Newspaper of The Weekly Ottumwa Courier, February 6, 1861, Page 1

Newspaper of The Weekly Ottumwa Courier dated February 6, 1861 Page 1
Text content (automatically generated)

NEW SERIES, VOL. 6, NO, •. J. XV. .MUHICIS, Froprictoifa Twenty" 24,00. hnoni wishing to inbscrlba for A 1MS time tban I CJjt ®ttiuntoa (toutifr. ti PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY IN 3PXTMRO"2"'S LO O K (THIRD FLOOB) *TTUMWA, WAPELLO CO., IOWA, My J. W. Sk. o. p. tomtit. E S INVAKIABLY IN ADVANCE One copy, pery«%r fl,RO Fourcoplea" fl.OO. ten .. 12,00. one ye»r can do so by remitting the amount they wish to be to appropriated. In no cane will we enternew frame* unless they are accompanied with money. SPEECH OF HON- JAMES HARLAN, IS THE SENATE, January 11,1861. The Senate having nnrtet eonsf#fefititfbn the resolution offered by Mr. HUNTER, on the 2d of January, for the retrocession of the forts, arsenals, magazines, and (lock-yards of the United States, to the States in which they lie, when those States,by a regular con vention of the people, express desire for them— Mr. Harlan said Mr. President: I would most willingly do anything in my power, which an honora ble man could do, to allay the commotion which surrounds us. The first pertinent inquiry presented is, what is its cause The Senator from Alabama [Mr. Glay] ftir nishes a laconic reply. In a recent letter, dated at New Orleans, and addressed to friends in South Carolina, the Senator re mark* of the people of the free States of the Union "They are the most bitter, relentless, and vindictive enemies we have on earth.*, ««of course, we cannot live un der the same Government with these people, unless we could control it." We must control We must govern the North—the North must obey The minor ity must govern the majority Is not this the key to the solution of all the difficulties And we have had thfs doctrine amply illus trated in the speech of the Senator who has just taken his seat, [Mr. Hunter.] After informing us that the Republican party had marched into power over the fragments of a broken Constitution, which, according to his own statement, would couvert this Govern ment into a new confederation of States, se curing to the minority the power to control it. Whatever may be pretended to the con trary, the real grievance inflicted on "the South by the North," is the invitation exten ded to the southern Democracy, on the Gth day of last November, to resign the reins of Government into the hands of their political opponents. This will become manifest on an examination of the alleged causes of complaint. These are all stated in general and ambiguous terras, without specification. The most usual allegation, which has been reiterated to-day, is that the provisions of the Constitution have been violated. The (secession argument which follows, is, that when a contract has been violated by one part}' it may be declared void by the other to its provisions that the Constitution of the United States is such a contract between the several States that the Federal Gov xnent is merely their agent, appointed to car ry out its provisions that this contract hav ing been broken by some of the States, the other States may voluntarily secede, and demand a division of liabilities and assets. I shall not now enter into an examination of this constitutional question but, believ ing it to be totally untenable, I shall for the the present suppose it to be the true theory of our Federal Union because whether true or false is not material to the prcsont inquiry. For when you demand that all the provis ions of the Constitution shall be carried out —including the provision on the subject of fugitives from service—there i? but one re sponse. On this proposition there is no di vision of opinion between the great political parties. The party that has recently tri umphed at the polls admits freely and une quivocally, in the clearest and broadest terms, that every pait of the Constitution must be obeyed according to its true intent and meaning. There is but one alternative with a law-abiding people the fundamental law must be obeyed, or lawfully changed and no one, anywhere, has proposed so to chango the Constitution as to erase this pro vision. Its terms arc not ambiguous it provides that— "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." The Republican national convention did not proposo any amendment to thi3 part of the Constitution no Republican member of either branch of Congress has ever proposed its abrogation no Republican Governor, or State Legislature, or State convention, has ever demanded it. The asservation that the Republicans are opposed to this provision of the Constitution is a sheer fabrication, asser ted in the first instance for political purposes, and now adhered to for the sake of consist ency. It being admitted that Uie Constitution must be sustained, the corrollary follows, that all laws made in pursuance of its pro visions should be obeyed. In 1793, Congress enacted a law to carry into effect this pro vision cf the Constitution, which required the co-operation of the several States. This remained the law of the land until the latter provisions were declared void hy the Su preme Court of tho United States in the cel ebrated Prigg case. This adjudication