legislation of 1850 (commonly called the Compromise measures), is hereby declared inoperative and void; it being the true intent and meaning of this act not to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States,"

which prevailed-yeas 35, nays 10-as follows:

YEAS-for Douglas' Amendment: Messrs. Adams, Atchison, Bayard, Bell, Benjamin, Brodhead, Brown, Butler, Cass, Clayton, Dawson, Dixon, Dodge of Iowa, Douglas, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Geyer, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson, Jones of Iowa, Jones of Tenn, Mason, Morton, Norris, Pierce, Pettit, Pratt, Sebastian, Slidell, Stuart, Thompson of Ky. Toombs, Weller. Williams-35.

NAYS-against the Amendment: Messrs. Allen, Chase, Dodge of Wisc., Everett, Fish, Foote, Houston, Seward, Sumner, Wade—10.

The vote on this amendment is significant, and we invite to it the attention of the reader. Here we have the emphatic declaration of every Democratic senator, especially of every Democratic senator from the slave States, in favor of the great peace measure of non-intervention with slavery in the States and Territories, avowing "the true intent and meaning of this act to be, not to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." How this doctrine, deemed sound, then, contrasts with the late shibboleth of the Senate caucus, that if the people of a Territory want slavery, Congress shall not interfere, but if they do not want it, Congress is to legislate it on them.

Mr. Badger of N. C. moved to add to the aforesaid sec tion:

"Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to revive

or put in force any law or regulation which may have existed prior to the to the act of 6th of March, 1820, either protecting, establishing, prohibiting, or abolishing Slavery."

Carried-yeas 35, nays 6.

It had been charged by Edmund Burke, of New Hampshire, and other Abolition enemies of the measure at the north, that the repeal of the restriction would revive slavery in Kansas and Nebraska, by putting in force the old French laws. The object of Mr. Badger was to set this slander at rest. Every Southern Democrat voted for the proviso.

The question on the engrossment of the bill was now reached, and it was carried--yeas 29, nays 12-as follows:

YEAS-To engross the bill for its third reading: MESSRS. Adams, Atchison, Badger, Benjamin, Brodhead, Brown, Butler, Clay, Dawson, Dixon, Dodge of Iowa, Douglas, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Gwin, Hunter, Jobnson, Jones of Iowa, Jones of Tenn., Mason, Morton, Norris, Pettit, Pratt, Sebastian, Shields, Slidell, Stuart, Williams-29.

NAYS-against the engrossment: Messrs. Chase, Dodge of Wisc., Fessenden, Fish, Foot, Hamlin, James, Seward, Smith, Sumner, Wade, Walker-12.

On the night of the 3d of March, 1854, Mr. Douglas closed the debate in a speech of great eloquence and ability. The attention of the reader is particularly directed to those passages in which Mr. Douglas speaks of the necessity for the organization of these Territories; and to his elucidation of what had generally been called the Missouri Compromise, in which he proves that Missouri was not admitted into the Union under the Missouri restriction, the Act of 1820, but under Mr. Clay's compromise, or joint resolution, of March 2, 1821; and also to the broad nationality of the views of the whole speech. We give it entire in a subsequent part of the work.

The vote was then taken, and the bill passed-yeas 37, nays 14. So the bill was passed, and its title declared to be "An Act to organize the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas." The bill being approved by the President, became a law. We give it entire, in a subsequent part of this work.

CHAPTER IX.

MR. DOUGLAS AT CHICAGO, 1854.

Ir is difficult to give a full idea of the excitement that prevailed at Chicago, at the time of the passage of the Nebraska bill. It far surpassed the excitement in 1850, relative to the Compromise measures. The ranks of the Abolitionists, always full there, had been largely recruited during the last three years: and among the new converts were many professed ministers of the Gospel. These men eagerly seized on any pretext that would give them a little notoriety, and as the public mind, that is to say, the Abolition sentiment in Chicago, was already worked up to a high pitch, they conceived the idea of treating Senator Douglas as a delinquent schoolboy. Accordingly, they addressed to him, and published in the Chicago daily papers at the same time, a most scurrilous and abusive letter, in which they impiously arrogated to themselves the authority to speak "in the name of Almighty God," and soundly berated Mr. Douglas for his course in the Senate. With admirable temper, Mr. Douglas wrote them a letter, which will be found in a subsequent part of this work.

In the autumn of 1854, Mr. Douglas returned to Chicago. The city was convulsed with excitement. The Nebraska Bill, and its author, were denounced in the most bitter and violent manner. Neither were understood. The opposition organs, the "Tribune," the "Journal," and the "Press," had

for months teemed with articles written in the most savage style, in which the Nebraska Bill and its provisions had been studiously misrepresented and misquoted, and Mr. Douglas vilified and abused as the author of countless woes to generations yet unborn. It is no compliment to the intelligence of the readers and supporters of these papers to state what is, nevertheless, the fact, that these statements were swallowed with eager credulity, and that Mr. Douglas was regarded by the Abolitionists as a monster in human form.

In a few days after his arrival in Chicago, Mr. Douglas caused the announcement to be made that he would address the citizens in vindication of the Nebraska Bill. A meeting was accordingly appointed, to take place at North Market Hall. At the hour of meeting, the vast space in front of the Hall was filled with men, the crowd numbering nearly ten thousand persons. Probably one-third of the number were really desirous to hear the senator's speech; but by far the greater part of the crowd were violent and radical Abolitionists, who were determined that he should not speak.

HIS SPEECH THERE.

Mr. Douglas appeared before the meeting, on an open balcony, and commenced his address. He alluded to the excitement that prevailed, but asked a patient hearing, and promised his audit to be as brief as he could be, consistently with a full exposition of the subject. He spoke of the sacred rights of the people of the Territories to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way; the great principle that lay at the foundation of the Nebraska Bill. At this part of his remarks, several prominent Abolitionists commenced to groan and hiss. Others followed the example, The noise and tumult increased.

The senator stopped speaking, and stood calmly, with his