The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-05-25

often had occasion to say that have mod
lhed my opinions on many questions, and
take more pleasure in retracting an error
than IN persevering in it. All ask is, if it
be true that gentlemen have taken step in
advance or step backward, that they will
excuse me for not following them until they
convince me that they ought to have taken
that step.
The country has been informed that
was removed from the post of chairman of
the Committee on Territories, in 1858, be-
cause 1 uttered at Freeport, Illinois, the
identical sentiments contained in the speeches
and letters of acceptance of Mr.. Buchanan
and Mr.. Breckenridge in 1856. My heresy
consisted in uttering the same sentiment
then that the Senator from Mississippi bears
testimony that held and uttered in 1850 !;
that it has been shown that ! uttered during
the debate on the Kansas>N ebraska bill, in
1854, and in the debates of 1856, and which
was known to have held for many years.
! do not complain of my removal from the
committee. l acknowledge that, if it be
true that my opinions were so heretical, that
1 did not fairly and honestly represent the
sentiments of the Senate on these great
questions, it was right to displace ME, and
put man there who did. have no cons
plants to make. But when you displace
me for that reason, do not charge that 1
have changed, when the fact is, that you
have changed your opinions. You did elect
me chairman of that committee, in l847,
with knowledge of my opinions. You res
elected me each year for eleven years, by a
unanimous vote in caucus, with a full
knowledge of those opinions. At the end
of eleven years, you removed me for holding
the Identical opinions that | held when you
had unanimously selected me. l do not
complain of this; but l do think that fair
ness reqnires that the facts should have been
stated truly; and you should have said,
1--WE have got tired of this doctrine of nom
intervention it does not work to suit US !;
it has not yielded such practical fruits on
the plains of Kansas as we anticipated we
have concluded to abandon it all, and 60
back to the old doctrine proclaimed by
Yancey, at Baltimore, in 1848, and rejected
by the convention by an almost unanimous
vote"
Now, sir, there is difference of opinion,
it seems, on this question, between me and
majority of the Democratic Senators. 1
regret that difference. 1t would have afford.
ed me sincere and genuine satisfaction if l
could have continued to hold the same rela-
tions on this question that did formerly.
1t was painful to me to find that this differ
ence of opinion had grown up, and that they
had determined to make this new test by
which nay orthodoxy was to be questioned,
and was to be branded as hereto. While
l regretted that determination on the part of
some political friends here, cannot recog>
nize, and do not now recognize, the right of
caucus of the Senate, or of the House, to
ty. Senators are not chosen for the purpose
of making party platforms. That is no part
of their duty. Under our political system
there has grown up an organization known
as national convention, composed of dele.
gates elected fresh from the people, to as
semble once in four years to establish plat.
form for the party and select its nominees.
The Cincinnati platform was the only au.
thOritive exposition of Democratic faith un.
til the Charleston convention met. have
stood firmly, faithfully by the Cincinnati
platform, and have looked confidently to the
Charleston convention to find it reafirmed.
You gentlemen who differ with me, agreed
to appeal to Charleston as the grand council
that should decide all differences of political
opinion between you and me. I agreed :,
also, to look to the Charleston convention as
the representatives of the party assembled
from every State in the Union, and after
great elaboration, three days debate in
committee, and very elaborate and able
debate in full convention, the party deter
mined, by an overwhelming majority, in
favor of the readoption of the Cincinnati
platform.
existence of these differences of opinion, that
was in favor of the Cincinnati platform
without the dotting of an I, or the crossing
of a t. The Charleston convention affirmed
the same platform. l am no longer here
tic. am no longer an outlaw from the
Democratic party. l am no longer rebel
against the Democratic organization. The
Charleston convention repudiated this new
test, contained in the Senate caucus resolu-
lions, by majority of twenty seven, and
affirmed the Cincinnati platform in lieu of
H. AuOu, GU ioA 90 tuC piotIOA LII 10 Cou>
cerned, am sustained by the party-the
only authority on earth which, according to
Democratic usages, can determine the Dem.
cratic creed. The question now is whether
my friend from Mississippi will again ac-
quiesce in the decisions of his party upon
the platform which they have adopted, or
is be going to retire from the party, bolt its
nominations, break it up, because the par
ty has concluded not to change from its pc
siton of 1856. Are my friends around me
here going to desert the party because the
party has not changed as suddenly as they
have?
The country has often been told that I
and my friends in Illinois were not acting in
harmony with the Democratic organization.
We have said in reply to that accusation,
1--WE will appeal to the national convention
at Charleston and ascertain who constitute
the Democratic party in Illinois, whether it
be the regular organization that sustains
me, or the Federal oficeholders that acted,
with the Republicans, against me-" The
Federal Office holders sent their delegates to
Charleston. The regular Democratic Or
ganization, known as the Douglas organiza-
tion-the same organization that returned
me to the Senate the same organization
that beat the Republicans and the Federal
office holders combined in 1858-sent their
delegates to Charleston, and the convention
proceeded with great (}alihnration and i'm