Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1859-09-21
From the Charleston Mercury.
Letter from the Hon. NJ. l.. Bonhar


Letter from the Hon. NJ. L. Bonham.
Mr.. Ep1roR: On the first Monday in June
last, l addressed portion of my constituents
at Laurens Court House. Circumstances did
not admit of my preparing report of that ad
dress for publication. An extract from the
brief report of my remarks by the Editor oi
the Herald, having recently appeared in yonr
paper, as indicative of my views as to the
policy Of the South in the approaching Presi'
Dental election, deem il not improper,
through the same medium, which circuates
extensively in the Fourth Congressional Dis.
trict, succinctly but more fully to state the
views expressed, and now entertain, upon
that absorbing question.
The debate in the Senate last February as
to the tue construction Of the ansas.Nebras-
ka act, and the rights of the slave States in
the territories brought the advocates of the
opposing constructions face to face in that
body and before the whole country. Subse-
auent discussions on the stump and through
the press have but served to make palmer the
distinction. There con now be no more "cheat-
ing" or " being cheated" as TO this question,
unless the South chooses to be cheated. For
one. rejoice that it is so.
The mass of the democratic party North,
with some few South, maintain that, although
it is the right of the STAKEHOLDER to carry his
property into the territories, still the right is
perfect in the people thereof, prior to the for
nation of State constitution, by adverse, un-
friendly, or hostile legislation (all the same in
effect to make it slave territory or free terri
tory, no matter what may be the decision of
the Supreme Court. If this be true-if a
handful of squatters from the over-poPulous
States of Europe and crowded cities Of the
North. pushed forward by Emigrant Aid. So
cieties into new territories, can, by untrie eadly
or hostile legislation, exclude slavery, without
the power on the part of Congress, by the
passage of adequate laws, to restrain such un.
constitutional legislation, then would that act
indeed be what its author is charged with
having said it was" the best freesoil measure
ever adopted by Congress" But is this true7
The squatter sovereignty advocates themselves
concede that Congress has not the power to
legislate slavery into or out of the territories,
as is contended by the abolitionists. The no.
ton, therefore, that Congress-an agent-can
delegate to it's creatures, the territorial legs-
latures, power which the Congress itself
does not possess, but which resides alone with
the sovereign States, the creators Of that Con.
gress, would seem to be too preposterous for
serious argument. But it is claimed that the
doctrine of non.intervention in the Kansas.
Nebraska act precludes Congress from inter
fering to counteract this unfriendiy or hostile
territorial legislation. Non.intervention meant
nothing more nor less, at the passage OF that
act, than that Congress should not legIslate
slavery into or out of the territories, but that
the people thereof should decide the question
for themselves, when adopting their cons,itu'
tions, with ON adequate population, preparato.
ry to admission into the Union. That was
the meaning, as held by all democrats in Con.
gress except such as seem to have had
reserved construction for future use. No one
then maintained, in Congress, that it implied
the right of the territorial Legislatures to over
ride the Constitution and the decision of the
Supreme Court, and exclude slavery from the
territories, with no power on the part OF Con-
press to restrain them. With such construc-
ton that measure could not have commanded
the support of corporaFs guard among
Southern members.
On the other hand, if all property, without
distinction, should be equally protected by the
territorial laws, congressional legislation might
not be requisite. But if the territorial legis.
latnre should discriminate in its laws against
slave property, either by emitting 10 afford it
equal protection with all other property, or by
positive hostile enactnents, it would be the
duty of Congress, the common agent OF oil
the States, to afford that protection which its
agent, the territorial legislature, had so with.
held, in violation Of the Supreme Court. No
other doctrine is compatible with the rights OF
the slave States in the territories. And it's
passing strange how any one can support the
Fugitive Slave Law, which carries out the
provisions oil the constitution in sovereign
States, and yet deny the power Of Congress to
.,ass laws to carry out those provisions in the
territories, the common property OF those
sovereign States.
These, according to my understanding, are
the opposing constructions-squatter soyer'
eighty and its opposite. On the former plat
form Judge Douglas has announced to the
democratic party that they eau take him as
lheir candidate for President in 1862 or not
at all. This is bold and decided. aud will, 1t
il to be hoped, inspire like sElflt on the
Fart Of the South.
The issue is thus distinctly rendered. Can
the South decline to meet it without an aban-
donment of her rights? Can she support
Judge Douglas or ANY man holding tho same
views on this question without being concu.
dad? think not. The issue being rendered,
failure to meet it subjects the Son,h to
decree by default, and her mou'h will be
eTcr after closed. Her own people would re-
gard it res adiudicata.
Nor ought the South now to ignore this
issue and support candidate who IS uncom-
ritted. The question is before the country,
and even though it were but an abstraction.
the principle is none the less important that
there is no immediate application. No one
doubts tiat the Indian and other territories
suited 10 slave labor will be acquired by the
Gaycrnment-how soon no one knows; and
there can he no better time than this to settle
tho question. In my humble Judgment 1t IS
the duty of the South, laying aside all issues,
the agitation of which will distract her coun-
Gil, Without producing present good, to de-
nsnd OF the democratic party-not "slavc
code"-an ugly name to make obnoxious a
great constitutional right-but distinct re:
ccoenition, in the approaching Presidential
contest of the right on the part of slavebold'
ers to congressional legislation, whenever
such legislation may be needed, to protect
their rights against the unfriendly or hostile
legislation of any territory and in default
thereof, to support for her candidate some
statesman who is sound upon that question as
vel: as others of vital interest to the South.
She should eschew all compromise Oh the
question of slavery in all its bearings The
com promise ofthe constitution, whereby three
6fths of the labor Of the South only is repre-
sented, whilst that of the North is fully repre-
sented, was an error, but it is a part Of that
con, pact and by that let her abide. For the
futuse the word compromh should be stricken
from, the Southern political vocabulary. It is
| .;..a sha had known whether that partY-the