The weekly Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1861, 1856-05-15
DEBATE BETWEEN
DOUGLAS AND SEWARD.
DOUGLAS TRIuMpHANTi


ate, ii was universally conceded that this
hitherto unconquersble Goliath Of the oppo-
sition was efectually vanquished. "routed,
horse, foot and drsgosn." 1t was his first
public failure in forensic fight, and the re-
suit was attributed more to his "want of con-
dition," as the pugilists say, than to any real
superiority in the "Litlle Giant" On that
hightit will be remembered that ss often as
the New York Senator essayed to speak he
was 30 e6ectually sileuced by the Senator
from Illinois, that before the debate was
closed he arose, took his hat, and in sullen
silence walked out of the Senate Chamber,
the Senator from Illinois suspendng his
speech and an awful stiffness reigned during
the performance. When the retiring Sena.
tor reached the lobby, shouts went up from
The gallery, which it took several minutes
Tor the Speakers hammer to still.
The next passage of arms between these
two gentlemen came off in the Senate few
days since, on the occasion of Douglas reply
to Collamer's speech made in support of the
Minority Report on Kansas affairs.
We publish the account as taken down by
the official Reporters Of the Senate. Like
Henry Gays mouth, it will speak for itself.
II ever political comba1tant was annihila.
ted by his opponent, his positions swept a.
way and himself blown out of existence, it
WAS Senator Seward on this occasion as his
debateewill show. We copy only the close
Of the speech where Mr.. s. was brought for.
ward upon the forum:
:" Mr.. President, have a few words to say
to the Senator from New York [Mr. Sew.
ard] before close my remarks. On the
day presented to the Senate the report of
the Committee on Territories. and immed-
ately after the minority report was read at
the Secretary's desk. he rose and volunteer.
ed the pledge that he would make good ev.
cry position affirmed by it. As he has the
floor for the next speech upon this question,
he will be expected to redeem his pledge, or
acknowledge his inability to do SO. One of
these positions is. that the experiment" of
allowing the people to settle the slavery
question for themselves in territories pre-
paratory to their admission into the Union,
was introduced into our Legislation for the
fret time in the history Of this republic in
the Kansas Nebras act; and that,if violence
resulted from this experiment as q natural,
and perhaps unavoidable. consequence, it
wac the ''vice of q mistaken law" | call
on the Senator from New York to sustain
the truth OF this allegation. desire him to
answer specifically whether the compromise
measures of 1850 did not leave the people
of New Mexico and Utah perfectly free to
decide the slavery question for themselves.
and guaranty their admission into the Union
with or without slavery. as their constitution
should provide at the time of admission /
ask him il he did not oppose the bills for the
Organization of those Territories at that
time. for the reason that they did not contain
the Wilmot proviso prohibiting slavery. and
for the reason that they did not contain the
! guarantee that they should be admitted with
or without slavery, as they should decide for
themselves! When he answers this ques-
tion. would like to have him explain at the
same time whether he did not stand pledged,
in 1861, to sustain the whg Baltimore plat,
form. and to support General Scott, standing
cn that platform "with the resolutions an.
nexed." to use his emphatic language; and
whether those resolutions did not bind G len.
eral Scott and the party supporting him, to
carry out in good faith the compromise mea.
sure Of 1860 sin substance and in princi
pie o. desire direct answer on these
points, in order that the Senate may Judge
how far he.redeems his pledge to make good
the positions of the minority report Iwould
like to have him explain the difference be-
tween the experiment Of the compromise
neasures Of 1869 and of the Kansas Nebras.
ka act Of 1854, in allowing the people to
decide the slavery question for themselves,
and whether that question in each case was
equally the "vice Of q mistaken law 2" IF
he shall answer that he did regard both
measures in the same light, Ishould be graf
lied i he will explain how it was that he
united with the wing party. in 1862, to sus-
tain the 'vice of that mistaken law," and
now calls upon ell the odds and ends, frag-
ments and portions of parties and isms, to
merge ell differences on other points, and
form fusion with him on the isolated point
Of eradicating this "vice Of a mistaken law"
In the name Of freedom and humanity r.
While he is portraying the beauties Of me-
gro freedom and equality. and demonstrating
the epropriety Of sacrificing the political aud
{ constitutional rights OF 100000 Of white
people for the benefit of 100000 Of ne
groes. would be glad II he would point out
the advantages which the negro will derive
/. from the admission Of Kansas with the To-
peka consttution. That constitution pro-
NJ vides that as long % Kansas shalt be ..
State, as long ss wster runs and grass grows,
pc negro. FREE or slave. shall ever live or
breathe underthat constitution.
The senator from Vermont attempts TO-
Fsridicuie The Nebraska Bill because 1t con-
tains q aiprovision declaring the constitution
7 oF the United Statea to be in force in the