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*
