The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume], September 30, 1859, Image 2

About The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865

Image provided by: Minnesota Historical Society; Saint Paul, MN

                
Puneer # Jfmfftrat
SAINT PAUL.
Friday Mornlng_JSeptember JO, 1859,
THE OHIO THIEF!
Further Development* In regard to
James H. Baker.
CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN HON. CHARLES
REEMELIN, OF CINCINNATI, AND A
MINNESOTA REPUBLICAN.
BAKER CONVICTED BY REPUBLICAN
TESTIMONY.
The second advent of James H. Baker
in St. Paul, renders it proper that we should
reproduce the evidence heretofore made
public, convicting him of bribery and per
jury, together with such additional testi
mony as we have been able to obtain. In
his speech on Thursday night, Baker did
not attempt to defend himself; his sole ref
erence to his action in regard to the Ohio
loan, consisted in whining complaints that
in assailing him in reference thereto, »ve
attacked his pi ivate character. He rested
his defeuce on the case be made out at the
Theatre, in his first speech in St. Paul. In
reference to Baker’s private character, we
have yet to learn that, in exposing a public
thief—a convicted perjurer—a defaulting
and disgraced official—a refugee from jus
tice and the outraged and betrayed public
sentiment of a sister State—we are travel
ling beyond the Hue of our duty as a public
journalist. To pass over Baker’s crimes
in silence, when he is a candidate for
a high and honorable office before the
people of this State, we would be direlect
in our duty, not only to the Democratic
party, but to every citizen of Minnesota,
who has an interest in the honest adminis
tration of our State affairs. The forger,
the thief, or the assassin, who has been tried
and convicted by the Courts of Justice,
could ask immunity from exposure with a
far better grace than James H. Baker,
who has been perambulating Minnesota for
months, constantly employed in assailing
the official and personal integrity of Gov
ernor Sibley, George L. Becker and
other men, who were toiling for the advance
ment of our State, when Baker was receiv
ing bribes from Wall street brokers, to aid
them in robbing the people of Ohio.
It will be recollected that at the Threatre,
Baker contended that the evidence of H.
A. Johnston, to whom was awarded the
Ohio loan, acquitted him of the charges
preferred, and that the Report of the Inves
tigating Commission was a partizan re
port, prepared by two Democrats, Messrs r
Morgan and Edgerton, who had feelings of
personal hostility against him. To sustain
the first point, he quoted the testimony of
Mr. Johnston as follows :
“ That he (Johnston) made the bid for the
Ohio Loan, oflßsG, alone, and on his own hook
—that he had no partner before it was awarded
him—that he ascertained in his own way,
without getting any information from the Fund
Commissioner. &c. * * * also, that he nev
er paid Auditor Wright or Secretary Baker
anything for getting the loan, that he had no
agreement or understanding, or even conver
sation with either of them, and was introduced
to them only after the award was made,” &c.
[Long and loud applause ]
Baker, however, neglected to read, and
for obvious reasons, the conclusion of the
paragraph. Immediately after the closing
words, the “ award teas made,” and in the
same sentence, we have the following addi
tional testimony from Mr. Johnston:
“ That Ludlow (Johnson’s agent in bribing
Baker) had told him afterwards once, that
these Western officers always came poor, and
WANTED MONEY, AND THAT HE HAD LENT TWO
of the Fund Commissioners (BAKER AND
WRIGHT) say $4,000. That when told of this,
he (Johnson) expressed to Ludlow, or some
one else at the time, that Ludlow was too
OFTEN FOOL ENOUGH TO GREASE THE WHEELS
when IT was not needed.”—[See page 504 of the
testimony.
The testimony produced by Baker him
self, and which he relies upon for an acquit
tal at the hands of the public, convicts him
of having accepted a bribe of 34,000, to
betray tne people ot Ohio into the hands of
Wall street plunderers. So much for the
first point of Baker’s defence.
His second assertion, that the report owes
its origin to the personal and political hos
tility of Messrs. Morgan and Edgerton,
we are enabled to controvert in a manner
fully as emphatic and indisputable. The
commission of investigation, appointed by
the Ohio Legislature, consisted of Hons.
