Newspapers / The Western Sentinel (Winston-Salem, … / Nov. 4, 1859, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The Western Sentinel (Winston-Salem, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
V - i;-"- v- .xr BY J. W. ALSPAUGH.J A Democratic Journal Devoted to National and StatePpUticsr;iiterate Tfews, etc. TWO DOLLARS A YEAU f :l t VOL. IV. AVINSTON, TO RTPI-CIOXillSr., FEIDAY KOVEMBEE 4,1859. Ko. 11 .i ? i A THE PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY J. W. ALSPAUGH, Etitor and Proprietor. Terms of SubscripJioit. "The Western Skstixkl" is published every Friday morning, and mailed to subscribers at two dollahs a year, in ad vance; two dollars and a half after six months, or tueek dollars after the close of the subscription year. To any one procuring six subscribers, and paying the cash in advance, the paper will be furuished one year, gratis. .Terms of Advertising in t2ie Seaitinel. Our regular rates of advertising are as follow One square (14 lines or less) first insertion $1 00 E-ich subsequent insertion, ------ 23 For one sqare three months, - - - - 3 50 For six months, - -- -- -- -- 5 50 For twelve mouths, - -- -- - 8 50 P? Liberal deductions in favor of regular ad vertisers. Professional or Business Cards, not exceeding five Unas in length, five dollars a year longer oues in proportion. Po;tmasters are required by law to n t'fy pu'nishors when papers are not taken from their 0 h,3s :iu-l those tailing to do so become respon sible tor the subscription-money. OJieeoa West Street, leloic the II. E. Church POETBY. From the New York Ledger. THE ?IOUxTAI ZSURfAL. BY MRS. L. II. SIGOL'US The Rev. Dr. Mitchell, Professc istry, Mineralogy and Geology, in sity of North Giro! in a, lost his life fic exploration of the Black Mountain est. laud east of the Mississippi, and w. ed on Mount, Mitchell, its most elevated p. June 10th, 1858. . Where is he, Mountain Spirit? Dread Moimtim S:irit, say ! That honored Sou of Science Who dared thy shrauded way 1 Oh, giant-firs ! whose branches, In gloomy grandeur meet, Did ye his steps imprison Within your dark retreat? Ye Mists and mufflod Thunders j. That robe yourselves in -black, i. .Have you hi steps del tided T0-VaTrje-f1froii Makc answer have ye seen him ? For hearts with fear are bow'd. And torches, like the wandering stars, Gleam out above the cloud. Sound hunter's horn ! haste mountain ers ! Lo, mi the yielding fern, Are these his foot-prints o'er the ledge ? Will he no more return 1 lie cometh ! How? As marble comes Forth from its quarried bed, With dripping locks, and rigid brow, Comes back the noble dead. O'er that deep, watery mirror, With s.veetly pensive grace, The graceful Rhododendron lean'd To look upon his face. While, 'mid the slippeiy gorges, The gorgeous laurels stand, Which, faithless, like the broken reed, Betray 'd iiis grasping hand. No crystal, in its hermit-bed, No strata of the dales, No stranger, plant, or noteless vine, In Carolinian vales ; No shell upon her shore, No ivy on her wall No wiuged bird, or reptile form, But he could name them all. So Nature hath rewarded him Who loved her sacred lore, . With such a pillow of repose As man ne'er had before. A monument that biddeth Old Egypt's glory hide, With all her kingly pyramids, In all their rude-hill pride. Up! up ! courageous mountaineers- Each nerve and sinew strain For what ye do from love this day Ye ne'er shaljLdo again. 2$rom beetling crag to summit, - ,' , So ominous and steep, They force their venturous way, where scarce The chamois dares to leap. There, many thousand Yeet above Atlantic's surging height, Prelate and priest, with lifted hands. - ( Invoke the God of Might ; And then the cloud-encircled cliff ; Its granite bosom spread, . , . And in the strong and close embrace Inlocked the saintly dead. So in thy sepulchre of rock, v .," Followers of Jesus, rest, . - Serene approachless and sublime, , Until the mountain crest " - Shall redden with the fires of doom," - - And Earth affrighted standi ' , " Then joyful leave thy Pisgah tomb, And tread the promised Land. f " r -Hartford, February 16, 1859. , When Prof. Mitchell was . discovered in a stream into which, during the mists of the eve- ping and the darkness of asudden thunder-storm he had fallen, over's precipice, of Ibrty feet, he held in his hand a broken branch of laurel. IW"! never complained of my pondi--fion but once,1" said an old, man, 'whenmy feet --Tere bare and I had no money to buy 'shot's ; but I met a man without feet J and becamo contented," From the Washington Constitution. Appendix to Judge Black's Pamphlet. AVe publish below an appenix to Judge Black's "Observation on Senator Douglas's Views on Popular Sovereignty,"- called forth on demand for a second edition by Jud?e D.'s attempt to rely to those "Ob- servationsv at Wooster, Ohio, and by the commentaries which have been made on them by some of his friends. The appen dix, couched in the same dignilied, unim passioned language as the "'Observation," is marked by the same force cf thought, closeness of reason, and felicity of expres sion that characterized