FACTS AND FIGURES
I
i

FREMONT AMD FREEDOM.

“Is lie capable—Is he honest ?”
Read and Judge.

C
.

900HH1A :

“ Sec. 12. If any free persons, by speaking or by writing, assert or maintain that

persons have not a right to hold slaves in the Territory, or shall introduce into Kan-

sas, print, publish, write, circulate, or caused to be introduced into the Territory,

writteu, printed, published, or circulated in this Territory, any book, paper, mag-

zine pamphlet, or circular, containing any "denial of the rights of persons to hold

aves in this Territory, such persons shall be deemed guilty of felony, and punish-

d by imprisonment at hard labor for a term not less than two years.”

—

Kansas

Law, passed by Bogus Legislature.

“ Congress shall make no new law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof

;
or abridging the freedom of speech or of the

press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the Government

for a redress of grievances.”

—

Constitution of the United States.

11 A well regulated Militia being necessary to the Security of a free State, the
right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”— Con-
stitution of the United States.

“ Give me Liberty, or give me Death.”

Patrick Henry.

PROVIDENCE, R- I.
PRINTBD AT THE DAILY TRIBUNE OFFICE, 3 CANAL STREET.

1856 .



x . _ Hn'o \^\r>&v\

"L v VaVat- 's^saA/v^ >'>- - - >

A X
fc.k.

m

Sj>^
Ca|>anr>

THE NEW YOi K

PUBLIC LIBRARY

900981

A

ASTOR, LENOX AND
TILDEN FOUNDATIONS

R 1&3? L



FACTS AND FIGURES.

R ader, let us forget our respecting parties a few moments and

rem mber our obligations to our country and to our God, while we

consider the question of our next President. As American Citi-

zens responsible to a certain extent for the character and official acts

of men whom we aid in elevating to power, it becomes a vastly im-

portant question. “WHAT IS OUR DUTY in the coming elec-
tion ?

CANDIDATES.
Four candidates are before the public, and you doubtless expect to

vote for one of them
;
and as an honest man you intend to vote for

the test man for this Nation. The friends of each candidate ask

you o vote for their nominee on the ground that he is the best man.

Have you carefully examined their respective merits in the light of

facte and figures so as to vote understanding^ ? Can you if neces-

sary sacrifice 'party for principle—give up mere political triumph
for tie triumph of truth and righteousness ? Come let us review

the ground of political action, and enquire after truth and duty.

MILLARD FILLMORE, JAMES BUCHANAN, JOHN C.
FREMONT and GERRIT SMITH are the candidates for the
Pree dency. GERRIT SMITH, the Anti-Slavery candidate and
one of the noblest men in our nation, is too well know to the public

to require a comparison. We therefore call attention to the three
grea rival candidates that engross the public mind.

W aich is the best man for our nation
,
under existing circumstan-

ces, i 3 the great question with every honest man.

Mr. Fillmore is properly the candidate of the Native American

part; in the South, with such of the American party in the Free

States, as sympathise with the South on the question of national pol-

icy, with reference to slavery. Perhaps we should include among

Mr. Fillmore’s supporters, a portion of the old Whig party which
has adopted him for their candidate, since his nomination by the

Americans.

M;\ Buchanan is the regular Democratic candidate, nominated by

the p arty at their convention in Cincinnati. Southern Whigs very

gene ally support him, because they consider him a better man for

the South
;
while many Northern Whigs will probably support him

from symyathy with the South on the subject of slavery.

M •. Fremont is the Republican candidate. The Republican par-
ty, if made up of Democrats, Whigs, Americans, Free Soilers, Anti

Slav ry men and members of all parties, who unite in Mr. Fremont

as a nan for the times
,
who if elected will exert his executive pow-

er to check the progress of American slavery, and bring back the

government to the original design of our National Constitution.

—

Wit] the supporters of Mr. Fremont, the question is, the progress of
liber < /, or the progress of slavery. They appeal to the ballot box for

a decision of this question.

w0H20JUN34



4

ISSUE.

We shall now attempt to prove beyond all controversy, by “facts
and figures,” that the true issue in the coming presidential election,

is thAgtension, or non-extension of slavery. There may be “ side

m?£^jbut they are of so little account, compared with the main
question, as Scarcely to be mentioned when considering the claims of

candidates.

•That the supporters of Mr. Fremont regard this as the real issue
,

needs no proof. That the friends of Mr. Buchanan at the South

consider this the great question, is evident from the fact that Whigs

and Democrats endorse him as “safe” on the subject of slavery,

while Northern Democracy do not deny it, but claim the Southern

vote on that ground. Mr. Fillmore is identified with pro-slavery by

official acts and public speeches. Indeed, some Southerners based

Mr. Fillmore’s claims to the vote of the South, on the fact, that he

is 'more reliable on the subject of slavery, than Mr. Buchanan.

—

That we do not misrepresent either of the candidates, will appear

when we give “ Facts and Figures.”

Now, reader, if the extension or non-extension of slavery in this

country is the real issue, then on which side will you arrange your-

self in this great conflict of principles ? Will you, perhaps, a de-

scendant of our patriotic fathers, who fought the battles of the Rev-

olution—an American citizen—a professed friend of humanity ; will
you, we ask, be found on the side of oppression ? Never, no, never

,

we trust, while sentiments and feelings of true manhood animate

you with the love of civil liberty.

CAUSE AND EFFECT.
Ever since our nation’s birth, sentiments of liberty have been

cherished by our fathers, as a divine legacy to mankind. The Dec-

laration of American Independence was the embodiment of that sen-

timent, while it was also the first emphatic act in the grand pro-

gramme of American liberty. Since then the contest between free-

dom and oppression has waxed warmer and warmer, slavery continu-

ally invading and encroaching on the rights of liberty by extending

its domain and contriving to monopolize to a great extent, the pub-

lic offices of the nation.

For some few years past the conflict has raged with more violence,

liberty showing a more determined resistence to oppression, while

slavery has exhibited the energy of despair, until our country fairly

reels on the borders of political revolution.

The repeal of the Missouri Compromise, the Nebraska Bill, and

recent Kanzas outrages, have aroused the nation to a sense of dan-

ger, and to efforts in behalf of liberty. Hence the issue is between

freedom and oppression. In proof of this, we now offer some facts.

FACTS.
“ During the Debates on the repeal of the “ Missouri Compromise,” in the U. S.

House of Representatives, the following language was addressed to the oponents of

that measure by

ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS, OF GA.
“ Well, gentlemen, you make a good deal of clamor on the Nebraska meas-

ure, but it don’t alarm us at all. We have got used to that kind of talk. You have
threatened before, but never performed. You have always cared in, and you will

again. You are a mouthing white-livered set. Of course you will oppose: we expect

that; but we don’t care for your opposition. You will rail; but we don’t care for

your railing You will hiss; but so do adders. We expect it of adders, and we
expect it of you. You are like the devils that were pitched over the battlements



5

of heaven into hell. They set up a howl of discomfiture; and so will you. But

tlieirfate was sealed, and so is yours. You must SUBMIT TO THE YOKE. But
don't chafe Gentlemen

,
we have got you in our power. You tried to drive us to the

wall in 1850; but times are changed. You went a wooling and CAME HOME FLEE-
CED. Don't be so IMPUDENT as to COMPLAIN. You will only be SLAPPED IN
THE FACE. Don't resist] you will only 6e LASHED INTO OBEDIENCE.”

Such language shows what the South means, and the character of

the issue they are now making with the North.

The fact that Fremont is discarded by the South on account of

the suspicion of Anti-Slavery, proves that Slavery is the issue.

—

See an extract from the

MOBILE ADVERTISER.
“ There are men here in Alabama

,
and in this county

,
who are net ashamed to own a

preferencefor Fremont
,
or any other abolitionist, to Buchanan. How can the South

ever expect to maintain her self-respect or obtain her just rights, if she even endures

such persons on her soil, much less permits them to occupy influentialpositions within
her border."

That Slavery, and the extension of Slave territory is the real issue,

is very certain from the reasons offered for oppositions to Fremont,

and the election of Mr. Buchanan or Mr. Fillmore. Take the argu-

ment for Buchanan as an illustration :

“ The Richmond Enquirer
,
under the head of “A Record without a Blemish,”

gives the following list of Mr. Buchanan’s votes in Congress on questions relating

to Slavery. We believe it correct except in its omission of the fact that in 1819

—

before he had caught a glimpse of the White House—Mr. Buchanan signed a call,
for a meeting of the citizens of Lancaster to protest against the admission of Mis-

souri as a Slave State. Since that we do not know that he has ever spoken, acted

or voted with reference to Slavery otherwise than to ‘‘strengthen and uphold it,”

as the Enquirer fairly asserts in its article in its introductory to the following sum-

mary :

I. In 1836, Mr. Buchanan supported a bill to prohibit the ciiculation of Abolition

Papers through the Mail.

2 In the same year he proposed and voted for the admission of Arkansas.

3. In 1836 -37 he denounced and voted to reject petitions for the Abolition of

Slavery in the District of Columbia.-

4. In 1837 he voted for Mr. Calhoun’s famous resolutions, defining the rights of

the States and the limits of Federal authority, and affirming it to be the duty of

the Government to protect and uphold the institutions of the South.

5. In 1838, 1839 and 1840, he invariably voted with Southern Senators against the

consideration of Anti-Slavery Petitions.

6. In 1844-5, he advocated and voted for the annexation of Texas.

7. In 1847, he sustained the Clayton Compromise.

8. In 1850, he proposed and urged the extension of the Missouri Compromise to

the Pacific Ocean.

9. But he promptly acquiesced in the Compromise of 1850, and employed all his

influence in favor of the Fugitive Slave law.

10 In 1854 he remonstrated against an enactment of the Pennsylvania Legislature

for the obstruction and arrest of fugitive slaves

II. In 1854 he negotiated for the admission of Cuba.

12. In 1856 he approves the repeal of the Missouri restriction, and supports the

principles of the Kansas Nebraska Act.

13. He never gave a yote against the interests of Slavery and uttered a word
which could pain the most sensitive Southern heart.

The prominent facts of Mr. Buchanan’s record touching Slavery are thus group-
ed into a single view; so that the person of the least patience in research may as-
certain at a glance how the Democratic candidate stands in respect to the great is-
sue of the canvass. In this succinct statement, we give not detached passages and
isolated acts, but we bring the whole history of a long life to bear upon the popu-
lar mind with the irresistable force of truth. This rapid retrospect discloses a
consistency and an efficiency of service to the South which flattery can claim for

no other man. Mr. Buchanan is not only vindicated from calumny; he is not sim-
ply shown to be exempt from just reproach and worthy of confidence; he is promi-
nent to his proper position in advance of any and every statesman of the North, in
the confidence and affection of the people of the South he demands not a mere re-
cognition of his attachment to the Constitution, but unbounded applause for such
service in the interest of the South as no other man can boast. Against the cap-
tious criticism of a desperate adversary, refining upon distinctions and skulking
among quibbles, the Democracy oppose this incontestible attestation of their candi-
dates realty.