A. P. Edgerton, Charles Reemelin, and
Wm. D. Morgan. The particular duty of
investigating Baker’s rascalities devolved
upon Mr. Reemelin, the Republican mem
ber of the Board, and a gentleman who has
always stood high with the Republican
party of Ohio. In support of this state
ment, we refer to the following correspond
ence, which effectually demolishes the last
remaining vestige of Baker s defence, and
convicts him, by Republican testimony, of
every charge we have preferred.
Red Wing, Goodhue Co.. Min., j
September 2, 1859. j
Charles Reemelin, Esq., Cincinnati:
Sir You will at a glance see why I ask as
a favor of you, whether the charge preferred
in the enclosed, whiehl cut from the “Pioneer
and Democrat,” is true, and the extract there
in made is from the “ Report ” as made by
yourself and associates?
Mr. Baker is our nominee for the office of
Secretary of State, and we desire to stand by
him, if he is worthy, which should be the pre
sumption, and refute all false statements made
for electioneering purposes; but if he is unwor
thy, we would not support him. Your knowl
edge will enable you to set ns right in the mat
ter, which I trust yon will do at the earliest
moment, and very much oblige many who in
these perilous times desire to look before we
leap.
In Freedom’s cause, yours truly.
(Signed) QRRIN DIN3MORE.
Cincinnati, September 5, 1859.
O. Dinsmore, E«v., Red Wing
Sir The extract from the report of the
Ohio Treasury Investigating Commission which
you enclose to me with yours of the 3d inst.,
and which you say you cut from the Pioneer
and Democrat, tea* every word written by me,
and I did then, and do new, most solemnly believe
every word to be true ; and I must add, that a*
Trustees of the Ohio Lfe Insurance and Trust
Company, I have since seen much to confirm, and
nothing _ to take away, any bad impression I pre
viously had of James H. Baker.
You sign yourself “in Freedom’s cause, yours
truly,” and I accept your salutation; and espe
cially, because you say in your letter, that you
will not support unworthy men though nomina
ted—a determination which the friends of liberty
should never violate.
Most respectfully yours,
(Signed) CHAS. REEMELIN.
In the face of the testimony we have pro
duced, and of the statement of Hon. Mr.
Reemelin, made to a Minnesota Republi
can, who was anxious to ascertain the
truth or falsehood of the charge against
Baker ; in the face of these proofs, we do
not believe a single honest citizen, aware
of the facts, and who is a sincere friend of
Minnesota, or who is anxious for the
triumph of honesty, and the overthrow of
rascality, can vote to place James H.
Baker in the high official position for which
he is a candidate. To elect him, would be a
tribute to his eminent qualities as a scoun
drel, and putting a premium upon corrup
tion, bribery and perjury in office.
Let us briefly review the testimony.
While Secretary of State, and by law one
of the Fund Commissioners of the State of
Ohio, Baker visited New York, to nego
tiate a loan of §2,400,000 ; while there he
was bribed by one Ludlow, to give H. A.
Johnston Sc Co., superior advantages in
bidding for the loan. In support of this
statement, we give the testimony of Hon.
Stanley Matthews, United States Dis
trict Attorney for the Southern District of
Ohio. He says, in giving to the Commis
sion an account of his conversation with Lud
low, that he (Ludlow) stated that
“the Ohio loan negotiated in the fall of 1856,
was given to H. A. Johnson & Co.; that he,
(Ludlow) was a partner with Johnson in that
transaction; and that by an arrangement be
tween himself. Ludlow, and F. M. Wright and
Mr. Baker, these two latter gentlemen were
to participate with him in the profits upon
his share; and that an advance on ac
count of the profitsjexpected to be realized,
he had paid to those gentlemen $4,000, and ta
ken the ncte referred to. He did not state
where it was executed. The note so far fas
I recollect, was not written on a Trust Comp
any blank note, but upon a piece of white writ
ing paper. I asked him, on that state of facts
how he could elaim that they owed him the
money. He said, in reply, that the original un
derstanding was, that they were to get nothing
except out of the profits when realized, and
that lie took the note because he had advanced
in anticipation; and that his State stocks having
been so sacrificed, there had been a loss instead
of a profit, and they were entitled to nothing
out of the transaction, and therefore owed him
the money. He asked me what he should do
with the note. I told him to give it to the as
signees ; and he afterwards told me that he
had given it to Mr- Broadwell.”—[Testimony
Investigating Committee, page 523.
