The Potter journal. [volume] (Coudersport, Pa.) 1857-1872, 1860-02-23
TERMS. ..sl.2s PER ANNUM.

L.
And yet there it stands, and nothing thas
Mr. Douglas ever said can be more une-
qhivocal in its meaning. And here again
we may claim the privilege Of drawing
few logical deductions from Mr. Douglass
own premises. If, as Mr.. Douglas dis
tinctIy and emphatically tells us, slave
holder has right to take his slave, as
property, into Territory, and to hold him
there as property, before any legislation
on that point is had, from what source
does that right arise Not from the law
Of nature, for the right to hold a slave is
" unfounded in the law of nature, and in
the unwritten and common law :" and
even Mr. Douglas, little as he may care
about nature and her laws, will hardly
dare to assert that the system of slave la
Dor is the natural and normal condition
of society. 1t must then spring from pos
tive law But from what kind of posi-
tive law? Not from any positive law Of
a local and municipal character, for there
is none such in the Territory so far.
Where is its source, then There is bur
one kiud Of positive law to which the Ter
ritories are subject before any local egis-
laton has been had, and that is the Con-
ststu'ion Of the United States. If, there
fore, Mr.. Douglas asserts, as he does, that
a STAKEHOLDER has right to take his slave
as property into a Territory, he must, at
the same time, admit that, in the absence
of local legislation positively establishing
slavery, the Constitution Of the United
States, the only valid law existing there,
must be the source of that right. What
else does Mr. Buchanan assert, but that
slavery exists in the Territories by virtue
Of tho Federal Constitution Where is,
then. the point OF difference between Mr..
Buchanan and Mr. Douglas? Why all
this pomp and circumstance of glorious
war Whence these fierce battles be-
tween The Montechi and Capuletti Of the
Democratic camp? Are yc not brothers?
But Mr.. Douglas is statesman, $50
they are all, ali statesmcn,) and pretends
that the Constitution does not establish
slavery in the Territories, "6eyona the
po,ocr Of the people to control it By lap."
What does that mean? 1t means that
the people of a Territory shall have the
power to embarrass the STAKEHOLDER in the
enjoyment Of his right by unfriendly
legislation" The right to hold slaves"
SAYS he in another place, q worthless
right unless protected by appropriate po-
lice regulations. If the people of Ter
ritory do not want slavery, they have but
to withhold all all protection and all friend
ly legislation" Indeed, most ingenious
ex 1edient.
But, alas Here is one of those cases
where the abstract admission of right is
Of decisive Importance Suppose, for ar
gumcnt's sake, slave might escape from
his owner in Territory, without being in
actual danger Of recapture would that in
any way affect the constitutional right of
the Shareholder to the possession and en-
joyment of his property? l have already
quoted Mr. Douglass own answer to this
question. Of" says he, slavery exists
in the Territories by virtue of the Cousti-
tuition" (that is, il a sioreholaer has "a
right to iatreduce his "Slare property"
7rhere there is no other lu1C but the Con-
$titm'on,) "Mca it becomes the imperative
duty Of Congress, TO the performance OF
lchlch eUery member is bonnd by his OATH
and conscirncc, and from 1chich no corr
stderatirn Of p0liry or erpediency cam re-
lease him, to provide By 'a'o such adequate
and complete protector as is essential to
the enjoyment Of that important right"
And Mr.. Douglas, after having en-
phatically admitted the right of property
IN slave, where that right can spring
from no other law but the Constitution,
then dares TO speak of unfriendly legisla-
ton. Where is his coucience Where
| IS his oath? Where is his honor? T Ap-
Iplause
| But Mr.. Douglas says more;
"The Constitution being the supreme
law of the land, in the States as we'll as
in the Territories, then slavery exists in
Pennsylvania just as well as in Kansas,
and in South Carolina, and the irrepres-
sible conflict is there p
Aye, the rrepressible conflict Is thore,
not only between the two antagonistic sys.
tems of labor, but between Mr. Douglass
own theories not only in the States and
Territories, but in Mr. Douglass own
head. Laughter and cheers. Whatev-
er ambiguous expressions Mr.. Douglas
may invent, the dilemma stares him in
the face, z and here l put myself on his
own ground either slavery is excluded
from the Territories so long as it is not
admitted by special act of Territorial
legislation, or, if stakeholder has the
right to introduce his slave property there
before such legislation is had, he can pos.
sess that right By virtue of DO other but,
the only law existing there, the Constitu-
ton of the United States. Either slave.