6

We presume no one will question the Pro-slavery of the Hon-
Stephen A. Douglass. He endorses Mr. Buchanan as follows :
The Identity of Buchanan with Douglas.—We give an extract f m at

speech by senator Douglas at a Buchanan ratification meeting in New York:- -

“But my friends, I find that these Black ‘republican’ murderers and blac ‘re-
publican’ newspapers have all begun to shed crocodile tears over mine own hv nble
fate, because they made a Douglas platform and put Buchanan on it. I w h to
call your attention to a point for a moment, and that is whether it is not a Bu iian-

an platform as well as a Douglas. They say it is a Douglas, because it enc rsect
every position that I have taken, not only on the slavery question, and Kans; and

Nebraska, biit the foreign policy, that is true, and because it is true, I stand vith

heart and soul ready to devote "all my energies to the success of the platforn and
candidate. Now, my friends, if you will listen for an instant for a brief hist deal
account, I will show you that Buchanan and myself have for several years b; k

—

ever since I came into public life—held the same position on the slavery qui tion
from beginning to end.”

Does Mr. Douglas regard Slavery as the issue ? Take also the

testimony of President Pierce :

Where Mr. Buchanan Stands.—President Pierce, in a late speech, says of
the nomination of Mr. Buchanan

:

“
I congratulate yau that your choice has fallen on a man who stands o the-

IDENTICAL PLATFORM THAT I OCCUPY, and that he will take the . ame
with the standard lowered never an inch.”

The following extract from the New York Tribune, needs no com-
ment—it explains itself.
“ Mr. Buchanan was the candidate of Virginia at the two last Democratic ' rati-

onal Conventions, and her slave-breeding politicians are not often mistaken in ieir

tools. There is not a man in the Union who, since he snuffed the Presidency far

off, has been more subservient to the Slave Power than he. His distinguished' ind

and champion, the Hon. J. Glancy Jones, in a late triumphant reply to his f uth

American Colleague the Hon. Henry M. Fuller, who had vainly attempted to dek

some flaws in Mr. Buchanan’s Pro-slavery escutcheon, truly said

—

“ All such accusations as these against Mr. Buchanan are anawered.
“ By the fact that, twenty years ago, in the Senate of the United States, In was

among the first of Northern men to resist the inroads of Abolitionism.”
“ By his opposition to the circulation of insurrectionary documents throug the

mails of the United States among the slaves of the South.”
“ By his determined support of the bill admitting Arkansas into the Ame can'

Union.”
“ By his early support of the Annexation of Texas.
“ By his persevering support of the Fugitive Slave law.”
“ By his energetic efforts to effect a repeal of the law of the State of Penns !va-

nia, denying to the Federal authorities the use of her prisons for the detenti> 1 of

fugitive slaves.

“ By his early and unyielding opposition to the Wilmot Proviso.
“ By the fact that, while a member of Mr. Polk’s Cabinet, against the oppo* ion

of fanaticism, he proposed to extend the Missouri line to the Pacific amid tl de-

light and gratitude of national men of all parts of the Union.”
“ By every vote he gave in the American Congress on the question of SI; ry,

and by the fact that ot all Northern men he has been among the most promin cm
asserting and defending a strict construction of the Federal Constitution.”

“ By the construction which he placed upon the compromise measures of 50.,
the letter addressed by him in November of the same year to the people of I la-

delphia, in which he cleclared that the compromise measures had supersede he

Missouri line, or, to use his own language, that that line had ‘ passed away,’ v ch

construction led inevitably to the adoption of the principle of popular sovereig: ty,.

embodied in the Ivansas-Nebraska bill.”

These extracts not only prove conclusively that Slavery b he

issue, but they also prove that James Buchanan is Pro-Slave to

the back-bone, and that the South will sustain him for that very ,a-

son.

FILLMORE.

But what of Millard Fillmore? A few facts will answer he
question as to his reliability. Once Mr. Fillmore stood, profess ly

on the side of liberty. Alas ! how fallen. Let his admirers ad

the following :



.

7

MR. FILLMORE IN 1838.
“ BUFFALO, Oct. ITfcfr,. 1838.

To W. Mitts, Esq., Chairman, cfc., tf c.:

—

Sir:—Your communication of the 15th inst., as chairman of a Committee suppor-

ted by
1 The Anti-Slavery Society of the County of Erie,' has just come to hand.

—

You solicit mv answer to the following interrogatories

;

1st. Do you believe that petitions to Congress on the subject of slavery and the

I
slave trade ought to be received, read, and respectfully considered by the represe'n-

tatives of the people ?

2. Are you opposed to the annexation of Texas to this Union under any circum-

i stances, so long as slaves are held therein ?

!
3. Are you in favor of Congress exercising all the constitutional power it posses-

[
es, to abolish the slave trade between the States ?

4. Are you in favor of immediate legislation for the abolition of slavery in the

District of Columbia ?

I am much engaged and have no time to enter into an argument, or to explain at

length my reasons for my opinion. I shall, therefore, content myself for the present,

by answering all your interrogatories IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, and leave for
some future occasion a more extended discussion of the subject.

* * * * * * * * *

I am very respectifully,
Your obedient servant,

MILLARD FLLIMORE.”

How just the remarks of the New York Courier

—

The New York Courier, commenting on the above letter, truly says:—Now, in
1856, this same Millard Fillmore is so in love with Slavery that he stands pledged,

if elected to the Presidency, to oppose any legislation which shall exclude slavery

from Kansas, or the tendency of which shall be to restore the Missouri Compromise

of 1820, and the restriction of slavery to south of 36 deg, 30 min. ! But this is not

all. Such is his infatuation with slavery, and such his subserviency to the slave

power, that in the desperate hope of carrying a portion of the South, he publicly

proclaims that the election of Fremont by the people of the United Slates, is good

cause for the dissolution of the Union. If this be not treason to the Union, it evin-

ces such consummate folly, and such abject subserviency to the Slave Power, that

honest and intelligent men will not vote for him.”

After signing the Fugitive Slave Bill, we are prepared to hear

Mr. Fillmore’s Albany speech, in which he goes off in the style of

Southern disunion.

(Extract from Mr. Fillmore's speech at Albany.)

“ We see a political party presenting candidates for the Presidency and Vice-
Presidency, selected for the first time from the free States alone, with the avowed

purpose of electing these candidates by suffrages of one part of the Union only to

rule over the whole United States. ( Cries of
‘ shame! shame!’) Can it be possible

that these who are now engaged in such a measure can have seriously reflec -

ted upon the consequences which must inevitably follow, in case of success? Can
they have the madness or the folly to believe that our Southern brethren would

submit to be governed by such a Chief Magistrate V

DONELSON ON FILLMORE.
The following query, which answered itself when propounded by Andrew J.

Donelson, a little over four years ago, does not require an answer now.
“ Is it not, to the plain sense of every man, a monstrous foolery to ask a National

Democrat to sustain Mr. Fillmore, now repudiated bv two thirds' of his own party
as an eleventh hour apostate from his known Abolitionism of 1848, to the old Demo-
cratic doctrine of non-intervention as embodied in the Compromise.

But, as scarcely anybody regards Mr. Fillmore as likely to carry

a single State in the Union, it is hardly worth while to talk about-

him. Let those who will vote for him remember that their influ-
ence goes for Slavery.

FREMONT.

That Mr. Fremont, if elected, will give the weight of his influence

for Liberty
,
there can be little doubt

;
indeed, that is the grand ob-

jection of the South. Before he was a candidate for the Presidency,

he was the pride and admiration of Ins country. Since his nomina-

tion, selfish, sordid politicians and a hireling press have said and

done all they could to blight his character and prospects of success.



8

This is just like the age we live in, and well accords with the

spirit and manner of conducting political campaigns. But the cause

of truth has nothing to fear from investigation, but much to hope.

—

We therefore invite attention to Mr. Fremont’s character and adap-
tation to public station. What he was before receiving the nomina-

tion of the Republican party, will appear from the testimony of his

political enemies, as well as other documents. Then
,
they had no

motive for traducing his character and lying about his civil and re-

ligious life
;
hence we believe they tell us the truth in past history.

A few facts will show their estimate.
Hon. John C. Calhoun,—a South Carolinian Democrat, a

leader in theirr anks, and a severe critic on men, bears the follow-

ing testimony

:

“ I have an acquaintance with the Colonel, (Fremont,) and am so

favorably impressed as to him, that I tvould as readily trust him as

any other individual. HIS INTEGRITY IS ABOVE SUSPIC-
ION.” The following expresses a like sentiment :

“ I regard Col. Fremont as one of the most heroic and successful officers in out

army—an army of which any nation might be proud.”

—

Senator Rush of Texas.

How does this compare with the slang we hear now ?
Another speaks of Fremont as follows :

“ Col. Fremont in my opinion, is the most meritorious American of his age now
in existence.”

—

Senator Allen of Ohio.

The following high authority is very satisfactory. The nation are

about to fulfil the prediction of the Hon. Senator :

“ Col. Fremont exhibited a combination of energy, promptitude, sagacity and

prudence, which indicates the highest capacity for civil and military command.

—

That the country will do justice to his valuable and distinguished services, I enter-

tain not the slighest doubt.”

—

Senatoi' Dix.

We commend the following to Rufus Choate. It may aid him in
his estimotians of the two candidates :

“ Col, Fremont is a young officer of great merit—one who deserves well of his
country for the bravery and ability with which he discharged his important and

delicate duties in California.”

—

Daniel Webster.

The following speaks well for Fremont, as possessing ability to

act in public life

:

In his speech at Utica, Caleb Lyon said:
“ He was a Secretary of the California Constitutional Convention.

^

Col. Fremont

was prominently and nearly solely influential in giving the State a Free Constituti-

on. He exhibited wonderful power over men in directing the mountain men and
miners in their action. A strange body was it, and his mind gave it direction.”

The following testimony is valuable
;
first, because the witness is

under oath : second, because that witness is James Buchanan, the

present candidate of the Democratic party. In another place we

will give a fuller extract. Mr. Buchanan says ;—“His (Fremont’s)
SERVICES "WERE VERY VALUABLE

;
HE BORE A CONSPICUOUS PART

IN THE CONQUEST OF CALIFORNIA, AND IN MY OPINION IS BETTER

ENTITLED TO BE CALLED THE CQNQUERER OF CALIFORNIA,
' THAN ANY OTHER MAN.”

