The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1856-01-23
soUND DEmoRAoT.

The Toledo Conn5eTcsdL Republican
has recently contained some able articles
upon the Future of Democracy which
are we'll deserving Of consideration.
We commend to the consideration of the
Fusion Abolitionists the views present.
ed in the following extract upon the
proper government ofTerritories. Dem
ocrats everywhere are rapidly a ssuming
this position. The Republican, says:
Especially does it exhibit a deplo-
rablo want of clearness and accuracy Of
judgment, to attempt to make it appear
that a Democrat is necessarily a friend
to slavery who favors the practice of
leaving the subject in the Territories to
the people rather than to Congress.
Had that body the power to decide with
regard to the existence of the ~institu-
ton in the States, the question might
assume somewhat q different shape.
Even then, where such interest and feel.
ing are involved-sectional feeling and
interests is extremely doubtful
whether it would be wise for Congress
to attempt, in the present relations of
agents to their constituents, to legislate
on the question. May it not also be
questionable whether it is wisest to
trust the settlement of the question of
slavery in the Territories to Congress ?
Could we be assured it would always act
against MISREPRESENTATION, it might an
swer to let it control but we cannot be
so assured. The interests of freedom
will suffer more frequently than they
will gain by the action o that body. In
the Territories the question must be
settled by the people directly interested
who, If they vote lin favor of slavery,
vote to entail an evil on themselves and
their posterity. In Congress the direct
personal interest of those who decide
the matter is comparatively small.
There are no means by which the peo-
pie of the Territories can be bought by
one or tbs other side there are abund-
ant mean by which the votes of mem
bers of Congress can be Influenced.
Once formed into States, all admit that
the people will have the right to decide.
This being SO, it is of little use, so rap
id is the growth of our Territories, for
Congress to interfere. While it is quar-
reling over its action, the Territory will
have progressed to the condition of a
State, and its control, save in the act of
admission, be at an end. Experience
has shown that the doctrine Of non-in-
tervention brings to the aid of the cause
of anti-slaYery in the Territories, a class
whose voice is unheard and without in
fuenee in Congress-that of the anti
slavery men of the Southern States.
The results of this policy 1.-THE best test)
are certainly thus far in its favor, and
from the best means We have of judging,
al our present Territories are safe from
slavery under its operation. Would it
not be a glorious vindication of Demo-
cratic principles, if, as now appears GER
tain, a Territorial policy originating
from them and not with special refer
ence to slavery, but adopted out of a
general regard for the political rights of
our new communities, should prove their
surest and best protection against this
thr eatened evil !?
"These results go far to vindicate our
main proposition, hat the best safe
guard against all political evil is the
most complete ~ascendency of the Dem
%ocratic principle, whether in large or
small communities. IF we could con-
.ceive it possible that the people of any
new Territory would deliberately vote
to entail upon themselves slavery, of
what benefit would be a prohibition by
Congress? 1t might prevent for a
time a particular form of oppression !;
but if the people we're really in favor of
it, or willing to submit to it, Congress
could not prevent them from establish
ing, even under color of republican law,
something almost as bad. The spirit as
well as form of liberty is necessary for
its preservation.
r-HrgEE Err=E| ~ Zs-..-