Primary tabs



The Doctrines and Policy of the Republican Party,



We propose, to give as fully as our limits will allow, the sentiments and policy of the loading Republicans now supporting Abraham Lincoln for the Presidency. We charge upon these men a systematic effort to excite the hostility of the North towards the South, to influence the citizens of both to mutual hatred and variance, by the most galling and offensive language they can employ in reference to the South; and then, by creating a feeling incompatible with the Union, to bring about, its final overthrow. We charge upon them a reckless disregard of the Constitution, a studied contempt for the judicial tribunals, and the utterance of dogmas which are calculated to incite insurrection among the slaves, and to result in all the horrors of a servile war. We charge upon them the well-known fact that these teachings and this agitation, begun for the basest purposes, have already realized at Harper's Ferry a successful result in the murder of peaceful and unoffending citizens; and that this midnight massacre of slaveholders, and attempted servile revolt, so far from exciting abhorrence and condemnation from this party, has elicited warm sympathy for the guilty actors, who were selected to give a practical illustration of their doctrines.

We ask you, fellow-citizens, if this work is to be permitted to go on? We urge you to read carefully the extracts which we annex, showing the aims and designs of the leading Republicans, and to consider whether such a party of sectional hate and intolerance may be permitted with safety to control our institutions, or to be allowed to grasp the reins of government of our Federal Union.

We quote first from Seward, because he is the real leader and soul of the Republican party, as he was the first to build up and promote this sectional organization. Hear the man who received 173 votes at the Chicago Convention, and who would have been nominated but for the private malice of Greely. At Cleveland, in 1848, he said:

"Slavery can be limited to its present bounds; it can be ameliorated. IT CAN BE, AND IT MUST BE, ABOLISHED, and YOU and I CAN and must do it. The task is as simple and easy as its consummation will be beneficent, and its rewards glorious. It requires only to follow this simple rule of action: to do everywhere and on every occasion what we can, and not to neglect or refuse to do what we can, at any time, because at that precise time, and on that particular occasion, we cannot do more. Circumstances determine possibilities."

* * * "Extend a cordial welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs at your door, and DEFEND HIM as you would your paternal gods."

"Correct your own error that slavery has any CONSTITUTIONAL guarantee which may not be RELEASED, and ought not to be relinquished." * * "You will soon bring the parties of the country into an effective aggression upon slavery."

WASHINGTON CITY — Issued by the National Democratic Executive Committee 1860.


Not content with thus denying the existence of "any constitutional guarantee" to slavery; not satisfied with thus advising a forcible resistance to the reclamation of fugitive slaves i defiance of the Constitution, which says expressly that they shall be "delivered up," Mr. Seward proceeds to set aside the entire Constitution, and to erect in its stead his higher-law gospel:

"But there is a HIGHER LAW than the Constitution, which regulates our authority over the domain, and devotes it to the same noble purposes."

In October, 1855, at Albany, he said:

"Slavery is not, and never can be, perpetual. It will be overthrown either peacefully and lawfully under this Constitution, or it will work the subversion of the Constitution together with its own overthrow. Then the slaveholder would perish in the struggle."

We quote from Horace Mann, of Massachusetts, former M. C.; Henry Wilson, U. S. Senator; Charles Sumner, Joshua R. Giddings, N. P. Banks, and other leading Republicans, all of whom concur in temper and spirit with Mr. Seward, or surpass him in violence and treasonable doctrine:

"In conclusion, I have only to add that such is my solemn and abiding conviction of the character of slavery, that under a full sense of my responsibility to my country and my God, I deliberately say, better disunion — better a civil or a servile war — better anything that God in His providence shall send — than an extension of the bounds of slavery." — (Speech of Hon. Horace Mann.)

"We shall change the Supreme Court of the United States, and place men in that court who believe with its pure and immaculate Chief Justice, John Jay, that our prayers will be impious to heaven while we sustain and support human slavery. We shall free the Supreme Court of the United States from Judge Kane. And here let me say there is a public sentiment growing up in this country that regard's Passamore Williamson in his prison at Philadelphia as a martyr to the holy cause of personal liberty. There is a public sentiment springing up that will brand upon the brow of Judge Kane a mark that will make him exclaim, as his namesake, the elder Cain: ‘It is too great for me to bear.’" — (Speech of Senator Wilson, October, 1855, at New York.)

At the Philadelphia American Convention, June 12, 1855, Senator Wilson said:

"I am in favor of relieving the Federal Government from all connection with, and responsibility for, the existence of slavery. To effect this object I am in favor of the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia and the prohibition of slavery in all the Territories."

"I tell you here to-night, that the agitation of this question of slavery will continue while the foot of a slave presses the soil of the American Republic." — (Speech of same Senator on another occasion.

"There was no freedom at the South for either white or black; and he would strive to protect the free soil of the North from the same blighting curse. There was really no Union now between the North and the South; and he believed no two nations upon the earth entertained feelings of more bitter rancor towards each other than these two sections of the Republic. The only salvation of the Union, therefore, was to be found in divesting it entirely from all taint of SLAVERY. There was no Union with the South. Let us have a Union," said he, "or let us sweep away this remnant which we call a Union. I go for a Union where all men, are equal, or for no Union at all, and I go for right." — (Speech of Senator Wade, of Ohio, at a mass meeting of Republicans in Maine, in 1855, reported in Boston Atlas.)

Mr. Wade is now a leading Republican Senator.

"The obligation incumbent upon the free States to deliver up fugitive slaves, is that burden; and it must be obliterated from that Constitution at every hazard." — (Speech of Hon. Josiah Quincy at Boston, August 18, 1854.)

Listen to Charles Sumner, another Republican Senator, advising resistance to the Fugitive Slave law in Boston, and in the United States Senate:

"The good citizen, as he reads the requirements of this act, (relative to fugitive slaves,) is filled with horror. * * Here the path of duty is clear. I AM BOUND TO DISOBEY THIS ACT." * * * *

"Sir, I will not dishonor this home of the Pilgrims, and of the Revolution, by admitting — nay, I cannot believe — that this bill will be executed here." — (Sumner's Boston speech, 1850.)

This seditious conspirator is the pet of his State and party. "There are men, or rather beings with the semblance of men, who go about the country declaring that Charles Sumner is not hurt, us stated; but that he is merely playing possum,


They lie, and they know it. Forgive me, fellow-citizens," said the speaker, "for using this language. I feel incensed against men who thus injure the NOBLEST and PUREST CHAMPION of FREEDOM." — (Speech of Hon. Anson Burlingame at Lancaster, Pa., October, 1856.)

"The Republican party docs not wish to interfere in the internal government or social institutions of the slave States, but merely to place around them a cordon of free States. Then this horrible system will die of inanition; or, like the scorpion, seeing no means of escape, sting itself to death" — (Speech of Hon. Anson Burlingame, of Massachusetts, at Lancaster, Pa., October, 1856.)

"The cry of ‘the Union is in danger,’ is the argument of fools to an audience of idiot." (Speech of Hon. Thaddeus Stevens, of Pennsylvania, at Lancaster, October, 1856.)

