The weekly Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1861, 1860-05-30

Senate Of that State, the 2Sth of Dec, ls47,
and the House Of Representatives the 29th
OF December, and were approved by the
Governor on the 30th of December. lam
aware that Florida subsequently passed re-
solutions asserting doctrines inconsistent
with these, and state this as evidence that
this doctrine, for which an now arraigned,
was not deemed to be political heresy at that
day. 1t may not be improper here TO re.
mark that, during this session of Congress,
received letter from q State Senator OF
Florida, inclosiDg resolutions which he had
introduced for the repeal of those resolu
tlons which have read, as being unsound,
and unconstitutional and dangerous to the
rights OF the South, and denouncing me by
name as the great author Of all this mischief
which is to strike down Southern rights
Mr.. PUgh, read the resolutions. 1t will be
observed that in their resolutions the State
OF Florida had declared that the Territorial
Legislature, while in Territorial condition,
had the exclusive right to determine for it.
self whether Slavery shall or shall not exist
within the limits of such Territory. As
have remarked, Florida changed her policy,
but If she solemnly proclaimed that doctrine
to the world as a sovereign State of this
Union, l should think she could forgive US
for remaining faithful to her creed, If we can
forgive her for abandoning it. /, Sir, ar.
raign no man, and much less sovereign
State. She had the right to proclaim her
opinions, and il she afterward believed they
were wrong she ought to have changed
them. But, Sir, having proclaimed them
and then changed, 1t seems to me that even
quarter should be granted to those who stnnG
by Florida's original position +; and Florida
was not the only State that held these doc.
trines at that time. I have here some reso'
lutions adopted by the Democratic State
Convention of Georgia In l847, and l have
seen it asserted in newspapers that they
were copied into several other Southern
Conventions.
[Mr. Pugh read the resolutions. Mr.. L
@. c. Lamar's name being among the sign
ers.
Mr.. Douglas proceeded. Here, Sir, WI
find this doctrine Of Non.intervention dis
tinctly defined by the Democratic Stat
Convention of Georgia. Two things are af
firmed (: that Congress has no constitutions
power TO legislate on the subject OF Slaverl
in the Territories. One would think tina
was pretty good Non Intervention canno
legislute at all on the subject in the Terri
tory. 1t may be, and PROFESSIONALLY is, tru
that some of the eminent men who partici
pated in that Convention have since changed
their opinions, and now believe it is botl
within the power and duty Of Congress tt
legisate for the protection Of Slavery in tht
Territories, just as they then believed it un
constitutional All have to say to thes'
men, for whose talent have great respect
is, that / can forgive them for having chang
ed from the doctrines which they invited u
OF the North to rally in support OF. and
think they could pardon Us for remaining
faithful to that doctrine which we and thel
egre ed TO stand upon. In pursuing this sub
iect fear muy become tedious, but fee
it my duty to present the evidence that th'
! Democratic POrty in lS4S stood plain OF
this cardinal doctrine OF Non.intervention
can show, on high Southern authority, tina
the Convention which assembled in 1856 Il
nominate a candidate for President and Ia!
down q platform for the party, adhered t
this doctrine. The attention. of the countr,
and Of the party had been specially called Il
this doctrine of Non.intervention by Con
gress with Slavery in the Territories
Hence the nomination OF Gen. Cass, wit
his opinion as expressed in the Nicholson
letter, was not the result OF accident, but h
was chosen because he spoke the sentiment
OF q majority OF the Democratic Party at tn
North. In that Convention, on the first bal
lot, Gen. Cass received sixty six votes fror
the slavehoIding States; Mr.. Buchanan
nineteen MIR. Woodbury., eighteen, ETC., tn
votes being given by Maryland, Delaware
Virginia, Mississippi. Louisiana, Texas, Al
kansae, Tennessee, Kentucky and Missouri
These States did not think Non-interventior
or Squatter Sovereignty as it is now called
was a heresy which furnished sufficlen
cause for disrupting the Democratic Party
much less dissolving the Union. They vo
ted for Gen. Cass with knowledge OF hi
opinions on this question-he was their fir
choice. Old Virginia did not take him as
choice Of evils. She had an opportunity G
, voting for Southern man, holding the sam
views which are how expressed by the nj
Dority of the Democratic Party, as shown b
, their repeated votes at Charleston. Sh
u could have voted for Mr.. Calhoun, but oil
} Virginia believed that intervention on tn
, subject of Slavery meant dsunon. Henc
+ she gave her vote first, last and all the tim
! for Gen. Cass, the great expounder and en-
} bodiment Of non-interventon. The same
true of Mississippi, represented here ever
. ably by the Senator who arraigned me. H
tells us he has ever fought this doctrine, b,
] at that time he had not 30 much power in Il
' State, and hence he was then unable to g.
duce Mi. .sissippi away from this doctrine
. and Louisiana, then true to the Democrat
5 creed, true TO the doctrine of non. interve
=, ton, true to the maintenance of the Unio
hostile to Intervention because it led direct
to disunion, she rallied around Gen. Cass
. the standard. bearer in 1S48 first, last and O
!, the time. So with other States. Then {
q the fourth ballot Gen. Cass received fro
8 the slave. holding States "a votes. Mr. B
t chanan 7, etc.; and even South Carolin
when she found her favorite had no chan,
D so soon as she found Gen. Cass was Il
choice of majority of the party-she whee
9 ed into line, and declared for the champit
I Of Squatter Sovereignty, or Popular Sove
I eighty, or Non.intervention, or whatever v,
u choose to call it. She did not then tbir
8 this doctrine wos sufficient cause either
d dissolve the Union or disrupt the Democrat
Il Party. On the first ballot Gen. Cass r
o ceiyed only 50 votes from the North, viii
he received 66 from the South, being q m
}. iority of the whole number. These fac
It show that he was not the choice OF a major
!, ty Of the Northern Democracy, but was Il
J. choice Of majority of the Southern Dem
cracy. ] will now proceed to show tn
:. these votes were cast with reference to Il
y. distinct question OF on.intervention, as no
y supported BY myself and affirmed by Il
Democratic Party ut Charleston, and as r
sisted by the Senator from Mississippi aI
those who seeded fren that Convention, ;,
6 After Gen. Cass had received the uomin