Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1854-03-22
The sovereignty Ofthe People.


The Sovereignty or the People.
are the people capable of selfgovernmenti
Acorrect answer to this enquiry, viii at once
demonstrate. the principles Of the Douglas bill
recently passed by the U. s. Senate. on the sub
ject Of the organization of Nebraska Territory
and forever settle the question one way or the
other. At the time of the organization Of this
government the doctrine Of popular sovereignty
was not thoroughly understood. The, history of
practical Democracy, as exhibited in the rise and
fail Of the Republics of Greece aud Rome, was,
to some extent, in opposition to the principles
of popular government maintained by the Repub-
lican party, with Jefferson at its head. ,-E
The utopia of Mr.. Locke, who, absorbed in met
aphysics, had dreamed of popular sovereingty and
framed a constimtionrepublica in theory but not
in practice, was found better suited 10 the wants
ofthis country than the opposite extreme advanced
supported by MrPaine. TheFederal party beley-
ing that well regulated .aristocracy alone could
WELD the sceptre, with safety to government and
security to the people, maintained that the rich
and we'll born should govern. On the other hand,
Jefferson ane his party contended, that the Peo-
pie possessed sufficient intelligence and honesty
to regulate their own government and to control
and manage their national affairs. And SO the
sequel proved. -.~- j isG 70.
At this juncture, before the Constitution was
adoped, the people of this government, believed
they were capable Of self-government. Are there
any now, who dispute that citizen of Ohio is pos
sessed of fewer rights and privileges than was a
citizen in Virginia in 1888! Should that citizen Of
Ohio emigrate to Kanzas or Nebraska. does he
leave his sovereignty behind is his right to vote,
to hold Office, his freedom of speech, his right Of
conscience, his right of trial by jury or his habeas
corpus, laid aside like garment! If not, than Is
citizen of that Territory as much freeman as
though he boasted of place among the produst
of Ohio's sons. lrf..a. rf nd s.I a-s
But the defendants of the Federal party, who
inherit the anti-republican dogmas of Hamil-
ton, will tell u.s. that the constitution has provid-
ed that Congress is the law making power for cit
izens of Nebraska! and to this we wish to deovte
a paragraph. .I..t rs.
"Gongress," says the Constitution, "shall have
power to dispose of, and make all neediul rules
and regulations respecting the territory or Other
property belonging to the United States. But there
is no provision that gives to Congress the exciu'
sive law making power regulating the internal at
fairs of the territory. 1t must, therefore, be infer
red, that the trainers of that instrument only de-
signed that Congress should regulate the nationa
property interest which it possessed in such Ter
ritory Had the contrary been intended, language
would have been adopted similar to that employee
in relation to the District of Columbia. Where
it asserts that Congress shall Exercise erclts1u
jurisdiction in all cases whatsoever over such dis
trict (not exceeding ten miles square) as may By
cession ofparticular States, and the acceptance
Congress, become the seat of Government of tn
United States," &c. > ag .st.a
And again. Art. 10, Of the amendment to tn
Constitution asserts, that ''The powers not dele
gated to the United States by the Constition, no
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to tn
States and to the people, Implying plainly tina
"people" who live without the borders ofa State
should have the same privileges as those VIII
have State government to protect them.