"In the other section, they found fifteen slave States. There they did not find the mechanic arts, save in a rude form; there they did not find commerce, nor philanthropic institutions; but they found three millions of slaves, and six MILLIONS OF DEGRADED WHITE FREEMEN!" — (Speech of Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, in New York, October 4, 1856.)

"We deny the authority of Congress, or a, territorial legislature, of any individual or association, or individuals, to give LEGAL ASSISTANCE to SLAVERY IN ANT TERRITORY or THE UNITED STATES, while the present Constitution shall be maintained." — (Republican platform of 1856.)

"Resolved, That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign power over the Territories of the United States for their government, and that in the exercise of this power, it is both the right and duty of Congress TO PROHIBIT IN THE TERRITORY THOSE TWIN RELICS OF BARBARISM, POLYGAMY AND SLAVERY." — (Republican platform of 1856.)

The foregoing extracts, from the Republican platform of 1856, are in consonance with the revolutionary doctrines of Seward, Wilson, and others above cited; and the several resolutions quoted is but the digest of Sumner's late offensive harangue in the U. S. Senate upon what he termed the "barbarism of slavery."

JOHN P. HALE, of New Hampshire, a delegate to the Republican Fremont Convention, of 17th June, 1856, and then, as now, a leading Republican Senator, addressed that convention, and said:

"Mr. Hale congratulated the convention upon the spirit of unanimity with which it had done its work. I believe," said he, "that this is not so much a convention to change the administration of the government, but to say whether there shall be any government to be administered. You have assembled, not to say whether this Union shall be preserved, but to say whether it shall be a blessing or a scorn and hissing among the nations."

Rufus P. Spaulding was a leading member of the Republican party of 1856. He said:

"In the case of the alternative being presented, of the continuance of slavery or a dissolution of the Union, I am for dissolution; and I care not how quick it comes."

Nathaniel P. Banks, of Massachusetts, was chosen by the Black Republicans Speaker of the House of Representatives at the session of 1855-6. The following is an extract from one of his New England speeches:

"Although I am not one of that class of men who cry for the preservation of the Union; though I am willing, in a certain state of circumstances, to let it slide, I have no fear for its perpetuation. But let me say, if the chief object of the people of this country be to maintain and propagate chattel property in man — in other words, human slavery — this Union cannot and ought not to stand."

While Mr. Banks was a candidate for the Speakership, he was interrogated as to his views upon the subject of an equality of the white and black races. Mr. Banks was in doubt upon this point; but took good care not to admit the inferiority of the negro race. He said:

"So far as he had studied the subject of races, he had adopted the idea that when there is a weaker race in existence, it will succumb to and be absorbed in the stronger race. This was the universal law as regarded the races of men in the world. In regard to the question, whether the white race or the black race was superior, he proposed to wait until time should develop whether the white race should absorb the black, or THE BLACK ABSORB THE WHITE."

Mr. Banks was elected by a solid, sectional, abolition vote. It appears that previous to his election, it was demanded that he should pledge himself to organize the committees of the House upon sectional principles. This disgraceful stipulation was put through at the instance of Joshua R. Giddings, in caucus. See the Ohio State Journal, a Republican paper, of that date, which say:


"On the 1st instant, lit a very full meeting of the members opposed to the extension of slavery, the following resolution, offered by that vigilant, tried, and stern old man, Mr. Giddings, was adopted without a dissenting voice:

"Resolved, That we will support no man for Speaker who is not pledged to carry out the parliamentary law by giving to each proposed measure, ordered by the House to be committed, a majority of such special committee, and to organize the standing committees of the House by placing on each a majority of the friends of freedom, and who are favorable to making reports on all petitions committed to them."

Mr. Banks has been and is now the Republican Governor of Massachusetts, and was a prominent candidate of the Republicans for the Presidency. He carried out his instructions as Speaker of the House. Mr. Giddings was a leader of the Fremont Convention in 1856, and was one of the most prominent persons in the Convention of 1860, which nominated Abraham Lincoln. Listen to him:

"I look forward to the day when there shall be a servile insurrection in the South; when the black man, armed with British bayonets, and led on by British officers, shall assert his freedom, and wage a war of extermination against his master; when the torch of the incendiary shall light up the towns and cities of the South, and blot out the last vestige of slavery. And though I may not mock at their calamity, nor Iaugh when their fear cometh, YET I WILL HAIL IT AS THE DAWN OF A POLITICAL MILLENIUM."

The following is the position upon the Fugitive Slave law of this Republican leader of the Convention of 1860 — a man who had influence enough in that body to obtain the insertion of a plank in the platform, intended by him to imply the doctrine of negro equality. (See the letter of Hon. Joshua R Giddings to a meeting at Palmyra, Ohio, in 1850) He says:

"The Fugitive Slave law commands us to participate in arresting and saving victims to this southern immolation, by torture a thousand times more cruel than ordinary assassination. I would be as willing to handle the scourge, to sink the thing into his, quivering flesh, and to tear from him the life which God has given him, as to seize him and hand him over to his tormenters, with the full knowledge and conviction that they will do it. Nor is the crime of the slave-catcher less in the sight of God and good men, than is the guilt of him who consummates the outrage by this final sacrifice of the victim.

"Yet, we are told, we must obey this law and perpetuate these crimes until a slave-ridden Congress shall see fit to reclaim us from such sin against God by repealing the law. Whether it be right to obey God rather than man, judge ye.

"From my inmost soul, I abhor, detest, and repudiate this law. I despise the human being who would obey it, if such a being has existence."

Here is resistance to a law of the land, which has been pronounced constitutional by the judicial tribunals, openly counselled by Giddings, as we have shown it to be by Sumner, Seward, and other Republican leaders! These men, with Greely, Banks, and other kindred spirits, are the men whom Lincoln, if chosen President, would call to aid him in "administering the laws" of the Union, according to the oath prescribed. Are such men fit to be trusted with such duties?

Listen to Hon. Anson Burlingame, Republican member of Congress from Massachusetts:

"The times demand, and we must have, an anti-slavery Constitution, an anti-slavery Bible, and an anti-slavery God!"

No Republican press has ever rebuked or disavowed this frightful blasphemy In fact, it is but a sample of their ordinary political harangues.

"I have no doubt that the free and slave States ought to separate," — (J. S. P., regular correspondent of New York Tribune.)

When the Kansas-Nebraska bill was pending, Greely, of the New York Tribune, was for destroying the Government and Union rather than allow the bill to pass by the ordinary forms of legislation. He said:

"We urge, therefore, unbending determination on the part of the northern members hostile to this intolerable outrage, and demand of them, in behalf of peace, in behalf of freedom, in behalf of justice and humanity, resistance to the last. Better that confusion should cause — better that discord should reign in the national councils — better that Congress should break up in wild discord — nay, better that the Capitol itself should blaze by the torch of the incen


diary, or fall and bury all its inmates beneath its crumbling ruins, than that this perfidy and wrong should be finally accomplished."

