COLUMBIA
DEMOCRAT,
AND BLOOMSBURGr GENERAL ADVERTISER,
WI L..TATE, Editor.
"TO HOLD AND TRIM TIIE TORCH OP TRUTH AND WAVE IT O'EU THE DARKENED EAHTII."
$2 OOJPER ANNUM.
OL. 14-NO. 28.
2 Ijoicc Jpoctrn.
THE SORROWING CHILD.
Tho following sweet and touching lines
from tho pen of a gifted daughter of South
Carolina, whoso productions aro "houso
hold words" throughout tho land. Sho
has .written much, in proso and verso, and
licr.L'Nortlicrn'' and "Southern Harps"
are well known, Loth at homo and abroad :
I walked one morning through llie crowded itrcct.
Where nintiygnynnd happy oust I rmt.
. i l'or 'twM a festive day J
The beIN rhlmod forth tliclr loud and merry peal,
Tli. children lrolicked with unnuntcd zeal
. The merry houra away.
I was atl eye, all car, nil aympathy,
f'&i And my own youthful days enme back to me
ygpMX- I was a child again :
.Willie the ten thousand thoughts I could not spenk,
Flaihed from my roving )-, nM(l Unitlit'd uiy cheuk,
And llrcd my busy bruin.
rAt length I saw a poor and lonely child,
IVi Her check was pule, her sunken c)c wna wild,
As on the scene she gar.i'd ;
pale Hps 'inivircJ, jet tlic clirtl no t-ar.
But ran her Iiitlo finger tliruuglt her hair,
;W Aatlwugli Uu child neru crazed.
Ir - M
- Then murt my heart ha c painted on my f.ico
JjjjjjffilBwecl I'll) ' liuly and nttractivu grace,
VikVW r,'r n" 1 BiIent ,tfMMl
jn4 looked itpoti the pour forgakeii iliihl,
tv if Utr.pale cheek gloucd, her eyen grew fur less w ltd,
Ami altered eemed lie! muud.
She gazed upon me for ft moment; thare,
And then 1 saw a large reluctant tear
ifUft UulUluuly down her cheek :
And prevent.)' Uvt lit tit arms outspread,
8ha funvurd sprang, und rni"d lie r loxely head,
w4 f i'il In uiu fu Ppcak.
VWnl th" vlzhx tlial creet ne lipro Mow,
AjTheru it no kilit un ad, eu lull f woe,
-VIts a cJitt.tliufiU in distress!
how my Piipatlii.ing heart did win I
vAad how I liiiiL'L'il unto Lh.il. hi-nrl tn take
ll'"-' 'I')., f-liilil I, .V l,ii 1.11 "lit lit at!
SlOncc nnd again the eliild rmnyed to rpenk,
!yjjKut..ollji!i( loud, m title tears j lined down her cheek,
-Yir?i't' Could uttn not one word.
-jgjrt M her weep. I km-w t'u mild duller good
Thua tiitinnr torlli tliu luntr liiinrif-nncd llnnd
TP
Now in lur juutig heart Miired,
' ., At length ilie pokuindtidd mi all lurprk'f ;
tj Her tali', thuujjli dill of nam mid was Iri f:
iit t'18 "aH 11,1 "Md'aii ihlld;
-And Finre her nmilii-r died, n cheering rny
Ujjou lur had and folitjry way
II. id fur mis uiojiictii Fiiulod.
d pli d a H't'i'iMiin vn li r mail
y S5ljmd a Unr f rymp ithy tn fmcd;
jQfcpl& Had h1ii,( mi" In'i !) h-art I
And rinca teat hnhr lint If-artliaa thing tomrj
rtiiiiioe iii.ticitii.T isiuniairy,
Or eem itaeuuntitrpurt.
''My father, Cml ! ihu ee r may I Mess
By lion in l (.y np.iiliy.liy ifinl'Tiirc!!,
JjJ Karh min.ri.r 1 Kiel
Oh, Hon of (In 1 1 in love, undoing love,
liifplred Ht'itu!, .in 1 noiiri'lifil from nhuvu
V,jr .May 1 reendle thee I
political
Lm
' ,TIIK 1'llKSIDKXTIAL CANVASS.
M '
Tho Groat Spocch of Mr. Brock
vtinridgo at Lexington, Ky.
LEXtNOTON. kv.. Sunt. fl. Kvnrvtlllllrr
was propitious tor the great lirccuiuriugo
$! .. n ., ,.
' Barbecue which came off to-day, at Ash
land, a mile and a half from tho city.
At an early hour tho roads from all di
rections wcro crow led with people. At
11 o'clock A. M., a salute of thirty-threo
guns announced tho arrival of JMr. Breck
inridge, lie was hailed with an enthusi
astic demonstration. At twenty minutes
after 11 Mr. Brcckinridgo aroso and
said :
'' 'BFBUUII OF Mil. nilSCKINUIHUn.
