Mountain Democrat. [volume] (Placerville, El Dorado Co., Cal.) 1854-1860, 1859-06-11
j. n. HAhhHLSON.
Col. B. F. WASHINGTON, San Francisco.
SAN FnANcrsco. Nav %. 1889.

y. II. hAhhALSON.
Col. B. F. WASHINGTON, San Francisco.
SAN FRANCISCO, May %, 1859.
DEAR Sir: Your favor of the 26th inst, Is
hereby acknowledged. You inform me that
ian effort is being made on the part Of our
political enemies to induce the belief that the
Democratic party has departed from the Gin
cinnat plAtform-that 1t has abandoned the
principle of non.intervention, and is pledged
to the enactment Of q slave code for the Ter
ritorics." You also inform me that you are
opposed to non-intervention by Congress
with slavery in the Territories for any such
purpose" and ask my opinion as to "the
proper course to be pursued upon this point
by the Democratic Convention" This is an
important question, and it is with no little
diffidence that proceed to respond to it.
In the first place I admit what our oppo-
nents expend. 80 much effort 10 prove, that
the design of the Nebraska Kansas law was,
thereafter, to exclude the subject Of slavery
in the Territories from the halls Of Congress,
and leave it with the people Immediately in
terested, to regulate in their own way, sub
ject only to the constitution Of the United
States. II there is any Democrat in the State
who understands it differently, have yet to
i
point. It declares that "the legislative pow
er Of the Territory shall extend to all right
ful subjects Of legislation consistent with the
visions Of this act" It moreover defines its
intention to be, mot to legislate slavery into
any State or Territory, nor to exclude it there.
from" So too, the Cincinnati platform lays
it down that non.interference by Congress
with slavery in State and Territory, or in the
District Of Columbia" "is the basis Of the
compromises of 1885, confirmed by both the
Democratic and Wing parties in national con-
ventions-ratified by the people in the elec-
ton of 1852-and rightfully applied to the
organization Of Territories in 1854" When,
where and how has the Democratic party IA.
ken position inconsistent with these princi-
pies? 1t will be answered, no doubt, "In the
debate in the Senate, on the 23d Of February
last, between Messrs. Brown, Douglas and 9th
ers." In the first place, say, Douglas had
as much right to speak for the Democracy as
Brown, and paradOxical as itmay seem, ncith-
or had the slightest. When the Democratic
party desire to lay down principles for lcgis-
lative or partizan action, it IL usually done
with Q little more formality than in running
debate in the Senate, upon an abstract ques-
ton, sprung by mutual understanding be.
tween two Senators, for the purpose Of getting
off prepared sensational speeches for bun
comb.
do not hesitate to say that am opposed
to Congressional intervention with slavery in
the Territories, either for protection or other
wise, am opposed to it because,
First, such legislation Is not demanded by
any existing or probable emergency. In Kan
sas, the only Territory where the friends Of
Intervention could with color Of justice de-
lnand it, its socel status as respects slavery is
definitely settled. Tho sentiment of its peo-
pie is most emphaticAlly against it. For Con.
gress to intervene for its protection by posi-.
tive enactment could result in no possible
good to the south, and at best q most insig
niticant and short lived advantage to the few
holding slaves there. Within brief period
that Territory will enter the Union as free
State, and every slave brought within her bor-
ders will doubtless be enfranchised. What .
folly then would it be for the south, merely to
vindicate an abstrsct right, to demand legisla-
ton which at most could only result to its loss
and disadvantage.
Secondly, because the Democratic party is
solemnly pledged to the doctrine Of non-inter-
ventiOn. l am perfectly aware that there is q
wide distinction between intervention for the
protection Of SIacO property. and intervention
to establish or prohibit slavery. The Kansas
law porceeds upon the latter idea-"it being
the true intent and meaning ofthis act not leg
islate slavery into any State or Territory nor
to arcLUde It thereIrOm." To this extent alone
the Cincinnati Platform pledges the Demo-
cratic party. Upon the power or duty Of the
general government to intervene for the pur-
pose of protecting the citizen in his rights Of
property Ofevery species when they are sought
to be invaded, that platform is properly silent.
The moment the Supreme Court decided that
slaves were property, and that their owners
had the same right to take and hold them in
the Territories as they had in regard to any
other species Of property, the whole question
resolved itself into one simply Of pI Operty.-
As such it is not question Of party doctrine,
or subject to party whim or prejudice. 1t is
one Of natural right and constitutional guaran-
ty. What government will or should do when
these rights in one or another species of prop.
erty, are sought to DO illegally invaded 10 the
Territories, either by partixan Legislatures un-
der form Of law, or marauding associations in
defiance Of law, or fanatical usurpers by claim
Of divine law, It is time enough to determine
when the emergency arisCa
Thirdly, because It would result In farther
agitation Of the slavery question. The Dem
ocratic party is pledged " to resist eli attempts
at renewing, in Congress or out Of It, the agi-
tation Of the slavery question, under ssA0t1Usr
shape or color The attempt may b m0dS." Had
this pledge been adhered to BY the gentlemen
who inaugurated the recent debate in the
Senate an to what Congress might could,
would or should do, 10 this or that contingen-
cy, cannot but think Il would have oondUced
more to their consistency a. Democrats, as
well a. 10 the harmony and welfare Of the par
ty. There is no excuse OF justification, 10 my
opinion, for farther agitation at this time. The
south has every thing that It has . right to
demand. The north has surrendered moth
ing that 1t had right to retain. Our Con-
stitutiOn was framed in compromise and mu-
tuAl concession. 1t is only by compromise
and mutual concession that It can be perpct-
uated as blessing to ourselves and children.