Washington sentinel., 1856-07-19

Whilst all statutes must be construed strict
and not in accordance with the intent an
meaning of their trainers, where such inten
and meaning are directly at variance with th
| plain and obvious import of the language il
which they are expressed, yet when there
merely patent ambiguity in their phraseolog
we must have recourse to extraneous sources ii
order to determine their true Specification. w
therefore refer those whose minds are becloudet
with doubts and clogged with difficulties in re
gard TO the proper construction of such por
tions of the Kansas N ebraska act as relate Il
the subject of slavery and the real import 0
Mr.. Buchanan's letter, to the able and elaborate
report Of Judge Douglas, as chairman of the
committee on territories, March IL, 1886, anc
to the speech Of Mr.. Buchanan on the admis
sion of Arkansas into the Union--to his
speech in Washington in l848, concerning the
admission of California--to his letter on the
compromise measures Of 1850, and to the fol
lowing expose from the Chicago Tribune, q
Black Republican sheet:
"Buchanan's platform: lst.' Congress has
no power to exclude slavery from any terri
tory; I'd. The people of territory have nc
power to prohibit slavery AS long as the terri
torial government lasts Sd. Squatter Sover-
eighty is humbug, and no longer plank In
the Democratic creed.'
1t may be well "to make assurance douby
sure, to quote an extract from the card Of Col
VIM. A. Richardson, published in The Wash
ington Union sometime last May,) rs he was
one of the warmest and ablest champions oi
the bill, and the staunch friend of Senator
Douglas. His Interpretation Of the act is au.
thoritative, and sustains the views we have
above presented. "My position then was, and
now is, that the Kansas N ebraska act was
based upon the true principles of the Constitu.
tion, in recognizing the right of each State
and Territory, preparatory to its admission
into the Union, to form and regulate their do
mestic institutions in their own way, subject
to the Constitution of the United States, and
that should vote for the admission of each
new State, with or without slavery, as its own
people should decide"
We shrewdly suspect that, if the truth were
known, at least nine tenths of these furious
declaimers about the squatter sovereignty fea-
ture of the Kansas-N Nebraska act, stand in the
same category with gentleman OF acknow-
lodged intelligence and ability, whom we heard
the other day inveighing Justify against it. and
modestly acknowledging in the same breath
that he had never seen the act and knew
nothing Of its provisions, beyond what he could
CLEAN from the public journals. e. from the
prolific columns of the Richmond Whig. He
reminded US of Sir Fretfnl Plagiary, in Sheri-
dams Critic: "The newspapers! Sir, they are
the most villainous, licentious, abominable, in
fernal--not that ever read them; no, sir, /
make it point never to read a newspaper"
The Kansas Nebraska act Sir, it is the most
infamous, atrocious, execrable-not that ever
read it; no, Fam no dirty, tme-serving politician,
and therefore not presumed to be acquainted
with the Legislation of the country! The same
gentleman defined squatter sovereignty to be
the right of an unnaturalized foreigner to vote
in the Territories, and said that as the Mis-
souri, restriction gave the North all territory
above 800 30< and the South all beloto (i) its
repeal had opened the entire public domain,
both above and below the line to general
scramble"-a free fight! Plaudite Samitesi I
Where ignorance is popular, 'tis folly to be
anything but Know-nothingl
Yours, &C.,
PETER PLYMLEY.
WEsTMoRELAND, July IL, 1856.