Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-05-08

THURSDAY. MAY 8. 1866.
The Position OF the Democratic Party
on the Slavery Questi0n.

The Democracy as a party, North and
South, East and West, believe in the doctrine
Of "nOn- Intervention" 10y Congress with the
question of slavery in the Territories. as well
rs in the States; leaving the people thereof
perfectly free to form and regulate their do.
nestle institutions in their own way, subject
only to the Constitution of the United States.
This is the common platform of the Demo-
cratic party in every section aud locality.
Upon this the party is unit True, the mena-
bers do not all eractIy agree IN their construc-
ton Of this platform. Many, North and
South, hold that the people 10 Territory can
neither prohibit nor establish slavery until
they come TO make constitution preparatory
TO admission into the Union as a State. This
is our own well-grounded opinion While
many ia each section 6eliece that the people,
as aoeu IN a territorial condition, as lohen they
form State Constitution, haze full and ample
pOUer either to establish or prohibit sLdUery
within the limits Of the Territory Which they
inhabit; and that this right is clearly recognized
6y the Kansas act, and not prohibited by the
constitution of the United States.
We thank our neighbor for placing this
statement on record. We presume he
weighed bis language carefully, and put it
forth as his well considered and deliberate
ly formed opinion. We propose, therefore,
briefly to examine the claims of the De-
mocracy to soundness on the Slavery ques-
ton, according to the showing of the
Union and American
Many, North and South" says that jour-
nal, "hold that the people in territory
can neither prohibit nor establish slarery until
they come TO make constitution preparatory
to admission into the Union as State"
Those democrats who entertain this doctrine
we grant, are sound. The people are the
source of all political power, and when
they assemble in convention, through their
delegates, to frame a Sta te Constitution,
they have the right to determine whether
their State shall recognize slavery as do
mestic institution. But Democrats who
subscribe to this doctrine are fel0 in the
North, and not "many" as the Union and
american claims Amongst all the Demo
cratic leaders in that section of the Union,
we can call to mind at present but a single
one, Mr.. j. CLANCY JONES, Of Pennsylva-
mia, who has announced his adhesion to it.
If there are others we will be obliged to
our neighbor if he will name them and
give extracts from their speeches or
writings.
1t will give US great pleasure to recog-
nize an such Northern men as sound and
national on the slavery question; provided
they agree to admit into the Union such
new States as may adopt slavery as a do
nestle institution.
Again: MANY in each section" contin-
ues the Union and american, "believe that
the people, as nell in TERRITORIAL CoNDI-
TIoN as eOhen they form a State Constitution,
haze full and ample pO1Oer either to establish
or prohibit slavery l0ithia tie limits Of thu
territory 1chioh they irha6it; and that THIS Is
clearly recognized By the Kansas act, and not
prohibited By the Constitution" This is the
doctrine of soUATTER SOVEREIGNTY an ITS
moa odious sense. According to it, the first
few emigrants who may squat" in any ter
ritory, at the first session Of the territorial
Legislature, or any subsequent one, have
the right to say to the emigrant from the
South, You must not bring yOur slares here
this sol is cOnsecrated to freedom; # yOa1
do bring them, they shall be freed" This
doctrine has been justly denounced by the
UHiOn and american, as incompatible aoith
the Constitution" and "of all Others most
odious to the South" denounced by Mr..
Calhoun as the "most m1onStrOus doctrine
erer adUanced By an american statesman" as
WORSE THAN WuMoT PROFESSIONALISM by
the Richmond Enquirer in the following
language:
Among the fair, but false and fatal theories
of the day, none attracts so much homage as
the 'Squatter Sovereignty courtezan. There
are none so radiant with meretricious charms,
none so ready with deceitful promise, and
and reproach. The sovereignty of the people
is noble principle, and should command uni
versal homage. 'Squatter Sovereignty is an
imposture-a counterfeit copy-an ugly idol
wrought by mems hands-and should be kick
ed off the pedestal where it sits in mock ma
jesty and courts the admiration of fools and
demagogues.
Yet many" Democrats I'm each section"
entertain the doctrine thus denounced, as
our neighbor admits. We may add that
the great body of the Northern Democracy
entertain it; and profess to believe it is
sanctioned by the Kansas-Nebraska act.
Men who subscribe to such doctrine can
not be, and are not, altogether sound on
the slavery question. They are worse than
the Wimot Provisoists, because the latter
propose TO act through Congress, body in
which the South could make itself heard
and felt, whilst the former would act hrO'
the aHti-siarsry sqEatters Of the North, a
po,osr more efficient and more certain IN It's
operations against the rights Of the South,
and before which the South could neither
make itself felt nor heard.
We are justified, therefore, in coming to
the conclusion that the Democracy Of the
North are not sound on the slavery ques-
ton, rated by the standard of the Union
and American.
As the advocates of Squatter Sovereign
~ in the Democratic ranks claim that it lis
-.--s-.g =. IL. 49, - y NO fbfnt -