Mr. Broadwell, one of the assignees of
the Ohio Life and Trust Company, produced
the note. We quote from his testimony,
page 519 :
“The following is a copy of the note above
referred to :
* On demand, we promise to pay Edwin Lad
low, or order, four thousand dollars, for value
received.
(Signed) F. M. Wright,
J. H. Baker.’
The above note is endorsed 'Edwin Lud
low.’ S. J. BROADWELL.” A
The consequences of the award made by
Baker, and which he was bribed to make,
are all portrayed in the Report of the Com
mission, by Mr. Reemelin. Speaking of
the measures adopted to secure H. A.
Johnson an advantage in bidding, Mr.
Reemelin says:
Thus bids were checked from substantial
men at home and abroad. Besides, it was a
sort of public secret among moneyed men in
New York, that there was to be some foul play
in the awarding of the loan, and that Johnson
and Ludlow had inside opportunities denied to
others. All these matters, to wit: a superficial
law, inexperienced negotiators, the procrasti
nation of the General Assembly and the Fund
Commissioners in bringing the loan forward, a
suspected place to negotiate in, controlled and
surrounded as it was by suspected men—these
are the causes which deterred real capitalists
from coming forward, and which threw the
loan into irresponsible hands, and made Ohio
State Stock fall from 109, at which figure they
stood in January, 1856, to 1034, a difference of
54, or $132,000 on the $2,400,000. And that was
the penalty the State paid for ceasing to occu
py that high and Btrong financial positions
which was pre-eminently accorded to it among
the other States of the Union.
So Baker’s scoundrelism robbed the
people of Ohio, according to Mr. Reemelin,
of 3132,000. Dear bought experience.
Will the people of Minnesota pay as much ?
Mr. Wright was opposed to awarding
the loan to H. A. Johnson, deeming his
bid too disastrous to the interests of the
State. But Baker, with the 34,000 bribe
in his pocket, and visions floating before
him, of u contingent profits out of the
award of the loan,” insisted upon its being
given to Johnson. In his testimony,
Weight says:
THE WEEKLY PIONEER AND DEMOCRAT.
I was very much disappointed at the rates
bid, end the amount bid for. Mr. Baker agreed
with me that the rate was too low, but he also
at once expressed the opinion that the bid
shonld be awarded to H. A. Johnson & Co.,
their bid being the highest for the whole loan.
I disagreed with him, and told him that my
determination was fixed, to throw up all the
bids, to make no letting at all, as the rates
were entirely too low. I felt that 6 or 7 per
cent, premium shoald have been obtained.
This difference between Baker and myself led
to protracted discussion between us—the point
of difference being, whether under our adver
tisement. we were bound to award to the high
e9t bidder.
A convenient third party was called in,
who sided with Baker, and the loan was
awarded to H. A. Jhonston & Co. Bak
er’s obstinacy in insisting upon an award
so ruinous to the State is explained by the
$4,000 “grease,”
On page 852 of the testimony, Charles
Stetson, President of the Ohio Life and
Trust Company, states that Bakeer was
written to on the subject of the $4,000
“grease,” and that he “made no reply .”
This is a sufficient answer to the statement
made by Baker the other night, at Minne
apolis, that he had paid the note lor $4,000
all bat S3OO. Baker knew he lied when
he said so.
