Daily Iowa State Democrat. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1856-1859, 1858-03-22

the famous "popular sovereignty"
clause in the Kansas Nebraska bill, -
Many seem to suppose that the phrase
containing the words domestic insti-
tutions" confers upon the people Of
Kansas rights and privileges they would
not otherwise possess, aud that it is i'm
peratively necessary that the Constitu-
ton shall DO submitted to the popular
vote, because the Nebraska act dcclar-
ed that the people should form and
regulate their domestic institutions in
their own away. 1t cannot be dispu-
ted that the institution Of slavery was
the only domestic institutions referred
TO, and that the object Of the bill was
TO placc''thc relations Of master and SER
want on the same footing as the other
domestic relations. In other words, as
Congress has never ATTEMPTED to lcgis-
late as to husband and wife, parent and
child, guardian and ward it was intend
cd that it should not legslate as to mas
tor and servant. That was unques-
tionably the object Of the Kansas Ne
braska bill. Senator Toombs gives us
in late speech an interesting history
Of the "stump speech in the belly of
thu; bill, to which VIC invite" particular
attention.
The clause which seems to be bone
of contention and to have created
trouble, and to have been banded
about between politicians, about popu-
lar sovereignty, was no part or parcel
of the demand or Of the object of the
bill. We were not then to be taught
popular sovereignty. We did not
want new lessons on popular sovcr-
eighty in 1854. We had no new
theory on that subject. 1--WE said !:
"Here is a law excluding us from the
Territories repeal it," After consul
tation. the Democratic party, with a
large body Of the Wings, said : ave
will repeal it, because it is unjust" 1t
was repealed by gentlemen of the
North and the south, constituting a
large body Of this House, and major
ity Of the other, and maintained, as
have said, subsequently, by the Judi
ciary and the people. The effect Of
that repeal would have been to leave
the people, when they might come to
make their State Constitution, free to
make Government to slit themselves;
and, in the mean time, it would admit
everybody, and protect everybody,
while 1t was under the government of
the United States, common property.
We declare that when they came to
ask admission into the Union, and
clothe themselves with the attributes
Of sovereignty, they should be protect
ed in making government to suit
themselves and coming into this Union,
with or without slavery, as their Con
stitution may prescribe.
This was all we wanted, but it was
said by gentlemen from the Northern
States that this would be the subject
of Misrepresentation, that this simple
repeal might possibly revive the pro-
slavery laws of Louisiana, and whether
it did or not, it would be so charged
by the adversaries who were raising
clamor throughout the whole North,
and therefore they asked us to let the
bill interpret itself upon this point.
That was the sole reason for the intro
duction of the sentence which seems
now to be made in many quarters the
chief Of the corner. 1t was legisla-
tive Interpretation of the effect of re.
pealing the eighth section of the act of
1920. We desired nothing more than
that repeal, and this legislative inter-
probation was intended to prevent mis-
representation in the country. 1t was
said ''it will be charged that by repeal
ing the act Of 1880 we restore the sla-
very laws" and many gentlemen sup
posed that might be the effect. That,
however, was not our object. Hold
ing the principle which l did, and the
great body Of the gentlemen with
whom acted, that slavery was lawful
wherever it was not prohibited, was
content to unite with those who held
the contrary doctrine, that it was law
full nowhere except where it was ex-
pressly allowed by statute. Being
willing to stand on my own principles,
and legislate on my principles, and
take the consequences Of standing on
them, l said: "all ask Of you is a
tabula yasa /; therefore, if this can be
construed as having the effect you
fear; if it can be injuriously construed
against you in the non-slaveholdine
States of the Union; if it will tend to
raise prejudice against you on this
question, and stand in the way Of your
carrying out this great principle o
constitutional law, put the fair interpre
tation in the bill and let it speak fol
itself." Hence, we injected what ,
distinguished member of the othe
House, and for a long time a distin
guiahed member of this body, and wa
stump speech, into the bowels of tn,
bill. It was to prevent misinterpreta-
ton of it, Is once had occasion t.
cay to the honorable senator from New
York (Ar. Seward.) That was the sol.
motive. That clause was that it was
"The true intent and meaning O
this act is not to legislate slavery int
any Territory or State, nor to exclude
it therefrom, but to leave the peopl,
thereof perfectly free to form and reg
ulate their domestic institutions il
THAR oRn ~ev .uhsno< on1v "a III.