Newspaper Page Text
TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION.
The National RcrDBMCAff ii published every afternoon, (Sundays excepted,) at tba comer of Indiana Avenue and Second street) and is delivered to city subscribers at six cents per week, mail aubscribers at three dol lars and fifty cents per annum, in 'advance. Advertisements Inserted at liberal rates. tSf All communications, whether on usi ness or for publication, should be addressed to LEWIS CLEPIIA.NE k Co, Washington, D. C. PUBLISHPIIS' NOTIC. Subscriptions, advertisement, and comma nications, intended for this paper, may be left at Adamson's periodical store, on Seventh street, opposite the General Post Office, whore copies of the paper may also be had Immediately pn, its issue. Advertisements should be seht'' in befora twelve o'clock, M., otherwise tiiey may have to lie ot cr a day. Communications upon all subjects, particu-. Iarly with reference to onr citjr affairs, will re ceive respectful attention. QSKimkl Vol. I. WASHINGTON, D. C, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1860. No. 17. PRICE ONE CENT. - ' ..'i' . . LETTER OF SENATOR WILSON 10 HON. CALEB GUSHING. Senate Chamber, December ltth, 1860. lion. Caleb Cutting: Sir: Pn tbe 6th , of November, one hundred and seventy thousand men of Massachusetts thronged to the ballot-boxes to express their choice for Chief Magistrate of the Republic. By speech) by letter, by act, your sentiments, opin ions, wishes, were raAdeknowu to these thousands of your native State; yet hardly one thirtieth part of that holt 'of one hundred and seventy thousand mea voted with yon for the representative-' your aeotlmentsj opinions,' policy. You nowj elr,tep forth froavthe ranks of your insignificant beftd of confederates, 'to lecture the thousands of Massachusetts freemen who heeded not your voice on the day of the conflict You assume to come forthto. speak to the people of Massachusetts "on the itatt of -the Union." Yon profess to speak for the Union now In peril. You announce that " we. the people of .the United States, ar'e'ln the midst of a revolution j " that "men in the South'have taken the Initiatory step to dissolve the Union ; " that " the ship of Sate Is among the breakers, drifting on the lee-shore of destruction." At such a crisis, truth, justice, patriotism, should have impelled you to utter the language of the statesman, not the language of the parti san. Have you, sir, so spoken? Have you ao rather so spoken as to further deceive and rats lead those who are already deceived and misted? to excite and embitter those who are already ex cited and embittered to madness? Have you not, by misrepresenting the feelings, sentiments, opin ions, purposes, of the people of your native Mas sachusetts and of the North, by monstrous accu sations against tbe Republican party, and by perversions of the language of its public men, weaponed the hands of the dlslojal men who are now playing upon the passions and the tears of their deceived and deluded countrymen? Had you, sir, toiled with "malignant Indus try " to frame accusatory and vituperative phrases against the people of Massachusetts and of the North, for the sole nse and benefit of your dis loyal confederates, who, at Charleston and Balti more, with your complicity and co-operation, broke upthe Democratic party, as " the firsts'ep to disunion," you could not have achieved a greater success than you have achieved in this, tbe most Incendiary speech which has fallen from the lips of man during recent contests of opin ion and of aetion. The British statesman, Can ning, describes a class of men "whose element is mischief and whose delight is in disturbance." Surely you, sir, have shown that you are without a peer in the work of misrepresenting the North and exasperating the South, for the sole benefit of mea " whose element, Is mischief and whose delight Is In disturbance." No one can read your speech without feeling that you entered ifpon the performance of your self-lmpoied task with a heart and will with a sort of jubilant ferocity. Your brain seems to lust, to hunger and thirst after accusatory and vituperative phrases to stigmatise the " degenerate bods '' of Massachusetts ana or tbe Norm. with reckless audacitv you asBart that tbe mind of Massachu setts Is "INFILTRATED WITH THE VENOM OF ABOLITIONISM ;" that her people are filled with "SECTIONAL tlATR AND ABOLITION RAGE;" that "SECTIONAL AND ABOLITION DELIRIUM HAS SEIZED UrON TUE.MIND OF MASSACHUSETTS, CORRUPTING HER CON SCIENCE, PERVERTING HER RELIGION, DIS TORTING HER MORALITY, POISONING HER LAW, EXTINGUISHING HER PATRIOTISM, MISGUIDING HER CONDUCT." Why, sir, are these railing accusations now made against Massachusetts? Why are these vituperative phrases now blurted into tbe too willing ear of the credulous, sensitive, and mad dened South ? Will the ulteranceof these phrases, wnlcn me Heart or Massachusetts Instinctively pronounces false wickedly, cruelly false now tend to save the Imperilled Union ? Will tbeir utterance not rather spur on the fiery spirits who would " plunge tbe cotton States into revolu tion," and "shiver the Union from turret to foundation stone?" You stigmatise tbe Christian men of the North as "degenerate sons," who "had organized, In the Northern States, a system