the author, of that doctrine, to the Presidency; ho believed Mr. Buchanan to be the author of the doctrine of squatter sov ereignty. The Democratic leaders endeav ored to deceive the people then, as to the true principles of their nominee. The whigs exposed them. The next year Gen. Cass went into the Senate, and he then took oc casion to put his own construction upon his Nicholson letter. He said his friends had misrepresented him : hut the Whigs had done him justice—they had construed his views rightly. Here, then, was the begin ning of the odious doctrine of squatter sov ereignty. It began with the leaders of the Democratic party—it continues with the leaders of the Democratic party—it belongs exclusively to the Democratic leaders ; and it is even said to be in their wonderful and inimitable Cincinnati platform ! At least so contends Mr. Douglas. Will the people be deceived by these Democratic leaders a gain ? He believed the great body of all were honest minded men—he be lieved the great body of the Democratic par ty, were honest and well-meaning citizens; but their leaders had deceived them. He believed there were some of the Democratic leaders who would not only sacrifice the rights of the people, but they would even sac rifice their very country to maintain office and pewer! He appealed to his Democrat ic friends, there present, to look to their leaders—to hold them to a stricter account —to regard party less, and their rights, their interests, and their country more. The Democratic party had control of the Government for years—if the leaders of that party were such good friends to the South, how was it that the South always lost rights under them ? How come it that those doc trines most dangerous to the South, always emanated from these Democratic leaders? What does the history of the past show?— Did the people remember ever hearing of a “Northern man with Southern feelings?”— Some called him a fox —some said he was a magician —some that he was a weasel —but he called him Martin Van Buren A\'hat did these Democratic leaders tell the people of the South about Martin Van Bu ren 1 “\\ liv, that ho was the only truo and honest man—“A Northern man with South ern principles.” What is Van Buren now? An abolitionist. Where does ho stand ? On i the great Cincinnati platform ! What they told you about Van Buren, they told you about Pierce, and Cass, and are now telling , you about Stephen A. Douglas. And where does Douglas stand? On the Cincinnati Platform! All these Democratic leaders, these freesoilers, these squatter sovereignty Douglas men—all, all stand on the Cincin nati Platform ! All—even down to your Gov. Joseph E. Brown! He stands on Wie ; Cincinnati Platform—right on the verv middle plank; and in the middle of the mid dle plank, with Martin Van Buren on one ; end, and Stephen A. Douglass on the other! | Beautiful trio ! Gov. Brown has the little Magician for his “right Bower,” and the lit tle Giant for his “left Bower!” That is, Gov. Brown has Martin Van Buren on one side, and Stephen Arnold Douglass on the other! Gov. Brown stands upon the Cincinnati platform; he, (Col. Akin,) did not; and while he was blessed with common sense 1 and reason, he never would. He stood upon the Pixcipi.es announced by the Conven tion in Macon on the 20th of July. Thev embodied the true doctrine; there was no room for two constructons to be placed upon them. There was no Northern and South ern construction ; they were not meant for a humbug. The Cincinnati platform had two constructions—a Northern and a South- , ern—such things were designed to humbug the people. He warned his fellow-citizens against all such clap-traps as the Cincinnati platform—they were humbugs and nothing but humbugs. But while on the subject of humbugs, con tinued Col. Akin, he would call attention i to the most eonsumate humbug of the day— he meant the management of the State Road ; by Gov. Brown and his Superintendent.— What is the impression that has gone out about this matter ? What is the impression made by Gov, Brown’s friends ? Is it not that Gov. Brown has made the State Road pay more than Gov. Johnson did ? That is the impression made, he did not doubt, up on the mind of every man in this vast as sembly. But what are the facts?—he had them there in figures—he had them from authority that Democrats could not dispute —he had the Federal Union thero to eon dptnn Gov. Brown, to expose his uffmitiga ted humbug. In former times, ifhe. (Col. Akiu,) and the Federal Union happened to agreo, he thought there must be something wrong—hut on this occasion, their tables of figures agreed so well, that he concluded both must be right. What arc the facts ? These tables show, said the speaker, that for the four years of Gov. Johnson's administration, the month ly net earnings of the Hoad, was $35,892, while for the seventeen months of Governor Brown’s administration, the monthly earn ings have only been $29,235, showing a dif ference in favor of Gov. Johnson of nearly $7,000 per month! Tho Hoad has an in creasing business—it was well equipped by Gov. Johnson—and yet Gov. Brown has done worse with it than Gov. Johnson. Still he is humbugging the people into the belief that he i< making the Bead pay hotter than Gov. Johnson, and