re sulted in the repeal of [State laws by the Legislatures of several States, originally de signed to aid the Federal Government in securing the rendition of fugitives from ser vice. The Supreme Court of the United States having declared them void, they were formally repealed. And Congress enacted the fugitive slave law of 1850, authorizing the Federal judicial tribunals and commis sioners to issue summary process for the arrest of such fugitives, and author zing the marshals to execute these mandates with force—to employ the power of the country, Or the armies of the Republic, for this pur pose and declaring all who resist their exe cution guilty of a high offense against the United States, punishable by fine and im prisonment. It is true, sir, that some of the provisions of this law a: e offensive to the in stincts andjimpulses of a free people. I shall delay, now, to mention but one or two of them. It is painful to a freeman, unaccustomed to the local institutions that have been allu ded to to-day, to be compelled to aid in "running down" a human being who is fly ing from the land of the task-master. He arrest another's property, is without reciproc ity. Since civilization commenced, show me an example of such a law. Nor is there justification in the averment that this de mand is not made on the quiet dweller in the free States to leave his daily avocation to pursue the alleged fugitive, until the pursued resists the pursuer. If he were a horse, vicious and dangerous to tho pursuer, you would never dream of coercing your neigh bor for aid on that account, or of making him a felon for declining. Nor is there a Legis lature under the sun that would justify such a demand. If the recapture requires risk of life or limb, the risk is the owner's, not his neighbor's let him take his property at his peril, if he can do so without a breach of the peace. But, if the alleged fugitive may be consid ered as a man, as a "person," to adopt the language of the Constitution, as well as prjp erty by the laws'ofa State, he has the indefea sible right, in every State in the Union, to assert his manhood. He may deny the claim of the pursuer to ownership over him he may deny that he is a slave or, ifa slave, that he is the slave of the ^claimant. This would raise an issue of fact and, according to our notions of Magna Charta and consti- could agree to stand neutral to allow the plication has been made to the President of claimant to run down his own slave but all jthe United States for the enforcement of the his honorable impulses rebel against being of the South under this Uw, he has i poured forth the Federal Treasury, and made compelled, with his own hands, to aid act- i tutional liberty, every issue of fact joined in ,in Your reply to this view of the subject, that "to provide a jury trial for an alleged fugitive slave in a free State would he equiv alent to an abandonment of the claim," in- law. But waiving the needlessly offensive char- has been held to be constitutional by the Federal and State Courts with singular una nimity—but ono adyerso opinion having been rendered in a period of ten years follow ing its passage and that has since been overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States. And the people have gene rally acquiesced in its execution, and obeyed its provisions, and quietly submitted to its penalties, civil and criminal. And when you examiuc the platforms of tho Republican party, you find no demand for its repeal or its modification. You have, therefore, iaifs ig A'H force for carrying out this provision of the Constitu tion, conceived by your own brains, and framed with your own hand, st.ll held by its author, the Senator from Virginia, [Mr. Ma son,] to be perfect which no organized po litical party proposes to repeal or modify, sd as to weaken its efficacy, and which is execu ted with singular fidelity. On this subject the Senator from Georgia, [Mr. Iverson,] re marked acter of some of the provisions of this law, it validity, it is manifest that these laws arei believed to be constitutional by all parties, or are of no practical importance. In either case it is incredible that the statesmen and jurists of the southern States could regard this as a real cause of complaint, much le a cause for a dissolution of the Union. 8. It is demanded that tho South ought not to be required to submit to the election of a sectional candidate to the Presidency. "We have* fugitive slave law of which the South does not complain. It is sufficiently guarded to accomplish all the objects for.. ., which it was designed, if there was a proper """ldge or Mr. Bell, is larger than the relative public sentiment in the northern States. No' number cast for either of the latter in the| judiciary and Executive of this Government! _• with ample powers to evecutc the laws. We in its governmental capacity, has brought any oppression upon you—committed any aggression on your rights "I standjrendy to answer the charge should it be made. True, Massach^etts has viola ted the compact true, Connecticut has vio lated it true, Legislatures of other States have passed measures obnoxious to the South and it is equally true that the Congress of the United States, in answer to the demand of the South, has passed the fugitive slave law and it is equally true that, when ap- „t. e 0f ively in re riviting shackles and chains on i that when your rights have been questioned, the limbs of a human being who had thrown !its Supreme Court has maintained them.