for the purposo of preaching a crusade against tbe people of the South." You oaten that " the minds of too many at tbe North had got to be utterly lost to all sepse of truth or falsehood, right or wrong ; and everything of good gave way to the frantic clamor of mere unreasoning and senseless sym pathy with black men ; " that " the sacred pul pit, to a great extent, became Infected with po litical abolitionism as with an epidemic plague ; " that " political power at the North could be ob tained only by pandering to this unconstitutional spirit of intermeddlesomeness ; " that " tbns the dally speech and thought of tens of thousands of persons in the Northern States was of such hostility of feeling towards their fellow citizens of the Southern States, as tbe bitterest national hatred, and that only, could apply to foreign en emies." Why, sir, ii this perilous crisis of the nation, do you thus accuse the North ? Is It your pur pose to deepen the fearful delusion of the South, concerning tbe feelings, sentiments, opinions, of the North? Would you Intensify the angry ex citement of tbe South? You gave aid and com fort to Yancey and his associates at Charleston and Baltimore, in their efforts to disrupt the Democratic party. Then you were their confed erate, or their instrument Is it your purpose now to give aid And comfort to Yancey and his distoyaiionieasraies, in meir maa euort to dis rupt the Union ? Mean you to be their accom plice or their instrument now? Iago said that be would not only deceive Othello, but so far prevail as to cam his thanks, eveu while prac ticing upon bim the fatal deception: "Make the Moor thank me, love me, and reward me, For making him egreglously an ass, And practicing upon his peace and quiet Even to madness," Are you now fired with like ambition? Do you hope, by railing accusations against your na tive State and' tbe North, not only to deceive the South, but to earn tbe grateful thanks of the South for deceiving her? Sir, you, in your letters and speeches, have persistently accused the people of Massachusetts and of the North of entertaiulng feelings of bit ter, unreasoning, malignant hatred toward their countrymen of the South. Your words have penetrated tbe ear and fired the heart of tbe South ; and now, In this crisis, which falsehood, misrepresentation, and calumny, have precipitated upon us, you, sally out and ring Into tbe ear of tbe South the accusation that Massachusetts Is filled with " suctlonal bate and abolition rage." The people of Massachusetts, of the North, do not " bate " their countrymen of the South ; qot one in a thousand of tbe men of Massachusetts is filled with "sectional hate." I know Massa- chnsetts I know something of her people. Du ring tbe past fifteen years, 1 have traversed every portion of the State, from the sands of the Cape to the hills of Berkshlie; spoken in nearly tv. err town I sat at the tables and slept beneath tbe roofs of her people. Around those tables and. beneath those roots Iibave heard prayers to Al mighty God foe blessings on slave, and on mas ter, vruui luuuiauus 01 uonsuan uoinee, in i tr ......I ... xf U--I--J .l r .L .- ' -. ' Msuvuuitti, iinw r.niauu, me iiurui, icusui thousands of ,men and women dally Implore God's blessing upon the whole country upon the poor stave r d bis proud master. Go, sir, to the firesides of the liberty-loving, God-fear-tng men of your native Stale, you now stigma tize as "degenerate sons," filled with " tect'onal hate and abolition rage and you will hear jthem, Vith bpen HibltJ and 'on beaded' knees, com mend master and lave, and tbe Whole coun try, to the protection of that Being who .made all men in His 'own Image. Men 'of the South visiting Massachusetts, on pleasure or business, are ever treated by all her people with considerate kindness and fraternal regard ' The pnblio men of the South ara ever welcomed to Massacbuset'-s; treated with courtesy by all, and sometimes with " complimentary fiun keyism" by tbo few. Yancey, Henry, Illlllard, Maynard, and other men pf the South, were du ring tbe late canvass listened to with attention and the utmost courtesy, and that, too, when quiet citizens or Massachusetts were, In portions of tbe South, subjected to the greatest Indigni ties. During the past seven years I have travelled more than eighty thousand miles, in seventeen Stales, delivered more than four hundred ad dresses, looked Into the faces of hundreds of thousands of the people, sat with them at their tables, slept b.neath their roots, listened to their words; and what I have said of tbe people of Massachusetts, I can say, alto, of tbe people of New England and of the North. During the late anvass I attended nearly one hundred tub lie meetings In tbe North, saw hundreds of thou sands of people, and hesrd many addresses by others. 