asking them to vote for him oil that account! He, (Gov. Brown,) puts forward no other claim, and he, (Col. Akin.) thought this a very feeble one. Why was it that the State Road could not bo made to pay ? The speaker was charitable, and thought, perhaps, that Gov. Brown had done the best he knew how—that Dr. Lewis, his Superintendent, had done the best lie knew how. We should not punish men for ignorance—it might come too near ourselves. But he, (Col. Akin,) remembered that Gov. Brown expressed the belief in his Inaugural, that the State Road, with proper manage ment, ought to be the best paying stock in the State. In his, (Gov. Brown’s,) hands, it was, unquestionably, the poorest. Gov. Johnson paid an interest of 7 per cent., and he wai condemned ; What should be done with Gov. Brown, who has scarcely paid 5 per cent? It has been asked, said Col. Akin, what become of the money earned by the State Road ? He did not pretend to answer. Gov. Brown’s friends and Gov. Johnson’s friends must look to it—if there was stealing by one party, there was a backing of it by the oth er. It Gov. Brown says Gov. Johnson stole it, Gov. Brown is as had as the thief—lor he backed him. He (Col. Akin) would let them settle the fight between them—he would advise the people, however, to de mand a strict investigation of the affairs of the State Hoad. Col. Akin disclaimed any unkind feeling against any one—he was not unkindly dis posed towards his political opponents—he only did not like their principles, nor did he their policy. He did not think that Gov. Brown had so much right to complain of his opponents ns he had of his political friends. The latter may support him for party purposes, but they did not seem to re gard his opinions with any kind of respect. They had not carried out a single one of his recommendations. He did not approve of Gov. Brown’s recommendations himself—he would allude to one in particular. The do nations to certain Colleges. He (Col. Akin) would go as far as any man of his means, to educate the people —that was well known where he lived. But he was opposed to building up aristocracies. Gov. Brown would give S4()0,000 to three or four Col leges, I that a few young men might be edu cated at them by the public. The poor young men might be educated or not, but the Colleges would be sure to claim the money. He was not in favor of making a distinction among the institutions of learn ing. Ho wished them all to prosper; he wished every boy and girl in the the State could read and write w* 11. He had rather he taxed to educate the people than to be taxed for anything else. He was willing to pay the Colleges for all the poor boys they would educate—if they educated ten pay them for ten—if they educated ’one hundred pay them for one hundred. That was a fair business way of doing. He did not like Gov. Brown’s plan of paying the money whether the work was done or not. The Colleges might be honest enough, but who were to carry the poor boys there. He was for making the Colleges take an interest in the matter, and look up the boys themselves, and educate them ; being well assured the State would pay them. The subject of edu cation was one that lay close to his heart — that he took more interest in than almost any other—and he hoped to see the time when we should have a good common school system. Gov. Brown had made a “little war” up on the Banks—his party did not sustain him in that. It was a matter for astonishment that they should have nominated him for a second term, when they agreed with him in nothing in his first. But that was none of his (Col. Akin’s) business—if Gov. Brown was satisfied lie (Akin) would try to be so too. The hoarseness, consequent upon a severe cold under which Col. Akin labored, made his delivery very troublesome at times. He said i he could not make such a speech as he wished he could only converse, as it were, with the audience. He would try and make himself un derstood. Col. Akin then spoke of the political issues of the day— of the position of the South—of her gradual loss of equality ; of the constant en croachments of the North ; intervention and non intervention. The North claimed interveu tion to prohibit slavery in the Territories ; we claimed it, that we should be let alone. All we wished was to be let alone,and that theConstitu tiou and laws he enforced. He was for abiding by the Constitution and the laws: he demand ed that they should be carried out in good faith. He cared nothing for platforms. It would ap pear that the leaders of the Democratic party regarded their Cincinnati platform above the Constitution or the laws. They had placed a new construction upon their platform ; or, tak en anew position, and that was, that there should be no more said about slavery. This, he presumed must be intended expressly for the South ; the North may say and do as they please, but the people of the South must keep their mouths shut. He denounced such base treachery, and called upon all good men, right thinking men, to rally upon the Constitution and the laws, as our great stronghold, and drop the treacherous, wire-pulling demagogues, who had deceived us time and again. They had benefited themselves, but they had injured the State. Col. Akin spoke about an hour and twenty minutes : and there was much in his speech we have been unable to give in as forcible a man ner as he presented it. His manner of speaking is agreeable and pleasing, and at times eloquent and impas sioned. There is a stern, honest look about the man, that carries conviction of the truth of what ho states. He is every inch a noble-hearted gentleman; and the applause which greeted him at almost every sentence, told but too plainly the power he exercised over his hearers, and the force with which his command of language enabled him to express what he knew and felt. The impression his presence has made here, is in the highest degree favorable.