The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-08-03

AOOllClO0lSC6 was inAS0y o"S"o '~ ~
detection from our own ranks; men who
abandoned us, not because they supported
the Wilmost proviso, but because they
feared the Democratic party was about to
surrender the doctrine of non-interven-
ton f" by Congress, and become an active
agent, through the fundamentally of the
Federal government, for compelling the
Territories, one and all, to accept slavery
as an institution forever, unalterable and
uncomfortable. Time has now dissipated
the fears of many, and they have returned
to their old allegiance. The people Of the
North are beginning to understand, also,
that the true responsibility for all the agi.
tation which resulted from the Kansas Ne
braska act is upon those who resisted the
application of a, sound principle to merely
formal change of circumstances. But in
1854, suddenly and almost as if by magical
touch, the Democratic party of the North
and Northwest disappeared Only thirteen
Democrats were elected to the House of
Representatives, in that year, from all the
non.slaveholding States, California included,
and four of that number-almOst one third
were from the State of Illinois. 1t re-
quired years of constant effort to satisfy the
northern people that the Kansas ebraska
act was not an act of Southern aggression,
but an act for carrying into effect the prin-
ciple established by the compromise meas
ures of 1850. The undersigned do not mean
to palliate misconception so gross, but
merely to relate an indisputable fact. Our
leader in these eventful contests, now the
candidate of the Democratic party for the
Presidency of the United States, did, almost
without exaggeration, travel from Washing
ton City to Chicago, in 1854, by the light
of his own burning ef6gies.
1t was after such disastrous consequences
to the Democratic party, with hearts full of
appreciation, that our delegates from all the
States, north and south, assembled at Gin
cinnati in June, 1856, to consult with refer
ence to public affairs. Confident in the
justice of our cause, and appealing to the
sober judgment of the people, the Demo-
cratic National Convention, by a unanimous
vote, endorsed the Kansas. Nebraska act,
and resolved to abide by its principles.
The result is we'll known. The nominees of
that convention received a sufficient num-
Der of electoral votes to secure them in the
Presidency and Vice Presidency of the
United States. The fact was developed,
also, that in others of the Northern States,
New York, Ohio and Iowa, at least, the
Black Republicans had prevailed by mere
plurality, and in opposition to clear and
definite majority of the popular vote. At
no time since has the Black Republican
party attained power in the States of New
York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Indiana and Illinois, by its own strength,
but in every instance by some combination
with the remnant of the American party in
those States a remnant opposed to the ad-
ministration of James Buchanan, but never
satisfied to cooperate with the Abolition
lists in Presidential election.
KANsAs-NEBRAsKA BILL.
The Kansas-Nebraska bill was a CON-
promise Of conflicting opinions within the
Democratic party,-some of its supporters
believing that Congress had constitutional
authority to prohibit the existence of slavery
in the Territories others, that while Con-
gress had not, each Territorial Legislature
had such power; and yet Others, that nei-
ther Congress nor Territorial Legislature
could prohibit slavery, but were both en-
trusted with the power, coupled with the
duty of maintaining and protecting that re-
latiOn. To harmonic in support of the bill
such various opinions, and thus unite the
Democratic party, North an South, upon q
fair and final basis of action, was the task
to which Stephen A. Douglas addressed his
intellect and his influence. Democrats who
believed that Congress had power to pro-
hibit slavery within the Territories, upon
the one hand, or, upon the other, to maintain
slavery, agreed to delegate the entire exer-
else of such authority, whatever its extent
or nature might be, to the Territorial Legis-
latures, as the agents and substitutes of
Congress for that purpose; whilst those
who believed that the Territorial Legisla-
lures had inherent authority over the SUBJ
ject-authority not delegated by Congress,
but arising from right of self government
-concurred in a solemn declaration that
the action of every Territorial Legislature
should be subject to the prohibitions, limi-
tations and principles expressed in the Con-
stitution of the United States.
And, in order to provide q convenient
method for attesting the constitutionality of
any act which Territorial Legislature
might adopt, whether for the prohibition or
maintenance Of slavery, in case any citizen
should feel aggrieved by such legislation,
the right of appeal to the Supreme Court OF
the United States was so enlarged by the
9th and 9th sections of the bill as to in
clude "all cases involving title to slaves -
decided by the supreme court of Territory,
"without regard to the value of the matter,
property or title in controversy" and also
all cases decided by the court last named,
or by any district court of Territory, or
any Judge of either of the said courts, upon
any writ Of habeas corpus involving the
question OF personal freedom. The plain
object of these provisions was to Danish all
discussion of the subject of slavery within
the Territories, except the enforcement OF
the fugitive slave act, from the Congress of
the United States, and thus localize, as far
as possible, every controversy to which that
subject could give occasion. If, as in the
case of Kansas, Territorial Legislature
should exclude slavery, or, as in the case of
New Mexico, should protect and maintain
it, those who desired to contest the authority
of the legislature, one way or another, could
resort to the courts of justice with their
claims, and, by the decision of the highest
appellate tribunal--namely, the Supreme
Court of the United States--all such claims