The following presents the views and feelings of South Carolina,

relative to the merits of Fremont. It is worthy of note that to her

brave Fremont she gives a sword, while to her cowardly Brooks

she gives a cane, or bludgeon, the weapon of a bully, or a rowdy.

SWORD FROM SOUTH CAROLINA.
The citizens of Charleston S. C., at a public meeting, in 1846, after passing reso-

lutions, highly eulogistic of Col. Fremont’s services in Oregon and California, voted



9

him a sword, limiting the subscribtion for the same at one dollar to a person. The

sword is costly and elegantly wrought, of gold and silver mounted, in a scabbard of

gold, and bears the following inscription:

Presented

by the citizens of Charleston

to Lieutenant-Colonel

JOHN CHARLES FREMONT,

A memorial of their high appreciation

of the gallantry and science

he has displayed in his

services in Oregon and California.

Sword belt from the Charleston ladies.

[From the Charleston, S. C. Mercury, Sept. 2Yth, 1847.]

We regret to learn that Col. Fremont, whose departure for Aiken we noticed a
few days’ since, did not reach that place in time to see his mother alive, she died,

but a few hours before his arrival. He accompanied her remains the next day to

this city, and after witnessing the last sad rites, left here the following evening for

Washington. In this affliction, rendered doubly poignant by his deep disappoint-

ment in°not receiving her parting look of recognition after his long and eventful ab-

sence, he has the sympathy of the entire community.

“ The marked and brilliant career of Col. Fremont has arrested general attention

and admiration, and has been watched with a lively interest by his fellow citizens

of South Carolina. Charleston particularly is proud of him, and the reputation

which he has at so early an age achieved for himself, she claims as something in

which she too has a share. But for the melancholy circumstance attending his vis-

it, our city would have manifested by suitable demonstrations their respect for him,

and their continued confidence in his honor and integrity. It will require some-

thing more than mere accusation to sully them in the minds of the people of Charles-

ton. Some months since a sword was voted to him by our citizens, the_individual

subscriptions to which were limited to $1 ; it now awaits his acceptance at a suita-

ble opportunity. We are happy to learn that the ladies of Charleston propose, by a
similar subscription, to furnish an appropriate belt to accompany the sword, an ev-

idence that they too can appreciate the gallantry and heroism which have so signally

marked his career, and have thrown an air of romance over the usually dry detail

of scientific pursuits.”

The following is from a most reliable source, and the writer en~

ioyed an excellent opportunity for acquaintance. Let ranting dem-

agogues blush when they traduce such a character, if they are ca-

pable of blushing :

A TRIBUTE TO COL. FREMONT.—Mr. Winthrop, in his late speech in Bos-
ton spoke of the Pathfinder in such terms as the following:

“ For Mr. Fremont I entertain nothing but respect and esteem. Our seats were

next to each other during his brief term in the Senate of the United States, and I

was a witness to his intelligent and faithful service. Our homes in Washington

were within a biscuit’s throw of each other, for a much longer period, and I can

bear the most cordisl testimony to the -attractions and accomplishments of more

than one of those beneath his roof. His scientific attainments and explorations

have reflected the highest credit on his country as well as on himself.”

That distinguished philanthropist, Hon. G-errit Smith, bears the

following pleasing testimony relative to Fremont. Mr. Smith is

himself the candidate of another party :

GERRIT SMITH AND FREMONT —Gerrit Smith stopped in this city yester-
day on his way to the great Kansas meeting at Buffalo. While here the following

colloquy occurred between him and another gentleman.
“ Are you acquainted with Mr. Fremont, Mr. Smith?”
“ Very well—he dined with me several times at Washington, and he is a great fa-

vourite in my family.”
“ What kind of aman is he?”
“ He is the most modest man I ever knew—he rarely speaks unless spoken to, a

man of talents, generous impulses, and an accomplished scholar.”
“ Is he firm, has he decision of character, is he reliable, in case he is elected Pres-

ident?”
“ Perfectly—if Mr. Fremont is President, he will carry out his convictions prompt

fcly, and with unfaltering firmness.”

“ Is he a slaveholder?”

“ No, never—until lately he has been very poor, and in no condition to be a slave-
holder—besides he is anti-slavery.”



10

“ Well, what do you think of Jessie?”
“ She is beautiful, highly educated, and accomplished. Her mother is the daugh-

ter of Gov. McDowell, of Virginia, (an abolitionist). Mrs. Fremont told me her
mother taught her to hate slavery, and she did hate it. She said she would never

own a slave nor permit one to do her work. She did her own work rather—it is a
shrewd choice, the selection of Fremont.”

“ It is of great importance that he be elected—the question is not now a consti-
tutional question—but a question of blows, a war question, and if the first battle is
to be in Kansas, we should cast aside party and fight the battle.

—

Syracruse Journal.

LIEUT. WALPOLE.
“ Lieut. Walpole of the British navy, mentions that Fremont’s expeditions were

conducted on temperance principles. This enabled him to maintain the perfection

of discipline which won the admiration of all who witnessed the condhct of his
batallion. Without any military badges, without even a drum to tap, there was the

most exact regularity and order. Without severity there was obedience under

Fremont’s scho'ol of personal good conduct and good feeling, and of every manly

virtue. The consequence is that those of his men who survived their hardships
are, with scarcely a single exception, good citizens, useful members ot society, men
of commendable habits, and enjoying the prosperity which such characteristics will

be like, in the long run to command.”

How glorious an example to our entire army in this.

The following extract shows how Fremont is regarded by the

distinguished Bayard Taylor.

COL. FREMONT IN CALIFORNIA.—In Bayard Taylor’s narrative of his trav-
els in California in 1846, we find the following allusion to Col. Fremont:

“ In the morning we went with Lieut. Beale to call upon Col. Fremont, whom
we found on the portico of Mr. Cook’s house, wearing a sombrero and California

jacket, and showing no trace of the terrible hardships he had lately undergone It

may be enteresting to the thousands who have followed him, as readers may, on

his remarkable journeys and explorations for the past eight years, to know that*he is

a man of about thirty five years of age; of medium hight, and lightly but most com-

pactly knit—in fact, I have seen in no other man the qualities of lightness, activity,
strength and physical endurance in so perfect an equilibriam. His face is rather

thin and embrowned by exposure; his nose a bold aquiline, and his eye deep set and

keen as a hawk’s. The rough -camp-life of many years has lessened in no degree 1

Ms native refinement of character and polish of manners. A stranger would never
suppose him to be the Columbus of our central wilderness, though, when so in-

formed, would believe it without surprise.”

The following testimonial from a distinguished man and a scholar,,

ought to excite feelings ofadmiration and regard towards Col. Fremont:

LETTER FROM BARON HUMBOLDT.
“To COL. FREMOFT, Senator:—It is very agreabie to me, sir, to address you

these lines by my excellent friend our minister to the United States, N. de Gerold Af-
ter having given you, in the new edition ofmy “Aspects of nature,” the public testi-
mony of the admiration which is due to your gigantic labors between St. Louis, of
Missouri, and the coasts of the South Sea, I feel nappy to offer you, in this little token

of my existence (dans cepetit signe de vie), the homage of my warm acknowledgement.
You have displayed a noble courage in distant expeditions, braved all the dangers of

cold and famine, enriched all the branches of the natural sciences, illustrated a vast

country which was almost entirely unknown to us.

A merit so rare has been acknowledged by a sovereign warmly interested in the
progress of physical geography; the king orders me to offer you the grand golden med-

al destined to those whohave labored at scientific progress. I hope that this mark of

the Royal good will, will be agreeable to you at a time when, upon the proposition of

the illustrious geographer, Chas. Ritter, the Geographical Society at Berlin has named

you an honorary member. For myself, I must thank you particularly also for the hon-

or which you have done in attaching my name and that of my fellow-laborer and inti-

mate friend, Mr. Bonpland, to countries neighboring to those which have been the ob-

ject of our labors. California , which has so nobly resisted the introduction of
Slavery

,
will

'be worthily represented by afriend of- liberty and of the progress of intelligence. _
Accept, 1 pray you, sir, the expression ofmy high and affectionate consideration.

Your most humble and most obedient servant,
A. YON HUMBOLDT.

Sane Souci
,
October 7,

On the envolopa thus addressed

:

To Colonel Fremont, Senator,
With the Great Golden Medal

For progress in the sciences.

Baron Humboldt.

There is a great deal of force in the remarks of the Boston -Chron-

icle, when it says, “ For the honesty and competency of our candi-

date, we have the certificate of the highest authority among our op-

ponents, and they cannot eat their own words without ruining their

cause.” The following is a specimen :



11

“Hon. David R. Carter, a Democratic member of Congress from 6hio, said df

Col. Fremont in that debate:
“ He is a small man, but he is as gallant as any mass of stuffof the same size that

was ever wrapped up in a coat that would fit him. And, sir, he met a combinations

of enemies, such as very few of the servants of this republic have ever met—both'
ienemies that man presents and enemies that God presents; mountain enemies, ra-

vine enemies, enemies of frost and of heat, and of fasting. * * *

Sir, you might as well undertake to separate Fremont’s soul from his body by

your action here
1

hefbeing 3,000 miles distant, as to separate Fremont’s fame from

the fame of this side of the Repnblic.”

“FREMONT IN OREGON.—We take the following tribute to Col. Fremont
from the Oregonian, printed at Portland. It will be read with interest, emanating

as it does from the largest and most popular journal in Oregon.

“ Col. Fremont is now fairly before the people of the United States, as a candidate

for the highest office within their gift. That he has done much during his life to
benefit his country, cannot be denied. That his prospects of an election as the

chief Magistrate of the Union, are equal if not superior to all others, is admitted by

everybody except those wearing the partyfetters, is undoubted. That if elected

he will make a good President, all concede. Therefore we are safe in saying that

a vast improvement on the present dynasty is near at hand, and we look forward

with pleasing anticipations to the time when this government will be brought back

to its original purity by the reformation consequent upon the approaching Fresi-”

dential election, and the fruits growing out of it.’

FREMONT’S INTEGRITY.
Certain reckless politicians in the desperation of their cause, have

endeavored to impeach Mr. Fremont’s integrity, while in the United

States’ service in California. With how much honor and sucoes-

will appear from the following extracts :

FREMONT ! IS HE HONEST? IS HE COMPETENT?
Let his opponents answer. The matter of his honesty when in the public service, in

California, which Buchanan’s pack mule Bigler was commissioned to agitate > the

Senate, was passed upon by Congress in 1853, with all the documents which belo g to

it. They discussed all the “ cattle,” “ milch cows,” “ Mariposa purchase,” and e ery-

thing that bore on the question, and this is what Gov. Gorman, a Dfemocrat v aom
Pierce has made Governor of 3Iinnesota, said

:

“The prejudices which had been upon my mind have been dispelled by the in esti-
gation of all his conduct in California, and lam prepared to bear testimony on ties oc-
casion to the correctness of his w/iole line of conduct as an officer and disbursing agent.

