Daily national Democrat., 1859-05-13
They Abandon their Ground.


q" In tho judgment of your committee, these
measures Compromise measures of $500 were
intended to have far more comprehensive aud
enduring effect than the mere adjustment Of the
difficulties arising out Of the recent acquisition Of
Mexican territory. They were designed to estab-
lish certain great principles which would not only
furnish adequate remedies for existing evils, but
IN ALL TIME To COME avoid the peris OF a similar
agitation, by '0third'0iag the question Of slavery
from tie LLiIls Of Compress and the political arena,
and committing it to the arbitrament of those who
were Immediately interested in and alone respon-
sible for its consequences
This was Henry Clay's view of those Com
promise measures lie emphatically express
ed himself in favor of allowing the people to
manage this question for themselves and OF
taking it out of the hands Of Congress alto
gethcr.
Mr.. Douglas said at the close of the debate
on those measures:
"Mr. President as there has been so much mis-
representation upon this point, must be permit
ted TO repeat that the doctrine OF the report OF the
committee, as has been conelusNey p'o'eu W
these extracts is
"First that the whole question of slavery
should be aoithdrapa from tho HlHs Of Congress
and the political arena, and committed to the ar
btrament of those who are Immediately interes-
ted in and alone responsible for its existence.
"Second In applying this principle to the Ter
rit0ries and the new States to be formed theretom
all questions pertaining to slavery aCere to be re-
ferred 10 tie psopLe residing therein"
What could be clearer? The question was
to be withdrawn from the halls of Congress
The people were to decide for Themselves
This was the Interpretation given to the bill
by the distinguished author of it himself, at
the time it was introduced. Who has chan
ged, Douglas or Davis and Brown?
The Chairman of the Committee on Terri
tories in the House of Representatives, the
Hon. VIM. A. Richardson, understood the
Kansas N ebraska Bill in the same way. lie
said, after the enactment of the bill
| The Constitution does not, in my opinion, carry
the institutions of any of the states into any OF
the territories: but it affords the same protection
there to the institutions of one state as Of another
The citizen of Virginia is as much entitled IN the
common Territory to the protection of his prop
erty under the Constitution as the citizen of Hi
nois; but both are dependent upon tie iegiSsdt50a
0fthe teyyit0riaL 0OGeFnnsRt for laws to protect
their property of whatever kind it may be. Thus
it will be seen that though there may be upon this
point difference MISUNDERSTANDING ques-
tons for judicial deciSion-yet, there is none
practically among the friends of n0N-iatergenti0A
Jy Congress- as the practical result is to place the
decision of the questions IN the hands Of those
who are most deeply interested in its sOlu-
tion namely THE PEOPLE OF THE TERRITORIES, who
have made it their home and whose interests are
the most deeply involved in the character Of the
institutions under which they are to live
Thus we have the concurrent declarations Of
the chairmen oftho committees on Territories,
who reported the Kansas Nebraska Bill, both
in the Senate and in the House. that the true
of the bill is that the question
of slavery is taken entirely out of the hands
of Congress and left with the Territorial Leg
lature
Hon. Lewis Cass, present Secretary Of State
under Mr. Buchanan, took the same view of
it, understood it in the same way, and so de-
clared himself in the debate on the question
on the goth of May, 1854.
Hon. Isaac Toucey, now Secretary of the
Navy, declared, the Interpretation of that bill
as follows:
"The original act recognizes as in the Terrific
ridl Legislature, all the power which they can
have subject to the Constitution and subject to
the organic law Of the territory. There Is no am
biguty. 1t Is as explicit as language can make
it. The only doubt which arises is as to the
meaning of the Constitution. That we cannot
define thatis question exclusively for the judi
cial tribunals"
Precisely the present and past doctrine of
Stephen A. Douglas The Supreme Court
must decide as to tie meaning of the Consti
tuition, not Congress.
Howell Cobb, of Georgia, present Secreta-
ry of the Treasury, was equally explicit on
the subject. lie said to the people of West
chester, Pennsylvania in a public speech,
which was extensively circulated:
"The Government of the United States should
not force the institution of slavery upon the peo-
pie either of the Territories OF Of States against
the aOW of the people, though my voice could
bring 1t about. l stand upon the principle-the
people of my State decide It for themselves, you
for yourselves, the people of Kansas for them
selves. (Applause.) That is the Constitution and
stand by it."
Further on he said in the same speech;
Those who hold that the Territorial Legisa-
ture cannot pass q law prohibiting StGre'y, admit
that unless they pass laws for its prtecton, slave
| ry Will not 60 there. Therefore, practically ma
jority of the people represented in the Territorial
Legislature decides the question. Whether they
decide 1t by prohibiting it. according to the one
doctrine, or by refusing to pass laws to protect it.
as contended for by the other party, is immateri
al. The majority Of the people by the action o
the Territorial Legislature will decide the ques
ton; and all must a6jde the decision they make"
Precisely the doctrine of Douglass Free
port speech How much more will the Le-
comptonites stutify themselves, the unblush-
ing hypocrites?
Hon. John c. Breckenridge, now Vice Pre-
sident of the United States, understood tn
bill in the same way. lie said, on March 23d
1854, in the House of Representatives
"But if nonintervention by Congress be tn
principle that underes the compromise of 1856
then the prohibition of 1920, being inconsisten
with the principle, should be removed, and pei
| feet a-iRterCenti0B thus be established by law.
among the many Misrepresentation sent :
the country by some of the enemies of this bill
perhaps none is more fragrant than the charg
that ii proposes kgislate sLaUory into Kansas an,
Nebraska. The right to establish involves tn
co-relative right to prohibit, and denying both,
wonld vote for neither"
Hon. James L. Orr, Speaker of the Hous
of Representative, said in reference to thi
bill:
''The great and leading feature in that bill was
totrq@9er the legislation and power Of Congress:
on slavery, and all other subjects, 10 tie terrific
rae 'eg'Statures, and let the popular will there
shape and form the laws for their own government
without restriction save the proviso that such leg
lslauon should be consistent with the Constitution
and general laws of the Union"
Further on he says:
"The great point upon which the Democratic
party at Cincinnati rested, was, that the govern.
e. -. "A. : L Il