Washington sentinel., 1854-05-30


proclaimed tonight, having for its object yio-
lent resistance to the law and the Constitution
Mr.. President, the pretext for all this denun-
citation and threatened violence on the part OF
the abolitionists and their allies is to be found
In the organization of the Territories of Kan
sas and Nebraska, upon the principles of the
compromise measures of 1850, which rendered
It necessary to remove the Missouri restriction
IN order that the people might have the power
to regulate their own domestic concerns in their
own way. The senator from New York, Mr..
SEWARD, In his speech today has said that, up
to 1920, Congress prohibited slavery wherever
1t had the power, and that the Missouri COM
promise was the first departure from the origi-
nal anti-slavery policy. When will this system
of fmisapprehension or Misrepresentation cease?
When and where did Congress ever prohibit
slavery in any of the Territories of the United
States, since the adoption Of the Constitution,
except by the Missouri restriction? Did Con-
gress prohibit it in the Territory Of Mississippi,
or Alabama, or Orleans, or Louisiana, or Ar
kansas, or Missouri, or any where else prior to
| 1920?
The eighth section Of the Missouri act was
the first interference on the part of Congress
1 with the domestic concerns of the people in
the Territories. While that eighth section has
remained on the statute-book for thirty-four
| years, as we have been so often told during this
debate, yet it has remained a dead-letter, with
out legal effect, and imperative all this time,
for the reason that the whole country being
appropriated to Indians and occupied by
savages, there was nothing and nobody for the
restriction to operate upon. Now, when it is
| proposed to organize the Territories and throw
them open to settlement, to establish civiliza-
ton where barbarism has hitherto reigned, it
becomes necessary to determine the question
whether the restriction shall take effect or the
principle of self-government prevail. The
question is substantially the same that it would
have been if what is called the Missouri com
promise had never passed; for it requires
an act of Congress organizing the Territories
in order to give legal effect and practical ope-
ration 10 the slavery restriction. To render
this restriction operative at this day would be a
practical repudiation of the great principle of
self-government in the Territories and equality
in the States, recognized in the acts Of 1850.
But, sir, because we propose to stand by
those principles, and carry them into practical
operation in all future territorial organizations,
we have been notified to-day by several senator's
that the old political parties are to be dissolved
and that the northern wings, disaffeced demo
Gratis, abolitionists and freesoers are to be
fused and amalgamated into sectional party
and marshalled under the black flag of aboli
tionism! The senator from Ohio Mr.. CHASE
has announced that the one million of voters in
the free States who sustained General Scott at
| the last presidential election are to be enrolled
| in this new organization with opinions on the
| slavery question more ultra and radical than
| his own and that this new party is to wage
war upon slavery wherever it may exist.
Mr.. WADE. What are you going to do
about it?
Mr.. DOUGLAS. will tell the senator what
am going to do about it. ! am going to call
the attention of the Senate and the country to
the fact that the leaders of this new political or
ganization avow their purpose of making war
upon the local and domestic institutions of the
different States of the Union. desire the peo
pie OF the free States to understand distinctly the
purposes and designs of this new political or
ganizasion. Those purposes, as avowed to-day
in open debate, contemplate civil war; servile
insurrection, and disunion. do not hesitate,
here in the presence of its leaders and confed-
crates, to denounce the scheme as involving
treason in its most revolving form, and men
who encourage or countenanee it are guilty of
treason against the Constitution and the gov
ernment of the country.
Mr.. WADE. It's bad business. Laughter
. Mr.. DOUGLAS. The senator says truly It
cipes is bad business. 1t is bad business to
threaten to be faithless to oaths aithless to the
Constitution The idea of amalgamating the
great whig party of the north with the aboli-
tionists and putting them under the black ban
ner OF abolition, is rather a startling PROPOSE
tion to this country. Do gentlemen imagine
that the whig party can be transferred by a few
politicians and sold like cattle in the market?
| doubt whether the national wings, those who
belong to the political school of Clay and Web
ster, will allow themselves to be thus transfer
red and merged in the ranks of abolitionism,
and made to march in hostile array against the
institutions of the sovereign States of this Union
in violation of the Constitution! | doubt it
very much. But, if that be the plan of opera
tons, if gentlemen expect to make this ANAL
gamation, it they expect to induce the wings
to surrender to the abolitionists, adoptthe abo-
lition creed, and then combine with a portion
Of the clergy and organize sectional party for
the purpose of waging war upon the insttu-
tons Of some of the States Of the Union, in VIC.
lation of the Constitution Of the country, we
shall be ready to meet them on that issue.
These threats of determination of northern
men have no terrors for me. Sir, if the choice
is to be taken Of falling in such contest, while
resisting war upon the Constitution or saving
myself by joining the ranks Of traitors, will
glory in such fall. Gentlemen mistake the
people of the north if they think they can be
led into any such crusade
1t will be noticed, that during the whole
course Of this debate, the abolition gentlemen
have been cautious to compliment the southern
men for their advocacy of this bill, and then to
denounce northern men for supportingit. Why
is this? Why do you speak in terms Of ad.
miration and respect fer every southern man
who advocates and supports the measure, and
then abuse us for doing the same thing? You
say it is moral wrong; you say it is crime.
If it be SO, is it not as much crime for
southern man to support it, as for a northern
man to do so?
Mr.. WADE. No. sir.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. The Senator says not.
Then he entertains different code of morals
from myself
Mr.. WADE. / hope so.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. And trust so too. If it
is right for southern men to commit crime, it
is code Of morals which / have never en-
braced, and / trust ! never shall Sir, Iunder-
stand well the object of that course of remark.
1t is to encourage the south to keep united as
co,tbar,, y,o rty ,d tl,o,, n ,x...l -