1 have often disclaimed, for myself and for the people of tbe North, any feelings of hostility towards our brethren of the South, and I have heard other speakers do tbe same, and every where the people unanimously and enthusiasti cally applauded tbo sentiment. All over tbe free States, the Republican speakers, while firmly averring tbeir determination to use all constitu tional and legal means to arrest tbe extension of slavery, disclaimed for the Republicau party all feelings of hostility towards tbe people of the South, and everywhere the whole people heartily applauded the sentiment. Not ooe, no, not one In a thousand of the one million eight hundred thousand men who voted for Lincoln, was actuated by "teclional hate and abolition rage." This Iassert positively, and with out hes tation or qualification, and I put my as sertion against yours. Tbe people of Massachusetts loithed slavery and loved liberty ; they were ready to step to the verge of constitutional power to arrest Its expansion, but they hated not their brethren of the South; they embraced in tbeir affections the whole country, and the people of the whole country. Is it "sectional bets and rbolltlon rage" to eipre.s "disapprobation of slavery," which you, sir, once pronounced in Congress "but another form of tbe love of liberty ? " Look, sir, at your own history, before you uudertake to condemn others. On the Fourth of July, 1833, you told the men of Massachusetts that " this proud anniver sary day of our emancipation" should be "con secrated" to "the spreading abroad of the gr-at trut that all men are born to equal participation in thebleuingsoflffe the rights and wrongs or Tint SLAVE, WHEREVER UK HAY BE, AND OF WHATEVER cl'ue on COMM.KXION." Vou wished " that tbo curie of involuntary servitude did not still cling tA ar lnwrreZh a rtnrtiAn nr nim As-tnnB virm An sJ.i v aw migv t I'vitiwu ui vis vuuiHijuitiii ii- stroying their peace, filling their dwellings with the agonies of perpetual domestic suspicion, subjecting their families to massacre, and hanging its dead weight upon tbeir public welfare ; that the chains of the negro uere at length ana forever struck from his limbs ; that liberty, knowledge, and Ch. Mani.u. were made equally the unpurchased birth ight of the European and the AJrican, throughout the Jicw World I" You asserted that " the doctrines of emanci pation are among the peculiar and character istic lessons of the religion of Jesus Christ." You d'dared, "We see, among tbe Slate o." tho Union, some which nature has most bouute cusly favored, com arat vely impoverished by the system of slave labor rendered tributary to the Industrious population of the free States or of foreign countries, lor all the comforts and conveniences of life unblessed by the sign of universal competency, happiness, and welfare, me commodious nab'tnt'ons, lue tbrllty and well-o.-dered farms, the flourishing m.inu facto ries, the ships, the churches, the schools, which are the result and honor rf Tree labor in the Eastern and Middle States ; we tee all this, the re rlbutlon which slavery works out upon i self, we see thnt monstrous disloyalty towards the Un' n, in certain regions of the South, of which, whatever may be the pretexts, this undoubtedly is not tub least rauiTKUL soibik; and lu these consider ations, even if the right of the slavo did not cry to Heaven for hit ransom, we should find Incentives enough to plead, and labor, and pray, ror tne purincation ot mis ptague ipot from onr Iand,-fr the end of this great drawback in the palmy prosperity of tbe Union." You fully proclaimed "I avow these to ub TUB SEXTIWEVTS WHICH 1 ENTBRTAIXJ I BELIEVE THEM TO HAVE UNIVERSAL CURRENCY THROUGHOUT Nfcw Eholand." Is it "sectional hate and aboli- tionrage" for Massachusetts for the Republicans of Massachusetts to wish that " tbe curse of in voluntary senitude did not cling to so large a portion of our countrymen ; " to regard slavery as a "rLAOUKSPOT" the "rRurrruLBOURCn" uv THAT " MONSTROUS DISLOYALTY TOWARDS THE U.MON IN CERTAIN RtQIONS OF THE SOUTH " to believe that "the doctrines of emancipation are among the peculiar and characteristic lessons of tbe re ligion of Jesus Christ?" Vou, sir, in a letter to John G. Wblttier, in the autumu of 1838, explanatory of a previous letter, said: " In respect to the District of Columbia, I am 1 in favor of the abolition ofslavery and the slave 1 trade thoreln, by the earliest practicable legls ' lation of Congress, regard being had for the 'just rights of all classes of tbe citizens, and ) 1 intended to be so understood." '! ' did not design it to be understood that I enter 4 tained any desire or disposition to chango my 1 course In regard to the subjects embraced in 1 the letter; but, on the contrary, being resolved ' to continue to maintain, oti all suitable occa ' sions, as I have heretofore done, tbe prluclples 1 and spirit of tbe resolves of the Legislature of ' Masachueetts, appertaining to the right of petl 1 tlon,and to slavery and the slavo trade In their ' various relations." The resou:ions passed in 1838the "principles and spirit" of which you " resolved to continue to maintain as heretofore" declared that "Con gress has, by tbe Constitution, power to abolish slavery and the (lave trade la the DNtrl't of Columbia:" that "Congress ought to take meas ures to effect the abolition of slavery in 'the Dittrlot of Columbia;" that "tbe rights of hu manity, the claims of justice and the common good, al&e demand tbe suppression of the slave trade carried on in nnd through the District of Columbia;" that "Congress has power to abol ish slavery In tho Territories or the United States;" that "Congress has power to abolish tbe traffic in slava , between different States;" " the exercise of this power Is demanded