I beg you, my neighbor., friends and
old'coustituonts, to bo assured that I fei-1
profoundly graceful for the cordialtwclcome
you havo extended to me. The circum
stances under which I appear beforo you
aro novel and unusual. 1 do it in obedi
ence to tho request of fricuds whoso iutel
Ji"cnco I havo been aecustouiucd to obn
serve, and if it bo an uncommon thing for
n person in my position to address assem
blies of people, I can only say that I hopo
10 U1HCUS5 lOpiCS WIJIUII aiu 111 lb muiiiii.1
not altogether unworthy tho attitudo which
I occupy. I shall certainly indulge in no
language which, in my opinion, will fall
below tliu dignity of political discussion.
The condition of my health and my posi
tion make it impossible for mo to extend
wy.voico over this vast assembly, but I
trust I will becomo stronger as I proceed
'I have been asked, fellow citizens, to
speak at my own homo. bcauo I and tho
political organization with which I am con
nected havo been assailed in an unusual
manner and charged with treason to my
own country. I appear beforo you to-day
forjho purposo of repelling certain accu
sations which havo been mado against mo
personally, and industriously circulated
through other States of th Union, and
next, to show that tho principles upon
which I stand aro tho principles of both tho
Constitution and tho Union of our country.
Great applause. And fcurcly if any timo
tho justification could bo found by any
man for addressing tho peoplo in the posi-
, tion which 1 occupy, it will bo found in my
, case.
. ' "Anonvmom writcw and wandering ora
tors havo chosen to tell the pcop'o that I
individuallv.am a disuntonist auda traitor
to my country and they declare, with as
surance, that I havo exhibited tv treason
that inukea, by comparison with it, Burr a
BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA COUNTY, PA., SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, I860.
a patriot and the memory of Arnold re
spectable. ISut, fullow-citlzcns, before I come to
those topics j I dcairo to mako and prove n
coinprchcusivc statoment in regard to my
position in connection with the Presidency
of tho United States. I have been charged
with intriguing for this nomination. I
have been charged with leaping before tho
wishes of tho peoplo and desiring to thrust
myself beforo them, for the highest office in
their gift. To that, I answer that it is
wholly untrue. I have written to nobody,
soliciting support. I have intrigued with
nobody. I havo promised nobody. To
these statements I challenge contradic
tion from any human bcing. Cheers.
3Ir. Brcckinridce, rcsuiinncr I did not
seek or desiro to bo placed before thepeo.
pie ior ine omce ot rrcsiucut, by any
Convection, or any part of any Convention.
Wlion I returned to tho Stato of Kentucky
in tho spring of lSflO, and was informed
that froino partial friends wore prctonling
my name to tho public in that connection,
and a certain editor (whoso presence I sec
here,) in this Stato, had ho'utcd my name
for tho Presidency ,1 said to him : "Friend
I am not in any scuso a candidato for tho
Presidency." and I desired that my namo
bhould bo taken down from the head of
their columns. It was done. Avery em
inent citizen of tho- Commonwealth of Ken
tucky, (Mr. Guthrie,) was prc5cntod for
that office I was gratified to too it, and
as far as my own declarations wcro con-ci-riicd,
I united cordially in presenting
him for the suffrages of the American peo
ple though at no time, in or out of the
Commonwealth of Kentucky, did I do an
act or uttir a word which would bring my
nanus in conflict with his, or that of any
other eminent American citizen who do
tired, or whoso friends desired for him,
tnat position. Aim it you trok tli troub
le to road the proceedings of the t'-harlca-tou
Convention you will remember that
when I received the vote of Arkansas, one
of my friends arose and withdrew my name
declaring that I would not allow it to como
in opposition to tho goulloinen before the
Convention. When that Convention as
sembled at Baltimore, my feelings and my
conduct wcro still unchanged. After the
disruption which took place tliere,my name
without any solicitation on my part, was
profited as a candidate. Previously, not
deeming such a thing possible, I said I did
not desiru to bo presented to tiio Ameri
can people, but I am content with tho lion
on which havo been heaped upon mo by
my Stato and my country, and I look for
ward with pleasure to the prospett I havo
of scning my country in the Senate of tho
United States for tho next six years, my
name however was presented, and I felt
that I could not refuse to accept tho uom
i'.alion under tho circumstances without
abandoning vital principles and betraying
my friendr. It if said I was not regularly
nominated for the Presidency ; but that is