Not one dollar can be traced in his hands
,
no property can be traced in his hands

,
for which

he cannot give to the Government satisfactory vouchers that it has been appropriate^ and

j

properly applied.”

Speaking of Col. Fremont’s achievements in California, Gov. Gorman himself, a gal-
lant officer in the Mexican war, said:
“ Upon our whole Pacific border no battallion behaved with more distingui hed

bravery, than did that battallion under Col. Fremont.—No battles were ever to ght

|

against such tremendous odds. THE BATTLE OF BUENA VISTA, EVEN, s AS
NOT FOUGHT AGAINST SUCH ODDS AS WERE SOME OF THE BAT1 LEU
FOUGHT BY THIS LITTLE BATTALLION UNDER FREMONT. But this 1 ave
soldier, who served his country faithfully and honorably, is now incarcerated aL oad
for debts incurred for the benefit of his government, the payment of which is soui« ,t to

r be denied by mere quibbling.”

Mr. Buchanan, the Democratic candidate for President, gives the

following testimony under oath. See his evidence before the com-

missioners. Mr. B. says

—

A. To the best ofmy knowledge, the originals of the bills, copies of which are now
i

produced and shown to me and are hereto annexed, marked Nos. 1. 2, 3 and 4, ere

I

presented at the same Department in the City of Washington, for acceptance and
payment, but I do not recollect the individual or individuals by whom present!

;
/

should have accepted and paid these bills,from my general knowledge of the transaction in 'ali-
fornia , had Congress appropriated any money

,
and placed it at my disposal

,
which could b ap-

plied to their payment, though it would have been more correct to have drawn these bills o i. the

Secretrry of War: I should have accepted and paid these bills, and have them cha ged
in account against Col. Fremont, to be settled for at the general settlement of hi ac-

counts as Commander of the California battallion, had any such appropriation , een
made; I know of no other matter or thing touching or concerning the matters at sue
in this case, or the parties thereto material or necessary to be known and adduct d in
evidence on the trial thereof.

Will presses and politicians that have uttered the falsehood, low

take it back ? We wait to see. As a further illustration of Fre-
mont’s integrity in his [connection with California matters, we s tb-

mit to our readers an extract from the House of Representatives,

taken from the New York Tribune :



12

Years afterwards—-in fact, only last year—liis long evaded claim to be mid for cattle
furnished, not to his own command, but to other U, S. officers in California after hehad caused to wield any authority there, was brought to issL befoirTSrLs andunanimously sanctioned. Both Houses, after a careful scrutiny decided^ that themoney was honestly his due, and should be naid. Here

Drtuv/uuueu. jouiii nouses, alter a care
money was honestly his due, and should be paid. Here is the essentiaTDorlToiTnf the
unanimous Report of the House Committee on Indian * •

portion of the

(O rr nf S O l?,aofmon WtTic .
unammuus report oi me h ouse Committee on Indian Affairs, consisting of Messrs
Orr of S. C., Eastman of Wis Grow of Pa., Ball of Ohio, Maxwell of Fla°, Wright of
IP®

8-
’
Greenwood of Ark., Pringle of N. V and Latham of Cal. (all Democrats but

Rail and Pringle, and five of them now Buchanan men.)
democrats but

“Colonel Fremont,’’ they say, “purchased a larg ® number o*f beef cattle in the
southern part of the State, and hired drivers at a heavy cost to drive them to thedesignated place. The cattle were driven upward of three hundred Ses fathe heat
Sfe

8

^ r^Hfh^rnnte
dl

tx
s®a®?n ’ a

J; §
reat lab°r and exposure, and some 400 were lost ordied on the route. He delivered to agent Barbour, and took his receipt thereof one

^if?f29^nn
h
i^

nd
\

red
/
nd tW

f

e^'five thousand hundred pounds
P
of beef on thehoof (l,225,o00 lbs,) and accepted in payment drafts drawn by agent Barbour and the

Secretary of the Interior, amounting to one hundred and eighty-three thousand eio-hthundred and twenty five ddlars ($183,825). These drafts were protested on vreseZ
tion

,
no appropriation having been made by Congress from which they could be paidSubsequently

,
the treaties were rejected by the Senate, for reasons which have not vet^i^«1Ci’ and the- ^dia»® of California hale been driven from thei? landsan d hoines, and have received no compensation from the Government save the beef

for

m
The*beeTvF^?i^t^th^hmik«

n<

fTh
h
\
n0
? °?

ks the G ove“ menJTo pa^ hff
nL- n-u? 11,1 .

w
,

ei
V

1

?
t
?
the hands of the agents of the Government

: whether it was
ali faithfully distributed among the Indians by the sub-agents is not a questioi thaT H
to affect the justice and equity of the claim of Col. Fremont. He thrnished he agents
of the Government with a large quantity of beef. Most if not all of it was usfd infeeding the Indians

;
it was furnished to comply with treaty stipulations : it storrped the

ivtir and restorer}, peace to the country and will the Government now shield itselfSi thepayment ot this daim, and devolve a ruinous loss upon one of its own citizens unnn
HAVE RECEIVED tSpauvaSJ r vtP®A™authoritv to make the contract? WEED J HE ADVAN 1AGES AND BENEFITS OF THF FONTT? A pt
FOR IT^

11 C0MMITTEE RELIEVE THAT IT IS JUST THAT WE SHOULD PAYFOR IT.”
Weller and Gwin Senators from Dalifornia, united in saying that Col. Fremont was

justly entitled to the money. The Representatives of California (McDou^al and La

^reSdencv t „
Mr

' «»
to reP»rt- h™.

, ^

* J -“O W*. illWUVlU.

Such is the action of our government and such is the testimony
of Democrats including Mr. Buchanan, under oath. If Fremont is
r defaulter, or defrauder, these witnesses are convicted of being
grossly ignorant, or parties to deception.

FREMONT’S RELIGION.

JOs Fremont a Catholic ?—If not, why does he not deny it ?
Yyhy, my poor, deluded friend, he has denied it daily ever since he
Fas nominated, and his friends have denied it for him, on his au-

f
ncl on their own - Here, for example, is a denial from a

California ex-member of Congress :

Washington, D. C, Aug. 16
,
1856 .

My dear Sir : I am authorized by Col Fremont to deny, in the
most positive language, the report now in circulation, to the effect
that he is a Roman Catholic.
From a long and intimate acquaintance with Col. Fremont, I will

further add that I know of my own knowledge, that he had never
had any connection whatever with the Catholic Church, or the
Catholic religion. Q. yy. WRIGHT.
Hon. Richard Mott, House of Representatives.—Bost. Chron.
A great effort has been made to identify Fremont with Romanism.

The evident design of this effort, is to destroy the confidence of Prot-
estants and Native Americans, and thus cut off their votes. That
conupt political parties, who care very little about any religion,
should seize upon such an argument only evinces the hypocrisy of
such organizations. Here, for example, is a party, which is laboring
pight and day to swell their ranks with Irish Catholics, and yet with
holy horror cry out, “ Why, Fremont is a Catholic !” What candor

!

Wh have no fellowship for Catholicism, nor have we any for duplic-



I

13

ity and barefaced hypocrisy. Still, we are ready to meet the charge

and show its utter falsehood. Indeed, this has been done again and

again, while the “ dog Nobles” continue looking at the same old

hole. We deny most emphatically that Fremont is, or ever was a
Roman Catholic. The following is a specimen of political candor.

'No doubt everybody will believe it!

“The following paragraph," said to have come from a political tract in circulation

in the Eastern States, is a good snmmary of the ‘New York Express’ for the past

month or so

:

“ I live in New York, next door to Col. Fremont. I know him well. He invaria-
bly attends church Sundays—at Bishop Hughes’s church in the forenoon, and a
Puseyite church in the afternoon. Two Sundays ago he and Bishop Hughes were
[coming home from church, arm in arm, and they were so drunk that they reeled

against my door yard fence and knocked out three lengths.”

If Fremont were a Romanist, would not Romanists be likely to

give him their support ? But what are the facts ? Hear

!

“ The Albany Evening Telegraph says that of seventeen Irish Catholic papers in

the United States, not one supports Fremont, and SIXTEEN give a hearty support
to Buchanan. The other is neutral or refuses to support Buchanan on account of

the Keating affair.

This fact presents the following dilemma for the Hindoos to solve : The presum*

ition is that Fremont is not a Catholic, for If he is, then the charge that Catholics

linvariabiy combine and support persons for office of their own religion in preference
to those of the Protestant faith, it is found false.”

But we offer in evidence church records under the certificate of

the Rector

—

WASHINGTON CITY, July 12, 1856.
“ The following children of J. Charles and Jessie Benton Fremont have been bap-

tized in the Church of the Parish of Epiphany, Washington, D. C., their baptisms

being recorded in the register of said parish:

“ 1848, Aug, 15, Elizabeth McDow.ell Benton Fremont.
“ 1848, Aug. 15, Benton Fremont.
“ 1853, Dec. 28, Johu Charles Fremont.
“ 1855, Aug. I, Francis Preston Bennet.

“As none wTere baptized in a house, but all were broughtto the church, the order

j

of the Protestant Episcopal Church for ‘the Ministration of Public Baptism of in-

fants,’ was that which was used.

J. W. FRENCH,
“ Rector Of the Parish of the Epiphany,”

Washington, D. C.

“ANOTHER WITNESS:—Rev. J. Banwell Campbell, rector of St. Phillip’s
I

I

Protestant Episcopal church, in Charlestown. S, C., writes to the Charleston Cour-

ier, that he finds the following in the handwriting of Bishop Gadsden:
—“On the

;

37th of June, 1827, of St. Philip’s Congregation, was confirmed at St. Panl’s church

! by the Right Rev. Nathaniel Bowen, Charles Fremont, a non communicant.”

We give the following as a specimen of many that might be of*
' fered to the public

:

A New York correspondent of the Boston Journal, says;
!

“In conversation with Col. Fremont, this morning, I asked him explicitly, that I

might authoritively deny the story concerning his religion—“Colonel, are you a
Roman Catholic?” To which he replied—“lam not, nor have I ever been; and but

j

twice during my life, do I remember to have been inside of a Roman Catholic
church.”

At a public meeting in Spridgfield, Mass., on the evening of July

4th, Hon. C. C. Dhaffee declared “that he knew Fremont person*

j

ally, and that if any man said, he was now or ever had been a Ro-

j

man Catholic, he lied in his throat
,
and held himself responsible for

i
the charge, according to any code of honor, North or South.”

