Arkansas true Democrat., 1860-09-15

he opposed the admission of Kansas with slavery. He desired to make it free State, and wanted lime to bring it about aided by unfriendly legislation. In his speech at Bloomington, 18th July, 1858, he said: "Under the principles of popular soy vereignty
 ne uses the word popuar) sauery has been Kept out Aansds." And again he said: e If this princi- ple of popular sovereignty, asserted in the Kansas Neoraska bill be fairly carried out, by letting the people decide the question for themselves by fair Vote at fair election and with fair returns slare- ry 'oa not erist one day or one hour IN ANY TERRI TORY" This he proclaimed all over Illinois, to be
 the practical result of his squatter sovereignty doc. trine; and when pressed by Mir. LINCOLN, who snowed that squatter sovereignty was in conflict with the decision of the Supreme Court, he said in his speech at Freeport:
 No matter what the decision the of Supreme Court may be on that abstract question, still the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to make slaoe territory or a free territory, IS PERFECT AND COMPLETE uNpER THE NEBRASKA BILL"
 Here he boldly afirms that the people of a ter. ritory have the right to nullify set at noueht and trampse not only upon the decision of the high est Judicial authority in the world but the constitution the only bond of union, and he reiterated the same sentiment on every stump in Illinois. His ambition to be President has made him desperate, ana caused nm to resort to species of demagogue | U States, much less candidate for the Presidency; py claiming to be the only man in the democratic party who is ill favor of self-gosernment This is the beginning, the middle. and the end of his cleo. toneerlng sOng-this is his excuse for arraying himself in hostility against the national democracy who advocate the true doctrine of self fgovcrnment l. e. when the people meet in convention to form State constitutionthen, and not till then, are they clothed with sovereignty. Again in his speech at Chicago he said:
 My objection to the Lecompton contriyance was that it undertook to force slavery on the people l of Kansas agaiast tteir tciX''
 l And thus the attempt has been made by him to create the impression that the democratic party, and the southern people, ,cish 10 force slarery where the people do not lnt II, and where it is not desra- ble or profitable for it to go. Now no one knows better than Judge DOUGLAS that such an imputation is libel upon the democracy and upon the south ern people-all they ask, all they have ever asked was recognition of the principle of Slate equality of the rights of all under the constitution, and the right to enjoy them equally, any and every where within the limits of the United States-tbe States and Territories This right the aboltionsts l deny-this right Judge DOUGLAS denies, and advo- yates in lieu the odious doctrine of squatterim un der which he says slavery will not exist day or an hour in any terrtory.'
 CHARLESTON CONVENTION.
 Since the adoption of the Cincinnati platform in l q eign State-and been defeated. The Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case has decided all doubtful con stiutonal questions in regard to the rights and the equality of the States and of the people; and ow- ing to the fact that Mr. Douglas and those demo- crats North, who were of his way of thinking, had asserted that under the Kansas act, and the Cncin nati platform which had ndorsed that act; the peo- pie of territory during the territorial existence had the right to exclude the owner of slave, from going there with that species of property | it was demanded by the entire democracy and the whole South that the Charleston conven- ton when it met should in their platform assert the rqaalay of the States, affirm that they had an equal right to go to the territories with their pro- perty, and that under the constitution they were entitled to protection while there under the terri | torial government.
 | The democratic convention of Alabama, as, sembed at Montgomery in January, 1S60 to ap- point delegates from that State to the Charleston convention It chose to declare the opinions en- tertained by majority of it's members that no ter ritoral legislature had right to prohibit the inst- tuition of slavery, and that the Congress of the United States was under immediate obligation to maintain and protect that institution every where; in the States-in the territores-and in the wilder ness in which territorial governments are yet un- | organized "To such declaration of opinion by the State of Alabama there could be no reasonable ground of objection" Douglas address to the democracy of the U. s.
 | The sentiment embraced in the foregoing was the sentiment entertained by the entire South and by national men every where was based upon the opinion of the Supreme Court, and, to it, Gin the language of the said committee,) there could be no reasonable objection.'
 Yet Mr. Douqlas seeing the tide of popular senti- ment in that direction advertised his friends long before the meeting of the convention. that if sen timents such as those adopted by the Alabama con- venton were incorporated in the platform at Charleston, he would not accept the nominations and thus for the first time in the history of this country, has an aspirant to the Presidency unso- licted attempted to dictate to the democracy, the kind of platform he wanted them to make for him to stand upon. The time however arrived-the l convention met, and usual committee consist | ing of one from each State was appointed to pre- pare platform of principles; majority of that committee composed of the members of each of the Is southern States, and the members of the Pacific States-Oregon and California, agreed upon the | following:
 1st That the Territories are common property held in trust for dI the citizens of the United States.
 2nd. That all citizens of the United States have an equal right to settle in the Territories with their property.
 3rd. That neither Congress nor Territorial Legislature can destroy or impair their rights, 1 either of persons or property. 4th. That it is the duty of the Federal Govern ment to protect those rights, which contain the doctrines enunciated by the Supreme Court, and the doctrine contained in the Alabama resolutions; | to which the Douglas Executive Committee say: l "There could be no reasonable objection" Yet that report was summarly voted down by the friends of Mir. DOUGLAS, (who by the adoption of q double rule-the unit rule and the indiriduat rule, which secured to him some thirty or forty votes in the convention to which he not entitled accord ing to the usages ofconventions heretofore adopted) l the rights of the South and the Supreme Court, by denying one half of the States equal rights in the Territories with their property. This done to drive the southern members (nearly all of whom were opposed to Mir. DoUGLAs,) out of the conven- tion. It had the desired effect. The delegations from Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Florida, South Carolina, and nearly all from Georgia and Arkan- sas, withdrew and entered their solemn protest against the proceedings of the convention. The Douglas delegates remaining, adopted the two | third rule-declaring that POP votes or B of the whole electoral college should be necessary to a choice. Finding that they could not succeed in i making nomination, they adjourned the conven- tion to Baltimore, on the 18th of June. In the meantime, the edng delegates returned and con- ferred with their constituents, who without one single exception indorsed their action, and hoping to see a reconciliation effected, they re- accredited them to the
 BALTIMORE CONVENTION.
 Upon the meeting of the convention at Balti- more, delegates appointed by meetings gotten up by the friends of Mir. DOUGLAS without the shadow of authority, from the States of Aladama, Louisiana, Georgia, Arkansas, and several other States were there clamingua right to seats in said convention in place of the Regularly accredited members, who were there ready to claim their seats, should the convention manifest disposition to do justice to | all parts of the Union.
 The contestants or unlawful, irregular bogus del egates admitted from the States of Alabama and Louisiana, and the regular delegates ,oerc er- ctuded, and other irregular delegates from Arkan sas, Georgis and other States, frienely to MT. Douglas were admitted with power to cast a cor responding vote--against which unusual, unjust and corrupt proceedings and manifest sacrifice of principles for the sake of men, the whole South with California, Oregon and number of delegates from the other northern States, entered their solemn protest and withdrew, numbering (without counting the eight votes of South Carolina) lO5 votes out of the 303 votes, which left in the DoUG LAS convention l90 votes; less by l2 votes than 202, the numbero votes necessary to make nomi- nation. But it was resolved in the convention by a vote on appeal from the decision of the presiding officer, that the minority of the Georgia delegation could not vote in the convention after the majority had ,rithdracn.''
 By the application of this rule to the other dele