the pamphlet. It lajrs bare to the very bone the flaws and im perfections of Judge Douglas's '"Views on Popular Sovereignty," modified, amended and altered, though they have been by re flection and by circumstances; shows that all attempts to give new readings of the Constitution which the Supreme Court does not warrant, are sure to lead to dis astrous consequences, and recommends all who desire to preserve an unblemished po litical reputation to respect t lie principles, and acknowledge the binding force of the guarantees of the great Charter of our Lib erties. We commend the appendix to the ear nest perusal of our l eaders and of the A merican people generally. APPENDIX. Another edition of the "Observations" lag called for, an opportunity is afl'ord tor adding some thoughts suggested by e attempted reply of Mr. Douglas, and y some criticisms of a different kind Inch have appeared in other quarters. 3Jr. Douglas charges us with entertain ing the opinion that "all the States of the Union" may confbeate private properly a doctrine which he denounces as a most "wicked and dangerous heresy." He championizes the inviolability of prop erty, and invokes the fiery indignation of the public upon us for ascribing to the States an- power of taking it away. Xow mark how plain a tale will put him down. There i$ no such thr.'g and nothing like it on all thc&e pages, from the first to the last. Mr. Douglas was meivlv nourishing his lance in the einpfyt air. lie ground for his assertion, "except had no a most nrrrrnrnTirtzrT' i n iei eii Cor of Til S trouYv ! 1 1 nial that the potter existed in the Territo ries. The Territories must wait till they become sovereign States before they can confiscate property: that was our position. Therefore, says the loic of Mr. Dougras all the states in the Union may do it now. What right had he to uiiike imputations of heresy founded upon mere inference, when our opinion on the very point was directly expressed in words so plain that mistake was impossible ? The following sentences occur on page 12: "All free people know, that if they would remain free, tl.ey must compel the government to keep its hand off their pri vate property ; and this can be done only by tying them up with careful restrictions. Accordingly our Federal Constitution de clares that 'no person shall be deprived of his property except by due process of law," and that "piivate property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.' It is universally agreed that this applies only to the exercise of the power by the government of the Unit ed States. We are also protected against tne estate governments oy a similar pro vision in the State constitutions. Legis lative robbery is, therefore, a crime which cannot be committed either by Congress or by any State legislature, unless it be done in flat rebellion to the fundamental law- of the land." The close of the same paragraph shows why it was important that no 'attempt should be made to exercise such power by a lerritory: "Is it, not everv way better to wait until the new. inhabitants know themselves and rno onntliioi' -until tliia rt rxr t tlif Toi". torVis settled by some experience ; andrns"uul.on OI ine un ueu oes proiec . above all, until the great power powers of a sov - ereign State are regularly conferred upon, them and properly limited, so as to pre vent the gross abuses which ,alvays ac company unrestricted power in human hands? r . -: i: - J ; , Mr.. Douglas certainly read these passa ges, for he borrowed a phrase from them and put it into his own speech. He fought UliU L' U L i l All inn wvvii Ltt.ll . VU Ut to liavfl miVttmrfnrwl tl,n,r, Tf 1 T.r.tl, rH and understood them, whv did he.lWR- that this pamphlet favored the dangerous heresy referred to r . Let the , charity,; which f'ttiinketh no evil" find the best ex-V cuse for him it can. y r That the government of a sovereign State, unrestricted and unchecked by any constitutional 'prohibition, would have power, to confiscate, private property even without compensation to the; owner, : is a Eroposition which will scarcely be denied y any one who has' mastered the; primer of political science.'; Sovereignty, wliich ; is the supreme - authority of an indepen dent State or government, is in" its nature irresponsible and absolute. : Tt cannot be otherwise, since it has - no superior tby whom it can be,. called -to account' Mere moral abstractions or -theoretic principles of natural justice do not limit the legal au? tbority of a sovereign. , f$ o - government ought to violate justice ; but any supreme government, whose hands are entirely free can violate it with impunity. For these, reasons it is that the Saxon race have been , laboring, planning, and fighting during, these seven hundred years, for Great; Charters, Bills of Pughts, and Constitu-,j tions to limit the sovereignty of all the governments they lived under. Our an, cestors in the old country, as well as hi A i Lierica, have wasted their money aud.which allows a man to cover up the truth od in vain to establish constitutional .' kunder a.n equivoque. We are bound to blood