The interview given below speaks for itself:

(From, the Boston Atlas.)

j

FREMONT’S RELIGION.—To the editor:—A certain Fillmore man in New
I

York, seriously exercised about the religion of Mr. Fremont, finally made this of

|

fer to a Fremont man: That if Mr. Fremont would say to him that he was not a
Catholic, and never had been, he would vote for him or forfeit a thousand dollars'



14

The offer wp gladly accepted, and a time appointed to call on Mr, Fremont and
propound tho momentous question. At the time agreed upon, the party, consisting
of five persons, proceeded to the residence of Col. Fremont, aud were introduced

hi-

a ve
?
er
.^

1® ge^leman who had known the Colonel in California. The party

fZltug

*

y ,he °hjecl of their '**’ t,,ey were i”trodoced
-
™d

ha^been
Mr‘ Fremont

’
1 called to ask Touif your are a Casholic or ever

n /-
re
??
0n
v~“ \

an
?

H,
ot

.

a Catho|ic, and I have never been a Catholic. I was rear-

il,'r
Pr

i

eSai1 Episcopal Church, where my children have also been baptised:my wife is also a member of that Church.” p

Priest””*

6 man'~ i 11 is adraitted
>
1 believe, that you were married by a Chatholic

diluted^”

U ^0t that is afact which is upon the record, and was never

Fillmore man.—“ I am told a Catholic Priest cannot marry parties unless one of
them is a member of that Church.”
Fremont.—

“

That may be so: I have taken little interest in the tenets of that
Church, and know little about them. All I know is, myself and wife were married
by a Catholic clergymen ofthe city of Washington, and we are both Protestants
I believe, however, that tnere are many instances where Proteseants have been mar-
ried by a Catholic clergymen. I know some other cases myself ”

Fillmore man.-^ I am informed that there is a person who is ready to make affidavit
that you habitually attended the Catholic Church in California »

YK

Fremont.—

“

So far is that from being true, I attended no church in California - 1 was
generally a pretty hard worked and hard workingman in CoUfm-nJo j'
r remoni

.

oo mr is mat irom being true, I attended no church in California- 1 was

Alf
ett

+

h
-

ar
i

w
?
rk.ed a

.

nd bard working man while in California, and’ found
it necessary to rest, instead ol going long distances to church: whenever it was con-
venient, my wite attended the Protestant church.”

°

Fillmore man l am entirely satisfied, Colonel,—you shall have my vote, as I have
promised my triend there, on this result of our interview. I am sternly opposed to the
turtner extension of slave territorv. nnrl miiv

inwiuiaere, on inis resuu or our interview. I am sternly opposed to the
further extension of slave territory, and only wished those honest doubts dispelled byyour personal declarations. v

ujr

Fremont.—^Thank you. 1 am informed there are other and much worse stories to beput in circulation about me, one ot which is that I have been a slaveholder
,
and that ona certaiu voyage, myself and my wife took turns in whinni™ a h1»v«

-nT
a ausimeuue society, jl cannot use liquor—it is against my nature.

The conversation was conducted on the part of Mr. Fremout with such entire Frank-
ness, with such freedom from those evasive modes of expression which politicians

C

°Ti

Cea
i-n

S 6ad °f expressinS their thoughts, as to win the admiration of^he hsteners. The Fillmore man was a prominent Delegate to the Whig Convention atAlbany, It is needless to say he did not attend. Authentic !

It would seem superfluous to say more in regard to Fremont’s relig-
ious faith. Still we add the following from the New York Evange-
list of Sept. 18. Some of our opponents are like certain old Testa-
ment sinners, who needed “line upon line, line upon line.” As we
have the means, we give the “ lines.”

IS FREMONT A CATHOLIC !—THE QUESTION SETTLED
[From the New York Evangelist

,
Sept. 18.]

NOT FOR- PARTY, BUT FOR TRUTH.

*i

:It not ou
f

business to enter into the strife of politics. That is not our vocation,

f.

nd we have religiously abstained from such contests. Nor shall we depart Dorn the
line of strict propriety. But we are sometimes appealed to for information as to mat-
ters of fact, by readers who imagine that we may have special means of knowing the
truth. In such a case we are willing to tell what we know—not for the sake of party,
,but of truth. This we may do without sacrificing our neutral and independent charac-
ter. If we can help to correct an error, or to disabuse the public mind of a false im-
pression, we are doing a service to right minded men of all parties. We do not uree
our readers to vote one way or the other, but we do wish them to vote intelligently.

”

It is well known that one of the candidates for the Presidency has been charged with

T^
n
4,

aA0man Cathpbc- To this story we never gave the slightest importance know-ing that it was one of those bald falsehoods which were fabricated for a party purpose
and which would drop into oblivion and be despised as soon as it had served its object.But as the originators of the story cling to it with great pertinacity, thinking it a very
effective wea,pon to excite odium and prejudice, some good men have thought it worth
while to set ihe matter at once and forever at rest. Clergymen of this city have been

to
.

by members of their churches, and by letters from abroad, to make personal
inquiry, since the public would have entire confidence in their statement, knowing that
they could have no motive to misstate the fact.

’

,,SlSlled to, anumber of clergymen, though very reluctant to do anythingwhich could bring their numes before the public in connection with any political que£
;ln? \-°

aIled T c.01 . iremont for the purpose of a frank conversation in regard to hisreligious profession and belief. This they did—not for their own personal satisfaction
•—for no; one of them had a doubt about the matter—but simply that they mi«-ht be

by a« assurance from his own lips. Among those who wen? were
^tev. Dr. DeWitt, of the Dutch Reformed Church; Professors Henry B. Smith and R.



15

D. Hitchcock, of the Union Theological Seminary; Rev. David B. Coe, Secretary ot
the Home Missionary Society, and one of the editors of this paper. They were recei-
ved with great cordiality, and Col. Fremont responded very frankly and cheerfully to
their enquiries.

When it was remarked that some of our good people were disturbed about his reli-
gion, he replied, smiling, that he was glad that his opponents were willing to admit,
at least, that he had some religious feeling—that he was -not wholly indifferent to
Christianity. One of the ministers inquired if the account of his early religious educa-
tion and of his joining the Episcopal church, as given in Bigelow’s “ Life of Fremont,”
was correct? He replied that it was, and added, in a few words, that he had been
born and educated in the Episcopal church

;
thatj|he had been confirmed as a member of

that church, and had never had a shadow of a thought of leaving it.
When allusion was made to the persistant assertions that he was a Catholie, he re-

plied that he could not imagine how such a story took its rise, for, that, in fact, he had
hardly been inside of a Catholic church more thau half a dozen times in his life, and
then upon occasions of public interest or curiosity
All this was said very quietly, and with no apparent desire to obtrude his religious

education and belief No one could listen to this frank, yet modest statement, without
feeling that it was perfectly ingenious

;
and that, with no bigotry towards others, he

was sincerely and unaffectedly attached to the religion in which he had been educated
by a pious mother.

The following from the Providence Daily Journal speaks for it-

self. Mr. Hatfield is well known among us, and his testimony must

be satisfactory

:

Warren, R. 1., Sept. 12, 1856.
Dear Bro.—I have some interest and more curiosity to know the truth in reference to

the report, so current, that Col Fremont is a Catholic
;
and it has occurred to me that

you may have means of knowing, and perhaps would take the trouble to inform an old
frihnd and correspondent on the subject.

It is extremely difficult to arrive at the truth in times of such intense excitement; as

the political papers are filled with contradictory statements, each of which claim to be

true.

Are you acquainted with Alderman Fullmer, who has testified on the subject? Are
you able to give me definite and reliable information with regard to the report that
Fremont is a Catholic?
An answer to the above at such time as may suit your convenience will oblige, yours

truly, S. C. BROWN.
Rev. R. M. Hatfield, New York.

New York, (12 Forsyth st.,) )
Sept. 13, 1856.

j .

Dear Brother—Your note of the 12th inst. came to hand this morning
,
and I avail

myself of my first leisure moments to reply to its contents. Of Alderman Fullmer I
have nothing to say. I do not know the man, and have no wish to repeat rumors that
are current with regard to his character. In times of high political excitement like

the present, such rumors are utterly unreliable. Touching the report that Colonel

Fremont is a Catholic, I am prepared to give you “ definite and reliable informa-
tion.” Such reports are utterly false, “ all a lie from end to en .” Macauly, in one of

his reviews, says that one who has never read the life of Bareve, may be said not to
know what a lie is. The eloquent essayist would certainly modify his opinion were he
to acquaint himself with the present position of American politics, or look occasionally

into the columns of some of our Fillmore papers. Neither Barevej nor the father of

lies himself, ever concocted a baser falsehood than the one by which a set of dema-

gogues are attempting to deceive the public with regard to the religious sentiments of

Col. Fremont. He is not a Romanist, never has been, and has done nothing to give
color to the fabrications of his slanderers John Wesley was not more free from all

reasonable suspicion of leaning toward the church of Rome, than is John C. Fremont.

He was educated in the Protestant faith, confirmed in a Protestant church, has been
during all his life-time, and is now, an undisguised and decided Protestant. This

statement I make not on the strength of newspaper reports, nor from hearsay or second
hand testimony. I am personally acquainted with Col. Fremont, I know that he is not
a Papist, just as I know that you are not one. With the hope that my reply will be
satisfactory, I remain, Fraternally yours,

R. M. HATFIELD.
Rev. S. C. Brown, Warren, R. I.

DISUNION.

Who are the disunionists, we ask ? Republicans have no thoughts

of dissolving the Union, but desire to unite and consolidate it by a

more faithful administration of government according to the spirit

and design of the Coastitution. It is Southern fanaticism that talks

of dissolving the Union. We submit a few specimens

:

The following paragraph appears in the Washington correspondence of the New Or-
leans Delta

:

u
It is already arranged in the event of Fremont’s election, or a failure to elect by the

people, to call the Legislatures of Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia, to concert

measures to withdraw from the Union before Fremont can get possession of the army

and the navy and the purse-strings of Government. Governor Wise is actively at work

already in the matter. The South, can rely on the President in the emergency contemplated.

'Hie question now is, whether the people of the South will sustain their leaders.”



16

Reannexation Off THE Slave States to England.—The Richmond Whig pro-
poses the following

:

“ The time is not so remote hut that it lingers in the memory and traditions of our
people, when England was familiar and endearingly spoken of as home. If the worst
comes to the worst—and we cannot find peace, justice or safety with our Yankee
brethren—that time may come again /”

We give below some extracts from Buchanan Democrats

:

BY SENATOR YULER, OF FLORIDA.
u For my part, I am ready to proceed to extreme measures, even to the dissolution of

the Union.”
BY SENATOR BROWN, OF MISSISSIPPI.

