Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

on the 21st day of April, 1858, and will not hesitate to apply those principles wherever a proper case may arise.

Resolved, That the Democracy of the State of Illinois is unanimously in favor of Stephen A. Douglas for the next presidency, and the delegates from this state are instructed to vote for him, and make every honorable effort to procure his nomination.

The Democratic State Conventions of Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and Iowa, have since adopted resolutions substantially of the same character, and in other states, where delegates are appointed by districts, resolutions expressing the same doctrine and instructions in favor of Douglas' nomination at Charleston have also been adopted. In Pennsylvania, Tennessee, New Jersey and New York, and in other states where no expression has been made in favor of any particular person for the presidency, the state conventions have asserted principles and proclaimed doctrines so much in accordance with those of Mr. Douglas, that he and his friends would be somewhat embarrassed if forced to chose between them, in selecting the particular one they would prefer. The resolutions so enthusiastically adopted by the Tennessee Democracy in their state Convention are resolutions that can be adopted and as heartily and emphatically approved and sustained by the Democracy of the northwest, as they can be by those gallant Democrats who learned Democracy from the precept and example of Jackson and Polk.

THE DEMOCRATIC ORGANIZATION IN ILLINOIS.

As has been stated elsewhere in this volume, there was no organization of the Democracy of Illinois until 1837. On the 22d of July of that year, the Legislature being then in session, a meeting of the Democratic members and other Democrats was held at the State House in Wandalia to adopt such measures as would produce “concert of action” in the party, and to enable it to combine all its members against the strong and united opposition. A call for a state Convention, to meet at Vandalia in December following, was agreed upon, and a committee of thirty were selected to prepare and publish an address to the people of the state. On that committee were James Semple, afterwards United States senator, W. A. Richardson, James Shields, now of Minnesota, John A. McClernand, now of the House of Representatives, Robert Smith, ex-member

of Congress, and other leading Democrats. A Central Committee, consisting of five members from each congressional district, was also appointed, viz: 1st. W. A. Richardson, J. W. Stephenson, E. D. Taylor, Newton Cloud, J. D. Early; 2d. W. L. D. Ewing, William Walters, H. Smith, Joseph Kitchell, Dr. Turney; 3d. H. M. Rollings, H. L. Webb, R. G. Murphy, A. M. Jenkins, and S. M. Hubbard. This was the first State Committee appointed by the Democracy of Illinois. The Convention met in December, 1837, and nominated J. W. Stephenson for governor, and J. S. Hacker for lieutenantgovernor. The candidates having both withdrawn in April, the Convention was called to reassemble, and did reassemble, on the 5th of June, 1838. The Convention nominated Thomas Carlin for governor and S. H. Anderson for lieutenant-governor; and appointed as the State Committee V. Hickox, John Taylor, Robert Allen, John Calhoun, C. R. Hurst, J. S. Roberts, and David Prickett. This committee, in 1839, called a state Convention, to meet in the December following; and on the 9th of December the second Democratic State Convention in Illinois met at Springfield, to which place the seat of government had been removed. This body appointed as the State Committee, until the next state Convention, E. D. Taylor, W. Hickox, James Shields, J. R. Diller, M. Carpenter, William Walters, and G. R. Webber; and in September, 1841, they issued a call for a state Convention to meet in December following. On the 13th of December, 1841, the Third Democratic State Convention met at Springfield. Having nominated candidates, it renewed the state authority by appointing the following State Committee: D. B. Campbell, James Shepherd, and G. R. Weber, of Sangamon; James H. Ralston, of Adams; Thompson Campbell, of Jo Daviess; N.W. Nunnally, of Edgar; and John A. McClernand, of Gallatin. A. W. Snyder was nominated for governor, and John Moore for lieutenant-governor. Snyder died during the canvass, and the Hon. Thomas Ford, a judge of the Supreme Court, was selected as the candidate in his stead. The State Committee appointed by the Convention of 1841 called, in 1842, a state Convention (the 4th), to meet in February, 1844, to appoint delegates to the Baltimore Convention. It made no change in the State Committee. The Fifth Democratic State Convention met (pursuant to the call of the committee) on February 10, 1846. It nominated A. C. French for governor, aud Joseph B. Wells for lieutenantgovernor. It appointed as the State Committee: J.R. Diller, William Walters, B. C. Webster, E. D. Jones, Peter Sweat, M. McConnell, and John Moore. In 1847, a Convention having met and prepared a new Constitution for the state, which went into operation in April, 1848, the office of governor was to become vacant on the 1st of January, 1849. The Sixth Democratic State Convention met (pursuant to the call of the State Committee) on the 24th of April, 1848, and nominated A. C. French for reëlection as governor, and William McMurtry for lieutenant-governor—besides a number of candidates for other state offices. It also appointed the delegates to the Baltimore Convention. The following gentlemen were appointed the State Committee: W. Hickox, of Sangamon; E. F. Sweeney, of Warren; Thomas Dyer, of Cook; James Bigler, of Brown; J. P. Cooper, of Clark; F. D. Preston, of Gallatin; Robert Dunlap, of Madison; J. R. Diller, of Sangamon; James Dunlap, of Morgan; H. E. Roberts, of Sangamon. The Seventh State Convention met (pursuant to the call of the State Committee) April 19, 1852. It nominated J. A. Matteson for governor, and the full list of candidates for other offices. It appointed the delegates to the Baltimore Convention, and selected as the State Committee the following gentlemen—four from the State at large and one from each Congressional District, viz.: At large, John A. McClernand, of Gallatin ; J. McRoberts, of Will; C. Sweeney, of Jo Daviess, and T. L. Harris, of Menard; 1st district, W. H. Snyder, of St. Clair; 2d district, F. D. Preston, of Jefferson; 3d district, B. W. Henry, of Shelby; 4th district, E. Wilcox, of Kane; 5th district, M. W. Delahay, of Green; 6th district, James Sibley, of Hancock; 7th district, C. H. Lanphier, of Sangamon. On the 1st of May, 1856, the Eighth Democratic State Convention met (pursuant to the call of the committee) at Springfield. The Convention nominated W. A. Richardson for governor, and nominated an entire state ticket; appointed delegates to the Cincinnati Convention, and selected the following State Committee: For the state at large, Alexander Starne, and Charles H. Lanphier; 1st district, F. W. S. Brawley; 2d district, John Dement; 3d district, William Reddick;

