The weekly north Iowa times. [volume] (McGregor, Iowa) 1857-1867, 1860-02-22
Another Great Deba te.
DOUGLAS AND FESSENDEN.

Another Great Debate.
DOUGLAS AND FEsSENDEN.
Popular Sovereignty Triumphant :!
Mr.. Fcssenden said he felt impelled to re-
ply in few words to what was said about
the Republican party. The honorable SEN
ator from Virginia (Mr. Mason) had offered
resolution, and had a committee appointed
to inquire into this matter Of invasion at
Harper's Ferry, and also to suggest RENE
dy He had been willing to wait for their
report, but the honorable senator from Hi
nois, (Mr. Douglas seemed to distrust their
ability to make the examination or provide
the remedy. He brings in resolution, and
speaks on it, and assumes to instruct the
committee. But was that all the object of
the honorable senator from Illinois? Was
there not something beyond? He had made
what might be called a political speech, in
tended to affect political parties. He tho't
he had seen the senator's argument before,
and he must be permitted to say he had ad
vanced nothing specially new. He thought
there was no member of this congress who
was not as 1esirous as the senator to stop
these attempts toincite insurrection or make
attacks on neighboring states.
He did not know of any design anywhere,
except by few individuals who belonged to
no party, to do anything of this kind. He
was inclined to agree with the senator from
Illinois on the constitutional right to make
such laws to suppress invasion. But it is
said that the Republican party is RESPONSE
ble for this outrage, and that it is due to the
teachings of that party. We have heard
this before; have heard it in the senate. 1t
has been iterated and reiterated. We have
heard it in the other branch Of congress,
and in the newspapers; and it seems that
the honorable senator has no other design
than to proclaim the same belief. We
might have presumed this without his dec
laration, for it is now dogma of the Dem
ocratic party-a portion of the creed, and a
part of the scheme for the campaign, in ref
erencc to the fall election, to charge on the
Republican party that they are responsible
Mr.. F. said nothing could be found in the
Republican party, or their acts, to author
ize the accusation. There was not enough
to convince the country, or at least his sec
ton of it, that the Republican party are re-
Sponsible. There is no creed, no practice,
no doctrine of that party which will justify
the accusation in any shape. The idea Of
appealing to the free states to stop agitation,
not to aggress on their neighborS, not to en-
courage disagreeable doctrines, when, in his
Judgment, the men who made these appeals
have counselled aggression from the begin.
ming He told the honorable senator from
Illinois frankly, that he believed him coun-
selling aggression when he advocated the
repeal of the Missouri restriction. He be-
lieved, as was stated by the honorable SEN
ator from South Carolina, that the design
of that repeal was to extend slavery over
the territory and enlarge its area 1t seems
certain members of the Republican party
have proclaimed there was an antagonism
between certain principles with regard to
this doctrine. We have been surprised that
gentlemen of intcllig 4uce, who knew the
meaning of words, should undertake to say
that free states and slave states cannot exist
in this Union together. But there is nc
such an idea in any speech of the gentle.
man from Illinois, (Mr Lincoln or of the
senator from New York If free labor OF
save labor came together, they must neces
sa,ily antagonize. That is all. But no one
claims that free and slave states could not
exist in the same Union.
Mr.. Davis inquired what he meant ex,
actly?
Mr.. Fessenden-I believe that free labor
is in its character independent, and tends tc
promote the wealth and manliness Of the
laborer; while slave labor tends to degrade
and impoverish the laborer, to diminish his
comfort and bclttle his character. In 9th
er words, where slave labor exists, it tcnds
to degenerate the free labor on the same soil
Now, sir, to come to another point: Tht
senator from Illinois says that his answer t.
this doctrine was, that there should alway!
be diversity Of interests, a diversity of do
mcstic institutions. What do understand
the senator to mean? Does he mean tina
there should be no external force of the gen
eral government or Of any government
abroad brought to bear upon the institu
: tions of different states and different eli
mates, and compel similarity? Is tina
what he means!
Mr.. Douglas-I mean the power of tn,
federal government should not be used ei
ther to extend or repress, establish or abol
ish, any domestic institution in any state
but that each state should be left entirely t.
do just as it pleases, without any interter
ence by the federal government, directly o.
indirectly, to control the decision.
Mr.. Fessenden That means nothing NOR,
than squatter sovereignty-his doctrine il
another shape. But no one claims that thu
government has any right to interfere. HI
may set up as many men Of straw as h'
pleases, and charge, with lance at rest, OIL
as many wind mills as he pleases, but | un
derstand him to claim there must be a di
versity. Does he say there must be slave
ry, and that, therefore, it is right? 1t is al
assumption the Republican party woult
like to have the government interfere. Suc(
is not the fact. The allegation is entirely
unfounded in fact understood the sena
tor to say that the Republican party desire
to make war on slavery in the states, in
stead of against its introduction into trc'
territory. deny the charge, and there il
nothing in the speech Of the senator to sub
stantiate the charge. We hold, as we have
always, that the stakeholder has no right t
90 with his slaves into free territory, unles
there is some law there to authorize it,
3 From this it has been argued that the,
made war on slavery everywhere. ! sa,
here, as have said before, that hate slave