The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1858-07-09

about ten years ago new theory WAS
brosched, and in 1854 it became the car
dinsl doctrine of the party 1t was put
forth under the imposing name Of Popu-
lar Sovereignty" which was understood to
signify the right Of the people Of the Ter
ritories, equally with the people of the
States, to form aud regulate all their in.
ternal affairs without the interposition Of
Congress; denying that Congress had any
right to leglslate for them /;
and asserting the right Of the terrific
rial government to establish or prohibit
slavery as they should see fit. In 1856
q different doctrine was vaguely shadow
ed forth in the Cincinnati Platform /;
though sufficiently plain for all who were
disposed to understand it; namely, that
the great privilege of popular sovereign
ty" was not to be exercised by the people
of the Territories in their territorial ca
pacity, or while they remained in terri
torial condition; but only when they
come to form State constitution.
Still, however, through all the north
ern states, the presidential campaign was
fought, by them, on the ostensible ground
of the absolute right Of the people of the
Territories to decide and determine for
themselves whether they would tolerate
slavery among them or not; as well as
their right to determine all their other
domestic institutions
But after the bred Scott Decision in
1857, they repudiated all their former ar
gumests in favor of the right of the peo-
ple of the territories to determine whether
they would have the institution Of slavery
among them or not, (Which had previ-
ously constituted the sum and substance
of their idea of popular sovereignty and
denied the right of the people to prohibit
slavery in the territories, and asserted
that they are bound to submit to it while
they remain a Territory; but proclaim
ing that when thy form State con-
stitution they may then establish or pro-
hibit il. But later they have denied them
even this right; and sought to force a
constitution upon them after it had been
expressly aud directly repudiated by an
overwhelming majority of the people.
In 1856 they had holy horror for
"Dun ms Bill" because it permitted
aaUery to continue in Kansas for eighteen
or twenty months; bat in 1858 they ad-
vocatc the Lecompton Constitution which
makes slavery perpetual and irrcpcalabte.
And not only this, but they make fidelity
to that constitution a test of party fealty.
IN 1857 "shcy asyerreu tnarsmvrry cUdi
not legally exist in Kansas without pos
tive law; and in 1853, they proclail
that it is as much slave State as Geo
gia.
The right of the people to determin
their institutions when they come to forI
a state constitution was not an issue bt
tween the parties in the last campaign
The Republicans have never denied tina
doctrine; and yet when they united wit
the few boiling democrats in the last Cor
gross, to sustain that doctrine they wer
accused by almost all the democratic jour
nails Of this, and other northern States
with having changed their position, an
with getting upon the democratic plat
form. If by that action we have got upo
the democratic platform, we repeat tn
question Where are they i" If th
Republicans have mounted the Democrat
platform, where are the democrats?
In 1856 they had much to say abor
the equality of States. But in 1855
they say to Kansas, if she will consent
come in as a slaue State, she may be a,
mittcd Immediately with her present POI
ulation Of some 10000 or $4,000; b,
that if she insists on being free stat
, she must wait until they are Obliged
let her in that is, until she has 3 pop
lation Of 80, 900 or 100000.
, What their next dodge will be it is il
, possible to conjecture; unless it is to q
sumo the ground that Kansas is already
State, admitted into the Union by Il
English Bill, and that the only thing su
mittcd to them was whether they won
: have the laud or not.
=, "Upon National and State question
r they are systematically num-" In tn
D State, at least, they can only "put for