rgest crowds flock to
hear the candidates that ever attended political meetings since
the Hero of New Orleans used to address the masses in person.
The present incumbent, Andrew Johnson, is the Democratic
candidate, and a _Mr. Gentry_, a _pro-slavery_ renegade from
the Federal Whig ranks, is the opposing candidate, brought out
by a Know Nothing conclave. This man is on the stump abusing
the Catholics, and denouncing them for their tyranny, while he
openly advocates the _slavery doctrines of Southern Niggerdom_!
On the other hand, his competitor, Gov. Johnson, well and
favorably known to our leading Democrats of Ohio, HAS NO
SYMPATHIES WITH SLAVERY, and is the advocate of such amendments
to the Federal Constitution as will give all power to the
people, and EFFECTUALLY PUT DOWN THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY!"

Now, this showing up of Democracy, on the Slavery question, may look
_shabby_ to many ultra Southern men, and it may induce them to charge
that the Democratic party are _inconsistent_. We defend them against the
charge of _inconsistency_, and maintain that what would be called
_inconsistency_ here, is nothing but _Democracy_. For instance, A. O. P.
Q. X. Y. Z. Nicholson, the editor of the great official organ of
Democracy at Washington, said, editorially, and "by authority," so late
as 1855:

"IT IS NO PART OF THE CREED OF A DEMOCRAT, AS SUCH, TO ADVOCATE
OR OPPOSE THE EXTENSION OF SLAVERY. HE MAY DO THE ONE OR THE
OTHER, IN THE EXERCISE OF HIS RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN, AND NOT
OFFEND AGAINST HIS DEMOCRATIC FEALTY!"

Precisely so! A man may advocate the _abolition_ of slavery where it
exists; he may, as a Black Republican, arm himself with Sharpe's rifle,
and go into Kansas, and shoot down pro-slavery men, and still be a
consistent Democrat, if he vote for the party, and stand by the nominees
of the party conventions! Hence, all the factions at home and from
abroad--all religions--all the ends and odds of God's creation are now
associated together, and are battling in the same unholy cause, in the
name of _Democracy_!

And further to exhibit the inconsistency of this Democratic and Foreign
party, it will be recollected that, in 1844, they nominated SILAS
WRIGHT, of New York, for Vice-President, to run on the ticket with COL.
POLK--a position he declined, because he would not agree to be _second
best_ on the ticket. In a letter to JAMES