Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-10-14
POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY .ENLARGED."

1t was thought to be considerable step in the
career of Progressive Democracy when sove-
reignty" was claimed for squatters upon the public
ers; but it remained for the Massachusetts, Demo
Gacy to discover still greater refinement. in poll
tical deductions. Witness the resolutions adopted
at the Democratic State Convention in Lowell. We
recur to one of them, upon which a reliance is
placed to show an approval Of the "principles" of
the Nebraska bill, though the words Kansas and
Nebraska are not found in the resolutions
ResoDed That the Constitution recognises the prin
cpe OF self government and the power OF the people, in
whatever bond united with each other whether in State
county, tocn, district Territory, to control their in
stutions that this principle alone the colonies
tered upon the struggle for independence the Confeder
ton established and the Federal Constitution adopt
ed that only by rigid regard for this principle
hope to preserve liberties against usurpaon rival
res and anarchy and that confidence in this principle
old country, enforced by Jefferson sustained by
Jackson leads to look with pride and satisfaction
every of the Administration calculated to give
Of federal folly from our legislation and extending the
rights and privileges States Territories
which claimed by and secured to the people or
Massachusetts, and all her sister States when they
united in this Confederation"
The Boston Daily Advertiser disposes of this
new absurdity in mastery manner. 1t says, in,
reference to the authorship of this resolution, that
it could not have supposed that the eagerness to
echo principle supposed to find favor at Wash
ington could have betrayed any person who even
as child, had been educated at New England
school into the utterance Of SO much nonsense"
The Advertiser gives the following strong illusra-
ton to show the practical working Of the doctrine
if attempted to be carried into effect:
The right of the States to control their own nsttu
tons (subject to the Consttuon) was never doubted
The right OF the Territories to do So far slavery
concerned and that and nothing else is the institution
in question: maintained by Congress till the
last wnter and for any such right being
Counties toons and districts, it reserved for the saga
cious framer of this resolution to make the discovery
and, having made it, to find in it remedy against rival
res and anarchy We apprehend that If in the free
State Of Massachusetts, for instance the county of Essex
should exercise its right Of selgovernment and esta
bsh slavery Salem, however, should set at defiance
the county ordinance and insist that there should be
slavery, and finally two of the districts into which
that city is divided should claim the power of con-
trolling its own Institutions in this respect state Of
things approaching very nearly to anarchy would be the
consequence.
awe mention Massachusetts of course only for argu-
ments sake, and not if there possibility that
any harm could result from carrying the ridiculous
principle Of the Lowell resolutions There are States
howeverinois, for instance-where it might be other
wse The southern portion Of that State said to be
friendly to slavery What would be the consequence
there of setting the absurd doctrine that every
N every town, and every district has the right ito
troll its own institutions?"
The Advertiser calls attention to another ludic-
rous position Of the Massachusetts, Democracy. The
deep and almost universal agitation of the country
ought to have been considered too serious subject
for random asseyeration yet the writer Of the reso
lutions has dealt out sarcasm upon his friends
which even adversary would have spared them.
For instance, the Administration is auded because
it has confirmed The traterna1 feeling among the
States by impartial Legislation and has recognised
the right of each State and the sovereign right of
the people to manage their own affairs !" whereas,
in reality, is well remarked by the intelligent jour
nal from which we quote, the measure compliment
ed in indirect terms !" has agitated the country
more than any subject of discussion or legislation
for thirty years"
The Advertiser concludes its remarks by the fol-
lowing contrast Of the past and present opinions Of
the Massachusetts, Democracy; and, although we
have heretofore recorded those Of lS40, they will
bear repetition at the present moment:
1t is painful to mark the discrepancy between the
those passed at the Democratic Convention Springfield
in l849 the policy Of the Democratic party
that occasion to propatc the friends Of the Wilmot pro-
viso The following resolutions were accordingly intro
ducad by the Hon. B. r. HALLETT and unanimously
adopted by the Convention:
ResolUd That opposed to slavery in every form
and color and in favor of freedom and eeso wherever
man lives throughout Gods heritage
s ResolUed, That, by common law and common sense
we'll by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the
United States, Tin Prigg Pennsylvania, 16 Peters,
the state of slavery is municipal regulation
founded upon and limited to the verge of the Territorial
law that is the limits of the State creating it.
g" Resolped, therefore, That slavery does not exist by
any municipal law in the Territories and Congress has
power to institute it, the local laws Of any State
thorizng slavery be transported there
slavery exist there but by local law Of the Territory
SANCTIONED CONGRESS- the Legislative act Of State
in its sovereign capacity
We need not say that the act Of last winter far
slavery is concerned is founded the principle that
Congress has right interfere in this matter that it
is question solely for the individuals who may happen
be resident in the Territories when their Govern
ors think proper fix the time for holding the frst cleo
tons. In word the Democratic Convention in 1s49
solved that slavery could not be admitted into Terri
tory without the sanction Of Congress- the Democratic
Convention Of 1854 ratfes the doctrine Of squatter
sovereignty ="
NOMINATIONS FOR CONGRESS.
The Hard-shel Democrats Of the city of New York
have made the following nominations for the next Con-
gress, viz
EMANUEL B. HART in the third district; MIKE WALSH