New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-12-13

rsIy conceded that Congress bad no power; but
outside Il those States, and W thin the Federal
jurisdiction, We asserted. as plainly as we could
The right Of all men t. Liberty, denied TO any men
the rph, 10 destroy iha. Liberty, and affirmed the
duty of Congress TO cause il to be respected No
body who really desired TO know what We held on
this subject, was for one moment in doubt as t.
our views.
Tie parry which supported Buchanan, on the
other hand, had previously been divided into two
hostile camps on this question. The doctrine pro-
POUNDED by Gen. Case, aud understood 10 De th,t
also Of portion Of the Northern DEMOCRACY,
affirmed the nshsaal right Of majority Of the white
settlers in ary Territory to decide at auy time
whether il should be Slave or Free; while the doc
trDe Of the great mass of tae Southern or Slave
holding Democrats Was known 20 be, in direct con
tradicion 10 this, that each citizen Of slavehold-
ing State had an indefeas bic right 10 emigrste TO
any Federal Territory with his property, ~he her
composed Of negroes, horses, oxen or other; and
there to retain that property" and require the
civil power TO protect him in tie use and enjoy men.
thereof, just as Northern immigrant might de-
maid protection in tie enjoyment of has prop
eriy."
The radical difference between these diverse doc
trines of squatter Sovereignty and iniefeasble
Southern tight to cary Slayey into any and every
Territory Was as clearly developed and understood
year since as it is low. More than year ago,
Mr.. r. Brodbead, L. s Senator from Peansy Iva lia,
in Democratic stump speech at taston, announced
his adhesion to the Southern doctrine on this sub
jet, sDd Mr.. J. Clancy Jones, the leading Demo
crat from Penbsy vania, gave in bis adhesion to it
in speech in the House last Winter. We under
stood Mr.. Cadwalader of the same State to take
tie same view. And it was already notorious that,
when the Nebraska bill was before Congress, It's
frields in either House refused to let any sort of
provision be inserted which should assert the
right Of the People Of Kansas aud Nebraska, rhik
they retained the condition Of Territories, to exclude
or aboliih Slavery-GOv. Chase's amendment to
that end having been voted do xn by So 10 l0-ev ry
Nebraska Senator who voted at all voting against
il. Again last July, Mr. Trumbull's amendment TO
the TOonbs BILL declaring that the people of Kansas
have power through their Territorial legislature,
to exclude or to recognize aid regulate Slavery, was
NOttu uONu " Cicai faity hoPu""N""'
in its favor, "a Democrats and Americans against
it, Mr.. douglas, when asked in the Senate whether
the People of TIE Territories do or do not possess
the power TO inhibit Slavery, declined to answer,
referring the inquirer TO the Federal Courts
for a solution of his question. And the Cincinnati
Convention which nominated Mr. Buchanan, with
reference TO this question,
"P,olred That we recognize the right Of the people
of all the Territories including Kansas and Nebr.ska
acting through the legally and fairly expressed will OF
tie majority of the actual residents aud rh,nerer Tie
n.mter # their inhabitants jHst.fes az to form Con-
sfi uton with or without domestic Slavery, and be
admitted into the Union upon terms of per ect equality
with tie other States
Now if this resolve does not deny, and was not
intended to deny, the right of any Territory TO ex-
cude Slavery prior to lis merging its Territorial
character in that Of sovereign State, then We do
not SEE how NEGATIVE pregnant" can be wOrded
so US to express its meaning. That this is Mr..
Buchapau's view also, the citation We have ready
made from the letter of an admirlpg friend to The
Huntsville D,mOcrat seems TO us clearly to establish.
The albany Attds, which provoked and CON-
menced a controversy with US by accusing US OF
incorporating the vital issue involved in Mr.
Buchansh's election, asserting that Dir. u.s. TIL
unph had affirmed simply the absolute right Of the
People Of any Territory to decide the Slavery ques-
ton for themselves, has been wisely careful to pros
ecute the contest a. the longest range possible. 1t
hiss scrrpulously withheld cur proofs from the eyes
Of IFS /, aders, though we had copied its articles
almost rerbdtim, and is now able to tell ts readers
Will characteristic efrontery that The TRIBUNE
admits that 1.-The organic Kansas act does give to
- the people of Kansas the right to establish or
prohibit Slavery, as they may see fiS"
Every reader of THE TRIBUNE koows that this
is the exact opposite of the truth. We do, indeed,
hold that the terms Of the Kansas Nebraska act,
taken by themselves and without reference to the
cotempoIaneous exposition Of it given by the
speeches and votes Of its advocates, would seem to
bear the construction cOntended for BY The Atlas;
but see also that the practical ehect of the act
is to deny TO the People of Kansas and Nebraska
any right to exclude Slavery until they shall come
TO form State Constitutions, and that this was the
clear intent, the msnfest purpose, of majority of
those wlo passed the act; and tina. this, and not
What The atlas substitutes for it, is "what was
" settled"-so far as anything wac settled-"by
"Mr. Buchansn's election"
The atlas observes that it is "per ectly natural
"'bat THE TRIBUNE should stand on ooe side Of
this question [of Congressional inhibition Of Slay
"ery in the Territories and we The Aaasl on the
"other." But if this is so natural, will The Atlas
be good enough to tell US how it happened that
THE TRIBUNE and The Atlas stood on the same
side of this very question few years ago, and that
the very side still maintained by The TRIBUNEl