Daily national Democrat., 1859-04-01
peat DEBATE IN THE UNITED
STATES SENATE.
nNpOPULAR SOVEREIONTY
February 23, 1859.
SPEECH OF SENATOR DOUGLAS.

;retop Globe of the lst inst, and occupies
over forty columns of that paper. We pub
lish below the first speech Of Senator Doug
las on that OCCASION in reply to Mr.. Brown,
of Mississippi, the debate having been con-
tinued for some hours afterwards by Messrs
Davis, Green, Mason, Pugh, Doolittle, Hun
fer. Broderick, Stuart, Gwin, Bigler, Hale
Fessenden, Clingman, Smith, Crittenden, and
Douglas:
Mr.. DOUGLAS If no other Northern Dem
oerat desires to be heard on the points pre-
sented by The Senator from Mississippi, feel
it incumbent on me to say something in vim
dicaton Of my own position, reluctant as |
am to occupy time at this stage of the session
in a discussion of this question | admire
the fraukness, candor, and directness with
which that Senator has approached this ques-
ton. No man can accuse him, none suspect
him, of desire "to cheat or be cheated" and
hope that shall be able to put my opin-
ions on the record in a manner that will
acquit me Of the slightest suspicion of desi-
ring to cheat or to he cheated. To a certain
point, that Senator and myself agree Then
there comes a divergence, which grows wider
and wider the further we travel. We agree
that under the decision of the Supreme
Court of the United States, slaves are prop
erty, standing ON an equal footing with all
other property; and that, consequently, the
owner of a slave has the same right to emf
CRATE to territory. and carry his slave prop
ty with him, as the owner of any other spe-
cies of property has &c move there, and carry
his property with him.
Mr. DooLurLE. Will the honorable Sena-
for allow
Mr.. DouGLAs. l am replying to the Sena-
tor from Mississippi now, and would prefer,
therefore, to go on.
Mr.. DooLrTLE. wish to put question
aothe honorable Senator from Illinois on that
point
Mr.. DouGLAs. I desire to deal with his
pont The right of transit to and from the
Territories is the same for one species of prop
erty as it is for all others. Thus far the Sen
ator from Mississippi and myself agree-that
slave property in the Territories stands on an
equal footing with every other species of
property. Now, the question arises, to what
extent is property, slaves included, subject to
he local law of the Territory? Whatever
power the Territorial Legislature has over
other species of property, extends, in my
Judgment, to the same extent, and in like
manner, to the slave property. The Terri
torial Legislature has the same power to leg
islate in respect to slaves that it has in re-
gard to any other property, to the same ex-
tent, and no further. If the Senator wishes
to know what power it has over slaves in
the Territories, | answer, let him tell me
what power it has to legislate over every
other species of property either by encour-
agement or by taxation, or in any other mode
and he has my answer in regard to slave
property.
But the Senator says there is something
peculiar in slave property, requiring further
protection than other species of property
If So it is the misfortune of those who own
that species of property. He tells us that i!
the Territorial Legislature fails to pass a
slave code for the Territories fails to pass
police regulations to protect slave property.
the absence of such legislation practically
excludes slave property as effectuay as a
constitutional prohibition would exclude it
L agree to that proposition. He says, further
more, that it is competent for the Territorial
Legislature, by the exercise of the taxing
power, and other functions within the limits
of the Contribution, TO adopt unfriendly leg
islation which practically drives slavery out
of the Territory. | agree to that PROPOSE
ton. That is Just what said and all said
and Just what meant by my Freeport speech
in Illinois, upon which there has been so
much comment throughout the country.
But the Senator says that while non action
bv the Territorial Legislature excludes slave
ry and while the Territorial Legislature may,
mithin limits of the federal constitution, adopt
such a system of unfliendy Legislation as in
effect to exclude slavery from its limits, vet
tits wrong for the Legislature to pursue that
policy; and, because the Territorial Legisa-
ture ought not to adopt that line of policy,
he will not be content with such legislation,
but will appeal to Congress, and demand
Congressional code of laws protecting slavery
in the Territories, in opposition to the wish
es of the people. Well, sir his conclusion is
logical one unless my position is right
All men must agree that non action by the
Territorial Legislature is practical exclusion.
II the people of a Territory want slavery
they will protect it by slave code. If they
do not want slavery; if they believe it is not
necessary; if they are of opinion that their
Interests do not revuire it, or will be prriu-
diced by it, they will not furnish the neces-
sary remedies and police regulations, usually
called a slave code. for its protection.
The Senator from Mississippi says that they
ought to pass such a code; but he admits that
1t is immaterial to inquire whether they
ought or ought not to do It; for if they do
not want 1t, they will not enact it and if
they do not do it, there is no mode by which
you can compel them to do it, He admits
there Is no compulsory means by which you
can eoerce the Territorial legislature to PASS
such law; and for that reason he insists
that, IN case Of non-action by the Territorial
Legislature, 1t is the right aud duty of South
ern Senators and Representatives to demand
Affirmative action by Congress in the enact
ment OF slave code for the Territories. He
says that it is not necessary to put the ques-
tlon to me, whether | would vote for Con
gresslonal slave code. He desires to know
0t all Northern Democrats what they will
90; he does not wish an answer from me. |
am much obliged to him for taking it for
granted, from my past record, that | never
would vote for slave code in the Territories
oy Congress and have vet to learn that
there is a man in free State of this Union,
'ot any party, who would.
Mr. MASON. viii the Senator be kind
code2
,,n Mt DOUGLAS. Yes, sir. The Senator from
mississippi defined it very well in his speech
LIS PT9i'ioh was, that while the Constitution
gave nun the right of protection in a Terri
Cory Ior ms save property, it did not, of it
sen, lurhish adequate protection. He drew
distinction between the right and tho f,ot
and said that the protection could nnl,i ~ w.
furnished by legislation; that legisloton
could only come from one of two sonroos
the Territorial Legislature or the Cnn@ros.
of the United States. lie would look to tho
Territorial Legislature in the first instance
Ii he got adequate legislation there he was
content; but if the Territorial Legislature
failed to act and give him that adequate leg