One of the most convincing proofs of
Baker’s knavery, however, is to be Pound
In the following extract from Judge Mat
thew’s testimony :
“Ludlow also gave me an account of the cir
cumstances of an interview which had taken
place at his house the evening previous to the
opening of the bids, at which he said, himself,
H. A. Johnson, F. M. Wright, and J. H. Baker
were present. He said that he had invited these
gentlemen to dine at his house at seven o’clock,
but that Atwood, who had been dogging the
tund commisssioners about the loan, had got
hold of them in the afternoon, and they could
not get away from him, till finally they told
Atwood they had an engagement up town and
must go; when Atwood, to their surprise, in
sisted on going with them. The hour had long
since passed for dinner when the doorbell rang,
and he (Ludlow) opened it himself, and found
the three there : je®* that he let Wright and
Baker in, and slammed the door ’in Atwood’s
face. The next morning, the bids having been
opened and the loan awarded to H. A. John
son & Co., Atwood, and Wright, and Baker,
were in the Trust Company office in conversa
tion, when H. A. Johnson came in, and was
about to pass them without recognition. At
wood turned to Johnsou with an appearanco of
surprise, and asked him if he was not acquain
ted with Mr. Wright, and Baker, the fund com
missioners of Ohio, who had just awarded to
him the Ohio loan, “©ft Mr. Johnson then ad
vanced and was formally introduced to Messrs.
Wright and Baker. Ludlow told me nothing
of what had taken place by conversation or
otherwise, on the previous evening at his house;
except that Johnson, Wright, Baker and him
self were present, and he laughed heartily at
the self-possession with which Wright and
Baker permitted themselves to be introduced
to a gentleman with whom they had passed the
previous evening.”
It was at this interview that the whole
matter in regard to the award of the loan,
and Baker’s interest in the profits of it, and
the $4,000 preliminary “ grease,” were de
termined upon. Having thus spent an
evening with Johnston, the next morning the
loan was awarded to him at a loss to the
State of Ohio of $132,000, and a gain to Mr.
Baker of several thousands. But appear
ances must be guarded. It would not do
for the fact to be known that Baker and
Johnson were acquainted prior to the
award. So the next morning, Messrs Ba
ker and Wright were in the Trust Com
pany’s office, and Mr. Johnson entered and
was formally introduced. The scene was
laughable. The facetious Ludlow “ laughed
heartily at the self possession with which
Wright and Baker permitted themselves
to be introduced to a gentleman with whom
they had passed the evening previous.” The
reason for the introduction is obvious.
Mr. Reemelin, in the report, of which he
assumes the authorship and responsibility,
says Baker “ was regarded as venal and
corrupt by all with whom he came in con
tact that he was put down on the “ list,”
by the Wall street sharpers, with Gibson,
the great defaulter, as “ corrupt that
Baker had sold himself to Ludlow
and that “ Baker received the whole
$4,000, and that he alone made the bar
gain with Ludlow for contingent profits out
of the loan.” We could pile testimony upon
testimony—affidavits upon affidavits, to
show Baker’s guilt. But it is unnecessary.
His weak defence has been shattered by the
authority he invoked himself, and Mr. Ree
melin’s letter is conclusive as to the investi
gation being unjustly conducted by Baker’s
political enemies. To escape the odium of
bribery and perjury, Baker has involved
himself in a maze of lies, which would serve
'the useful purpose of additional testimony to
fasten upon him the guilt of high crimes, if
anything further was necessary.
—lt is unnecessary we should refer to the
personal villification of the editors of this
paper, by Baker, on Thursday evening.
“ No rogue e’er felt the halter draw,
With good opinion of the law.”
As to his talk about bowie knives and re
volvers, it is all fudge. No man who uses
such weapons, boasts of so doing. Baker’s
boasts, therefore, convince us that he is not
only a perjured scoundrel, but a miserable
poltrooD.
Delinquent Taxes.
The Ohio refugee and swindler, in his
speech at Concert Hall, in arguing in favor
of repudiation, said the delinquent State
taxes, amounted to 3600,000, and upon this
statement based his repudiation argument.
Mr. Dunbar, State Auditor, informs us
that the delinquent taxes amount to about
3100,000. A mistake of half a million of
dollars is quite natural for the distinguished
financier as, he styles himself.
