The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-05-08

slaves, mat she should not be admitted as
State. But we do contend, that if the Con
stitution OF any Territory, asking admission
INTO the Union, contains any gross violations
OF morality, religion, property, or liberty, Con
gress should not hesitate to refuse her peti
ton"
Our comments, enclosed within brackets, Of
course, give the views of the Enquirer without
circumlocution.
The Enquirer holds that the application o.
this doctrine is much clearer to the case Of
Kansas, because in it, there is no embarrass
ment from pre-existing arrangements.
After the extinction of the Indian tribes, il
became mere tabula rasa,' to be disposed o.
and governed by US, its owners, as we pleased
According to the ignorance or intelligence
the fitness or unftness of the People for self
government, "the Federal Government may
keep Territory in absolute political bondage
or may allow it the privileges of full-grown po
litical manhood. But all the while the soUer
eighty Orer the Territories resides IN the FEEDER
al Government, and cannot be alienated on any
pretence. 1t is trust power, and cannot be
delegated. The Federal Government could not
if it would, abdicate its sovereignty over the
Territories and, though its exercise be allow
ed to the people of the Territories, yet the Fed
erdl Government reserres the right to naodifJ
and ann,I the acts Of its sa5ordinates. In re
spect Of any political power they may enjoy, the
people of the Territories are, to borrow an illus
tration from the law, but tenants at will"
Now, as to the use the Oligarchy intends to
make of this doctrine-a use which the Gin
cinnati Convention will be required to sane
tion
"Yet the power of the Federal Government
over the Territories is not al unconditional
and complete sovereignty. Like every other
trust power, it is limited by its nature and OBJ
jects. The Territories are the common prop
erty of the States; the Federal Government,
as their agent, is intrusted with the control of
this property, and is bound by the obligations
of equality and honesty in the administration
of the estate. The Federal Government can
not discriminate invidiousy between the citi-
zens OF the States in the enjoyment of the COM
mon property, nor impose partial aud oppres-
sive burdens, upon those who stand on a level
of perfect equality. For illustration the Fed
eral Government cannot say to the citizens of
New York, you may carry your property to
Kansas, and to the citizens of Virginia, you
shall not carry your property to Kansas Now,
more: the Federal Government is empowered
and obliged to see that the citizens of the
States have equal rights in the Territories, and
to secure them in the quiet enjoyment of their
property. For illustration If any operatice
local lar should exclude Slavery from Kansas,
the Federal Government IS bound to ren,Oce the
restriction. ia Territorial Legislature ,cerc
10 attempt to abolish i&avery aoithn the limits
Of any Territory, ii scOuld be the imperative
tuty Of the Federal Government to interfere
md protect the securities Of property. These
are political postulates, selfevident PROPOSE
lions in the theory of our Government"
AS our object, at present, is to state the doc.
trine and demand of the Oligarchy, not to con-
Lrovert them, we proceed next to notice the
speech of Ex-Governor Brown, of Mississippi,
delivered in the United States Senate, Tuesday,
April 29th. This Senator, whatever we may
think of his theories, is disposed to deal frank.
y. When the Kansas bill was under discus
sion, he maintained that it conferred no right
upon the People to exclude, or in any way in
Ierfere with, Slavery; but, he knew that other
friends of the bill took different view, and he
now says that a grievous error was committed,
in not defining precisely what we meant, by
leaving the people of Territory perfectly free
to form and regulate their domestic institutions
in their own way" Error or not, the omis-
sion was Intentional, not, we trust, on the part
OF MIR. Brown, but certainly on the part of the
great body of the supporters of the bill. Such
a definition would have defeated it. Had it
denied the People the right to exclude or in.
terfere with Slavery" in terms, some of its
friends in the free States would have rejected
it; had it affirmed the right, in so many words,
Southern men would have rejected it. The
time has come, says Mr.. Brown, when a. this
delicate and perplexing question must be set
ted and he holds that the report of Mr. Doug
las, accompanying his bill for the formation of
a State Government in Kansas, sets forth clear
ly the principles for its satisfactory solution.
This report, he says, denies at once, Territorial
and Congressional Sovereignty over the Terri
tories-the doctrine of Squatter Sovereignty
and of Federal Sovereignty; maintaining that
" the sovereignty of a Territory remains in
allegiance, suspended in the United States, IN
trnst for the people, until they shall be admit.
ted into the Union as a State" 1t assumes
that the validity of the act of Congress organ.
izng the Territory of Kansas, depends solely
on the po,cer Of Congress to admit new States,
and that Congress can legislate in relation to
any Territory, only so far as it may be neces
sary to prepare it for admission as State
hence, adds Mr.. Brown, the author of the re-
port denies the right of Congress to exclude
Slavery from Territory, and, as the People Of
the Territory have no right not derived from
Congress, he also denies the validity of Terri
torial legislation against Slavery. The Senator
proceeds to compliment Mr.. Douglas stronely
for thus boldly planting himself on true South
ern ground.
Mr.. Brown is satisfied with the trustee thee
~ of Mr.. Douglas, inasmuch as it involves q
denial of the validity of all Anti.Savery legis
lation still he arrives at the same practical con
clusion by a different theory. His view is, tina,
the sovereignty of the Territories resides not in
the Legislatures or People thereof, not in the
United States, but in the States,
I" The sovereignty being in the States, or in
the people, Massachusetts must retain her part
New York hers, Tennessee hers, Mississippi
hers, and all the other States their parts re
spectively, to be held and exercised jointly un
til the Territory, with the requisite population
legally and constitutionally ascertained, ant
with republican form of Government, asks
admission into the Union as State. As sh.
steps into the Union, she becomes coequal with
the other States and, go Instant, the sover
eighty passes from the States as they now ex
ist into the new State"
Let us sum up and classify the contradiction
theories of the Oigarchy and its allies.