Lewistown gazette. [volume] (Lewistown, Pa.) 1843-1944, 1860-03-01
THURSDAY, MARCH l, 1860.

zine (and it is indeed true, what Judge
Black Intimates, that that article is one Of
the obscurest documents by which politi
clan ever attempted to befog his followers J,
but we may gather Mr. Douglas real opin-
Ion from another manifesto preceding this,
In his New Orleans speech, delivered after
his recent success in Illinois, he defined
his position III substance as follows: eThe
Democracy of Illinois hold that slave
holder has the same right to take his slave
/ property into a Territory as any other
+ man has to take his horse or his merchan-
! disc -
What2 Slavery is the creature of local
law, and yet the STAKEHOLDER has the right
to take his slave property into Territory
before any local law has given him that
right! A slave does not become free,
when voluntarily brought by his owner up
on the soil of Territory, where no posi-
tive local law establishing slavery exists
How is this possible? How can even the
elastic mind of democratic candidate for
the Presidency ultis these contradictory
assumptions ? Applause And yet
there 1t stands, and nothing that Mr. Doug
las ever said can be more unequiyocal in
its meaning. And here again we may
claim taa pligilaga of drawing few logi-
cal deductions from Mr.. Douglas own pre-
misses. If, as Mr.. Douglas distinctly and
cmphaticaliY tells Us, a Stakeholder has a
right to take his slave as property into
Territory, and to hold him there as proper
ty, before any legislation on that point is
had, from what source does that right arise?
Not from the law of nature-for the right
TO hold slave Is 'uniounded in the laF of
mature. and in the unwritten and common
law little as he may care about nature and
her laws, he will hardly dare 10 assert that
the system of slave labor is the natural and
normal condition of society. 1t must then
spring from positive law. But from what
kind of positive law? Not from any pos
tive law Of local and municipal charac-
ter, for there is none such in the Territory
so far. Where is its source then? There
is but one kind of positive law to which
the Territories are subject, before any local
legislation has been had, and that is the
Constitution Of tie Jntte0 States. If.
therefore, Mr.. Douglas asserts, as he does,
that STAKEHOLDER has right to take his
sl2Ee as property into Territory, be must
at the same time admit that, in the absence
OF local legislation positively establishing
slavery, the Constitution of the United
States, the only valid law existing there,
must be the source Of that right What
else does Mr. Buchanan assert, but that
slavery exists in the Territories by virtue
of the Federal Constitution Where is,
then, the point Of difference Jetwecn Mr..
Buchanan and Mr. Douglas? Why all
this pomp and circumstance of glorious
war Whence these fierce battles betEeen
the Montechi and Calpuletti of the Demo
cratic camp? Are ye not brothers?
Mr.. Douglas is u statesman, (as they are
all, all statRsmep,) and pretends that the
Constitution does not establish slagery in
the territories, beyond the power of the
people to control it by law What does
that mean? 1t means that people Of
territory shall have the power, not to ex-
clude slavery By lay, fQF NJ. Douglas new
er uses that expression, but to embarrass
the STAKEHOLDER in the enjoyment of his
right by unfriendly legislation The
right to bold slaves, says he, in another
place, is a worthless right, unless protee-
ted by appropriate police regulations If
the people of territory do not want sla-
very, they have but to withhold all pro-
lection and all friendly legislation In
deed, most ingenious expedient!
But alas Here is one of those cases
where the abstract admission of right is
of decisive importance. Supposing, for
arguments sake, slave might escape from
his owner IN a territory, without being in
actual danger of a re-capture, would that
IN any way affect the constitutional right
of the STAKEHOLDER to the possession and en-
joyment of his property? IT, says he,
slavery exists in the territories by virtue
of the Constitution (that is, if slave
'holder has right to introduce his slave
property" where there is no other law but
the Constitution then it becomes the i'm
'perative duty of Congress, to the perform
'ance of which every member is bound by
'his oath and conscience, and from which
no consideration of policy or expediency
'can release him, to provide by law such
adequate and complete protection, as is es-
'sentlal to the enjoyment of that important
right
And Mr. Douglas having emphatically |
admitted the right of property in slave,
where that right can spring from no other
law than the Constitution, then dares
to speak of unfriendly legislation Where
is his conscience? ;? Where is his oath
Where is his honor? [Applause.]
But Mr.. Douglas says more: The Con-
stitution being the supreme law of the
land in the States as well as the territor-
les, then slavery exists in Pennsylvania
( just as well as in Kansas and in South |
Carolina, and the irrepressible conflict Is
8 therep Ave, the irrepressible conflict is