The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-06-01

or others. They did not regard the inter-
ventionist then any better than an Adolf
zionist. Southern interventionists and
Northern interventionists, by the fair in
tendment of that platform, were on an
equality.
YANCEY WANTED A SLAVE CODE IN 1848.
After that Platform was adopted, Mr..
Yancey, of Alabama, felt it to be his duty
to record his solemn protest against this
dangerous heresy of the territorial legisa-
lures deciding on the slavery question. He
came into the convention the next day, May
rs, with an elaborate report against this
dogma, this heresy promulgate by General
Cass in his Nicholson letter, signed by VIM.
L. Yancey, of Alabama, j ohm G. McGehee,
of Florida, and j. NJ. Commander of South
Carolina, accompanied with resolution. l
shall ask the Senate to listen patiently to
the entire report of Mr.. Yancey upon that
occasion, for it embraces every thought, ev-
cry idea, every principle, every pretext as.
signed at Charleston for withdrawing from
the recent convention. In order that I may
do Mr.. Yancey full justice, l shall ask the
Senate to listen to the entire report, the res
olution, and the vote thereon. It is only one
column Of Niles Register. may here be per-
mitted to remark that, by anything 1 have
said, or may say of him here, 1 mean no
personal disrespect to Mr.. Yancey. We
are old personal friends. We met as MEM
bers of Congress seventeen years ago. Our
social relations have always been uninter-
rupted. have as much admiration as any
man living for his brilliant, his surprising
ability, for his great social qualities, and for
the holiness and the nerve with which he
avows his principles and follows them to
their logical consequences; although shrink
with horror from the consequences to which
his principles would lead this republic.
[Mr. PUGH here read YANcEY's report, which
IN explicit terms denounces non. Intervention,
and demands protection for slave property in
the territories.]
Mr.. Douglas-It will be observed that, in
that report, Mr.. Yancey embodied the whole
argument in favor of Intervention for pro>
lection, or for any other purpose, which we
have heard repeated over and over again for
so many years. doubt whether any Sen
ator can take his own speech and fund any
one idea or argument in favor of that doc
trine which is not embodied in the report of
Mr. Yancey. The first statement there is,
that it is understood that Gen. Cass, the
nominee, holds that territorial legislature
may exclude slavery from the territory. 1t
was not denied that Gen. Cass held that
doctrine. 1t was known that be did and
he was nominated because he did hold the
doctrine that the people of territory might
either introduce or exclude, protect or pro
hibit slavery at pleasure. For that reason,
Mr.. Yancey and bis two colleagues on the
committee proceeded to put their protest on
record. The argument of the equality of the
states, of which we have heard so much, was
urged. The other argument that the terri
tories are the common property, and, there,
fore, should be open to all the citizens, in>
dependent of local authority, was used. The
argument that it is not creditabIe to the
Democratic party to 60 before the country
lodging the question of the rights of the
South in the territories was brought for
ward. 1t says that the convention, in the
platform, had refused to express an opinion
on the question whether the territorial leg
islature could prohibit slavery or not; that
it was not creditable to them to avoid ex-
pressing an opinion on the point that it
convicted the Democratic party of double.
dealing in the manner that they charged up
on the Wings, and that what rendered it nee.
essary to have an expression of opinion on
that point, was, that the candidate held that
aterritorial legislature could exclude slavery.
Then he concludes with resolution, which
is very adroitly written, know, but, taken
in connection with the report, has a clear
Specification, in harmony with the report.
That the doctrine of non.interference with
the rights of property of any portion of the
people of this confederation, be it in the states
or in the territories, by any other than the par
ties interested in them, is the true republican
doctrine recognized by this body.
That is, nobody but the owner of the
slave must interfere with his right to hold
him. Neither Congress nor a territorial
legislature must interfere with the rights of
the Shareholder in the territories to manage
and control his slaves. That was the pro
position Mr.. Yancey presented 1t was
submitted to the convention-falrly and
boldly met and 1 will read the vote in the
convention, by States, rejecting Mr.. Yam
Wy ANPOAC ouu ACSOiutiOu. L dUCcy
inforced his report with speech, which is
here reported, but which is too long to quote,
and then concluded
now close by offering the resolution as an
amendment to the report of the committee.
The question was taken on Mr.. Yanceys
resolution, and it was, by States, rejected-36
to ZIG, as follows:
YEAs-Maryland. l; South Carolina, 9; Geor.
gia, 9; Florida, 3; Alabama, 9; Arkansas. 8;
Tennessee, l; Kentucky, 1-36.
NAYs-Maine, 9; New Hampshire, 6; Massa.
chusetts, IL: Vermont, g. Rhode Island, 4; Con.
necticut, 6; New Jersey, Z; New York; Penn.
sylvania, rs; Delaware, 3; Maryland, 6; Vir-
ginia, II; North Carolina, IL; Mississippi, 6;
Louisiana, 6; Texas, 4; Tennessee, IL; Ken.
lucky, II; Ohio, %; Indiana, II; Illinois, 8;
Michigan. 5; Iowa, 4; Missouri, Z; Wisconsin,
4-2l6.
Here we find Virginia, North Carolina,
Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri, voting
against the incorporation of the doctrine of
Intervention for the protection of slavery
into the platform. They voted against the
doctrine of Mr.. Yancey's report and resolu
ton. Those States then had the opportu~
nifty of affirming this doctrine, ifthey thought
it ought to be any portion of the Democratic
creed. Not only the States 1 have named
the border States-voted that way, but
you will find voting against this doctrine,
Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas-the very
States that have now seceeded from the
Charleston convention, for the reason that
L