— There was a waking up of the old enthusi asm of the people—and our friends abroad may rest assured that Warren Akin will leave his mark,and do his whole duty wher ever he goes. He will be the next Govern or of Georgia ! —mark that! JuRILKE ix Texn*eßSee. —The Hon. Thomas Swan of Baltimore, has been cordially invited to Memphis, Tennessee, to attend a grand ju- ■ bilee in honor of the recent opposition victory J achieved in that State, and to be one of the speakers on the occasion. Where does Col. Speer Stand? Our Correspondent “Crawford” makes an astounding revelation, to-day, through our columns, in reference to the double-dealing of the Democratic candidate for Congress, ia this District, touching his views of Senator Iverson’s Griffin speech and Mr. Buchanan’s administration. The “State Press” supports Speer because he is an Iverson Southern Rights Politician, and so do the Southern Rights Democrats of Crawford county, while in other counties Speer is considered a strong Douglas man, and, welielieve, is supported by the Georgia Telegraph, mainly, on tbi9 ground! Now, somebody is to be badly cheated, if this state of things is to continue. Mr Speer cannot be allowed to pass himself off as both “pig and puppy,” in the canvass. Let him take his choice, as is his right, but he “can not serve two masters” at the same time. If he is opposed to Iverson, and in favor of Stephen Arnold Douglas for the Presidency, let him say so—and then let the “State Press” quit its attacks upon Hardeman for his repu diation in 1850, ottheULTRA DISUNION sentiments of that year. There is no honesty nor fairness in the mode of conducting the present canvass, when a candidate takes two different positions and rides two different horses, at the same time, as does Col. Speer. On the other hand, Capt. Hardeman plants himself firmly upon the platform of his party, and is prepared to stand by the South, in the Union , as long as the Constitutional rights of his section arc preserved, but equally prepar ed to “disrupt every tie that binds him to the , Union,” in case of further aggression. Yes, Mr. Hardeman is a Union man so long as the “stars and stripes” fioat over a confederacy of equal rights and equal privileges. And all the parading by the “State Press,” of Hard eman’s resignation of his position of Secre tary of the Khett and Yaney Disunion Meet ing of 1850, will only give him votes, instead of losing him any, especially as his opponent is on BOTH SIDES OF THAT FENCE, and nobody knows on which side he will finally alight! Away with all such shuffling ; politicians! Col. Speer and Democratic Principles. Our correspondent, “One of the oil Guard ,” takes our neighbor of the State Tress, to task, for saying that Col. Speer was “nobly battling for Democratic principles,” Scc.— We are not anxious to throw in a shot for our correspondent, who is fully able to do his own fighting ; hut it occurred to us, that Col. Speer, in his “noble battling,” might forgot that one of the “Democratic principles” is, to always represent an opponent in every false light that is possible, and make his best public acts appear as his worst crimes. This, in a Democratic sense, is doubtless consider ed “noble battling,” but it sometimes brings a man of Col. Speer’s abilities out at the little end of the horn, and as speckled as a Turkey e gg- Hard to Convince. We believe the hardest thing to effect in this world, (politically at least,) is lo get the truth out of a Democratic press or leader, — and the next hardest is to convince either of the truth. Some of them still claim GeD. Houston's election as a Democratic victory. We hope they may gain just such a victory in Georgia. The Washington Slates says: “It is well known to every Democrat that Gen. Houston uot only deserted the Demo cratic party some years ago, but that he has been acting in opposition to it ever since; that he ran for Governor in the recent can vass in Texas in opposition to the regular nominee of the Democratic party; that he canvassed the State, and made speeches in opposition to the regular Democratic ticket.” Yet the Constitution , Mr. Buchanan’s organ, claims his election as a Democratic victory! The Right Spirit. We notice a letter in the Savannah Repub lican, from Col. C. H. Hopkins, dated from his residence at Bellville, near Darien, Aug. 20th 1859, in which he proposes, in com pany with Col. A. H. H. Dawson, to visit all the counties of the First Congressional Dis trict, and speak to and converse with the people in favor of Col. Akin. This is a right spirit—aud worthy of following. If some