Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1856-05-13
TtiE kiCHMUNU ENQuikEK.
TUESDAY MORNING, MAY I3, 1880.

TUESDAY MORNING, MAY i3, isoo.
THE KNOw-NOTHING PARTY OF Nlh1 l,n
AGAINST THE KANSAS-NEBRASha A"i'
ApOOR PRETEXT
lt;s every way fortunate that the controversy !"
zb&b tho S,n,b ia now involved with the enemies Oh
A., institutions Ia narrowed down TO dispute over
0,rc,s 5;.,;nc, and incontrovertibie principle-"e
,,.a, ne ,r;,c;rss Of tie absolute equality Of the
STATES. The Missouri Compromise the "iimot FRO
viso, and every such measure OF aro'f"rs
n,p slavery, affirmed the contrary of this essential
principle; and implied power in Congress 10 dis
erimiuate lnvidiousy between sovereign States anu
~ impose burdeusome and deroGatory deprivation
upon tho South. AS the Missouri Compromise was
the original act OF this sort OF unequal and unconSt
tu,ionsl legislation, so the repeal Of the Missouri
Compromise was Intended as signal remuneration o'
the principle of sectional distinction and State her
oriry, and MS "a supreme Offer Of atonement ana IN
d.mui,v 10 the South The principle OF the co'equai
dignity and sovereignty OF all the S,asesof thor e1
smntion from partial burdens and invidous restrlc-
tions-was the animatng aud essential spirit OF the
ebraska bill. 1t was for this recognition Oh
Its common rights that the South contendedi ana IL
is this recognition of it's common rights tnat In'
South prizes and appauds in the repeal OF the MIS-
souri, restriction. The principle is clear aud ncon"o
ver,ible but Black Republicanism disputes H. anu
proposes, In q drunken dream of irresistible power
once more to reduce the South under the yoke. ke'
stored to its freedom aud standing upon its dignity
the South sternly refuses again to wear the garo OF
servy and to hold its rights by sutferance' 80 the
struggle between Black Repu6licau'sm and the oouto
is reduced to this single issue: whether the sou'h
shall retain it's recently recovered equalty under inc
Constitution or shall be again provincalized and de-
GRADED The position of the South in this con'ro-
versy is so obviously and incontestaby right IN law
and in rsa.on and the maintenance of that position is
so absolutely essential the honor and safety OF the
South, that no Southern can honestly hesitate 70
su,oor, il with all his hear; and all his strength The
contest between slavery and aboltlonism being mar
rowed down to single vital issue, every nao ls Toe
10 slavery and to the South who sides with abolition
ism on this ISSUE He traitor ut heart who is not
with us and for in the battle which Is to determine
the ultimate destiny Of the struggle.
In the light Of these evident truths the people OF
Virginia will interpret the action OF the Know NO
hing Convention at Staunton, which not only 40
stained from implying any positive sanction OF tue
praoiple for which the South contends, but meanly
and sneakingly throws tho influence OF the Know
Nothing party on the side of Black Republlcanism'
Ths Convention Of Kuow-Nothings had no word OF
Applause for the repeal of the Missouri restriction,
bu. wen, out of it's way pronounce their condemna
ton OF certain imaginary defects in the details OF the
Kansas. Nebraska act. So far, then, as the hnow'
Nothing party of Virginia are not neutral III the
struggle which now imperatively demands the utmost
display of energy in tho South they are unequlVoca'
ly and actively promoting the interests OF BLACK Ne
publ,canl.m. The Know Nothing organ i'll this city,
tenounces the repeal of the Missouri restriction as an
ta,7utous and dishonest measure; and the hnow-No-
thing party in the State respond to the sentiment IN
the formal platform of their principles.
The pretext by which the KnowNothing party Ill
Virginia seek to excuse their condemnation Of the
peal of the Missouri restriction. is based upon the al
LEGATION that the Kansas Nebraska bill atiirms the
nriocjp,e of Squstter Sovereignty. AZ theIe IS at
49,, .at. .sS,.;s:~.. .1 :. 20 ~~-.
the Kaow Nothing party stands in this State, we pro-
pose TO discus. it in very few words.
Ii Squatter Sovereignty is asserted in the Kansas
Nebraska act il is affirmed still clearly and en-
phai;caly in the National Platform of the Know. No
thing party. The only clause in the Kansas Nebras-
ka BILL which i. alleged to countenance the doctrne
of Squatter Sovereignty, is in these words 81" being
the true intent and meaning Of this act, not to legs
late slavery into any territory State exclude
4. herefrom, but leave the people thereof perfectly
free to form and regulate their domestic institutions
in their way subject only to the Constitution OF
the United States" Now read the following para
graph:
art. of the American Platform.-The recogni-
ton of the right Of the native born and naturalized
citiz-n, of the United States permanently residing in
euy Territory thereof TO frame their constitution
and laws and to regulate their domestic and social a
fairs their tcdy, subject only to the provisions
of the Federal Constitution, with the privilege of adj
mission into the Union whenever they have the re-
cuiste population for one Representative in Con-
gress," &C.
Is not the meaning Of these sentences identical D
In TRUTH the article in the American platform lie OBJ
vously plagiarism from the Kansas Nebraska bill;
so thar if one arms Squatter Sovereignty the other
INSERTS it even more strongly and unequivocally.-
With what consistency. then, can the know-Noth-
ings Of Virginia pretend to repudiate and detest
Squatter Sovereignty, which. by their interpre-
tion is incorporated fundamental article of their
political creedl Their brazeu.faced effroutery is
equal to any ab.urdity.
But, We deny that the Kansas. Nebraska bill To-
wolves the principle of Squa,ter Sovereignty. 1t is
true that from partial and cursory perusal OF its
language, we at first thought it susceptible of an
souivocal interpretations but more accurate aud
ple,e study satisfies US that the Kansas Nebraska
act directly and positively repudaes Squatter Sove.
reignty.
Take the werds quoted above. The act "leaves
It to the people Of the State territory to form
and regulate their domestic institutions in their
way, subject only to tie Constitution Of The Uni
ted Slater" The words Territory or State are moi
used altsrnativey because that would have in
yolved the absurd idea that Congress might regulate
the institutions of State. The word State was
clearly employed to modify, restrict and explain the
meaniug Of the word Territory. 1t was meant to
convey the idea SO happily expressed by Mr. Cushing
OF an tHeh0ate State and to assert for the people of
territory in certain stage OF development, the RICH,
to regulate their own institutions lu general sense
tits indsputably true that the people Oft territory
may form and regulate their own Institutions and
before we can affirm that person. using such Ian.
guage asserts squatter sovereignty we must know
precisely what he intends by the expression. II he
says the author Of the Kansas. Nebraska act will
answer, that he means 20 claim for the people Of a
territory in soreretyh convention, and by an organic
article of Const.tut onu other words of an inchoat.
!Siose-,he right to form and regulate their own in
situations he alrms the true doctrine and not squat
ter sovereignty But the meaning Of the above phrase
oogy ss,i farther limited and explained by the words
subject only TO the Constitution Of the United State.
Whatever might have been the language Of the Kan
sas Nebraska bill, these words would have saved i
from enunciatiug Squatter Sovereignty for they say
in substance that the act meant to assert only sucl
principles as are consistent with the constitution
among which We cannot reckon Squatter Sovereignty
Iffron these technical verbal distinctions. We ris'
10 the consideration Of the Kansas. Nebraska bill Al
A whole and in it's general effect we will SEQ that i