The Lansing state Republican. [volume] (Lansing, Mich.) 1855-1874, 1860-02-14

clfai cua actcT, Tor there s none such In
tie Territory 80 far. Where is its source,
then There is but one kind Of positive
if# u which the Territories are subject
ief,re any local legislation has been had,
AID thai IS The Constitution of the Cni-
ted States. If, therefore, Mr. Douglas as
sertS, as be docs, that slas ehoder has a
right TO take his slave as property into a
Territory, he must, at the same time, ad-
mt that, In the absence Of local legislation
positively establishing slavery, the Cons,i.
tuition OF the United States, the only valid
law exls luC there, must be the source of
that night What else does Mr Buchanan
assert, bat that slavery exists in the Terri
tories by virtue of the Federal Constitution
Where Is, then, the poiut Of difference be-
tween Mr. Buchanan and Mr.. Douglas
/ Why all this pomp and circumstance of
glorious war ! Whence these fierce bat
ties between the Montechi and Capuletti Of
he Democratic camp, Are ye not broth
ers
But Mr.. Douglas is statesman, $50 they
are all, al statesmcn,) and pretends that
( the Constitution does not establish slavery
in the Territories. beyona rte potcs1 of
the peQplc 10 control IL by lar" What
does that mean ! 1t means that the peo-
pie of 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, is worthless right, unless
protected by appropriate police regulations.
If the people Of Territory do not want
slavery, they have but to withhold all pro-
lection and all friendly leg station" In-
deed, most ingenious expedient.
/ But alas Here is one of those cases
where the abStract admission Of a right is
of decisive importance. Suppose, for ar
gumeut's sake slave mi yht escape from
his owner in Territory, without being in
actual danger Of recapture; would that in
any way affect the constitutional right of
the STAKEHOLDER to the possession and enjoy.
meut of his property | have already
quoted Nlr. Dyu lass own answer to this
question. If, says he, slavery exists
III the Territories by virtue OF the Consti-
tuition (that Is, II u aarehoider has a
right to introduce has stare property -
'che/c there as no other lar bu tie Con-
/ StitMiOa) Then II bec0neS the impera
tire duty Of Congress, To tie peltor-
m0nce Of arhich ecery member as 6ound
! 6y his Oath and conference, and tram
tchtch no consideration Of poLicy or e.
ped,ency can release Inn, tn l,oUiGe By
lar s"ch ade2~ate anil compiete protec
tion as IS essential TO the enjoyment Of
I that 'nlpoIt0nt right."
Aud Nr, Douglas, after having empatic
ally admitted the right of property IN a
slave where that right can sprlng from 30
other law but the Constitution. then dares
to speak Of unfriendly legislation. Where
is his conscience ; Where is his oath
Where i, his honor, Applause
/ But Mr.. Douglas says more:
The Constitution being the supIemc
law Of the land in the States as well as il
the Territories, then slavery exists in Penn
/ sylvauia just as well as III Kansas and Ill
South Carolina, aud the irrepressible con-
! fllct is there ~
Aye, the irrcpressible conflict is there.
not only between the two antagonis;ic sys
TENS of labor, but between NJ Douglas
own theories; not on y in the States aud
Territories, but in Mr. Douglas own head
Laughter aud cheers Whatever ambig.
uous expressions Mr. Douglas may invent,
the dilemma stares him in the face land
here | put myself on bis own ground, J
either slavery is excluded from the Terri.
tories 50 long as 1t is not admitted by =
special act of Territorial legislation, or il
a Shareholder has the right 10 introduce hi.
property there before such legislation i.
had he can possess that right by virtue OF
no other but the cnly law existing there,
the Constitution Of the United States
Either Slavery has no rights in the Terri
tories, except those sprugIug from positive
law of local OF municipal character. or
according TO Judge Douglass own admis
sion, the Southern construction Of the Con
stltution and OF the pr nciples Of popular
sovereignty Is the only legitimate one, thai
the Constitution, by its own force. carrie.
slavery wherever it is the supreme law o
the laud, that Congress l. obliged to enac
a slave code for Its protection, aud thai
popular sovereignty means the power o
the people to vote for slavery, bu, by NJ
meals against it. There is no escape from
this dilemma.
Which side will Mr. Douglas take p
will he be bold enough to say that slavery
being ,he creature of local law only, is ex
cluded from the Territories in the absenc'
of positive law establishing il 4; or will h'
be honest enough to cOncele that
according 10 his own proposition in BIZ
New Orleans speech, slavery exists in th'
Territories by virtue of the Federal Con
sttution He will neither be bold enough
TO do the first, nor honest enough to do tn,
second; be will be cowardy enough TO d.
} neither. Applause He is in the posi-
tlOn of that Democratic candidate for Con
gress in the We>t, who, when asked 50 Ar,
you Buchanan man or Douglas man !,
answered, " | am" Great laughter anc
cheers Ii you ask Mr. Douglas. " D
you ho.d that slavery Is the creature Of 10
Ca. law, or that a saveho der has the righ
IL Introduce bis slave property where Their
is 10 local law ! be will answer, " do.
Continued laughter aud applause
, Such Is Mr Douglass doctrine Of popu
lar sovereignty. But after having givel
you Nr Douglass own definitions in hi