Year: 1859

I
from Illinois, has written and printed an elaborate
essay comprising thirty-eight columns of Harper's
| Maya sine in which he has undertaken TO point out
the dividing line between federal and local authori
ty" Very many persons have glanced over its para
graphs TO catch the leading ideas without loss Of time
and some few have probably read IL with care.


Those who dissent froi the doctrines Of this paper
owe 10 its author, If not 10 his arguments, most re-
spectful answer. Mr. Douglas is not the man TO be
treated with disdainfu silence. Ills ability Is fact
unquestioned his public career in the face Of many
disadvantages has been uncommonly successful; and
he has been for many years working, struggling
candidate for the Presidency. He is moreover, the
Coryphcus Of his political sect-the founder Of new
schoo-and his disciples naturally believe in the I'M
falibe verify Of his words ms part Of their faith


The style of the article is, in some respects, highly
commendable. 1t is entirely free from the vulgar
| clap-trap of the stump; has vain adornment OF
classical scholarship; it shows sign Of the eloquent
Senators il is without the logic of the great de-
batter Many portions Of il very obscure. II
seems TO be an unsuccessful effort at legal precision
like the writing of judge, who is trying in vain Ia
give good reasons for wrong decision question
of law which he has not quite mastered


| With the help of Messrs Seward K Lincoln, he has
defined accurately enough the platform of the so
called Republican party and he does not attempt to
conceal his conviction that their doctrines are in the
last degree, dangerous. They are, most assuredly,
full of evil and saturated with mischief The ire
pressible conflict which they speak Of with so much
|
of the Northern and Southern States will be fatal not
merely to the peace of the country but to the exist
| cnce of the Government itself. Mr. Douglas knows
this and he knows also, that the Democratic party
Is the only power which is can be- organized to re-
| sist the Republican forces or oppose their hostile
march upon the capital. lie who divides and weak
the friends of the country at such crisis in her
| fortunes assumes very grave responsibility.
| Mr. Douglas separates the Democratic party into
three classes, and Describes them as folows


tl...t st..tt,
Of the United States neither establishes prohibits
slavery in the States Territories beyond the power
of the people legally TO control IT, but leaves the peo
pie thereof prefeety free to form and regulate then
domestic institutions in their own way, subject only
to the Constitution of the United States"


i Second. Those who believe thn the Constitution
establishes slavery in the Territories and withhods
from Congress and the Territorial Legislature the
power TO control it, aud who insist that in the ovont
the Territorial Legislature fails 10 enact the requisite
laws for its protection IL becomes the Imperative duty
Of Congress to inteposc its authority and furnish such
| protection.


| Third. Those who while protesting to believe
that the Constitution establishes slavery in the Ter
ritories beyond the power Of Congress the Terrific
rial Legislature TO control it, at the time protest
against the duty Of Congress to interfere for its pro-
ection but insist that it is the duty of the Judiciary
to protect and maintain slavery in the Territories
We give Mr.. Douglas the full benefit of his own
statement This is his mode Of expressing those diff
fcrences, which, he says, disturb the harmony, and
threaten the integrity Of the American Democracy
These passages should therefore, bc most carefully
considered.


The first class is the one to which he himself be-
longs and to both the others he is equally opposed
lie has no right to come between the second and third
class If the difference which he speaks of, does
st among his opponents, IL is their business not his
| TO settle il or fight it out We SHALL therefore, con-


fine ourselves to the dispute between Mr. Douglas and
his followers on one hand, and the rest of the Demo-
cratic party ON the other presuming that he will be
willing to observe the principle of non-intervention in
| all matters with which he has concern


! We will nvort the order in which he has discussed
| the subject and endeavor TO show


| l. That he has not correctly stated the doctrine
| held by his opponents; and,


2 That his own opinions, as given by himself are
altogether unsound


l. lie says that certain portion Of the Democratic
party believe profess TO believe that the Consti-
luton establishes sldrery in the Territories and in
sst that II Is the duty of the Judiciary to maintain it
there ieitiom any iaie on the subject. We do not
charge him with any intention to bc unfair; but we
assert that he has in fact done wrong to, probably
nnetcen-wentcths of the party, by attempting to
put them grounds which they never chose for
| themselves


The Constitution certainly does not establish sla-
| very in the Territories, anywhere clsc. Nobody
in this country ever thought said So But the Con-
stitution regards sacred and invioable all the
rights which citizen may leg lily acquire in State
| IL man acquires property of any kind in state
and goes with il into Territory he l. not for that
reason to be stripped oft Our simple and plain pro-
position is chat the legal owner of aslave other
chattcl may go with into Federal Territory with
out forfeiting his title.


Who denies the truth Of this and upon what ground
can il be controvcrtcd The reasons which support
il are very obvious and very conclusive As n urisi
and statesman, Mr. Douglas ought to he familiar
with them md there was Il time when he was sup
| DOscl lcretand them very we'll We will brief
| ly give him n few Of them;


| II is automatic principle of public law that a
| right of property private relation, condition or
status lawfully existing in one State country, is
not changed by the mere removal Of the parties to
another country unless the law of that other country
bo in direct conflict with il. For instance: mar
riage legally soemrzcd in France is binding in
| America; children born in Gcrmlny are legitimate
here If they arc legitimate there; AMI q merchant
who buys goods in New York according TO the laws OF
that State may carry them TO Illinois and hold them
there under his contract II is precisely 80 with the
status of n negro carried from part Of the United
States 10 another the question of his freedom or SER
vudc depends the law of ths place whore he camc
from, and depends that alone, if there be con-
fcting law Mt tho place to which he goes Is taken
Tho Federal Constitution, therefore, recognises sla
very legal condition wherever the local govern
ncnts have chosen to LET il stand unaboshed, and re-
CARDS IL Illegal wherever the laws Of the place have
| forbidden IT, slave being property in Virginia, re-
mains property an his master has all the rights Of
Virginia master wherever he may go, that he goes
not to any place where the loc, law in conflict
with his right II VIII not be pretended that the
Constitution itself furnishes 10 the Territories
fcting law. II contains provision that can be tor
| turcd into any scmblapcc OF prohibition.


2 The dispute on the question whether slavery or
freedom IL local or general Is q mere war Of words.
The black in this country neither bond nor free
| by virtue Of any general law That portion Of IL
which is free Is free by virtue Of local regulation
and the slave service for similar The
Constitution and laws OF The United States simply do
clare that everything done i'm the premises by the
by the State governments Is right, and they shall be
projected in carrying II out. But free negroes and
slaves may both find themselves outside any state iu-
risdicon, and in Territory whore regulation has
yet been made ON the subject. There the Consttu-
tion Is equally impartial II neither frees the slave
nor ensaves the freeman II requires both 10 remain
ia siaia quo until the status already impressed upon
them by the law of their previous domicil, shall be
| changed by some competent local authority. What
Is competent local authority ina Territory will be
| elsewhere considered.


3. The Federal Constitution carefully guards the
rights Of private property against the Federal Gov
cnment ITSELF by declaring that II shall NOT be taken
for public without compensation, nor without due
process Of law. Slaves are private property, aud
every man who has taken oath Of fleliiy 10 the
Constitution is reIigiously morally and politically
bound TO regard them as such. Does anybody sup
pose that Constitution which acknowledges the
crsdncss Of private property fully would wantony
destroy that right not BY any words that are found