WILLIAM WINDOM, CANDIDATE FOB
CONGRESS.
He la Proved to toe a Know Nothing,
and Something aa Bad.
It will be recollected that Mr. Windom
received the votes of the Repudiation dele
gates from Hennepin County, in the Re
publican State Convention, upon the solemn
and public assurance of Mr. Buck, Win
dom’s representative, lhat he (Windom)
was in no manner connected with the Rail
road interests of the State. It was upon
such assurances, that Windom was enabled
to beat Norton. The Winona Democrat
has since fastened the lie upon both Buck
and Windom, by producing the articles of
agreement between William Windom, and
the Transit Railroad Company, by which
the former agreed to serve the Company as
their Attorney, at the rate of $3,000 per
year—extra professional fees and all expenses
to be paid by the Company. It has since
been contended that Windom was merely
an attorney to negotiate for the right of
way. But the Democrat has disproved this,
by showing that it was Mr. Windom who
negotiated, compromised or settled, on be
half of the Railroad Company, the claim of
Mistress Hall, of Washington City, which
so shocked and horrified our virtuons Hen
nepin county friends. Of course, no Re
publican will contend that Mr. Windom
was conducting a right-of-way negotiation
with this eccentric fallen angel.
But we propose to submit Mr. Windom’s
reputation for veracity to a more severe test
than this. It will be recollected that a few
weeks since, we charged that he joined a
Know-Nothing lodge, and assumed the obli
gations of a member of that order, at Mount
Yernon, Knox county, Ohio, in 1854, and
that he was sent as a delegate to the Grand
Council of the State of Ohio, in the same
year—thus showing that he not only joined,
but actively participated in the proceedings
of the dark lantern order. We produced
proof—irrefutable proof—to sustain our
statements. But Mr. Windom, a conscien
tious and zealous church member as he
claims to be, has denounced on the stump,
the proofs as forgeries, and the statements
made in this journal, as falsehoods. In a
letter to the Times editor, Mr. Windom
says :
Dear Sir I have just learned that the Fio
neer has a long article in relation to Know
Nothingism, in which, with a great deal of par
ade, the editor charges me with being a member
of the order.
I PRONOUNCE THE WHOLE CHARGE
AN UNMITIGATED LIE!
I understand Cavanaugh claims that he has
certain pnblications made by authority. If
this is true, lie has discovered a kind of Know
Nothingism / never heard of.
Yours, WM. WINDOM,
Now, let us see who is the liar, Mr. Win
dom or the Pioneer and Democrat. The
following letter, received from a prominent
gentleman in Mt. Vernon, Ohio, will aid us
materially, in determining this question :
Mt. Vernon, 0., Sept. 19th, 1859.
To the Editors of the Pioneer and Democrat.
We learn by the late files of the Pioneer and
Democrat, that William Windom, formerly of
this city, now of Winona, in the State of Min
nesota, and a candidate for Congress in that
district, denies of ever having belonged to the
Know Nothing Order, in this place. I send
you herewith the charter of the Know Nothing
Lodge, which formerly existed ! n this city, and
in which Mr. Windom's name appear as Vice
President of the Lodge.
You are at liberty to publish the document,
and expose his position while here, to the peo
ple of your State.
Respectfully, &c.,
Accompanying the above letter, was the
original Charter of Knox Council, No 150,
attested by the “ Seal of the Grand Council
of the State of Ohio,” in which “ our worthy
brother, William Windom,” was author
ized and empowered to assist in the forma
tion of the Lodge, as its Vice President.
This Charter is as follows :
“ Against the iusidious wiles of Foreign Influenced
conj-tre yon lo b'lieve me, Fellow-Citizens,) the jealousy
of a Free People ought to be cons'autly awake. It is
one of the most baneful foes of a Republican Govern
ment.”—Washington,
Oliio State Council.
Wm. Z. Reed, Pres’t. Marine Ruffner, Treas.
R. C. Jordan, V.Pres. R. S. Newton, Instruct’r.
JohnE. Rees, Corres. Nathan Stewart, Serg.
Secretary. at Arms.
