Washington telegraph., 1856-06-18

does-oracularly-the same paper says
that
"Squatter Sovereignty is an imposture,
an ugly idol, wrought by mems hands,
and should be kicked off the pedestal,
where it sits in mock majesty and courts
the alteration of fools and demagogues."
Again, this influential advocate of your
party, told the Cincinnati Convention that
they
-"must repudiate Squatter Sovereignty
and expressly assert State equality"
This last paragraph is quite suggestive,
neighbors The South has never demand
ed anything more of the North than
recognition of State equality. Because
this recognition has uniformly, except by
few national, conservative men, been
denied to the South by Northern men, in
express terms, and by legislative acts
such as the act endorsing the 'spernicious
heresy" of Squatter Sovereignty-we find
the permanency of the Union jeopardized-
the fact of theexistence of civil war staring
US in the face, and the necessity of the repu-
diation of this ''inposture" made apparent
to, and urged upon, the Legislators who
are responsible for this political enormity.
The paragraph above is suggestive, we
have said. The recognition of State equal
ity is all that the South demands. That
recognition is not embodied in the prin-
ciple of Squatter Sovereignty, or Southern
men would not be clamorous for the abro-
cation of the doctrine. Are we not right?
How, then, can you, as Southern men,
contend for the validity of this principle?
And were you not wrong when you said
that the Democratic party-the whole
party-the constitution loving, equal rights
portion of the party endorsed the doc
trine of Squatter Sovereignty Don't
you think you were wrong, neighbors p
And what becomes of your first PROPOSE
tion2
As to the second position which you
assumed-to the effect that the party
which opposed itself to the principle of
Squatter Sovereignty, "made itself an
ally to those Northern Abolitionists whose
opposition to the Nebraska bill has couch
ed its hydra-head under efforts to restore
the Missouri Compromise are .xery
little disposed to admit its correctness
Even supposing it is true, in it's length
and breadth, you virtually assert, in the
above declaration, that the Southern,
equal rights Democracy, are the allies of
the Abolitionists, for they war against
the principle of Squatter Sovereign
ty-" But this is neither here nor there,
for neither do those equal rights Dem
ocrats who oppose this doctrine, nor
do the representatives of the principles
of the American party who war against
it, make themselves allies of those North
ern Abolitionists, who, as you say. de-
mand, as the fruit of their opposition to
the Nebraska bill, the restoration of the
Missouri Compromise. And we will
prove the truth of our position to you.-
Now, as opposed to your groundless asser-
ton, We lay down two propositions, which,
proven by us, cannot fail to show the fall
lacy Of your fancy; for the assertions which
you made, and to which we have refer
red, are mere fancies. First, we assert
that the Abolitionists do not desire, and
would never consent to, the restoration of
the Missouri Compromise line; second,
that if that line could be restored, it
would be of far more advantage to the
South than the existent legislation bear
ing upon the rights of Southern men en-
igrating with their property to territory
having only territorial form of govern
ment; and further, if restored, it would
necessarily depend upon the legislative
action of Southern men, and such North
ern men as would be willing to give the
South her rights.
First, then, the Abolitionists do not
desire, and would never consent to, the
restoration of the Missouri Compromise
line. 1t is known that under the opera
tion of the act of Congress establishing
that line, all territory North of $50 30
was made and declared free By the
same act Southern men were protected in
their tenure In slave property in all terri
tory below that parallel. 1t is not neces-
sary, We presume, to tell you how far and
through what territory, the line referred
to, extended West. We take it for grant
ed you are familiar with the fact. Add
tional territory was acquired by the Gov
ernment. Pending the organization of
territorial governments for this acquisition,
the contest arose which resulted in the
acts of legislation recognizing Squatter
Sovereignty. 1t will be well to enquire
here through whose agency this recogni-
tion was procured, and under what pre-
texts it was forced upon the country 1t
is an oft told tale, and in spite of its fire.
quent repetition, it seems that the South
ern people will not perceive Its truth.
Hon. Stephen A. Douglas told his con-
stituents that
"The objection to the Missouri prohi-
tion Is, that it is unsound in principle,
and legalizes slavery South, as much as it
prohibits it North What one man now
In this vast assemblage is willing to re-
store this line? If one, let him give his
name Is there an a6oLitionist present
soho IS 'cikiing to restore this Liae2 Is
there Know-Nothing? If SO, give us
his name, for Barnum wants him. Any
one can make a fortune by exhibiting him