The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1859-02-16

tile rights Of the stakeholder in the Terrific
ries as the Wilmot proviso. Il remember to-
have said. that if the Kansas.Nebraska bill
received such construction as TO authorize
this idea Of popular sovereignty and il
was this to which Mr.. Buchanan pledged
himself when adopting the Cincinnati plat.
form-I would not give " the toss Of cop.
per" between him. as the embodiment OF
this idea. and Mr.. Fremont, as the embodi-
ment Of the idea OF congressional sovereign.
ty" applying the prohibition through the
Wilmot proyiso.
This remark was repeated from Lexington
to Louisiana. by the members Of the Demo-
cratic party, as something perfectly hereiicai,
and had belonged to the Democratic church.
suppose should have been excommunica-
ted with as much facility. for such an objec.
ton, as the distinguished advocate of this
idea of popular sovereignty" has been,
within the past year, for adhering to the
idea. After the presidential election, it was
confessed on that side Of the House that the
Kansas Nebraska bill did receive two con-
structions, differing at the North and South,
but southern Democrats declared that the
difference nds imnldterial." In the midst
Of that discussion, the honorable member
from Tennessee, (Mr. Jones,) came forward
and made speech in advocacy Of the idea
which has been since SO much denounced by
| southern Democrats yet see he holds his
place in the very empyrean of Democracy.
| then presumed, from the facts exhibited
and the wide latitude for differences Of opin-
ion given in that party, that il was probably
true that the whole party concurred in the
declaration to which have alluded. Tes.
timonies Of like character have since then
been afforded by other leaders Of that party
engaged in the actual administration, which
serve to confirm and strengthen the opinion
that in The Democratic party differences Q
opinion are immaieriai.
| When the member from Maine announce:
that his party deems this squatter sovereign
ty the next best abolition specific to tn,
Wilmot proyiso, suppose his other declar
alton should not excite so much surprise
to wit, that il Maine cannot have his idea a,
the basis Of organization against slavery ex
tension, she will throw herself into the arms
Of the Democracy upon The squaiter sovereign
~ idea as the next best chance of affect
ing slavery in the Territories adversely.
am still Of the opinion that there is not rooir
!" for the toss Of a copper between squattei
sovereignty and the Wilmot proviso or, L
speak plainly, between territorial prevention
Of enjoying right and the congressional
prohibition Of the use of it. And it does
seem to me that party containing elements
both for and against this idea Of popular
sovereignty, cannot be firmly attached Il
any particular sci Of opinions on the subject
or must have capacity to admit into the
organization every variety and shade o
opinion. Can il be there is nothing in tn,
difference Of opinion on this point between
Mr. Douglas and Mr.. Davis the one holdin.
| to the doctrine Of his Freeport speech, anC
the other denouncing il as fatally hcreti
\ CALI
There is looseness Of thought on thi'
point which in my estimation is remarkable
A gentlemen insists on the doctrine OF non
4 Intervention by Congress in the affairs d
Territories, and lauds this principle 10 ,ht
skies. Here he parts, toto c9lO, from Oh,
I member from Maine, who insists on the righ
7 of congressional intervention in the affairs o.
Territories. lie establishes territorial 20,
vernment BY Congress. He insists that un
der such government the territorial inhab
itants may legislate upon every subject
4 limited only By the Constitution; and tina
within this range, he may legislate, not /,
exclude slavery, but TO prevent the mastel
from enjoying the rights incident to his re-
lation Of master. lie thus "hods with III,
hare and runs with the hounds He i
against the views of the northern Free-Soil
er, vet reaches the same result By differ
! ent process; he is with the stakeholder, We
cuts him of from the enjoyment Of the right
granted to him. The error Of this con
struction Of powers is exposed By the yer,
fact that its premises and conclusion
are inconsistent with each other; that j
offers theory one way and reduces 4
Y practice another way. II is high time ",
had reached tangible, solid ground on thi
point. ! hold the doctrine enunciated il
1850, which was heralded to the world a
4 the true policy by Clay, Webster, Fillmore
Dickinson, and their colaborers. IL is this
the General Government. being one OF ia,
deriyatiye powers only, will interfere or in
teryene to shape the destiny Of the embry,
States of the Union there shall be no cen
trail influence exerted BY il TO invite, or pro
hAUAkt " hAMA4tI 1Ath "
labor or any SORT Of political Institutions il
the Territories, further than 10 see that the
are republican IN their form. upon the al
mission OF the State into the Union. ltwil
eonfne itself % The honest exercise Of III
agency delegated to il for the common ben
EFT uf ali the principals under whose powe
of attorney Il acts. That power Of attorne
is the Constitution Of the United State,
which expresses the grants Of power to III
agent and the prohibitions, and The Govern
ment must keep within the limitations eE
, pressed, or implications necessarily spring
ing from what has been expressed. TO carr
out that which j. within The OBJECT of III
. expressed grant.
, Z. Perfect freedom in the several loo,
, sovsrtigaiits 10 manage their own affairs /
their own ast, provided Ia. right Of con
science Is left free, and The form of the RI
public is preserved, j. guaranteed By II
. Constitution.
Bot the territorial government is in n
sense a s0gtrtigniy. Il derives it, life an