“If the Wilmot Proviso is adopted, it will raise a storm that will sweep away this
Union, and I pray God devoutly it will do so.”

BY MR. MORSE OF LOUISIANA.
“ The southern man who will stand up and say that he is for the Union. ‘ now and

forever,’ is more dangerous to the cause he represents than those who are in open hos-
tility. If California be trammeled with a preamble declaring the territory now- free, I
am willing to dissolve the Union.”

BY MR. STANTON, OF TENNESSEE
“ When the Wilmot proviso is adopted, I and the South are ready to walk out of the

Union.”

BY SENATOR BUTLER, OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
“ I do not make the salvation ol the Union the paramount question.”

BY SENATOR MASON, OF VIRGINIA.
“ It is the time the yoke was thrown off and the question settled.”

BY MR. MeWILLIE, OF MISSISSIPPI.
“The people of the South know their rights, and will maintain them at all hazards,

even should disunion result. * * The South must defend their rights at the ex-
pense of blood.”

BY MR. MEAD OF VIRGINIA.
“ If you exclude us, 1 am not willing to submit. * * We intend to give the

land peaceably if we can
,
forcibly if we must,”
BY MR. COLCOCIv, OF GEORGIA.

“If the Wilmot proviso should pass in any form, 1 will introduce a bill for the disso-
lution of the Union.”

The following resolution was adopted at a Congressional caucus of Southern Demo-
crats held in Washington in January, 1849:
“ Resolved, That the dissolution of the Union is preferable to the submission of the

South to the Wilmot Proviso.”
The following toasts were drank at -a Democratic 4th of July celebration at Atchison

City, in Kansas

:

“Disunion:—By secession or otherwise—a beacon of hope to an oppressed people
and the surest remedy for southern wrrongs. (Enthusiastic cheers )”
“ The City of Atchison:—May she, before the close of the year ’57, be the capitol of

a southern Republic, (Cheers.)”
Spoken Out.—Judge Rust, of Louisiana, one of the Democratic speakers, of Con-

cord, N. H., uttered in very plain English precisely what Rufus Choat took for grant-
ed when he wrote his remarkable letter against the Declaration of Independence. He
said.

“The institution of slavery is stronger than faction, than fanaticism, than party,
than the Constitution

,

than the Union.”

These extracts show who are the disunionists,—Democrats or Re-
publicans. We add a few more to prove that such madcaps will
find trouble at home if such treason is attempted. Such “ nullifiers”

might find in Fremont another Jackson to deal with. Don’t believe

they will try the experiment.

Henry W. Davis, a young and talented member from Maryland, made a speech in
Congress in which he attributed the evils that now afflict Kansas and the country to
the right cause, the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and indignantly denounced

those who threaten a dissolution of the Union if Fremont is elected. He said

:

“ There are men who go about the country declaiming about the inevitable Conse-
quences of the election of Fremont; and the question is asked whether that simple fact

is not sufficient, not merely to justify but to require a dissolution of the Union. The

question has been asked me to day. This is a question which 1 do not regard as a sub-
ject for discussion. It never will be done while men have their senses. It never will be

done until some party, bent upon an acquiring party power, shall again and again ex-

asperate beyond the reach of reason the Northern and Southern minds, as my Southern
friends have now exasperated the Northern mind. It would be an act of suicide, and
sane men do not commit suicide. The act itself is insanity. It will be done if ever in a
tempest of fury and excitement which cannot stop to reason.”

The following is significant, because from a man supposed to possess

a good deal of the spirit of Revolution. The extract says

:

“ Scarcely less indignant was the denunciation of Senator Houston, who said

“ They tell me, that if Fremont is elected, forty thousand bayonets will bristle

about the Capitol—that the South, in fact, will secede. Mr. President, I scorn the
suggestion ! Thore will be neither bristling bayonets nor secession. If Col. Fre-

mont shall be elected by a majority of the people, though I am not his supportner,



17

I shall respect the majesty of the people; and to Col. Fremont, as the Chief Magis-

trate of their choice, I shall pay my respectful homage.” [Here the old hero, put-
ting his hand to his breast, made one of his most elaborate bows.J”

“ We are told to vote for Buchanan to defeat Fremont, as the election of the lat-
ter would lead to the -dissolution of the Union. It is false ; to say that Southern

men will dissolve the Union in the event of Fremont’s election, is a slander and a

calumny on them. The Union is stable and strong, and we remain so, let who

will be elected. There is not one inch of soil from Minnesota to the Belize that is

in the political North or the political South. The Union is welded and bound to-

gether by ties of blood and kindred, and will come out unscathed from the fiery

trial of ttie coming election.”

The North need have no fears about the South leaving the North,

or dissolving the Union. It is only the hot-bloods that talk such

nonsense. It would be suicide for the South to do any such tiling.

If they can scare a few “ faint-hearts and dough-faces into compli-

ance, it will be capital game. Let the North be firm, and the Union

is safe. Fremont’s election will teach the South that all this scare-

baby cry about the Union is of no avail, and the cry will soon die

out.

DEMOCRACY.

We have a few words to say about Modern Democracy. It is
a base slander upon the word to call Pierce’s administration Democ-

racy
;
or say that the party bearing the name are in the true sense

Democrats. “ Modern Democracy” is a spurious
,
bogus concern ;

—

hence many intelligent, honest Democrats are leaving the party.

—

We commend to “ honest Democrats” a pamphlet called “A Plain
Statement,” from which we select the following definition, taken

from Kendall’s Expositor:

“ The Democracy we advocate is justice between man and man; between state and
state; between nation and nation. It is morality. It is giving every man his due. Jt
is doing unto others as we would have them do unto us. It advocates the banishment
of falsehood, fraud, and violence, from the affairs of men. It is the moral code ofHim
‘ who spake as never man spake.’ It is the perfection of reason and the law of God.’’

Thus Jefferson says, “The love of justice and the love of country

plead equally the cause of the people : it is a moral reproach to us

that they should have plead it so long in vain.” See letters to Ed-

ward Cole, Aug. 25, 1814.

Such was Jeffersonian Democracy. Let us look at the modern,

bogus kind.

New York Day Book.—So late as June 21, 1856, the Day
Book gives us the following :

“ Negro ‘ slavery ’ is the basis ofAmerican DEMOCRACY; or the subordination ofan m-
; ftrior race has secured, and always will secure, the equality of the superior race!”

Have the party repudiated this “ Day Book” Democracy ?
We add the following as further illustrating the Democracy of the

New York Day Book:
Modern Democracy.—The New York Day Book, the leading Buchanan paper in

i New York City and State, says :
“We hold negro ‘ slavery’ to be right, right per se

,
right in itself, in the nature and

necessity offhings. *** ***** *
It also adds, that when the question is submitted to the Northern Democracy, they

will be in favor of the extension of slavery. So much for the democracy.—IVew Bed-
ford Standard.

Perhaps it will be objected that the Day Book is not good author-
ity—is not the standard of Democracy. Suppose we try the char-
acter of the party by its declarations, and acts and the doings and

sayings of its leaders. The good old book says, “by their fruits ye
shall know them.”

The following resolution was adopted by the Democratic Conven-
tion in Cincinnati, and is one of the planks in the platform—



IB

*SW- pMti Afimialstratioffi ofFRANKLIN PIERCE has been true to -Demo-cratic principles, and therefore true to the great interests of the country: in the face of
X^

e
o
t

TT

)

^^T^T?»
h
TT^T^

naintaine^ the laws at home
:
and therefore we procl aim

E7” OUR UNQUALIFIED ADMIRATION OF HIS MEASURES AND POLICY.
We entreat all honest men to look at poor Kansas for an illustra-

tion of Mr. Pierce’s “ Democratic principles.”

The Richmond Inquirer says

:

The South once thought its own institutions wrongful and inexpedient. It thinks sono longer—and will insist that they shall be PROTECLED Anb EXTENDED by the
Fedjsbax. Government, equally with the institutions op raj

Now the “EXTENSION BY THE ARM OF THE FEDERAL GOVERN-
MENT,” of such“ institutions,” is the pet design of the South, and
the South is using and intends to use the Democratic party for such
purposes. That such is the fact cannot be denied with any show of
candor. Look at Facts and Figures bearing upon this point. Was
not the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise a Democratic measure,
supported by the South almost to a man ? Is not the South nowf A f' w U1C OUULli I1UW
using Democracy to carry Slavery into Kansas? Does not the
South claim Buchanan’s election on the ground that “he is safe

— ~ un KUQ giuuuu iimt nc is sujt
for the South” on the subject of Slavery

; because “he never gave a
vote, °v “uttered a word against it,” “ hut has always stood on
the side of the South ?” Are not the Pro-Slavery leaders in Kansas
to-day, Democrats, and have they not been from the commencement?
Have not those Pro-Slavery, Democratic Kansas leaders carried
elections byfraud and violence ? Take a few facts and figures, for
example :

Ka
y

sas Investigating Committee shows that, of 2871 votes cast at

™
f
+

r De^e£ate , 1 '29 were illegal, leaving but 1142 legal votes. And of the

bat°14121e|al
’ vStes

* deCtl0n for “embers of tbe Legislature, 4§08 were illegal, leaving

Was this fraud? Hear what Stringfellow said before the elec-
tion :

“I advise you
,
one and all, to enter every election district in Kansas, in defiance of Reederananis vile myrmidons, and vote at the point of the bowie-knife and revolver. Neither give

wh’iJh ?L
F

re irnoTpp
n

eal.»

• * * en0Ugh that the Slaveb<>lding intefest

Hear what David R. Atchison said, after the election

:

the
?

h T£
hy

’
an eleetion

i
or “embers of the Legislature to organize

the territory must be held, .... and, cold and inclement as the weather was, I
r Witn a comnanv nf mop a —i-u.. at ^ZefL?JeS ^lf,h ? c°mpany’oi men ’ • • • and the Abolitionists ofthe North saidand published it abroad^, that Atchison was there, with bowie-knife and revolver; and, by God ,Ine

?
e

J
dl

f,

g0 ***? tJ
}
at Territory—I never intend to go into that Territory-nvith-

ovt beingpreparedfor all such kind of tattle;'1

The “ Squatter Sovereign,” a Pro-Slavery paper published at In-
dependence, Missouri

,
boasts as follows :

tlG , , _ .
Independence, Missouri, March, 31, 1855.

several hundred emigrants from Kansas have just entered our city. They
were preceded by the Westport and Independence brass bands . . They
gave repeated cheers for Kansas aud Missouri. They report that not an anti-slave-
ry man will be in the Legislature of Kansas. We have made a clean sweep;'1

Read the following note of triumph from Atchinson :

~ u?
a
u

i(

i

A
,

tch
i
son

,

write9 t0 a gentleman in South Carolina, and the letter isP^edm. the Carolina Times. We quote a paragraph—

:

My opinion is that the South will be stirred by the transactions of these few
weeks and will come up with men and money. The latter is particularly wanted
to assist the men. In a few months, in my opinion, there will not be an Abolition-
ist in Kansas

;
they will be swept with a clean broom. Then the war will be cai'ried

elsewhere, ifwar we are to have.' ’

Look at the following from South Carolina

:

?
hat even the admission of Kansas as a slave State will not satisfy

.

