The Wyandot pioneer. (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1853-1868, 1857-09-03
Democracy.

While protesting to be the friends, e.
qually with the Republicans, of free so.
cieiy. the Democracy, when tested by
their acts, are found to fall sadly behind
their professions.
1t is but few years since, tha. the
Democratic Legislatures of Ohio, Indiana
and Michigan and other northern demo-
cratic States endorsed as did also theii
leading men, the doctrines of the vii.
mot Proyiso. In other words, recognize
ing slavery--where it-existed, they said
boldly. in private and in public, that il
should extend itself over no more new
territory. They now repudiate all such
doctrine. 1t was once democratic, but
is SO no longer. They even go farther,
they say through all their acknowledged
organs, that not only has slavery the
right to extend itself into our new terri
rles, but that in the absence of any posi-
tive Law prohibiting it, it may exist there
by virtue Of the Federal Constitution
Thus reco grizing slavery as national
i's-i' al ~. ia>,v.3. VI Z, Soc.d and states
night one, as Formerly claimcd by the
democratic party.
Changing all the prescriptions of the
Constitution and of the common law in
favor ol freedom, TO the advantage and
in favor Of slavery and its extension. And
yet they claim to be the friends of free
society. And still these friends Of free Z
dom go one stvp farthcrin favor of "free
society," While they claim that slavery
may exist in the Territories by virtue of
the Constitution. they 60 farther and
say that the Territorial Legislature, al
though squatter soyereigns, have no pow
er to exclude it. Claiming first that it
may gotwhere there is no positive law to
prohibit il, and there denying the right TO
enact the prohibitory Law. Denying the
right TO congress tolcgislate for the ter.
ritories, because they are sovereign, and
then denying to the territories the exer-
else OF a sovereign right.
Anterior to the repeal Of that term hon
ored compact, the Missouri Compromise,
and during~the quarter of century, in
which it was acquiesed in and acknowl.
edged as constitutional, by such old DEM
ocratic Fogies, as Andrew Jackson, John
c. Calhoun, Silas Wright, Martin Van
Buren, and the late James Buchanan,
(thc same Buchanan who committed su-
saneide, by swallowing the Cincinnati
PLATFORM exclaimin5 in his, agonizing
moments, ] am no longer James Bu-
ehanan, J it was universally claimed in re-
ply To all arguments en- the subject OF
slavery, that it was local institution, a
creation Of State law purely; limited by
the jurisdiction of the party enacting it,
and beyond the jurisdiction of the Gen.
eral Government. That all agitation on
the subject was bot only fruitless but
criminal. 70 this doctrine the Democra.
cy then cried amen. This was known as
the States Right doctrine. No one claim
ed or dreamed OF claiming the right OF
one of the citizens of any one of the states,
to carryth locallaw of bis State beyond
its limits. beyond the jurisdiction of the
State enaeting the Law. For such a
claim would be destructive of the de-
fence set upfor their peculiar institution.
TO admit that slavery was not a
question Of local jurisdiction purely, and
limited in its operations 10 the jurisdiction
d the State enacting the law by virtue ol
which it existed, was tonimit that it was
subject of general Jurisdiction, and
consequently aiegitimate subject of ag
itation by the whole people and of leg
islation by the general government
"A doctrine always denied and feared by
the Slaveholtling states, the authors Of tht
States right creed.
Such was Democratic doctrine, und
for the avowed purpose, or The pant Of the