Daily national Democrat., 1860-08-19
From the San Francisco Nation.
Views OF the Hon. ). w. Inge upon the
Political Issues of the Day.
SAN FRANcIsco Aug IL 1ee


the severest rules applicable to such proceed
ihSS' Dut the question of regularity can
never properly arise where "A division occurs
IN reference to the fundamental principles
which parties are organized to carry into
effect IT Douglas aud Breckenridge repro
sentcd the same political principles, then it
would be necessary to determine the question
OF regularity. But the division of the party
occurred III reference to the platform, before
the nominations were made, aud is essentially
one of substance and not of FORM The only
legitimate object of party organization is to
sustain principles in which we believe, and
as the two rival candidates nominated at
Baltimore represent different and antagonistic
principles, we have to be governed in our
elections 10y the principles they represent, and
not 10y the forms that were observed in their
nominations
This difference in principles is radical clear
and well defined. Douglas maintains the
| time honored Democratic doctrine of non
intervention by Congress with slavery in the
Territories; Breckinridge the anti Democratic
heresy of Congressional intervention for the
protection OF slavery in the Territories One
is Democratic, the other anti democratic :;
one is national, the olher sectional. Dourlns
faithfully and consistently represents 1t prin-
ciple of policy established into the Democrat.
ic creed in 1913, which has never since been
questioned or disturbed un,il the present day,
aud the practical efficacy of which has been
demonstrated by experience. breckenridge
represents mischievous, sectional principle,
solemny abandoned 10y the South in 1850,
and demonstrated by history to be fraught
with fatal evils to the harmony and perpetu
ity OF the Union. From 1920 to 1850. the
practice of Congress was to intervene on this
subject. First the spirit OF compromise ami
mated that Intervention, as in the ease of the
Louisiana Territory in 1920; afterwards, as
the anti-slavery fanatcism swelIed into a
great political power in the free States, the
national spiit of compromise was suffocated
and that OF rapaclous sectional monopoly
animated the intervention of Congress, as in
the case Of the Wimot ProviSo in 1916. 1t
then became apparent that the future action
OF Congress would be a struggle between
hostile sections, constantly recurring and
never ending, except in the overthrow of the
Republic. The only hope of peace to the
country and stability to the Union was in the
transfer of the subject, with the whole power
OF Congress over it, to the people Of the Ter
rltorles They eau determine it without diili.
Guilty, except in case Of foreign interference
out Of which all the troubles arose in Kansas:
they ought to determine it because it is pecu-
iarly question of local concern; and more
than all, they will determine it in every use,
because they have over it a practical 30 wer
which will mockingly defy the theoretical
sovereigntyof Congress / hold this doctrine
OF territorial control over slavery to he DO
Iiticol necessity, without which neither ma
t!onal parties nor the Union can longe
exist. How illustrative Of this is the present
condition of the country? Lincoln is for
Congressional Intervention to exclude, and
Breckinridge to protect, slavery, in all the
Territories of the Union, without reference
to soil, climate, or the will of the people in
terested. One is at the head of Northern
sectional the other Southern sectional, par
ty and it is claimed ly their friends that
they will be sustained by majorities in their
respective sections. My hope and confidence
is that the patriotic masses of both sections
are yet loyal to the Union, and will sustain
Douglas and mis- National Union policy,
against the sectional disunion Intervention of
Lincoln and Breckenridge. Upon fhe Doug.
las platform the Democratic party have
elected two successive Presidents, and have
never suffered defeat am not unmindful
of the defeat Of Cass, in S4S, but that contest
turned upon comparison of military PROV
eSs in which principle was forgotten in oft re-
hearshed battle fields, and it is not surprising
that the hero of HuI's surrender paled his
Intellectual fires before the conquerer of Buena
Vista.
The present Chief Magistrate undoubtedly
owes his position to this doctrine, and, it my
be added, the execration of the American
people, to its base abandonment. In 1856,
the Republicans stood squarely upon The doc
trine of Congressional Intervention. and were
beaten by the patriotic people of the free
States. Standing upon the same ground row
they will be beaten again in the free States,
unless conservative and national feeling are
extinct 1t must be confessed, that the hos
tile intervention of Lincoln has practical
OF iect, inside the Union and attainable 10y
the forms of legislation. If elected his party
before the end of his administration will have
the power and will exerci-e it, 10 abolish or
exclude slavery everywhere, outside of the
States. But the Intervention of Brecknrdge
| for protection, means nothing inside lie
| Union. Congress will never again legislate
for slavery in any form, and with II full
know ledge of the fact the supporters OF
Breckenridge desire to drag it back into the
halls of Congress. They dem nd change OF
venue from the impartial tribunal Of public
opinion, to packed jury, who have already
| prejudgcd the issne against them.
They insist Congress should exercise the
power to protect slavery in the Territories.
when Mr.. Breckenridge himself says "the
right to establish involves the corelalive right
to pi ohibit, and denying both, | would vote
for neither"
Gentlemen, no man living believes that
Congress will again legislnte to establish, or
project. PrGjudgrd (synonymous terms
slavery in any Territory OF this Union,
and we must therefore look beyond the
avowed objects of The Breckinridge party for
their real designs. What is the alternative
when what they call Constitutional right is
| denied ? When they demand of Congress
what they know it viii never do, what is the
meaning of that demand? 1t is painfully
apparent that the Breckenridge programme
means disunion, and if the people of he South
support him. which, may God forbid they
allo mean disunion, and there is no human
power that can arrest the downfall of this
confederation.
Viewing, this subject as Californian it as
tonishes me that an attempt even should be
made to organize Breckenridge party in This
State. In our fundamental law we have abol-
shed slavery, and the public sentiment of the
State is adverse to that institution. Why
should our people then be pulled along at the
tail end of this disunion movement?
We do not desire to see this Intervention
fuse again ignited in the halls Of Congress
nor to sustain the ambition of tho aspiring
youths who would fire the dome of ON
American Pantheon. Within the Union We
see vista of peace, prosperity, and power
for our young and vigorous State, With ouI
overland communications 10y steam aud light
ming, established under the fostering protec-
| tiOD 0f tha EaIapo1 spF hal