Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1860-09-11


that underies the compromise Of 1880 then the PrOhi
biton Of 1920, being inconsistent With that principle
should be removed Am rEEFEcT NON-INrEEYENrioN THUS
nE ESTABLISHED BY LAW.
Among the many misrepresentation sent to the coun-
try BY OF the enemies Of this bill perhaps none Is
fragrant than the charge that proposes 10 egsate
slavery into Nebraska and Kansas Sir, if the bill con-
tanned such feature h would receive my vote. The
right establish involves the eorreatve night 70 pro-
hbit and, denying both, would vote for neither lgo
further and express the opinion that clause egslatng
slavery into those Territories could not command one
Southern vote 10 this House. It due to both sections
ofhe country and to the people expose this ground
less charge. What then, is the present condition OF
Nebrasks and kansas! Why sir there is government
slavery, and very little population there for your
Federal laws e1clEde your citizens > but law remains
your statute book forever prohibiting slavery in these
Territories It is proposed simply take of this prohi-
bton, but not 10 make enactment in atirmance Of
slavery there Now in the absence of any law establish
ing slavery in that rgon previous TO the prohibiting act
il TOO clear for dispute that the repeal Of the prohb
ton has not the Affirmative effect ofXiDg slavery in that
country The efec, ofthe repeal therefore, is neither
TO establish nor exclude, but to leave the failure eORdi-
tiOA Of ne Territories olly depsNdsRi upon the action
II th iahabtats subject only 10 such limitations the
Federal Constitution may impose But to guard fully
sgEnst malicious peryersion the language Of the bill is
perfectly explicit on this PonG-lSes App. Con. Gl1be,
col. 29, p. al
Has Douglas himselfever expressed the doctrine Of alb
sOu.e nOninsrventOn in emphatic language than
thisi Never.
HE Il MoRE ENPHArIC AGAINST INTERVENTION.
Two years later June eth 1856, Mr. Breckenridge, AZ
ter bis nomination BY the DemOcratcpary for the Vice
Presidency said in formal speech Of acknowledgment
at Lexington;
upon the dstraeting question of domestic slavery
their position is clear The whole power Of the Demo
cratic organization is pledged to the following PROPOSE
tons: THAT CONGRESS SHALL NOT INTERVENE
UPON THIS SUBJECT IN TIE STATES IN THE
TERRITORIES Or IN THE DISTRICT OF C0LUM-
BIA; THAT TIE PEOPLE OF EACH TERRITORY
SHALL DETERMINE THE QUESTION FOR THEM
SELVES and be admitted into the Union upon foot
ing Of perfect equality with the original States witho
discrimination on account Of the allowance prohibit
ton Of slavery.
BELONGS TO NO PARTY DESIRING SLAVERY EIrEsDED.
At a subsequent stage in the canvass of 1856, Mr.
Breckinridge delivered speech in his own behalf at
TippeesnOe, in which he re.afirmed as follows the
viess be expressed at Lexington in June,
AN CONNECTED WITH NO PARTY rHAr has FOR ITS Oh.
JEcr rHE EXTENSION SLAVERY! Nor with any to pre-
vent the people Of State TERRIroRT from deciding
the question offs existence with them for themselves
happened 20 be in Congress when the Nebraska bill
passed and gavet my voice and vote and because did
what il dd-viE: Il ACESOwLxDGED ruE RIGHT or TIE
PEOPLE OF Tux TEERIroRY TO sErrLE Tx QUESTION
THEMSELVES, and not because supposed what DO
believe, that t egated slavery into the Territory
The Democratic party Is 40 PRo-sLAVERY PARTY.
The people Of the Territories under the KansasNe-
braska ac, have the full right to establish or prohibit
slavery JUsr A. A STATE would
The Louisville JourRG! well says that to add word
comment TO this would be Sasteiul and ridiculous
e..ess Il asserts the doctrine of absolute noniuter-
yeution as plainly SIS language can assert it. We may
p,rtneniy add however, that Mr.. Douglas few days
ago in speech at Concord, New Hampshire bore his
personal testimony to the fac, that Mr. Breckiuridge in
the campaign Of 1856 advocated this doctrine in pre-
esely the same extent aud with exactly the same con-
struction that the speaker himself advocated and row
advocates Il, Douglas declared solemnly that in the
campaign Of 1856 he spoke from the same stump with
Breckenridge and that the latter uculcated squa,er
ve7eignty with al the might Of his eloquence aud ZEAL
Il made speeches. Is Douglass language, "irom the
same stand With John Breckenridge in 1896, when he
was advocating his claims 70 the Yice-Presidency,
aud heard Ain 90 to ne srtres length aror Of pope
lar sovereignty ia the Ierriioriss To the ike effect is
the testimony OF Csssius NJ Clay, who, though Repub,
lcan is gentleman Of rreproachable veracity "Well-
now" said Mr. Clay ii his speech in Louisville last
month, "Where is his friend Breckinrdgc: Why, srs
/ met him over in the Free States, and where do you
think he was thens Why, be right along side of
Cash Clay. he was good FreesOler as Cash Clay.
lie Aad one method Of making Kansas free, and had
an0thsr-THAT WAS ALL THE DIFFERENCE. Xix WAS FOR
NoN-ISrERyESrIoN, AND WAS LOOKED UPON As DOUGLASS
RIaur.HAND NAN" And others testify the same thing
We have svaed ourselves in the preparation of the
above, OF a compilation in late number Of the Louis
vile Journal We shall continue this subject at early
day aud SHOW who John @. Breckenridge is The above
proves that up 1885, when he elected vicePrsi
dent ia pEvDLv DvED Ar sSvAFsss sovFerIGNrv
As IuDGE DOUGLAS HIMSELF.