by (he principles of humanity and justice;" that "no ne,w slave State should hereafter be admitted into the Union." Is t ' sectional hate and abo lition rage" for Massachusetts "or the Republi cans of Massachusetts. td believe that "Con gress baa, by tbe Constltnllon, power to prohibit slavery In the Terrlto-les of the United States," and to "resolve to continue to maintain as here tofore Its principles and spirit? " You proudly "confessed," twenty-three years ago, In the Hlls of Congress, that " we of the State of Massachusetts hold universally that domestic slavery Is an evil moral, political, and aochl ; we bold that negro Slavery, as It now ex ists In some of the States of this Union, Is an evil ; nnd If It depended on us, and slavery could be abolished lawfully, and with safety both to the blacks and tho whttes,'the two races would not coexist in their present relations another day." You then declared that "these opinions" were not tho " wjld chime.'a of itctndiary schematics;" that " the; were the opinions of the great oracles of republicanism In, th Houth as well as tbe North;" that " they were not only the opinions of JefTerson, bnt of Washington, Madison, and others, the brightest names In tbe annals of Amer ica ." Is It " sectional hate and abolition rage " for the people of Massachusetts, nnd for the Repub licans of Massarhuscits, to cling to these doc trines, which yon, in 1837, averred to be the doctrines of Virginia, "not the Vlrgicla of the revolutionary year 'seventy-six merely, but the Virginia of this blessed year of our Lord ?" In 1830, you stigmatized slavery In the Constitu tion of Arkansas as "this noxious matter," " the un clean thing." Then you nsked, " shall we, v. 1th the accents of liberty perpetually on our lips, shall wo be bn.tishly dumb, when It Is sought, hrough us, to render slaiery Irredeemably perpetual in a new State soliciting admission into f'e Union ? " Then you declared, " l do not persuade myself that liberty Is an evil, or slavery a blcsslnj. When called upon to accord my ofhclal saactiou to a frame of government, which not merely per mits, but expressly perpetuates, slavery, I should be false to ell the opinions and prluclples of my life if I did not promp ly return n peremptory and emphatic 'no.' " Is It "sectional hele and abolition rage" for the people of Massachusetts, for tbe Republicans of Massachusetts, now to re gard slavery as a " noxious ma' tr " an " unclean thiig" to the extension of which they would "promptly return a perempl-ry c d emihatlc 'no?'" In those days, when you "gloried" In the "old and persevering dedication to liberty " of Neir Eng'and, you proudly proclaimed : " Every tendency of my nature, and every les 1 eon of my education; the institutions and his 1 torlcal associations amid which I was born and ' bred; the moral force of the literature I cultl ' vate, and tbe laws I aid to administer; the ' maxims of religion, ethics, and s'- fesmansblp; ' In a word, tbe circumstances which have eur 1 rounded me through life, and that Innate spirit ' of the undying thought, which is above and be ' yond every circumstance of time and place all ' Impel me to r; robote slavery as the greatct of ' eoeiai and poll cat evils." is It "sectional ha'e 'and abolition rage" lor the people of Massa ' chusetts, for the Republicans of Massachusetts, now to "reprobate slavery as the greatest of so ' cial and political evils f" In those da I, when you averred that "If It were i llegcd to us that slavery Is a bb-slng, we should be pione to shrug our shoulders in silent wonder, and pass on," you declarel, ?tr the fullest recognition of the reserved rights of the States, " do not admit any implication in the Constitution adverse to liberty." "Tbe political power which tb pre-eminent statesmen of tbe evolutionary epoch, amid the disruptions cf ancient ties, and by tbeir blood nnd sufferings, strove to rear up In this New World out of tbe ruins of Ihe colonial condition, was no bifroni janui, with r'ght in Ibis eye and wrong in that. When tbey unfurled Ihe banner of Independence to the startled gaze of nationa, they did not de sign that 'liberty' should flash forth Its Ilgat nlug letters from one Bide of it, and the dark scroll of ' slavery ' hover . oni the other. They looked to the eventual cessation of personal servitude from among us, and made no mental reservation or limitation In its favor." Is it " sectional hate and abolition raae " for the people of Massachusetts, for the Republicans of JUssacbusell, now to interpret and unuersiaua theConstltutlon as you then Interpreted and under stood 11 to believe that " tne pre-eminent states men of the revolutionary epoch, when they un furled the banner of Independence to the startled gaze of nations, did not denlgn that ' liberty ' should flash forth Its ligbtriig letters from one side of It, and the dark scroll of slavery hover from the other ? " But you now say, sir, It was left to the " de generate sons " to begin to undo the work of the lathers " that it was not until twenty years ' after tbe establishment of the Constitution, ' when the last of the Revolutionary Presidents ' was in the seat of Federal power, that men of ' the Northern States began to strike blows at ' the equality of the Slates, by insisting on the ' putting