The Shasta courier., 1860-04-14
Remarks of Mr.. Douglas In Reply to
Stewards Speech.

tnC OCudlOT HOiu VIEW OTk contained an as |
sault upon the Democratic party, especially in
relation to the kansas-Nebraska Bill of which |
be (Mr. Douglas) was the author. 1t becomes
fashionable, said he, now for each gentleman
who makes speech against the Democratic |
party to refer to Kansas as the cause of all the |
disturbances which have since ensued. The |
Senator from New York talks about that Act |
re-opening the controversy, and about the repeal |
of the Missouri Compromise. Sir, wherein con-
sisted the necessity for the repeal of that Act |
except it was that the majority in northern States
refused to carry it out in good faith !, sir, |
stood willing to extend it to the Pacific ocean,
to abide by it forever, and the entire South |
without any exception in this body, was willing !
thus to abb by it. Sir, the Freesoil element |
of the Northern States so strong as to defeat
that measure, and thus opened the slavery ques-
tion anew. Those men who now complain of
the abrogation of that Act were the very men |
who denounced it. All were willing to abide by |
it SO long AS it stood upon the statute books,
and we were trying to carry it out. Sir, it was
the defeat of the bill to extend the Missouri Com
promise to the Pacific, in the House of Repre-
sentatiyes, after it passed the Senate, that OPEN
ed the controversy of 1850, which was termina-
ted in the establishment of the measure of that
year. The compromise measures of that year
were carried over the heads of the Senator from
New York and his associates; but in 1852 the
Senator's party agreed to abide by the measures
of 1850. In 1854 the Kansas Nebraska Act was
passed, to carry out the principles of those
sures. He was not willing to sit still and hear
himself charged with responsibility for the agi-
tation which belonged to the Senator and his
associates The present agitation resulted from
the resistance of that party to the measures ap-
proved by the people in two Presidential cleo
tions. But the Senator from New York went
further, and his doctrine was that the Declara-
ton of Independence asserted the equality of the
negro race, and therefore all laws in violation Of
that idea were not to be observed For himself
he thought four years ago the Senator declared
that the Declaration of Independence intended
to recognize the negro and white man as equals
under the Divine law, and hence that all provi-
| sions of the Constitution of the United States
which recognizes slavery were in violation Of
the Divine law. In other words it was an argu-
ment against the Constitution of the United
States, on the ground that it was contrary to the
law of God. The Senator from New York had
long held that doctrine, and proclaimed it in
speech which he made in Ohio in lS4S, that the
! Constitution of the United States was in viola
tion of the Divine law, and therefore not to be
obeyed. 1t has been the doctrine of the Sena-
tor for four years, and he had not heard it in the
Senate to-day for the first time He had met it
in his own State for the last ten years. The
Senator from New York says, in this very
speech, New York is yet slave State not that
she has slave within her limits, but because
the Constitution of New York did not allow a
negro to vote on equality with white men. For
that reason New York, he said, was slave State;
and for that reason every other State that dis
eliminates between the negro and the white man
was slave State. Notwithstanding that the
Senator, with the leading men of his party, was
committed to these doctrines, he argued that
fIo.u .lnro
white man. He desired to see gentlemen carry
out their principles to their logical conclusion
If they persisted in the declaration that the me-
gro is made the equal of the white man, then
let them carry out their doctrine by comforting
upon them all the rights Of citizenship exercised
by white men. For himself he thought the
Declaration of independence only referredto the
white race. If the Senator had correctly inter-
preted that instrument the sgners should have
Immediately emancipated their slaves; but they
did not do so. He thought this government was
made by white men and for the benefit of white
men.
Mr.. Doolttle (Rep.) J, of Wisconsin, asked why
not, then, give the Territories to white men?
Mr.. Douglas replied, that he would throw them
open to white men and negroes too, but he
wanted white men to organize them. If they
wanted slavery let them have it. 1t was their
business and not his. 1t was a question of po-
litical economy and self-interest. The Senator
from New York coined new definition of i" Ia
Dor States, and capital States" 1t took him
coed many years to coin these terms and bring
them into use. Something had occurred up in
New England to induce him to bring out these
| terms and take sides with numerous class of
voters. Strikes had occurred at the North among
| starving workmen, because the doctrine of the
"irrepressible conflict had driven off Southern
business. The senator had sought to place him.
self OF the side of the shoemakers. The work.
ingmen knew this very well, and they also knew
why so many Southern orders were not received
| as formerly.
Mr. Clark (Rep.l, of New Hampshire, said he
came from manufacturing town of 3 900 oper-
atiyes, but business was never better there than
now, and the workmen were never better con-
| tented.
Mr.. Douglas replied that there was no other
cause for the strike at Lynn and other places
| than the withdrawal of the Southern trade. The
| strike resulted from the general prevalence of
| the same feeling which induced the Senator
from Virginia to appear in homespun. He (Mr
Douglas) satisfied with the application of
" Popular Sovereignty" both in New Mexico and
kansas-one instituted slavery and the other
excluded it. He was satisfied with both. He
| would not vote for the repeal of the slave code
In New Mexico or force slarery on Kansas. Why
| ''os s.'S itSP"oiiS"u party start " Naiiy Out
their principles2 Why do they not bring in bills
to abolish those "twin relics of barbarism-sla-
very and polygamy 2" The Senator from New
York said they had no measure to propose
What, then, became of their pedges2 They
were afraid to make the attempt to carry out
their measures, as they did not want to drive off
the conservative men until after the election. In
the event of the Senator from New York being
elected President, let US see What he proposes
In speech made in Ohio he said "Slavery can
be limited to its present boundaries-it can be
| ameiorated-itc can nd must be abolished-and
you and must do it," Without such avowas
as this the Abolition wing of the party could
not be retained But they say that they propose
to do it all under the Constitution-that they
will carry out the Constitution, except that part
which is not comfortable to the law of God,
and they decide the question I" what is the law
of God" If the Constitution were violative OF
the law of God, he did not see how, in con-
science, they could take the oath to support it,
when the Senator devoted third of his speech
to very beutiful homily on the glories Of our
Constitution.
All that he has sad or that any man has
said, about this glorious Union, fully endorse
l am glad to say that the Union is glorious only