The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-09-25
vINpIcATIoN oF THE NEBRAsKA KANSAS BILI.

=
southern press strong disposition to assail and
pudate the Nebraska Kansas act AS sample of
tho mode Of assault pursued, we publish an article
on the subject somewhat condcnsed) from the Nor
folk Argus. That journal boasts its original hosti
ty to the passage of tho bill, and plumes itself now
on its sagacity in that particular II vouches some
detached declarations made by southern members of
Congress as evidence that the bill not expected
by its southern supporters, to plant slavery in Ter
rtores where the population would be hostile to it,
and it collatcs with these declarations of southern
men, those which were recently made by Judge
Douglas at Freeport this subject, to show, in ex
tenuation Of Judge Douglass conduct, that he
is not heretical and aithless in the matter his
words would show him to be. Here let stop to
note the strange spectacle, of the original opponents
Of the Kansas-N ebraska bill, now undertaking the
defence of Judge Douglas for maintaining what they
from the first maintained with regard to his own
bill, to wit that it could furnish protection in
the Territories to the property of emigrants from
half the States in the Unionnone of the protection
which was vaunted to be its express object by its
supporters The original southern opponents of
the bill contcnded that it would not afford this pro-
presence
northern audience thatit viii not afford it; where
upon its southern supporters clap their hands and
cxclam that they right, and commend the author
che bin for virtually coasssing that his measure
aras snde and cheat! For the life of us we cannot
much to admire in the candor either of the al-
thor of the bill or Of those who extol him.
But this great and important measure which cost SO
great struggle, which achieved SO much for the
vindcation of the constitutional rights Of the South
which reflected so much honor on the democratic
party, which developed in that party SO strong ma
tional sentiment and exhibited in it so conservative
character and potentially, must not be, cannot be
whistlcd down the wind in thsmanner The act is all
that it pretended to be and, if properly sustained
by the great party to which it its passage will
prove safe and protection to the property of
southern emigrants in the Territories.
Mr.. Orr and Mr. Smith did not announce the
doctrine in the extracts quoted from them by
the Argus which were unblushingly promul-
gated by Judge Douglas at Freeport Mr.. Doug
las contendcd for the right of free-soil MAORI
ties, in the Territories, by "unfriendly legisla-
tion," to exclude slavery therefrom The constitu-
tion, under the decision of the Supreme Court Of the
in the territories of the Union. Every
member of the territorial legislatures, every officer
OF tho territorial governments takes an oath to sup
port the constitution of the United States and vet
the doctrine Of Judge Douglas is, that these Iegis
iators, notwithstanding their OATH may either by re-
fusng the passage of laws giving remedies to slave
holders for the vindicaton of their rights or else
by passing laws positively unfrendIy" to the slave
holder nullify rights guaranteed by the constitution
We have already denounced this doctrine in proper
terms and shown it to be precisely the one on which
Ohio, Massachusetts, and other States based their
personal---very." bills for the notification Of the
fugitive-save law. In fact it is no other doctrine
thar th1t Of the higher law" of Mr.. Douglass
fread, Senator Seward. If a member of a terri |
torial legislature refuses to vote for laws Civ
ing effect and vitality to rights guaranteed by
the constitution, he violates his oath, and abuses
his trust. Yet it is tho doctrine of Judge Doug
las that he has the right to do this urong Does
our friend Of the Argus to say that this doc
trne is sound, that officers of the territorial gov
ernments shall have right thus to sspit upon the
constitution = Does it insist that such conduct, vic.
latng twould the spirit and principle of the Ne
braska-Kansas act, no less than Of the constitu-
ton, should any discredit the act than il
would dscredit the constitution itself? And is il
valid defence Of Judge Douglas, in maintaining the
right Of these officers to practise such conduct,
that he is supported in his doctrine by gentlemen Of
the South? I M
We must rescue Mr.. Orr however, from the sus-
picon Of maintaining such doctrine, and we find
evidence that he does not in the very extract from
his remarks, which is presented by the Argus for
he expressly says:
I'VE think they ought to pass laws in every Territory
when tho Territory open to settlement and slavehod
eu go there, 70 proteu Stare property
He expressed the belief, in spirit of depreca-
ton, that, notwithstanding this duty resting upon
them, free-soil majority in Territory would re-
fuse to pass such laws just as he might have ex-
pressed the belief before the fact that the freeso
majorities in Massachusetts and Ohio would enact
bills multiplying the fugitive slave
law. But that is a very different declaration from
the one Of Judge Douglass in which he asserts the
right Of the ree-soil majorites in the Territories
to exclude slavery perfect and complete under
the Nebraska BILL" Aperset right, complete right,
are very strong expressions. We have not time at
the moment to refer to the speech of Mr.. Smith ,
but have no doubt that his position is the same