T.M. Turner, Rec. Sec. G. Brashears, Marshal.
We, the State Council of the State of Ohio, in
due form assembled, in accordance with the
constitutional requirements of honorable Order,
in the City of Cincinnati, County of Hamilton
and State of Ohio,
Do, by these presents, appoint, authorize and
empower, our worthy and esteemed Brother
A. Ban Norton, to b« President, OUR WOR
THY BROTHER WILLIAM VVINDOM TO BE
THE VICE PRESIDENT, and our worthy Bro
ther Geo. W. Lewis, to be the Secretary, of a
COUNCIL of our hcnorable Order, to be by
virtue hereof, constituted, formed and held, in
the Town of Mount Vernon, County of Knox
and State of Ohio, in the United States of Ame
rica, which Council shall be distinguished by
the name and style of Knox Conned, No. 150—
and the said President, Vice President, and
Secretary, and their successors in office, are
hereby respectively authorized and directed,
by and with the consent and assistance of a
majority of the members of said Council duly
to be summoned and present upon such occa
sions, to ELECT and INSTAL the officers of
said Council, whenever any vacancies shall
happen by death, resignation, or otherwise, du
ring the official terms of said officers, in manner
and form as is or may be prescribed by the
Constitution of this State Council.
And furthermore, the said Council is hereby
invested with full power and authority to as
semble upon proper occasions, to ADMIT
MEMBERS and to CONFER DEGREES, as well
as to do and perform all and every snch acts
and things appertaining to the Order, as have
been and ought to be done, for the honor and
advantage thereof; conforming in all their pro
ceedings to the Constitution of this State
Council, otherwise this Charter or Warrant,
and the powers hereby granted, shall cease and
be of no farther effect, and must be returned to
this State Council.
Given under our hands and the Seal of the
Ohio State Council in the city of
Cincinnati, county of Hamilton and
State of Ohio, on this twentieth
[seal.] day of August, in the year of our
Lord one thousand eight hundred
and fifty-four, and in the year of
our National Independence the 79th.
T. M. TURNER, Recording Sec.
John E. Rees, Cor. Secretary.
We have the original in our possession
and those desirious of inspecting it, can
have the opportunity by calling at this office.
Mr. Windom’s Know Nothing brethren in
Ohio, were not altogether satisfied with his
false denial of being their associate, and
they sent the original charter along as a
reminder.
V e now submit to “ a candid public ”
Who is the Liar? William Windom or
the Pioneer and Democrat ? It is true,
we don’t belong to church, and Mr. Windom
does, but that makes no particular difference
in determining this question. Who is the
Liar?
An Appropriate Call in an Appropriate
Place.
This is certainly the age of inventions and
conventions—particularly the latter. Con
ventions to consider almost every conceiva
ble subject have been held or called during
the past few months, an 3 we have supposed
that the great overcomers «f evil with good,
who are soon to assemble at Buffalo, brought
up the rear. It seems, however, that the
infidels are to have that position ; thus, per
haps giving the devil a better chance for
taking the share always allotted to him—
“ the hindmost.” The call very appropri
ately appears in the “ Satanic ” New York
Herald:
infidel convention of 1859,
The Central Executive Committee of the In
fidel Association of the United St-.-tes, by vir
tue of power invested in them by the constitu
tion of that body, call upon infidels to meet in
convention on the first Monday in October next,
in the city of Philadelphia. They urge on all
to use every effort to cause the gathering to be
effective both in numbers and ability, so that
the proceedings may be most productive of ad
vantage to our common cause, the diffusion ot
truth and consequent destruction of error, es
pecially that form known as surperstition. The
Central Executive Committee will provide a
suitable place of meeting, and do all in their
power to arrange for the comfort of delegates
and friends. By order.
ROBERT HAMILTON, President.
If the election don’t interfere we presume
Charley Scheffer, the Republican candi
date for State Treasurer, will attend the
above Convention. Scheffer’s greatest
desire is to see the negroes of the south, re
volt, and cut the throats of every slavehold
ing man, woman and child in the Southern
States. After this has been accomplished,
Charles proposes to devote his attention to
preaching Red Republicanism and Athe
ism. He is the Stillwater colporteur now,
for eastern Infidel publishing houses.
