The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1858-10-21

ject. The Union, in q late number, has
been reading ne out Of the Democratic par.
ty because hold that the people Of terri
tory, like those Of State, have the right TO
have slavery or not, as they please. 1t has
devoted three and half columns to prove
certain propositions, one Of which / will
read 1t says;
We propose 20 show that Judge Douglas
action IN 1850 and 1854 was taken with especial
reference TO the announcement OF doctrine and
programme which was made at Freeport The
declaration At Freeport was. that In his opin.
ion the people can, by lawful means, exclude
slavery from a territory before il comes In a.
State and he declared that his competitor
had heard him argue the Nebraska bill on that
principle all over Illinois in 1854, 1855 aud 1856
and had no excuse to pretend 10 have any
doubt upon that subject.
The Washington Union there charges me
with the monstrous crime OF now prOclarning
from the stump the same doctrine that car.
ried out III 1850, by supporting Clay com.
promise measures. The Union also charges
that ! am now proclaiming the same doe
trine that did in 1854 10 support of the
Kansas aud Nebraska bill. II is shocked
that should now stand where | stood in
1850, when was supported by Clay, Web
ster, Cass, and the great men of that day,
and where ! stood in 1854, and in 1856,
when Mr.. Buchanan was elected President.
1t goes on to prove and succeeds in proving
from my speeches 10 Congress on Gays
compromise measures, that held the same
doctrines at that time that do now, and
then proves that by the Kansas and Ne.
braska bill ! advanced the same doctrine
that | now advance. 1t remarks:
$50 much for the course taken by Judge
Douglas on the compromises Of 1850. The
record shows, beyond the possibility Of cavil or
dispute, that he expressly intended in those
bill to give the territorial legislature power TO
exclude slavery. How stands his record In the
memorable session Of 1854 with reference to the
Kansas Nebraska bill itselfl We shall not over
haul the votes that were given on that notable
measure. Our space will not afford IT, We
have his own words, however, delivered In his
speech closing the great dc bate on that bill on
the night Of March 8, 1854, to show that he
mani to do In 1854 precisely what he had msant
to do In 1858. The kansas-N ebraska bill being
upon the passage, he said:
1t then quotes my remarks upon the pas
sage OF the bill as follows:
"The principle which we propose to carry
into effect by this bill is this That Congress
shall neither lsgislste slavery into any Territory
or State nor out Of the same but the people
shall be left free TO regulate their domestic con.
Germs In their own way subject only to the
OF the United States. In order to
carry this principle into practical operation, it
becomes necessary to remove whatever legal
obstacles might be found In the way Of its free
exercise. II 10 only for the purpose Of carrying
out this great fundamental principle Of self.
government that the bill renders the eigth sec.
ton OF the Missouri act imperative and void.
Now, let me ask, will those Senators who
have srraigned, or any one Of them, lave the
assurance to rise in his place and declare that
his great principle was never thought Of or
advocated A. applicable to territorial bills, in
1850; that, from that session until the present,
Nobody ever thought OF Incorporating this prn.
cipe in all new territorial organizations, &c,
&c. will begin with the compromises Of 1850.
Any Senator who will take the trouble TO ex.
amino our journals will find that on the 2jth of
March Of that year reported from the Com
nittee on Territories two bills, including the
measures: the admission of California,
! territorial government for Utah, a territorial
government for New Mexico, and the adjust
nent Of the Texas boundary. These bills pro.
sosed to leave the people Of Utah and New
Ne xico free to decide the slavery question for
he mselves, IN The prteiss language Of the Ne
~ aska bN now under discussion. A few weeks
the committee of thirteen took those !
bills and put q wafer between them and report. [
ID them back to the Senate as one bill, with |
ONE slight amendments. One Of these amend.
ssnts ras, that the 1trrrto,ta legislatures should
oi kgisiais upon the subject Of african siarsy.
objected 10 thus procis,on, upon the ground that |
subverted the great principles Of self govern I
nent, upon rhieh the bH had been originally I
) amsd by the tsrritO'iai eomm,ttss. On the first /
rial the Senate refused 10 strike il out, but sub !
equently did so, upon full debate, In order to /
stablsh that principle a. the rule Of action in /
erritorial organizations"
The Union comments thus upon my speech .
n that occasion
Thus it ia seen that, in framing the Nebras-
a Kansas bill, Judge Douglas framed it in I
he terms aud upon the model OF those OF Utah 4
nd New Mexico, and that in the debate he 4
ook pains expressly to revive the recollect on 1
{ the voting which had taken place upon .
mendments affecting the powers Of the terrific
al legislatures over the subject of slavery in
he bills Of 1850, in order to give the same
,eaning, force and effect to The Nebraska Nan.
~ bill on this subject as had been given TO
hose OF Utah and New Mexico
The Unioa proves the following PROPOSE
ions First, that | sustained Clay's com.
romise measures, on the ground that they
Established the principle OF seli-goyernment
, the territory. Secondly, that | brought
, the Kansas AMI Nebraska bill founded
pom the same principles as Clays com.
romise measures OF 1850; and thirdly. that
~ Freeport speech is in exact accordance
nth those principles. And what do you
mink is the imputation that the Union casts
pom me tor oil this 1t says that my
report speech is not Democratic, and that
was not Democrat in 1854 or in 1850
'ow. is not that funny. Great laughter
nd cheers) Think that the author OF the
ansas aud Nebraska bill was not Demo
nat when he introduced it. The Union
AVS was not sound Democrat in 1850,
or in 1884. nor in 1856, nor am in 1858,
ecause | have always taken and now occu-
y the ground that the people Of q territory,
&c those OF a State, have the right TO decide
" themselves whether slavery shall or shall
ut exist in territory. wish to cite tor
,e benefit Of the Washington UnIon and
Nc followers OF that sheet oue authority on