Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1860-11-07
THE NORTH CAROLINA STANDARD:
For the Standard.

For the Standard.
Mr.. HOLDEN: would thank you to publish the
following extract from the proceedings in the House
of Representatives of May the 20th and found re-
ported in the washington Union, May '2lst, 1854,
pending the passage of the Kansas Nebraska bill:
"Mr. Mace moved an amendment the effect of
which would be to give the Territorial Government
power to admit or exclude slavery at any time.
Mr.. English asked the gentleman whether he
would vote for the bill if that amendment was
adopted
Mr.. Mace. will 5,a' .-'@ ...
/ Mr.. English. Then will vote for it.
The amendment was rejected-Ayes rs, Noes 81.
Mr.. Parker proposed to amend the LIST section so
as to alter the boundary of Kansas, with view OF
encouraging large emigration there, so as to pre-
vent the admission of slavery.
Mr.. Breckenridge opposed the amendment; which
was rejected-Ayes 66, Noes So.
Mr.. Flagler moved to amend, by adding pro-
viso that the act should not take effect until the IT,
ties of Indians shall have been cxtnguished
Mr.. Hamilton offered the amendment; which was
rejected-Aycs 63, Noes "a.
Mr.. Fuller moved to amend the bill, so as to allow
the Territorial Legislature the power to establish or
exclude slavery, as to them should seem proper.
As National Democrat he said he should like to
vote for the bil and if this amendment were adopt
ed he should do so; if it were not, he should not,
as at present advised. In the spirit of kindness he
asked his friends who stood by him in the thirty
lrst Congress to yield little to Northern feeling
on this question.
Mr.. Riddle was opposed to the amendment; which
was rejected-Ayes rs, Noes o."
You will perceive that two efforts were made to
incorporate in the bill the right Of the Legislature
of the territorial Government to establish or ex-
clude slavery, and both voted down. The bill was
not amended in any way after the proceedings re-
ported above. No friend of Squatter Territorial
Sovereignty intn,ated, pending the discussions on
the bill, that the doctrine was already there; and
the two individuals who proposed it voted against
the bill on its final passage, and alleged they would
vote for it if it was inserted What now becomes
of Mr. Douglas assertion that the bill contains the
principle or doctrine now contended for by him
Refer to the Congressional Globe, where you will
I find all the proceedings on the Kansas Nebraska
bill.
If Mr.. Douglas, and those gentlemen in Congress
from the North who voted for the bill organizing
the Missouri restriction was repealed, did so, as is
now alleged that south of 80 deg. 80 min. would
thereby be opened to emigration, which could in
its first territorial legislature exclude slavery from
the country, they have practiced fraud upon the
South more infamous than the Wilmot Proviso.
The men who for the Wimot Proviso at the
North are now abolitlonsts, and those who recog-
nizc the doctrine of Squatter Territorial sover-
eighty will be restrctionists, through the common
agent, the Federal Government, Tomorrow. The
security of the South and might say the only Sc
curity Of the South is in strict construction Of
the Constitution; and with no political organ,za-
ton should he hold fellowship that do, not recog.
nize in its fullest and most comprehensive sense the
obligations of that doctrine ID.
Warren Co., Oct 26, 1860.