Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1858-10-07

The Accuser Self-convfcted under His
Own Indictment. e

Mr.. Douglas stated in his Freeport speech
that the people of Territory. by refusing to
! legislate for the protection of slavery on the
! one hand, or by extending legislative
encouragement to it on the other hand could
exercise the right under the Kansas-Ne
| bill, to make it either a free or a slave
Territory, no matter what might be the decis-
ion of the Supreme Court on the abstract
| question ofsavery property in the Territories.
| In the absence of Congressional Intervention
/ to protect slavery, wherever jeoparded by
the local law of Territory, that was the
practical effect and the undoubted right result
| ing from the Kansas-Nehraska bill, and that
| effect and that right he considered the Demo
cratic party had Endorsed by declaring mon
| interference. non-intervention with slavery in
States or Territories" to be the fixed policy of
| the party.
No sooner had Mr.. Douglas spoken thus,
than the Washington Union denounced him
as holding heretical opinions, as falsely
Interpreting the Democratic platform, and as
| deliberately repudating the bred Scott
| decision. These are tolerably grave accusa-
tons; but if Douglas is guilty, the accuser is
still greater criminal, and stands self-con-
victed by his own testimony. 1t was about
two mohths ago that the Union contained
labored editorial. written, apparently, to
prove that the Democratic party, for all the
practical purposee of the Black Republicans is
"a better party than theirs; in which editorial
it defended its position on the question of
slavery in the Territories thus:
THE Democratic party have nothing in the
world to do with slavery. They are neither
for it nor against it; for its extension, nor
against its extension. The cornerstone and
foundation of our creed upon this subject, so
far as Congress is concerned, and, Of course
so far as general State elections are concerned
is this: The people of the place-the people
of any given Territory--the people of any
State-have the Constitutional right to
create. or refuse to create or recognize slavery;
that is that Congress- has no rightfu
authority over the subject"
Let it be noted that while Douglas only
states the fact that the people of a Territory
may, under the Kansas Nebraska bill, ''create
or refuse to create or recognize slavery" he
does not deny the abstract Constitutional
right of the STAKEHOLDER uLder the bred Scott
decision, or assert that Congress has no
authority to enforce that Constitutional right
But the Union, i'm the extract above and by the
tenor of the whole article from which we
quote, does both. 1t unqualifedly asserts
that the people of every Territory shave the
Constitutional right to create or refuse to
gress has no rightful authority over the
snbject;" thus uttering hagitous heresy, thus
falsely and slanderously expounding the Demo-
cratic creed, and thus shamelessly flying in
the face of the bred Scott decision. Surely
this selt-convict,d political criminal should
pay the penalty of its own crimes, instead of
setting itself up as accuser. judge and jury
with regard to Others.-N. o. Delta.