Tenth, the lands that are to be granted to us by Congress when we become a state to be solely appropriated for educational purposes, for the erection and endowment of colleges, academies, and the support of common schools; all, without any distinction, to participate in the fund thus raised.

Eleventh, there shall be provision made for the unfortunate debtor, and a comfortable homestead allowed him that will be exempt from seizure by his creditors.

Twelfth, the duties arising from goods that are sold at auction shall be appropriated for the use of such city, village, or township that such goods may be sold in.

There are many other essential articles that ought to be inserted here, but my space will not permit me to go further. The four great cardinal points that we must adhere to, are, first, civil and religious liberty; second, the shortening of the time of aliens becoming citizens; third, no special taxation without a vote directly from the people; fourth, as few appointments as possible, the great body of office holders to be elected by the people. The secretary of state, auditor, and treasurer ought to be elected by the people, and to hold their office two years. These three officers are elected by the people agreeably to the constitution of the state of Iowa. I do think that we are entitled to as liberal a constitution as any state in the Union. We are equally as moral, as industrious, and intelligent as any of our sister states or territories.

A controversy was carried on last winter or spring between the Whigs and Democrats, the former charging the latter with having made odious distinctions between the native and adopted citizen, requiring of the adopted citizen a property qualification and longer residence than was required of the native citizen. It appeared from the evidence that was produced by the Democrats that there was no such odious distinction in the draft as originally drawn by the Democratic trustees of this town; but it appears that the odious distinction complained of was made by the Democratic legislature at Madison. If so, it will behoove the

Democratic convention to wipe off the foul stigma from their character by granting a liberal constitution to the people. This is the only means by which they will be able to regain the former confidence that the adopted citizen has invariably reposed in them.

Fellow citizens, I have now, to the best of my ability, performed my task, both as a delegate at the Democratic convention held at the courthouse on the eighth instant, and now upon paper. I have in both places given expression to my opinion freely and boldly, but not with disrespect to anyone.

It now remains for you to do you duty at the polls on the day of election in September. Remember before you cast your votes to make a binding contract with your Democratic candidates that they will to the utmost of their abilities carry out the principles of equality as laid down in this address. If any there be, those who turn recreant to the confidence reposed in them, upon their return home, let them be met with the hisses and scorn of an injured community, whose interests they have betrayed. Let them remain in obscurity never to be noticed by the Democracy again. I feel confident, fellow citizens, that the delegation we have chosen will prove as true to their trust as the needle to the pole, and are every way worthy of your support. Let there be no division in our ranks when we come to the polls; let us all have but one grand object in view, to elect the whole ticket, and to use our best exertions to obtain a liberal and free constitution for Wisconsin, that will be the means of bringing immigrants of character and capital into our young state, settling on our unoccupied lands, establishing factories upon our streams, opening new stores in our townships and villages, and building splendid dwelling and commercial houses in our seaport towns. In a word, there is nothing wanting but a good, liberal state constitution to make Wisconsin the queen and glory of the "far West," and Milwaukee the commercial emporium of the Upper Lakes.

I remain, fellow citizens, your ever faithful friend, DANIEL FITZSIMMONS.

Milwaukee, August 10, 1846.

AN APPEAL TO ALIENS

[ September 2, 1846 ]