— It is true, sir, that, for the eighty years of them off, and is flying from the pursuer.— He cannot avoid feeling, and perhaps saying, "Had I been in his condition, I would, at the risk of life and all else dear to me on earth, have done as that poor slave is doing." And, sir, I find these impulses are not pecu liar to the people of the free States. What honorable man in the South has not a du plicate copy of these impulses in his own heart Where is the honorable man, any where, whose impulses and instincts take sides with the strong against the weak with the oppressor against the opressed Such a man would bo an anamaly in God's individual States to the requirements of the creation. And when he sinks the common fundamental law of the nation. In fact, "the impulses of humanity, ignores the human members of the several State Legislatures origin of the fugitive, and regar.ls him mere-j and ly as a runaicay beast, and reflects on the article of the Federal Constitution, before subject, he can see no reason for making i they assume the duties of their respective himself a criminal for refusing to run down 1 another man's animal. As an act of good i mation to support its provisions. The mem neighborhood or friendship, he might cheer- bers of every State Legislature take the oath fully aid even a stranger in recapturing his of office. They cannot, therefore, enact any runaway horse or mule but what right has law in conflict with the provisions of the the owner to make him a felon for declining Constitution without violating this solemn Where is the reciprocity In aiding to arrest obligation. a felon there is reciprocity his own safety But it is alleged that the Legislatures o requires it. But taxing time and courage to the free States have, in fact, enacted law: It is not, therefore, wonderful that it should be received as a conceded truth. And yet so grave a charge should not be received without the clearest proof. It is incredible that it could be true. It is hardly possible th ta majority of the mam'jjrs of lir. Legis latures of one half of the States could delibe rately violate their consciences in disregard ing their oath of office. Who are these people thus charged with a grave crime They are the select repre sentative men of a :reut a:ii highly culti vated people, chosen by their neighbors to enact their local laws—laws for the protection of their own lives, liberty, property, and char- ac^er- suc^ our courts of law may be tried by a jury of i years» would deliberately and persistently freemen. The naked claim of the pursuer COInm5t ought not to be conclusive against him who consciences denies its truth he ought not to be conclu ded by affidavits, by purely ex parte testimo ny he has the right to be confronted with the witnesses who testify against him, to cross-examine them, and to introduce rebut ting testimony. Nor iught the decision on the questions of fact involving the freedom of a human being to be irrevocably intrusted to a petty magistrate, appointed by a foreign jurisdiction. volves an accusation that is distinctly offen-1 State to the contrary notwithstanding." sive. We deny your ri-ht to frame Federal Hence, if these "personal liberty bills" vi laws on the distinct assumption that the olate the Constitution and laws of the United people of eighteen States of the Union can- States, they arc void, and would be so de not be trusted ss jurors in your courts of dared by the courts, State or Federal, when- been derelict in his duty in the discharge of this law. Mr. Fillmore was President when this law was passed, and it received his sanc tion and I am ready to sav that, so far as he was concerned, he carried it out. Gen. Pierce carried it out, and the present Execu tive. So far as they have the power, they have done their duty faithfully. sectionalism disqualified him, they were Mr. Holt, a State Senator in tho Georgia equally ineligible. If the Republican party Legislature, is reported to have said was sectional, so was the Douglas party, and "Who, I ask senators, has ever made the the Bell party, and the Breckinridge party— charge, in all the discussions on this question, the latter "carrying their sectionalism to that the Government of the United States, I tho Federal bayonet. It is true, sir, the existence of this Government, it has nevtr trampled upon your sovereignty, and never refused you redress for any wrong." The commotion at tho South does not, therefore, arise from the failure of the Fede ral Government to carry into effect the pro visions of the Constitution on the subject of the rendition of fugitives from labor. 