The Placer herald., 1860-10-20
From the N Y. Day Book.
THE TREASON OF
Stephen Arnold Douglas.


FELLOW CrrIzrNs:-Thc writer of this was Ions
political admirer of Stephen A. Douglas. lie
was slow to believe that he could ever prove rec
reant to the Democratic party, or false to Dem
ocratic principles. But he has been luctantly
compelled to acknowledge both. Aye, more; he
has been compelled to believe, from irreiragablt
evidence that Stephen A. Douglas has not only
refused to support Democratic principles, but
that he has formed q conspiracy uiH the Biach
RepubhcdnS. the open and avowed enemies Of
the Constitution, in order. like the Benedict
Arnold, to wickedly crafty u revengeful ambi
tion. He will prove this by what follows. and
will not deal in assertions, but go directly to
facts that are undcniablc. and stand uncontra
dicted.
Previous to commencing the writer begs to
say, that he has no particular friendship for Mr.
Buchanan. He never received favor from his
hands, that ne is aware of This much the wri-
ter begs to say, lest his opposition to Mr.. Doug
! las mi ght be supposed, as much is charged, to
originate from the fay ort, Of Mr.. Buchanan.
In this case, at least, 1t surely does not. The
writer is not an oilice-holder, and never expects
to be; but simple citizen and voter, and anx-
| ious 10 see right princ{ples successful, and the
Constitution and the Union perpctuated
THE ORIGIN OF DEMOCRATIC TROUBLES.
In 1854 Mr.. Douglas brought in his bills to or
ganize the territories of Kansas and Nebra> ka.
Stripped of all its vcrbiage. there was among
point wherein they differed; and that was this.
At ohat time can Mepeopie Of a TERRITORY de-
eide the question Of the existence Of negro 'sia
Uery' among Hem? Ill agreed t.ey had the
power TO do so when they formed State Con-
stituton. Some contended they could do it be-
fore. None claimed that Congress had the
power to do it. Mr.. Douglas LETT this point I'M
decided in his bill, on the agreement that it was
a judicial question, and should be left to the
courts-dU Democrats agreeing TO be bound by
the decision. 1t was considered a question that
ought not to divid the Democratic party, and
the Supreme Court was chosen as the umpire.
The Supreme Court has decided the question
Lawyers may quibblc and split hairs about
obiter dictu. but such langua ge as the following
is too plain to admit of doubt:
1.-The right Of property in slave is distinctly
and ezpressedly affirmed in the G, nstitution,"
and mo tribunal acting undtr the authority of
the United States whether it be legislative. eX
ccutyc, or judicial, has light to draw distinc-
tion or to deny to it the benefit of the provis-
ions and guarantees. which have been provided
for the protection of private property"
And If Congress itself cannot do ths-il it
is beyond the power conferred on the Federal
Government-it couid not authorize Terriior-
iai Government to exercise Mtm II couid con-
fer no more on ana {0cal Government establish
Ell By its authority, to ciolatc the principies Of
the Constitutions" "INe onIy pO,cu conferred
IS the pouer. coup'ed mith The duty,V guard
ing ond protecting the 0cner IN has right"
Supreme Court. U. S.
Mr. D ougas refused to be bound by this de-
cision, for he has repudiatcd it in Just so many
words. Here they arc:
THE people of Territory can. by lawful
means, exclude. slavery dsfore it comes in as
State;" and mo matter achat may be the decision
Of the Supreme court on that abstract question,
still the right Of the people of the Territories to
make slave Territory ora free Territory, is
At this point the write. Of this parted reluc-
family, but detcrminedy parted. with Stephen
A. Douglas. When he read that sentence in
his Frecport speech he said. the die is cast,
Douglas has really resolved not only to abandon
the Democratic party in order to concilate the
free soiers of Illinois, but what is worse, he
has trampled upon his own agreement time after
time publicly announced in the United States
Senate-he has f,lsifcd his words not to be
trusted-in ord he has led before high Heav-
and the great American people. And this day
this foul stigma is branded upon the forehead of
Stephen .dynold Douglas. This. | am aware is
harsh language, but it is the truth, not |, that
makes it harsh.
Here then is the point where S. A. Douglas
broke off from the Democratic party. His Lc-
compton course could have been pardoned, but
his solemn reputation of his U0rd forfeited his
honor. and when that is lost in public man all
is lost And he seems to have felt it and delib-
cratey made up his m nd to stand the conse-
uuences for he made all sorts of arrangements
and coalitions with the Black Republicans, both
before and after this dark and damning event in
his political life. as shall now proceed to show.
DOUGLAS AND HORACE GREELEY
On the 18th Of March 1860 the Hon. VIM.
Kellogg of Illinois made speech in the House
of Representatives, showing that Horace Greeley
who had been attacking him (KcllOgg) had in
1858, in the campa On in Illinois, used his infu-
fort tbnp Ipc nt Ioc tn thn ntOr-
ship and that other iicpublcans had do.le the
same thing. The speech was not aimed at Mr..
Douglas directly, but his course was necessarily
brought out. The charge made by Mr.. Kellogg
was:
"That Mr.. Greeley was. again and again, with
Others in consultation in the parlor of Judge Dol-
glas planning and schcming The election ofJud9e
Douglas TO the Senate of the United States from
the State of Illinois,
In support of this Mr. Kellogg presented 4 let
ter IL, dressed to him by Greeley himself, in
which the admission is made as follows:
Senator Douglas and | have been acquainted
for ten years or more. during which time each
has given and taken hard blows, but | trust no
foul ones. am willing to call the account bal
anced if he is. Once only in our lives did we
agree on a political question that of resisting
the attempt to force an abhorred Con- titutlon
on the people of Kansas. During the struggle
on that point | was called to Washington, and
went to his house, where we had tW0 conrersd-
tions on pending topics."
What these conversations were, Greeley does
not say, but it is enough to damage forever the
character of any Democrat, and afix foul blot,
never to be washed out, that he ever was in po-
itical consultation with such an open traitor to
his country as Horace Greeley, and who has ut
tered such sentiments as these:
ABoLrsn1NG SLAVERY IN THE STATES.
Admit that Abolition in the States is what all
men ought to strive for, and it is clear to our
mind that large majority are not prepared for
this and the practical question is ths-shall we
politically attempt what will certainly inrolce
as in defeat and failure? or shall we not rather
attempt that which WE ARE ripe for, and thus, by
our consequent triumph, INVITE THAT MAJORITY
LII Incl an La III