The Jeffersonian. [volume] (Stroudsburg, Pa.) 1853-1911, 1859-12-15

by this time become sick or ashamed Of
their gro-begging. Why is it Mr.. Doug
las, that we find 90 allssion to these eff
forts to evsde or srbvert the Ordinance
of 81, and their uniform failure, in your
resume of the history of this subject ~
Why hut because the facts are at deadly
feud with your theory. and prove it the
novel heresy it truly is! There we're
statesmen in Congress in lo02-7 who
would gladly have procured repeal OF
suspension of the Ordinance of 's7. so
far as it forbade the Extension of Slave
ry; there was not one 80 far as can dis
cover---wbo denied the right of Consre>s
to preclude such Extension. The doe
ttiue which denies to Cons ress the right
to inhibit Slavery 10 the Territories bad
its origin in the perplcxlti of Presi-
dental asplraDt no longer ago than lsiS
When Office kers cea@e to have special
need of il, it aill die the death of the huu-
bugs. and be buried in their open grave.
You speak of the antagouIstic doctrine
which conides the guardianship of In
partial Freedom in the Territories of the
United States TO the whole people as rep
resented IN the Congress of the United
States rather than TO the few thousands Is
of their number who first gain a footing
on these Territories as strife breeding,
feud-iDciting, as between diverse sections
Of the Uuiou. History does not sustain
that in putation. The Ordinance of 81
and the Missouri Restriction successively
secured to the country long terms of eom-
parative rest from Slavery agitation.-
The Nebraska bill has given us-what
you see. 1t has distracted not merely
the country but the Democratic part5.-
Evon yo~ give three several interpreta.
tions of the spirit and drift of that act,
and of the " Popular Sovereignty which
it embodies, as held by different sections
Of that party. Mr. S na,or +! allow me
to say 10 conclusion that these diverse
interpretations yours seems to me the
most unsatisfactory and irritating. /
comprehend. | regard with certain re
spect, the Fire-eater who tells me-''The
Constitution guarantees the right of ta-
king slaves into the Territories and hold
ing them there: | demand of Cougre
such legislation as will render that right
iupregnable | trust be comprchend-
and respects me when | respond: " The
Constitution gIees no right to carry Slave
rs into the Territories; wherefore shall
endeavor 10 keep it out, aud will favor
no such legi-latiOn as you require;" bu,
how can either OF US respect you-hoW
can you respect yourself--wheu you say
in effect: True. you slave bolters have
a right to fill the Territories with your
slaves; bat the rquatter sovereigns may
nulIify that right by 'unfriendly lesisla-
ton, aud you are without remedy" Mr..
Senator whenever | realize that the
sloyeholders have a constitutional rig BIT to
carry their hun an cbattels iuto the Ter
ritories and hold them there, | will re,
spect that ri : bt in its lesitimst ste scope and
spirit, and not attempt to Whittle it away,
a. you do 10 Jour comments on the Dred
Scott decision. The topic is grave one;
the time is earnest; the People intent OF
facts. and 10 no mood to be AMUSED OF
cajo'ed by mere words. Think you mis-.
conceive alike topic. time aud people, tc
your own serious damage. Yours,
HORACE GREELEY.