n tiucstioii I havo not time to discuss to
day, and it ha already been thoroughly
exhibited and discoursed upon beforo tho
people. I refer you to tho bold letter of
your delegates lrom thin Congresional
district. 1 refer you to tho masterly and
exhaustive speech recently delivered by
my honorable friend in who-o grounds wo
are met. 1 can only say that the Con-
1 vpnlinn wliinli nssiMiililiwl nr. tlin l-'i-nnt
n-t . t..ii? .1 it
otieut. iiieairo, at jiaiiimuru, mis uuvoiu
not only of tho spirit of justice but of tho
forms of regularity. Cheers. The gen-
tlcman whom it presented never received a
voto required by the rules of tho Demo
cratic organization. Whole States wcro
excluded and disfranchised in that Con
veution,notto ppvak of individuals; tho most
ilagrant acts ot injustieo wero perpetrated
for tho purposo of forcing a particular dog
ma upon the Democratic organization ; and
the gentleman who is tho representative of
that dogma and principles, which I will
be able to show aro repugnant alike to
reason and tho Constitution. Owing to
tho impropriety of thoso proceedings, a
decided majority of tho delegates from
your own Stato withdrew from the Conven
tion declaring that it was not a National Con
vention of tho real Democratic organiza
tion. The entire delegation from tho fif
teen Southern Slates, aud of California
and Oregon, with large minorities from
other States, making in whole or in part
delegations from almost two-thirds of tho
States of tho Confederacy, represented a
National Dcmocratlo Convention, depend
ing upon tho authority and loyality of the
Domocratio parly. 'But after all tho great
que-tion H, what aro the principles (which
ought to commend themselves to tho Amer
ican people,) at issue in this canvass. Thcso
I will ilncuss before 1 am dono, but bctoro
1 proceed lurthcr, I will group together
and answer a number of personal accusa
lions, some of which cmauatcd in the State
of Kentucky and others elsewhere, by
which, through mo, it is attempted to strike
nowii tho organization witu wmcu 1 am
connected. It begets in mo almost a fee
ling of humiliatioii to answer somo of them
but as I havo imposed upon myself the
task 1 will go through them all as brictly
as 1 can. I Cheers.
I bcliovo it ha been published in almost
every Southern new-paper of the opposition
party, that I signod a petition for tho par
don ot John Jirown, tho Harpers 1-erry
murderor and traitor. This ii wholly un
true. So much for that. Cries of 'Good'.
It has been extensively charged and cir
culated that I was in favor of tho election
of Gen. Taylor to tho Presidciny, and op
posed to tho election of Cuss and Butler.
This also is wholly untruo. In tho year
1847, thcro was a mooting in tho city of
Lexington, m which 1 participated, in
which Gen. Taylor was recommended for
tho Presidoncy of the United States. A
diflcrenco of opinion existed at that time as
to tho political sentiments of that dhtin
guished gentleman. I wai assured opon
grounds satisfactory to mo, that they coin
cided with my own political opinions, and
I united in tho meeting. Pretty toon af
terwards, I went to Mexico, and when I
returned, twelve months aftcrwards,in 1848,
I found tho oampaign in full blast with
Ucn. Taylor tho candidato of tho Whigs,
and Cass and Uutlcr as tho nominees of
tho National Democracy. It Is well known
to thousands of thoso within tho sound of
my voico that as soon as I returned home,
I took tho stump in behalf of tho Democ
racy, and maintained its doctrines to tie
best of my ability Voice All right
and I was not nfraid to do it, because they
wcro the representatives of my principles,
and you may judge of my zeal, as ono of
thoso gentlemen was my old commander
and my friend. It was said that I was
not presoutj and did not vote at the elec
tion at Lexington, in 1849, and that is
truo, but with that fact has gono tho ex
planation which my opponents havo never
published, showing that it was my intention
to bo absent during tho canvass, but it
was not my intention to lose my vote. You
all know that at that time as a citizen, I
could vote anywhere in tho Stato, (being
beforo tho revision and adoption of our
present Constitution,) but it so happened
that thcro wcro six or eight gentlemen ac
companying mo, all of them belonging to
tho Whig party, and thoy proposed to mo
tiiat if I would not return to my own town
and vote thoy would not. If wo had all
voted, there would havo been six or seven
votes cast for Taylor, and only one cast
for Cats and Butler. Cheers. I ac
cepted tho proposition and wo went limit
ing, laughter, and if every man had dono
as well as mysulf, we would havo carried
tho State by forty thousand majority.
Applause Among tho-io with mo I re
member tho names of three of my friends
Thomas I. Uedd, Nelson Uutler and
George P. Jowctt.
