New-York daily tribune., 1858-03-24

Y
,esured 10 them q night which they lad not really
got It was intended merely 10 obvate an objection
without really removing that objection. lie heid
that Congress had no night 10 make any such pro-
vi,o an that contemplated by Pugh's amendment
He warned those who Here induced 70 support ~
amendment in hope. Of catching ht'ie PoP1i'@,s
favor for the preparation Of the enormous Itduu %
the LecopptOn Constitution, 10 beware VI ''o P'
eedent they were setting. .,.of
Mr. Douglas next inquired whether the peoP'oV'
Kansas had been perfectly free TO irdthe 'ee4I
Constitution He begged the SENATOR ci;.
Southto reflect what would have been theIr
and their action il the case hao oc'n - 81
tiyee & lrths Of the people were sd'eno'ueie' "nu
a. g.. A ord violence Convention, cOhposed
,S,aa Ion,tbs Of Free Solers had got together ana
soS ~ Inti.Slayery Constitution, and had sent
:, % Co.oress and had attempted to iorce II upon
Ysnsss xbat would you have sad j Would you
nave ,honght il fair and honest to force such Con
sttutiOD upon Kansas
q. the Senator from Illinois had looked az hun be
vould like to reply. If the slaveholdng majority
rad had an opportunity TO form PrO-Slavery Con
stitu ion and had neglected il, but had left the for
nation Of the Constitution tO the Free-Soilers ne
would not have complained, but would have voHd
TO admit the STATE.
THAT'S good" cried Mr.. Toombs, that's
good answer"
Mr. Douglas promily showed that it was dd.a
rood answer because il assumed fact vital to the
question at issue which fact he utterly Denied
The majority Of people in Kansas had not an oppor-
tunty TO frame Constitution, or 20 vote upon II
for ratification or rejection. When they were al
lowed to vote, they were defrauded out OF their
majority by forged and false returns. In the fret
place 10 Counties were disfranchised
THAT amt true" cried Mr.. TOOmbs. " IL is
true, +" responded Mr. Douglas; "it has been proved
eonclusiyely.", .
Mr.. Hammond here again interposed, and said
that Slaveholding majority would have submitted
even under those circumstances.
"They would have submitted did you say" III
qulred Douglas in tone OF sstonIshment.
Yea" replied Hammond.
"Tben all can say is," reOlned Douglas, that
they are the most submissive of men"
The audience laughed at this, and the galleries
applauded the manner in which it was uttered Mr.
Mason Of Virginia arose in great wrath, and SAID
if the ofense was repeated the galleries should be
cleared. To which Mr.. Brown of Mississippi,
Indignantly added, "The Senate IL not theater
Mr.. Hammond presently again lnterpOsed with
his insane notion about submission, but MIR. Doug
Las told him with some Impotence that he was too
III TO waste strength and voice in replying to ques-
tons that had just been answered twice already.
Mr.. Douglas next launched forth into IL most
searching and scathing exposition of John Calhoun
and his returns and especially his late letter to the
editor of The Washington Star, declaring that he
should issue the certificates to the Free-S'ate can
didates. This part Of his speech was a terrible
specimen of invectlve and sarcasm, and completely
carried the audience with it, SO that the Chamber
resounded with laughter in spite of the frOwn and
menacing gances Of Mr.. Mason.
Dropping JOHN Calhoun after shaking him sut
feienty, Mr.. Douglas resOrted to the purely Slav-
cry aspect of the question. If it were not for
Slavery, would there be any attempt to force this
Constitution upon Kansas If it were not for
Slavery, would there be in either House single ob.
lection to sending this Constitution to the people OF
Kansas for fair vote
Turning his attention next to The Washington
Union he said that paper for some months past had
been every other day reading him out OF the Demo
cratic party, calling him renegade, deserter,
traitor. The course of The Union was determined
by personal hatred. He had refused to vote for the
confirmation of the editor of The USiOa as Public
Printer, and hence his snim0slty.
At the request of Mr.. Douglas, Mr.. Stuart of
Michigan, who sst next to him, read IA silly aud
abusive article from The Union OF September last
containing among other nonsense all assertion that
the abolition Of Slavery in NewlOrk, Pennsylvania
and other States, was unconstitutional. Upon
these and other mOnstrous propositions OF the Gov
ernment organ Mr.. Douglas commented with great
severity. The article, he said, was printed in III,
Union on the 18th of September. On the 18th was
the first article giving in the adhesion of The Uaon
TO the LecOmptOn swinde. The same paper aud
the same man that upheld the LecOmpton outrage
might well maintain that the Emancipation Acts
of New York, New-Jersey aud other States were
void, and that those States not perfectly free
70 form their institutions in their own way.
al recognize" said Mr.. d.. the right OF the
Slsveholding States to regulate their own domestic
institutions; but do not admit cannot admit
that the right Of property in slaves is higher than
any State Constitution, or that the State cannot
abolish il. But such is the doctrine of The WASH
snQtos UniOn-such is the doctrine of the LecOmp-
ton Constitution. That doctrine, if accepted, is
fatal blow 10 the principles of our Government.
felt il 10 be such when first saw IT, and hence
refused to vote for the editor of The Cnton."
Mr.. Douglas then read from the Cincinnati Plat
torm various propositions upon Slavery, to each of
which be gave his assent saying that he stood upon
them last year, and stood upon them still. They IT,
lated chiefly as did his inferences from them to the
proposition that each State must decide for itself
upon the status condition Of its negro population
without interference from Congress. The right of
each State 10 regulate its own institutions he dwet
upon with much earnestness, as the cardinal prlnc-
pie Of our Government. The proposition that prop
erty in slaves was above all law a monstrous
proposition, against which he protested, i'll his own
name and the name Of his constituents.
may remark, BY the way, that this part of Mr..
Douglass speech WAS evidently Intended to lay the
groundwork for future radical position on the
Slavery question.
Mr. Douglas next spoke in reference to his rela-
tion to the Democratic party. Was the Lecomp-
ton measure party measure He did not tnd it
in the party platform. o but, he was told il was
IN Administration measure. All yes but that did
not make IT a party measure. John Tyler iutro-
dueed Administration measures into Congress, bat
that did not make them party measures. Was the
modification of the Neutrallty law party measure