of the institutions of Southern States ' under tbe ban of the Union, in excluding them ' from the common Federal territory." Now, yon arraign, accuse, and cenBure the North for tbe Missouri restrictions of 1820. Now, those restrictions are "blows at the equal ity of tbe States," struck by the " degenerate eons" of the North. In 1830, when yon " felt It to be your duty as a Northern man to take a counter stand In conservation of one amonf, the dearest of the Institutions of the North ' the institution of liberty ' when " no choice re mained to us but to maintain, temperately yet firmly, the rights and the principles of the North," you approvingly referred to these Missouri re strictions as precedents for, and Incentives to, tho imposition of restrictions on Arkansas. You could not " suffer the bill for the admission of Arkansas to pass without a word of protesta tion" you "concurred In reprobating the clause " of her Constitution concerning slavery it foreclosed in advance the progress of civiliza tion and of liberty foiever" Then restrictions upon slavery were not " blows at the equality of tbe States" thenyou questioned not the power of slavery restrictions, for you claimed that Con gress might require " Cuba, If she asked admis sion into the Union, to emancipate her slaves " now, tbe exclusion of slavery from tbe territories Is " putting the institutions of the South under tho ban of tbe Union"" striking blows at the equality of the Slates." To this, your arraign ment of the " men of the Northern States" the " degenerate nons " for striking "blows at tbe equality of the States" they reply, In the words of Daniel Webster, "Neither i principle nor In fact IB there'apy weouality" "there la no exclusion of SouTHEitN'people; there Is only the exclusion of a peculiar local law." By tho decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, " the state of slavery Is a mere ' municipal regulation, founded upon and Hm ' Ited to the -verge of the State law." Blavery. by common consent, Is the creature of the local laws, customs, and usages of the States ; and the jurists of the country, Sonth and North, bare held and decided, that when the master takes his slave beyond the jurisdiction of the local law bf the Stats recognising slavery, Into ajree State, the i slave becomes a ifreei man. This was the doctrine of the Republican fathers, of tbe statesmen end jurists of tbe North and South. Sonthern State courts have again and again affirmed this doctrine. In this crisis of the nation, when the disloyal men in the fjoutb threaten the disruption of the Union, you stand forth to accuse the "Northern States" of "con fiscating tbe property and other domestic rights of citizens of Ihe South, sojourning or In tran sit at the North." You say : " Treading In the same path, the next step of ' abandonment or perversion of the Constitution 1 by the sons, was for the Northern States to as ' sume to confiscate the property and other do ' mestlc rights of citizens of tho South, sojonrn ' ing or in transit at the North, the possession of 1 which, during such sojourn or transit, is guaran ' tied to them by the same explicit provision of 1 the Constitution which guaranties to the cltl 1 zens of the North the privilege to go with their 1 property and other domestic rights lu transit or ' sojourn Into any Southern State." To answer this monstrous accusation, now made by you against the Northern States, of "abandonment or perversion of the Constitu tion," by assuming "to confiscate tbe property and other domestic rights of citizens of tbe South, sojournlug or In transit at the North," I quote your opinions In 1P58. On tbe 20th of February, 1858, you made a speech la the Massachusetts House of Repre sentatives, on the "jury bill." Tbe discussion strayed into the character and merits of the Dred Scott decision, and a large part of your speech was devoted to that subject. Mr. Wells said: " The Constitution of the United States pro ' vtdes that the citizens of one State, going into ' another State, shall be entitled to all the rights, ' privileges, and Immunities, of citizens of that 1 State. I ask the gentleman if the Dred Scott ' decision does not expressly deprive every col ' ored man of that right?" You, in reply, said : " 1 reply, that the Dred Scott case does not ' touch that question; and I most beg pardon of ' tbe House It I occupy treble the time I lntend ' cd. Gentleman after gentleman introduces ' new questions, and I must reply to them, or ' elso leave It to be assumed that they are right. " The gentleman assumes that but for the do 1 cislon of tbe case of Dred bcott t. Sandford, ' the citizen of Massachusc.ts has all equal rights ' in Missouri, under the Constitution. Now let ' us see what Ihe proposition of the Constitution ' to which he refers means, and I beg that tbe ' gentleman will read what there Is In the varl 1 ous commentaries on the subject. What are 'the rights of a citizen of Virg'nia in Virgmiat ' One right is to hold tlares. Does the gentleman ' admit that he has that right in Massachusettst If ' his theory is true, be has. lie has the right to ' carry bis slave through tbe State of North Car ' olina Into South Carolina. Has he the right to ' carry his slave through Mastachaietts into IVr ' monlf He has, upon the premises