The sympathy of the Republican party with these anarchical and revolutionary views of Horace Greely, and their readiness to break up the government in order to carry out their plans, was fully shown some few months afterwards by their defeating the Army Appropriation bill in the House of Representatives, where they were in a majority; thus stopping the wheels of government, and compelling an extra session of Congress, because the Senate would not relinquish their powers as a co-ordinate branch of the Government, and agree to the unconstitutional proviso passed by the House, depriving the President of the command of the army and navy of the United States!

James Watson Webb, a member of the Fremont Convention, and the editor of the New York Courier and Enquirer, a leading Republican organ, made a speech in that body, from which we extract the following:

"Our people — loving order, loving law, and willing to abide by the ballot-box — come together from all pans of the Union and ask us to give them a nomination which, when fairly put before the people, will unite public sentiment, and through the ballot-box will restrain and repel this pro-slavery extension, and this aggression of the slaveocracy. What else are they doing? They tell you they are willing to abide by the ballot-box, and willing to make that last appeal. If we fail there, what, then ? We will drive it back, sword in hand, and, so help me God, believing that to he right, I am with them. [Loud cheers, and cries of ‘good ’] Northern gentlemen, on your action depends the result. You may with God's blessing, present to this country a name, rallying around it all the elements of the; opposition, and thus we will become so strong that, through the ballot-box, we shall save the country. But, if a name be presented on which we may not rally, and the consequence is civil war — nothing more, nothing less, but civil war — I ask, then, what is our first duty?"

The assigned cause for the formation, organization, violence, treason, and resistance to the laws by the Republican party, was the repeal in the Kansas-Nebraska act, of the Missouri compromise line of 30°ree; 30'. Yet it is notorious that the line was voted against by the freesoilers and abolitionists, when proposed to be applied to Texas by the South, in 1844. This line was framed on the principle of a partition or division of the Territory between the North and the South. In 1847-8, 9, and 50, when the South demanded the application, of this line (of thirty-six, thirty) to the Territories acquired from Mexico, these free-oilers voted it down. In 1854 and '5, they were ready to dissolve the Union to preserve this line, which they, years before, repudiated with scorn.

In 1856, the staple of their party was the pretended outrages upon their friends in Kansas. All these troubles there, sprung from the resistance of men like John Brown and Jim Lane to the laws and judicial tribunals of the Territory. How far this violence belonged to one party may be seen from the following extract:

We quote from the Kansas correspondent of the New York Times, a Republican Press, in 1856:

"About one hundred of Lane's party, including Dr. Cutter's, were on hand, and seemed to gury in an opportunity to fight so soon for principle. They are a fine-looking set of men, and are of the right stamp to make Kansas free — that is, they have the nerve and the will to hew out their own fortunes freely and boldly. Tomorrow our camp moves into town, to await further orders. The campaign seems begun. The third last monster invasion of Kansas is at hand, AND THE CRY IS, SPARE NOT."

In consonance with such a hellish spirit, we find the murder of the Doyles and other unarmed men in Kansas by John Brown and his party — by John Brown, the favorite of the Republican party — John Brown, whose services and accomplishments shown in the work of murder and assassination in Kansas induced the Republicans to entrust him with the Harper's Ferry invasion. Mrs. Buylo testifies that John Brown and his party of soldiers took her husband from his bed by night and her two eldest boys, and led them outside of the building, where they murdered them in cold blood. Allen, Wilkinson, and Sherman, were murdered


under similar circumstances by John Brown, and the Republicans forthwith extolled him to the skies as a hero!

A letter dated August 23, 1856, to the Springfield (Mass.) Republican, a Republican paper, says:

"We are having war in earnest — four fights within the last five days, in all of which the free-State men were the assailants, and the victors. Four lives lost on our side, and some eight or ten badly wounded."

Is this what the Republicans refer to by their parrot-cry of "bleeding Kansas?"

But read the following disgraceful confession which appeared in the New York Times, (a Republican sheet.) It fully shows that the system of outrage and violence was purposely kept alive in Kansas during the campaign of 1856, with a view to inflame the popular mind of the North against the South, and thus promote Fremont's election:

"LAWRENCE, KANSAS, Monday, July, 1856.

"Companies of dragoons are stationed at Lecompton, Blanton, Palmyra, and Cedar Creek. In their immediate neighborhood, and generally throughout the Territory, affairs appear quiet and peaceful. This appearance, however, is deceptive. The same feelings — the same desire to fight — exists now as did exist before the appearance of the dragoons. Travelers here and there are stopped and robbed, and cabins where arms are secreted and men stationed are assaulted and rifled of their arms and ammunition. These attacks on the part of the free-State party are conducted in a more quiet and orderly manner than heretofore. When done, it is done so that no bogus sheriff, backed by the United States dragoons, knows upon whom to put his finger. Within a few days arms and ammunition have been taken from different places where they had been stored by the pro-slavery regulators, and expeditions are now on foot looking to farther captures! We are frequently in receipt of rumors from different parts of the Territory, giving account of the encampments of armed men. ENOUGH DAILY HAPPENS TO KEEP ALIVE THE EXCITEMENT AND GIVE HEALTHFUL ENCOURAGEMENT TO THE WAR SPIRIT."

This writer lets out the whole secret of the Republican campaign of 1856. It was war in Kansas, and agitation at the North. His operations in the line of bloodshed and robbery looked solely to Fremont's election. John Brown appears to have been controlled by a cordial love for such "KANSAS WORK" — to use his own expressive phrase — while many of their associates were probably controlled by both these motives. The sagacity of the people detected this foul conspiracy, and by the Presidential election of 1860 the Republican party was found to be in a minority, in the popular vote of the Union, by the instrumentality of not less than 1,346,000 votes!! It has lost instead of gaining strength wince then ; but by the divisions of the conservative masses opposed to them, this party, which is now in a minority of more than, a million of the popular vote of the Union, dares to hope and contend for an administration of the government upon its own sectional, unconstitutional, and infamous basis. It aims to work wrong, injustice, and insult to our southern brethren of a minority government.

At December term, 1856, the United States Supreme Court gave its decision in the celebrated Dred Scott case. The case had been begun in Missouri in 1853, was appealed to the Supreme Court, and the judgment there appeared in the spring of 1857. With unusual unanimity the court ruled that a negro was not a citizen of the United States, and that neither by Congress or by a Territorial legislature (the creature of Congress) could the right of property in slaves held in a Territory be impaired or destroyed. This decision was a death-blow to the doctrines of negro equality and the Wilmot proviso, which were the corner-stone of the Republican faith. Forthwith their presses all over the land teemed with the foulest abuse of the court, and contempt for its authority. The judges who, up to that hour, had been revered by every good citizen, and respected even by the bad, were reviled as the tools of the "slave power," their personal characters assailed, and the members of the court declared to be in their dotage. The Tribune, which is more read than any other Republican organ, declared that their judgment was


not entitled to any more "moral weight than the judgment of a majority of those congregated in any Washington bar-room."

