Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1861-01-11

asked Mr.. Wade if it was not the policy
of the Republican party to confne slave
ry by action with the government to its
present limits, and to exclude slavery
from Territories now possessed or here
after acquired, whether or not it was in
favor Of returning fugitive slaves; in
short, whether it was not the policy Of
that party to exert all the power of gov
eminent to restrain and cripple slavery
with a view TO its ultimate extinction.
Mr.. Wade said the answer could be
found in his speech. He had no add
tions to make.
Mr.. Douglas said he did not expect
unequivocal answer. He proceeded to
argue that such was the policy of the
Republicans, quoting Lincoln's speeches
to show that he maintains such a policy.
He had hoped Mr.. Lincoln would repu-
diate extreme measures but, be that as
it may, neither he nor bis party have
power to harm the South. The South,
however, are ready to rush into revolu-
ton, and meet its consequences. lie
was in favor of enforcing the laws; but
we must look the facts in the face. In
| this government, laws must be enforced
by civil process. How are you going to
enforce the laws when the government
has not the power2 How can you en-
force the laws by civil process in South
Carolina? lie denied the right Of Sc
cession but she has seeded and how
can we help it? She will not be alone,
and how can we enforce the laws unless
we made war and conquer the state !?
Are we prepared for a war with our
brethren? He could never tolerate the
idea until every hope of adjustment was
gone lie was for peace to save the
. Union; war was inevitable disunion.-
Referring to the purchase Of Louisiana,
he said it was purchased for the whole
Union, and for the safety of the Missis-
sipPi river in particular, and the people
Of the interior would never allow for
eign State to hold the mouth Of that riy-
cr. He also referred to the purchase of
/ Florida and the amount paid. He refer
ed to the inconsistency of the Presidents
message, where it says we cannot coerce
a State to remain in the Union, and then
a few sentences further on. advocates the
/ purchase Of Cuba. As if we would pay
three hundred millions for Cuba. and she
next day might secede and reannex her
self to Spain and Spain might sell her
again. Texas cost a war with Mexico
and ten thousand lives. In the name
of seven thousand Illinoisians who fought
4 in the battles Of that war he nroteste5
AGAINST tbe riobt of that State IN scceda
Mr.. Hemphill of Texas asked if the
protection of Texas was the only reason
of that war: if the United States paid
Texas any thing for land, and if it did
not acquire California from that war.
Mr. Douglas said that the only cause
OF complaint that Mexico had was the
annexation OF Texas and that the gov
eminent pad Texas ten millions for some
barren land that she did not own,
/ (Laushter)
Mr. Douglas further said the Constitu
ton was intended to be perpetual. He
denied the right Of secession under the
Constitution, as against the Constitution,
justice and good faith. There could be
no government without coercion, but CO.
ercion must be used in the mode de-
scrlbed by law. This is not question
OF coercion. Where no authority OF a
Federal Government remains, we are
bound to recognize government de titcto
where a state maintains individual sway.
How IS the law to be enforced in Sc
ceding state unless by making war? In
his opinion we have reached point.
where disunlon was inevitable unless a
compromise, founded on concession, was
made. He preferred compromise TO war;
and concession to disunion. No compro-
mise would be available unless it carried