The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1860-07-31
THEN AND NOW.
Mr. Douglas on Non-Mtcrrention.

Mr. Douglas pretends that the legislature of
Territory has the power to exclude slave proper
ty from such Territory, and that even if the eXer-
else OF that power be violation of Constitutional
right, Congress has no power to interfere to pre-
vent remedy that contravention Of the supreme
law Of the land 1t is from the doctrine Of non
Intervention laid down in the Kansas bill that Mr
Douglas derives this arbitrary power Of territorial
legislature
Mr. Douglas, however, not always Of this
opinion. In 1856, in the famous debate on Mr.
Clayton's amendment to Mr. Toombs' bill for the
admission of Kansas relative to the repeal Of the
test oaths' required by the legislature of Kansas
as qualification OF voters, Mr. Douglas and Mr.
Pugh then voted for the repeal Of those oaths on
the ground that they were violative of private
right; that the local legislature in imposing them,
had 'usurped authority never intended to be con-
ferred by the organic law and which, if exercised,
would overthrow that law and that it was the duty
Of Congress to interfere to repeal the action of the
legislature NJ Claytons amendment was adopted
by vote of 40 to 3, Mr. Douglas and Mr. Pugh
voting with the ma jorty after having made elabo-
rate speeches in favor of Congressional interfcr-
cnce The "test oaths" were imposed by pro-
slavery legislature with view to favor the intro
duction of slavery into the Territory of Kansas
They were imposed by the exercise of the power
specially conferred on the legislature by the Or
and were only obnoxious to the abolition settlers in
the Territory Of the John Brown and Jim Lane
school.
We do not propose to discuss whether they were
right or wrong, but they the act of the terri
torial legislature and the Senate of the United
States voted to repeal them at the earnest instance
of Mr. Douglas. Only three Southern Senators
voted in the negative. 1t was Mr. Douglas opin-
ion, therefore in July, 1885, that interference by
Congress to prevent territorial legislature from
exceeding its powers, and violating constitutional
rights, not any breach at that time of the
intervention compact And yet, he thinks now
that to declare that Congress has the power, and
is bound to protect constitutional rights against
adverse territorial legislation a manifest invasion
of that compact. Can it be that Mr. Douglas
makes distinction between the constitutional
rights of John Brown, Jim Lane, and horde of
freebooting aboltionsts who infested Kansas in
1856, ana the constitutional rights of Southern
citizens who slaves and ask that their proper
ty be protected in the same way as that of any
other citizens? Can it be that Mr. Douglas be-
lieves that Congress has the power without viola
ting the non-iEtervention doctrine, to repeal all
laws passed by a territorial legislature which favor
proprietors of slaves; but that Congress has no
power, without fragrant abandonment Of non
intervention, to repeal any territorial enactment
which Injuries slave property, matter how clear
ly subverslve of constitutional right! Does non
intervention only apply to territorial laws passed
for the protection of John Brown and his gang,
and is intervention only permissible with reference
to the acts Of pro-slayery legislatures?
Mr. Douglas very solicitous for the protec-
tion Of the constitutional rghs of the rufians and
horse-thieves who composed the Abolition party
in Kansas; but he will not hear Of any protection
being extended to the constitutional rights of the
citizens of the Southern States who have settled,
may yet settle with their slave property in the
territories which the common property of all.
The Inconsistency is marked and undeniable,
and cannot be explained on any grounds of polit-
cal honesty. 1t does not need elaborate argument
to demonstrate that if Congress has the power 70
repeal the act of the legislature of Territory
which it has created prescribing the qualifications
of voters in such Territory the ground that such
act is unconstitutional and violative of private
right, Congress has also the power to declare that
the action of a territorial legislature, deprivng
four millions of citizens of their constitutional
rights and confscating their property if they
ture to exercise those rights, is also null and void,
and for the same reason Wash. Constitution.
Bs= "fast" undertook the task of teas
ing eccentric preacher. ado you believe" he
said, sin the story of the Prodigal Son and the
Fatted Calf" "Yes," said the preacher "Well,
then, was it male female calfthat was killed?
ga female" promptly replied the divine "How
60 you know that" because Cooking the in
toroootor in tbo H,ooN coo tho noalo ali pou,