Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-09-25


inhabitants Of Territory, by their ordinary
Territorial Legislation, to tx the institutions of
the future State, In such manner as they may
please, and at any time they may choose to
exercise this power.
The Utah act (section 8, page 455, volume 9,
aioresaid) provides as follows:
An the laws passed by the Legislative Assem-
bly, and Governor shall be submitted TO the, Con-
gress Of the United States, and, IL dsapproved,
shall be null and Of no effect"
Here the Utah act negatives, prohibits, and
destroys, in the first organic law Of the Terri
tory, every appearance Of "squatter soyer-
eighty" Congress retains, In terms, the right
to annul the improyident Legislation Of the Ter
ritory, whilst il remains such, permitting the
citizens thereof in the section before quoted
| from, to decide the question Of slavery or no
slavery, in forming State constitution
Is not THIS the true doctrinei Is not this
all the South demands2 Is not this what the
Conservatives Of both North and South as
scented to in 1850 in the Compromise measuress
Did not Willard Fillmore approve" those
measuresS Did he not use his influence to
promote their passageS Can any man imag-
Inc that, noe, after having promoted the pas
sage OF those measures and approved them as
President in 1850, in which measures squat
ter sovereignty wasignored, guarded against
and inhibited, Willard Fillmore would initiate
James Buchanan--sink his own identity-re-
pudiate the platform which he built In 1850
PROSTATE the American platform Of 1856,
which is modelled after that OF 1850, on this
question, and embrace opinions at war with
the doctrines of his Washington-like Adj
ministrationp
The principles on which the Kansas bill was
founded, are the same as those Of the Utah bill
on the question Of " State Equality" but they
are as wide apart as the poles, on the question
of "Squatter" power. The Compromise
measures Of 1850 repudiated the idea Of allow
ing the first few thousand settlers in Terrific
ry to fix for all time by Territorial legislation,
the destiny Of the future States. The Kansas
act of 1854 expressly and purposely destroyed
all checks upon Territorial legislation. But the
contrast does not end here. The Kansas act
allows "all who have made declaration Of in
tention to become citizens, TO exercise the
right of suffrage and to hold Office in the Ter
ritory."
This is substantially the provision Of the
Kansas act, and under this provision, the
paupers and criminals of Europe, spewed out
upon our shores, within the last ten days
prior TO their reaching Kansas, are placed
upon the footing of native and naturalized
citizens! Look, now, at the Compromise
measures of 1850. The Utah act, (see sec. 5,
page 454, vol. 0 aforesaid declares as follows:
"Provided, That the right Of suffrage, and of
holding Office, shall be exercised citizens
Of The United States, including the recognised
as citizens by the treaty with the republic of Mex
leo, concluded February 2, ls4s."
This brief review of the Territorial acts of
1850 embraced in the Compromise measures
of that date, and the contrast thereof with the
Kansas act of 1854, on the points stated, con-
clusively show that Willard Fillmore stands
committed, by his official action in 1860,
against that miserable, contemplate revolu-
tionary demagoguism, denominated "squatter
sovereignty" by which the future destiny of the
embryo States of this Union, is given over to
the tender mercies of the "cargoes Of folly,
crime, and wretchedness yearly shipped off to
America" to free the prisons and almshouses
of Europel
The letter of Col. Williams is only cumula-
tive evidence, that Mr.. Fillmore occupies this
position of direct antagonism to the most dan
gerous political heresy, ever concoeted by prof
ligate politicians, to catch that floating cote
which unfortunately in the past few years, has
decided our Presidential contests. Mr.. Fillmore
it is thus seen, would be false to the principles
on which he acted in 1850, when the Union
was preserved by the prudence, wisdom and
sagacity Of himself and his Union-loving friends
of both political parties-he would be false to
the principles which the American party has
incorporated in its platform-he would forfeit
the high claim to the confidence and esteem of
his countrymen, so justly acquired by his no
BILE and manly bearing, in the crisis Of 1860,
if he were to recognise in 'squatter sovereign
ty" aught else but dangerous demagoguism
He is not the man to trim his political sails
to catch popular breeze. His principles are
fixed-he is an American in the proper
SenSc VI ZIG tSthi--ile 10 pouiol III 40 iuoot
| enlarged sense-hs is a statesman from study,
training, and experimental not time-serv-
ing politician. That such man should enter
tain principles in 1856 which he advocated
and sanctioned in 1850 is natural and reasona-
BILE whilst it is no more natural that Mr..
Buchanan should maintain the sovereign and
exclusive power Of Congress over slavery in
the Territories in 1848-and in 1855 repudi-
ate that doctrine, and adopt the "squatter SOW