New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-12-29


deeply interested party, any voice in determining
whether they are 10 be slaves or not We insist
that il A. and b. may righfully vote on the quc'-
ton of C.'s being slave or a freeman for life,
taen C.. ought to be allowed voice in deciding
this (for HIM vital question. Your great Demo
cratic principle of Popular Sovereignty is there
fore a sham--a delusion-snce il allows part
of the community TO decide questions in which
another part have the deepest interest"
But beginning in the year 1855, the Democratic
party defined Popular Sovereignty with regard to
the Territories as the right of each to decide
whether il should be slayehodng or freelsbor At the
time Of its framing for itsey State Constitution.
(see Brodheads and Clancy ,Jones's speeches, Gin
cinnat Platform, Buchanan's Inaugural. &c, &C.
This was, to our mind, a complete abandonment of
the Popular Sovereignty" ground originally
preached in Gen. Cass's Nicholson letter, and which
formed the ayowed base Of Douglass Nebraska bill
the ground, namely, that the People Of Terrific
~ rghtfuy possess all the powers of the People ola
State, 40 far as their internal government and polty
are regarded. 1t was silent abandonment Of the
premises Of Cas- and Douglas, and q retrograde TO
the doctrine of Jefferson and the Revolutionary
Fathers which the Republicans have steadily main
taned-the doctrine, namely, that Federal Terri
tory is dependency fthe Federal Government, not
a sovereignty and that some of the most important
political rights Of its people are in allegiance, await.
ing IFS Transformation into State. In other words
Territory is State still in its minority. On this
vital proposition, the Democracy have quietly
abandoned the novel ground assumed by Gen.
Cass in his Nicholson letter and returned TO that of
Mr.. Jefferson and the Republicans.
The Nebraska struggle never hinged on the right
Of slayeholding and slavery-lovng Territory to
come into the Union az Slave State. What the
Republicans sought was not to keep State out of
the Union because of Slavery, but to keep Slavery
out of each embryo State. They had an eye to
Solomons maxim: " Train up child in the way
he should go, and when he is old [of age] he will
I" not depart from it, They wished so to nurture
and educate embryo States that they would have
no desire to enter the Union as other than Free
States. And in this aspiration 30 far as Kansas is
concerned, they have, against great odds and tr-
umphing over constant Misrepresentation and OBJ
loquy. succeeded. Whatever trials, postpOnements
reverses, may darken the immediate conference.-the
future, the end will be the enduring triumph of
Freedom in Kansas. And the victory thus achieved,
through many tribulations and sacrifices, has
taught us how to win future victories.
As Republicans, We are under no sort of obliga.
ton to Mr.. Douglas for his present attitude on the
Ksnsas question. As Republicans, it would have
been better for us had he gone in with Buchanan
and Cobb, and tried to force the LecOmpton Con.
stitutOn through Congress. By that course, he
must have seriously damaged his OWL party, while
he could not have succeeded in its ostensibe object
The People Of Kansas have rifles; they are now
tens of thousands in number, and they won't submit
to the Lecompton swindle-so there's the end Of it.
Ifthere is any party sOd enough to seek to impose
Constitution on new State by Federal cannon
and bayonets that party is too far behind the age to
govern this Republic from and after 1860. Alr.
Douglas is no Republican-he is simply Democrat
with eyes in his head, and who cannot perceive the
wisdom of obstinstely shutting them. He is work
ing to save bis party from ruin, by not allowing it
TO be wrecked on this Lecompton quicksand. In
this he will probably succeed, by the help of the
Republicans, who must vote and work with him
for Popular Sovereignty in Kansas, as against the
impudent fraud and usurpation of the Calhoun
Regency. If this casual cooperation with the Re.
pubcans in resistance to an outrageous wrong
should result in a schism among our opponents, so
much the better for our side. We apprehend,
however, nothing Of the sort. The Lecompton
fraud once beaten, as beaten it must be, its advo-
Gates viii be glad enough to sink all remembrance
of it, and act with their former brethren who
opposed it, as if nothing had ever separated them.