Another charge has been extensively
circulated throughout the Southern States
that I was nn emancipationist in 1 8 19, or
at least voted for an emancipationist at
some time. Mr. 15. read an extract from
a letter from tho lion. George llobortson,
published in a southern paper, haviug,
reference to his po-ition on this question
and alluding to his private affairs, and
commented on it at some length, and with
much severity. I come to tho fact that tho
only time I knew of tho question of eman
cipation being raised was in 1849, when
we wcru electing delegates to tho Conven
tion to form a now constitution. Then
Dr. Breckinridge and Mr. Shy wcro email
cipationisls. Mr. Wickliffo and I can
vased the county to tho best of our abilities
in opposition to emancipation, believing
that the interests of both races in the Com
monwealth would bo promoted by the con
tinuance of their present relation. At
the polls Dr. Breckinridge voted against
nio and I against him, cheers because we
wcro representing opposito piinciplc?, and
just so would it be again under similar cir
cumstances. So much for that charge.
But I havo seen pamphlets publiahcif and
..it it. - .. it
I cucuiuicu ait over tuu umuu, ior inu pur-
I . . . . .t.i T . IT XT . . I
..!..:.. .1 01.1. -i- v rr I.. 1
pose oi proving inui x was a ivtiow ioiu
. . . J - . . . J
1 1 have no doubt that a very considerable
proportion of those listening to mo
members of that Order in that year.
mo were
and if
thcro is a man anion you who belonged
to tho Order who ever saw mo in one of
your lodges, who did not know that I was
recognized as ono of the most uncompro
mising oppoucnts of that Order, let him
bo good enough to say so now. I believe
I was tho first gen tleinan in Congress who
took a position against the organization.
When I returned homo in tho fiiring of
1855, it was making great progress in this
commonwealth, and although 1 had with
drawn from public life to attend to my pri-
vato affairs.I opposed it in repeated spcoch
es all over Kentucky. This statement may
not bo very acceptable to somo gentlemen
within the sound of my voico, but I do not
want to deceive any man. I btaud upon
my principles, and am willing to view
them without tho slightest regard to con
sequences.
I am represented to this day as having
said that I would mako a differonco be
tween ono of my own religious belief and
another and that between an unnaturalized
nnd naiuralized citizen I would mako a
political difference. I never uttered tuch
a sentiment. (Great applause.)
Tho underlying prineiplo with mo was
this: that tho condition of citizenship be
ing onco obtained, no question, cither of
birth or religion, should be allowed to com
mingle with political consideration. (Ap
plause.) I deem it only necessary to mako
thoso statements hero succinctly and pass
on, becauso I am speaking to assembled
thousands who Know tins injustice.
But, fellow-citizens, to como to more ex
tended topics, it has beon asserted that I
and tho political organization with which I
am connected, havo abandoned the ground
on which wo stood in regard to tho terri
torial question in 1851 and '50, that wo
then occupied a position which is now oc
cupied by tho friends and supporters of
Mr Douglas, and by that eminent gen
tleman himself. I deny it, and I shall
now proceed to provo this denial both ns
to myself and as to tho party therein in
volved. Thcro was a body to whom wo
could refer tho Question, nnd we thought it
unnecessary further to debato, each party
agreeing to aoquiesco in tho decision aj
rendered by tho said body, I bclievo that
nouo of my speeches in this connection
wcro prepared by mo, except by the brief-
est notes. Never was n single report of
II.a.a 1 1...
theso speeches revised by mo or written
out in full. The reports of them are thoso
which various persons choso to mako. I
havo been amused to soo various portions
of what thoy call Tippccanoo tpcech, and
tho divers reports of tho reporters which
they choso to make for different papers at
different times. I have in my bauds a ro
port which roads as follows, in refcrenco
to tho Territorial qwtion : "Tho peoplo
of tho Territories, under tho Kansas Ne
braska Act, havo tho full right to prohibit.
slavery, which prineiplo is as old as the
llcpubhcan Government itself."
Not only did I ever utter such a sen
timent, but I havo no reason to bclievo
that any body even thought I uttered it
I had never seen it iu any newspaper any
where. But I havo no timo to waste in
comments upon tho propriety or delicacy
of a gentleman who is beforo tho country
for tho office of President, in introducing
tho namo of one who is also n candidato
with nic, and giving his personal testimony-
As to that gentleman's opinions I shall
ivasto no timo in discussion of tho pro
priety of such a course. I wish to meet
the accusation of tho Hon. S. A. Douglas,
in a scries of papers which ho has been
reading in various States, and even re
cently in Concord, N. II. I give his own
language ! " Thcro is not an honest man
in all America," says Mr. Douglas, " that
will deny that James Buchanan and John
C. Brcckinridgo, in 1850, were pledged to
tho doctrino of non-intervention by Con
gress with slavery in tho Territories.''
(Mark tho word, it is there non-intervention.)
" I mado speeches from the same
stump with J. C. Brcckinridgo in 1850,
when ho was advocating his own claims
to tho Vice Prcsi-lenoy, and heard him go
to tho extreme length in favor of ptpu
lar sovereignty iu tho Territories."' Then
speaking of other gentlemen from the
South, who had been expressing them
selves in tho North, he pays, " In every
one of tho speeches ihcy advocated squat
ter sovereignty in its broadest sense.''
