The Kansas herald of freedom., 1858-02-13
For IA. Htrdal n Eh.ssen.
The Three ouinicas.

1A-s- --->t @O--s--AA s-Ao FdcoSsAS W. l---.~r
ture of circumstances in Kansas, citizen
of the Territory may be allowed perhaps
10 asay ,0hat he kao.ps' on the subjecS.-t
IN availing himself of the privilege he
viii endeavor to be brief. Short articles
sre read by more than long ones. The
late sad preceding Presidential elections |
hasing turned upon shs questioned popu-
lar sovereignty. as, IN fact ali our cleo
tions do, in some shape or other, it GER
taainly viii not be considered out of place
IN citizens of a Territory so vitality
affected as Kansas ID by the peculiar
phase which this question has assumed
in relation to her people, to give his ideas
on the question. To The three opinions .
then, for on the road to the point of is
final adjudication every question may be
discussed by every body. The progress of
questions political and the progress of
time going hand in hand. it is to be hoped,
at least, together-towards their final
adjustment upon e well settled basis
of Democracy. Mr.. Buchanan being at
the present time the ultimate arbiter of
all theses it seems-so far, at least, as
political power is concerned.
First in order of the thres opiaions,''
comes that acted upon by the Federal
Government from the foundation of our
confederacy up to the year 1850: acted
upon, too, during all, or nearly all that
time without any question as to it, legally
or constitutionally. Imean that under
which Congress was considered to have
not only an exclusive but an absolute
right to legislate about the Territories, and
agreeable to which the slavery clause was
so often inserted. An entertainer of this
opinion was DANIEL WEBsrER, one of the
most distinguished too of the upholders
of this doctrine. That clause in our
Federal Constitution which gives to Con-
gress the powerto 'pass all needful rules
and regulations" respecting the terrific
ries and other property of the United
States" was referred TO by him for this
power. Uuder this clause il was Mr..
Webster's idea that Congress, with respect
to the territories, had despotic power if
they chose to exercise it. In 1648 he,
under this conviction, declared himself
unalterably opposed to the admission OF
any more slave States.
Next comes an opinion somewhat diff
ferent-one that argues the clause about
the territories to mean that it relates to
them only as property and not as commu-
mites or political organizations in other
words, that it gives Congress the right to
dispose of the lands &C., but not to gov
ern the population, and that the right
which Congress has to annex territory
and legislate about if, which right is de-
rived from its right to declare war. make
treaties, &C., is qualified and not absolute.
This is the opinion held by Mr.. Calhoun,
at least in the later years of his life, and
as we shall see further on would seem to
be the groundwork of the late much
talked of decision in the Dread Scott
ease-thas decision assuming, I believe,
that slavery exists, per Sc in the territories,
and perhaps in the States. He entertain
ed the idea of a.qualifed power in Con-
gress to legislate about the territories
That is to say Congress has no right to
legislate in opposition to either the letter
or spiritof the Constitution. For instance
Congress has no right to create nobility
in territory, or to repeal the habeas corpus
law; neither can it legislate slavery unto
or out of territory, because this would
be prejudicing the interests Of one portion
of the people, while it would be fayoring
those of another, and here comes in the
analogy Of the Dred Scott decision, the
favorite theory of the per Sc existence of
slavery in the territories under the Con-
stitution; and the further fayorite theory
that NortheTners and Southerners are both
equally entitled to take their institutions
there, and that no right exists, in the in
habitants to pretend to any policy or
establish their institutions until Congress,
according to an invariable practices au-
thorizes census to be taken and q Con-
stitution to be framed. -
| Now comes the opinion entertained by
another distinguished statesman, and is
the one most in accordance with the spirit
of the times. l refer to the " Squatter
Sovereign" doctrine, and will hint, or
merely hint, for l may be in error, that
Mr. Cass is the author of the comparatively
new theory. If this is an error some
body no doubt will correct. Be the au-
thor who he may, the theory was applied
for the first time when California was
admitted, and subsequently, further acted
ION, sanctioned and endorsed in the Kan
sas-Nebraska Act It is sometimes con-
founded with the Calhoun doctrine-not
the Lord Presiden. FOR his doctrine is per-
fectly non deseript-I mean that held by
the deceased statesman, but is different
from 1t, essentially so, for it gives to the
settlers the right at once to shape the
character of the future State. Under it,
strictly speaking, Congress would have no
right to nsddle with any Of the doings of
the "Squatter," for they are the sover-
eigns. Anything their legislature might
see proper to dc. no matter how wrong,
Congress could have nothing to do with it.
Laws the most cruel, yindictive or tyran-
ical passed by territorial legislature
l. ~ - :