The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1859-05-19
MEssRs. DOUGLAS AND FoRNEY.

The Philadelphia Press, edited by COL For
ney, speaks complainingly of the fact that the
Washington States is called the organ of Mr..
Douglas In that paper of a recent date we find
the following essay to exculpate Mr.. Douglas
from the imputation:
"THE DIFFEREsCE.-The Washington States,
which is called by the Administration papers,
for their own purposes, the organ of Judge
Douglas, and which has taken some pains to
do injustice to the States Rights Democracy of
Pennsylvania, defines its position, as to the
doctrine of non-intervention, as follows We
have repudated the doctrine of squatter sover-
eignty We have denied authority to the Ter
ritorial Governments to abolish or in any way
impair the security of slave property. On the
contrary, we have maintained it to be the duty
of the local Legislatures to supply every requl-
site guaranty for the peaceful possession of this
property. The non-ntervention for which we
contend is simply the abstioence of Congress
errlcres. fEe policy Ne % ID PURSUE sRf
ance of the principle of the Kansas Nebraska
act, and in obedience to the injunction of the
Cincinnati platform. We differ lcih Judge
Douglas an his conception Of Territorial polOer,
and zoe haze been at no pains TO conceal our DIS
sent We agree uoith him only an tie policy Of
Congressional 1lOIt-lnteTUefltIOR.
The Press thinks this definition of its posi-
ton by the States conclusive that ii cannot be
the organ of Mr.. douglas. But the difference
as very trifing, and it is just what ought to be
expected from Southern supporter of the Hi
nois Senator. 1t would be impracticable to
maintain, in Southern Democratic news
paper, that the people of Territory may ex-
clude Slavery by unfriendly legislation and
Mr.. Douglas himself, while insisting on this
meagre sort of popular sovereignty, admits that
it is inconsistent with the constitutional rights
of the Shareholders, as expounded by the bred
Scott decision. He fully endorses that decis-
ION, which etiectually nullifes the Anti.Slavery
enactments of the Territorial Legislatures So
that his difference with the States is a mere
pretence, set up in order to satisfy the conflict
ing prejudices of his Northern and Southern
friends.
As proof that Mr. Douglas regards the diff
ference between his own position and that of
the States as immaterial, we may cite the fact.
heretofore noted, that he has sent abroad cir
cular letters urging his frinds TO sustain that
party, Presidential aspirant of first-rate pre-
tensions, makes such efforts, solitary and
alone" to build up newspaper at the seat of
Government, it is the way of the world to STYLE
the paper thus founded his organ. Can the
editor of the Press produce a circular letter
from Judge Douglas, recommending his paper
10 the support of the public? We doubt it.
Mr.. Douglas would not now be willing to have
the South think that he takes so much interest
IN the maintenance of Northern journal such
as the Press; but he braves Northern opinion
by giving his name and influence to the sup
port of the Washington States, paper of ultra
Southern views-a paper which insists that the
Constitution carries Slavery into every foot OF
the public domain, and keeps it there in
spite of the people who may inhabit it, and
which declares that the South has right tc
demand the repeal of the laws which prohibi
the slave trade.