Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1856-05-26
ror Interesting news, teleeraPhic &c. see outside


TRUE OF -quaer sovereignty. aud quoted that portion I
the hill which they sajd maintained the oiJecionabl"
doctrine Aner having Thousand times done 50, thrN
meet Philsdelpha and boast that in theirsevenh See
ton they have adopted language OF the precise import
with that which they had objected The great boast
the Wing is that the Philadelphia convention adopted
the seventh sccon which the Wing also boasts ident
cal IN import and almost identical in terms with the ka
sas-Nebra-ka Thus the Wing and the whole oppos
ton have defined their words in advance and say the,
maintain the doctrine OF squstter sovereignty No doubt
they do and hence the ! 9Th section repealed aud
the Missouri Compromise denounced by this Phiapelpis
Convention. The Wing and it, allies know what tl''ir
words mean, and have right - define them but
have right to define for US the same words when eau
ploycd by We. that is almost the whole Democratic
party maintained, when the Kansas hill on its pa
sage aud have held since that its terms 40 not JUST
y sqasiter sovereignty We have the right TO de-
hne words that the Wing and its allies have to dehir
theirs The 9TH section does contain the doctrine m
squater Sovereignty and inserted concession 10
the North In hen Of the 18th section To which the North
objected The Kansas-Nebraska BILL although in the
same wod contains such doctrine because the words
empuvcd in different sens" by those who enacted
the hill.-GHgUirer Of Saturday.
We hardly know how To notice the foregoing
budget of errors if we may term errors what APP
pears to be nothing less than downright
nisrcpresentationS We have searched in vain to
find in any sentence line, word OF this paragraph
the slightest approximation TO accuracy. IL is pal
pablo and egrrgious error from beginning to end.
contained the doctrine of Squatter Sovereignty -
We defy the Enquirer to produce particle of evil
dcnce from our columns to sustain it in its bold and
tiippant assertion. We have never, at any time or
under any circumstances, made such charge With
our notions OF the Constitution there is not and can
not be any such thing as squatter Sovereignty. Yet
understand what is meant 10y the term; andknow
that others especially leading Democrats-assert a
Il = 1 IL ..I.
language of the Nebraska bill had the appearance of
jusulying the Squatter Sovereignty construction
which those who believe in and uphold such doctrine
have put upon it.
We may illustrate views touching the subject
of squatter sovereignty in very simple manner
For instance, do not believe there is can be
such a thing a. Wilmot-proviSoism, because do
believe that the Constitution recognizes asserts
such doctrine, ia any form whatsoever. Yet, We
know what it means by such doctrine, and that it j.,
upheld aud maintained by thousands Of people in
this country. And in warning upon it, we war upon
what believe TO be a wretched hereSy which like
squatter sovereignty, is unwarranted and un>uppnr-
ted by any fair aud Just construction Of the Coust
tuition. la other words denounce what Others
call Wilmot-provisoism and squatter sovereignty
not that we believe, or have ever believed with our
ideas Of what the contitution teaches, that such
things can have an existence.
Aud here may say Tor all-aS it ne
cessariiy follows from what we have already said
that We object out and out to the resolution
OF the late Staunton convention which denounce,
squattcr sovereignty part dHd p4rcei of the Ne
braska bill. We agree with our contemporaries Of
the Lynchburg HiryiniIh that such "A concession wa
unnecessary aud impolitic If absolutely stupid
because unless the constitution itself recognizes an.
sanctions such doctrine (and Southern men Of q.
parties contend that it does not then it is not COL
tanned in the Nebraska bill, as it is impossible f
Congress to give to others what it does not posses
We look upon the so-caled doctrine of Souatt.t
sovereignty with as much hatred and detestation
anybody and We are ready to battle against it viii,
as much Zeal, whenever it asserts itself in tangiL
form. That is, it, rs they certainly do the Norfi
ern Democracy with Cass, Pearce, and Douglas .t
their head contend for the existence Of such a d..
trne aud that il Is actually asserted in the Nebras
bill We are prompt to meet them at the threShho :
and take issue with them at once But We maintai
that Southern should not under any circun-
stance, admit the existence OF such doctrine muc.,
less concede that it is contained ia the Kansas NJ.
braska bill
The Enquirer says that itself and "amost the
whole Democratic party maintained when the Kan
sas till on it, passage, anu have held ever sine
that its terms do not justify squater sovereignty ~
Now, say that the Enquirer maintained
no such thing On the contrary, it declared over
and over again with peeysb emphasis that there was
too much reason to believe that the Kansas bill did
recognized squatter sovereignty; and il consequently
appealed to its friends in Congress to rid that bill of
mel a al
that It did not, and was not so intended But IL.
Northern allies too shrewd to follow the Eugui.
rer's advise. And to this day they still boast that
the squatter sovereignty principle is incorporated
into the Nebraska BILL aud was designed to be by
ats most prominent aud active supporters
Again although lisa small matter to aude to- While
'strue that the language Of the Philadelphia platform
and the Nebraska BILL in defining the rights Of the
people in the territories, is almost identical" yetw
have never "boased Of the fact as the Eaquirer al.
ieges The E"9"rer made the discovery first snd it
did the blasting affirming with great flourish Of
irumpcs, that the seventh section Of the Phiad,l.
pha platform was 'ObcioHsly Piagiarisa, troa, tie
Nebraska bHt'
Ia conclusion, we suggest to the Eaguirer that If
u wouldbe more particular in regard To It's facts it
logic might be a little more plausible and sprigbtly
although nothing could redeem it from ridicule
Mr. koan, the Reporter ior the New York Herald -,
the Stanton Convention, publishes card in the last M
qurer In reply 10 the structures on some DO tons Of
report Of the proceedings Of that convention II wa..
tirey foreign 60 our purpose doLim any manner Of m
justicc-our object simply being do justice to polue
slsnd personal friend Who thought would rece..ar,
suffer Sone injury 10 the esumaton particularly Of tbo
not acquainted With hun by the report Of hi. ems,k .
II appeared in the Herald NIX himself admin. .,,,,
sl We charged, In tie following paragraph fom nh. c,,d
II do not doubt but that there may be some yro.o ,
exception In reference 10 w. Gimers speech the
ing Ia the National American Of this date with beco,
justice to me, femark- that the confusion during h. s
livery such as 10 render most of what he .s, ,,
insudbc. But Tor this, The Wig make. no e,eu,s n,
doubt because he Tas ignorant Of the true stat. Of ii,
facts"
Even so-we knew nothing OF the confusion ,llude,
TO- and even &c bad that Woud still not have helped IA
matter, 80 far a. NJ. Gilmer va. concerned We "a,
that injustice had been done him no natter from VII,
cause, snd simply desired remedy t. IL never d,
CURED 10 u- hoWevG,and certainly never intepds
20 intimate any such thing--thst Mr. =. had designed