of the gen 1 tlenun from Greenfield. Nay, let us look at ' the etiH more extravagant consequences of these 1 premises of the gentleman from Grce fkld. In ' tbo State of Michigan, it is7 expressly p.ovided ' by Its Con-tltutlon that aliens wbo'sboll have ' made the preparatory declaration of their inten 1 tion to become citizens of the United States, ' i'.iall be citizens of that Stato. Are they citl ' zens of Massachusetts? I repeat the question: 1 Do they, therefore, become admitted to all the ' rights of citizenship in the State of Massachu setts?" In February, 1858, you thus explicitly denied the right of the slave owner to take bis slave through Massachusetts Into Vermont. Tbe course of the debate led you to put this denial Into the form of an interrogatory, but it is none tbe less explicit. You speak of tbe doctrine as lending to extravagant consequences. Now, in Novem ber, 1800, expounding the very same claute in the Uoniittution to which your attention was directed in 1858 by Mr. Wells, you announce tbe opposite doctrine, and berate tbe people of Massachusetts and other Northern States, "degenerate sons" of their fathers, as you call them, for interfering with a constitutional right, which, two and a bait years ago, you scouted and ridiculed as being an absurd and extravagant claim. That you should remember to forget your early declarations of sen timent and opinion does not surprise me In the least; but that you should remember to forget your avowed opinions of two and a half years ago, does surprlso me, 1 confess. Surely, the audacity of inconsistency cannot further go. The Republicans are committed, fully com mitted, to the faith and creed of the Republican fathers. " Our policy," la the words of Abraham Lincoln, "Is exactly the policy of the men who made tbe Union; nothing more nor nothing less." Washington and his compeers "saw the direful effects of slavery." They believed It to be in tbo process of ultimate extinction ; they hoped " we should have a Confederacy of free States." Even yon, sir, admitted, aye, proudly and tri umphantly boasted, a quarter of a century ago, In the Halls of Congress, that " the prominent ' statesmen of tbe revolutionary epoch looked to 1 the eventual cessation of personal servitude ' from among us, and made no mental reserva ' tion or limitation in Its favor." You now, sir, charge tbe Republican party with the abandonment of tbe doctrine of the "coequalitf of the States ;" with attempting to inaugurate tbe doctrines of " tho irrepressible conflict" the idea of "the unification of labor" over " the rights of the States. In your speech before the Breckinridge State Convention, in Bos ton, In September, you said: " The Republican party has been conceived, ' born, and nurtured into strength, in order, if 1 passible, to force or seduce the federal Uooern ' ment into alolitiontim, or else tbe Republican ' p .rly is a monstrous and ridiculous abortion, a 1 gigantic falsehood, swindle, and fraud. And I ' reassert, confidently, if Mr. Lincoln is elected, the ' Republicans will hare to burst up at once, or to ' attach the domeittc rights of the Slates." Now, do you, sir, attempt to establish these wanton allegations against a party that embraces as much intelligence, character, and patriotism as were ever embodied in any political organiza tion, by'appealing to the authorized platforms, State and National, of the party ? No I To the votes of Its representative men in the Congress of the United States? No I Not to the plat forms of the party ; not to its faith and creed ; not to tbe votes of its chosen representatives in the, Nullonal or State Governments, do you refer I Inr pttilenrM in .n.tntn lit. .a ivanlnli ull.trftllnnt. but you refer to the language of Mr. Sen'ard.and Mr. Lincoln language which does not,tithout perversion, bear the tonitructlon ybu put upon it; and to a few unpremeditated, unstudied, un revised words of mine words which hi-e been, and may be perverted, but which were never In tended to express the meaning you so unjustly and 'unfairly put upon them. , tVliy, sir, rcs6rt to thisquibblinfj''to this pet ty criticism upon words and phrases, this per version and misrepresentation of men who rec ognise tho doctrine of State rights? Why at tempt, by1 this playing upon words, to misstate the position of a great party, that everywhere proclaims non intervention by Congress with the domestic rights of the Slates ? Mr. Seward can appeal to the records of his country for vindication against your allegations. Jo those records I too can appeal for vindication. Mr. Lincoln, in reply to the charge 6f Mr. Douglas of being "In favor of ranking; war by tho ' North upon the South, for the eitormiilation ' of slavery," said, " I do not believe the Ian ' (range 1 employed will bear any such construe 1 tion ; " " I know that I never meant any such ' thinj.', and I believe that no fair mind cau in ' fer nny such thing from anything I have ever ' said." " Alice no purjyosc, direct ' ly ur inifircdli, to interfere with the intlitu ' tion nfflartry in the Slatm icicrc it exist. I Uelicce 1 hate no lairjul ri;iht to do no, and I ' have no inclination to do to.'1 " When ' it i-i said that Iain in fator of interfering ' Kith slavery ichere it existe, I know it 'it tin ' wan anted ly anything