Dallas herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1849-1873, 1860-10-10
DALLAS, pALLAS COUNTY. rEXAS, 0CTOGER TO, 1850.

! in IL federal rclalioi1Si u rin-slaNcil
rariy; that il was neither such
pari- nor nn antl-slaycry party
| that il nega,ivcd tho interference
of the Federal Government Nhcih
cr to in,r1iurc 0r cYclllc slavery
and lci the tcrrit"i& opem Il
commCn settlement from all th'
States lhu, each State was entitlc,
10 form its own Constitution, nm,
ontcr the Union without discriIni
nation by Congress ON account o
lis allowance or prohibition OF slave
ry, aud that the statement thai Mr.
u. advocated squatter sovereignty
was untrue.
Mr.. breckenridge then continued
In the autumn OF tho same year
received a Louisiana paper, con
s,.s' ~, --.ana.. l.l-l nnd.,l -
General Mills, who heard my spccrh
in. which he denied that | had ud
mitied this doctrine Of the terrific.
rial power. He sent me slip con.
tanning his speech, In the same
month, before the Presidential clec-
ton, | answered him, saysng-
Hands Off the whole subject by the
Federal Government, except for one
or two protective purposes men
toned in the Constitution the
equal rights of all sections on tho
common territory, and the absolute
power Of each new State to settle
the question in its Constitution
These are my doctrines, and those
of our platform, and what is more,
Of the Constitution. Now, fellow
citizens, against the statement of
that distinguished Senator, in which
he undertakes to prove allegations
against mysrlfby himself, and thus
oppose my own statement, next in
proof | read to'you from my speech
in 1854, in Congress; the article in
the Lexington paper before the
Presidential election; the testimony
of Gen. Mills, who heard that speech
at Tippccanoc, and my own lcttcr
in answer to tho latter gentleman's
containing my opinion Of the qucs-
ton at that time, and what has ever
since been my opinion. CA voice
Now you arc talking.) think l
have proven as fully as could be OK
pcctcd in the Inns of Il speech that
the charge is uniounded in fact, and
will add That the position as
sumcd was that taken by all the
Southern friends of the Nebraska
bill, and by Il portion Of its North
,rn friends. These were our pri-
gatc opinions--thcso were the oRin-
ons we urged on all proper occa-
lions, but we did not undertake to
orcc all others to agree. to them.
We had agreed to refer them to
ho highest tribunal in the Union.
: S,.z. :, 51. stsa-est, ,c,ey,tzS ,..;oc:.
myself and the Constitutional Dc.
nocracy from the charge of having
,bandoned tho position they took
n 1S54-5-6, l turn upon my accuscr,
nd undertake to show that he him
elf abandoned the arrangement lie
olemnly made at the time the Kan
as Nebraska bill passed the Con-
rcss Of the United States, and ! do
ot make myself u witness against
i'm to do it. | will provo it by
imsolf On the I'd Of July, 1856,
! the debate upon the bill to au-
lorizc the people of Kansas TO form
Constitution preparatory to adj
,ission into the Union as q State
hen the question arose as to what
as the true meaning of the Kan (
,s-Nebraska bill, and tie limita-
on Of the power of the territorial
)vcrnmcnt, Mr. Trumbul offered ,
70 following amendment as an ad- 4
tional section to the bill "
" And be it farther enacted, That J
10 provision in the act 10 organize I
&c territories Of Nebraska and |
ansas, which declares it to be the j
uc intent and meaning Of said act C
,t to|cgislatc slavery into any tor v
tory Vr State, nor TO exclude it i
lcrofrom, but to leave the people
orcof perfectly free to form and v
gulate \hcir domestic institutions v
their Swn way, subject only 10 t
@ Constitution Of tho United |;
atcs, was iatendcd and does CON Fl
r upon or leavc to tho people Of fl
c territory Of Kansas full power p
any time, Though its territorial O.
rislature, to exclude slavery front Il
id territory; on to recognize and 0
rulatc it there.S c
That was Mr.. Tr,lmbull's amend
mt, aginst which an ovcrwhclm al
: majority of the Senate voted, VI
,luding Gen. Cass and Senator Il
uglar. Let me, hl-ra,,i.,,, -, Ii NJ, -
uglas tho justice to say that no tr
ted against that amendment not CT
,ausc he did not believe the terri on
ial legislature had the powor to pr
,ludo slavery from the territory,
because hc did not believe 1t Ia.
y CoilSlSiSiit VI uCSh'c Wv - -
n lcgislativcly which they hal de
ccd TO leave 10 the Court. TN
len. Cass ~td (Mr. B. here que LAY
from Gen. Cass TO show taat iiic th
rlh and Soulh differed about iilt fia
.cra that n,i:eht be- gwen y ter IL
rial legislature, AMI that Tie an
lsas bill left that TO he adjudica ha
by the Court, by which alone tin
constitutional question could be thi
led) Te
inally, Mr.. Breckenridge con clu
led, Mr. Douglas, in the same 10
ate, used the following language tut
efcrcncc to thc attempt Of his
raguo 10 eocrce IN opinion out 10
im upon the quest ~ whether Sui
territorial lssa>lst IRE had tho as
cr 20 exclude elavc propei',y BE- bci
flicv bceamo e State ,Nr t'r
4ift4rr-Iddp hos. ffs.lf from Me ill