Daily national Democrat. [volume] (Marysville, Calif.) 1858-1861, 1860-01-31
Gwin and Pugh.


run both it and himself in the ground. We
are only surprised that a man as sagacious as
Latham should lend himself to the effort OF
fastening it upon California. We tell mm
that he NAV as well abandon the project lie
cannot Dougnsize our Democracy"
We desire to know, now, whether this Is
the manner in which the great Democrat
doctrine Of Popular Sovereignty is to be
treated by the leaders of the Lecompton De-
moeracy in this State. "The popular sover-
eighty hmaJug is pretty welt played out !!
1t was no "humbug" when thousands of Doug
las voters in the last election were sustaining
the Administration ticket The Douglas
doctrine was no "humbug' then But, the
election being over, and the Douglas strength
of the State being divided by the existence OF
two organizations, and it being the intention
to send delegates to Charleston hostile to Mr.
Douglas, it is very convenient to denounce
the Popular Sovereignty doctrine as "hum-
bug" We warned Douglas men that such
would be the turn which affairs would take,
after their votes were secured, and they see
now the truth of the prophecy
AS to the merits of the debate between
Senators Gwin and Pugh, the former, in at
lacking the position of the Senator from Hi
nois, on the proper construction of the Kan
sas.N ebraska Bill, takes precisely the same
position that Douglas did, in the celebrated
Kansas debate Observe the report of his
remarks on that head and the brief observa-
tions of Senator Pugh during the same:
Gwin--I maintain that the only position
that ever was taken by the California De-
mocracy was that this was a judicial ques-
ton, entirely to be removed from the Halls
of Congress and, whenever the question was
brought before the judicial tribunals, the
power should be given to carry their decision
into full effect.
Pugh-Did net the Senator understand tle
Senator from Illinois to maintain that doctrine
here in debate2
Gwin-No, sir; did not. understood
him to state that now the power existed and
could lawfully be exercised by the erritorial
Legislature, and was conferred by the Kansas
Nebraska bill to exclude slavery by non
action and unfrendly legislation.
Pugh-I appeal to all Senators and the
record, that that was the proposition of the
Senator from Illinois, and the very PROPOSE
ton of which the Senator from California
said, if that was the meaning of the Kansas
Nebraska bill, he would not have voted for
it.
Gwin-What was the proposition?
Pugh-The Senator from Illinois asserted
over and over again-more than twenty times
in that debate, in February last, that be
understood that question to be Il judicial
question, to be determined by the judiciary
and that Congress was not to interfere with
it. That was his construction of the Kans s.
Nebraska act, as avowed in that debate
When the Senator from California rose, after
the Senator from Illinois had finished his re-
marks, and said that if that was the construc-
ton of the bill he would never have voted
sor it, confess | was astonished. Now. il
turns out that the very construction which
the Senator denounced when it came from
the lips of the Senator from Illinois, he now
affirms himself
1t appears then, that the position of Sena.
tor Gwin is Substantially the same as that o
Senator Douglas, according to his own show
ing, to- wit: that the question of slavery was
by the Kansas Nebraska Bill, designed to |,
taken altogether from the Halls of Congress,
and left to the decision of the judicial tribu.
nails
When shown by Senator Pugh the logical
dilemma in which he had placed himself, OBJ
serve how he gets out of it:
Gwin-The Senator is very good tacti-
cian and very skillful at the bar, no doubt
in replying backwards and forwards on ega
questions do not pretend to any such skill
but | say this, that the proposition which the
Senator from Illinois took was that the Kan
sas Nebraska bill conferred a legal power
upon Territorial Legislature to exclude
slavery by non action or hostile legislation.
Pugh-That was his private opinion.
Gwin-Private-ah, very private. indeed
when he stated that he had avowed that
doctrine in one hundred and twenty speeches
and that he was elected to the Senate upon
it. and that was the Interpretation he put on
the Kansas Nebraska bin said that if he
had avowed that Interpretation of the bill al
the time it was under discussion | never
should have voted for it. Now the Senator
says, have merely agreed to everything the
senator from Illinois says. Have | ever
agreed to that Interpretation of that bill?
stated then that if he had explained to the
Senate that he meant 10y the bill what h,
said at Freeport, never should have voteC
for the bill That is what stated and l re
peat it now.
So here is the difference between the Cali
fornia Senator and Senator Douglas. Mr.
Gwin believes that Territorial Legislator,
cannot non-dct and cannot umfriendly legis-
late. Douglas says it can non.act and it can
unfrendly legislate. lift non act, there is nc
power to force it to act. If it unfriendll
Isgislate the judicial tribunals have the pow
er to say whether such Legislation be consti
tutional or unconstitutional, valid or invalid
1t appears to us that the great anxiety
which exists among certain adherents of the
Administration to attack the abstract PROMO
sition of Douglas, that the TERRITORIAL Legis
lature may non-act or unfriendly legislate
and that Congress is debarred from interior.
ing to apply the remedy for such non action
or for such unfriendly legislation-is to be
attributed to desire on their part ultimate
ly, and all in due time, to demand of Congress.
a slave code for the Territories. If such b,
not their object, why are they everlastingly
attacking a position which alone stands il
the way of it? They say they are willing tC
leave the matter to the judicial tribunals
Douglas says the same. But, when he asserts
and proves that Congress is debarred from
interfering in any manner with the question
OIL slavery In the Territories, they proceed t.
denounce him with all the Litterress .
which they are capable.
The Legislature of Vernon.