The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-11-07
THE QUESTION OF SOVEREIGNTY IN THE TERRI
TORIES.


squatter sovereignty in the Territories II utterly
negatives the idea that there any original ursdic
ton Legislative authority in the Territory and
serts that all authority therein is deivdtire coming
from uittout and not inherent IN it's inhabitants OF
tribunals. Its whole theory in regard to authority
in the Territories is that what Congress cannot do
with respect to them, therefore their tribunals
which the mere agents and creatures of Con-
gress cannot do that the supreme ultimate author
ity of the Territories resides outside of them and not
soithm Thus the Supreme Court takes direct issue
with the advocates of the squatter sovereignty doc
rine that the prime ultimate source Of authority in
the Territories is in its people w, and not in the
United States, tcithoua.
Those who entertain the latter view Of the origin
Of authority in the Territories derive it from set of
very vicious notions in regard to personal freedom
and personal sovereignty, which very prevalent
among radical politicians. There are very sound,
philosophic and just doctrines concerning popular
sovereignty, and also very unsound, absurd and in
cendiary doctrines. The sovereignty which belongs
to the people of an entire community or nationality ii,
the aggregate, has two opposite extremes, which are
each equally in conflict with the true conservative
idea Of popular sovereignty. On hand, it is
maintained that because nation possesses the at
tribute Of sovereignty in the aggregate, usage may
for convenience sake, have concentrated all the
sovereign functions in single individual Of
specific lineage, as king, monarch, the like
On the other extreme it is contended that because
the people are sovereign in the aggregate, each
particular individual member Of the nationality is in
~1lv ND al, IN Re
son and right as integer man and not as member
Of the community. Each of these extreme dogmas
10 alike hostile to the true idea viz that sovereign
ty is attribute of the nation and not of the in
dividual and that each individual person is an in
tegral participant of that sovereignty only as mem
Der Of the MISUNDERSTANDING right on the one
hand to usurp the entire sovereignty to himself nor
the other, to seize to himself his integral micros
copic fraction Of sovereignty and march off with it
but that in tho latter case by his repatriation, he
loses his integral individual share of sovereignty
and becomes wandcrer, an adventurer, pirate, or
colonist. as the case may be, until he joins himself
TO some new nationality with its consent.
The radical, red republican, squatter sovereign
idea, prevalent among radical politicians, il very
different from the one last stated. 1t u.s. that as the
people of each nationality sovereign, the individ
ua members of the nationality are each absolute
ereigns in their persons in all things affecting
individuality, and may remain in the national
ity in which they are born in full absolute posses
sion Of this individual sovereignty, or, if exparia
ting themselves from it, carry along with them in
absolute indefeasble right this inherent sovereignty
wherever they co. The corolary of this doctrine u.s.
that if no more than single man go out from a
State into unoeeuped domain, he carries this inherent
sovsrcignay o., his back and stamps IL on his ne,o
territorial abode-much more, that if two or three
of such sovereign come-outers gather together in
any unoccupcd domain, or two or three thou
sand or twenty thirty thousand Of Them they
stamp their aggregate sovereignty that territory
This then, is squoer soueregnty and its source is
found in the red republican doctrine Of absolute in
dividual sovereignty, inherent in the integer ind
vidual and not derivatve from his nationality. It
has its origin in the same set of doctrines which
give the negro slave the right of running away,
red women liberty to obey the allurements of pas
siona attraction and make all government the mere
creature and baube of the mob. The dogma Of
squatter sovereignty derives the supreme authority
in Territories from the few scattering adventur-
oAo th0a boou pdu, HlCluulnR Inc VaRaDOnQS
and outlaws who have fed there from fear of pun
ishment Quilted organized government from FESTIVE
under its conservative restraints or sought that
fortune beyond the limits of society, which their
imprudence, improvidence, want of thrift or want
Of honesty had lost them within it. Thus the dogma
10 not only derived from vicious source but rests
on vicious popular basis
We might enlarge at great length upon the bale
full results of erecting States and governments
in the domains of the Union on such vicious basis
upon principles derived from radical an origin
and so impure political fountain but our object
embraces nothing at presentthan merely point
ing out the respective Of the vicious and Of
the sound doctrines touching sovereign authority in
the federal Territories.
We havo that squatter sovereignty comes
from the same fraternity with red-republicanism,
aboIitionism woman s-rightsism, ct id omne genus of
denominations and that it will not do to allow insti-
tutions in the Territories, the ncpient co-soveregn
States Of this Union, to grow up from such source.
sovereignty which should be the fruit of SO nox-
ious parentage would not be fit for association
with that sovereignty of the States of this Union of
which we are so justly proud and SO Justly boast
Where, then, does the rightfu sovereignty or SUI