Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1860-11-23
How can Clay Wing be Democrat?

rom the New Ork lflDunc ~ lIlc Us
pecial attention of that class of our read
ers who profess to be old line Wings
who attest their vcncrtion for the men,
DRY Of the great dcrofthcirp party by
now voting and acting with his adver-
saries; who through his lifelong SER
vice to the whole Union, pursued him
untiringlv with malignant calumny and
Islander. The article quoted clearly de-
monstrates that the greatest of Amcri-
can Statesmen to the latest hour of his
political life endorsed the doctrine now
contended for by the Republicans, viz:
that the Federal Constitution vested in
Congress, exclusive power to legislatc
on the question of Slavery III the Ter
ritorics: that Slavery did not, nor could
not exist in any State or Territory UNI
til established by municipal or local
law: in other words, that slavery is and
was but Il creature of local law. The
ncw-f,nglcd hcrcsy cllristcned the bred
Scott decision, invented by the party
majority OF political Supreme Bench,
sitting in Judgment upon questions of
difference between factions OF the Dem
ocratic party, must find elsewhere an
endorsement, than in amy word or deed
ofthc .llustrious sage of Ashland. The
tollowiu arc the extracts:
MIR. CLAWS COMPROMISE.
When Hunt, Ducr, Briggs. Brooks, and Hiram
| kctchum are asked. How do You reconcile your
present course and attitude with your repeated.
persistent recorded declarations and votes in
=. favor of the positive exclusion of Slavery from
1.-THE Federal Territories ?'-they have but one an
swcr : The Compromise of 1880 we went in
- for that. and thereby pledged ourselves to main
- tain its principles and oppose all further agita-
! 'tion respecting Slavery. Well, gentlemen :;
:. how is il tina, we now find you in league with
Stephen \. Douglas the very man who first
- broke that pledge. ripped mp the settlement of
:. lSj0 and rc-opcncd the iood-gate of Slavery
.agit,,on? liz. indeed, says tina, the Compro-
:. mise of 1880 involved the overthrow of the Mis-
:. touri Re sric,ion but yor not merely know bet
:. ter, he does Int you have hundred times
:. condemned hi, Nebraska blaSa winton and I'M
'iusti.abc reopcnins OF the Slavery controversy
''so HIS false pretcnsc cannot avail ior. What,
- then. do you say?
And there is no answer.
In the Spring of 1854. during The pcnlcncv of
the Nebraska hill, ana nearly four year, after the
Clay Compromise of 1880. the editor of this paper
WIS asked to address an anti-Nchrisaa E!.>..:., in
this city. He declined, simply because his views
! Oh u: Yuncct were well known. AMI his speaking
at such a meeting could do good. urging the i'll
,itcr To call instead on men Of known conservative
views ANA nttitudc--among others, ON Hiram
kctchum. The suggestion was adopted the cal,
malc--and this reported to rs as the response:
Mir. Kctchum declines to speak, saying that it is
not possible that this Nebraska hill should pass in
its present any shape invoi, ing repeal of the
Missouri Rcstrciion--that they might as we'll at
tempt to repeal the Federal Constitution. No
doubt Mr.. Kctchum then believed what he said
that he regarded II violation of the Missouri Com
pact as beyond the stretch of human har,hool.-
Yet this same Hiram kctclIum is To-day in close al
lance with tho responsible author Cf that great
wrong and is laboring to save him from the re'r-
button he has SO richly deserved
We have time and again rcfntcdthc false prctcnrc
that the Dougnsitcs of 1860 mt all sustained 10y
the Henry Clay doctrines of 1850. OF course. this
does not stop the iteration Of the untruth hut it
wcakcns its effect In this conviction, we rccur to
the subject. and call attention to the facts
Mr. Clay introduced his project of Compromise
on the 10Th ofJanuary, 1880. Here is the second
matter now in controversy
90. RESOLVED. That, as Slavery does not exist
by law [in] and is not likely to be introduced into
any of the territory acquired by the United States
from the Republic of Mexico, it is incxpcdcnt for
Congress to provide by law either for its introduce
ton into. or exclusion from, any part of the said
territory and that appropriate Territorial Govern
mcnts ought to be established b. Congress in all
the said territory, not assigned as within the boun
daries of the proposed State of California; without
the adoption of any restriction or condition on the
subject of Slavery"
Mr.. Clay. it will be seen. based his rcpugnancc
to any prohibition Of Slavery in the Territories en-
prcs,ly on the ground that it had no existing legal
rights therein other words, could only go into
the Territories under the protection Of affirmative
positive law.
That this was Mr.. Clay view throughout, we do
positively know and, accordingly, his plan Of
compromise was assailcd so soon rs presented by
the Pro-Slavery Senators, rs giving the North the
meat of the oyster ami The South barely the shells
Sal Gen. Henry 5. Footc of Mississippi
-. The Resolutions of tho Hon. Senator assert
that Slavery does not now exist by law in the Ter
ritorics recently acquired by Mexico whereas,
am ofOpinon that the treaty with the Mexican Re-
public carried the Constitution with all its guaran-
ties, to all the territories obtained by treaty and
secured the privilege to every Southern slavchold-
cr to enter any part of it, attended by his slave
property, and enjoy the same therein, free from all
mocstation or hindrance whatsoever"
Here you see the vitalqucstion plainly presented
Mr.. Clay's plan did not allow the stakeholder
legal toothod in the Territories, while Gen. Footc
insisted that he had perfect right to 20 and take
his slaves thither in the absence of any legislative
prohibition, by virtue Of the Federal Constitution
So Mr.. Mason of Virginia, following, said
"Sr, so far as l have read these resolutions,
there is hut one proposition to which can give II
hearty assent, and that is tho resolution which pro-
poses to organize Territorial governments ut once