Nebraska advertiser., 1858-02-18

narfieg.f that al 0iltl local anu 4OASoeAC AuOSS'
shouldbe submitted te1he people; lsaid to tnenl1 we
agree that the people shall decide for themselves what
kind Of . Judiciary system they Will establish; we agree
TAT nc people shall determine for themselves what
ki5d AZ aybanRing system they viii have, or whethef
they will have any banks at all; We agree that the peo-
DE may decide tor themselves what shall be the elect
Eve franchise Ia their respective States; they shall de-
cido for themselves what shall be tie rule Of taxation
and the ~pFinciple upon which their anaace shall be re-
~gulafed, Te agree hstthey miy dende for thetnselves>
the relations between husband and wife, parent and
child, guardian and ward; and Why should we not then,
allow them to decide for themselves the relations be-
tween master and servant? Why make an exception Of
the slavery question By taking il out ofthat great rule Of
self government which applies to all the other relations
| OF lise2' The very first proposition in the Nebraska bill
was to show that the Missouri restriction, prohibiting
the people from deciding the slavery question for Them
selves, constituted an exception 70 z generafrule, IN
violation Of the principle OF SELF goYeTnment, Audience,
that exception should be repealed, and the slavery ques-
tion, like all other questions, submitted to the pespIe to
be decided for themselves.
Sir. that was the principle on which the Nebraska bill
was defended by its friends. Instead OF making the sla-
VERY question an exception, II removed an odious exeepT
ton which before existed. Its whole object was 70 abb
lish that odious exception, and make the rule general,
universal in its application to all matters which were
local and domestic, ane nos natiOnAi O. feaeraa.
We repealed the Missouri re~striCtion because that was
confined 70 slavery. That was the only exception there
was to the general principle OF self government. That
exception was taken away for the avOwed and express
purpose OF making the rule Of self-gUvernment general
and universal, so that the people should form and regu-
late all their domestic institutions in their own way.
Sir, what would this boosted principle Of popular So
vereigny have been worth. II 1t applied only to the ne
gro, anddid not extend to the white man2 Do you think
we could have aroused the sympathies and the patriotism
Of this broad Republic, and have carried the Presidential
election lastyear in the face of a tremendous opposition,
on the principle Of extending the right Of self-government
10 the negro question, but denying Il as to all relations
affecting white men? No, sir. We aroused the patriot
ism Of the country and carried the election in defence Of
that great principle which allowed all white men to form
and regulate their domestic institutions to suit them
selves. FRI t-f
All! But, says one, Judge DoUGLAs
and his followers are cutting loose from
the Administration and Democratic par
ty, and stepping on the Republican plat
form! Not a whit of it. Mr.. Douglas
and those who are with him to-day stand
upon the same platform-the same plank
they did when it was made, as we have
clearly shown herein before. The Rep
publican press throughout the country-al-
ways convinced no doubt-are now pub
licly acknowledging the correctness of the
great principle or doctrine of popular
sovereignty: Some no doubt think that
they are creating, or at least assisting to
create a division in the Democratic party.
"Lay not the lattering JUNCTION to your
souls" This party-the people--are
like a well regulated, good conditioned
family-may have, it is true, its family
jars, slight differences as to policy or ex-
pediency; but when they come TO principle,
there is no difference-they are a unit.
That there is a difference of policy be-
tween Mr.. Douglas and Mr.. Buchanan,
we of course do not pretend to deny. But
does it follow that Mr.. Douglas in occupy
ing the position he does, or hat others by
endorsing that position, and insisting
upon the application of the Kansas-Ne-
braska Bill, become Indifferent or I'M
friendly to the success of the Administra-
ton? Not by any means.
MI. Buchanan in his message informs
us of his disappointment and modification
that the whole Constitution had not been
submitted to the people. But so dear to
his heart is the peace of his country, that
he is ready to make great sacrifices to
preserve it. He thinks it right to stand
by the principle; but inexpedient to do so
IN the present case; that by the admis-
sion of Kansas under the Lecompton
Constitution she would have the whole
matter into her own hands, with power to
change or amend, and thus take the
''yexed question" from the whole country
to within her own boundaries, where il
properly belongs. Herein, in our opinion,
is the solution of that part of his message
relating to Kansas. Mr.. Douglas, how
ever, with many thousands of others
and we are happy to class ourself with
that number-think "~expediency is a dan.
gerous doctrine when in collision with
principles" t.1 H.. r..lv a.
We can easily conceive this difference
in policy, and yet harmony on the great
principle. The position of Mr. Buchanan
is an Executive one, having nothing what.
ever to do with this or any other question,
save advise; that of Mr.. Douglas a Lau
making one, having to act in the premi.
SEES; hence he must take an active part.
And, further, being the author of the
Kansas Nebraska Bill, he ought to under.
stand what it means, and what was in.
tended by its provisions:
Hear what Mr.. Douglas himself saws
as to any difference between himself and
the President:
When yesterday the President's Message was read ),
the clerks desk, heard it but imperfectly, and I wa,
Of the impression that the President of the United State,
had approved and endorsed the action Of the Lecomptor
Constitution IN Kansas. Under that impression, 1 felt n
my duty to state that, while I concurred in the genera,
sed the action OF that Convention, / entirely disseptet
from it, and would avail myself Of an early opportunit,
70 state my reasons for my dissent. ,Upon amUre carefui
and critical examination Of the Message, lam rejoiced I,
find that the President Of the United States has NOT re
commended that Congress- shall pass a law to receiv,
Kansas into the Union under the Constitution formed a
Lecompton. 1t is true that the tone OF the Message indi,
r Gates a Willingness on the part Of the President to siQr
ball II we shall see proper to pass one receiving Kansa,
into the Union Under that Constitution. But, Sir. il n
a1act OF great significance, and worthy Of consideration
: tnat the Presidenth has refrained from the endorsement