Daily national Democrat., 1858-11-19

stitution, in a majority of the States of the
Union at the time of its adoption, and that
the citizens Of the slaveholding States had
the right, under the Constitution to carry
slaves into the common territories of the
Union. 1t decided, consequently, that Con
gress had no power to take this right from
slave holders, 10y abolishng or prohibiting
| slavery in Territory ami as it did not have
/ this power itself, that it could not confer it
on any local government established by its
authority. The Court decided in that Gaze
other points in reference to the political
status of the negro, and the constitution
ality of certain legislation by Congress, but
| that which we have stated is practically the
most important part of its decision 1t con.
| firmed the Democratic doctrine of popular
sovereignty, illustrated in the Kansas Ne
braska act, and asserted in the national plat
form Of the party at Cincinnati before the
Dred Scott decision was pronounced, and it
is this part of the decision which. it is char
ged, Judge DOUGLAS has repudiated. There
is no evidence to sustain the charge. either
in his Freeport speech, or in any other which
he has ever made.
The docrine of the Dred Scott decision is
that slave property, so far as federal laws
operate in the Territories of the Union, is on
the same footing with any other kind of
property, and that neither Congress, or Il
territorial legislature established bv its au-
thority, can enact laws to exclude it, or do
anything which shall interfere with the right
of shareholders to carry this property into a
Territory, which is recognized by the decis-
ion as institutional and inviolable. But.
in reference to this right to carry slaves into
the common territories of the Union. the de-
cision is simply judicial declaration of it,
existence, and all that Mr.. Douglas has asser.
ted whilst admitting this right. and DENYING
that Congress or a territorial legislature can
do anything to impair it, is that it NAV be
practically nullitied "by lawful means" In
other words, his position is that the charac-
ter of a Territory as free or slave. will be
determined by the character of the people
who settle it, and that the people NAV make
it free Territory without denying the right
of shareholders to carry their property there.
which is affirmed by the s. prene Court Of
the United States in the Dred Scott decision
or using any unlawful means to hinder them
in the exercise and enjoyment of this light
This is illustrated in the history of the Terri
tory of Nebraska. That Territory has been
settled by people hostile to slaverv-thev
have elected Representatives who have been
hostile to it, and who consequently have
failed to enact police regulations, or any 9th
er laws fof the protection of slave PROPERTY.
They have not excluded it, but they have
not encouraged it, by affording it the protee.
tion which it peculiarly needs; and thus by
doing nothing upon the subject by letting It
alone severely, they have, "by lawful means >
excluded the institution of slavery from the
Territory. The right to carry slaves into II
is perfect, unqualified and unquestioned but
they are not carried there, because the local
law does not furnish remedies and means to
enforce this right and secure its enjoyment
The people have excluded slavery and made
Nebraska free, without the use of any unlaw
tul means. This is what the people of Ne
braska have done-this is what Senator
Douglas asserts that the people of any other
Territory may do. Is this a declaration of the
doctrine of squatter sovereignty ? or a repu-
diatlon of any principle established bv the
Dred Scott decision? BY no means. but
simply the statement of legal proposition
which has never been controverted, even bv
statesmen of the most ultra Southern Rights
Opinions who have many of them asserted il
themselves, and upon it, demanded that Con |
gress should relieve the slaveholding States
from the practical wrong, which it worked |
10y the positive legislation which would effec.
tually protect 81 We property in the Terrific
ries, and vitalze the right to carry it-there-
make it practical and substantial, bv furnish |
ing remedies to enforce it,
so much for this latest charge of the Wash |
ington Union against the distinguished Sena.
tor OF Illinois. lie has not repudiated the
l)red Scott decision or uttered one word in
his treeport speech or elsewhere, inconsistent
with the principles established bv it.