The independent press. (Abbeville C.H., S.C.) 1853-1860, 1857-01-16

Territorial Legislature have failed to pass
any law to regulate. dispose of, or protect
such property, then the local law Of the
State Of which l am Il citizen will apply to
snch property, provided it does not conflict
with the Constitution and the laws of Con-
gress made under it.
Ipresume that my colleague and myself
will coincide in the opinion that the Terri
tcrial Legislature has no authority to pass
laws prohibiting the introduction Of slaves,
or the manumission of them if in the Terri
tory, and any laws to that effect would be
void. The point of difference between us
is, as to the effect of failure to make po-
lice regulations. He gives virtue to public
opinion at too early period, and his posi-
ton would as effectually exclude the Slave
owner with his property, 's those gentle
men who admit the right of a Territorial
Legislature to exclude. lie makes the gen.
eral opinion of a few stragglcrs more ctfica-
rious than territorial law. In the name Of
public opinion, lie prohibits the free exercise
OF opinion lin truth, his position is the squat
ter sovereignty ofopinion.
When Kansas comes to us in the najes-
ty Of a sovereign, will regard her opinion
not before. But it has been suggested
that the squatter sovereign doctrine will
work as we'll for the South as for the North,
and that the time may come when it will be
to our interest that the doctrine shonld pre-
vail. And thus we are cajolcd into making
this Gf it has not already become SOY a
Government Of expediency For my own
part, prefer the Government of the Con.
stitution.
have alluded, sir, to these differences of
opinion and construction which exist be-
tween Democrats, as elements Of weakness
in the party organization. No good can
result from concealing them, or harm from
aluding 10 them. The differences are no.
torious; and it is the part Of wisdom and
Of patriotism to reconcile them at once and
tor us all to occupy common ground,
which may be clcarl defined and clearly
understood both at the North and the
South. If the advocates of squattcr sovcr-
cignty persist in their construction of the
X ansas-Ncbraska act, they will inevitably
drive off many of us from the South, who
desire 10 act III concert with them. Can
they do without us! No. Nor can we do
without them, and retain any party strength.
We believe that squatter sovereignty is as
fatal to It's as the Wilmot proviso and so
believing it would be suicide to wink at it.
With them it is not matter of life and
death. Many distinguished Northern gen
tlemen give adhesion to the Southern con-
struction of tile act. Why, then, should
we not all agree that the Territory of Kan
sas shall be free and open to every citizen
of the Uni1ed States, with every kind of
property, slaves included and named, until
the people of the Territory shall have form
ed State constitution, which act of sovcr-
eighty they may perform whenever they
number population of ninety three thou
sand four hundred and twenty, and not be-
fore and, "when admitted as State or
States, the said Territory, or any portion of
the same, shall he received into the Union
with or without slavery as their constitution
may prescribe at tile time oftheir admission" I"
My individual opinion, Mr.. Speaker, and
give it for whatever it is worth, is that the
principle Of the Kansas bill, As generally
understood at the South, is worth more to
the South than the Territory itself; and,
for my own part, would willingly give up
the Territory to secure the principle, but for
the fact that the equilibrium Of the great Sec
tions would thereby be liopelessly destroyed
in the Senate, and that the permanent ma
jority would afterwards laugh at the prin-
ciple.
Itake the following extract from the thirty.
serond section Of the Kansas Nebraska act ::
''rhat the Constitution and laws of the
United States which are not locally inappli-
cable, shall have the same force and effect
within the said Territory of Kansas as else
where in tho United States, except the
eighth section of that preparatory to the ad-
mission Of Missouri into the Union, APPROX
ed March SIXTH eighteen hundred and twcn-
ty, which, being inconsistent with the
principle Of non-intervention by Congress
with slaves in the State and Territories,
rs recognized by the legislation of eighteen
hundred and fifty, commonly called the
compromise measures, is hereby declared
imperative and void; It being the true in
tent and meaning Of this act not to legislate
slavery into any Territory or State, nor to
exclude it tl,erefrom, but leave the people
thereof perfectly free to form and regulate
their domestic institutions in their own wav
subject only to the Constitution of the Uni.
ted States; Prouided, That nothing here.
incontained shall be constructed to revive
or put in force any longer or regulation
wbicl, may have existed prior to the act of
sixth March, eighteen hundred and twenty,
either protecting, establishing, prohibiting
or abolishing slavery" -
This paragraph seems to be declaratory
Of the Intentions of5the frnmers and SUP
porters Of the act. How I understand !,
has already been expressed. It's meaning
appeared clear TO me then; it seems 80 now
III voting for the bill hoped and believed
that my Influence was being contributed
towards transferring the agitation Of slavery
in the Territories from these HaIls,,to the
Territories themselves. fancied that the.
bill embodied principles just and right ID q
themselves, and IN strict conformity with the
principles Of States Right and the Consti.
tuition. The more sangdiie OF lis cherish