Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-10-04

the political evils" of slavery, growing out
Of the three ffths representation, what harm
to the interests Of the South would he accom-
plishS
Yet how soon might man Of his eloquence
and power excite plantation Of slaves to re-
bellion, by hurting his anathemas at the inst-
tuition Of slavery, in the language and spirit
of fanaticism, and under the guise Of morality
and reIigionf Well might Mr.. Calhoun say
that the whole spirit of the resolution hinged
upon the word" religious" And what were
Mr. Buchanan's objections to the use of the
term moral and religioussp He did not
wish to excite anybody's /" prejudice Z"
Whose "prejudicesSp Why, those Of the
Abolitionists He affected to think the reso-
luton as strong without these words "moral
and religious" as with them These are the
reasons he assigned. Has any man right to
'intermeddlel with the domestic institutions
of the South on "moral or religious pretexts ?"
Certainly not Then sOhy did Mr.. Buchanan
vote to strike out these words2 He had not
the moral courage -he was afraid he would
excite the "prejudices" of those who might
wish to resort to moral and religious" pre-
textsl
But we now pass from those questions, hay-
ing reference to Mr.. Buchanans opinions on
the eOis of slayery,--the Missouri Compro-
mise" and the sovereign aud exclusive
power Of Congress over slavery in the Terri
tories" We pass from 1s4S 10 1866, term
Of eight years. In an "age of progress this
is, to be sure, long space of time. Princi-
pies have not however, changed, though men
have sadly changed their principles between
these dates. We left Mr.. Buchanan, eight
years ago, in our review, standing firmly Gas
we supposeD upon that compromise to
which we have REFEREED compromise which,
however wrong in theory, had done some good
in practice-but which had been annihilated
some time between 1848 and 1856, Git is not
very important whether in 1850 or in 1s54,)
and he turns up In June, 1865, Tor he was
turned up,) an advocate of "souATTER sovER-
EIGHTY" doctrine which, it had Just then oc-
Cured to him, at the age ofsixty eight, was the
true, genuine, elementary principle Of self
government"
"The elementary principle of selEgovern-
ment ?" OF course, ~ the elementary princi-
pie of self-government'' is, that eUsry man may
goperr himself but we do not understand that,
in political community, governed by laws
emanating from majorities in such community,
or otherwise enacted in conformity with writ
ten constitutions agreed upon by those com
munities, that the elementary principle Of
may be acted upon by indi-
viduals in defiance of the fundamental or NUM-
cipal law Into this absurdity, however, that
miserable demagoguism leads its advocates
In his letter accepting the nomination of the
Cincinnati Convention, Mr.. Buchanan says of
the Kansas Nebraska bill
This legislation is founded upon principles as
ancient as free government itself, and in accord
ance with them has simply declared that the peo-
pie of Territory, LIKE THOSE OF STATE, shall
decide for themselves whether slavery shall shall
not exist within their limits"
The people Of any Territory, then, have the
same right of government precisely as the
people Of any State, and this right flows from
" the elementary principle of selfgoyernment
This is Mr.. Buchanan's argument
Whence does Mr. Buchanan claim this right
of the people OF Territory From "the eIe-
mentary principles of se!t-goUernment p
Then the right attaches to all men, at all
times, wherever they may sojourn in the Ter
ritories Of the United States This is the le-
climate deduction from his premises. Con-
gress, then, is powerless, 50 far as right is con-
cerned. Two soUereiynties cannot co-exist in
a Territory, over the same subjects of domin-
ion. If the people of Territory have the
same right to exercise sovereign power which
is enjoyed by the people Of State, it follows
that the power exercised by Congress over
them is usurped The first man who'enters
a Territory, according to "the elementary
principles Of selfgovernment laid down by
Mr.. Buchanan, has right to decide who mag
and who shall not thereafter enter that Terri
tory, and sOhGt species of property he may or
shall not bring into the Territory There is
no restriction placed upon the elementary
principles of selfgovernment by Mr.. Buchan-
an. This is "squatter sovereignty in its ma
ked elementary form. But is it not rather
singular that this elementary principle of
self government should in practice be de-
rived from an usurped authorityH
Is it not singular, that this : squatter SOW
ereignty" which Mr.. Buchanan plants upon
the apparently impregnable basis Of /" the ele
mentary principle of government" should IN
practice owe its exercise to an authority which
is perfectly null and Ooid, if squatter sover-
eighty" be the true theory, legitimately de-
rived from that elementary principle of gov