The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1858-11-27
A Slave Code for the Territories.

A Slave Code for the Territories.
A late number Of The Richmond Enquirer,
leading Democratic paper Of the South,
and which has been devoted friend, with
Governor Wise, of Senator Dousla, in his
late struggle, lays down tie following plat
form to be insisted on by the Democracy Of
the South:
But while eounselinS unity and harmo-
nv, Virginia is not not unmindful Of the
great questions get unsettled With regard to
slavery in the territories. Virginia sees that
though the constitution recognizes, and
the Supreme Court sustains her right to
carry slaves into q territory, yet she also
remembes what Judge Douglas SO pointedly
brought to light to light in IIlino;s--that this
right may be rendered MIL and void by the
non xction of the territorial legislature
While Virginia recognizes 10 power that
can compel . territorial legislature TO enact
those laws necessary TO protect the consti-
tutional rights of slave holders, yet she does
ho.d that Congress has the right, and is in
duty bound, to protect slavery in the Teri
torie- until the people of Terri ory, when
en- the eve OF fOrmiag a State Cove Dment,
may decide the question finally fer the iu
ture State.
This question is one o5ore tie p1attorms
Of pGrtte.; and must be met and decided
constitu,ional!y IN favor of protection, or
unconstitu,iouailv agains; il. 1t caa not
and must not be compensated II the Gin
cinnrti Pk,,Jorm does not prvcide for this
question, az mast be mate to meet thss Issue.
Without proposing at this time to enter
int Lengthy discussion OF the matter, we
think, however, the time has coure when
tn. democracy of the North should, in q
plain and decided way, define their posi-
ton On this question. So far ar the denoc-
racy Of Illinois are cor cernsd, and We be
!ieve the democracy Of the entire North
hold the same view, they would regard tie
attempt by Congress to pass 4 slave code
for the territories as above indicated, as :;
Palpahle violation O! the doctrine Of popular
sovereignty and congressional nor-utervru-
ton, and as such would oppose it to the
last. If Congress has the right to pass
laws 10 protect slavery in the territories, i.
can also pass laws to est0blist or uJoIi~6
er prohibit slavery in the territories Thi.
iican doctrine of congressional scvercigntv.
against which We have been fighting for the
last ten years.
That the bred Scott decision, which au-
thorizes the South to take their slaves INTO
the territories, also requires Congress 10
protect them there, is stqHitar which we
do No: understand. As the democracy o:
the North understand that decision, ii SIN.
ply places slavery on leve! with al other
property in the territories, and such is as
much under the control Of the local legi>la-
ture, and as much subject to Local police
regulations as any other property in the
territories would bs. We have vet to learn
wherein that decision or any other decision
invests slave property with a higher char.
aeter or sancti,y than property in focks,
herds, swine, wh.skey, or gunpowder.
Hitherto the doctrine of the South on the
subject of congressional supremacy over the
territories hes been to this effect: that the
sovereignty OF the territories is held in GJey-
0nco by Congress. That Congress can new
er exercise this sovereignty itself; but up
On organizing territory passes it over TO
the local legislature. by whom alone it can
then be exercised. We can quote the speech
e. Of Mason. Hunter. Toornbs, Brown, of
Ms ;iSsipIi, and We know not how many
NOR. n maintenance Of this position. To
is the democracy Of the North have ever
assented, and this we understand to be the
doctrine Of the Supreme Court in the Drcd
Scott case. This is what We understand to
be the foundation Of the doctrine Of popular
sovereignty. If this doctrine is now TO be
rooted up, and the discarded notion of con.
SresSionai intervention or = protection" sub.
stituted, the democratic platform will need
new construction, and parties must be or
ganized on a new basis