2. It is demanded that the individual States should not enact laws in violation of the Constitution of the United States. This is admitted by all. None deny the obligation to conform the legislation of the Governors" are required by the sixth offices, to bind themselves by oath or affir- that do conflict with the constitutional right of the people of the slave States, st3'led, "perl sonal liberty bills." The late Democratic national convention, which nominated Hon. John C. Breckinridge, and the Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] each for the Presi dency, made this charge in general terms, as a plank in their platform "Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the fugitive slave law are hostile in char acter, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect." v*ic]ence probable that such men, numbers, for a long series of this great crime against their own But if it were credible that they could do so—that they could, from year to year, thus intentionally violate the plain provisions of the Constitution of tho United States—it is impossible that any one anywhere could be harmed by such enactments. All such pre tended laws would be totally void for the sixth article of the Constitution Of the Uni ted States provides that— "This Constitution and the laws of thei United States, which shall be made in ir s u a n e e e o s a i the supreme law of the land' and the judg in every State shall be bound thereby, am thing in the constitution or laws of an)] ever a case could arise under them. But asi no case has arisen under them to test their But, on examination of the election re turns, it will be found that thedamand would render ineligible every candidate for tho Pres idency at the recent election. The Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] is obnoxious to the same objection he received (not esti matiog the fusion vote) over one million votes, of which less than one hundred and seventy thousand were polled in the entire South. And of the three million thre« hundred thousand votes polled in the North( lot estimating the fusion vote,) Mr. Breck inridge received less than one hundred thou sand and Mr. Bell but about thirty thou sand. The relative number of votes cast foi Mr. Lincoln, South, when compared witl the aggregate vote cast for either Mr. Breck better fugitive slave law could be devised, by frec States,as compared with the whole vot^j the free States believe that the mass of the this Congress or any other. It clothes the I st for Mr. Lincoln. And this resi- Rttained do not complain that any Executive has ever: free States, by the champions of all part u after full and free discussion J&I0I :mimm*ii4jmi*im^ Ittunuua ©TTUMWA, IOWA, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6,1861. while Mr. Lincoln's friends were denied, by the violence of mobs, the right of discussion in a majority of the slave States, and de clared their opinions at greit peril in others. Hence, if Mr. Lincoln was sectional, all his opponents were as intensely sectional The marked distinction between Mr. Lin coln and his opponents, however, is, he re ceived a very large plurality of the popular vote over each of them, and a large majority of the electoral vote over all of them com bined. 4. When pressed on these points, Sena tors admit that it is not the escape of a few miserable slaves through the free States, nor the personal liberty bills, nor yet the elec tion of Mr. Lincoln by the free States to the Presidency, that justifies the alarm manifes ted in the South but that it is the pub lic opinion behind these acts, giving rise to them, which justifies alarm that it is that condition of society which tolerates the de nunciation of slavery, finally culminating in the election of a candidate known to be op posed to slayer, and elected because he was known to be thus hostile, which causes com plaint, and justifies opposition to his inaugu ration as the President of the .vhole Repub lic. It is demanded thai the press, the pul pit, the legislator, and the elector, in the free States, shall be restrained from this discus sion which results in this deep-seated oppo sition to your institutions. Aud the Sena tor from Illinois [Mr. Douglas,] has proposed a bill for a law, something like the sedition laws of the early time, to declare freedom of speech, and of the press, in the free States, on this subject, a grave crime, to be punish ed by fine and imprisonment in the jails and penitentiaries, a bill which the Senator from Georgia [Mr. Toombs,] distinctly approved, a few days since, and which I understood the Senator from Virginia to approve to* You demand that the people among them selves shall no longer speak disparagingly of slavery—shall cease to intermeddle, as you call it, with your institutions, and thus to engender opposition to it. We must bridle the pulpit bridle the press bridle our the Tni^n. Tha sober second thought of your own people, we may well hope, will per suade them that this is not sufficient cause for the destruction cf the LTnion. 5. The most grievous complaint is, that this agitation causes the people of the free States to hate slavery, and by the necessary association of cause with effect, to hate slave holders. We are told that this must cease that your hanor will not permit you to live in the same Union with such confederates. The people of the free States must change nmuM