1 be abettors look beyond it. Not long since a Mr. Townsend at a meeting in Charles-
ton South. Carolina, used the following significant language.



u
In gaining Kansas we shut out an enemy from our camp; we support Missouri,

and immeasurably strenthen our outposts on that important frontier; and with her

•we not only secure Missouri to our ranks, but the Indian Territory, -which is large

enough for two or three States, will cease to be doubtful ground—as it now is—and
will be certain for the South. Kansas, then, is the Malakoff fortress, the taking of

which will decide our victory in this battle with Abolitionism in that quarter—

a

!J

battle in which three toJive slave States are to be theprizes won or lost to the South and

her cherished institutions.

Douglas’ Democratic Bill was designed to make Kansas a Slave

State, and so understood by the Pro-Slavery press

—

Wori^g of Douglas's Bill.—The Leavenworth Herald, the Stringfellow organ, is
strongly in favor of this bill, and gives reasons

:

“ Our party has now a majoity in the Territory; but whether it will retain that

majority is to our mind a matter of much doubt. Every one knows that the

capacity of the Northern States for colonization is far superior to that of the South-

ern States. Then we may let this bill pass, and let the question of slavery be
brought up when our party has a majority in the Territory. We regard the bill as
eminently wise and just, and believe that, if it takes effect, Kansas will be a

SLAVE STATE.”

“ OSTEND CIRCULAR”
We refer to this famous document to prove that the extension of

[Slavery is a cherished object with the South—that the seizure of
Cuba as well Us the possession of Kansas, is essential to the carry-

ing out of the plan, and that the South calculate on Mr. Buchanan

and Democracy to carry out the measure. What Mr. Buchanan’s

views are relative to the seizure of Cuba, may be easily ascertained.

James Buchanan says—“After we shall have offered Spain a
price for Cuba, far beyond its present value, and this shall have

been refused, it will then be time to consider the question—Does
Cuba in the possession of Spain, seriously endanger our internal

peace, and the existence of our cherished Union ? Should this ques-

tion be answered in the affirmative, then by every law human and

divine
,
we shall be justified in wresting itfrom Spain , if we possess

the power. And we ought neither to count the cost, nor regard the

odds which Spain might enlist against us.”

Some sinner having dared to breathe a suspicion thatMr. Buchan-

might be tainted with the sin of Free-Soilism, the Charleston Mer-

cury, S. C., comes to the rescue as follows

:

“ But, in order that the absurdity of the charge of Mr. Buchanan’s being a ‘ free-

soiler’ may, if possible, become apparent, we need only cite the fact, that, two

years ago, he signed the Ostend manifesto, a document whose sole object was to

acquire Cuba, out of which two or three slave States could have been formed. Here,

then, is his record. The champion of the admission of Arkansas, the champion of

the annexation of Texas, the champion of the acquisition of Cuba—where is the
tain or suspicion of tree-soilism in all this ? Whatever are Mr. Buchanan's preju-

dices against Slavery
,
his votes and his acts are with us.

What Democracy thinks about Cuba, may be inferred from the

[following resolution, passed at the Cincinnati nominating Conven-

tion :

“ Resolved
,
That the Democratic party will expect of the next Administration

that every proper effort be made to insure our ascendancy in the Gulf of Mexico

—

to maintain a permanent protection of the great outlets through which is emptied

into its waters the products raised upon our soil and commodities created by the in-

dustry of the people in our western valleys and the Uuion at large.”

Cuba is situated at the entrance of the Gulf of Mexico. Now the
plain English of Mr. Buchanan’s instructions, the Charleston Mer-

cury, and this Democratic platform, is, “ get Cuba at any rate

—

hon-

orably ifwe can, but violently if Spain refuses to sell
;
in other words,

buy or steal it—nay still worse, rob Spain ! ! Can an honest man vote

for such men and measures without wearing the blush of eternal



2ft

sliame, when he meets an honest man. Such moral principles ought

to sink any party below the respect ofmen of decent morals. And to
talk about the “ divine law” justifying sueh seizure is adding glaring

hypocrisy to national robbery. It is morals with a vengeance

!

FREE LABOR.
Reader, do you believe in labor, and are you a laborer ? Hear

what the South thinks ofyou and all other free working men who earn

their bread by honest industry, and remember James Buchanan is the

choice of the South, because “ he never gave a vote, ‘or’ uttered&word
against Slavery.”
“ THE OPINION OF A BUCHANAN ORGAN.—The Muscogee, Alabama, Herald,

gives the following opinion of free men and free labor

:

Free society! we sicken of the name. What is it but a conglomeration of GREASY
MECHANICS, FILTHY OPERATIVES, SMALL FISTED FARMERS, and moon

/struck theorists? All the northern and especially of the New England states are de-
void of society fitted for well bred gentlemen The prevailing class one meets with is
that of mechanics struggling to be genteel, and small farmers who do their own drud-
gery; and yet who are hardly fit lor association with a southern gentleman^ body ser-
vant. This is your free society which the northern hordes are endeavoring to extend
into Kansas.”

The very word FREE, orfree labor is so abhorrent to Southern

blood, that the mention of it almost brings on hysterics. Read the

following beautiful extract from the RICHMOND ENQUIRER,
Dec. 28, 1855

:

“ We have got to hating everything with the prefix free—from free negroes down
and up, through the whole catalogue of abominations, demagogueries, lusts, philoso-
phies, and follies, free farms, free labor, free niggers, Iree society, free will, tree think-
ing, free love, free wives, free children, and free schools, all belonging to the same
brood of damnable isms whose mother is Sin and whose daddy is the Devil—are all
the progeny of that prolific monster which greeted Satan on his arrival at the gates

of hell.

Where such an abhorrence of everything free prevails, we are pre-

pared to hear such sentiments as follows

:

JOHN C. CALHOUN.
“We regard slavery as the most safe and stable basis for free institutions in the

world. It is impossible with us that the conflict should take place between labor and
capital. Every plantation is a little community, with the master at its head, who con-
centrates in himself the united interests of capital and labor, of which he is the com-

mon representative.”

CHANCELOR HARPER, S. C.
“Would you do a benefit to the horse, or the ox, by giving him a cultivated under-

standing, a fine feeling? So far as the mere laborer has the pride, the knowledge, or
the aspiration of a freeman, he is unfitted for his situation. If there are sordid, ser-

vile, laborious offices to be performed, is it not better that there should be sordid, ser-

vile, laborious beings to perform them? Odium has been cast upon our legislation on
account of its forbidding the elements of education being communicated to slaves.—

But, in truth, what injury is done them by this? He who works during the day with his
hands does not read in the intervals of leisure

,
for his amusement , or the improvement of his

mind; or the exception is so very fare as scarcely to need the being provided for.”—

Southern Literary Messenger.

B. WATKINS LEIGH, VA.
“ In every civilized country under the sun. some there must be who labor for their

daily bread,—men who tend the herds, and dig the foil,—who have no real norperson-
al capital of their own, and who earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow^i-
I have as sincere feelings of regard for that people as any man who lives among them.
ButI ask gentleman to say, whether they believe that those who depend on their daily
labor for their daily subsistence, can, or do, ever enter into political affairs? They

never do, never will, never can ”

—

Speech in Virginia Convention
,
1829.

F. W. PICKENS. S. C.
“ All society settles down into a classification of capitalists and laborers. The former

will own the latter, either collectively through the government, or individually in a
state ofdomestic servitude, as exists in the Southern States of this confederacy If la-

f borers ever obtain the political power ofa country
,
it is infact in a state of revolution.”—Speech

* in Congress, January 21, 1S37.

GEORGE M’DUFFIE.
“If we look into the elements of which all political communities are composed, it

will be found that servitude in some iorm is one of the es ential constituents. . . .

In the very nature of things, there must be classes of persons to discharge all the diff-

erent offices of society, from the highest to the lowest. . . . Where these offices are
performed by members of the political community, a dangerous element is obviously
introduced by the body politic. . . . Domestic slavery, therefore Instead, of being

an evil, is the corner stone ofour republican edifice —Message to S. C. Legislature, 1835.



,21

What a contrast do we find in the following extract from Fremont’s

letter of acceptance

—

“ FREE LABOR—The natural capital which constitutes the real wealth of this great
country, and creates that intelligent power in the masses alone to be relied on as the

bulwark of free institutions.—JOHN C. FREMONT.
In an elaborate speech on his Bill to regulate the working of the mines, Mr. Fremont,

said

:

“ The principles of this bill, as I have already stated them, are to exclude all idea of

making a national revenue out ot these mines, to prevent the possibility of monopolies

bv monied capitalists, and to give natural capital, that is to say, to LABOR and IN-
DUSTRY, a fair chance to work, and the secure enjoyment of what they find.”

slavery ever has and ever will war with free labor, and tend to de-

**\he working man. Southerners show their appreciation of the

honest laborer, when they style all such “ greasy mechanics, fil-

thy OPERATIVES, AND SMALL FISTED FARMERS,” wllO are unfit to

associate with their “ body servants.” Will the working men sustain

such men by giving political power to that party which go with the

South ?

BUCHANAN’S FITNESS.
Since Democracy and Pro-Slavery are desirous of comparing fit-

ness, and boast of Mr. Buchanan’s long-tried and well-known politi-

cal character and eminent qualifications for the Presidency, we sub-

mit a witness or two upon that point

:

GEN. JACKSON ON BUCHANAN.
The following note was addressed to Col. Polk on the subject of his appointing Mr.

Buchanan to a place in his Cabinet. The opinion of ‘Old Hickorv’ did not save Polk’S
administration from the disgrace—for he had already given Mr. Buchanan the appoint-

ment:
HERMITAGE, Feb. 28, 1845.

“Your observations with regard to Mr. Buchanan are correct. HE SHOWED A
WANT OF MORAL COURAGE in the aiTair of the intrigue of Adams and Clay—
did not do me justice in the expose he then made and I am sure about that time did
believe there was a perfect understanding between Adams and Clay about the Presi-
dency and the Secretary of State. This I am sure of. But whether he viewed that

honost indignation as (which) I thought it deserved.
“ ANDREW JACKSON.”

