a close scrutiny will, in most cases, show that the remedies offered are but new forms of old mistakes.
Of all the expedients which have been invented for the settlement of the slavery question, Mr. Douglas's doctrine of popular sovereignty is certainly the most remarkable, not only by the apparent novelty of the thing, but by the pompous assurance with which it was offered to the nation as a perfect and radical cure. Formerly compromises were made between the two conflicting systems of labor by separating them by geographical lines. These compromises did indeed produce intervals of comparative repose, but the war commenced again with renewed acrimony, as soon as a new bone of contention presented itself. The system of compromises as a whole proved a failure. Mr. Douglas's doctrine of popular sovereignty proposed to bring the two antagonistic elements into immediate contact and to let them struggle hand to hand for the supremacy on the same ground. In this manner, he predicted, the slavery question would settle itself in the smooth way of ordinary business. He seemed to be confident of success; but hardly is his doctrine, in the shape of a law for the organization of Territories, put upon the statute-book, when the struggle grows fiercer than ever, and the difficulties ripen into a crisis. This does not disturb him. He sends forth manifesto upon manifesto, and even during the State campaign of last fall, he mounts the rostrum in Ohio in order to show what he can do, and like a second Constantine he points his finger at the great principle of “popular sovereignty,” and says to his followers: “In this sign you will conquer.” But the tendency of events appears unwilling to yield to his prophecy. There seems to be no charm in his command; there is certainly no victory in his sign. He has hardly defined his doctrine more elaborately than ever before, when his friends are routed everywhere,
