East Saginaw courier., 1860-09-20
DOUGLAS ON BRECKINRIDGE
His Great Speech at Baltimore.
HE EXHIBITS BRECKINRIDGEs RECORD On
THE i" DOGMA
COMPLETE DEFENCE OF IIIs OWN
POSITION.

COMPLETE DEFENCE OF HIS OWN
| POSITION.
fThe following is that part Of Douglas
speech at Baltimore in which he replied
to Breckinridge's speech at Lexington.
Since / arrived here tonight, a frienc
read to me portion of speech deliv
cred by Mr.. BreckinUdge, at Lexington
Kentucky, yesterday. In that speech
find that Mr.. Breckinridge justifes the
breaking up Of the democratic conven
ton and the division of the democratic
party to the great danger of the election
of black republican, on the ground, he
says, that the regular party insisted on a
particular dogma, and that he would not
take anybody as a candidate for the
Presidency who was the representative
of that dogma. [Cheers.
Now let me ask you what is that dog.
ma Of which he speaks, and which he
charges me as being the representative
of? Is it the dogma of non-intervention
by Congress with slavery in the Terrific
ries? All that my friends desired at
Charleston, and again at Baltimore, was,
that the convention this year should reaf-
firm the platform adopted at Cincinnati
in 1856; we asked nothing more. That
platform declared the platform of non-in-
tervention. James Buchanan was elected
President and John G. Breckenridge Vice
President on that platform and as
pledged to that dogma.
They were made President and Vice
President by the power of that very
dogma. They never could have been
elected to office unless for that very
dogma Of non intervention. And now
Breckinlidge tells you that rather than
submit to the dogma upon which he was
elected and to observe which he had
pledged his honor of fidelity, it was bet
ter to break up the party, to hazard the
election of black republican, and all
the dire consequences that would likely
follow. | again repeat that we only ask
the same dogma upon which Buchanan
and Breckinridge were elected; we only
ask the same platform on which they
were nominated we did not require any
change of platform, any change of prin-
clple, or any change of usage of the
party. But he and his party take the
ground that the man who now stands
where he and others stood four years ago
is no better than all aboltionist. Cheers
Did he tell You so four years ago?-
[Cries, "No."l Did he not tell you four
years ago that the peace of this country
depended upon the very doctrine OF non
intervention? Cries, Eyes. Did he
not tell you that the election of such an
interventionist as Fremont would be Just
cause of disunion? Cries, "Hcdid. +
Did he not tell you that southern honor,
southern rights and southern equality in
the confederacy depended on maintaining
the doctrine Of non-intervention as af-
firmed in the Cincinnati platform ?
[Cries, ale did SOL And now this
Breckenridge, who was elected Vice
President by your efforts and by mine
upon that self-same doctrine, tells you
that no man ought to be entrusted with
the reins of government who stands by
the principle to which he pledged his sa-
cred honor to stand by four years ago
TCheers.
Again, my fellow-ci citizens, Major Breck-
inridge, in his stump speech, defended
himself against the charge that he was
opposed to Gen. Cass in 1S4S. He says
it is true that in 1S47 he attended the
meeting which brought out Gen. Taylor
for the Presidency, but that subsequent
ly, in 1S4S, after Cass was nominated, he
took the stump for Csss, because he rep
resented his (Breckinridge's) principles.
Now mark his language 81 went for
Cass because Cass represented my princi'
pies" What principles did Cass repre-
sent? Why, he had just written the
Nicholson letter. Cheers.l The Mich
olson letter was non-intervention, with
squattcr sovereignty added. Cheers.
Yet Breckenridge says he went for
Cass against Taylor, after being first
committed to Taylor, because Cass rep
resented his principles. [Cheers 1t
seems, then, that Breckenridge was sound
on the dogma in 1913. Laughter. j.
Again, in convention assembled in this
city, in 1S4S, when they nominated Cass
for President, they adopted the same
platform of non-intervention. Now look
on that platform. Breckenridge was
bound in 1S4S, and he pledged himself,
to the doctrine Of non-intervention by
Congress with slavery in the Territories.
Breckenridge went for Cass because
Cass represented his principles on this
dogma. So it seems, then, that Breckin-
ridge and Cass, in the South, were to-
cether in 1S4S. We all went for the
dogma then. Let any man read the rec
ord, if he has doubt upon this point
The only objection had myself TO Cass
at the time was, that he went a little too
far on squattcr sovereignty. [Cheers.]
But it seems that Breckenridge went the
whole hog with him daughter for Cass
thoroughly represented his principles
Now the difference between myself and
Cass on that point was, that Cass said
the people had right to make their own
laws in the Territory outside Of the con-
stitution of the United States And
this, recollect, was the doctrine of Breck
inridge = for did not Csss represent
Breckinridge's principles? [Cheers and
laughter
did not, however, believe that doc
trine. said that they had right to
made their own laws in the Territories