tho slavery of the great mass of where truth is left free to combat it." "This may be a good rule," you say, in relation to everything under the sun, sacred and pro fane, that pertains to time and eternity, ex cept the 'patriarchal institution on every malignant hatred of the South, which re other subject men may speak, write, and quires a total separation, or the repeal of publish what they choose," being respons- these laws, and other satisfactory guaran ible therefor but here is an institution that tees to be promptly tendered by the free is either too good or too bad to bo talked States. about—its merits may not be discussed here is the imag set up in the plain, which all men must fall down and worship, on pen alty of being cast into the fiery furnace.— You have deprived your people in the slave States of freedom of speech and of the press on this subject and you now demand that the people of the free States shall adopt your laws and u«a»w, on pvn of dissolution of I own people at home, but that they shall en in the moral world. Hence, we are told that pression can excite applause, it is not in the free States it is not in the slave States it is not on earth it is not in Heaven. Men with their feelings unperverted do not love oppression angels do not love oppression the Almighty Maker of all does not love op pression in God's great domain, who is it that loves oppression and who loves the oppressor? their speech, their modes of thought, their jactly equal, and shall remain exactly equal, mental perceptions, until they shall he to every other State in the enjoyment of her brought to love that which seems to them right to make her own laws, and regulate hateful that the elemental structure of their her own domestic institutions within her minds must be so wrought upon as to chang own limits, everybody admits hut I inquire their perceptions of the beautiful nnd agree-! in what other sense is this claim to equality able, It is well known, to be sure, as we true 11 is said that we are a confederation are told by the learned, that the constant of equal States and that this equality must contemplation of that which produces pleas- be maintained. Where are the States equal urable emotions in the mind, will in time under this confederation Do they have an become an object of tender regard, or of love I equal voice in the election of a President? aud that which uniformly produces unpleas- Certainly not. New York casting thirty ant or painful emotions, will become an ob ject of aversion that this is a law of the mind, fixed by the author of our nature i gress Not at all. You may say that they that this is no more true in the physical than Iloiner's and Milton's poetry will bo read 'icre Not at all each Senator has one with rapture to the end of time the lesson distinct vote, and the two Senators from each of the Savior and the example of his life will State are often divided so that a bill may command the adoration of mankind as long as the ages last. When the strong stoop to lift up the oppressed, humanity applauds to the ends of the earth and when the strong oppress the weak, they are never loved. Tho sight of oppression never arouses pleasur able emotions—but ever painful it is so now, it ever has been so, and it ever will be so to the end of time, and probably in the world of spirits, through eternity. If there is any place in God's universe where this law of the mind does not exist, or where op-1 Stales, and in no other sense and it seems These emotions are not volun- i you would and you have no right to coerce them if you could. But, in point of fact, the complaint is not true as charged, and its proof is founded in erroneous casuistry. An overwhelming majority of the people of «it.i*t«H ar cast for Mr. Lincoln. And this result waij' slaves, as now situated, are incapable of the comes a citizen of a Territory, loses his citi- I inquire, Mr. President, in the next place, in thq' enjoyment of freedom with safety to them- unship in the State from which he has mi-1 how will secession, and possibly a dreadful artiesi' solves or to the white people. They regard grated. A resident in Nebraska, or Kansas, civil war, cure any of the alVgrd evils to the a grain of Tirulent poison dropped in food or a well, destroy whole familie and communities and I their State limits. our people would be no more likely to ex-rite 8 a temper productive of such a result than the people of your own States. You have sla very in your midst and how you can dis pose of it God only knows. But while you retain these people, you must provide for them as best you can humanity and Chris tianity both demand this at your hands.— And when you do this in good faith, with out violating the common laws of humanity and the principles of Christianity, you are not hated by any one anywhere. It is only when you hold them for the sordid purposes of gain, ignoring their common claims to the sympathy of the human family, that it be comes odious and hateful it is when you offensively thrust it upon us as a great good to be desired and extended and perpetuated by all the powers of the National Govern ment, that it excites loathing among the people of the North. Now, if it shall appear that you have wantonly excited this opposi tion to slaven', it will follow that you have no just cause to dissolve the Uuion on that account. This brings me to the considers- tion of your next demand. 6. You demand that tho free States shall" of to tolerate and protect slavery because your what reciprocity there is in such a claim?