of our prominent men in each district would only take the trouble to go into such parts of every county, that could not be well visited by our candidates, Warren Akin’s success would be sure and certain. We regret to learn, however, that Col. Dawson will not be able to make the tour suggested in Col. Hopkin’s letter. Gov Brown’s Superintendent. Dr. John W. L?wis. the Superintendent of the State Road is arraigned by the Confeder acy, on a charge of defrauding the Slate out ot some of the earnings ot the Road, by shipping his Pig Iron, of which he is a manufacturer, at about sl.9scts per ton, less than the published rates of freight. This act of probable dishon esty, was brought to light by the fact, that Messrs. Cothran k Elliott, of Floyd co., have also a manufactory of Pig Iron, and shipped to the same house that Dr. Lewis did, Mr. Swift of Huntsville, Ala. A few days ago, Mr. Swift informed Messrs. Cothran k Elliott that lie could not take any I more of their Iron, though better than Dr. Lewis’, on account of the great disparity in the amount paid on the freight. Messrs. C. k E. determined to investigate the matter, as they knew they were one station nearer Chattanoo ga than Dr. Lewis, and that their freight, if any thing, ought to be less. The freight from Messrs. Cothran and Elliot’s shipping p oint Kingston, to Chattanooga, was, per ton, $3.25 this they paid, while, Dr. Lewis shipped his at $1.35 per ton. We make no comments for the resent. Messrs. Cothran A Elliott, Gen. J. n. Rice.SDd Daniel K. Mitchell, are referred to, for tLe 1 truth of the charges made, and facts stated. Periodicals. The September Number of “The llajq>y Home , and Parlor Magazine,” published by Messrs. C. Stone & Cos., Boston, is on our table, with a very beautiful engraving of •‘Solomon’s Judgment,” and an elegant colored print, entitled “The Lady's Chaplet.” This very neat and beautifully printed peri odical is of a strictly moral and religious tone, without sectarianism, and is highly spoken of and appreciated by many eminent Divines of various religious tenets. Price £2,00 per annum. “The. Illustrated Pilgrim Almanac, for 18G0, a handsome and valuable compilation, by Messrs. A. Williams & Cos., of BostOD, and Messrs. Dexter A Cos., and Ross A Goucey, of New York, is also on our table. Price 25 cents. Douglas in Pennsylvania. The Democrats of Berks county, (Pa.,) i met on the 23d of August, and elected four delegates to the State Convention, instructed to vote from first to last, for Douglas dele gates to the Charleston Convention. Berks I is the strongest Democratic county in the | State, usually giving from 5,000 to “(5,000 Democratic majority. It moreover joins Lancaster, the county of Mr. Bnchanan’s I residence. It may be safely set down that Pennsylvania will go for Douglas in the Charleston Convention. i The Comproaiiae of 1850, and the Kana Art of 1854. The Augusta Constitutionalist of the 28d inst., publishes spme lengthy extracts from the sp*M-h of the Hon. A. IT. .Stephens, de livered in the House of Representatives on the Oth of January, 1857, for the purpose of vindicating the Kansas Bill against what it is pleased to term “the current misrepresen tations of the Opposition, as to its principles ! and objects,” and sums up the following I propositions as conclusively established by the extracts: “Ist. That the Kansas-Nebraska bill of 1851, did hut carry out in good faith, 0,,, ! principles and policy of the Territorial act : of the compromise of 1850, uj>on the subject of slavery. 2d. That if there is any squatter sovereign ty in the Kansas Nebraska bill, there nui t ’ be squatter sovereignty in tho I’tnh and Nev Mexico hills, which were a part of the compromise of 1850. 3. That there is no squatter sovereignty in the Kansas Nebraska bill—or, in other words, no recognition of the power of the territorial legislature to exclude slavery : because all the powers, which the territorial I legislature of Kansas and Nebraska, under the bill, can exercise, arc derived bv it from Congress, and Congress could not ha ve grant ed to them the power to prohibit slavery, for i the simple reason that Congress did not have it to grant. Both of these positions, i. q. that Congress has no power to exclude slave ry from a Territory, and that it consequent ly cannot confer this power upon a territo rial legislature, three months after they were announced by Mr. Stephens, were sus i tained and re-affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Dred .Srof/decis- I ion. ! 