New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-05-17
Con,,,uea from r,nh Paige.

Sdministration of which he was rnng spirit, as evil
Sence that the principle which brought that fdmns-
sration otp ex xerce was vicious and dangerous
He Thought the Senator had given in bis adhesion to
the doctrine and that he looked with pleasure on the
massage of the Nebraska Act a. measure OF value TO
she Southern States, and that he would have been
the 6rst 70 defend il; but find he takes pleasure
Ia citing these very sbuses in justification of his course
when be fought the principle, and In verihcaloh
of what he told before the South agreed To &C |
quieece He should pass on to the next cnapshI :.
The history Of this principle of non-inervention w
will be found in the proceedings OF the Nsdoi
vention at Cincinnati in 1856. All VIII renneoc he,
Alabama sent delegates 10 Cincinnati, den'uias s;n
the platform should be made first, and tnen ui s3
an ultimatnm which if not acceded 10, they wou,l
withdraw. That was, that the oonasn"V rrbst was
recognize the principle OF noninter Vch"o 80 "xr,;ct
incorporated into The platform =; PORTION Of the
nIatform was resd.l The Convention snlrmeu tao
doctrine in the planest language me Piatiolm ta,I
declares that the same PIS tbs nsrty understood in
fS5S ,b.t the Convention which nominated Pierce III
ISso had aft med the same doctrine OF non-inervehuo
and they alec declare that the principle was eorree.
sl;sd in the Kansas aud Nebraska BILL and that II
wss tie great Conservative principle on which alone
the peace and Ierpeuty of the Union could be pre-
served These were declared at Cincinnati unani'
mously. The vote was taken by States ana every uei
ecstion from every State was unanimous. There was
not one man from Mississippi protesting against inns
principle nor from Alabama, South Carolina, georgia
or from any other Southern State. But we are now
he upadmous vote In 1856, is unsound and 30 rot
ten four years after as 10 Justify the very States
adopting il then in breaking up the party because we
insist upon adherng to 1t now MOI only ,s Sa s s
The candidates accepted that platform, WIN
cons ruciion which they themselves put upon ~ ana
which is d e same he Mr.. Dougas has ever placed
upon it. Mr.. Buchanan's letter OF acceptance WAS
readl Mr. buchanan not only accepted on the plat
form but he was kind enough to tell the people what
meant and that il meant " that the people OF q Ter
rforv like those of q State should decide Tor Them
selves whether Slavery should or should not exist
within their limits" This was Squatter Sovereignty
in it's broadest FORM Mr.. Buchanan told the people
that Slavery could not exist there unless the people
of the Territory said co. and il should exist If they did
saw 80. He was elected ON that construction OF the
platform. He CIR Douglas did not ask for that
constructions he only asked that 1t be readopted, and
lei Il construe Itself but Mr.. Buchanan was sound
on that platform in 1885, with construction Identical
with that which is now denounced as heresy. The
distinguished gentleman who was nominated on
the same ticket, understood the platform in the
same way and after the nomination be returned 10 his
home at Lexington, Kentucky And when his neigh
bors assembled TO congratulate him on his good for
tune, hr. Breckenridge made speech IN reply snow
ing how he understood the Kansas bill, and the Gu
rinnati platform. Part of Mr.. Breckinridge's Lex
ington speech was read. lie Mr.. Doogasl stood on
that platform now; and as he had had difficulty IN
harmopizrg with his political friends with respect tn
a PLATFORM he now rendered them Mr.. BuchaDan's
Letter Of acceptance and Mr. Brecknrdses letter OF
acceptance letting each construe IT for himself tie
take their own language He was willing 10 be &C.
commodeting He would not insist on platform taken
from his speeches writings, but he couli PICK
them up ali Senate and all overhe country from
speeches and writings Of those who now ariagn-
ing him not being sound on the Slavery qnes-
ton. lAppause in galleries. He spoke OF these things
with pect for the purpose of c0nden-
nation or placing any man in false position If these
gentleman stand now where they did IN 1876, he
Wa with them. If they did not, then the question
arises who he's changed He did not complain if they
hah fl nuens lint ha had rtQh tn ask
would fu nish him with those arguments and reasons
which induced the change in their minds in order that
be might correct his errors too, if indeed he in
error. He did not believe IN never changing; and
though be claimed very consistent record as public
man, he bad modified his opinions on many questions,
and took pleasure in reractng an error than In
persevering in il. All he asked that gentlemen who
have taken a step forward or backward would forgive
him for not following them until convinced that they
ought TO have taken the step. The country was
well Informed that he removed from the
Craftsmanship of the Committee Territories in
1858 because he uttered at Freeport the Identical
sentiments contained IN the letters OF acceptance OF
MesGs. Buchanan and Breckenridge in 1856 His
leI esy consisted III utteTng the same sentiments that
be uttered in 1850 in 1854, and in 1856, and which he
was known TO have held for many years. tie did not
complain of the removal. If his opinions 90
hereIcal that he did not fairly represent the opinions
of The Senate il was right But when they displaced
him for this reason do charge him with changing,
when the fact is they have changed. At the end OF
eleven years he was removed for holding the identical
opinions he held when be was selected as the Chair
10 be stated truly. They should have said We have
I" got tired Of this doctrine of nOn-interventon, it
didn't work 10 suit IL has not yielded such prac
teal fruits the plains of Kansas anticipated
and have concluded 10 abandon IL and go back 10
the old doctrine proclaimed by Mr.. Yancey III 1913,
and rejected by an almost unanimous vote" II
painful 10 find such differences between himself
and friends. They were determined 10 make new
tests TO determine his orthodoxy. He should not and
did not recognize the right OF caucus OF the Senate
House to prescribe tests for the Democratic
Mn fkV ne n
making party platforms. Under political system
there has grown up an organization known as the
National Convention, eonpOsdd of delegates elected
fresh from the people, who once IN four years estab
hsh a platform and select nominees for the party
The Cincinnati platform was the only authoritative
platform Of the party until the Charleston Convention
met He had stood firmly and faithfully by the Cin-
cnnati platform, looking confidently 10 il re-
affirmed at Charleston. They bad all agreed 10 ap-
peato Charleston the council 10 settle the differences
The of the party assembled at Charles
son. and after three days debate the party determined
by an overwhelming majority IA favor of readopton |
of the Cincinnati Platform. Now, he longer a
hereto; he no longer outlaw from the Demo |
cratic party be no longer a rebel against Demo.
cratic power The Charleston Convention repudiated |
this test vcnained IN the resolutions by
vote OF "a majority 10 affirm the Cincinnati Plat
form; so that lie sustained by the party far |
the Platform concerned. The question |
is whether the Senator from Mississippi will again
acquiesce in the decision of his party, or - he |
going TO retire from the party and bolt its nomna-
ton break up because the party has concluded not
TO change from its position OF 1856 Were his friends
around him going ~ desert the party because the
party has not changed suddenly they have |
The country has often been told that he and his
friends in Illinois not acting in harmony with
the Democratic organization. They had replied that
hey would appeal 10 the National Convention to
rertain who conafifuta the Democratic marty in