Marshall County Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1855-1859, 1858-01-14

AieOu lux q cOpy VI MS speech ueilNereQ IN
the Senate Of the United States, December
90, 1857.
We have given it an attentive reading,
and it is but justice to pronounce it III
many. respects not unworthy the great
mind by which it was conceived. We are
all willing to accord to DIR. Fitch the tall
eats ef true statesman, and have long
regarded him with an honest pride as our
representative, yet, we must be allowed, at
this time. TO join issue with him on some
of the positions assumed in the speech be-
fore US, and, by a very little trouble, as we
think, to show up the sophistry and icti-
tious reasoning by which lie attempts to
bolster up an erroneous policy. In doing
this, we shall not, as ne are sorry to say
is the case with some of the public jour
nails, open TRADE of abuse upon DR..
Fitch; but, in the spirit of the Senator's
own words, we are willing to attribute none
but the most honorable and patriotic mo-
tives in assuming whatever position he may
on the Kansas question.
In his exordium the Senator begins by
exculpzting himself from the charge Of
reading Mr.. Douglas or any other Senator
who may differ from him, out of the Dem
ocratic party. Passing from this to the
points directly at issue, lie proceeds to ar
que, at some length, the question Of State
rights, claiming in their behalf, that since
the organization OF our government, the
doctrine of non-intervention by Congress
on all questions of domestic policy, with
one exception, has been respected, and
that it underlies the very foundation of oul
free institutions. This one exception was
the question of slavery, which had been
reserved to the Federal Government by the
compromise of 1929. The repeal of this
by the Kansas act brought this excepted
right also under the same rule, leaving tn;
people as free TO decide upon that question
as any other.
Lest it might be inferred by some that
We mislepresent the Senator, we quote bis
own words:
"The repeal of the Missouri line was,
therefore, for the purpose only of placing
that one exceptional question upon the
same footing with all the others taking it
from its exceptional position and placing i:
under the rule y
This is precisely the doctrine Mr. Doug
las holds, but not the doctrine declared by
the President, who tells us that the repeal
of the Compromise act of 1920 was to
make the slavery question an exception,
and submit that by Itself, and not The
others. We see, then, that both DR.. Fitch
and Mr.. Douglas set out with the same
policy, and while the latter has pursued a
steady, straight forward course. the form
er has fallen into policy which may just
" bring upon him the charge of inconsist-
ency. $50
After having committed himself in an
unquestionable manner. to these principles.
he turns around and denies their applica-
ton to Kansas--dcnies the conclusions OF
the very premises he has helped to estab-
fish. Not openly, indeed, but indirectly,
by endeavoring to overturn, by display OF
spacious and unsubstantal reasoning. the
only way in which this application can be
legilimately made. He even charges Doug
las with trying to ''lipit the power pre-
viously possessed by our people," This is
simply ridiculous. Did the people of Kan.
sas, or even a small majority of them, en-
dorse the convention; had they all been al
lowed to vote at the election of those dele.
gates, instead Of near one half the coun-
ties being excluded from the right of rep
resentation by no fault of their own, which
was the case; and did they now SO fan en-
dorse the acts of that convention as will
inely to receive and act upon that consti
tuition rs it comes from the hands Of Their
delegates, there might be some plausibility
to the charge; and his arguments agains
the Walker doctrine of ssno delegated pow
err might not seem SO entirely devoid o
support. As it is, any analogy he may at
tempt to draw between Kansas and the con
stitution of the U. S., or any OF the In
dnidual States, is in violation of the frs
principles of logic, which require, to draw
ANYTHING like correct inference, that tn
two things compared must have, at least
some points and characteristics in com
mon.
He further charges, that if the permits
sorry act of Messrs. Toembs and Dougla