Washington sentinel., 1854-04-26

State into The Union, the organization Of terrific
rial governments for Utah and New Mexico, the
establishment of the boundary between the latter
and the State of Texas, the suppression OF the
slave trade in the District of Columbia, and the
extradition of fugitive slaves and, connected with
them, the rejection Of the proposition 10 exclude
slavery from the Territories of the United States
and to abolish il in the District of Columbia; and
whilst they do not entirely approve, will abide by
il as permanent adjustment of this sectional
controversy SO long the same in all its features
shall be faithfully adhered TO and enforced
minority Resolutons.l
80. Resolred Thatthis convention deems il right
and proper that full weight should be given in It's
action TO the will of majority OF the people OF
Mississippi, expressed in the election OF sep
tember last in regard 10 the slavery question.
s3. Rssoired, That this convention considers ac-
quescence in the measures of Congress, called
the compromise the settled policy of the people
of Mississippi, as indicated by that election"
And to this platform Mississippi stlladheres-
not ofapproval, for, in my opinion, but a small
minority Of the people of that State approved
these measures but of acquiescence in them.
And / undertake to say that her great states
man, Hon. Jefferson Davis, who now pre-
sides over the War Department, and who stern
" opposed these measures in every shape in
which they were presented, was never more en-
shrined in the confidence and affections of the
people of Mississippi than he is to-day.
Having, then, forced upon the south the COM
promise of 1850, we ask the north to adhere to
it in good faith, to carry out the spirit mean
ing, and purpose of the doctrine of non-inter-
vention of these measures.
But we are told that this principle was in
tended only to apply to that particular Terri.
tory, and that we have no right to expect its
further extension.
But, sir, deem it proper just here to declare
that il non-intervention means, as some here
contend, the abandonment of any duty by the
federal government to avoid the hazard of per-
forming it, scorn and utterly reject the doc
trine 1t is only acceptable to me and those |
represent as principle, which is to confne
the action of the federal government to the
great objects for which it was instituted, not tc
fetter its arm, so that it cannot hold its protect
ing shield over every citizen of the United
States, whether found within the territory sub
iect to the jurisdiction of the federal govern
ment, or upon the high seas, where federal
protection alone could avail him. Then tell
me not this doctrine was for Utah and New
Mexico alone; and, above all, tell me not it was
there or elsewhere to screen the federal gov
ernment from the performance Of the duties for
which the citizen pays tax to the government
the security Of political, PERSONAL and property
rights. With this Interpretation of the doctrine
of ofnon-intervention, acceptit; and ifit was only
intended to apply to this particular Territory,
this principle was never designed to be a final
settlement Of the slavery question. This agi-
tation is to 60 on; the halls of Congress are to
be the scene of continued strife and contention.
The press is still to TEEN with inhammatory
appeals to the lowest passion Of the people.
Mobs are to be lashed into fury by abolition
orators, and the slavery battle is to be fought
over again, whenever square mile of territory
is acquired, or Congress called upon to organ
ize territorial government.
Sir, if this be true, the action Of State and
national conventions, pedging fidelity to these
measures, as a settlement, fixed and irrevoca-
Bile, of this question, in fact and principle, was
worse than n mockery.
If understand and hope do not mistake,
the sentiment of those with whom / am asso-
cated here, they propose to repeal the Missouri
compromise, because it was usurpation of
power for Congress to attempt to exclude any
particular species of property from any portion
of that Territory, which they held in trust for
the common benefit of the States; and if l
am not mistaken in this opinion, how can they,
in the same breath which declares that act void
and imperative, deny that those laws which
were passed for the protection of slave property
within this Territory, shall not have the effect
given to them by these enactments? They
were covered by the prohibition of 1920. We
now declare that Congress had no authority
thus to bury them; and, taking the covering
off, what right have we to say that they shall
not resume the vitality Of which this incubus
derives them?
Does this Territory belong to the States, as
described in the Constitution, or is it the prop
erty of those who, in the race of emigration,
shall be the first to reach it? Let it not be
said that have asked question which admits
of but one answer; for upon the answer to this
question depends the solution of that difficulty
which now, and for years past, has convulsed
our country from it's centre to its circumference
If it be the property of the States, and Con-
gress, as the trustee of the States, holds it in
charge, then we are bound to administer it for
the benefit of all the people of all the States
those for whom we hold the trust.
We may delegate any portion of the power
we possess to such authority as we may consti-
tute within the Territories but this authority
can derive from US no more power than we
have, and exercise no power which is not SO
derived.
But if, on the other hand, the doctrine of
squatter sovereignty be the true one-thatis to
say, if the Territories belong to those few or
many who may chance first to reach it--then
we have nothing to delegate. The power of
legislation is theirs by inherent right and the
duty to administer is theirs, not ours. Under
this view of the case, we have no right to ap-
point governor, judges, and other officers no
obligation to support a territorial government !;
no right to tax the people of the United States
for that purpose. And to one Of these extremes
or the other l hold sound logic and regard for
truth compels every man to go. Ny position
is the first; and therefore / hold that Congress,
in delegating powers to the territorial govern
ment, must have due regard to the limits ofthe
Constitution, measuring out in each case in
proportion to the capacity of the inhabitants to
receive, and in no case surrendering that super.
visory control which, as the agents fthe States,
they are bound to retain until the States them
selves shall, in one Of the forms established,
release them.
have frankly and freely presented my views,
and have not withheld those objections which
feel to some amendments which have been
incorporated in this bill and to those who,
viewing this subject from different point, find
objections to the measure Of different charac.