The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1860-08-02

/ EoIO OIO'
/ That sounds like good Republica
doctrine, without particle of 'disunio
doctrine, without particle of"disunior
i'll it. Mr., Douglas does not leave tt
matter thus, however, but returns to I'll
defence of congressional interventio
in the following clear style; -, -,
"But you say that we propose to prc
hibit by law your emigrating to tn
territories with your property. Nv
propose no such thing. We recogniz
your right, in common with our own,t
p emigrate to the territories with YOU
property, and there hold and enjoy
lin the subordination to the laws Iyo
may find in some respects different fror
our own, las the laws of the various State
OF this Union vary, on some points, fror
the laws of each other. Some specie
of property are excluded by law in mos
of the States, as well as Territories, a
being unwise, immoral, or contrary t.
the principles, of sound public policy
For instance, the banker is prohibited
from emigration to Minnesota, Oregon
and California with his bank. The banl
may be property by the laws of New
York, but ceases to be so when taker
into State Or Territory where banking
1 is prohibited by the local law. So ar
dent spirits, owhiskey, brandy, all the
intoxicating drinks are reco. nized as
property in most Of the States, if not al
OF them; but no citizen, whether from
the North or the South, can take this
property with HIM, and hold, sell OF
use at his pleasure,in all the Territories,
because it is prohibited by the lo,a
LAWN Oregon by the statutes of the
Territory. aud in the Indian country by
the acts-of Congress. Nor can man
go there and take and hold his slave
for. the same reason. There are laws
against the introduction, sale and use
OF specific kinds of property, whether
brought from the North or the South, or
from the foreign countries. - Con.
Globe, 1850, Appendia, yol %, part |,
page 371.l ...-. ..af os q
The odious doctrine claimed to be
settled by the bred Scott decision, that
the constitution recognises property in
slaves, and guarantees full protection to
such property throughout our national
domain, could not be more plumply de.
MED, nor the opposite position be more
positively asserted than is done here.
Again, he tells us in the following
words that Kit is no violence of south.
ern rights to prohibit slavery" by con
gressiona! intervention
THE territories belong to the United
States as one people, one nation, land are
to be disposed of for the benefit of all.
according to the principles of the con
stitution. Each State as a member of
the confederacy, has right to a voice
in forming the rules and regulations of
the government of the territories: but
different sections-North, South, East
and West-have no such right. 1t is
no violation OF southern rights to pro.
hibit slavery Con. Globe, Appendic,
ToS. Y, part l, Page 800.
When instructed by the democratic
legislature Of Illinois to vote for the
Wilmot Proviso, he says:
81 have no desire to break loose. NV
opinions are my own, land express them
freely. My votes belong to those who
sent me here, ana to them I am respons.
ible. have never differed with nv
constituency, during seven years ser.
vice III Congress, except upon one soil.
tary question, and even on that have
no constitutional difficulties, and have
previously twice given the same vote,
under peculiar circumstances, which is
now required at my hands. 1 have no
desire, therefore, to break loose from
the instructions Con. Globe, Mar. Is,
APpendi~, 0oh 2, part l, p. 800.
Slavery, then, is prohibited in all the
country acquired from Mexico, by a fan,
damental lava constitutional provis-
ion, adopted by the inhabitants Of the
country, and which must continue in
force forever. unless repealed by com
petent authority. Tbs doctrine is not
new to me, nor is it now advanced to
me for the first time. = Con. Globe, 1850,
oot. 10, part l, page 373.
''He had no constitutional difficulty
in voting for the WllmOt Proviso then.
1t is thus shown that through a series
of years, Mr. Douglas pursued and de-
tended the policy of congressional pro-
hlbltlon of slavery, not only in territo>
ries, but even in states-never denying
and never doubling the competency Of
Congress to extend the Wilmot Proviso
to all territory belonging to the gov
eminent. Let us now examine
ID. DOUGLAS ON THE ''IRREPREss1BLE
CONFLICT.
We shall here find that the existence
of this conflict was recognized nv
Mr.. Douglas several years before Mr..
Lincoln spoke Of it in Illinois, or Mr..
Seward in Rochester. Mr.. Douglas
said /:
81 have already had occasion to re-
mark that at the time of the adoption of
the constitution there were twelve (slave
states) and six of them have since abol-
ished slavery. This fact shows that the
cause of free dom has steadily and firm.
ly and steadily advanced, while slavery
las reeeded in the same ratio. We all
look forward with confidence to the
time when Delaware, MARYLAND, Vir-
ginla, Kentucky and Missouri, and prob
ably North Carolina and Tennessee, will
adopt one gradual system of emancipa>
ton, under the operation Of which those
States must in process of time become
free"
Then, sir, the possession of the Sen
ator from South Carolina, is entirely
impracticable. 1t is also inadmissible
if practicable. 1t would reyolutionize
the fundamental principles of the gov
eminent. 1t would destroy the great
principles Of popular equality mot pops
alar sovereignty which must necessa-
rilY form the basis of all institutions