trovernments, if it be true that a govern-. ment without a constitution is not capable. doing ininstice. They knew better than-1 that. They understood very well thatjhr soverneign government, no matter "iv. whom its power is wielded, ma' da what wrong it pleases, and "bid its willvouch the deed. Now, what is the constitutional prohi bition which can anywhere be found to restrain "Populor Sovereignty in the Ter ritories" (if there be such a thing there) from confiscating any citizen's property '( There is none. A Territory has no cons titution of its own ; and nobody would be absurd enough to say, that it is gov- erned bv the constitution of another State Will it be said, that the provision in the Federal Constitution, which forbids the taking of private property without com pensation, can be used so as to restrain a territorial sovereignty I Certainly not. The Supreme court have decided, (in Bar ron vs. The city of Baltimore, 7 Peters, 243) that the clause referred to applies ex clusively to the exercise of the power by Federal government. The rule was so Laid down by Chief Justice Marshall. It was concurred in by the whole court; and its correctness has never been denied or doubted by any Judge, lawyer, or states man from the time of the decision to this day. If, therefore, there be a sovereignty unlimited by any constitutional interdict. This implies a power in the territories in finitely greater than that of any other gov ernment in all North America. The simple and easy solution of all this difficulty is furnished by the Supreme Court, and adopted by the democratic party as the true principle governing the subject. It is this: That the Territories . .... S tire not sovcrj;--!ities. but thou- overn- mcnts are public corporations, established by Congress tQ ma.nage; the,. local - affai rs of the inhabitants, like the government 6f ITclTvretraisTieil VK U' fixate ' LegfsraTure:: Indeed, there is, probably, n. city in the United States, whose powers are not larger than those of a Federal Territory. The people of a city elect their own maj'or, and, directly or indirectly, appoint their municipal officers. But the President ap points the Chief Executive of a Territory, as well as the judges. lie may send them there from any part of the Union, and in point of tact they are generally strangers to the inhabitants w hen first chosen. They are in no way responsible to the Territory or its people, but to the Federal Govern ment alone, and they may be removed whenever the President thinks proper. The territorial legislature issometimes(aud only sometimes) elected by the people; but why ? Because Congress has been pleased to permit it by the organic act. The power that gives this privilege could withhold it too. It is always coupled w'uh restrictions and regulations which could never be imposed oil a sovereignty by any authority except its own. The organic act generally prescribes the qualifications ot voters, and divides the territory' into districts; and the action of the legislative body itself is controlled by the veto power of a governor appointed by the President and removable at his pleasure. ' It is too clear for possible controversy, that a Ter ritory is not a sovereign power, but a sub ordinate dependency. It cannot deprive a man of his property without due pro cess of law, or without just compensation, for two reasons : 1. It has no sovereign power of its pwn; and, 2. The Federal Government, being forbidden by the Con stitution to exercise such power itself, cannot bestow it on a. Territory. ,, The H.rt X." p-.s iv t a territorial legislature, lust as a orate con stitution protects it from robbery .by the' authorities of a city corporation. It should be noted that when this ques tion was before the Supreme Court of tho United States, there was some difference of opinion anion sr the Judges, on the ques- tion whether Uongress mignt,or mignt not. 1 - - - . . . - 1 legislate for a lerritory iii such manner to. take away tlie- right of property slaves. . A maioritv 'ot two thirds or more held the negative ; and Mr. Douglas ad- f mits that the majority was clearly right. But no 'member ot-the court ex pressed me -opinion, -uor-was it even thought of by the counsel, that the Territories had any such i liinerent ananaturai power. iu men- owu, i . -i . i -, : . j ai power, oi ineir -own. Indeed there is no judge: of any grade or cnaracter nor any. wnier ou iaw. ur K"YT ernment, who has ever asseneu or given the least conntenanceto this notion of pop ular or any other kind, of sovereignty tn' the Territories Some trouble will be" saved in this part of the argument, by the. fact that since the first pnblication of this pamphlet, Mr. Douglas denies and repudiates all claim of sovereignty for the -Territories; . He even says that he never -did reward theiri as sovereigns, ilis words spoKen at. woos- ler, Ohio, and written out by himself are these : . - ., "I NEv,vR claimed that territorial gov ernments were sovereign, or that tte Terri tories were sovereign power sP Of course this is not to be understood as a mere naked denial that he had pre viously used