Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1859-08-29
SLAVERY IN THE TERRITORIES,

One of our contemporaries, whose knowledge
of the political issues of the time seems rather
crude. deprecates any mis-statement OF oena-
tor Douglass views of popular sovereignty IN
the territories. We do likewise, for there is
nothing to be gained by mis-statements OF any
kind. At the same time we must say that the
only direct mis-statement of the matter we
have seen anywhere outof certain Democratic
Journals, appeared in the columns OF TINS CO.
Temporary. That Northern Journals favorable
to Mr.. Douglas should fail to state the case
correctly, is perhaps natural. He did SO IN
Illinois: and his followers will do it constant
ly until the next President is elected. But
any mistake in regard to the matter is quite
unnecessary if not altogether inexcusable, IN
any public journal with position like that of
the contemporary to whom we refer.
Mr.. Douglas has not left his views in doubt
among those who attend to such matters care
fully. He certainly shows no lack of dispose
ton to make half statements and misleading
statements for effect among those who are not
carefully attentive to what is said but, when
closely questioned, he tells his meaning very
pl9 My. In the Senate, last February, he
made full declaration of his views; and this
declaration, made in reply TO the criticisms and
questions of Southern Senators, was explicit
and complete. They desired an explanation
of some of his campaign speeches in Illinois,
and he gave it on every point; and he said
then, what he says now in private letters to
all who seem intent on knowing the truth,
that this speech tells exactly what he means
that it shows "what he meant and all he
meant" in his much talked of Freeport speech,
lin word, that it is the authoritative exposi-
ton of his doctrine of popular sovereignty.
We have now before us one of his private let
tiers in which he says this; ,,,,,,r, ,a.os,u
:, " rprrrrUTy auUe eatHer potoer or
right to abolish slavery to prohibit its intrOduc-
tion among them. Many of his northern follow
ers wish to hide this fact; and he himself has
aimed to keep it out of sight He did so in his
Freeport speech, using language that led some
unsophisticated persons to suppose him hostile
to the bred Scott decision. His speech in the
Senate corrects all such misapprehensions
and it also gives us the proper Interpretation
published in the last number of Harper's
Monthly. In the beginning of that speech he
states as follows one point of agreement be-
tween HIM and Mr. Brown of Mississippi =
eve agree that under the decision of the ST.
preme Court of the United States, slaves are
property, standing on equal footing with all
other property and that, consequently, the
o,cner Of stdue has the same right to emigrate to
territory and carry his slave property with
him, as the owner of any other species of pro-
perry has to so there and carry his property
with him."
He could not endorse the bred Scott decision
more explicitly, nor say in palmer terms that
slavery has constitutional right to 90 into the
territories. But the same view is reiterated in
this speech in reply to other Senators. 1t is
put forth as an essential part of his doctrine,
and we are expressly forbidden to suppose that
he means anything contrary to it. In any
study of his doctrine, we must begin here
The following was said in reply to Mr.. Clay,
of Alabama:
'fThe Senator from Alabama asks me wheth-
er the Southern people, under the Constitution,
have not the right to carry their slaves there
answer, yes-the same right that you have
to carry any other property. Then you ask,
have they not right to hold it there when
they get it there? answer, the same right
that you have to hold any other property, sub
ject to such local laws as the local legislature
may constitutionally enact"
Do not overlook the word "constitutionally,"
for it signifies much, in this place.
Mr.. Douglas makes point of saying that
the existence of slavery in a territory may be
discouraged by an omission to make laws in
its favor. He does not undertake to demon
strate this, because it has nothing whatever
to support it, and is contrary to every lesson
afforded by the history of slavery. Cum
ningly used. it may bewilder some minds,
but it is Immediately silenced and set aside
when we turn to facts. bred Scott and his
law and against law. Slavery went to Cali
fornia and existed there without difficulty and
without feeling at all endangered by the want
of local law in its favor. 1t went there in
actual defiance of law and, without the slight
est aid from local enactments, it would have
won supreme control in that region, if the ad-
mission of California as State had been de-
layed two years Slaves, says Mr.. Douglas,
can be held in territory lust as one holds.apY
other r.re.aaItaIn itself in defiance of law. it
certainly cannot find much difficulty where
this doctrine prevails, doctrine that gives il
aid which it never had before.