Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1860-06-02

my present views, will cite you to an ext act
of speech mndc by me in Augusta, in July
last, ON taking final leave of my constituents.
| could not rc.st;tc thom more clearly OF more
lrichy. In speaking of, aud reviewing this
matter then suid;
"And, as you all may know, it (non-inter
ycntion) came Short OF what | wished. 1t
was, in my view, not the full measure of eur
| rights-that required, in my Judgment, the
enactment by Congress of ni necdful laws for
the protection of Slave property in the Ferri- :
tories SO long rs the Territorial condition las
ted.
" But an overwhelming majority of the
South was against that position, 1T was said !
that we who mointt ned ityicdcd the whole
question by yielding the jufisdiot:on and ,..at |
/ il we conceded the power to rrct>vt VIC nee
cssarily coDc"n :, with it tho power t. pro
hbit. THIS by no means followed in my
judgment But such was the prevailing opn-
ion. And it was not until it Was we'll aSccr-
tanned that large majority of the South
would not ask for or even vote for Congress
sional protection that those of us who were
for it yielded to non,intcrycution, because,
/ though it came short of our wishes, vet it
contained no sacrifice of principle, had no.
thing aggressive in it, and secured, for all
practical purposes, what was wanted; that is,
the unrestricted right of expansion over the
common public domain, us inclination, convc-
nicncc orncccssity may require, on thcpart
of the people
" Thus the settlement was made, thus the
record stands, and hy it | am still willing to
stand, os it was fully up to tho demands of
the South, through her representatives, at
the time, though not up to my own, and as by
it the right of expansion to the extent of pop,
ulation and capacity is amply lysecurcd." "
8 In this you clearly perceive what think
of the proper cOursc Now to be taken on the
same subject. While in the beginning of this
controversy | was not favorable to the policy
adopted, yet finally yielded my assent. 1t
was yielded to the South-to the prevailing
sentiment Of my own section But it never
+ would have been yielded if had seen that
+ any of our important rights, or any principle
u essential to our safety or security, could, by
n possibility, result from its operation. NQr
i wonll now be willing to abide by it; !, :
y saw iu its practical workings amy SER" yn
l. ry to the South likely to arise rom !" n''
n parties in the South, after thc sGtt!cNoh' M'S
to made, gave it the sanction of t"%,r acqH''S
= cencc, II not cordial approval W hat, thch
III has occurred since to cause us to change GU
e. position in relation to it? Is it that those o
or from 1913 to $50, did afterwards stand,no
a bly by us in lS5 :, in taking off the old Con
y, ..rrssional restriction of 1920, SO as to hav
I'd complete non-intcwcuton throughout tin
n length and breadth of the common public dt
on main? Was this hcroism on their part, |
OF adhcriny to principle, at tho hazard aud per
ay of their political lives and fortunes, the caus
M of present complaint? This cannot be; fr
Il never was an act of Congress SO generally ar
In so unanimously hailed with delight at u
IN South as this one was--l mean the Nans
IN Nebraska act of 1854. 1t was not only q
my dorscd by all paxtjes in Georgia, but cr'
as one who did not agree to its just proNisie
on upon the subject of slavery, was dcclarcCj
on be unfit to hold party associations With
OF party net castle TO the interests of the SO,
hsV What, then, is the caase OF compialht ~
ere Wherein has this policy worked anylnJuoo
) OF the South, or wherein is it likely to work
mat The only cause of complaint have '..d
lcrc is,~that non intervention, as cstabiIslrih
OF 1850, and carried out in 1879, IS not or
zen stood at the North as it is at the Southht,
an while we hold that, in leaving ''the oie
!, in subject where the Constitution and thcat
ma, principles of sclfgovcrnmcnt place Itne
as common Territories arc to remain Q for
e III settlement by Southern people, wiheir
put slaves, until otherwise provided bytate
i"'h, Constitutions The friends and suplrs OF
ana the same doctrine at the North .nainthat,
nth, under it, the people of an organized'mto-
Tres, nv can protect or exclude Slave pro- BE-
mt rita- fore the formation of State Const>n.- |
! ms This opinion, or construction of ., is |
nsto- what is commonly dubbed "Squattover-
the eighty" Upon this point Of dice IN
uhr construction of what are the GrtFncl- !
ar OF pies of sefgovcrnmcnt," under thStitu-
re- ton of the United States, II great mas
INC been said and written.
We have heard it in the socialc-,in
'ctcd the forum-on the hustings-and nails
areiy of legislation. The newspapers literal
I'd IN ly groaucd with dissertations oniamphr
:, LII lets have been published for andhst til'
~ OF respective sides Congress has snontns
4 set in its discussion, and may spe many
III DC years az they have months, witF'rriN!hS
M at any more definite or satlstactc cie,''Slon
" - in relation to it than NIilton's pea sPir-
OH i III its did upon the abstruae qucst'' which
the they held such high and prol ooOote'
Oh OH oi when they rcasoncd-
'toh; "0f Providence fore .knowiedg, ""u i"'ci
their Fixed fate, free will fora-knowl Dso,' St,s
cunts And fo4Gd no end in waRderins io':
after 1t is not my purpose now to 'iio iiSt oi
honld these disputants: My own Of upon inc
mand subject arc known and it is'y Anc"n
,ction that this difference Of opiniori
ion of is no new thing in the histori,SS suoJect.
For Those who hold the doctrin 'he people
,us;d of the Territories according great Prin-