4th. That the South sustained the com j promise of 1850, and the Kansas -Nebraska act, not l*ecause they would make the Ter ritories which they covered slave States, but because they repudiated the principle of Con gressional intervention against slavery.” We have no disposition to sav anythin* unkindly of Mr. Stephens at this time. Rut as the Constitutionalist has hoisted him as a defence, against the assaults that are made upon the treacherous principles of the Kan sas Bill, and we feel disposed to reply to the i propositions above laid down, if we hit Mr. ! Steaphens in striking at the supporters of Mr. Dougins and his squatter sovereignty, he must blame his own political friends for lug i ging in his name to bolster up this tottering j stronghold of the freesoil Democracy. To the Ist proposition we reply: Whatever may have been the virtues ] claimed for the Kansas Nebraska hill, by , its supporters, it was undoubtedly the cause | of opening up the whole slavery controver j sy, which we were assured, the Compromise of 1850 had forever settled. This was per se , bad faith. It fastened the infamous doc trines of Squatter Sovereignty. Territorial Legislation, and Alien Suffrage, Mr. Doug las’ three great hobbies, upon our Territorial ; policy and w hich have lost to the South her | equality in the Territories. Does the Con i stitutionalui assert that this was carrying j out “in good faith, the principles and policy jof the Compromise of 1850?” If so, then j the people of the South did not understand i what the Compromise of 1850 meant. But we assert and will maintain, that the i Kansas hill, so far from carrying “out in good faith” the principles of the legislation of 1850, was designed to destroy their effect, by putting a bar to their operation—or rath er placing such constructions upon the prin ciples, as to destroy effectually their benefits to the South. There was considerable mys tery about the whole matter, which has nev er been fully explained. The leaders of the i Democracy have evidently concealed much j of the truth from the people. If we understand it rightly, the original | Kansas hill introduced by Gen. Dodge, of : lowa, was never reported back from the j Committee. Another was substituted, with i the Squatter Sovereignty’ and Alien Suf j frage features. These obnoxious and unjust ■ features were stricken out in the Senate, and amendments by Mr. Clayton, of Delaware, put in their stead, which made the bill iden tical, or nearly so, with the Utah and New Mexico bills. Mr. Douglas and the North ern Democrats, generally, voted against these amendments, except Mr. Broadhead,of Penn sylvania. In favor of them, the whole South. The Bill was sent to the House, and no more was heard of it. But Richardson, of i Illinois, of Speakership notoriety, a most I unprincipled freesoil Democrat, reported j this present Kansas bill in lieu of the Senate J bill. The two bills were no more alike than j black and white. Samuel Smith, of Ten j nessee, another low down, infamous Demo j crat, (and who has just met with a deserved j defeat in the recent Tennessee election,) moved the --previous question,” and thus shut off’ all debate. It was no doubt a trick lof Stephen A. Dougin-. Southern men were told that they must vote tor this hill, or be • denounced as traitors to the South ! Now, did Mr. Stephens know what it 1 contained, or did he not ? We pause for a j reply. The bill passed the House, was sent to the Senate, and after a brief period passed. The Northern Democrats voting for it, except Mr. Broadhead, of Pennsylvania, and be was instantly repudiated by his party’ on account of it. Messrs. Crittenden, Bell, and Houston, were the only Southern Senators who voted against it. The whole matter was a master-piece of freesoil swindling, aided by Southern Dem erats. If these Southern Democratic Rep resentatives did not see and know the fact, they were unfit to be trusted with the care of our right* ; if they did, and deceived us for the sake of party interests, they are infamous traitors. What lias the (/institutionalist to say to this ? To the 2d proposition we reply; j 5\ ere it true, the evil would be still more J extensive, still more injurious to the South, and still more difficult to remedy. But we deny the proposition. While the bills of Utah and New Mexico were a part *of the legislation of 1860. The Kansas Bill was of 18-VL Besides they differ verv ma terially in their legislative features. In the Utah and New Mexico Bills there is no such language as “The people of a Territory, like , those of a State, have the right to regulate theirdomestic institutions in theirown way.” And no other bill on the Statute book, but the Kansas Bill, gives an Alieu a right to vote. The l tab and New Mexico Bills ex ( eludes any and all, who were not residents \ of the Territories at the time of the passage ! of the bills, from voting or holding office. — These obnoxious features are in the Kansas I Bill, and constitute Mr. Douglas’ squatter sovereignty and territorial legisiation doc- J trines. It did not occur in the compromise of 18-50. It was an after-thought of the wiley freesoilers, headed by Douglas, who had the address to even hoodwink Mr. Stephens into j their support. To the 3rd proposition wo reply : It matters very little now, whether Mr. • Stephens made a speech two years ago, or did not, denying that the Kansas Bill con tained the doctrine of squatter sovereignty and territorial legislation. Mr. Douglas, the Constitutionalist'x admitted leader, says that IT does. He plants himself firmly on that issue s and has the audacity lo dictate it to tlie coining Charleston Convention " What is Mr. Stephens’ opinion now, against the dic tum of the man whom the Constitutionalist would make President ? Mr. Douglas emphatically declared in the j Senate of the U. States, on the 23d of Feb ruary, 1859, that Kansas in her territorial capacity, had a right to regulate her own i domestic concerns—in other words to pro*