The Shasta courier., 1858-11-27
Dougl..---orr---steph.n.---D.vis.

Douglas, some time since, at Freeport and at
Joliet, expressed the opinion that the people of
a Territory can, under the Kansas-Nebraska
Bill introduce slavery or exclude it-just as they
please; for the reason that the institution can
not exist unless it is supported by friendly local
and police regulations, and that the absence of
such legislation would be an exclusion as effect
i've as positive prohibition.
For uttering these sentiments number of our
Democratic contemporaries have pronounced him
off the Democratic track, and 4" identified with
the Black Republicans" Some of these writers,
however, it is but just to state, were for many
years enemies to the Democracy, and are recent
converts, and therefore not presumed to be the
best judges in the world of genuine Democracy
We confess that this Interpretation of the
Kansas-Nebraska Bill sounds Democratic to our
ears. In the language Of tue Ne~ Hampshire
Patriot, the leading Democratic paper in that
State, it +" has the old fashioned Democratic ring
about it which of yore characterized his efforts" :"
This old-fashioned Democratic ring" of course
does not sound familiar to very new and exceed
iugly fresh Democrats of few months stand
ling; hence, in the ardor of their new profess
sions of faith, they have, with that indiscreet
| zeal which always characterizes the new convert
in religion or politics. pronounced it not the gen.
nine Democratic rin Iet Us enquire Fhich is
right.
Upon examination we find that the views of
Douglas correspond with the sentiments of lead
ing Southern politicians on the same point. For
instance, Mr.. Orr, of South Carolina, now Speak
er of the House of Representatives, in speech
delivered in 1856, sald:
"If the people decline to pass such laws, what
| is the remedy? None, sir"
Mr.. Stephens, of Georgia, probably the lead
| ing man in the House, about the same time in a
speech, said
"I am willing that the Territorial Legislature
may act upon the subject when and how they
please"
Senator jeff. Davis, ex-Secretary of War, not
long since made a speech in Maine in which he
uttered sentiments on this point precisely coin
and Stephens. Hear him:
"I If the inhabitants of any Territory should
refuse to enact such laws and police regulations
as would give security to their property or to
his, it would be rendered more or less valueless
in proportion to the difficulties ofholding it with
out such protection. In the case of property in
labor of man, or what is usually called slave
property, the insecurity would be so great that
the owner could not ordinarily retain it. There
fore, though the right would remain, the remedy
being withheld, it would follow that the owner
would be practically debarred by the circum-
stances of the case from taking slave property
into Territory where the sense of the inhabi-
tants was opposed to its introduction. So much
for the oft repeated fallacy of forcing slavery
upon any community"
Now if Douglas, because of his views on this
point, has placed himselfin position justifying
the remark of the S. F. National, that-"Heuce-
forth his ways and those of the National DEM
ocracy are distinct" does he not go forth accom-
panied by Messrs. Orr Stephens and Davis? and
will they not continue to walk in the very centre
of the great Democratic army?