Hero, in tho space of twelve lines, you
see non-intervention, popular sovereignty,
all evidently conveying tho same meaning,
that I held doe riucs of non-intervention
as it was originally understood and en
grafted into tho lcgisla ion of tho country,
as I will proceed lo show moro fully in
another part of my speech. But I pre-
sumo that Mr. Douglas in this statement
meant to declare that, in 15(3, from the
samo s'limp wbh mo, he advocated the
doctrino that a territorial legislature had
tho power to exclude slavo property un
der territorial conditions, and 1 also
presume that he uses this cxprcss'on in
that sense j and this is tlio question that
has been tho wliolo point of dispute.
Well at no timo cither beforo or after the
passage of tho Kansas-Nebraska bill in
Congress, did I ever entertain or utter tho
opinion that a Territorial Legislature,
prior lo the formation of a Stato Consti
tution, had tho power to exclude slavo
property from the cinmon Territories of
tho Union, and no other advocatoofmy
doctrines can bo found who will sub
stantially change this expression. Now I
ant to entertain you briefly by as clear an
exposition as I can make ot tho attitudes
of the parties, in regard to tho question
at issue. In 1851, wo removed tho re
strictiou of tho Missouri line, and passed
tho Kansas-Ncbrarka bi!l through both
Houses of Congress, and it became a law.
The argument of thoso, North and South,
who opposed the repeal of the Compro
mise was that tho Territories should bo
left open to settlement. There was but
ono point upon which tho friends of tho
bill differed. Tho Southern friends of tho
measure, and a few of its Northern friends,
denied tho power cither of Congress or tho
Territorial Legislature to exclude any
description of property.
The other party assumed tho ground that
tho Territorial Legislature had tho power
ot such exclusion. It was a constitutional
question, however, and thoy agreed not to
make it a matter of legislative dispute, but
to insert a provision in tho bill referring
the question to tho Supremo Court for do
cision, and all parties wero bound to abide
by tho decision mado by the august tribu
nal upon this Constitutional question.
W e now provo that tliero was bucu an
agreement. Ordinarily a bill cannot bo
taken from a Territorial Court to tho Su
premo Court of the United States until tho
matter in controversy amouuts to 1000,
and in order that this que-tion might bo
tried beforo tho Supremo Court a clauso
was inserted to meet tho contingency,
During tho poriod between the passago of
that bill and tho decision ot ths Supremo
Court, all persons on each tide cutcrtaincd
their own opinion.
Wo in the South held that tho Territo
rial Legislature did not havo tho power.
Jlr. Uouglas and ins mends held mat tho
Territorial-Legislature did havo the power.
Wo suspended that nucstion and referred
it by a bill to tho Supremo Court of tho
United States to determine tlio constitution
al nucstion therein involved.
Thcro was a body to whom wo could ro
tor tho question, and wo thought it uniico
cssary further to debats it, each party
agreeing to acquiesce in tho decision as
rendered by tho said body. I think that
is a pretty plain statement on that point.
1 mako it to show that thcro was a vow
taken by tho Southern fiicnds of tho mo
suro in Congress, and, among thorn, avow
taken by your huiublo speaker to support
tho decision.
Mr. Brcckinridgo hero read somo ex
tracts from his speech delivered in tho
IIouso of Kcprcscutatives in 1851, Wo
. were willing, ho continued, to havo tho
' r.iincf!nrt AnntAnA 1... 1,n Anuria f f1tn TTntf.
nucstion decided by tho courts of tho Unit
od States. Again I say it was contended
upon ono hand, (upon tho idea of the o
quality of tho States under tho Constitu
tion and their common property in tho
territories,) that tho citizens of tho slavo
holding States may rcmovo to tho Terri
tories with their slaves and thcro legally
hold them until tho Territory is resolved
into a Stato. In that capacity it may cx
cludo them. On tho other hand, it is said
that slavery, being in conflict with com
mon right, can exist only by tho forco of
positive law, and it 13 denied that tho
Court ever furnished the law. I said that
wo demand that all citizens of tho United
States shall bo allowed to enter tho com
mon territory with tho Constitution alono
in their hands, for that instrument pro
tects tho title of tho master to his slavo in
this common territory. You cannot com
plaiu if it does not protect his title. Wo
ask no help from Congress. If difficulties
occurred, we were to let them bo submit
ted to tho Court.
