The Buchanan County guardian. (Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa) 1858-1864, 1860-02-02

as he defined his wishes in his speech,
he wants slave code for the States, so
that any one known to help forward fu-
gilive slave on his way to freedom, shall
be liable to criminal prosecution in fed
eral courts. by federal appointees. This
is Mr.. DOUGLAS last bid for Southern
support. and to make his offer more ac-
ceptable. he spices it with abuse of the
Republican party, charging upon it the
responsibility of the Harper's Ferry raid,
and asserting that Republican doctrines
incite to violation of the constitution.
To be sure these assertions are by no
means novel-are by no means original
with Mr.. DOUGLAS, and it would be
somewhat astonishing that he should
think it necessary to repeat them, was it
not that we know he was required to
abuse Republicans in some way. and we
know that this is the only way in which
it can be done. But certainly these char
ges come with peculiar grace from Mr..
DOUGLAS, who more than any man-more
than all other men-in the country, is re-
sponsible for the ill-feelng now existing.
In 1852 both parties had agreed to call
the Slavery question settled, and the pub
lie mind was actually more at rest upon
it than it had been for long time previ.
ously. The country was willing it should
rest as it then WAS, and the people hoped
that they had forever got clear of the
vexed question. But STEPHEN A. DoUG-
LAS was the man who first disturbed the
quet-he was the man who again forced
the question upon the country-was the
man who again arrayed section against
section, and stirred up all the passion
that has since been evinced. All the
outrages committed in Kansas, all the
blood spilled there, can be traced to him.
His agency it was that made Brown a
monomaniac, and caused him to commit
the acts which he did. And yet Mr..
DOUGLAS, the author of all this, has the
effrontery, the disgusting GOODNESS, to rise
in his seat and arraign the Republican
party for the consequences of his own
acts. We are happy to know, however,
that he did not do it unquestioned, but
that Senator FEssESDEN, with his usual
clearness and power, showed precisely
where the responsibility rests.
Mr.. DOUGLAS evidently recognizes no
moral forces in this contest, nor in any
other. Possessing none of the higher
or more generous elements of mind or
character, he is unable to perceive that
the great duty of government is to pro-
tect the natural rights of its citizens, and
that the true mission of statesman is to
lead his government and his people to
act from the highest possible standpoint
of moral duty. His measures are those
ofexpediency, of gross selfshness. Thus,
in his late speech, as in his previous ones,
he declares an utter Indifference to the
right or the wrong of slavery. He ex-
presses no desire for its extinction, but a
perfect Indifference whether or not it is
rendered perpetual. He would regulate
it simply with an eye to present advan
tage, and cares nothing whether he there
by abolishes or perpetuates it. In his
own words, he cares not whether Slavery
is voted up or voted down. Whatever,
for the advancement Of his own purpos-
es, it is necessary to do with it, that Mr..
DOUGLAS will labor for. The question,
with him, has no moral aspect. He says
distinctly that he believes Slavery can ex-
list in this country forever, and without
rejecting upon us, or without violating
the ends for which the government was
established, or contravening natural
rights. 1t is thus apparent that he will
become the unscrupulous upholder of the
system whenever he thinks that his in
terests require that he should. He has
no anti-slavery principle, and no man in
the country is less to be trusted with the
interests of free labor, than STEPHEN A.
DOUGLAS.