, 1860-01-23
A Southern View Of the Dou.lo8 Con-
VcnEt0M in lI1lMots.

tFron the New Ore1ns Delta. 1:h.1
The illinois Convent!on which, nominated Mr..
Douglas for the Presidency passed Il series ul
resolutions, from which we may gathert' opiu-
ions OF srhat is ra@led tie Utmocrary Of that
State in reference to the question Of slavery 10
the Territories. We may also iutor,n ourselves
Of the wide discrepancy between Democratic
principles rs they are understood at the South
stood at the North. We shall see that if tue
doctrines professed and insisted on in the SoutL
are Democratic doctrines, the doctrines PRO-
fessed aud insisted On in Illinois BY tn. follow
ers Of Dir. Douglas must be emphatically unti
Democratic Thc:e Is no common ground On
the ereut question of Territorial policy and
Territorial rights the antagoni.m is troad mud
distinct: 1t is impossible that people profess
ing opinions so conflicting, on questions 20 im-
portant, eau belong to the same party for auy
other purpose than that Of party victory and
party plumber. II the Delegates chosen ~ this
Illinois Convention be admitted ut Charleston
it will be sufficient proof that the Democrats
party has become useless for any purposs in
volEing the rights or interests uf the South.
.MdcE Rpu6l,caas, or haotr AothiH4s, f{scted mr.
der pretnd<d Democratic forms. feoutd hag.
good cl4tM to admission 'nlo tie CAarltstoA Can
rt"tio".I i Mtsf Miaois dtltyat.s 1e rtoyni:td ia
spite Of The cdor IF Aeresy ,cAicA surrou.dt them,
In concise terms the Southern Democratic
doctrine, in reference to slavery in the Tcsrito-
ries, may be stated as follows: The Terrific
RIGS are LIE common property Of the States:
tile citizen of each State Las the rirl,t to take
his property into ny Territory, and hns a lust
claim to be protected in holding and enjoying
il, By any authority competent to give such pro.
lection: the right Of property in slaves is not
derived from my Constitution or any laws.
either State or Federal, but, like other property
rights, existed before the formation of those
Constitutions and laws, and its protection is one
Of the objects for which they were instituted:
neither the people nor the authorities OF Ter.
ritory can justly destroy or injure these rights,
or in anF way interfere with them, except for
their protection; the Supreme Court has recoy-
nized these principles, and it is the duty OF the
Federal Government to apply and enforce them
whenever any emergency demanding such al,-
plicatlon and enforcement may arise.
The Douglas doctrine, Us expressed in the
lusions Is this: The people Of the Territories
even to the extent of DESTROYING the right Of
property in slaycs, and should be permitted to
exercise this power at their usn discretion: the
right ofprcperty in slaves is derived from local
law; the Supreme Court has not decided that
the People Of Territory hare no right to pro-
h'l,it or exclude slarcry
In the face OF all issue so direct, who will
presume 10 say that the Charleston Convention
should not express an opinion either on one side
or the oaher? Who will deuounce US as ex-
tFemssts Tor insisting that The South has right
to know where The Democratic party stands On
this great question: Who will assert that the |
South IS bound to girc her united support to
any party which may refuse to recognize her |
rights and the principles 10 which she has nro- |
Gained her iu'moyabte devotion?