Mr. Seward charged directly collusion and corrupt connivance on the court, in his speech in the Senate on 3d March, 1858. Hear him:

"The mock debate had been heard in the chamber of the court in the basement of the Capitol, in the presence of the curious visitors at the seat of Government, whom the dullness of a judicial investigation could not disgust. The court did not hesitate to please the incoming President by seizing this extraneous and idle forensic discussion, and converting it into an occasion for pronouncing an opinion that the Missouri prohibition was void, and that by force of the Constitution, slavery existed, with all the elements of property in man over man, in all the Territories of the United States, paramount to any popular sovereignty within the Territories, and even to the authority of Congress itself." * * *

"The day of inauguration came — the first one among all the celebrations of that great national pageant that was to be desecrated by a coalition between, the Executive and Judicial departments, to undermine the national legislature and the liberties of the people."

Well might Senator Benjamin ask, "Is there a solitary word of truth in this? Not one. Is a solitary fact alleged? Not one; but a broad and naked charge is made, which is intended to stamp infamy upon characters hitherto beyond the breath of reproach. Shame, shame upon the Senator that makes such charges as these, and has no proof to support them."

Further on, in the same speech, Mr. Seward boldly threatens an attempt to reorganize the Supreme Court so as to make it conform to the will of the Republican party. He says:

"The Supreme Court also can reverse its spurious judgment more easily than we can reconcile the people to its usurpation." * * "The people of the United States never can, and they never will, accept principles so unconstitutional and so abhorrent. Never, never. Let the court recede. Whether it recedes or not, WE SHALL REORGANIZE THE COURT, AND THUS REFORM ITS POLITICAL SENTIMENTS AND PRACTICES, and bring them into harmony with the Constitution and THE LAWS OF NATURE."

Following up the same strain, Mr. Abraham Lincoln says: "The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and courts." Mr. Lincoln proposes to substitute popular clamor, however transient or erroneous, for the conclusions of an independent judiciary bound by their oaths to look only to the law and the facts.

Mr. Abbott, a Republican member of the House, said:

"Hence, the opinions of the court therein expressed are not only false, but they are extrajudicial usurpations, entitled to no more respect than the opinions of any other equal number of political demagogues and similar morals with themselves."

The address of the Republican Convention, of New York, October, 1855, says:

"It is one of the most lamentable features of the present Democratic degeneracy, that it has invaded even the sanctuary of justice, and from the seat once honored by Jay, Rutledge, Ellsworth, and Marshall, now strains its equity through the sieve of sectionalism, in accents as barbarous as they are disgraceful to the nation to which we belong, and the age in which we live. The infamy of the Dred Scott decision is but a legitimate sequence to the efforts that have been put forth to sectionalize and pack a tribunal in which was once centered the respect and confidence of the nation!"

In October, 1858, we find Mr. Seward, then confessed by all as the leader and master-spirit of the Republicans, laying down, in his Rochester speech, their manifesto of future operations. It contemplates no peace with the South, no cessation of the sectional strife, nothing but enduring hostility to southern institutions. He says:

"Thus, these antagonistic systems are continually coming into closer contact, and collision results. Shall I tell you what this collision means? They who think it is accidental, unnecessary, the work of interested or fanatical agitators, and therefore ephemeral, mistake the case altogether. IT IS AN IRREPRESSIBLE CONFLICT BETWEEN OPPOSING AND ENDURING FORCES, and it means that the United States must and will, sooner or later, become entirely a slaveholding nation, OR ENTIRELY A FREE-LABOR NATION. Either the cotton and rice fields of South Carolina, and the sugar plantations of Louisiana, will ultimately be tilled by free labor,


and Charleston and New Orleans become marts for legitimate merchandise alone, or else the rye fields and wheat fields of Massachusetts and New York must again be surrendered by their farmers to slave culture, and to the production of slaves, and Boston and New York become once more a market for trade in the bodies and souls of men. It is the failure to apprehend this great truth that induces so many unsuccessful attempts at final compromise between the slave and free States, and it is the existence, of this great fact that renders all such pretended compromise, when made, vain and ephemeral."

The whole country was startled and disgusted at this brutal and bloody manifesto. Conservative men of the North stood aghast at the idea of an unending strife between the North and the South. They held that it was not necessary for either section to force its system upon the other, and they knew that, to attempt it, would compel disunion and civil war. This doctrine of Seward's, however, was not new with him. It may be found shadowed forth in the speeches of Wilson and other Republicans heretofore quoted, and was distinctly avowed anterior to Seward by Mr. ABRAHAM LINCOLN, the present Republican candidate for the Presidency, in his canvas for the United States Senate. Hear him:

"In my opinion, it (the slavery agitation) will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. ‘A house divided against itself cannot stand.’ I believe the Government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the house to fall, but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the farther spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States — old as well as new. North as well as South."

It will be seen that Mr. Seward has merely worked up Lincoln's ideas into somewhat better phraseology, and that, for the sentiments of sectional hate and antagonism involved, they are equally responsible before God and man. Let no conservative or thoughtful man imagine that Seward was discarded because of his ultraism, when we find Lincoln on precisely the same ground.

Again, at Rome, New York, in same month, (October, 1858,) Mr. Seward says:

"Everything has been lost which can be lost, except the enjoyment of freedom and the exclusion of slavery within the free States. Slavery remains apparently stronger than ever in all the slave States, and freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of suffrage upon the subject of slavery, are actually unknown in those States. Slavery remains in the District of Columbia defiant of all your power; slavery remains in all the arsenals, docks, and navy-yards of the United States, and upon all the deck's of your national Marine."

"To retrieve these losses will be the work of a future day."

After the seeds of hate to the South had been thus planted in the minds of the ignorant and fanatical by the Republican leaders, it was not surprising that one who had been almost idolized by the Republican party for his midnight murders of unarmed southern men in cold blood in Kansas, should essay to carry out these teachings of an "irrepressible conflict," by stirring up a servile insurrection in Virginia. This bloody work was begun by John Brown, at Harper's Ferry, with a band of Republicans, black and white, aided by arms and money supplied by their political friends, on Sunday night, the 10th October, 1859. The time was fitly chosen by a party which clamors for an "anti-slavery Bible and antislavery God". We shall not recite how the town and United States arsenal were seized — how freedom was offered to the blacks, and pikes wherewith to murder the whites, and thus renew the scenes of Saint. Domingo; and how peaceful and unoffending white citizens were murdered in the sight of their families by these Republican wretches, fresh from Kansas, and covered with plaudits for like deeds there. The country is familiar with the facts, and will not soon forget how, from the first day to the very last, when all these men paid the penalty they could by their deaths for their atrocious crimes, the Republican press and orators apologized for their acts, extenuated their conduct, traduced the State which punished the murderers, and eulogized those murderers as martyrs and heroes in the cause of liberty! The people will recall how thousands of dollars have been collected


for Brown's family, while thousands of deserving and honest men, women, and children at the North were suffering last winter for bread.

Take the doctrine of the New York Times upon John Brown, and every man who believes free labor the best state of society is bound to approve and justify his (Brown's) acts:

"No man can justify an insurrection of southern slaves upon any other basis than this — that a better state of society for all concerned would certainly result from it than that which now exists. Anything less than this would not compensate for the slaughter of innocent women and children, the wholesale destruction of property, the infliction of torture, rapine, and every imaginable horror, the overthrow of all order, pence, and security, and the black and bloody anarchy, which muse inevitably attend upon the most successful insurrection of southern slaves which could possibly take place."

