The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1860-08-02
DOUGLAS AND HIS RECORD.
From the Toledo BLADE1

nIoLu lHc IOleuO BLADE.
Now that Stephen A. Douglas has
completely boxed the compass on the
question Of slavery in the territories, we
propose briefly to trace his tortuous
course, and from his own record to show
the utter heartlessness Of all his pro tess
ions OF principle in that connection. OF
all the demagogues that have gained a
national reputation, we think we shall
show him to be the most unscrupulous
and barefaced. We propose to take
four distinct views OF him-1st as a
Congressional Interventionist ssagainst
Slavery in the Territories Cd, as a
Non Interventionist, or advocate OF
Squatter Sovereignty; Sd, as defend.
er OF the 'Irrepressible conflict; " and
4th as a Congressional Interventionist
for Slavery in the Territories.
lsT DOUGLAS AS AN INTERvENTIoN1sT
AGAINST SLAVERY.
In l845, December 20, while Joint
resolution was pending,presentee by Mr.
Brown, Of Tennessee, for the admission
of Texas into the Union, Mr.. Douglas
offered the following amendment:
8 And in such State or States as may be form
ed out OF said Territory, north of said Missouri
Compromise line, slavery, or involuntary servi.
tude Except for crime,) shall be prohibited. >
Uniled States Statutes atlarge.-lS39-1S45 D.
79S. r
lie here not only seeks to employ
congressional Intervention against slav-
cry in the Territories, but by his amend
ment would prohibit States from having
slavery, even if their people wished it..
Again, on tie 10th of August, l848,
the bill for establishing the territorial
government of Oregon being before the
Senate: Mr.. Douglas offered an amend
ment, prohibiting slavery within the
proposed territory, which was adopted,
receiving, as he elsewhere tells us, the
votes IF all the Southern senator's.
In lS48' on the 23d Of October, the
Springfield, Qll.,) Journal, says Mr..
Douglas made speech in that city, in
which he gave utterance TO the follows
ing:
The Missouri Compromise had an origin akin
to that of the Constitution OF the U. S., conceiy.
ed in the spirit Of fraternal affection, and caicu
afd to remOre toreUer the danger echich seemed 10
threaten, at some distant day to Seuer the social
bonds Of union. All the evidence 9fpublic opin.
ion OF that day, seemed to indicate that this com.
promise had been CGnOnizeI in the hearts of The
American people as a sacred thing, which nc
RUTHLESS HAND would ever be reckless
enough to disturb"
Bear in mind that the sacred thing
which was thus "canonized in the hearts
of the American people," was a con.
gressional prohibition Of slavery in the
Territories
In 1850, this Sacred" measure of
congressional intervention against slav-
cry, was attacked by John 9. Calhoon
in the United States Senate, when Mr..
Douglas came promptly to it's defence,
as follows:
"The next thing in the series of ag-
gresslons complained ofby the Senator
from South Carolina is the Missouri
Compromise. The Missouri Compro.
mise is an act of northern injustice, de
signed to deprive the South of her due
share of the Territories Why, sir, it
was only the other day that the Sena-
tor from Mississippi despaired of any
peaceable adjustment Of existing diff.
cultles, because the Missouri Compro.
mise line could not be extended to the
Pacific. The measure was originally
adopted in the bill for the admission OF
Missouri, by a union of northern and
southern votes. The South has always
protested to be willing to abide by it.
and even to continue it, as a fair and
honorable adjustment of a vexed and
difficult question. In lS45 it was adj.
opted in the resolutions for the annexa
ton OF Texas, by southern as we'll as
northern votes, without the slightest
complaint that it was unfair in any sec
ton OF the country. In 1916 1t receiv
ed the support of every southern mem.
Der of the House of Representatives
wing and without an ex
ception, as an alternate measure of the
Wilmot Proviso. And again in ls4s
as an amendment to the Oregon bill. OF
my motion, it received the vote, if
recollect highland do not think car
possibly be mistaken-of every southern
senator, wing or Democrat, even inclu
ding the senator from South Carolin;
himself (Mr. Calhoun). And vet w,
are now told that this is only second t.
the ordinance of 1897 in the series O