those very words. We have no right to charge Mr. Douglas with ad opting the exploded svstem of momlitv. take his deniel fairlv as meaning, that he never thought the Territories had the right, ana powers, ylllcll belong to governments, Let us see how . this asser sovereign tkm will stand the test of investigation We do not deny, that the article in liar per is extremely difficult to understand. Its unjointed thoughts, loose expressions and illogical reasoning, have covered it with shadows, clouds and darkness. But we will not admit that it has no meaning i at all. It is scarcely possible to mistake the general purpose of the author. That purpose undoubtedly was to prove that the States and Territories, so far as con cerns their internal affairs, have political vights and powers which are precisely equal. In fact, he declares, in so many words, that Pennsylvania and Kansas are subordinate to the Constitution "in the same manner and to the same extent." lie not only levels the Territories up to the States, but levels the States down to the Territories. If Kansas has slavery by virtue of the Constitution, he insists, that by the same reasoning, Pennsylvania has it too. Xow we know Pennsylvania to be a sovereign ; and if Kansas be her equal then Kansas must necessarily be a sover eign a 'so. J3ut look at the last sentence, which is the grand summary of his whole doc trine : "The p?4incijde under our political sys tem is that every distinct political commu nity, loyal to the Constitution and the Union, is entitled to all the rights, privi leges, and ini m un 'dies of self -govern ment in respect to their local concerns and in ternal polity, subject only to the Consti tution of the United States." Here the btates and lerritoiies are piticed on a footing of perfect equalit-. There is no distinction made between them. If the State are sfivereign.' so are '-tlieTerritories. Besides, the "rights, priv- iBgesraTicrnnm besas pertaining to every distinct political community, (that is, to both States and Territories,) are sovereign rights, and noth ing else. Any community which has the independent and uncontrolabie right of self-government, with respect to its local concerns and internal polity, must be, quoad hoc, a sovereign. Again : Mr. Douglas in his speech at Cincinnati, made so lately as the Dth of September last, used the following unmis takable language : "Examine the bills and search the re cords and you will find that the great principle which underlies those measures (the compromise of 1850) is the right of the people of each State, and each Terri tory wmiE a Territory, to DECIDE the slavery question for themselves." Is not this claiming sovereignty for the Territories ? Can the slavery question be decided without legislating upon the right of property ? Can a subordinate govern ment do "that? If the Territories have power to decide whether a man shall keep his property or not, where did the power come from ? Surely not from Con gress through the organic acts. They must have it then upon what Mr. Douglas calls a great principle, and that great prin ciple can be nothing else than Mr. Doug las make a tour to the West, and on his way back he contradicts what he said as he went outf . There are but two sides to this contro versy : The Territories are either sover eign powers by natural and inherent right, or else they are political corporations, ow ing all the authority they possess to the acts of Congress which create them. It ,inot possible to believe, that Mr. 'Doug lass wrote thirty-eight columns in a mag azine to prove the trnth of the latter doc trine. Nobody but himself and his follow ers wereiever accused of denying it. If did not deny it, and plant himself up on the opposing ground of sovereignty n the Territories, then there was no dispute, or cause of division, between him and the Democratic party ; and he has conse quently been ingaged in raising an excite ment about nothing ; trying to toss the ocean of politics into a tempest, without having eyen a feather to waft, or a fly to drown. ; ' --- Brit that is not all. Mr. Douglas has continually used the very word sovereign tu, with reference to the Territories. This 80vereiantu in tfo Territories h has as- 1 oftrtR,i .,nri ro.ncrtA.l en nffn tbn 'thA phrase is in crreat danger of becoming ri uiculous. by the mere frequency with which he repeats it. VFor many months he has not made a speech or written a let ter for the newspapers on any other ob ject: It heads - his elaborate article in Ilarper ; if is" vociferated into the public car from the stump and it stares at us in great capitals from the hand-bills which calLthe people to his meetings. . Unless it" "teacknvowledged) he predicts the hopeless difiskm of the party, and even threatens to refuse its nomination for the Presiden cy. Now," all at once, the subject-matter of the whole controversy is admitted to be a nonentity. lie "checks his thunder in mid-volley," and owns that there is no sovereignty in a Territory any more than in a British colony. Other persons may have ridden their hobbies as hard as Mr. Douglas ; but, since the