Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1858-11-18

ton Union. 1t is no less than declaration of
old Bucks organ that Congress has supreme
power to legisate over and Tor the Territories
just the same doctrine that we have 81 long been
contending for: that Congress had the power to
prohibit Slavery in the Territories. But how
shall we reconcile this doctrine with the state
ment that Slavery exists by virtue of the Con-
stitution in all the Territories? The truth is it |
is but the keynote for the formation of two rad
ically-dierent Democratic parties, upon princi-
pies irreconcilably different. Douglas claims
that he is the great expounder of Democracy
when he asserts that Democracy is Popular
Sovereignty, and that the Territories are enti-
tied to the right, and are to be left perfectly
free, to form their own Constitution and regu-
late their own domestic affairs in their own way
and that the Territories may or may not have
Slavery, just as they please. On the other hand
old Buck declares that the territories have no
rights until they are enabled by Congress to
from Constitution and ask for State Govern
ment; and that Slavery exists in all these terri
tories by virtue Of the protection which the
Constitution gives to all kind of SO property"
(The difference of Repubhcanism from the above
is that it holds that Congress has the right to
and should exclude Slavery from the Territories
In these faltagonistic principles we see the
germ of dssision which will become more and
more decided during the discussions relative to
the admission Of now States during the next
Congress, until it will give to the Republicans
with their everlasting principles of Freedom
and Justice, a sure victory IN 1860. Let us
take courage from the harmony in our own
ranks, the virtue of our principles, and the in
evitabe distraction and division of the party
bound to Slavery. Let us guard well our actions,
that no side issues shall for a moment cause us
to lose sight Of the great principles declared by
our Fathers.
The article from the Washington Union, of
| Nov, 7th, is as follows
| One Of the great merits of The bred Scott
decision is the total extingushment it gives to
| the dogma of squatter sovereignty in the terri
tories. 1t utterly negatives the idea that there
is any original jurisdiction OF legislative au-
thority in the territory, and asserts that all
authority therein is deriudtiue coming from
| Dth0M, and not inherit in its inhabitants or
tribunal. Its whole theory in regard to au-
thority in the territories is, that what Congress
cannot do with respect to them therefore their
own tribunals which are the mere agents and
creatures of Congress, cannot do that the SUI
preme ultimate authority of the territories re-
side outside of them, and not ,U,tlin. Thus the
Supreme Court takes direct issue with the ad-
vocates Of the squatter sovereignty doctrine,
that the prime ultimate source Of authority in
the territories is in its people within, and not
in the United States, WITHOUT.
The corollary of this doctrine is, that if no
more than one single man go out from a state
into unoccupied domain, he carries this Inherent
sovereignty on his back and stamps it on his new
territorial dbOde-much more, that if two
or three of such sovereign come-outers gather
together in any unoccupied domain, or two or
three thousand, Or twenty or thirty thousand OF
them, they stamp their aggregate sovereignty
on that territory. This, then, is sguatter sou
ereignty, and its source is found in the red re.
publican doctrine Of absolute individual sover-
eighty. inherent in the integer individual and
not derpakirsA.-rvn his nationality. It has itt
origin in tie same set of doctrines, which give
the negro slave the right of running away
married women liberty to obey the allurements
OF passional attraction, and make all govern
ment the mere creature and bauble of the
mob. The dogma of squatter sovereignty de-
rives the supreme authority in new territories
from the few scattering Adventures therein
good and bad, including the vagabonds and out
laws who have fled there from fear of punish
ment, quilted organized government from res
tiveness under its conservative restraints, OF
sought that fortune beyond the limits of So
|ciety, which their imprudence, improvidence
want of thrift or want Of honesty had lost
them within it. Thus the dogma is not only
derived from vicious source, but rests on q
vicious popular basis.
Where, then, does the rightful sovereignty OF
supreme authority in the territories reside dur
ing the territorial condition of the infant com.
munity Let us see.
We first hear of the territory as a new pur-
chase by the federal government from some 9TH
er ownership. If it be inhabited by citizens OIL
the alternating nation at the time of purchase
the treaty of purchase expressl stipulates thu
these inhabitants are to enjoy all the rights
privileges and immunties of the citizens o
the United States. Thus the very act Of ac
QUESTION negatives the idea of the territories
subsection to the sovereignty of residents, wheth
er citizens or the savages or adventurers who
are the pets of the red republican theory.
The next acts we hear of in the history o
the new territory relate to the establishment o
land offices for the sale of its lands by the FEEDER
eral government. with reversion to the stats
into which it is in the future to mature. Here
again is an emphatic negation Of the red-repub
lican notion of the absolute individual sover
eighty Of the squatter in II new domain.
Whose right there is to dispute
From the centre all round to the sea.
The next step We see taken in the progress o
: the territory is Its organization into terrific
rial government, within prescribed territorial
netes and bounds, ty acts Of Congress. Her
@gain is an emphatic negation of the sovereign
tYof. the individual Squatters for Congress, 0
ifs oisR authority and right prescribes the form
of guxegnment and the territorial mctes anC
lhouIils6 of its authority, with utter indifference
ii tQthe pretentons of Its sovereign y occupants
IMoreoyer, it not only delegates in express term
, to the new government the specific power
which it is authorized to exercise, and to tn
territorial legislature the specific subjects OIL
which it may legislatc but it expressly re
serves to itself u veto upon all the acts Of thi
government and legislature, and all powers il
the territory not expressly delegated to thes
subordinate tribunals. Thus the squatter ha
no voice in determining the form of the govern
ment under which no lives, or the area of tn
state which he has entered, or the subject mat
tiers of jurisdiction delegated to the new gov
eminent which is erected over him by foreg
agency. Thus up to this point in the historr
of the territory we find that he has had n