The New York Tribune, the leading Republican Journal of the United States, and read probably by over 400,000 Republicans, said:

"There will be enough to heap execration on the memory of these mistaken men, (Brown and his party.) We leave this work to the fit hands and tongues of those who regard the fundamental axioms of the Declaration of Independence as ‘glittering generalities.’" *

Again, on 9th December, 1859, it says:

"You know that mistaken old John Crown and his, brave sons with him at Harper's Ferry, laid down their lives not to injure but benefit the South; that they and their comrades, dead or about to be killed, were the least ‘sectional of human beings.’ They sacrificed their all In an unlawful but heroic effort to benefit those whom they had never seen."

Again, it says:

"Unwise the world will pronounce him — reckless of artificial yet palpable obligations he certainly was ; but his very errors were heroic — the faults of a brave, impulsive, truthful nature, impatient of wrong, and only too conscious that resistance to tyrants is obedience to God! Let whoever would first cast a stone, ask himself whether his own noblest act was equal in grandeur and nobility to that for which John Brown pays the penalty of a death on the gallows." * * * * * * *

"To all who have suffered for human good, who have been persecuted for an idea, who have been hated because of their efforts to make the daily path of the despised and unfortunate less rugged, his memory will be fragrant through generations. It will be easier to die hereafter in a good cause, even on the gallows, since John Brown has hallowed that mode of exit from the troubles and temptations of this mortal life."

Consider, fellow-citizens, that the secret of all this eulogy of a murderer is, that he murdered southern men in an attempt to get up a servile insurrection at the South. Consider, too, that the editor who indites this eulogy upon the murderer, Brown, was the ruling spirit (if the Chicago Convention, which nominated Lincoln, and that by his efforts, even Seward was set aside, not for his ultraism, but to gratify the private malice of a disappointed place-hunter.

Wendell Phillips, at Boston, in February, 1860, said:

"And better than that Puritan conscience awakes, and flings its spear down into the centre of Virginia, in the revolt of John Brown; and the world says, do I approve of him? Well, he is your eldest born, you ought to know him; he bears your lineaments, you ought to acknowledge him. He is the natural product of the thought of the North, seeking vent somewhere, The irrepressible conflict has begun."***

On the same occasion, Garrison said:

"Whatever stands in the way of this sacred cause, put it down. It it is a party, let the party be abandoned; if it is the Church, let the Church be anathematized; if it is the Government, let the Government be repudiated."

The Chambersburg (Pennsylvania) correspondent of the Tribune writes, on the 26th October, 1S59, in respect to Cook and John Brown:

"The public pulse here throbs pity for Cook. * * Both here and in Philadelphia, the conduct of Cook and of Brown is arousing a deeper and broader (anti-slavery sentiment, (outside as well as inside of Abolition circles.) which even Kansas, with all its horrors and outrages, failed signally to excite. Why? IT HAS APPEALED TO THE RELIGIOUS NATURE OF THE PEOPLE, and water is beginning to flow from the rock of Horeh."


The Rev. Theodore Parker writes, on the 24th November, 1859, the following upon John Brown:

1. "A man held against his will as a slave has a natural right to kill every one who seeks to prevent his enjoyment of liberty.
2. "It may be a natural duty of the slave to develop this natural right in a practical manner, and actually kill all those who seek to prevent his enjoyment of liberty.
3. "The freeman has a natural right to help the slaves recover their liberty, and in that enterprise to do for them all which they have a right to do for themselves.
4. "It may be a natural duty for the freeman to help the slaves to the enjoyment of their liberty, and, as means to that end, to aid them in killing all such as oppose the natural freedom."

This letter of the Rev. Mr. Parker is published in the Tribune of 27th December, 1859, without one word of caution or dissent.

On the night of the day Speaker Pennington was elected, Mr. Cameron, United States Senator from Pennsylvania, speaking of the Harper's Ferry invasion, spoke of it slightingly, as follows:

"Never mind Harper's Ferry, my friends, that is a nine days' wonder."

Mr. Hickman, a prominent Republican member of the House, said:

"And I say to you to-night, my fellow-citizens, that if it will require the State of Virginia in arms to take old John Brown, and seventeen men and one cow, it will require more than the fifteen feeble States of the South to successfully compete with the eighteen mighty States of the North."

The Winstead (Connecticut) Herald, a Republican press, said of John Brown and his acts:

"For one, we confess we love him, we honor him, we applaud him. He is honest in his principles, courageous in their defence, and we have yet to be taught, reading from the book of inspiration we all acknowledge, how and wherein old John Brown is a transgressor."

"He dared to undertake what you, (the Republican leaders,) in the security of your sanctums, only are bold to preach."

We come next in our order to the infamous Helper book, or "The Impending Crisis of the South — how to meet it — by Hinton Rowan Helper;" of which the Republican leaders proposed to distribute one hundred thousand copies. Sixty-six Republican members of Congress recommended this book. Among them, (thus cordially endorsing the opinions and approving the enterprise,) we find all the prominent Republicans — Colfax, Burlingame, Lovejoy, Granger, Grow, Gid-dings, Edward Wade, Chaffee, John Sherman, the Washburns, Stanton, Covode, Potter, and other leading men. It is pretended, in behalf of these men, that they had not seen the compendium; but it must be remembered that the original work, of which this was to be a digest, is far more offensive, fanatical, and violent, than the compend. The writer says:

"Such are the agricultural achievements of slave labor; such are the results of ‘the sum of all villanies.’ The diabolical institution subsists on its own flesh. At one time children are sold to procure food for the parents; at another, parents are sold to procure food for the children. Within its pestilential atmosphere nothing succeeds; progress and prosperity are unknown; inanition and slothfulness ensue; everything becomes dull, dismal, and unprofitable; wretchedness and desolation stand or lie in bold relief throughout the land ; an aspect of most melancholy inactivity and dilapidation broods over every city and town; ignorance and prejudice sit enthroned over the minds of the people; usurping despots wield the sceptre of power; everywhere and in everything, between Delaware and the Gulf of Mexico, are the multitudinous evils of slavery apparent." *****

"On the other hand, we contend that many years of continual blushing and severe penance would not suffice to cancel or annul the shame and disgrace which justly attaches to the South in consequence of slavery — the direst evil that ever befel the land; that the South bears nothing like even a respectable approximation to the North in navigation, commerce, or manufactures; and that, contrary to the opinion entertained by ninety-nine hundredths of her people, she is far behind the free States in the only thing of which she has ever dared to boast — agriculture." * * * *

"The great revolutionary movement which was set on foot in Charlotte, Mecklenburg county. North Carolina, on the 20th day of May, 1776, has not been terminated, nor will it be until every slave in the United States is freed from the tyranny of its master. Every victim


of the vile institution, whether white or black, must be re-invested with the sacred rights and privileges of which he has been deprived by an inhuman oligarchy,"

"She (the South) has hugged a viper to her breast. Her whole system has been paralyzed; her conscience is seared; and, still holding in her embrace the cause of her shame and suffering, she is becoming callous to every principle of justice and humanity."

