The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-09-30
CAN SLAVERY BE EXCLUDED BY TERRIFIC
RIAL ACTIONS
Mr.. Douglas, at Freeport, Ill, thus publicl
defined his position on this question:

4 RIAL AcTI0Nf
+ Mr.. Douglas, at Freeport, Ill, thus publicl,
!, defined his position on this question:
"The next question Mr. Lincoln propoundet
i to me is, can the people of Territory exclud,
# Slavery from their limits by any fair means
Q before it comes into the Uaion as a State p
answer emphatically, as Mr. Lincoln has hearS
me answer a hundred times on every stump il
2 Illinois, that in my opinion the people of Ter
L ritory can by lawful means exclude Slavery be
z fore it comes in as State. Cheers Mr.
{ Lincoln knew that l had given that answe,
over and over again. he heard me argue the
Nebraska bill on that principle all over the
State in 1854, IS, and g, and he has now nc
= excuse to pretend to have any doubt upon thai
subject. Whatever the Supreme Court may
q hereafter decide as to the abstract question Of
whether Slavery may go in under the Constitu
ton or not, the people of Territory have the
, lawful means to admit it or exclude it. as they
, please, for the reason that Slavery cannot exist
; day or an hour anywhere, unless supported
by local police regulations, furnishing remedies
and means of enforcing the right to hold slaves
Those local and police regulations can only be
furnished by the local Legislature. If the peo-
pie of the Territory are opposed to Slavery, they
will elect members to the Legislature who will
adopt unfriendly legislation to it. If they are
for it, they will adopt the legislative measures
friendly 90 Slavery. Hence, no matter what
may be the decision of the Supreme Court on
that abstract question, still the right of the
people to make it slave Territory or a free
Territory is perfect and complete under the
Nebraska BILL"
The opinion of the Judges of the Supreme
Court, which Mr.. Douglas chooses to recognize
and respect as Decision, goes to this extent {:
that an act by Congress excluding Slavery from
the Territories is unconstitutional-that slaves
are property in the eye Of the Federal Consti-
tuition, and Shareholders may carry them, like
other porperty, into any of the Territories, and
hold them-and that neither the People nor
Legislature of Territory can constitutionalIy
pass an act impairing their right.
The Washington Union, determined to place
| MIR. Douglas in an attitude of direct antagonism
to the South, charges him with hostility to what
it styles the Decision of the Supreme Court
1t does him injustice. He accepts the dicta of
OF the Court as decisions. He accepts as Con-
stitutional Law, the Opinions of the Pro Slave
ry Judges, that slaves are property, in the
| judgment of the Constitution, that as property
they may be taken to any Territory Of the
| Union and held there, and that no act of Con
| gress, or of the People or Legislature of the
Territory, can exclude them, as property. The
Pro'Slavery Judges do not say that the Terri
| torial Legislature is bound to provide reguls-
| tons or remedies for the enforcement of this
right Of property. Mr. Douglas assumes that
it is not bound to make such provision. He
simply asserts, what they did not deny, and
therefore there is no conflict upon this point
There is a general assumption by Judge Doug
las that the People of Territory may lawfully
exclude Slavery, but the statement is TO be in.
terpreted by what follows They may exclude
1t by not furnishing the necessary regulations
for Its protection, and this he calls unfriendly
legislation. And even here he simply states
what he suppcses 10 be fact, without express
| ing any opinion of the character of such action
or non-action. He does rot counsel it, init.
mates no appreciation ofit. Doubtless, his oh.
| ject Was to counteract the argument of the
Republicans, that the opinions of the Pro Slave.
ry Judges of the Supreme Court, recognised as
conclusive by Mr.. Douglas, were tantamount
to denial of the right of the People of a Ter
ritory to protect themselves against Slavery,
notwithstanding all the glowing promises held
out to the Democracy of the North on the pas.
sage of the Nebraska Bill: but, on trying to
break the force of this argument, he took care
to guard his Southern position.
This is clearly the understanding of the
Washington States and Richmond (Va.) En-.
quirsr. They see nothing in the Freeport
speech disloyal to the South, or inconsistent
with the doctrines always maintained by Mr..
Douglas. He simply states what is the real
condition of things under the Kansas Nebrsska
act. He does no more than the ENQUIRER did
when the act passed. That act repealed an
unconstitutional restriction, left the STAKEHOLDER
to the assertion and exercise of his rights in
any Territory of the Union, but it left him, too,
to the mercy of local legislation. If the major
ity of the People were adverse to his rights.
tkey would not provide for their protection
If friendly, they would. The position of Judge
Douglas is neither more nor less than this.
The Enquirer certainly takes the correct
view of his position.
mistaken. Ii the STAKEHOLDER has rights in the
Territories, they are not without remedies, al
though local legislation may fail TO supply any
If the opinion of the Pro-Slavery Judges of
the Supreme Court be constitutional law, he
holds his slaves there as he does his other
property. If the slave escape, he may pursue
him, seize him, fog, con6ne him. There can
be no law against it. The slave cannot sue
HIM for assault and battery He is property.
Can horse appear in a. Court of Justice Sup
pose somebody apply for habeas corpus-;he
court finds that the slave is aot q person. but
property, brought into the Territory under the
Constitution of the United States-he denies
the writ Slavery may then exist in the Terri.
tory without the help of local Iegislation-if
the opinion of the Pro-Slavery Judges of the
Supreme Court be regarded as constitutional
law, and this is the assumption of Mr.. Douglas.
| There can be no doubt on this point. The
ksnsas-Nebrasks act, Wanted by the Pseudo-
Democracy of the North as measure calcula.
ted to spread free institutions, contains special
provision intended to place the claims of the
STAKEHOLDER under the special protection of the
| Supreme Court. The 9th section provides
that writs of error and appeal shall be allow.
ed, and may be taken to the Supreme Court of
the United States, in tie same manner and
under the same regulations az from the Circuit
Court OF the United States, when the value of
| the propertv tho aynov,1 q,