beginning of the world, no man ever dismounted so sud denly. "Sovereignty in the Territories," of which we have heard so much, is gener ally, if not always, coupled by Mr. Dong las with the prefix of "Popular." This last word appears to be used for the mere sake of the sound; and without xany re- mean that the people or inhabitants of the j Territories have any supreme power inde- i pendent ot the laws, or above the regular ity constituted legal authorities. They cannot meet together, count themselves, and say : "We are so many hundreds, or so many thousands, and we must there fore be obeyed ; the law is in our voice, and not in the rules which our govern ment has made to control us." Something like this view was vaguely entertained in time when the Lecompton constitution was opposed. But that is gone by. Mature reflection lias left moboeracy without a de fender. Nobody now insists that the right to make our annual laws and consti tutions can be exercised by law. Mr. Douglass himself says : "It can only be exercised where the inhabitants are suffi cient to constitute a government, and ca pable of performing its various functions and duties a fact to be ascertained and determined by Congress." The sover eignty, then, is in the government, if it be anywhere. But Mr. Douglas now savs it is not there ; and he is right. That being the case, where is it? AVben Mr. Douglas, in his speech at Wooster, was repudiating and denying the doctrine ot sovereignty in the lerrito ries, and resuming his old position, that they ara not sovereign powers, it would have been well to fall back upon some thing a little more intelligible than his re ports to the Senate, or his anti Lecomp ton letter to Philadelphia. Here is the way he describes S0Y,ereitity 'iu his re port oflSSG: . - - ,-' , 'X J . "Tlie sovereignty ofa Territory" remains in tabeifaTTtj;'-)ispeled'in':'the -' ThiiUd 'Statesf4f'ititri'thc 'ewple-nmti 1 -t hey shall be admitted kito .ihe Union as a State." . i What do these words" mean, and in what possible way can they help us to a knowledge of the matter under consider ation? Abeyance is good law French, and signifies the peculiar condition of an estate after one tenant has died, and be fore his successor is competent to take it. But what application can it have, even by analogy, to a sovereignty which never existed? It seems, too, that this sovereign ty is suspended in the United States ; that is, hung or dependent from something in the United States, and not independent like ever' other sovereignty under hea ven. But the most marvelous part of the business is that one government which is sovereign is represented as a trustee of the sovereignty ot another government which is admitted not to be sovereign. This is the talk of a man who has too much learning. These technical terms of the common law were invented by Eng lish conveyancers and real property law yers, for the purpose of expressing tlie ar tificial relations which - men sometimes bear to lands, tenements, and heredita ments ; but they are wholly inapplicable to such a subject as the sovereignty of a State or nation. We might as well cal1 territorial sovereignty, a contingent re mainder, an executory devise, or a special fee tail. There is some confusion of ideas on an other subject Mr. Douglas and his disciples ascribe to certain democrats (to the Pres ident among others) the belief that the constitution establishes slavery in the Ter ritories; and to sustain this accusation they quote from a message in which ex istence of slavery in the Territories by virtue of the constitution is asserted on the authority of the Supreme Court. Now we are in the wrong if the ex pression that a thing exists by virtue of the constitution be equivalent to saying that the constitution has established it. There is not only a substantial, but a wide and most obvious difference. The constitution does not establish "Christiani ty in the Territories ; but Christianity ex- I ists there by virtue of the constitution ; because when a unnsuan moves into a Territory, he cannot be prevented from takinsr his religion along with him. nor 4 can he afterwards be legally molested for making its principles the rule of his faith and practice. - We have said, and we repeat, that a man doe3 not forfeit his right of property in a slave by migrating with him to a Territory. The title which' tho owner ac quired in tho State from whence Je came must be respected in his new domicll as t was in the old, until it is legally and constitutionally divested. The r propogi; tion is undeniable But the absurd infer ence which some persons have drawn from it is not true, that "the master also takes with him the judicial remedies which were furnished him at the place where his ti- tie was acquired. Whether the relation of master and si aVe exists" or nof, is a qnes tion which must be determined aeeordihg to the law of the State i tiV whicRltV was created ; but the respective rights, .$rrcl ob- " ligations of the parties must -be yitotefefed and enforced by the law prevailing' trf he place where they are supposed to V6;V-" lated. This is also true with- 'respecrto. rights of every other kind. Two ;;mer- W chants living in the same town. 