"In this extraordinary crisis of affairs, no man can be a true patriot without first becoming an abolitionist."

"Henceforth, sirs, we are demandants, not supplicants. We demand our lights, nothing more, nothing less. It is for you to decide whether we are to have justice peaceably or by violence; for whatever consequences may follow, we are determined to have it one way or the other."

"Inscribed on the banner which we herewith unfurl to the world, with the full and fixed determination to stand by it or die by it, unless one of more virtuous efficacy shall be presented, are the mottoes which, in substance, embody the principles, us we conceive, that should govern us in our patriotic warfare against the most subtle and insidious foe that ever menaced the inalienable rights and liberties, and dearest interests of America:

"1. Thorough organization and independent political action on the part of the non-slaveholding whites of the South.

"2. Ineligibility of pro-slavery slaveholders; never another vote to any one who advocates the retention and perpetuation of human slavery.

"3. No co-operation with pro-slavery politicians; no fellowship with them in religion; no affiliation with them in society.

"4. No patronage to pro-slavery merchants; no guestship in slave-waiting hotels; no fees to pro-slavery lawyers; no employment of pro-slavery physicians; no audience to proslavery parsons.

"5. No more hiring of slaves by non-slaveholders.

"6. Abrupt discontinuance of subscription to pro slavery newspapers.

"7. The greatest possible encouragement to free, white labor.

The foregoing extracts may serve as a sample of the "Anti-slavery Bible" which the Hon. Mr. Burlingame said the "times demanded." This is the book which the Republican leaders, in their circular, think would be "productive of most beneficial results." This is the book of which the Tribune, 27th December, 1859, says:

"Finally, ignoring a few harsh epithets and questionable theories, and overlooking occasional faults of style, in view of the magnitude of the theme, the ‘Impending Crisis of the South’ is entitled to a place among the most valuable books of the day."

In accordance with the spirit of this book, we find the following resolution adopted at a public meeting in the town of Natick, Massachusetts, the residence of Senator Wilson, 20th November, 1859:

"Whereas, resistance to tyrants is obedience to God, therefore — Resolved, That it is the right and duty of the slaves to resist their masters; and it is the right and duty of the people of the North to incite slaves to resistance, and to aid them in it."

Mr. Wilson was present at this meeting, and did not raise his voice in opposition to the resolution.

The Helper book, bad as it is, is not more pernicious in its teachings and influence than the book of Mr Lysander Spooner, entitled the "Unconstitutionality of Slavery," endorsed by W. H. Seward and other Republicans. Mr. Seward, after reading it, says, it is a "very able work," and wishes that "it might be universally studied."

This book of Spooner denies that slavery had any legal existence in the country at the time of the Revolution, and holds that the Declaration of Independence makes slavery even now illegal.

In chapter 14, the writer says:

"Our answer to this argument is, that at the adoption of the Constitution of the United States, there was no legal or constitutional slavery in the States. Not a single State constitution then in existence recognized, authorized, or sanctioned slavery. All the slaveholding then practised was merely a private crime, committed by one person against another, like theft, robbery, or murder."

"Slavery is inconsistent with nearly everything that is either expressed or legally implied in the Constitution."


"This illustration is sufficient to prove that the power of the General Government to liberate men from slavery, by the use of the writ of habeas corpus, is of the amplest character; that it is not confined to the cases of those who are a part of ‘the people of the United States,’ and so parties to the Constitution; that it is limited only by the territory of the country; and that it exists utterly irrespective of ‘anything in the Constitution or laws of any State.’"

"If these opinions are correct, it is the constitutional duty of Congress to establish courts, if need be, in every county and township even, where there are slaves to be liberated; to provide attorneys to bring the cases before the courts; and to keep a standing military force, if need be, to sustain the proceedings.

"In addition to the use of the habeas corpus. Congress has power to prohibit the slave-trade between the States, which of itself would do much towards abolishing slavery in the northern slaveholding States. They have power, also, to organize, arm, and discipline the slaves as militia; thus enabling them to aid in obtaining and securing their own liberty."

Our extracts are taken from the New York Herald of 24 March, 1860. This book does not contain the violent language of the Helper book, but is even more malign and insidious in its attack upon the Constitution and the domestic peace of the country.

Read the following from the speech of the Hon. Owen Lovejoy, a prominent Republican from Illinois, delivered in the House of Representatives April 5, 1860:

"SIareholding has been justly designated as the sum of all villainy. Put every crime perpetrated among men into a moral crucible, and dissolve and combine them all, and the resultant amalgam is slaveholding. It has the violence of robbery.

"A MEMBER. You are joking.

"Mr. LOVEJOY. No, sir, I am speaking in dead earnest, before God, God's own truth. It has the violence of robbery, the blood and cruelty of piracy; it has the offensive and brutal lusts of polygamy, all combined and concentrated in itself, with aggravations that neither one of these crimes ever knew or dreamed of.

"Mr. Chairman, I was about stating, when interrupted, that the principle upon which slaveholding was sought to be justified in this country would, if carried out in the affairs of the universe, transform Jehovah, the Supreme, into an infinite Juggernaut, rolling the huge wheels of his omnipotence, ankle-deep, amid the crushed, mangled, and bleeding bodies of human beings, [laughter on the Democratic side,] on the ground that he was infinitely superior, and that they were an inferior race."

Mr. Lovejoy is a parson, and is a great favorite on the Republican side of the House. His speech was re-published in the Tribune, and praised for its "terseness and manly vigor." He is a warm political friend of Abraham Lincoln, of course.

On 24th July, 1860, Mr. John Hickman, member from Pennsylvania, said, at Concert Hall, Philadelphia:

"I am not ignorant of the fact that those who suppose they may rightfully make merchandise of mothers and their children, seem to think that they can shape the designs of Providence, and re-write the history of humanity, reversing everything our fathers thought, and for the maintenance of which they perilled life and honor."

The Hon. D. C. Leach, from Michigan, on 14th March, 1860, said in the House of Representatives:

"And I hesitate not to say, that these principles, (of the Republicans,) faithfully observed in the administration of government affairs, will lead to the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, to the repeal or essential modification of the Fugitive Slave law, and to the limitation of slavery to the States in which it now exists. If these resolutions from the Republican platform mean anything, they mean no less than this. And, sir, to limit slavery to its present possessions, is to destroy it. It must expand or die."

Hear Senator Wade, of Ohio, on the Helper book, in the United States Senate, 14th December, 1859:

"Now, I want to ask the Senator if there is anything in that book that he thinks dangerous to the people of any section of this country?" * * "Why, sir, has it come to this, in free America, that there must be a censorship of the press instituted — that a man cannot give currency to a book containing arguments that he thinks essentially affect the rights of whole classes of the free population of this nation? I hope not, and I believe not."