BARK RIVER, WAUKESHA Co., W. T. SIR: As a member of the Democratic party I feel in duty bound to express my feelings on a momentous question that is agitating the public mind, and which is dear to every lover of his country, and a question which is of the greatest interest to the people of the state of Wisconsin in the formation of our state constitution, viz: the right of suffrage. The Democratic creed is universal suffrage, equal rights, equal privileges, and equal protection to all-no distinction as to nativity or religious principles. On the other hand, the Whigs are opposed to those principles, particularly to the right of suffrage, which is the most dear to every lover of his country. But at the county convention in this county, Waukesha, held by the Whigs on the twenty-second inst., I discover they have taken an entire [ly] new tack. Resolutions were passed all at once in favor of negro suffrage. Now, sir, to this I have not the least objection, but it seems strange to me that such a resolution should have passed unanimously as is stated by the proceedings of that convention, for to my certain knowledge there were delegates in that convention who have always advocated the doctrine of a property qualification, allowing no person to vote or to hold office unless he was a freeholder. And it appears also that those very men to whom I allude in particular are nominated to the constitutional convention. Such is the inconsistency, so glaring in its nature, that I can't see for the life of me how such men can claim the confidence of any man, much more claim his vote. But, sir, the object is too plain to be misunderstood by any common sense man: it is to try and catch votes from the Liberty party, but in this they will find the viper has gnawed the file. True men of the Liberty party cannot be duped in that way; they have made a nomination which they will truly support.

But suppose the Liberty party did not support their own ticket-they had better support the Democratic party than the Whig party, because they have the best evidence that the former is the true friend of universal suffrage without distinction as to color. [In] the legislature last winter, when the bill was on its passage providing for the formation of a state government, a motion was made to strike out the word white so as to allow all male persons to vote for delegates, etc. Ten Democrats voted in the affirmative, and every Whig in the house voted in the negative. One of the Whigs, when his name was called, not being satisfied with saying "No!" exclaimed at the top of his voice, "No! Never!" Four of the Milwaukee County members voted in the affirmative-one of whom is now a Democratic nominee in the county of Waukesha to the constitutional convention.

Here we have the evidence recorded of the fact that a large portion of the Democratic party have done what the Whigs of this county (a few of them) pretend they will do if elected. But my motto is not to trust them until after election. Now let us look at the next resolution. After they let the negroes vote they resolve themselves into their old track again and confine the right of suffrage to citizens only, thus depriving about one-half of our enterprising white population and taxpayers of the right of suffrage a long time. The English, Scotch, Germans, and Irishmen must stop five years before they can have a choice in their rulers. Is this republicanism? Is this equality? No, sir! It's nothing more or less than downright old federal whiggery; and it is an example that will not be set by the framers of the constitution for the Eldorado of the West if the voters are true to their interests and elect Democrats to the convention. For example I will illustrate a case in point which I lay down as a rule in contrasting the difference between the Whig and Democratic parties on the question of universal suffrage. One of the Whig nominees is a resident of this town; he has repeatedly and for years past advocated the property qualification; he has stated, as can be proved by a number of

persons, that no person ought to vote or hold an office unless he was possessed of a freehold estate and also that a foreigner ought not to vote even then, unless he was a citizen, and had become enlightened enough to understand the constitution and laws of our country, because, says he, he is so ignorant that he don't know how he does vote. On the other hand, one of the Democratic nominees is also one of our townsmen, and has always advocated the right of universal suffrage. In the legislature last winter he supported universal suffrage without respect to color, birthright, or otherwise. I select those two persons out from the rest for no other purpose only [than] to contrast plainly the difference between the two parties; the one follows the creed of his party by supporting universal suffrage, the other follows the creed of his party by depriving about one-half of our taxpayers of this sacred right until they have been in the state five years, and would extend the time to twenty-one years if they only had the power. The extension of the time has been advocated by the great soul and body of the Whig party. It is obvious that, by extending the time to twentyone years, the foreigner never could enjoy the right of suffrage, for the aggregate foreign population have come to middle age when they arrive in this country; keep them twenty-one years longer and their time is no more.

One of the main arguments of the Whigs against foreigners voting as quick as they get their first paper (which is the Democratic creed) is this: They say that if you let them vote as quick as they get their first paper they never will complete their naturalization; hence they are not liable to be called out in defense of their country in cases of invasion or insurrection, etc. To some extent this is true and has created great prejudice against the foreigner; and it is due the foreigner as well as the country that such a state of things should not exist. I see it is advocated by some that our constitution should be framed making the foreigner a citizen in one year. It's true they can be citizens of our state in one year, but this will not make them citizens of the United