Republican vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1857, 1856-08-02

Buchana1 on Sguatter sot1eignty
Another Important Document.

6uChatid4 on HGu5tteI So9IeiSnIy.
Another Important Document.
1t Is remarkable fact that while the
Opposition press Of Virginia accuses Mr..
Buchanan OF teashiDg the doctrine Of
squatter Sovereignty, another Know
Nothing PAPER IN Alabama ariaigns him
| Tor protesting directly the contrary rrinci-
pie. The Noble Advertiser reproduce8
the following letter, for the purpose Of
proving that The Democratic candidate
maintains that the sovereignty over the
territories resides in the Federal Govern
meDt:
WksHiNcrcs, kusast 81, 1913.
Dear Sir: | have just received yours of
| The 10Th instant, in which you submit 10
NE the following Paragraph, and ask
whether Il contains ali eccrrate version OF
the c5n9 erteticu between US. concerning
my Berks county letter. on the occasion 70
which you refer:
"Happenmg 10 meet MIR. Buchanan a,
the Presidents lesee, on Friday evening
| called his attention to this letter, and
asked Inn ii he intended to BE- understood
as claiming that the population of Terri
y
RIGHT 10 eoorol tie question Of Slavery in
such Territory.
He declared tkai no suei, idea had ever
been maintained by him. that the con-
struetien put upon his language By
Mr.. fancy WAS a peryeIslon of It's plain
and obvious meail'ag3 that. in his opinion,
! the inhabitants of a territory, as such, had
10 political tights, although they possess.
ed all the private nights oil staericnn cifi.
zens; that they had no power Whatever
over the subject CT slavery; aud they could
neither interdiet nor establish it. except
when assembled in Conyention te fern a
State constitution. He further authorized
and requested ne to make any public use
of these declarations that might think
proper, to correct airy impression which
Mr.. Yancey's construction of his language
in the Berks letter might have made"
With the addition ul.lc. have inser-
ted between brackets this Statement. Is
substantially and almost literally correct,
according 10 my recollection.
! In my letter TO Berks ca@nty of 25th
August 1847. ] Ilad said, ''under the Mis-.
souri, Compromise. slavery was forever
prohibited North of the parallel Of So de.
grees 80 minutes and South of this paral.
ell the question was left TO be decided bv the
people" What people3 Undoubtedly
the people Of the Territory assembled 10
Convention TO form State Constitution,
and ask admission into the Union: and
not the first adventures, or first comers,"
who nigh. happen TO arrive III the Terri
tory assembled IN public meeting. II a
doubt on this subject could possibly exist,
it is removed by the next succeeding sen
tence OF my letter. proceeded to state /:
"Congress OH the ad,s,isoion Of Texas adop-
ted the same F.le " etc. And VIVA. was
this rule? "The Joint Resolution for an.
nexing Texas 10 the United States" ap-
proved March 1st, 1915. answers the ques-
ton in the following words: "And such
States as may be formed oui of that por.
ton Of sfid te.fiiory lying South of36 de.
grees 81 minutes. north latitude, common
ly known as the Missouri Compromise
line, shall be admitted into the Union,
with or without slavery, as the people o.
each State aShing admission may desire.
Such was the description OF the people to
whom referred in my ne.as county
letter.
Any other constructions OF the letter
would render it essentially Ineon>isten,
with itself. Having urged the adoption
OF the Missouri Compson'ise, the inieienc,
is irresistible that Congress, in my cpinio,
possesses iks power to Iegislate upon til,
subi4et Of slavery III Tie TeFsitefiss.-
What an absurdity. would it then be. If