The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1858-09-25
Unfriendly Police Regulations.

MOUNTAINEERING Sucn an ACT uaS Hee" ~.
| cided by the Supreme Court to be unconsti-
tutional, is being denounced and ridiculed IN
every section Of the country. In the free
State the doctrine advanced at Freeport,
when taken in connection with his Chicago,
Ottawa, and other speeches, creates disgust
and contempt, while at the South it is look
ed upon and treated al abolitionism of the
darkest hue. 1t 10 indeed a most extraordi-
| nary and unaccountnbls position for q man
of Judge Douglas ability as statesman, to
get into.
This is Of course not original with the
Press, for the same thing has substantially
appeared over and over in every Republican
and DANTE paper in the State since the pub
LEGATION of the Freeport Debate. tits seized
upon as something entirely new-as back
down on the part of Judge Douglas from the
earlier position he had assumed on the bred
Scott decision. Now if these editors were
honest, or if honest, then not hopelessly and
inexcusably ignorant, they would not with
hold from their readers the fact that, SO far
from this being . new idea with Judge
Douglas, the same doctrine was announced
by him in his celebrated speech at Spring
field in June, 1857, in exactly the Same
terms, in substance, as 1t Fresport. Here
is what he said in 1857:
"While the right (ths right of the master
to his slave in the territory continues in
full force under tho guarantees Of the consti-
tuition, and cannot be Invested or alienated
by an act of Congress. it necessarily remains
q barren and q worthless right unless sus-
tanned, protected, and enforced by appropri-
ate police regulations and local legislation
prescribing adequate remedies for its viola
ton. These regulations and remedies must
necessarily depend entirely upon the will
and wishes of the people of the territory, a.
they can only be prescribed by the local le-
| gislatures.
Hence, the great principle of popular 80
| vereignty and selfgovernnent is sustained
and firmly established by the authority Of
this decision.
Again, if those editors already alluded to
were honcst-indeed were not shamelessly
mendacious, they would admit that not only
has Judge Douglas uniformly, since the
bred Scott decision was first promulgated,
held this idea, but Southern statesmen &C.
nsrally admit the doctrine Thus, in the
last House of Representatives, Mr.. Speaker
Orr held the following language:
az say, although deny that squattsr So
vereignty exists in the Territories Of Kansas
and Nebraska by virtue Of this bill, il is a
matter practically of little consequence whs.
ther it does or not; and think shall be
able to satisfy the gentleman of that. The
gentleman knows that, in every slavehold-
ing community Of this Union, we have local
legislation and local police regulations ap-
pertaining to that institution, without which
the institution would not only be valueless,
but curse to the community. Without
them the Stakeholder could not enforce his
rights when invaded by others; and if you
had no local legislation for tho purpose OF
giving protection, the institution would be
of no value. | can appeal to every gentle
| holding constituency, to attest the truth OF
what have stated upon that point.
"Now, the legislative authority of Terri
tory is invested with . discretion to vote for
or against laws. We think they ought to
pass laws in every Territory, when the Ter
ritory is open to settlement, and slave hold
ers 60 there, to protect slave property. But
isemsdy Non;sS b. sf.s such waa' af tn:
people are opposed to the institution. and \
they do not desire it engrafted upon the
Territory, all they have to do is simply tn
decline to pass laws in the Territorial Legis.
laturo Tor its protection, and then it is az
we'll excluded as if the power was invested
in the Territorial Legislature, and exercised
by them to prohibit it. Now, ask the gen.
tlemon, what is the practical importance to
result from the agitation and discussion Of
this question as to whether squatter sove.
reignty does er does not exist? Practically,
it is a matter of little moment"
And why do Judge Douglas, Speaker Orr,
and democratic statesmen generally hold
this doctrine? Simply because the Dred
Scott decision does NOT deprive the people
of the Territories of the right to legislate in
reference to slavery. There is grossly
mistaken idea abroad as to what the bred
Scott decision on this subject really is. All
the Court affirmed is this, in Judge Taney's
own language:
''That the act of Congress, which prohi-
bited citizen from holding and owning
property of this kind in the territory Of the
Urited States north of the line therein men,
toned. is not warranted by the Censtitu-
ton, and is therefore void"
The territories are tho common property
OF the whole union. The people of oil the
states have an equal right to migrate to the
territories with their property. The consti
tuition recognizes slaves As property, and
congress cannot discriminate between what
is property in the North and what in the
South. This is the simple doctrine. But
when the territory, in its own legislature,
proceeds to adopt rules and regulations fol
itself, it can in q thousand ways modify its
domestic code SO as to make the holding oil
slaves, although not touching the ultimate
right of ownership unpleasant and unprsf.
liable. What consummate folly, after all,
is the whole Of this noise and fuss about
slavery in the territories. Can pine apples
thrive in No-vay? No more can slavery
exist in state or tsrriis-y where the pop
ular voice is against it; and equally vair
would prove all congressional or local pro
hibitions, where the people want it. IL
the end the only poxer supreme on the
subject is, popular Sovereignty" 1t il
the only true higher law" which no leg
islation can Illustrate. The God Of nature
Himself has engrafted it on the territories
and despite all compromises, bred Sect
decision and political wransles on the sub
ject, the cor pepui in the end defies them
oil.
! A HIGH COMPLIMENT TO JUDGE DOUGLAS.
The ST. Louis Republican thus speaks oil
Judge Douglas: --.-...
"No man has asserted his love Of the
Union, at all times and under trying Cir
cumstances, in more bold and orera helming