Hear Mr. Van Wyck, of New York, a leading Republican of the present House, on 7th March, 1860:


"You talk of God, justice, and mercy, who hold, claiming by Divine authority, four million of human beings in hopeless and irretrievable bondage, and ostracize free white men who will not sing hosannas to your traffic in the bodies and souls of men, and stigmatize as murderers and felons those who will not applaud the cruelty which tramples upon all the attributes of the mind, the affections of the heart, given by the Almighty to the children of his own creation."

"The leprosy of slavery is ‘in the warp and woof’ of your organization."

We shall now ask your attention, fellow-citizens, to the speech of Hon. Charles Sumner, delivered in the United States Senate on the 4 June, 1860. Mr. Sumner is one of the most prominent and influential Republican leaders. He has been twice chosen Senator, and is a warm supporter of Abraham Lincoln for the Presidency:

"Language is feeble to express al the enormity of this institution, which is now vaunted as in itself a form of civilization, ennobling, at least, to the master, if not the slave. Look at it in whatever light you will, and it is always the scab — the canker, the ‘bare-bones,’ and the shame of the country; wrong, not merely in the abstract, as is often admitted by its apologists, but wrong in the concrete also, and possessing no single element of right."

"Barbarous in origin; barbarous in consequences; barbarous in spirit; barbarous wherever it shows itself. Slavery must breed barbarians, while it develops everywhere alike in the individual, and in the society of which he forms a part, the essential elements of barbarism."

"By the license of slavery, a whole race is delivered over to prostitution and concubinage, without the protection of any law. Sir, is not slavery barbarous?"

"In the face of such an unutterable abomination, where impiety, cruelty, brutality, and robbery, all strive for mastery, it is vain to assert the humanity or refinement of its authors." * * "Cease, then, to blazon the humanity of slave masters. Tell me not of the lenity with which this cruel code is tempered to its unhappy subjects. Tell me not of the sympathy which overflows from the mansion of the master to the cabin of the slave. In vain you assert such ‘happy accidents.’"

"Violence, brutality, injustice, barbarism, must be reproduced in the lives of all who live within their fatal sphere. The meat that is eaten by the man enters into and become s a part of his body; the madder which is eaten by a dog changes his bones to red; and the slavery on which men live, in all its fivefold foulness, must become a part of themselves, discoloring their very souls, blotting their characters, and breaking forth in moral leprosy. This language is strong; but the evidence is even stronger. Some there may be of happy natures, like honorable Senators, who can thus feed and not be harmed. Mithridates FED ON POISON, and lived; and it may be there is a moral Mithridates, who can swallow without bane, the poison of slavery."

Such is the language hurled by a leading Republican from the United States Senate at the people of fifteen States of this Union! No Republican Senator rose in his place to enter a protest against the tirade of indecency, violence, and venomous outpouring of personal and party malice to the South; but all of them by their silence gave it their acquiescence and approval. Indeed, which one of them was authorized by his own moderation to cast the first stone at Sumner.

The most influential personage in the Chicago convention which nominated Lincoln, next to Greely, was Joshua R. Giddings. Hear the apostle of the Republicans on the subject of a forcible resistance to the fugitive slave law at Oberlin, Ohio:

"In disregarding the law, the prisoners did right. Their error consisted in sparing the lives of the slave catchers. Those pirates should have been delivered over to the colored men and consigned to the doom of pirates. You are aware that this is the doctrine which I proclaimed in Congress. I adhere to it. Had the prisoners executed the slave catchers promptly, it would have taught the Administration a lesson not soon to be forgotten. We should have been no more troubled with that class of miscreants. They would have learned better than to show themselves among an intelligent people who know their rights, and dare maintain them."

"Well might Wendell Phillips deny for himself and his friends the Constitution of this country. Daniel Webster says: ‘You are a law-abiding people.’ Shame on it, if this be true; if even the religion of New England sinks as low as its statute-book. But I say we are not a law-abiding community, and God be thanked for it."

The Chicago platform declared that the causes which called the Republican party into existence "are permanent in their nature." This is but an iteration in another form of the "irrepressible conflict" doctrine previously enunciated by Seward and Lincoln. With such


views, and led on by Greely (the eulogist of John Brown and Giddings,) the advocate of forcible resistance to the fugitive slave law, we are not surprised to find the same convention "denying the authority of Congress, of a Territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any Territory of the United States." The obvious aim of such a declaration is to encourage forcible interference with slave property in the Territories, and to incite slaves held there to rebel and murder their masters.

We find Mr. Lincoln reported as saying, on the 16th July, 1858, at Chicago, (see New York Herald of 19th May, 1800,) as follows:

"I have always haled slavery, I think, an much as any Abolitionist. I have been an Old Line Whig. I have always hated it, and I always believed it in a course of ultimate extinction. If I were in Congress, and a vote should come up on a question, whether slavery should be prohibited in a new Territory, in spite of the Dred Scott decision, I would vote that it should."

We shall now quote the testimony of leading Republican journals to show the profligacy and corruption of their own party. In nearly every State where they have had power, Corruption has followed their advent to office. In Wisconsin, we believe, an entire legislature was found to have been bribed. At the session of Congress of which Banks was Speaker, three or four Republicans were expelled for corruption — one of them, Mr. Matteson, a shining light of their party, and a special friend of W. H. Seward.

Hear the Tribune's appeal to the last Republican legislature of New York, begging them, for the sake of the party, to be moderate in their rascalities:

"Messrs. Republicans in the legislature I Will you not hear the cries of your brethren in this ill-starred, misgoverned city ? * * But if you turn in and aggravate their extortions — nay, even outdo them by attempting to steal yourselves rich out of the confiscation of our most valuable franchises, what can we do?" ** ** "If integrity and a, sense of decency do not suffice to make you. just to us, be entreated not to ruin the cause which has honored, you."

This appeal passed unheeded by the chiefs of a party which is constantly prating of God and religion. The Tribune said:

"And we do not believe it possible that another body so reckless, not merely of right, but of decency, not merely corrupt, but shameless, will be assembled in our halls of legislation within the next ten years. * * * * * *

"The State has been sold out by a portion of its chosen legislators, and they have clutched the gold. * * Look at the bills which thus passed, and the bills which barely failed, and judge whether legislation so manifestly corrupt, legislators so debauched by wholesale bribery, were ever before heard of."

This, too, of a legislature largely Republican in both branches. But hear another Republican witness. The New York Evening Post, a conspicuous Republican sheet. Bays of the late Republican State Convention at Syracuse:

"Among the names of the delegates are quite too many of those men who have figured in someway, at the late session of the legislature, in the iniquitous proceedings which have justly aroused the anger of all honest men. The list of delegates from the districts is altogether too thickly peppered with the nauseous names of those who were concerned in the gridiron railroad and other schemes of pillage — names the very sight of which excites intense disgust."

Is this a specimen of the boasted reform promised to us by the Republicans on their accession to power? "If these things are done in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?"

