Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1854-12-06
JUDGE DOUGLAS AT HOME.


hyered a speech which we find reported in the
Washington Sentinel of Tuesday. It occupies eight
columns of that Journal and although extending to
such length, its perusal has afforded great
pleasure. 1t only two days after the late cleo
ton in Illinois when this fattering tribute paid
to the Senator by a portion of his constituents
and the result of the contest throughout the State
was not fully known. The speech, of course was
confined pretty much to the all absorbing issue.
the Nebraka- Kansas b-and more triumphant
vlndication of that strangely abused measure we
have never seen. Powerful as Judge Douglass ef-
forts have been other Occasions in defence of the
bill, and of his own in reference to it, this
that We are noticing is absolutely overwhelming.
Ii we had ever entertained the shadow of doubt
as to the soundness of the principles and policy
embodied in the bill, we could not, after reading the
Senator's statements and arguments, and giving
them the calm and serious consideration which they
merit, hesitate to approve and applaud the agency
which he had in the organization and passage this
great law. We do not see how the rankest Adolf
ZIONIST or Free Soiler question resist the pow
erfu logic-the crushing facts-which the Senator
has brought to bear against them. The historical
review OF the Missouri Compromise from 1920 to
1850 is filled with the most irreragable proofs,
from the record, of the absolute hypocrsy-the to-
tai restitution of all honesty and farness-which
exhibited by the factous brawlers of the anti
slavery schools who so busily endeavoring to
name the people of the free States against the Ne
braska bill. Nothing is truer in the annals of
country than the fact stated by Judge Douglas that
IN lS45 when Texas was annexed, proposition to
extend the line of SO 80 Westward as far as the
QUESTION might reach, incorporated in the joint
resolutions for the annexation in which shape they
were passed. Nor is any thing truer than another
fact stated by him. viz that in 1913, after the
sion by Mexico of California, New Mexico and Utah,
provision inserted by the Senate in a bill re-
atng to the coded countries, for the extension of
this Missouri line to the Pacific and that it
stricken out in the House by the Free Soil vote.
Now, if there was any virtue in the Missouri Com
promse-if it was the great barrier against slavery
on this continent that the Free Sellers pretend that
1T was would not its extension to the Pacific have
widened the favorable influences attached to it?
And if so, why the proposition thus to extend
it in 1913 rejected by the North The truth is that
if this done the Abolitionsts and Free Sellers
knew that it would necessarily and forever put an
end to sectional conflicts upon the slavery question
and annihilate their plans for future agitation
They had no idea of permitting any such settlement
to be made if they could prevent it, and thereto
they defeated the proposition. They, in effect,
therefore, voted for combining the operation of the
$50 caed) Compromise of 1920 within the narrow
est possible limts-or, in other words they as good
turned their back upon t-for the refusal to al
low its benefits to be diffsed through the wide re-
gion between the point at which the line of SO 80
stopped in 1913 and the Pacific was equivalent,
under the circumstances, to declaration their
part, at the time, that they attributed real value
or importance whatever to it-and this is the only
solution which can be nationally given of their ex-
traordinary rejection of the extension proposition
in 1S4S In what light does this historical fact
cOntrastcd with their present course present these
noisy champions of the act of 1920! What SUI
premcly disgusting-what an unspeakably and re-
votngly pertidious exhibition do they make of
themselves in this particular! We will insert here
a passage from Douglass Speech which holds the
mirror up to these people better than do He
is speaking of the Senate provision in the bill of
lS49:
"When the measure sent to the House of
Representatives, it was promptly, and perhaps
may say with truth, Indignantly rejected in that
body by Northern men with free soil proclivites
1t is not my purpose on the present occasion to
question the proprety of that vote the patriot
ism of those who gavet but call attention to the
fact that if that line had been extended to the Pacific
proposed by myself and sanctioned by a vote of
the Senate there would have been at once and for
end of the slavery agitation concerning the
Territories loud applausel for if the line had
thus been extended to the Pacific and had been adj
hered to in good faith, it would not only have set
tied the question forever as to all territory then
owned, but would have prevented the renewal of
the controversy in regard to territory tn might
hereafter be acquired either upon the north or south
of it. Hence it will be perceived that those who
defeated the extension and observance of the Mis-
souri, line responsible for all the agtations and
consequences which followed the defeat of the Sen
ate's proposition 1t was not only rejected in the
House of Representatives, as have stated by north
ern votes, in August 1S4s but an appeal was i'm
mediately taken to the country in the Presidential
election which was then pending There were three
candidates in the field with warm and enthusiastic
supporters in all the free States. Martin Van Bu-
the candidate of the abolitionsts and free
SolierS, nominated at DuHalO ana standing the
Buffalo platform. That platform declared if my
memory serves me right, first that Congress pos
sesscd the constitutional power to abolish and pro-
hbt slavery every where in the Territories of the
United States and second that they the free soil
ers and abotonists, would abolish and prohibit
slavery wherever they had the constitutional power
not only in all the Territories of the United States
but in the District of Columbia, and in the dock
yards, forts, and arsenas, and all other places in
the States, the jurisdiction over which had been
ceded to the United States. Thus it appears that
every free soier and abolitionst in America by his
vote for Mr. Van Buren,, stood pledged to abolish
and prohibit slavery every where in the Territories
of the United States suppose that every where
meant south we'll as north of SO deg 80 min
and if so, desire to enquire, as have inquired in
all my speeches delivered l.. the presence of the alb
olitonists, whether they not pledged to bl OF
out the line of SO deg. 80 min. or the Missouri Com
promise lne as is now called, the dividing line
between free territory and slave territory or the
fashionable language of the day now is the barrier
of freedom against slavery?" [Appausel
We have not room for further extracts from, or
further comments on, this able speech We con-
| sider it broadly national and conservative in it's
character, and as such admire it. Sentiments
like those which it embraces, whether they come
from Democratic or Wing speaker, will always
command our approval. We express ourself with
out reference to party when we commend this
speech of the Illinois Senator to public favor How
may differ from him in our political views
and tenets with respect to the administration of the
affairs of the General Government both domestic and
foreign, we can yet applaud and endorse his expo
sures and denuncations of those wicked and I'M
principled agitators, the Aboltionists and Free
| Seilers who seeking, under the new name of
| FUSIONIST, to overthrow the Constitution, the
Government and the sacred cause of Liberty not
only in America but throug bout the world. Doug