The Abbeville banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1847-1869, 1857-01-08

1
nnent, is as fatal to our interests as the pos
tive enactment which had been repealed
1t non-connection with the bill and absen
lee'sm is necessary to gild the pill, how dc
know but that it may be rejected when its
essential components are ascertaincd?
MIR. Speaker, enough has transpired tc
show that my apprehensions were not alto.
gether without foundation. The assertion
has here frequently been made and uncon-
tradicted, that at many of the Democratic
meetings in the North the people were raj.
lied under banners upon which was inscrib.
cd buchanan, Breckenridge, and free
Kansas" Have not large placards been
here exhibited with these words in the lar.
gest letters upon them, and the word free
in italics! We are told by our Democratic
friends on tho floor that nothing more was
meant than that the people of Kansas
should be free to decide upon the subject OF
slavery for themselves. What was meant
is not the question. How were the words
understood by the masses? What was
their effect upon the voters? That is the
question; and if the presidential election
was carried upon false pretcnses, what cause
OF triumph have we! My friend from In
diana Mr.. English] has frankly avowed his
preference that Kansas should Le a free
State, though he is willing to admit her
with constitution recognizing slavery
To his position I do not object. We of the
South would prefer that she should he a
slave State, yet wo hold ourselves prepared
to vote for her admission even with a con-
s''lutlon rejecting slavery. if that is the
clearly ascertaincd will Of majority of her
citizens -,,X
But in sections where the. ssi,dtter sovcr-
cignty feature of the bill IS :n,hintained. is
i. not presumablo that the uniform and
continued expression of this preference at
meetings where banners were flying with
" Buchanan, breckenridge, and free Kansas"
might delude the voters into the belief, that
after all the Kansas Nebraska act was the
" best tree-soil measure ever passed 2" This
may be said to be but an inference, but
wien 1t is coupled with the fact, that many
northern Democrats have admitted that. in
the event Of Kansas becoming a slave State,
they will go by the board, it strikes me
more ae logical deduction.
Tha: the grav' 1t differences of opinion in
regard to tl- ;r::e construction of the Kan
.':'s--:'.n a.. &c. IRE entertained by north
"'h and southern Democrats, and by each
among themselves, is beyond doubt, and
this difference is the shoal which is threat
enng lis with wreck. The Senator from
Pennsylvania, Mr.. Bigler. when interroga-
ted as to the power of Territorial Legis-
lature TO exclude slavery, replied:
II am Of opinion that the people through
their local Legislature have that power.
arrive at this conclusion, because l can see
but two sources of law-making power for q
Territory-the one, Congress; and the
other, the people. hold that, when Con-
gress has conferred upon tho people of a
Territory all the law making power which
it possesses under the constitution, the pow
er is complete in the people, equal to the
question of domestic slavery, or any
other subject but this Is a legal question
and 1 for one should he gratificd to sec it
decided"
This seems to be the same ground as
that occupied by my friend from Indiana,
[Mr. EngIisl,,] as 1 know it to be that on
which many other gentlemen from free
States stand.
I this position they are sustained by dis.
tingu;shed southern gentlemen. Tn the
speech of my friend from Tennessee, IMr.
JONES' find this paragraph, which he will
pardon me for saying, is crammcd full with
her political heresies:
"But I understand that even those who
cry 'squatter sovereignty throughout the
South, and who most signally failed in the
last canvass under that cry, admit that tho
people Of Territory have right, when
they come to form State constitution. to
determine whether they will have slavery
or not. Am I correct in that position and
understanding of what they hold to be the
correct doctrine upon this suIjectq If so.
there may be not more than twelve bours,
difference of time between them and, NV.
self: I say they can do It to-day, aud thev
say that the same'men can do It tomorrow 4
by framing State constitution. Then tfera
is between us but one nights difference in
time, and perhaps but one hour. It is the
manner Of doing it, and not the thing done.
which seems to be in controversy, even il
the Democratic party. Now, it seems to
me that this should be no cause Of dissas;s.
faction with the Democratic party, nor
should i be any objection to the Demo.
cratic party. Our positions are clear, s.t,d
/ think well 4undensood.-as much /, ,so. So
~ q. ~ =.