Hear another Republican press, the Philadelphia Inquirer, upon the Pennsylvania legislature:

"Both houses of the legislature have adjourned, and for that one act we tender them our hearty thanks; for never in the history of Pennsylvania, has a session been marked by more corrupt, wicked intriguing than the present. Every good citizen feels the blush of honest indignation tingling his cheeks when he thinks of their proceedings. No measure, however beneficial, could stand the slightest chance of passing, unless by profuse expenditure of money. Almost every man, with some noble exceptions, had his price, and if common rumor be true, it was an enormous price. If it could not be paid in the hard cash, secure prospective profits were just as good."

This testimony as to a Republican legislature of Pennsylvania given by a Republican press of that State is copied by the New York Times, which goes on to say:

"Perhaps our own legislators at Albany may be gratified to read what is likely to be said of them whenever they shall gratify the State by adjourning. It will not differ much in its


general tenor from preceding. Public opinion is very nearly unanimous in regard to the character of their public acts."

So much for Republican honesty as shown up by their own organs!

At the Republican ratification meeting of June, 1860, to ratify Lincoln's nomination held In New York, Mr. William Evarts, chairman of the New York delegation to Chicago, said:

"He maintaines that the slave trade was principally maintained in the city of New York."

Yet these men are constantly denouncing the South for an alleged desire to revive this traffic!

The origin of the Republican party is traced by William Lloyd Garrison, a conspicuous abolitionist, and author of the sentiment that "the United States" Constitution is a covenant death, and an agreement with hell. In Mr. Garrison's speech delivered 29th May, 1866, we have shown to us the true connection of the Abolition and Republican parties:

"I come not to the Republican party; and, while I do not forget its actual position under the Constitution and within the Union, I am constrained to differ in judgment from some of my respected friends here about the comparative merits of that party. I think that they do not always accord to it all that justice demands; that they overlook the necessary formation of such a party as the result of our moral agitation: and I marvel that they do not see that to quarrel with it, to the extent they are doing, is to quarrel with CAUSE and EFFECT — WORK OF OUR OWN HANDS."

Mr. FOSTER asked Garrison: "Do you believe they (the Republicans) can succeed?"

Mr. GARRISON. "Certainly not. But that is not the question. They believe they can. They laugh at my incredulity, because I do not believe it. I think that ere long they will be satisfied that I am right, and that they have been deluded; in which case, I expect to hear them cry. ‘EXCLESIOR, COME UP HIGHER!’ and to see many of them take up their position under the banner of disunion."

"I have said again and again, that in proportion to the growth of disunion will be the growth of republicanism or freesoilism. I think if you will examine the map of Massachusetts, for example, you will find this to hold true with singular uniformity — that in those places where there are the most abolitionists, who have disfranchised themselves for conscience and the slaves sake, the HEAVIEST VOTE is THROWN FOR THE FREESOIL TICKET. This is as inevitable as the law of gravitation. The greater includes the less. If we should begin our work over again, and try the same experiment ten thousand times over, we should have the same resulting the formation of the same party. Whey then [?] one speak in a tone of despondency, or feel that our cause is in imminent danger [?] wrecked? Is this to take a philosophical view of the subject? Such then, is [?] of the Republican party."

Fellow-citizens, we have laid before you not the sentiments [?] occasional heated expressions of a few obscure men, but the repeated declarations and avowals of the leading orators, statesmen, and presses of the Republican party. In giving you the sentiments of Seward, Wilson, Sumner, Greely, Burlingame, Giddings, Webb, Hale, Lovejoy, Hickman, and Van Wick, we give you the doctrines of the republican leaders — of the men who have built up that party, who give it tone and direction, and who would surround and control the administration of Abraham Lincoln, if through your neglect he should be chosen to the Presidency. We have not spread before you this mass of venomous hate and insult to the South, of defiance for the laws, and contempt for the Constitution, of compacts, of blasphemy and indecency, without an object which, in our judgment, will excuse a presentation of contents so disgusting to every right-minded and conservative citizen. We want you to know these men; to mark their sectionalism; to realize the perils to which they are hurrying the country, and to save our beloved land from the scene of disunion and civil war they are ready to entail upon us. Ask yourselves whether such sentiments can be carried out in the administration of this Government? You well know that the North would never tolerate such wrong from the South, if the latter were the most powerful section of the Confederacy. Reflect that sectionalism is disunion. It means nothing else, and can have no other result. It was well said by Henry Clay:

"The abolitionists, let me suppose, succeed in their present aim of uniting the inhabitants of the free States ass one man against the inhabitants of the slave States. Union on one side will beget union on the other, and this process of reciprocal consolidation will be attended


with all the violent prejudices, embittered passions, implacable animosities which ever degraded or deformed human nature. Virtual dissolution of the Union will have taken place, whilst the forms of its existence remain." * *

"One section will stand in menacing and hostile array against the other. The collision of opinion will soon be followed by the clash of arms."

Fortunately, there is yet time and opportunity to avert this evil. We have shown you, in the language and address of the Republicans, the bitter hate and denunciation towards the South, which would be hardly compatible with an actual and bloody war between the two sections. Day by day this process of alienation and sectional exasperation goes on. Shall it be permitted to do it work and consummate its purpose to reduce the South to the lot of mere subject provinces in a union formed upon a basis of mutual equality? We ask you to give your vote, your voice, your time, and best energies, to crush out this sectional party. In the language of the Father of his Country we ask you "to frown indignantly upon the first dawning of any attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred tics which now link togther the various parts." We ask yon to heed the admonition of him who led our fathers through the perils of the revolution; where the blood of northern and souther patriots shed upon the same field, side by side, watered the tree of American liberty, and, by following his patriotic counsel, to repudiate and disown the teachings and platform of a sectional party who wish you to hate your brethren. We ask you now to strike a blow for the Union which shall restore peace and quiet to the land, and to rebuke the conspirators who, marshalled by Lincoln, are seeking to subvert the Constitution bequeathed to you by your fathers. We believe that you will do your whole duty, and that there is yet patriotism enough in the land to save the Government from the grasp of a sectional party. It remains for the conservative men of the North to prove that this confidence has not been placed in vain.

The following-named gentlemen compose this Committee:
Hon. I. I. STEVENS. of Oregon, CHAIRMAN.
Hon. B. W. JOHNSON, of Arkansas.
Hon. JEFFERSON DAVIS, of Mississippi.
Hon. JESSE D. BRIGHT, of Indiana.
Hon. THOMAS B. FLORENCE, of Pennsylvania.
Hon. GEORGE W. HUGHES, of Maryland.
Hon. JOHN W. STEVENSON, of Kentucky.
Hon. JOHN R. THOMSON, of New Jersey.
Hon. A. B. MEEK, of Alabama.
AUGUSTUS SCHELL, Esq. of New York.
ISAAC H. WRIGHT, Esq., of Massachusetts.
Hon. JAMES Q. BERRET, of Washington, D. C.
WM. FLINN, Esq., of Washington, D. C.
WALTER LENOX, Esq., of Washington, D. C.
GEO. W. BIGGS, Washington, D. C., TREASURER.

All communications should be addressed to Hon. ISAAC I. STEVENS, CHAIRMAN, Washington, D. C. Rooms of the Committee, at No. 28, 41/2 street.