The Fugitive Slave Law.
Our readers will recollect that when
James H. Baker, the Ohio swindler, made
his speech at the Theatre, he professed, with
all the cortortions of body and facial grim
aces which Uriah Heep could master, that
“lie (Baker) was a humble disciple of the
lamented Clay.” Immediately afterwards
this “humble disciple of the lamented Cl.».y
denounced the Fugitive Slave Act, with the
animosity and bitterness of a Lloyd Garri
son or a Fred Douglass. The man of
“grease” had evidently forgotten what the
‘‘lamented Clay” said in reference to the
Fugitive Slave Law, in his great speech of
November 25, 1850, at Frankfort, Ky.
Here it is, however, and we insert it for the
benefit of the “humble disciple
“If the agitation in regard to the FUGITIVE
SLAVE LAW should continue to increase, and
become alarming, it will tend to the formation
of two new parties, ONE FOR THE UNION.
AND THE OTHER AGAINST THE UNION.
Present parties have been created by the divi
sion of opinions as regards systems of National
policy; and as to finance, free trade or protec
tion, the improvement of rivers and harbors;
the distribution of the proceeds of the public
lands, &c. But these systems of policy, grow
ing out of the administration of the govern
ment of the Union, lose all their interest and
importance if that Union is to be dissolved.
They sink into utter insignificance before the
all-important, persuasive and paramount in
terest of the Union itself. And the platform
of that Union party will be the Union, the
Constitution and the enforcement of its laws,
AND IF IT SHOULD BE NECESSARY TO
FORM SUCH A PARTY, AND IT SHOULD BE
ACCORDINGLY FORMED, I ANNOUNCE MY
SELF A MEMBER OF THAT PARTY—WHAT
EVER BE ITS COMPONENT ELEMENTS.
SIR, I GO FURTHER. I HAVE HAD GREAT
HOPES AND CONFIDENCE IN THE PRIN
CIPLES OF THE WHIG PARTY. AS BEING
MOSTJLIKEY TO CONDUCE TO THE HONOR
THE PROSPERITY AND GLORY OF MY
COUNTRY; BUT IF IT IS TO BE MERGED
INTO A CONTEMPTIBLE ABOLITION PAR
TY, AND IF AOLITIONISM IS TO BE EN
GRAFTED ON THE WHIG CREED, FROM
THAT MOMENT I RENOUNCE THE PARTY
AND CEASE TO BE A WHIG.”
By referring to the debates in Congress,
Mr. Baker will discover that Henry Clay
reported the Fugitive Slave law from the
Committee of Thirteen, in 1850; and advo
cated its passage through Congress.
« Grease ” is rather forgetful, for of course
he don’t want to deceive.
Annie Williams, a seamstress, commit
ted suicide in Philadelphia on Monday, by
swallowing an ounce of laudanum, purchased
with the last penny she possessed. A local
paper describes her as “ only 23 years of
age, and possessed of as fine a person as the
finest lady you will meet on Chestnut street.’'
She could not obtain work to support her
self. For the benefit of our readers who
may know little of Geography, we will state
that Philadelphia is a town on the Delaware
River in the State of Pennsylvania, noted
for its Quaker antecedents, firemen’s riots
white board blinds, &c., &c.
The Issue Fairly Made.
The action of the Republicans and Dem
ocrats, of Massachusetts, at their recent
State Conventions, on the subject of the two
years’ amendment, to the Massachusetts
Constitution, degrading foreign born citi.
zees below the negro, is very significant, as
indicating the position and policy of the
two parties on this subject.
The Democratic Convention nominated
for Benjamin F. Butler. Mr.
B. was a member of the State Senate, last
year, from Lowell, and opposed with great
ability and eloquence, the enactment of the
two years’ amendment by the Legislature.
His speech on this subject, ranked with that
of Calek Cushing, in the powerful logic
with which it combated the passage of the
degrading amendment. The Democratic
Convention also passed resolutions denounc
ing it.