Were Andrew Jackson now living, would he vote for such a can-

didate ? Will Andrew Jackson men now vote for such a man ?
For and Against.—A Virginia letter writer says :—
“ Mr. Buchanan has been /or a bank and againtt it—for the tariff of 1842 and against

it—for the Maysville and Cumberland roads, and against internal improvements—for
distribution of the proceedings of the public lands and against it—for squatter sove-

reignty now and against it in 1848—for the principal of the Wilmot proviso hitherto, and
against it noiv, because it clashes with the squatter sovereignty platform built in Cin-

cinnati )—thanking his God that his fortune was cast in a state not cursed by slavery,
and now the champion of Southern institutions—but above all, for Geh. Washington’s
policy of non-intervention with the affairs of foreign countries, and yet the author of

the Ostend manifesto.’’

t
The following Southern comment on the Democratic platform we

o Lve to amuse our friends

:

|f

° Read the following from the Arkansas Whig :

—

“Now this Cincinnati platform seems to be a perfeet hodgepodge. Tom Kikkman
used to tell of a friend of his. dropping in about dinner time, on an old lady who in-
vited him to draw up to the table. There was a huge pie of the pot order for dinner.
The old lady helped him bountifully, and he being hungry, was doihg justice to it.
‘ Stranger,’ said the old lady, ‘ you will find almost every sort of meat in this pie.’
‘ Yes, maaam,’ said he, ‘ and fish too,’ as he drew between his lips what he imagined
was the back-bone of a red horse or sucker. ‘ Lord have mercy,’ exclaimed the old
woman, ‘ if there ain’t our fine tooth comb that Billy lost two weeks ago.’”

NON-EXTENSION.
JOHN C. FREMONT is the only candidate reliable and safe on

this subject. He says

:

“ I am opposed to slavery in the abstract, and on principle, sustained and made habi-
tual by long settled conflictions. While I feel inflexible In the belief that it ought not
to be interfered with where it exists under, the shie d of State sovereignty, I am in-
flexibly OPPOSED TO ITS EXTENSION ON THIS CONTINENT BEYOND ITS PRESENT
limits, JOHN C. FREMONT, 1856.



22

While Fremont is opposed to slavery and its extension, he is not a

sectionalist, but a man for the whole nation, North and South. Hear

him

:

Comprehending the magnitude of the trust which they have declared themselves willing to place

in my hands
,
and deeply sensible to the honor which their unreserved confidence in this threaten-

ing position of the public affairs implies , I feel that I cannot better respond than by a sincere
declaration that

,
in the event of my election to the presidency

,

J should enter upon the execution

of its duties with a single-hearted determination to promote the good of the WHOLE COUN-
TRY

',

and to direct solely to this end all the power of the Government, IRRESPECTIVE OF
PARTY ISSUESAND REGARDLESS OF SECTIONAL STRIFES.

JOHN C. FREMONT^
Fremont thinks with Daniel Webster on the subject of slavejafcg-

“ Under no circumstances will I consent to the further extension of the area of slavery
in the United States, or to the further increase of representation in the House of Rep-
reseptatives.” DANIEL WEBSTER, 1848.
WHENEVER THERE IS A SUBSTANTIVE GOOD TO BE DONE, WHENEVER

THERE IS A FOOT OF, LAND TO BE PREVENTED FROM BECOMING SLAVE
TERRITORY, I AM READY TO ASSERT THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EXCLUSION
OF SLAVERY.” DANIEL WEBSTER, 1850.

HENRY CLAY’S VIEWS.
“ I repeat that 1 never can and never will vote, and no earthly power will ever make

me vote, to spread Slavery over Territory where it does not exist ”

HENRY CLAY, 1850.
George Washington would never have voted for the extension of

slavery ; but for its abolition

—

I hope it Will not be conceived, from these observations, ttyat it is my wish to hold
the unhappy people who are the subject of thi6 letter, in slavery. I can only 6ay that
there is not a man living, who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted
for the abolition of it. . . . And this, so far as fny feelings will go, shall not be
wanting.

—

Letter of Gen. Washington to Robert Morris.

FREMONT AS A SENATOR.
Fremont was only twenty-one working days in the Senate. The

following Bills introduced by him show how his thoughts ran, and the

following votes indicate his position on leading questions relating to

slavery.

BILLS.
I.—A Bill to regulate the working of the Mines in California.
II.—A Bill to Grant said State Public Lands for Purposes of Educatton.
III.—A bill to Grant Six Townships for an University.
IV.—A Bill to Grant lands for Asylums for the Deaf and Dumb, for the Blind and

Insane.

V.—A Bill to Provide for Opening a road Across the Continent.
VOTES.

On a proposition to substitute for the bill to abolish the Slave Trade, a bill abolish-
ing Slavery in the District of Columbia, he voted Nay, the vote stood, Yeas 5, Nays 45.
On a bill to suppress the Slave trade in the District of Columbia,' he voted Yea.
On a bill to punish any person who should entice or induce a slave to run away, by

confinement in the District Penitentiary five years, he voted Nay.

On a bill to authorize the corporation in the District to prohibit free negroes under

!
penalty ot fine and imprisonment, he voted Nay.

CONCLUSION.
1. We have proved most conclusively, that the overshadowing)

question and grand issue of the November Presidential election, is"

the extension or non-extension of slavery.

2. We have now shown conclusively that the South claims the
election of Buchanan, on the ground that he is in favor of extension

;

also that the Democratic platform makes no issue with the claims of

the South, but passes resolutions satisfactory to the South, thus en-

dorsing the views and designs of the South on the subject of slavery.

3. We have also shown that Mr. Fillmore’s views on the subject
of slavery, so far as known, do not essentially differ from Mr. Bu-

chanan’s.

4. We have also shown, that of the three candidates, Fremont,
Fillmore and Buchanan, Fremont is the only one known to be op-

* posed to the extension of slavery ; and the South oppose him for

this very reason.



We«^ve,helow, two resolutions, passed by the Democratic State

•^Convention at Worcester, Mass., Sept. 22, 1847.

k-Y Resolved.
,
That the Democratic party and creed are the party and creed offreedom,whose

^"fundamental tenets are the inborn, heaven-granted freedom and equality of all men
^j(to deny which is to destroy republicanism,) the iimlted powers of all government, and

their derivation from the people as the fountain of political authority.

Resolved
,
That the corner-stone of all republican institutions is the inalienabie free-

^wdom and equality of all men; that the American Revolution, and all the political bless-
j^ings thereby secured to our country, were the legitimate results of the adoption of that

great principle by our fathers; and that we ought never to forget or fail to declare our
''^undying attachment to thi6 chief tenet in tha creed of Democracy.”

This talks like Jefferson and the Declaration of Independance,

oks like true Democracy.

est Democrats, are those your sentiments ? Can you then as

men, before God and your country, vote for James Buchanan

Democracy, that is willing to seize Cuba and Kanzas, for the

benefit of slavery ? Can you by a vote, endorse the Cincinnati Plat-

form, without renouncing true Democracy as defined in the above res-

V^olutions? Can you go with the present Democratic party—a party
%
\which endorses Pierce, Douglas, Atchison, Stringfellow, and at the

1

V South even Brooks, without sacrificing every essential principle of
\true Republican government? Can you go for a Democracy that

. blinks the outrages of poor bleeding Kansas, and sustains Franklin

^ ‘Pierce, whose executive power and influence has upheld Missouri

^Border Ruffianism ?

Whigs are in the same dilemma with Democrats. Mr. Fillmore is

\ not a whit safer for non-extension than is Mr. Buchanan
;
as his

' past acts and recent speeches most clearly show. The same Andrew
\ Jackson Donelson, who boasted in the Convention that nominated
^him, that “He owned one hundred slaves,” characterised Fill-

•fl^more a few years since, as an “ eleventh hour apostate abolitionist
”

—

*^That the man who endorsed the Fugitive Slave Law, should go against

^the South on the question of slavery, is too absurd to believe. Hon-

est Whigs choose then your position.

Fremont goes for liberty, against extension, against disunion and

for industry. Neither Whig nor Democrat nor Free Soiler need sac-

rifice his principles in voting for Fremont. Members of all parties

support him on the common ground of opposition to slavery. The

name, REPUBLICAN, may well apply to the supporters of Fre-
mont, for none are Republicans, who vote for slavery or its exten-

sion.

Let, then, every honest man of all parties, who professes to love his

^mntry as the land of freedom, and who would resist the progress of

M^J^ery, give his vote for JOHN CHARLES FREMONT, as the
ONLY candidate, reliable and safe in the present great emergency.
Wf 5. Therefore, to vote for Fillmore or Buchanan is to endorse the

South, and vote for the extension of American slavery.

, 6. We have also proved that the cry of “dissolution” is only the
panic-cry of a few hot-headed Southerners, that it is rebuked by

their own citizens, and that to prevent “ dissolution” we must elect

Fremont, whose administration will stop the enroachments of slavery

and bring the nation back to the Constitution, the only stable basis

of union.

7. We have also shown that to vote for Buchanan or Fillmore,
thus carrying out the designs of the South in regard to slavery, is to

degrade honest industry at the North, by endorsing, virtually, the sen-

timents of the South on the subject of Labor.



'S-iU :•:>(! f "t vj hv %”
f V'~> a

: ' WtblHb ••> BW15 .

t
* "«(»} ' I H

si*' ) tl> «$ ii** k> f«v<

; wv a

\

niUtwt

in .-ii.i . . , . » * f iu > • ’-non iw tjmin
m", *n »w» '•> taorn [

.]; ,

;

•^ . 4- v
,

i > -i

>?«»* .«• <• .7/n.

I

. .
. t ,

• o notte >nw Ml

«

fxi . :! 'b
•*

:

‘

. > d»f • >x - *

fo> H tm' -> ff . .

.;o : ’i i-:* .L .. - T •. . ,
r

i;i . ylqj-M

‘:j i In il; ol £if. II
?•„••

• ./ 1 'Hiltl I'

>« • i : ‘;vi
;

•

'

•
/• '&*

.

•

.

; li 0*i/; n'K

i. !
• * V : v ' :•’ '• ;>V -T v;r>

. } J

vlj I "f t ’
1

. " ,v . • ?»rt# „*» >‘t /to !>•' t Ml

i
fT/:OIA^ f .J.Uf.’rU ) /l110 .

• *• ;’:rrAlv

•V.vm 'wa* iii- < ivi » ,t.( >i /UuBHmi

%l\ v . 0| i L'«! *loi r oi tr!oi'

•
•

*i Jc Ml tm»r i waft- ft ‘to

ol m jiiu
J|iT' (Ti 4Mtl

•till . nwoM>rfi

V

:!>;/! )iU j&h4 iHjMS

.tarn (j '.to

.

luo ifiii / ri =•;. ;.pdi

hi t> oHOii odcts;^

.c^ Ml 'lo n. jabi