opposed, the right of the people, when they form a constitution, to form
it for themselves. Mr. Buchanan and his friends have not done it; they,
too, as well as the Republicans and the Anti-Lecompton Democrats, have
not done it; but on the contrary, they together have insisted on the
right of the people to form a constitution for themselves. The difference
between the Buchanan men on the one hand, and the Douglas men and the
Republicans on the other, has not been on a question of principle, but on
a question of fact.

The dispute was upon the question of fact, whether the Lecompton
Constitution had been fairly formed by the people or not. Mr. Buchanan
and his friends have not contended for the contrary principle any more
than the Douglas men or the Republicans. They have insisted that whatever
of small irregularities existed in getting up the Lecompton Constitution
were such as happen in the settlement of all new Territories. The
question was, Was it a fair emanation of the people? It was a question of
fact, and not of principle. As to the principle, all were agreed. Judge
Douglas voted with the Republicans upon that matter of fact.

He and they, by their voices and votes, denied that it was a fair
emanation of the people. The Administration affirmed that it was. With
respect to the evidence bearing upon that question of fact, I readily
agree that Judge Douglas and the Republicans had the right on their side,
and that the Administration was wrong. But I state again that, as a
matter of principle, there is no dispute upon the right of a people in a
Territory, merging into a State, to form a constitution for themselves
without outside interference from any quarter. This being so, what is
Judge Douglas going to spend his life for? Is he going to spend his life
in maintaining a principle that nobody on earth opposes? Does he expect
to stand up in majestic dignity, and go through his apotheosis and become