The Republican State Convention nomi
nated N. P. Banks, an original Know
Nothmg. Mr. B. was elected Governor of
Massachusetts in 1857, and one of the re
commendations contained in his first mes
sage, urged in strong terms the passage of
the “ two years’ amendment.” In 1858, he
was again elected, and in his message he
again urged the adoption of the amendment
to the Constitution. In pursuance of his
recommendations, two consecutive Republi
can Legislatures passed the amendment, and
last spring it was submitted to and approved
by the people of the State.
Ihe Democratic and Republican parties
of Massachusetts have nominated represen
tative men. Butler, with other Democrats
opposed the amendment,while Banks’ official
recommendation, and influeuce with the
Republicans, secured its passage.
“llow lie Nick* Them S”
lion. Thos. Corwin still continues to do
the country and the Democratic party of
Ohio good service, by flaying alive the
Chases, Giddingses, and other Abolitionists
of the Republican party, who declare that the
Fugitive-slave Law should Dot be obeyed.
At St. Clairsville, Ohio, the other day, he
was especially severe on the treasonable and
fanatical leaders who control the Republicans
of Ohio. He is reported in the Gazette
(Opp.) of that place as s tying :
“That is the law, and we have agreed to
abide by it—the law IS constitutional and it
must be OBEYED. Young lawyers with soaped
mustachios and a cigar a foot long in their
mouths, who had cursorily glanced over Black
stone’s Commentaries, and read Swan on Exe
cutors and Administrators, and perhaps seen
Wilcox s I orms, had no hesitation in pronounc
ing it unconstitutional; but in the face of such
distinguished authority IT IS constitutional,
and it is the law of the land—that the highest
and most intelligent tribunals in the land had
so pronounced it—so decided it, and there can
be no doubt about it.”
AY e have a few of those “ soaped and
mustachioed ” Republican lawyers in this
btate, who declare the Fugitive-slave law
unconstitutional. Cole, the candidate for
Attorney General, and “ Grease ” Baker,
are samples. The intellect of one and the
honesty of the other, secure for their opin
ions the exact amount of consideration to
which they are entitled.
The Irish Vote.
lhe Times and Minnesotian are bidding
very high for the “ Irish vote,” as they style
a certain class of voters. They will richly
deserve all the success they may achieve by
this labor. It has been but a short time
since we heard the warning cry raised here,
by the Republicans, about a certain “ irrup
tion of hordes of ignorant and degraded
Celts.” Now these same Republican poli
ticians come forward, and with tears of
sympathy and fair promises, complain that
the Democratic party is merely using our
Irish citizens as voting machines, and will
not allow them any participation in the
offices of the Government. The policy and
object of these unscrupulous demagogues,
whose constant aim is to excite jealousies
and differences between native and foreign
born citizens, is so transparent that they
themselves defeat the object sought to be
attained. When the Democracy nominate
on their city or county ticket, candidates of
Irish birth, the cry is immediately raised by
the Republican prints, that “ St. Paul is to
be ruled by the Irish.” But when the Dom
inating Conventions, in their discretion, omit
to nominate Irishmen, these same journals
hypocritically assert that the Democracy
believe “ the Irish are good enough to vote
but not to hold office.” Every citizen of St.
Paul is well aware that what we have here
stated, has been the constant policy of the
Republican politicians and presses of this
city. No party which has ever had all
existence in this country, has stooped to an
many mean, abject, and degrading measures
as have the Republicans of St. Paul, to
obtain the votes of foreign born citizens.
At the Portsmouth (N. H.) navy yard
the other day, the commandant issued or
ders that all the cattle employed In the yard
should be fed on cut feed, which were ac
cordingly carried into effect. But one old
ox who had been educated on long hay could
not accommodate himself to the new diet, and
it was reported to the proper authority that
the animal wouldn't eat cut feed. “ Not
eat it! ” exclaimed the head teamster, filled
with holy horror. “By thunder 1 he must
eat it. It’s the commodore’s orders 1 ”