— forth such a demand—that one sovereignty people We were told the other day, by This is, to say the least, not a very mod est demand. Taken in its lensrth and breadth ing laws of the slave States shall be extend ed into their jurisdictions respectively. They must agree that the slave State* shall not only enact laws for the government of their joy the right to dictate laws to the people of the free States also that is, that Missouri shall be permitted to dictate laws for Iowa Tennessee for Illinois Virginia for Penn sylvania South Carolina, Georgia, aud Lou isiana for New England. It is by such rea soning as this that secession justifies itself on this floor. 7 The next demand to which I shall al lude is that the equality of the States should be recognized by the Federal Government. Now, sir, that each State in the Union is ex- votes, and Iowa but four, and Florida three. Are they equal in the other branch of Con- arc arc Then what becomes of this claim of the equality of the States under the Constitution? Tht-y are equal at home that is, they are equal in the enjoyment of a common right to regulate their own domestic affairs, subject to the Constitution and laws of the United But you say that you are denied, by the theory of the policy of the Republican party, 845 tary you cannot compel men to love you if They have no means of setting up a juris diction in the Territories. They can not transfer their sovereignty outside of their own limits. But you mav say that each State should have an equal right to tansmit its citizens to the negroes for New Mexico, or Washington fearitory, of the South as an existing necessity, which I having emigrated from any one of the States no human goodness or wisdom can at pres-I of this Confederacy, looses his citizenship ent chang. They understand the danger of by virtue of that transit and so completely tampering with slaves, and the frightful conj^ is it lost that he no longer has the power to if sequences that might arise from an unguari ded expression in their presence calculated to excite unkind feelings towards their mas ters—since they are in your hou *es, and nurseries, as well as on your farms and plan tation*—and could so easily, with Lemmon case attempting the latter, they admit its truth. \ou admit that it would be become felons —that such laws manifest a but a barren right that the migration of slaves in any considerable number to the territory has already been barred by a higher law than man is capable of enacting. Then, and depth, it is this: that eighteen free Stats i the Constitution of the Lnited States can shall each promptly agree that the slavehold-' equal on this floor but in what sense they equal Do they vote by States pass this b*jy with the approval of hut one,. ,,, If.u 2* i f.u i -r o 'luusdictiou of a foreign Power, it would be of the States of tho Lnion, if the Senators ,, from the other thirty-two States should chance to be equally divided. Nor an States represented in the Federal courts. to-day that Senators on the other side of the j. Chamber perceive the truth of the allegation, as is manifested in the enlarged demands made for changes in the Constitution to in crease the power of minorities. equality in the Territories. But the States, must say it, though 1 trust it will be under- maintain a suit in the Federal courts against a citizen of a State. By that residence and citizenship in the Territory he is barred the right to assert his citizenship in the State which he has left. Nor can the States appear in the Territories by their laws. The laws of the several States have no force outside of If th in, jUppear s°lv0 so modify their laws as to permit you to hold were told to-day that this policy of slaves within their jurisdictions, for purpos- inhabiting by indirect means the emigration es transit and temporary sojourn that is, negroes to the new white convenience and interest require if. You S^e, ^ould greatly diminish the relative demand that the free States shall conhr on 1 nu,nber your citizens privileges that are not confer- jan^ 'norcase relative number of the ser red on their own. I inquire here, again. vile Sl) I ask on what principle of international law, Prade the white people to the condition of or international intercourse, you can put shall confer on the citizens of another sov- jin connection with this allegation, allow me ereignty rights which it denies to its own t° the Senator from Virginia, [Mr. Mason,] that jthe P«t tongues around our own firesides. We i gentlemen of the South feel humiliated at I Clay, of Kentucky, and Mr. Webster, of trample under foot the great cardinal idea of being restrained by confederates in the Massachusetts that slavery was even then the reformers, so pertinently restated by Mr. i LTnion from passing through their territories i barred from all the territories acquired from Jefferson, that "there is no danger in errorj with slaves, and commanding their servicesj Mexico, by an irrepealahle enactment of the during a temporary stay,-—attempting the Almighty in the formation of the soil and first, their property is confiscated, as in the fixing the climate of those regions and you if the grievous consequences to which the honarable Senator from Virginia referred would flow from the policy of the Republi can party, they are inevitable, and no change ave,"t mxtkt Mr. President, the States cannot in the Territories per »«, nor by their citizens, nor by their laws, I inquire in what sense this demand for equality is made.