The Tiffin weekly tribune. (Tiffin, Ohio) 1859-1868, 1860-01-27

tory could exclude slavery Ia spite Of
Congress, without derivation OF power
from Congress, and he alone is response
bic for il.
Mf. Doyis (Dom.) Of Miss.-1 suppose
the Senator from mIllinoisroforred 10 those
who must know his opinio in 1901 I
did know that he advocated the doctrine
Of sovereignty in the Territories-tho
right % do what they please. did not
agree with him thon-
Mr. Douglas interruptinQ)-I will corr
rect tho Scnator--noyer 20 do anything
inconsistont with the Constitution of the
United States.
Mr.. DHvis-The Senators opinion went
beyond that Of the Senator from Michi-
gan, now Secretary Of State.
Mr.. Dourlas--l wish 20 state that do
not wish TO be engaged in a controversy
in the speech Of the Senator from Ohio.
but certinly will show from the record
that he is mistaken in the position he as
signs me then, although then held pre-
cisoly the opinions hold now.
Mr., Dnvs-I believe be did, although
there was an intermediate period when
he did not--I think about the period Of
the enactment Of the Knnsns-Nebrasku
Bill. think he was more sound then
than now.
Mr.. Douglas-Whon the question
comes up for discussion, will show that
when tho Knnsos-Ncbraska bill passed, !
said its sole object was that the people Of
a Territory might introduce or exclude
slavery through the Territorial Lorislu-
tures, while a Territory, as well ne when
a States and no man who heard me then
Eoun have an excuse for not knowing my
position, and the record will sustain me.
Mr.. Davis--l do not doubt the Senator
lrocollocts what he said. / was not a
member Of the Senate then.
Mr.. Douglas--I hope the Senate will
not eXpr 80 an opinion then.
Mr.. Davis will not express an opin-
ion about thst time, but the language Of
the bill does show that the Senator has
changed his vicws as entertained in 1850.
! simply thought it necessary 10 say this,
that might not be put in tho category
Of those who endorsed the Senator as huv.
ing held those opinions all the time he
was chairman Of the Committee on Ter
ritorics. / am not, like the Senator rom
Missouri, (Mr. Green,) one Of those who
regretted that he was removed from the
Committee ON Territories. / thought il
eminontly proper, when he held opinions
differing from the majority, that he should
cease 70 be chairman Of that committee.
Mr.. Douglas--I do not know yet that
/ hold opinions not entertained by tie
majority. believe | hold opinions sus-
tuned by thrce-fourths ofthe Democracy
Of the Union. believe that can show
from the record that a majority Of tho
Senate at that time understood the Kan
sos-Ncbrasks bill as il was found. lam
prepared 10 show, also, that the difference
Of opinion was no cause discrimination
in the formation Of tho committee, and
show, too, that In the House of Repre-
scntatives, after the Kansas-Nebrasku
bill passed, that the question was put 10
Mr.. Richardson, the Democratic nomi-
nee for Speaker, whether he thought a
Territorial Legislature could exclude Sla-
very by Territorial enactment during
It's Territorial existence, and that gentle
man answered in writing, and after that
answer every Southern member but three
voted for him as sound on the Territorial
question.
MIR. Davis--I do not know what tho
Senator will be able to do from the rec
ord. The Senator's opinion upon the
power Of a Territorial Legislature was
deemed a sufficient cause by the Dcmoc-
racy not TO continue him in the position
OF Chairman Of the Committee on Terri
tories. ! say il wUs due to themselves and
due to the senator.
Mr.. DOuglas-l have never complain
ed. lnever intended to ulludc 10 il in
this body; but do assert the record
shows that the Senate knew eleven years
ago that held the identical opinions now
alleged as the cause Of my removal; and
during the eleven years, with a knowl-
edge Of these opinions, repeated over and
over again within the hearing Of every
member Of this body say FOR eleven
yours, by a unanimous vote, ] was put
chairman Of that committee. But | was
removed, and the cause assigned is that
hold the identical opinions held for the
eleven years when was chairman. If
these facts are proved, It will show that
those who removed me had changed their
opinions since eleven years ago. was
not sound because did not change as
suddenly as they did. My only ofunse
consists in my fidelity. | challenge the
world 70 show that | have changed hairs
breath ON that question during that elev-
on years. IL shows that tho majority
have changed their policy, but l have not
changed my opinions.
Mr.. Greon-l will ask the Senator
from Illinois whether in 1856 | was mis-
taken in believing that he held that the
power 10 prohibit slavery in the Terrific
ri9s was judicial question, TO be LETT as
a judicial question, and to be submitted
to as judicial question:
Mr.. DouglOs-fes, viii submit Il now.
Mr. Groon--At that time there was a
difference of opinion between Democrats
whether Congress could, by legislative
action, prohibit Slavery in Territory di-
rectly or indirectly, or not; and / dld as
sert that mover in his whole lifo-neyer
during the eleven years TO which he re-
fers, or the years that have transpired
since, did he assert, until the Freeport
speech, that Congress had not the power
aud the Territory had. When the Drod
Scott decision was rendered, we suppos-
ed that the whole question would be set
tied, and give peace forever. Therefore,
this rcstatemcnt of the caso strikes us
with ustonishmeut, and we feel regret.
Mr., Douglas-In 1856 l said that il
was a Judicial question over and over a.
gain. said SO before 1856, aud Ihave
alwoys said il since 1886. / declared I'm
my Illinois speeches that il was iuli-
oial question, and | have declared the
same thing in every publication that /
have made for the last two years. / as
sert now that Il is a judicial question:
The point is, that it was no want Of
soundnoss 10 principles that | held one
sido ofthe judicial question while others
held the Othors hut L nssorf that fb o.,