'may buy their goods in different States. Oan it r' doubted that the title of each depends roi I ffX the law of the State where he niade lhV purchase ? But the law of larceny - and ' trespass is the law ofa forum common to i loth, and must necessarily be the game. - "The validity of a man's -utarriagift-jtwjLjaA by the standard of the law wliiclupjSailr" ed in the country where it was solemnized; but if he beats his wife, she musty seek,; protection from the law of tlie place where v"l they live. Some of Mr. Douglas ? parti-Z x zans, and nearly all of the anti-slavery op- -position, contend that property in ' slaves cannot exist so as to entitle it to . protec-; tion of the same laws which secure the right of property in other things. For- their beneti' we shall briefly show how '; impossible it is to admit the distinction' which they insist upon. ( . ... -' What is property ? Whatever a : per- son may legally appropriate to his .own. exclusive use and transfer to another by sale or gift. By the laws of the southern ' States, negroes are within this definition, V and the Constitution of the United States not only recognizes the validity - of the ' State laws, but it aids in cariyingk them out. The trainers of the Constitution, see ing that slaves were liable to one. ;danger. from which all other property was ese'uit namely, that of being seduced away by the offer, in other States, of legal shelter from the pursuit of their owneis,. agreed that the Federal Government should guar- an tee their re-delivery to the exclusive possession of the persons entitled to "them, as propietors. Tlie law, theu, of tlie States. in which they are, ana the Constitution of the Federal Government, ito all, . legal intents and purposes, pronounce that slaves are property. Beaten here, pui adversa lies convert it from a legal to a theologi cal question. But. when t hey appeal frojn. ; -tucUocstitutiou to .the - jJiWe tucey am equally dissatisfied witlvthe decision they " get. coining is icit xneni um uiuu; jm ig" errawTi1Jfn"iRrr,5airc authority, Divine or human.. Those ; Who reject tlie Constitution must be- content to follow guides who are stone blind. They are men who aspire to be wise above whai is written, and thereby press them selves down to the extremest point of hu man folly. They turn their backs on all the light, which the worM has, or can have; they go forih into outer darkness, and wander perpetually in a howling wil derness of error. But Mr. Douglas is guiltless of this heresy, at least, lie concedes that slaved arc precisely like other property, so far as regards the legal remedies and constitu tional rights of the owner. He professes to take the fundamental law of the hind for his guide upon that point. Let his practice, then, correspond with his faith; let him "walk worthy ofthe vocation wherewith he is called ;" let him make no more appeals to popular prejudice for a sovereignty which does not exist; above all things, let him never, by tlie slightest suggestion, encourage any territorial gov ernment to undermine tho rights of tho citizens by legislation which is "unfriend ly" to the security of either property or life, We must not palter with the Con stitution in a double sense, but obey it, support it, defer d it, earnestly and faith fully, like men who believe in it and love if. " Whosoever attempts to trifle wi.h its principles, or weaken the obligation of its guarantees, will find sooner or later that he has fixed a stain upon his political character which "there is not rain enough in the sweet heavens" to wash o;;t. He Drinks. How ominous that sen tence falls ! How we pause in conversation and ejaculate, 'It's a pity !' How his mother hopes he will not when he grows older ; how his sisters persuade themselves that it is only a few wild oats that he is sowing! And yet the old men shake their heads and feel gloomy while they think ot it. Young man just commencing life, buoyant with hopes, don't drink! You are freighted with a precious cargo. The hopes of your parents, of your sisters, of your wife, of your children, all are laid down upon yon. In you the aged live over again their 'days ; through yon only can that weary one you love obtain a po sition in society , and from the level in wliich you place them, must your children go into the great struggle for life. Bcring of Human Bodies toe Fuel. The first and only railroad in Africa, was completed a few months ago. It connects Alexandria, the chief " Egyptian sea-port with Cairo. The most remarkable fact connected with this evidence of. progress in Egypt, is the use of human bodies for fuel. - The locomotives are fed -with this novel food, and actually derive their strength from the burning bones and flesh bi men.' ' ' .- -- . ' .. ' " J : x, i m - -.to1--af:,r;,-i :'0:; - -- i : i -""" . ) - ( ..: ,s H i . i:. it I .;si. if -it ":4i ? u
The Western Sentinel (Winston-Salem, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Nov. 4, 1859, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75