Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1856-08-09
From the Journal of Commerce, Aug. 4.
Kansas-The Philosophy OF squatter Sow
eretgnty.

From the Journal of Commerce, Aug. 4.
, Kansas-The Philosophy OF squatter Sow
eretgnty.
A Border Ru6iaa Constitutional argument
KANSAS AFFAIRs.-It has suited the purpos'
of the sectonalists to diffuse the impression
that the design Of the Kansas Nebraska bill
was to extend the area of slavery, and some
have had the efirontery to assert that by it
provision slavery is established in all the Ter
rtories of the United States. la making this
assertion they doubtless act upon the principle
that "a lie well stuck to is as good MS the
truth !" for they know full well that the only
portion of the Kansas Nebraska bill which con
tains the most distant allusion to slavery
namely the 32d section, distinctly proves the
falsehood Of their assertion. The concluding
portion of the ,a2d section expressly provides
"That the Constitution and all laws of the
United States which are not locally map
plicable shall have the same force and effect
within the said Territory Of Kansas else
where within the United States, except the
eighth section of the act preparatory to the
admission of Missouri into the Union, approved
March sixth, eighteen hundred and twenty,
which being inconsistent with the principle of
non-intervention by Congress- with slavery in
the States and Territories, as recognized by the
legislation of eighteen hundred and fifty, com
monty called the Compromise Measures, rs
| hereby declared imperative and void-it being
the true intent and meaning of this act not
to legislate slavery into any Territory or State,
nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the
people thereof perfectly free to form and regu-
i late their domestic institutions in their own
way, subject only to the Constitution of the
/ United States: Provided, That nothing herein
contained shall be construed to revive or put
in force any law or regulation which may have
existed prior to the act Of the sixth of March,
eighteen hundred and twenty, either protect
ing, establishing, prohibiting, or abolishing
slavery"
1t would puzzle subtler casusts than the Alb
clifton Republicans to torture this language
into anything tending, even indirectly, to the
4 establishment of slavery in the Territories. ii
it be conceded, as we suppose 1T must, that
/ Congress had the power to permit or prohibit
slavery in the Territories it was evidently com
| petent to that body to delegate that power to
! the people; and if the Constitution vested no
such power in the National Legislature, then
| it is equally manifest that they could not con-
! fer that which they did not possess. This po-
sition cannot be more clearly explained than
in the following extract from letter recently
written by Martin Van Buren,,
at is too clear to admit Of dispute or cayil
that it was the intention Of Congress to clothe
|
to exclude slavery from within their respective
limits, as well while they continued Territories
as in making provision for its exclusion from
the State when that transition shall take place.
| The only question that can be raised upon the
act in this regard must relate TO the effect of
i the grant-that is, whether the Constitution
authorizes Congress to clothe the people of the
Territories with the power to exclude slavery
therefrom while they remain Territories. l
| have not the slightest doubt Of the power of
Congress to give this authority to the people
Of the Territories. But it is, / think, quite
certain that if the objection raised in behalf
of the slave States in respect to legislation for
the government of the Territories is well found
ed, that objection could not be obviated, either
by the restoration of the Missouri compromise
or by the re-adoption of the old mode Of set
Ting the question of slavery in the Territories
by the direct legislation of Congress. Whether
these questions are settled by the act of the
people of the Territories or by the direct leg
islation of Congress, or by the restoration of
the Missouri compromise, ESQ far as that would
reach, the validity of the settlement in each
case, and to an equal extent, rests upon an act
of Congress and upon the consttutionality of
that act and this would, of course, have been
| the case if the Nebraska Kansas act had not
recognized in terms the subsection of the
powers it intended to grant to the Constitution"
The true intent and meaning Of the act was,
to remove the slavery question from the ma
tional Legislature and to vest the power, hitherto
claimed by Congress, in the people of the Ter.
ritory. Had this wise and equitable provision
been alhwed to go into quiet operation, its
opponents are well aware-and so is every
intelligent man in the nation who has not al
lowed fanatic zeal 10 get the better of his rea-
son-that there was no probability of slavery
going into Kansas as a permanent institution.
1t requires but very superficial knowledge of
the climate, geography, and characteristics of
Kansas and of the peculiarities Of slavery, TO
show the truth of this position. To have as
scented to this settlement of the question, how
ever, would have obliged the sectional agitators
to abandon course which they hope to turn
to so much advantage. in the Presidential cleo.
ton. 1t was necessary, therefore, for the ac-
complishment Of their objects, to place the
North and the South in a position of antago
nism for the mastery in Kansas; TO persuade
the one that its rights and interests were at.
tackled, that the South was usurping pre-
dominant power, and that Border Rufiansm"
was about to strangle freedom in its deadly
embrace and to induce the other TO assume a
position Of defence, under the belief that its
institutions and privileges were menaced with
destruction. IL was necessary to make the
repeal of the Missouri compromise the ground
work of a widespread sectional agitation; and
the best and easiest way Of doing so was by
raising the cry that Kansas was to be made a
slave State, by calling the phalanx of free
sellers and aboltionists to the rescue, and by
pompous display of buster and braggadocio,
exciting, unhappily with too much success, an
active opposition on the part Of the South.
What did they care so long as they gained
their purpose, if the strife Of passion which
they had engaged should surpass control and
and plunge the country into the horrors of civil
war? The more envenomed the discord, the
more abundant the advantages which these
unprincipled schemers hoped to derive. All
that avarice and thirst Of power could offer in
the shape of inducement--every advantage
that grossly exaggerated rumor and wilful per-
version Of fact could aford-were skillfully
and assdiously employed to keep alive the in
famed passions Of both parties, and to present
Kansas as the arena where the North and the
i q - -