, 1860-03-08


j, Now,si shall not accuse anybody of stating
that t "hish is not true; but ask, when was the
Iu.n told: ntwas true that in January, 1851,
ne oePartuFc IRON the policy OF 1850, ask II
~ "na a'so ttue, IN lso3. that the Compromise
=. u iooV was Inconsistent with that OF l820y--
oo'h propositions cannot stand together; and |
array tlle chairman Of tlie Committee On Terri.
tories. vino maue this atatcment in bis otticial
days afterwards: stated and Toted that the
Measnles o. to5o were Inconsistent with the
compromise nnp OK 1s2o, and there leave it.
Ineh, slf, tte question is asked here, with q
seeA!esshcss at Which asn astonisted, why do
yoa not curry out your plan of excluding slave
stanus that II IS part OF thu Republican plat
1orm lnat slavery is to be excluded from the Ter
!1torfcs OF the United States, and be wants to
EMO" why VIC uo not bring forward q bill for
taat t,.; Iu5pose. y bus been brought forward in
the yeas and nays, voted to keep slavery out
O. o. hansas, and he voted against the proposition.
time and again have Te tried it. 1 should be
Eery glad to have his evaporation in passing
such q bill NOW; and perhaps, since he has
ionnd ion, :,i gut that the Popular Sovereignty about
which be has talked is deluson, he may unite
with us to keep Slavery out Of the Territories
by tue action OF Congress, which has the only
legltim2te authority over the subject in tue Ter
f1tor1es. :,
Sir, there is another statement TINT cannot
permit to 60 uncaallenged, and Which / an as
tonished to hear made In His BODY. It relates
to the State Of Illinois. 1 had sepn The state-
ment before in some nf The newsnnners. int I
believe vas never present when such state
ment was made. until today. nv col)eapue
says: :" We tried slavery IN Illinois while twas
where, in connection with this remark.
that, as soon as he peop!s Of Illinois were per.
mitted TO manage their own affairs. they eIclu-
ded slavery. Now. g,r. state to the Senate.
aud to the country, that slayery never existed
in Illinois, BY virtue Of anT law. either before
| and imprisonedkin detianca of Inv. There was IN
attempt to indenture servants in the State Of
Illinois. under tie old Territorial Iaws- md
when We formed a State Coustitut;on-and I
wish nv colleague to hear it-so fur from the
statement being true that the State Of illinois
when she formed d State Constitution, she gaze,
| By her State Constitution, tie only validity To-
these iudenturcships they ever had. The Su-
preme Court Of tie State Of Illinois, the very
first time this question Of the freedom Of The
negroes in that State was brought before it, in
Lockwood, decidedly expressly that. under the
ordinance Of 1857, I'LL attempts to hold negroes
ia slavery, or to hold them o. indentured ser
wants, were illegal. It was never rs slaves that
they were attempted to be held: it was by d
species Of indcntureship, the negroes going
voluntarily before some clerk or court, and there
entering into articles of agreement with some
party to serve him for period Of years. often
tines extending beyopd the ordinary period of
human life; but when the question came before
the courts, after the State CONSTITUTION was
adopted, tile Supreme Court Of the STATE deci-
ded that those indeutures were ynid. under The
ordinance Of lTs7. and could not be sustained:
but that the people Of Illinois, in forming their
aI!S Sons..nl'?n saia tna. persons VINO
rial laws. should Le Leld to serve out the nerods
Of their indentures, the court held that, By yir-
tue Of this constitutional provision, the linden:
lures originally yoid were made valid. Tcat
vas the condition OF the negro population in
Illinois.
While Illinois was Territory, some of its in
| habitants petitioned repeatedly to Congress for
| permission TO establish slavery, and Congress
Us repeatedly refused their, petitions There
will be found now among the American State
| papers the report Of John Randolph, Of Eir-
ginia, denying the petition of the people Of lii
nois, to establish slavery in that Territory.
Then, sir, say that slurery, as such, never did
exist in that State; and the ground upon which
these indentureH were sustained was either tint
| they were entered into fairly, Us one freeman
would enter into contract With another, or else
that they had becn confirmed by the adoption
| Of the Constitution.
III rising, sir, my only intention was to repe1
| these impututions upon the Republican party Of
Illinois. and to correct tile statement Of my col
league in regard TO the existence Of slavery in
! that State; slavery Is such never was estab-
llshed IN ILLINOIS, either before or alter the Con-
stitutlon was adopted. unless IT was that slave
~ which one man by force might establish over
another; Inc very hrst Time the question came
hare n!read5 stated
1T this point Mr. Douglas nude rcpIv occu-
| win, .,ro ,o,,x,,z :, tbo f,yo1. af,an ,-h;,,,
r!6 o0's' ~NA "AA.AA
Ar. irumnui1 fe]oineo:
| Mr.. President, it only needs statement of
! facts and bringing my colleague back to the is
sue, to show TINT he has not answered at all the
| points which took. He has undertaken to
| show that slavery existed in Illinois; and how
does LIE do 1t? He refers to the census, winch
shows that somebody claimed slaves in Illinois.
Does that make it slave Stute? believe that
now slaves are claimed in all our free States.
There is Lennon case now pending in the
] State Of New York, where the right is claimed
| to hold slaves in that State. He says that the
F! Territorial Legislature Of Illinois adopted
slave code. That is true, and the State adopted
] slave code, if you please. Mauy of the first
| settlers Of Illinois wanted slnverr, and nothing
| kept slavery out Gnd raado Illinois what she il,
but the ordnance nf 1857. The fact that per-
| sons claimed to hold Slaves in illinois does not
prove that any were there. The very first time
the question was 0TopEat 10 Tie notice OF the
courts, It was DECIDED that slavery could not
] cxiiss:. in Illinois.
Nv colleague speaks Of nv having remarked
| thai stated Ills to bis teeth. / do. sir: and
| will tell ron wl,y used the eynression. It is
very seldom that We in Illinois have m oppor-
| tunitr to say ANYTHING to his face He sea,ce]y
eyer Temaus to hear. The examnle given to-nirbt
Of LEAVING the moment he is 1droueh sneaking,
! without Waiting to hear replr. Is not nnconl.
mon with him. Iknow be has trayersed the
State of Illinois. and made declarations ike
those which be has made here to-day. ayailed
myself OF the privilege Of saving what did. to-
day. to his face, because | had him here face to
fuce for once, nm well aware Of the way in
which be discusses questions. He uakes statt-
mepts. when there is nobody present to contra-
aict them, which the facts Of history will not
sustain. lie has gone on to speak here to.day,
and asked, in so many words, why The Repu6.
lican party. when they Get power. will MT give
to the uerrocs that eSuniity which they cfaim
for them, thereby assuming that we tepubl;-
cans claim, ctIrulity for the negro. We have not
done any such thing; and now will answer
that point, aud answer it SO that think be viii
never repeat it again, at least where hs can be
replied TO. He las asked here to-duy, whether
We claim that negroes arc created by The Al