Now upon my own personal vindica
tion : The doctrines announced by mo in
that speech wcro just as I havo ever de
clared in the Commonwealth of Kentucky,
such as I havo ever declared in every pub
lic address that 1 havo made in Ohio, In
diana, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Af
terward, when it was uudeistood that I
had been charged, or that I had admitted
that this power belonged to tlio Territori
al Legislature, iu tho month of September
or October, 1850, tho editor of tho Ken
tucky tstacmun, published in this city,
alluding to this chaigo, made tho following
statement, to which I beg leave to refer
you. Mark you, this was before tho Prcsi.
dential election of 1830.
Mr. Breckinridge then read from an
editorial in tho Kentucky Slatisman of
October, 1850, in which it was stated that,
during his tour throuah Indiana and Ohio,
ho (Mr. B.) avowcu tho bt-utimcnts h had
often proclaimed in Kentucky, and which
aro already embodied in tho Cincinnati
Platform, that ho denied that tho Demo
cratic party was in Federal relations a pro
slavery paity ; that it was neither such a
party nor an anti-slavery party ; that it
negatived tho interference of tho Federal
Government whether to introduce or ex
clude slavery, and loft tho Territories open
to common settlement from all the States;
that each Stato was entitled to form its
own Constitution, and enter tho Union
without discrimination by Congress on
account of its allowance or prohibition of
slavery, and that tho statement that Mr.
B. advocated squatter sovereignty was un
truo. Mr. Brcckinridgo then continued. Iu
the autumn of tho samo year I received a
Louisiana paper containing 6ome remarks
nmdo by General Mills, who heard my
speech, in which ho denied that I had ad
mitted this doctrine of tho Territorial pow-
cr. 11c sent mu a slip containing his
speech1 In tho samo month, before tho
Presidential election, I answered him, say
ing : Hands off of tho whole subject by tho
Federal Government except for ono or two
protective purposes mentioned in the Con
ttitution ; tho equal rights of all sections
in the common territory, and tho absoluto
power of each new State to scttlo tho ques
tion in its Constitution. Thoso aro my
doctrinos and thoso of our platform, and
what is moro, ot tho Constitution. (Great
cheers.)
JNow, lellow citizens, against mo state
ment ot that distinguished Senator, in
which ho undertakes to prove allegations
against myself by himself, I thus opposo
my own statement. Next in proof, I read
to you from my speech in 1851, in Con-
ress, tho article in tho .Lexington paper,
beforo the Presidential election, tho testi
mony of Gen. Mills, who heard that speech
at lippecanoe, and my own letter in au-
swer to tho latter gentleman, containing
my opinion of the question at that time,
and what has ever siueo been my opinion.
'' You are talking right.' ) 1 think 1 havo
proven as fully as could be expected in tho
limits ot a speech, that tho chargo is un
founded in fact, and I will add that tho
position I assumed, was that taken by all
tho Southern friends of tho Nebraska bill,
and by a portion of its Northern friends.
These wcro our private- opinions thcso
wcro opimous wo urgod on all proper oc
casions, but we did not unucrtano to lorco
all others to agreo to them. A o had
agreed to refer that to the highest tribunal
in tho Union. Now, gentlemen, having
vindicated myself and tho constitutional
Democracy from the chargo of having aban
doned tho position thoy took in 1851-5-0,
I turn upon my accuser and undertako lo
show that ho himself abandoned tho agree
ment ho solemnly mado at tho time tho
Kansas Nebraska bill passed tho Congress
ot tho United States, (great applause,) and
1 do not mako myselt a witness against
him to do it. I will prove it by himself.
(Applause.) On tho -'d of July, 1850, in
tho debato upon a bill to autliorizo the peo
ple of Kansas to form a Constitution pre
paratory to admission into the union as a
Stato, when the question aroso as to what
was tho truo meaning of tho Kansas-No-braska
bill, and tho limitation of tho pow
er ot tho territorial tiovcrnincn,) JMr. :
Trumbull offered tho following amendment '
ab an additional section to the bill : "And ,
bo it further enacted, that Iho provision iu
. .1 tn . . . . . . p xr I
tho act lo organizo ino .territories oi ie-
braska and Kansas, which declares it to bo until the year 1858, when tho Sonator
tho'truo intent it meaning of said act not to , from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) was) a caudi
lcnislato into any Territory or S'ato, nor ! data for ro election from that State, aud
lo cxcludo it therefrom, but lo leavo iho
pconlo thereof perfectly free to lorm and
I reculato their domestic institutions in their
I own way, subject only to iho Constitution
of tho Uni'cd States, was intended and
docs confer updn) or leaves to tho people
of tho Territory of Kansas, full power to
cxcludo slavery from said Territory, or to
recognize or regulate it therein." ,
That was Mr. Trumbull's amendment,
against which an overwhelming majority
of the Senate voted, including Gen. Cass
and Senator Douglas. Let me, however,
do Mr. Douglas tho justice to sny that ho
voted against that amendment, not be
cause ho did not bclievo the Territorial
Legislature had tho power to cxcludo sla
very from tho Territory, but becauso he
did not bolicro it was consistent to decido
tho question legislatively which thoy had
agreed to leavo to tho Court.
