Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1857-08-21
II. B. WARDEN'S LETTER
The New Greed OF the NIis.named Dcm-
H.r. Ocrntfc Party.

The New Creed OF the Mis-named DEM
.r Ocratfc Party.
The Democratic Party, in Convention,
last Thursday, not only endorsed the Dred
Scott Decision, but declared "ths concur
renee Of the Supreme Court Of the United
States, in the doctrines with regard to the
constitutional Powers ano Political Rights
of the States and Territories which have
been maintained by tho Democratic parLy.o
The fourth End fifth resolutions are in these
words:
ID. Resolvcd, That the great doctrine
ofpopular sovereignty first proclaimed to the
world by the Declaration of Independence
reiterated by Mr.. JeffeIson in his resolves
of 17s4,-indorsed by the Kansas Nebraska
Act, and reaflirmed in the Cincinnati plat
form, if fairly carried out, will rid tho coun-
try alike of Northern and Southern fanati-
cism, and fixes in perpetuity the existence
of our glorious Union.
"5. ResolUed, That while we look to no
authority but reason for our political opin-
ions, we deem it proper to express deep graf
ifcation at the concurrence of tho Supreme
Court Of tho United States in the doctrines
with regard to the Constitutional Powers
and Political Rights of the States and Ter
ritories, which have been maintained by the
Democratic Party and formally avowed by
it in three National Conventions"
The National Convention of June, 1856,
recognized" and adopted" the "principos
contained in the organic laws, establishing
the territories of Kansas and Nebraska, as
embodying the only sound and safe solution
v &c tbo lkolo.,orx, nnoet;o,O
great National idea of this whole country
can repose in its determined conservatism
) of the Observation-Disclosures by Congress
) with slavery in State and Territory, or in
) the District of Columbia"
The "principles" in the Organic Laws es-
) tablishing the Territories of Kansas and Ne
: braska, were summed up in the Organic
Act rs follows at being the true intent
and meaning of this act, not to legislate
: slavery into any State or Territory, or to ex-
clude it therefrom, but to leave the people
thereof perfectly free to form and regulate
their domestic institutions in their own way,
subject only to the Constitution of tho Uni
: ted States"
When the Kansas act was passed, it was
explained by all the oracles of the Democrat
ic party at the North as comforting on the
squatters, the settlers in Kansas, through g
: Territorial Legislature full power to allow
. or to prohibit the introduction of slavery
every Northern Democratic Press, every
I; Northern Democratic orator, insisting that
o no slave could be held in Kansas except un
der direct and express legislation in the
a Territory. But now it seems 'the doctrines
d with regard to the Constitutional Power
y and Political Rights of the States and Ter
i ritories," pronounced by the Supreme Cour
of the United States, ''concur' with those
Q (which have been maintained by the Dem
e ocratic party, and formally avowed by it il
three National Conventions"
If, then, we would know the real mean
ing of the language cited from the Kansas
:. Act, and the real meaning of the "recogni
= ton" and adoption" of its "principles" BY
the June Convention in 1856, at Cincinnati
we have only to read the following senten
ces from the syllabus in tho Dred Scot
}; case:
49, The United States under the present Constitution
cannot acquire territory to be held colony to be gov
erned at its will and pleasure But 1t may acquire terri
tory which at the time has not population which, /
the Judgment OF Congress- entities 1t to be admitted
= ~. During the time it remains Territory, Congress
may legsao 1t within the scope of its constitution
may establish Territorial Government-and the form
this local Government must be regulated by the discreto
It. Congress ITSELF by the Constitution is authorized to e,
ecse citizens Of the United States respect to the
~ rights of persons or rights of property.
".
81 The Territory thus acquired is acquired by the pei
pie of the United States their equal ben
h through their gent and trustee the Federal Cover
Congress
persons or property OF citizen in the Territory which
prohibitedby the Constitution. The Government and Il
citizens whenever the Territory Is open to seement bo
enter II with their respective rights defined and limit
" by the Constitution
ed a. Congress has right prohibit the citizens
any particular State States from taking their HON
Il, Nor has right give privileges class OF either
which 1t refuses another. The Territory is acquired Il
their equal and common heneft-snd II open to any
must be open to all upon equal and the same terms.
3 Every citizen has right to take with him into Il
I; Of the United States recognizes as property
mol 4 The Constitution Of the United States recognz
protectit And Congress cannot T exercise any more
thority property Of that dicription than 1t
bs a Of o. arS An Il
from taking with him his slaves when he
ce the Territory in question to reside Is an exercise Of
the Constitution-and the removal OF the plaintiff, by
owner to that territory gave him no title to freedom
.ass This is the only part of the Dred SEQ
@"s ~ decision in which anything relating to POI
ular sovereignty is anywhere discernable.-
this, then is the instance of the suppose
I" concurrence between the Court and Ii
y Party. Whether the negro may be a cit
zen of the United States, or not, does NJ
- 70 touch popular sovereignty, or any such "Col
u stitutional Powers and Political Rights
!, the States and Territories" as much ha,
~ been in the contemplation of those WI
81 framed, and those who adopted ResolutiC
-, 5 of the platform made last Thursday, (s'
'0' above.) Whether, when slave is taken
his master into free State, but returns vii
TO him to a slave State, he is free or slave, do
M not concern the doctrine of Popular Sow
d d reignty in Territories. 1t must be the do
trine have cited from the Dred Scott cas-
~, ~ which the Democratic Party findsw with dee
:, - qualification to concur with its own re
=. M opinions, "formerly ayowed by it 1.-THE Der
i, Ie ocratic Party) in three National Conve
'u tions."
H. 81 cannot believe, that the body of b
s Democratic voters can come to know al
~ n appreciate these things without alarm
90 the subject of relations they sustain to Il
party known as Democratic. For NV ov
part, have been strongly attached to d
6 Democratic party--too strongly to aband
- ~ it from caprice or selfishness- strong
oN to witness its Gradual change from the d