I haceecer intended, ' and, as I oeliece, bu anything I have ecer 'said." " I hold myself uwhr con ' slitutional obligations to alloic the people in ' all the Slates, without interference, direct or ' indirect, to do exactly at they please, and I ' deny that I hate any inclination to interfere ' with them, eten if there were no such consli ' tutiotial obligation." " I have said 1 a hundred times, and I have now no inclina ' lion to tnko it back, that believe Oiere is no ' right, and ought to be no inclination in tltc 'people oflhcjrti States to enter into the slate ' States, and interfere wi'h the question of sla ' very at all." To maintain your allegations against tho Republicans, you also refer'to and quote from a few unstudied sentences of mine, uttered in the first flush of our brilliant national triumph. These sentences, by which a legal mid peaceful success, ucbieveu by the ballot box, is dcicribid in tho metaphorical language of the conflicts and triumphs of physical forces, you, sir, mis interpret, misconstrue, pervert from them you draw inferences of my meaning, wholly un warranted. In speaking of the magnitude of the victory, I spuko of it as a triumph over that clement of political power, the slave power. That phrase, the slave power, which you now stigtnalizu as a " putty phrase of faction," upon which " Republicans are continually ring ing the changes," has becu for many years used by politicul parties, by public men, by presses, by the people ; and I supposed every man knew its political significance, knew there was a well defined and vital distinction between the words slave power and slavery, slaveholders, slave Stales, South, Local Interest, State rights. We speak ot the slave power as an illegitimate power, begotten of slavery, a seductive, aggressive, domineering power, which lias for some years swayed and controlled the National Government, ngumsttiio form3 and the spirit of the laws and the Constitution, nguinst the justice, liberty, faith, honor, humanity, and religiou, of the na tion, for the purposes of personal ambition and sectional domination. When we spenk of tho slave poer, we no more speak of the purely local domestic interests nud legal and constitu tional rights of slave States, than do tho peo ple of New York speak of the just legal rights of tho Central Hailrond, when they speak of its controlling influence at Albany. I said, in the speech you so unfairly criticize, that the present haughty nnd domineering slave power had borne our country far away from tbe faith and policy of our fathers that we had protested against its nggiessive policy, appealed to the heart, conscience, and reason of tho nnt'ion that it wns now broken beneath our feet, that our heels were upon it, that it wis ground to powder that whatever might happen", whoever might come into power hero after, that ihe slnre power could never be whnt it had been, could never sway the councils of America. Yuu say, sir, that I "did not dis tinctly define " what I " intended by the ex pression, slave power;" that it "intends, and must intend, tne entire slavchohhiig interest of tho South that is'to say, the slave property and the constitutional and legal rights therein of fifteen Southern States" that 1 mean "fif teen States of the Union, their power and their rights und their persons," " the power and the rights of those at tho North, who sympathize with tho Southern States, aro crushed and ground to powder liy the numerical power of sixteen States." These inferences are unwar ranted by my words these imputations aro cruelly unjust. My unpremeditated, unguard ed words concerning the slnve power may per haps bo tortured by the reckless tongue or pen of political malignity so as to appear to mean "the entiro slaveholdiug interest of tho South, the slavo property nnd the constitutional and legal rights of the fifteen Southern States " "their rights and their persons;" bat I never conceived, thought, nor intended to give ut terance to nny such sentiments. If I know myself, I should blush with a sense of self abasement, if I could cherish in my heart a sentiment of hatred, or tho wish to put the biand of inequality or degradation upoi my countrymen of any section of the Union. In hundreds of addresses before the people, in the public press, in halls of legislation, I have over nnd over again recognised the doctrine of States rights in its fullest sense, disavowed any purposo to make aggressions upon the constitutional rights of the States within the Union, to regulate their domestic affairs, nnd disclaimed nil hostility towards our country men of the South. I have voted as cheerfully for measures for the interests of the South as I have for the interests of the North. I would pour out tbe treasure and the blood of the na tion ns generously for the defence of the South as I would for the defence of my native New Englaud. Why, sir, do you resort to these misrepre sentations and perversions of a few words Bep nruted from their context, to establish the faith, creed, purpose, of tho Republican party ? The Republican party has a right to be judged by the faith and creed embodied in its national platform, and not by tbe unexplained utterance of nny man. To the Chicago platform we. ap peal, against your fnrHrencos from the di&Wrted, words