The Feliciana Democrat., 1858-10-16
PLAIN TRUTH.

There are several leading Democr attic Jour-
nails in the South, now engaged in discussing
the application of the Kansas. Nebraska bill
and the Dred Scott decision to the Territories,
and the position of Stephen A. Douglas with
regard to both. The discussion as far as we
have observed it, amounts to little or nothing
but an endless attenuation Of the thread Of
ycrbosity." The Washington Union is partic-
ularly conspicuous in this way. To use words
50 as to create a disticton without difference.
would seem t, be the height Of its dialect am.
bition
Calhoun and Davis, Stephens and Orr. and
other Southern Democrats, long ago held, and
so declared in congress, that whether the alb.
stract constitutional right ofsquatter sovereign.
ty were admitted or denied, or the abstract
Constitutional right Of the STAKEHOLDER in the
Territory were conceded or repudiated, it
would practically come to the same thing, mas
much AS, to use the words of Mr.. Orr in 1856,
"if the majority Of the people are opposed to
the institution, Slavery and if they do not
desire it ingrafted upon their Territory. all they
have to do is simply to decline to pass laws in
the Territorial Legislature for its protection,
and then it is as well excluded as if the power
was invested in the Territorial Legislature, and
exercised by them to prohibit it,"
Mr. Douglas, not long since in his Freeport
speech. took the same view Of the question,
and declared the me facts when he said
1T matters not what way the Supreme Court
may hereafter decide as to the abstract ques-
ton whether slavery may or may not go in
territory under the Constitution, the people
have the lawful means to introduce it or exclude
it as they please, for the reason that slavery
can not exist day or an hour anywhere, IN.
less it is supported by local police regulations.p
But this language Of Mr.. Douglas the Union
asonizes, with all its verbal sophistry, to dis.
tort into treason and heresy-into a repudia-
ton Of the Constitution and its Interpretation
by the Supreme Court, denial of his party
creed and desertion Of his party But the thing
can't be done. The matter is too plain to be
mystfed by fog verbalty. Douglas only
stated fact-a grievous enough fact for the
Sonth-as Calhoun had done, as Davis had
done, as Orr and Stephens had done We nev.
er regarded the KansasNebrarka formula as
sufficient, in itself. We were willing 10 take
it for what it was WORTH for its value as me-
cation of the Missouri restriction no more
But the Union has always asserted its suficien-
cy and now, when it is so papably and noto.
rionsly insufficient, the Union would escape GEN.
sure by representing that to be false applica-
ton Of the doctrine which is the necessary ef.
feet Of the doctrine ITSELF The device is too
shallow to succeed.
Let the Union take the ground that we took
in the beginning-the ground that the Rich
mond Enquirer now takes when it demands
that Congress shall interfere to protect slave.
ry i'm the TerrtOreS 81 that the Constitution.
al right of the STAKEHOLDER may be available
and real, and not "bnrren aud worthless" let
the Union do this, and it will then be in po-
sition to appeal to the South in its issue with
Douglas on the question of slavery in the Ter
ritories. We ask the Union again: Is it in
favor of making it part of the Democratic
creed that Congress shall interfere to protect.
slavery in the Territories 1t has no right to
arraign Douglas for stating the fact that such
protection is necessary.-Delta.