— When stripped of sophistry, it means that Congress shall enact laws for the Territories authorizing one class of their residents to hold another class in servitude or, at least, that no law shall be enactcd restraining men from holding others as slaves. Unless this be done, you complain that your people in the slave State* are deprived of a right of emigration to the common domain. It would be virtually, you say, giving up ail the public domain to the people of the North. Now, on examination, it will appear that this is equally untrue with the other assumption. The ten million people that were residing in he slave States in 1850, I inquire what one ivould bo inhibited from emigration hy the olicy of the Republican party if carried out bv the Federal Government Not one. Of the four million Africans, not one would be inhibited. Of the five and a half millions non-slave-holders, none would be inhibited nor of the half million slaveholders them- Territories, while the popi lation would spontaneously emi. of white people in the slave States, population, until that population would ^ir predominate as to enable them to de- l^e ne?ro' a°d or'gin«il a^vert on t,lis would remit the negro to his condition of barbarism. Now, sir, to the fact which was proclaimed Senate floor but ten years since, by men that then adorned this body— this result. The sober, second thought however, of the people residing in the slave States will convince t'lera cf the incorrect ness of the deduction of the Senator. You have now, according to the recent census, we were told to-day, twelve million people, and a territory capable of sustaining two hundred million at least. Hence there would appear to be practically but little dan ger from the increase of the number of slaves, for many years to come. You say, however, when this fallacy is exposed, that you do not oppose the policy of the Republican party ia consequence of any practical disadvantages, but because it is a badge of dishonor to prohibit the migra tion of slaves to the free Territories. My only reply to this—and I trust it will be re garded as a sufficient answer—is: it was not thus regarded by the fathers of the Re public. They inaugurated this policy, and never dreamed that they were humiliating themselves in the face of the world. Then, if it did not disgrace a Washington, nor a Jefferson, nor a Madison, nor their descend ants down to the year 1854, I deny that it is a badge of dishonor now. If this policy did not dishonor the fathers, it will not disgrace the I leave this branch of tfrn ^qql witl. on inquiry JRo\\' will this coil #TfTpage of itnr^ t'ist'^'Y Tl"' lowest of vJUT people in the slave States when they migrate to the Ter^k i. s are to be protected by the laws i:i ytnent of their natu ral rights and it is of that protection that you complain. Why, sir, if any one of the meanest people that live within the limits of any State should receive injustice within the just cause of complaint but how would this nation appear in the face of the world in complaining that foreign jurisdictions pro tect our citizens. When robbed of its soph istry, this is the substance of the complaint. And you declare your purpose to encounter i civil war ou this accouuf. On this subject, Mr. Clay once said—and I commend it to the serious consideration of secession Sens tors on the other side of the Chamber: of States, can never appear in the Territories, stood to" be said wi'h uo desire to excite 'But if. unhappily, we should be involved a tin war, in civil war, between the two parts Confederacy, in which the effort up­ on the one side should be to restrain the in troduction of slavery into the new Territo ries, and upon the other side to force its in troduction there, what a spectacle should we present to the astonishment of mankind, in an effort, not to propagate riiht, but —I a war Teiritorieg. Why, sir, nothing can be piore duction of slavery into this country."—Con fallacious. A citizen of a State, when he be-1 grmional Globe, part 1, vol. 22, page 117. l)roPa£aUj territories thus aeqniied from Mexico. It would be a war in which we should have no sympathies, no good wishes in which all mai kind would be against ns for from the commencement of the Revolution down to the present time, we have constantly re­ our nntls]l which I have alluded, and the long catalogue added to-day by the Senator from Virginia? In what way will a dissolution of the Union enable you to recapture your runaway slaves It would destroy your redress un der the Constitution and by the law of na tions you have no redress. Would it repeal the personal liberty bills of which complaint is sometimes made Would civil war and secession prevent in the future the election of a sectional candidate by the people of the f.-ee States? Would it prevent agitation of the subject of slavery within the limits of the free States? Would it prevent any body from hating slavery Would it give you the control of ihe local Legislatures of the free States, and secure the pas-age of laws to allow you to hold slaves for tempo rary purposes within their jurisdictions?