of vneii. This platform of Republican ism declared " That the Mainttiiame inviolate of the RIGHTS OP THE STATES, AM) E8-' 'PKCIALLY TUK RIGHT Of EACH STATE TO OltDKR AND CONTROL ITS ' OWN DOMESTIC INSTITUTIONS, AC ' CORDING TO'ITS OWN JUDOMEMTe. ' clusively, essential to that balance of power ' on which the ferfection and endurance) oftur 'political faith depends, and we denounce the ' taictest invasion by armed force of any Slate ' or Territory, no matter under what pretext 'j u ' among the gravest of crimes." In the Chicago platform are embodied tfwpriii-' ciples df 'the Republican party. Mr. Seward, foremost among the Republican statesmen or the Republic, standing last autumn In the Hall where this creed was proclaimed, uttered the united voice of 1,800,000 Republicans When ha said : " Hnil to this council chamber of" the great ' Republican party I justly adapted by Its vast ' ness nnd its simplicity to its great purports ' the hall whee the Rpresciilaties of freemen 'framed that creed of Ittpublican faith which ' 'carries healing for the relief of a dimrdered ' nalim. Woe! icoel be to him who shall add ' to, or shall subtract on' word fiom, that ' simple, sublime, truthful, bfneftrent crcd." Mr. Lincoln, in accepting the nomination of lb" Republican pirty, commiltel himself fully nnd unreservedly to this "creed of Republican filth,'1 this " simple, sublime, truthful, benefi cent creed."- In hfs letter of acceptance, Mr. Lincoln said: " The declaration of principles and senli ' meats, which acrompanirt your letter, meets ' my approval : and it shall be my care not to ' violate or disregard it in any part. " Imploring the assistance of Divine Prov ' idenco ; and with duo regard to the views 1 and feelings of all who were represented in 'the Convention; TO THE RIGHTS OP ' ALL THE STATES AND TERRITORIES, ' and oeople of the nation ; to the inviolability ' of the Constitution, and the perpetual union, ' harmony, and prosperity of all, I am most ' happy to co operate for the practical success ' of tne principle-i declared by the Convention." You, sir, are now retailing the theories nnd repeating the fallacies of the disciples of Mr. Calhoun to Massachusetts. Vain, sir, will be your efforts to pervert the reason or seduce the heart of her sons. The men of Massachusetts stand, and they will continue to stand, on these questions concerning tho powers of the Gen eral Government, secession, nullification, and disunion, by the doctrines of Daniel Webster ami the nets of Andrew Jackson. They will be slow to repudiate tho principles of Constitu tional construction Daniel Webster maintained in his immortal replies to Hayne and Calhoun, und which Andrew Jackson enunciated in his proclamation against nullification. You speak, sirj of " reigns of terror," of be ing "doomed to diein exile from Massachusetts," of your "chances of proscription, exile, or axe." Have you a renlzing sense that you merit tbo "doom of proscription, eile, or axe?" Or do you wish to arouse the sensi bilities, excite the admiration, quicken the gratitude, of the secessionists ? Or aro these only the utterances of that teeming fancy which Dees the advancing spectre of the " man on horseback?" Pray, bir, pardon ine fo sug gesting that you quite magnify your position in Massachusetts. Surely, a geulloinau who was "exiled" into the ranks of the little squad of the slave-code Democrats of Massachusetts, last No ember, cannot be deemed, by the peo ple of that Commonwealth, in tbeir pride of conscious power, other thau harmless. If you make no attempt and I am sure you will not to put in execution vour impotent threat, to "throttle us in our tracks," in a certain event, ou may jet lite many years on the banks of your clear, bright, sparkling Mcrrimac, and, after ' life's fitful lever," sleep among friends and kindred. Perhaps ft guierous people may forgive, if they do not forget, your speeches aud acts in tho interests of slavery, and grate fully remember your earlier accents for liberty, HENRY WILSON. G. W. DUTTON, BUTCHER AND VICTUALLER, F street, north side,) near Eleventh. a"MHC subscriber has opened a regular Family . Market on F street, near Eleventh street, where ho is prepared to furnish Meats of all kinds, Vegetables, Oysters, Jlutter, Eggs, and every de scription of Family Provisions, for family use, and respectfully solicits a share of the public patronage. He still continues to carry on tbe Butchering business at bis stands, No. 7 In the Centre Market, and No. 48 In tbe Northern Liberties Market, where he will always be found on market days, ready to supply his customers with choice .Meats. nov 20 G. W. DUTTON. G. W. GOODALL, Plumber and Qas and Steam Titter, 5G4 Seventh street, near Canal Bridge, Washington. ALL orders executed at the shortest uotice, in the most substantial manner, and on rea sonable terms. Personal attention given to every department of the business. nov 20 STRAY SHEEP. CAMK to tbe premises of tbe subscriber, on Thursday last, a stray SHEEP, which the owner can have by proving property and paying all eipenses Incurred. JAMKS GORMAN, dec 11 CDS G street. JOHN R. ELVANS, 309PENN8YLVANIA AVENUE, Bittoetii Ninth anl Tenth streets, DEiica IN COACH AND CABINET HARDWARE, BAR-IRON, STEEL, 4o. Stan or the Abx axd Haumbb. nov 26 lmeod. ' f