Gen. Cass said .(Mr. B. here quoted
from Gen. Cass) to show that tho North
and tho South differed about tho powers
that might bo given a Territorial Legisla
ture, and that the Kansas bill left that to
bo adjudicated by the Court by which
alono tho constitutional question could bo
settled.
Finally, (Mr. Brcckinridgo continued,)
Mr. Douglas in tho samo debato used tho
following language, in speaking of tho at
tempt ot his colleaguo to cocrco an opin
ion out of him upon the question whether
tho Territorial Legislature had tho power
to cxcludo slave property beforo they bo
come a Stato. Mr. Brcckinridgo here
read from Mr. Douglas' speech a declara
tion that this point in the Nebraska bill
was a judicial question which ho would
not discuss, because by tho bill it was
referred to tho Courts.
Mr. Brcckinridgo continued On the
15th of May last iu tho Senate Mr. Doug
las said Here Mr. B read an extract
from Mr. Douglas' speech concluding witli
the assertion " Wo agreed to refer it to
tho judiciary wo agreed to abide by
their decision."
I think I havo shown that upon the
point of disputes between tho friends of
tlio Kansas bill as to tho power of terri
torial legislation to cxcludo blavo proper
ty it was agreed to refer it to tho Supremo
Court, and when it hud been judicially
determined wo should abido by their de
cision. Now bear with mo while I read
a very little from the decision of tho Su
premo Court of tho United States in the
Urcd Scott case. Let us lor a moment
turn to the calm, enlightened, judicial ut-
rauco ot tho most august tribunal upon
the earth. 1 Repeated applause This
opinion was concurred in by all tho Judges
except two, nnd was uttered by tho illus
trious Chief Justice of tho United States.
Jlr. Brcckinridgo quoted at considera
ble length from tho Drcd Scott decision,
commenting on the points maintained in
that opinion, and continued as follows :
Now, my fellow citizens, what is tho
authoritative decision of tho Supremo
Court of tho United States, to whom we
agreed to refer this disputed question of
tho power ot tho territorial legislature!
They decido that tho Territories havo been
acnuired and nro liold by tho l'cueral
Government, and that tho citizens of all
the States may bold and enjoy their prop
city in them until thoy take upon them
selves tho functions of sovereignty, and
aro admitted into tho Union nothing less
than a Stato being competent to determine
tho question of Blavery or no slavery.
They declared that tho citizen enters any
Territory with tho Constitution in his
hand, and that tho Federal Government
can exercise no power over his property
there which tnat instrument lias not con
federal Government cannot do it, still
less can it forco a territorial government
to exercise thoso powers which it could
not confer upon any local government a
right to distinguish between slavo proper
ty and other kinds of property, for no dis
tinction exists that property iu slaves is
recognized by tho Constitution of tho Uni
ted States that thcro is no word in that
instrument which gives the Congress of
tlio United states greater power over it,
or which entitles that property to less
protection than any other property, and
that tho only power which the Congress of
tha United States has is in guarding and
protecting tho rights of citizens. Lan
guage could not luako it plainer.
1 havo heard it said that tho caso which
went to the Supreme Court of tho United
States was not tho caso which went from
tho territories, but a caso that went from
a State, and therefore nobody is bound
until a caso comes from a territory and is
regularly taken up. Wo agreed to refer
it to the supremo judicial tribunal upon
any caso properly arising and coming bo
fore that augu-t body. It was a proper
caso and properly decided by the Court.
It covors tho points ofdifferenco between
tho friends of the Nebraska bill. It is
candid, clear and statesmanlike.
Now I havo shown you tho points of
difference between us iu that bill, and tho
agreement between tho friends of tho bill.
I havo .shown you tho decision of tho Su
premo Court. Wo havo arrived at a
point where thcro should havo been har
mony nnd peace a point agreed upon.
Tho only point of differonco had been
determined by tho highest judicial author
ity of tho Union. Of oourso tho constitu
tional question was settled according to
tho agreement.
the opinion of tho Supremo Court was
delivered in 1657, Everything was quiet
then for tho first tiino in tlio history of
American politics wo timl tho opinion ad-
.vanecd that there was it mode by which
the subordinate authorities may overrule
VOL. 24,
tho opinion of tho highest court in th
Union.
Then wo find tho agreement to abido
by tho decision of tho Court violated, and
tho declaration mado that a subordinate
territorial authority may confiseato or
cxcludo from tho tciritory tho property of
citizens of tho Southern States without
regard to tho opinion of tho Supremo
Court 16 tile ointrary.