— Would it give you the power to establish slavery in the territories Every one, a.4 seems to me, must answer each and all of these inquiries in the ne.ative. These complaints, therefoie, coming fionl that part of the Chamber, sound to me like mere pretexts. They are not the reasons of the bluster and threats and menace which resound through this Chamber. There is a reason, however, which justifies itself by ev ery historical parallel. You have governed this country for the last sixty years. You have controlled its legislation you have con trolled its judiciary you have controlled its internal policy you have controlled its for eign relat'uns you have grown haughty, proud, and—1 say it without intending of fense—insolent. Being accustomed to com mand, you have forgotten how to obey. Al though you have been fairly beaten at the polls, you refuse to yield the Government into the hands of your constitutional succes sors. You demand that the victors shall adopt your party dogma3 and your party platforms as their policy, or you will rob them of all the fruits of victory. You pro pose to adopt the Mexican policy—when vanquished at the polls to appeal to arms to abandon the peaceful policy adopted by your fathers, of settling questions by ma jorities, according to law. You prefer the hazard, to say the least, of settling them up on the battle-field. If any one could doubt 00 this subject, an examination of the terms of redress proposed by the vanquished party will dissipate that delusion. Every proposition includes as its cardinal measure an abandonment of their principles by theRepublicans, aud, I may add, the Douglas party, and the adoption of the principles incorporated in the platform «f tho Breckinridge party and in tho Senate resolu tions which passed this body at the last scs sii^MAUaftAgress.^^,« Mr. ancestors for the intro- m. OLD 8ERIES, VOL. 12,N6.« TEM.1IS—$l,50,in Advuncc. 1 The radical difference between the Rcpub^ can party and the Douglas wing of th$ mocratic party—or the northern Democr acv, as it is sometimes styled—on thSj ne hand, and the southern Democracy on*, n the other, pertains to the right to ex. |elude slavery from_ th&,,X«eal?ries.jUi^ IKcpublTeaTr s mam tinned that slavery coul|y be rightfully and constitutionally excluded either by Congres or by the the Territorial Leg"Matures. The northern Democracy, who chiefly voted for Mr. Douglas, main tained that slavery could be rightfully and constitutionally excluded by the Territorial Legislatures only. The Republicans and northern Democracy differed from each oth er in regard to the means to be employed to effect this end but they agreed on the great principle of the BMHT, under the constitu­ tion of tlrt United State*, to exclude it.— The Southern Democracy, which chiefly cast its vote for Hon. J. C. Breckinridge and the Senator from Oregon, [Mr. LANE,] BRECKINRIDGE said: adopted the opposing doctrine. I cannot state their position more clearly than by repeating the language of these eminent gentlemen in theii letters accepting the nominations. said: "The citizens of the States may enter tha Territories of the Union ^vith their property, of whatever kind, and enjoy it during the territorial condition without let or hinder ance, either by Congress or by the subordi nate territorial govefanMHtia," Mr. LANE "Non intervention on the Snbject of sla very, I may emphatically say, is the cardi nal maxim of the Democracy non-interven tion by Congress and non-intervention by Territorial Legislature, as is fully stated by the first resolution of the platform s adopted. If the Constitution establishes the ri !it of every citizen to enter the com. mon Territories with whatever property hu legally possesses, it necessarily devolves on the Fedeeal Government the duty to protect this right of the citizens whenever or uherc ever assailed or infringed." On this subject the issue was fkirly join ed. There was no equivocation. The Sen ator from Mississippi, not now in his seat, [Mr. BROWS,] stated on this floor, that on that side they neither desired to chest nor to be cheated. Tho people have decided against you by a majority unparalleled in the history of this Government. The vote cast for Mr. Douglas was over one million.— llis friends claixi for him four fifths of the votes cast for the fusion ticket in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Texas, which would increase the number of ballots cast for him to one and a half million. The votes cast for Mr. Lincoln amounted to one million eight hundred and seventy thousand and if you add the vote cast for Mr. Breck inridge and Mr. Bell, and their fair propor tion of the fusion vote, as stated by the nor thern Democracy, their vote will not amount to more than one and a half million: one and a half million on the oue side, and three million three hundred and seventy thousand on the other, of this great issue of principle —the right to excl ide slavery from the Ter ritories belonging to the Republic. Being thus overwhelmed, you have not the grace to yield to the will of the majority like goo«| citizens, and four years hence go to the polls for the redress of any of the error* thai in your opinion, the people may have com mitted but you rebel against the Govern* •pent you have sworn to support-~ CDNCICDED NEXT WKRK.