New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-03-09

CIV bat can be fsIfeT th1n 70 let Tue TtOp4e vi
"sny Territory settle tie Slavery question f)r
"themselyes7" Such was the inquiry triumphant
y urged by the advocates in the Free States Of 3D.
chanan's election throughout the late excited car
yass. The Republicans we're necessarily charged
by them with making in7idious, unfounded de
tinc.ion between American citizens resiilng in
States and those who may have migrated thence
into Territories, denying to tue latter important
rights universally conceded to the former. It was
On the platform thus formed that a minority of the
Free States were carried for Buchanan, and bis
election secured. Patiently and earnestly did the
Republicans labor to prove this prc'ense OF
"Squatter Sovereignty" delusion and a snare.
The deeDerately blind who we're determined NJ, to
SEQ we're re-enforced by smaller number really de-
luded, aud the equal right Of Americans living in
Territories with those living in STATES was pro-
claiued as the genuine Democratic doctrine, and
ratified as aforesaid. Vain'y did we point to the
Cincinnati. Democratic Platform as ar'full, embody
ing that very doctrine of Territorial pupilage aud
waTdsbip which it was yaunted as denying. New
Jertey, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Illinois were
carried for buchanan on the false pretense that he
and bis prominent supporters were hostile to
Slavery Extension aud tenacious only that the Pec-
pie of the Territories should decide the Slavery
Question for themselves.
Now mark the doctrine Of Mr. Buchansn's To-
augural Address Oh this very subject;
"A difference Of opinion has arisen ia regard 70 the
time when the people Of Territory Ell Il! decide this
question for them,elYes. This is happily q matter Of
but little practical importance aDd btsi1es II Is judi
- r. sha NtV
Court of the United States before whom II ia no1
per ding and will il is understood, be speedily aud
finally settcd. To their deCisicn, in common with all
good cze d. ehail cbeerfuly submit Whatever THIS
nav be; though it has been my individual opinion
that under tie ebraska ac, the appropriate
pt riod will be Nken he nDnaGer o 0ctuG Tesdegs az
tie Territories sk0H justify tie for.not'oH Of CoHsh-
futicn nh riec 10 its admission as State iao the
tniCn.
10 where, tell me where" is Squs.ter Soyer
eentyl Where the Inherent, indefeasib,e right of
the People Of Territory, equally with those of
Stste, to form and change their own institutions
When M,y come TO form State Gorernme.t, they
nay forbid Slavery of course they inay-no thanks
TO "Squatter Sovereignty" for that. But as people
Of T,rrito,y, no such right is conceded them.
Niue tenths, bnety.Dine hundiedths of them may
desire 10 bCCp Slavery out of their community from
the start; but no power to do this is conceded
them, and any Single STAKEHOLDER is authorized to
establish Slavery practically among them in def
snce of every one else. Mr.. Buchanan's 'inaiyid-
ual opinion comes practically to this result; and
he points us to the Supreme Court as about to give
an authoritative decision, which decision, IS be
xell Kew, would sustain the most extrayagant
claims of The slave-bieeders. AL the acts passed
by so many different Congresses (the LIST nclude1),
tending to limit or forbid Slavery in the Territories,
are nulfed at blow-eyen the act or Joint resolve
authorizing the Annexation Of Texas, is obnoxious
10 this sweeping condemnation. Any Shareholder,
under this rev decision, may plant Slavery in Min
nesota or Nebraska Tomorrow, in ostcntatious def
unce Of their whole People. Such, reduced to
practice, is Squaster Sovereignty.