Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1856-10-04
aE We clip the following from the Phila'
delphia Ledger. an independent paper. -

delphia Ledger, an independent paper.
"THE TERRIroRIEs. Times OPINIONS
The relations between the territories and the
federal government, it is well known, make
up the principal issue iu the current Presi-
dental canvass. On this subject curious to
say, three different opinions have been advan.
ced, by various eminent statesmen, living and
dead it is worth our while, perhaps, to see
what their opinions are. :.
First in order was that practically acted
upon, from the foundation of the Union, up
to the year 1850; aud acted upon, Tor most
Of that time also, without question rs to its
constitutionallty we mean that which con-
sidered Congress to have not only an exclu-
sive, but au absolute right to legislate about
the territories, and under which the slavery
prohibition clause was so often inserted
Mr.. Webster, one of the distinguished uphol.
ders of this doctrine, contended that this
power was given to Congress, in that clause
of the Constitution, which declared that Con-
gress shoid have a right ito pass all ncedful
rules and regulations respecting ''the terri.
tories and other property Of the United
States" 1t was Mr.. Webster's idea, that
| Congress, as I'd the territories had despotic
power, if they chose to exercise it; and un-
! der this conviction, he declared, himself in
ls4s, unalterably opposed to the admission
Of new Slave States.
| Mr.. Calhoun, at least in the later years OF
his life, held different opinion. He argued
that the clause about the territories related
to them only as property, and not as commu'
mites or political organizations in other
words, that it gave Congress the right to dis
pose Of the land, &C., but not to govern the
population. and that the right Of Congress to
legislate, which was derived from its right to
make treaties, &C., declare war, and therefore
to annex territory, was exclusive and ab-
soute. That is to say, Congress has no right
to legislate in opposition 10 either the ietter
| or spirit Of the Consultation; 1t cannot, Tor
example. create nobility in q territory, or
repeai the hubeds corpus law; nor can it, and
here came out his favorite notion, legislate
slavery either into or out OF territory, be-
cause this would be to favor the people of one
section at the expense Of those OF the other
which, he maintained, was never the intent OF
the Constitution. He denied the existence
Of either an express or Implied grant in the
Constitution to Congress to legislate about
slavery at all. Holding this view, he urged
that the practice into which Congress hat
fallen was of no binding force, because prece
dents are invalid when they favor what is
clearly unconstitutional. MIR. Calhoun, in {
word. considered that Congress had no powe,
to vote slavery into or out Of a territory
that consequently Northerners and Southern
ers we're equally entitled to take their insti
tutions there and that only when Congress
authorized census to be taken, and Con
stitution to be formed, according to prac
tce mover devated from till Michigan ap
piled for admission, could the question be vo
ted upon, and that then the inhabitants wer
!. to do it for themselves.
} The third opinion is the "sqnatter sever
eighty doctrine" often confounded with Nj
Calhouns, but essentially different from it,
This gives the settlers, at once, the right t
: determine the character Of the future STATE
1t is new theory first carried into efec
when California was admitted ; and subst
9uently further endorsed By the Kansas
Nebraska act. Under it, if strictly adhere
to, Congress has no power to repeal law
3 passed by territorial legislature, no matte
, how cruel, vindctive, or tyrannical they ma
, be- as it is admitted to have under both tn
Calhoun and Webster doctrine. The onl
remedy, in such cases. is to q new legislator,
! or by appeal to court Of law, if the enNc
3 ments are unconstitutional. SO also, if q
= election has been carried by fraudulent vote
no redress can be afforded by Congress, BIT
only by the territorial Legislature, or possibl
the courts, if the official certificates hav
2 once been made out in favor Of the bogus
candidates. Though Kansas was set goin
on the "squatter sovereignty" principle, bot
!, parties in Congress have since abandoned Ii
u theory, for both have introduced bills TO r.
n peal part. or oil Of the laws passed by tt
so-called "border rufian" Legislature.
These are the three opinions. 1t is for Il
= people to decide which is most consistel
with the principles of the federal constitute
and the spirit in which the Union W!
formed.