Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1859-07-02
pRESIDENTLlL IND POLITICAL.

to make the coming presidential contest an ex-
citing one for the democracy. Among these is
the recent pronunciamento of Senator Douglas,
explaining his position in reference to the pres
idency. 1t appears that he is quite willing to
accept the nomination at the hands of the
Charleston Convention provided he can do so
ON his own conditions, and those are such as
will insure his own personal triumph, or will,
according to present indications, split the DEM
ocratic party. The Senator still adheres to his
squatter sovereignty principles, and proposes
to win on the old Cincinnati platform or to be
counted out of the ring. That all our readers
may know exactly the ground upon which he
plants his aims, aspirations and hopes, we re-
produce his letter entire:
WASHINGTON, June %, 1859.
My DEAR SIR: | have received your letter inquir-
ing whether my friends are Mt liberty to present my
name to the Charleston Convention for the Presiden-
tal nomination. Before the question can be finally
determined, it will he necessary understand dis
tnctlv upon what issues the canvass is TO be conduct
ed If rs have full faith they will the Democratic
Party shall determine in the Presidential election of
1850 to adhere to the principles embodied in the
promise measures of 1850, and ratified by the people
in the Presidential election of 1862 and reafrmed in
the Kansas Nebraska act of 1854, and incorporated
into the Cincinnati Platform of 1866, as expounded
by Mr. buchanan in his letters accepting the nomina-
ton and approved by the people-in that event my
friends will be at liberty to present my name to the
Convention if they proper to do IT, on the
contrary, it shall become the policy of the Democrat
&c party-which | cannot anticipae-to repudiate
these their time honorcl principles which we have
achieved 50 many patriotic tiumphs and, in lieu of
them the Convention shall incrpoate into the creed
OF the party such new issues tho revival of the AZ
rican Slave Trade or Congressional Slave Code for
the Territories the doctrine that the Constitution
of the United States either establishes or prohibits
Slavery in the Territories beyond the power of the
people legally 10 control it other property, it is due
to candor to say that, in such event, could not
accept the nomination if rendered to me. Trusting
that this will be deemed sufficiently explicit.
am, very respectfully, your friend
(Signedl S. A DOUGLAS.
To j. d. Dom, Esq, Dubuque, Iowa.
This letter was orthodox doctrine with the
democratic party in 1866 it was the precise
ground upon which the Misso uri Compromise
was repealed and the succeeding democratic
campaign conducted. All the leading demo-
cratic journals made it their test of political
communion, and all the little organs piped
their shrll assent thereto. Now a different
tune is played. The democratic papers in the
interest of the administration denounce this
very same doctrine as "squatter sovereignty run
to seed" The President-the recognised lead
er of the party-is not content with leaving
the matter of Slavery in the hands of the peo-
pie of the Territories. He contends that the
Constitution and the dicta of the Supreme
Court carry Slavery into the territories, and
that it is the duty OF Congress to protect this
institution in the same manner that other prop
erty is protected. In other words he abiures
squatter sovereignty and falls back upon the
worst form Of Congressional sovereignty-in-
reference in favor of Slavery 1t is true that
the organ at Washington endeavors to state the
position of the administration in terms some
what more mildly drawn than the above but
the Richmond EHq"irer, which is more relia-
bio n""ounrt cf 4 - ....-oe ~.
wS"'oA ,ut.c,ru deIuucraIic uocLfines, co,ues 81
the rescue and lashes the milk -and-water mouth
piece of the President. After asserting the ul-
timatum Of the Southern Democracy to be
nothing less than Congressional protection for
Slavery, the Enquirer says:
"The organ at Washington should not attempt TO shy
droa"d this rital point After concedng the principle
cOntended Tor, it should manfully face all its conse-
quences. 1t should canddly and promptly say, that
il the people of the Territories should attempt to med.
die with slave property within their limits and the
judiciary sh0ah prove inadequate to its full and eff
Client protection congress should interfere 10 protect H.
1t Is insulting to the people of the South to tell them
that they have an equal right in the public domain
with the people of the Free States, but that they shall
not have full protection in the enjoyment of that right
if it is Illegally invaded or nterlered with"
This demand of the Enquirer is reasonable.
The principle of Congressional interference for
the protection of Slavery in the territories, has
been very distinctly recognised by the chief
leaders and organs of the democratic party. 1t
is the logical sequence of the decision and dicta
Of the Supreme Court in the bred Scott case
1t is now the sheerest cowardice to ''attempt to
shy around" the question, merely because the
idea is repulsive to the people, and a violation
Of the old democratic doctrine that Slavery
was nothing more, and could be nothing more,
than local institution and the creature of local
law. No wonder the Constitution and other
lesser lights attempt to stave off this concession.
They fear the effects of this doctrine. But they
will soon have to show their hands distinctly in
its favor The South insists that the democrat
ic body will decrease unless the medicine, bitter
as is the pill, is taken. The Enquirer further
says:
"From every quarter Of the South we are informed
that this question Of protection of Slavery in the Ter
ritories will be made an issue before the Charleston
Convention article in the platform of the party
The denial or evasion Of it will involve the party in
hopeless defeat in the South. The Convention will,
in our opinion, meet the ISSUE and, upon the bred
Scott decision, affirm the duty of Congress to protect
rights judiciousy acknowledged"
With this explanation of the relative posi-
tons of the administration and Senator Doug
las the full import of the recent letter of the
latter, as published above, will be readily APP
precioted.
How stands the democratic party in Yer
mont on this issueP Some of the Republican
papers declared that the results of the late DEM
ocratic convention were a triumph of the friends
OF Douglas. This statement the administration
papers vehemently denied. Let us examine
the proceedings of that convention by the light