4th district, Robert Holloway; 5th district, W. H. Carlin; 6th district, Virgil Hickox; 7th district, W. D. Latshaw; 8th district, A. H. Trapp; 9th district, S. S. Taylor. The Ninth Democratic State Convention met (pursuant to the call of the above named committee) at Springfield, on the 21st of April, 1858, and nominated W. B. Fondey for State Treasurer and A. C. French for Superintendent of Public Instruction. It appointed as the State Committee the following persons: At large, John Moore, C. H. Lanphier. 1st district, C. J. Horsman; 2d district, J. W. Sheahan; 3d district, N. Elwood; 4th district, John McDonald ; 5th district, Alexander Starne; 6th district, W. Hickox; 7th district, S. A. Buckmaster; 8th district, O. B. Ficklin; 9th district, John White. The Tenth Democratic State Convention met (pursuant to the call of the above committee) at Springfield, January 4, 1860, and appointed delegates to Charleston. The Convention did not nominate candidates for state officers, and by resolution continued the existing State Committee in office, until the meeting of the Convention to be held to nominate candidates for state offices, and an electoral ticket. That committee have called the Eleventh Democratic State Convention to meet at Springfield, on the 13th of June, to nominate candidates for Governor, Lieutenant-governor, Secretary of State, Auditor of Public Accounts, State Treasurer, and Superintendant of Public Instruction, also eleven candidates for Presidential electors—electors pledged to vote for the nominees of the Charleston Convention. For twenty-two years the authority of the Democratic State Committee has been transmitted in unbroken succession from each State Convention to the following one.

CHAPTER XX.

UTAH AND THE MORMONS.—MINNESOTA.-OREGON.-SLAVE TRADE.

AN attempt has been frequently made by the enemies of popular right to show the failure of popular sovereignty by pointing to the enormities aud outrages perpetrated by the Mormons in Utah. There is no question that the practices in Utah are dangerous to the peace of the Union, and dangerous to the moral and political character of the republic. That the political and social condition of the Mormon settlements in Utah are destined to be, especially if weak and timorous counsels prevail, a source of great vexation and trouble to the American people. Polygamy exists in Utah, but polygamy is not the result of popular sovereignty. Polygamy existed in Utah before the passage of the territorial act of 1850, and polygamy will exist among the Mormons so long and wherever they have the political power. The Mormons are in a majority in Kansas, they constitute so nearly the entire population that Utah may be regarded as a Mormon community. They have peculiar doctrines, which form part of what they call their “religious faith.” They have an ecclesiastical organization, with its courts, tribunals, officers, decrees, mandates and punishments, to all of which the people, as members of a religious society, yield implicit obedience. In the list of powers claimed and exercised by this ecclesiastical authority is that of summary divorce, and of sealing in marriage. It is by the authority of this theocratical government, which rules above and independently of the civil government of the Territory, that polygamy and its attendant vices are encouraged, fostered and promoted.

If Utah were a state, we suppose there is no one who would admit that Congress or the federal government had the constitutional power or authority to legislate for the prohibition or punishment of polygamy, or any other crime of that nature within the limits of the state. It would be one of those instances where the federal government would be restrained, by a total absence of all power, to interpose its authority.

« ZurückWeiter »