The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-10-05
HIS RECORD.

We propose to-day in perfect good humor, and
with none Of the "envenomsd malice" which his
partisans ascribe to us, to examine the record of
Judge Douglas on the much-vexed question OF slavery
In the Territories. qs8 es a6 ss 5a
There are some who believe that Congress cannot
legislate this subject in the Territories at all
others who believe it may legslate for the purpose Of
projecting the institutions others who believe that it
may lcgslate on tho subject notwithstanding the
Nebraska-Kansas act and the bred Scott decision,
either for the purpose of establishing excluding
slavery; and others who hold that, although Congress
is pledged by the Nebraska Kansas bill and forbid
den by the bred Scott decision to legisate on the
subject at ALL yet the territorial legislatures have the
and forbidden not to do
This last is the present doctrine of Judge Douglas.
Our object to-day is to show that this doctrine is not
with him, and that he labored SO to shape and
succeeded in SO shaping the legislation of Congress
this subject in 1850 and in 1854 as to prepare the
way for proclaiming the doctrine apparently long
meditated and now announced by him.
We hesitate not to say that it is the most insidous
obnoxious, and dangerous form in which the anti
slavery doctrine has ever been announced for the
Territorieshat of pledging Congress to strict non
interference in the Territories then maintaining for
its creature, the territorial Legislature, the power
practically to exclude by denying the remedies need
full for the enforcement of constitutional rights and
by adopting enactments positively "unfriendly" to
the slaveholdiDg emgrant; and, finally, demanding
that Congress shall insist rule that the consti-
tuons of New States shall be submitted to the votes
of inhabitantsthough thrust into them by northern
abolition aid emigrant societies, armed with
Sharpe's riAes--as was done in the Lecompton con-
test This, we say, is the worst form in which the
anti-savery policy in the Territories has ever been
advocated and yet this is the precise character of
the anti-slavery policy now openly maintained by
Judge Douglas
Judge Douglas has long been an idol with large
portion of the southern people, who are at last be-
ginning to detect the true character Of their fond
ling. "a child treats its doll as living creature,
handles and fondles it, gives it the air. dresses and
undresses it, and puts it to bed. Some unlucky day
it espes little Of the bran oozing out of it's valued
form; curiosity is set at work--how is it made, is
the question--research begins--the opening in the
seam Of the pnppet is increased the stufipg pours
reduced to trumpery piece of sown leather,
turned inside out, and cast with contempt away.
Our Little Giant has been provoking this process of
investigation it has been letting its bran out and
the minds even Of the little children of society have
been set to work to see whether there is anything
better in il than the chaff."
His past services have been appealed to in expi-
alton of his late heresy Were these "past services"
any better or other than the wretched bran now
oozing from his ripped seams ? We propose to-.
show that they were identically the same thing.
We propose to show that Judge Douglass action
in 1850 and 1854 was taken with especial reference to
the announcement of doctrine and programme which
was made at Freeport. Tho declaration at Freeport
was, that in his opinion the people can, By la,th
means, exclude slavery from Territory before it
comes in State !" and he declared that his com
petitor had "heard him argue the Nebraska bill on
that principle all Illinois in 1854 1855 and 1856
and had excuse to pretend to haze any doubt upon
that subject 2 sts
AS, however, there few politicians in other
quarters who pretend to entertain doubts on this
subject we shall take the pains to go back to the
records and show that when southern senators en-
deavored to insert clause preventing territorial
legislatures from excluding slavery, in the territorial
bills Of 1850 and in the Nebraska Kansas bill in
1854, Judge Douglas was the person who prevented
the insertion
In THE SENATE, MAY 22d 1850, p 1914 CONGRESSIONAL
GLoBETae compromise being under consideration
and the amendment of Mr. Davis Of Mississippi to the
10th section being under consideration Mr. Pratt moved
MS a substitute therefor the following
Strike out in the 10th section the words In respect
to- and insert to introduce exclude. making that
part Of the section read thus; THAT the legislative
power of said Territory shall extend to all ghtf sub
jects Of legislation consistent with the constitution of tho
United States and the provisions of this act but law
shall be passed interfering with the primary disposal Of
the SOIL nor to introduce exclude African slavery.
Mr. Pratt propose further after the word slavery
to insert provided that nothing herein contained shall
be construed to prevent said territorial legislature pass
ing such laws may be necessary for the protection of
the rights property Of any kind which may have BEEN
may DO hereafter lawfully introduced into said Terri
tory"
The consideration Of this amendment declared out
of order at this time.
Mar 2s, p. lo74.-H. Darts accepted ho amendment Of |
Mr.. Pratt with modification the latter clause 80
that said clause win read after the words for the pro-
lection Of the rights Of property Of any kind which may
have been, may be hereafter confornuby % ne con-
shaon and lcs Of the United States held in or introduced
into said Territory" Up. 1888.
JuSE 8, p llls.-Hr. Chose Of Ohio, moved to amend