The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1860-05-23
Douglas Late Speech.

Douglas Late Speech. :
The following is the telegraphic abstract !
Of the Speech delivered by Douglas, on |
Tuesday, in reply to JEFF Davis:
Mr.. Douglas said he had no taste for discus Q
sion as to the personal or political position of
any Senator. He had no assault to make on
any one, and no impeachment of any ones
record He did, however, complain of the
speech of the Senator from Mississippi, ar
raigning his conduct. 1t would be necessary
to refer to that Senator's course in order to
explain his own, and he would take as his text
certain extracts from the speech of Mr.. Davis,
which he caused to be read.
Mr.. Douglas said the extracts had conclu-
sively showed that the doctrine of popular
sovereignty did not originate with him. 1t
was presented in 1s4S, with General Cass as
the nominee, on the basis of fnon-intervention.
1t entered into the compromise measures of
1850, was reafirmed in the platform of 1852,
and in the Nebraska bill of 1854. He then
showed that it was contain ed in General Cass'
Nicholson letter. which, prior to its pUblica-
ton, was shown around among Southern and
Northwestern Senators, and was indorsed by |
Southern and other Senators, who were now
opposed to him. He read Dickinson's resolu-
tions offered during the pending of the ques-
tion, to show that he recognized the doctrine. !
He was not aware that either Dickinson or
Cass had modified their views, yet his record
was held up as though he stood alone, a here
tic then, hereto now, and unworthy of rec9g-
milton in the Democratic family. He cited
resolutions of the Legislature of Florida of
l847, to show that the doctrine of non-inter-
vention was not then deemed political heresy,
also resolutions at Miliedgevilie, Ga, in 1s47,
and afterward adopted by several Southern
Conventions, opposing all legislation by Con-
gress on slavery in the Territories.
He remarked that many gentlemen who
then approved of these resolutions, were now
conscientiously opposed to them. II he could
forgive them for their charge, they ought to-
be willing to forgive him for adherence to his
own principles. H aH rsa
/ Gen. Cass on the fourth ballot had "a South
ern votes. Even South Carolina, when she
found she could not elect her own favorite,
yielded to the voice of the majority, and gave
her adhesion to the champion of Squatter|
Sovereignty. The next day the platform was
adopted declaring against Congressional inter
vention, and that interference by Abolitionists
or others was dangerous. What others! Why
those who now want slave code. They were
then classed by the Democratic Convention as
bad Abolitionists.
On the succeeding day Yancey brought in
report, protesting against the action of the
Convention for recognizing the power of the
Territories on the subject of slavery, which
was identical with the views which caused his
withdrawal from the Charleston Convention.
He meant no disrepect to Mr.. Yancey. They
had personal relations of the kindest charac-
ter. He admired the candor and consistency
with which he expressed his views, but shrunk
lot ~1xx l1oru
their adoption.
Mr.. Yancey's report was rejected by ayes
So, nays 2l6. Among the nays were Della
ware 3, Maryland 6, Virginia II, North Caro-
lima IL, Mississippi 6, Louisiana 6, Texas 4,
Tennessee IL and Kentucky IL, many of which
J have now withdrawn from Charleston, because
this doctrine was not incorporated in the plat
form.
He left the people to decide who had chang
ed He thought he had conclusiyely proved
that the Democrats proclaimed the doctrine of
non-intervention in 1S48, The Senator from
Mississippi was one of the few who refused to
acquiesce. He opposed the doctrines, but sup
lported the Squatter- Sovereignty nominee.
Mr.. Douglas next showed that the princi-
lple was incorporated in the Compromise Meas
ures Of 1850, and that Clay and Cass asserted
the power of the people of the Territories
over the question Of slavery. He also read
from his own speeches to show his position
was the same then as now. The Senator's
(from MississippD appeal to the people was
unsuccessful. Mississippi elected Foote Gov.
ernor. In Alabama the result was the same,
and Yancey and his colleagues were told that
' the State had respect for the laws. Georgia
sustained the doctrine of non-intervention by
wenty-one thousand majority. The seces-
sioEists were obliged to become submission
i lists; and in South Carolina your Rhe:ts & Co.
were put down by the Union men.
Mr.. Douglas said that the Democracy par
doned Mr.. Davis on the ground of his acqui-
escence in the Compromise Measures, and he
granted him quarter.
4 Mr.. Davis, with intense feeling-aI scorn
your quarter" saifigs ia osauH %#tg9
Mr.. Douglas-"Yes, as scorned yours the
other day" He thought it strange that those
who had been forgiven should now undertake
to prescribe the Democracy. He had no inten-
Ftion to prescribe those who entered into their
organization, and were willing to support the
regular nominees. He then took up the Kan
sas- Nebraska Bill to show that the same doc
trine of non Intervention entered into that,
and read resolutions of the Georgia Legisla-
ture Of 1854, after its passage, to snow that
the country understood that measure as he did.
, The House of Representatives understood it
, in the same way, and Mr.. Richardson, who re-
ported the bill. was made Democratic candi-
date for Speaker at the next session. He be-
Ilieved that he was as sound on the question as
} Mr.. Richardson. Who had changed since
, then? Was it hei If Southern men had chang
ed their minds, he had no fault to find; but il
they havehdon SO, they ought honestly to
avow it. If he could forgive them for changing
could they not'be magnanimous enough to for.
: give him for adheriug to- their former doc
trines? He did not believe that the Alabams
Democracy would follow the lead of Mr. Yam.
cey any more than they did in 1s4S.
Mr.. Douglas, being exhausted, gave way tc
an Adjournment.