Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1857-01-29

the Territory, because it is nowhere
delegated to the United States by
the constitution, nor prohibited by
it TO the people.
But, sir, | said that | believed the
position Of the democratic party
in the late contest, and at the present
time, was equally clear with that Of
your own. And willgo not 10 the
Cincinnati platform, but to the Kan
sas-Nebraska act itself, to see what
those principles are and wherein those
Of Us who bel ong TO the democratic
party disagree. The nineteenth sec
ton of the act organizing the Terri
tory Of Kansas, after having pre-
scribed The boundr:es of what is to
be the territory Of Kansas, provides
as follows:
"Whcn admitted as State or
States, the said Territory, or any per-
ton Of the same, shall be received
into the Union with or without slave
~, as their constitution may pre-
scribe at the time of their admiss-
ion."
Now is there any doubt, is there
any uncertainty, or vagueness what
ever, iu that provision Of the Kansas
bill? 1t is clear and explicit; and ]
take it for granted, and so state upon
this floor, that there is not member
of the democratic party here, who
has acted with that party in the late
contest who does not uneq livocall y
subscribe to that provision in the
Kansas act, and who does not stand
ready, whether be be from the North
or tn e South, to vote for the admiss-
ion Of Kansasas State into the I'm
ion,with her constitution as the people
there, the bona tide residents and
voters of that Territory, shall make
it, whether it tolerates or prohibits
slavery. Then if am right in that
position, there is no discordance or
Earring in The democratic party in
reference to that great first principle
Of the Kansas act.
How is with you, Mr. Speaker, and
your party, calling yourselves repub.
licans? Will you, or is there a man OF
your party in this hall, who will vote
to admit Kans as as State into this
Union if she comes here and asks
admission with a constitution fairly
made, rejecting and imbodying the
will of the people Of that Territory,
if it should tolerate and sanction the
institution of African slavery? I
take it that there is not one. You
would trample under foot every prin-
ciple of republicaGism and the
constitution itself, and reject her
because her people had imbodied
their will and wishes into the consti.
tuition of the State.
You are for arbitrarily and des-
politically governing the people of the
Territories, and forming their do
nestle institutions without their CON
sent. To strengthen you in this pc
sition: you enormously charge tht
democratic party as being the advo
Gates of slavery extension. The de.
mocracy Of the country, as party
neither advocate the extension of the
institution, nor its prohibition; but
have planted themselves upon the
great principles Of non-interventior
by Congress, and the right Of the
people to govern themselves, and thai
each separate political community
I should determine the question fol
ITSELF For ne,slaye holder as | am
with all my sympathies and interests
with that section where slavery ex.
, lists, | do not desire to see the insti.
|, tuition established 10 any section oil
country against the wishes of the
people residing therein.
X
Non-intervention On the part o.
Congress is the only ground in my
opinion, upon which the country Car
remain in union, and have peace and
harmony through all its borders, and
be free from agitation and excite
ment upon this question. 1t is the
, ground that Congress sbalknot inter.
fere with the domestic institution of a
State or of a Territory, but that the
people of both States and Territories
shall be left free to form and to regu.
late their domestic institutions il
their own way. subject only to the con.
stitution of the United States.
\ A HARD CAsE.-A committee OF
the Ohio Legislature are investiga-