New-York daily tribune., 1854-05-30
The Courier des Eats Unis again chants the praise

of the Nebraska bill in terms like these;
"To take the Nebraska bill by itself, it reposes on
principle so clear in its moral and constitutional equity,
that its spontaneous adoption by the moderate mon OF oil
parties and of all ATTITUDES would in other times not have
with either doubt difficulty 10 Leave 20 Tue popu-
laor of the Territories full and entire liberty in their do
mesic institutions is evidently much more consonant win
the dogma Of popular sovereignty ana te absolute naS
portion of the Union under pretext oil ITS geographich
position it is also no less ncontestiby the simplest means
of putting end TO all conflicts between the Norm and
South TO all pressure OF the latter on the orner an"
al distrust between them.
We are familiar with this sort OF nonsense from
journals that sustain the bill, because their editors or
their editors cousins postmasters or tdewaters;
but why it should appear in paper whose position
ought to be of independence and Importantly u
Is difficult to understand How does Tho Courier re-
concile its talk about popular sovereignty with the
notorious fact concisely stated by Mr. Benton, that
the bill denies to the People of the Territory every
attribute Of sovereignty; denies them freedom OF
4" election, denies them freedom Of voting, denies
them the choice of their own laws denies them the
right of fixing qualifications for voters, subjects
them to foreign supervision and the control OF the
Federal Government which they had no hand In
"electng" What sort of popular sovereignty
is that which puts over the people a Governor
appointed by the President, endows that Cover.
representatives or when he allows them to stand sub
iecs them to the administration Of judges the People
did not appoint and after ALL subjects the whole Of
them to the approval of the Government at Washing
tom What does contemporary say to the fact that
the House of Representatives twice voted down
amendments to the bill offered by Mr. Mace Of Indi
anna aud Mr.. Fuller of Maine, expressly authorizing
the Territorial Legislature to establish exclude
Slavery, as the People might instruct themi Does
The Courier wish to pass for blind or ignorant that
it holds such language as that we above cite from ts
columnsi And how does it suppose this bill can put
an end to conflicts and dstrust between North and
South when it's object is TO take from the former
vast territory which thirty years ago the latter SOL
EMMY guaranteed to Freedom Forever receiving
therefor ample consideration, which it still hods'
The breaking of ancient and solemn treaties is not
usually thought to be of peace and friendship.
Let it never be forgotten that Douglass bill, now
enacted, does not even pretend TO allow the rhok
People of Nebraska TO decide the mOmentous ques-
tons involved. By its express terms, but "jye
uhte persons allowed any voice in the premises
Who DEGREES the disfranchisement Of the residue'
Certainly not the Nebraska squatters, but the pro-
Slavery majority in COngress-the same that tried to
disfranchise the unnaturalzed settlers also but were
backed out of the attempt. We appeal to the Corr
yier, therefore, to answer directly this question
Does the Nebraska bill really "leave to the people oil
the Territories full and entire liberty in their do
"mestic institutions ?" Yea or Nay