In a dobalo between Senator Douglas
and Mr. Lincoln, tho former said i " Tho
next question propounded to mo by Mr(
Lincoln is can tho peoplo of a Territory
in any lawful way, against the wishes of
tlw United States, cxcludo slavery from
their limits prior to tho formation of tho
Stato Constitutibn t I answer emphati
cally, as Mr. L. has hoard mo answer a
hundred times from every stump in Illi
nois, that in my opinion tho people of a
Territory can, by lawful means, oxolude
slavery from their limits prior to tho fort
mation ot a stato UonstitutloHi"
That quostion we agreed, in the Kan
sas-Nebraska bill, td refer to tho Supremo
Court, and it was decided, as I have just
shown you, tho year beforo this speech
wa3 mado by Sir. Douglas, in which de
cision they say tuat neither Congress nor
tho territorial legislature has tho powor to'
cxcludo slavery, but its only right and
duty is to guard and protect it. I havo
shown vou that Mr. D. agreed to submit
tlio quostion to that Court and that ho
acquiesced iu tho decision. I quoted Jlr.
D. again concerning what ho calls " an
abstract question." The question may be
" abstract," but it is ono involving tho
equality of the States cf this Union, and
tho vital rights of more than half of them.
Applause. " It matters not," says Mr.
Douglas, " what way tho Supremo Court
may hereafter decido as to tho abstract ques
tion, whether slavery may or may not go
:.. ii.- rt ..!i..i; .
iiibir i J.vill(.uijr uuuvi tuu juuauiuuuu,
Tho people have tho lawful means to in
troduce or cxcludo as they pleaso, for tho
reason that slavery cannot exist a day or
an hour anywhere, unless it is supported
by local polico regulations. It matters
littlo as to tho right to go Into tho Terri
tories. Tho peoplo may lawfully cxcluf
it."
I havo shown you that in 1850, in thi.
Senate of the United States, he said that
if tlio Constitution authorizes it to go there
and protects it, no power on earth can
take it away. I would liko to see those
statements reconciled. Great applause.
Whether tho Constitution did authorize it
to go there, nnd protect tho individual in
his property, was a question which ho
agreed to refer to the" court. This I havo
proven not by nlyself but by him. Ho
now says, " no matter which way the
court decides, it may bo excluded."
Prolonged applause;)
If I wcro dispdscd to iinitato the bad
example of an eminent man, I might say
as he said about mo, that thcro is not an
honest man in the United States who can
deny that tho agreement was mado, that
tho decision was mado in accordance with
our views of the Constitution, aud that tho
agreement has been violated by tho Sena
tor and his personal adherents, who agreed
to abido by it. Applause.
Do not wo stato our principles fairly I
Do we not state them in tho very lau
guago of tho Supremo Court 1 Do wo not
stand upon the Constitution as adjudicated
by tho Court I And do not wo express
our reasons in tcmperato, manly and re
spectful arguments T
The pure language in which tho Su
preme Court states the question and de
cides it, and tiio manner in which it is
Btated by tho distinguished Senator from
Illinois aro questions upon which tho
highest intellects of the country aro exer
cised, engaging tho anxious attention of
your wisest and best men, engaging tho
attention of tho most august tribunal on
earth, debated in your Senate, debated in
your IIouso of ltcpresentatives, debated
betore an anxious people questions which
aro stated from ono end ot tho country to
the other. Tho cry Is, ''Is it not well
argued m tho decision! How firm and
yet tempcrato, without any appeal to
scoli inal passion and prcjudico 1"
Tho question whether your property is
tho saico as other property ; whether it
has tho samo rights iu tho Territories as
other property; tho statement as mado
" that you shan't forco slavery down tho
throats of an unwilling peoplo'' thoso
arguments consist of an appeal to tho pas
sions of ono section of tho Union against
another.
Mr. Douglas admitted that slavo prop
erty stauds upon tho samo footing with
other property. Tho Supremo Court de
cided that under tuo Constitution it stands
on tho samo footing and it lias tho same
right to protection in the common territo
ries as other property.
Yet wo hear tho accusation about " for
cing slavery down tho throats of an un
willing people." Who vauts to do it!
I .1. . .1 -. ..
uoia tuo cxisicueo oi mo question ot pro
tection of privato property in this U . c
imply that tho Southern States aro fou
to take charge of suck property! Substi
tute this word " proporty" for tho word
" slaves,'' and sco how it would read.
You attempt to forco slavery down tho
throats of an unwilling people you at
tempt to forco properly down the throat,
of an unwilling people. Laughter and
cheers. Why tho territorial authority is
tho croaturo of Congress Congress is thr
creature of tho Constitution tho Consti
tution of tho States aud tho peoplo of t
Statoi and hero vou would have a 1"
territorial Lsgislaturo, three or fjar
grees removed from tho original source c
' power, with the right to excludo trvery