Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1860-08-03
The Consistency of the Douglasites.

The Douglas ticket, with Squatter
Sovereignty head and Slave Code tail, is
a singular combination of political elements
The leaders of that party ignore the fact
that Douglas was compelled to ' crawfsh"
on the question of Non-Intervention be-
fore he could even get nomination at the
hands of the rump of the Democracy left
IN the Convention at Baltimore, after the
secession of the Delegates who subsequent
ly met and nominated Breckenridge. They
advocate his election and claim that he
still stands on the platform of Non-Inter-
vention, when in fact the declaration of
principles enunciated by the convention
that placed him in nomination, is all that
the friends of Slave Code could require,
and repudiates in as plain term, as the En-
gllsh language can express it, the doctrine
of allowing the citizens of territory to
regulate their domestic institutions in their
own way, which up to a recent period has
beensDouglas' great hobby, and upon which
he expected to ride into power. But ia
king these on-Interyentionists at their
own word, let US show their brazen effront-
cry and duplicity by examining for mo-
ment the record of their candidate for the
Vice Presidency, Mr. H. V. johnson. On
the 2Sth day of May 1860, when he had
no idea that his name would ever be flying
as tail to Douglas, Non-Intervention,
SquatterSovereignty kite at the North, he
wrote letter, in which appears the follow
ing paragraphs:
l believe that it is the right of the South to
demand and the duty of Congress to extend
protection to persons and property of every
kind. Including slavery. in the territories du-
ring their territorial state. This is no new
opinion / advocated the doctrine as far back
as 1918. If you have any curiosity to see the
argument, | refer you to my speech ON the Or
egon bill, delivered 7th of July of that year,
and reported in the Congressional Globe. How
unjust therefore are the insinuations with which
you intersperse and interlard your editorial
comments, that all are in favor of Squatter Sow
ereignty, who happen not to agree with the Sc
ceders from the Charleston Convention I re-
pei the insinuation, SO far as it may be intended
to apply to me, come from what quarter it may
and plead my own record in vindication.
There you have Mr.. Johnson's views,
as entertained by him up to so late day
as the 2sth of last May. And yet the
Watertown Democrat, and other papers of
that ilk, howl themselves hoarse in the ad-
vocacy of Douglas and Johnson as Non-In-
terventionists, when their record, as made
up by themselves, shows them to;be as ultra
as the most blood-thirsty advocate of
Slave Code could desire The fact is, they
know that the Democracy lied their way
throug h in the campaign of 1856, having
one Interpretation of their platform for the
North and another for the South; and
they are green enough to think that the
game can be played over again now But,
gentlemen, we give you timely notice that it
will not win. The Popular Sovereignty
dodge has had its day, and the gullibility
of the Free, thinking men of the Nation
cannot be successfully relied upon second
timn