The Portage County Democrat. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1859-11-30

Oh Tue eiuS 0l the SeiI-StVleQ D6mOcFaIlc party.
| Oar opponents were sagacious enough.there
fore, when they iierated and reiterated the cry
of Popular Sovereignty, and by bold and
ciamorous assertions, sought to create the be
lief that the Republicans, in seeking to arrest
the spread of slaTer-, were assaiIing the right
i of the people to govern themselves. 1t was
the only course. indeed. which offered the
slightest possibility of success for the defend
| ers of Slavery, as the best relation between
capital and labor. are yet few in the free
States, even among those who call themselves
Democrats. 1t is not to be denied that many
were misled by that cry and by those asser-
tions. We can never be obliged to maintain
orr Republican positions under greater disad,
vanfages than those produced by the miscon-
ceptions thus created fssiJ
There was however, one great advantage
! in all this. It compelled general and thor.
ough discussion of the position takea by Mr.
Douglas and his friends 1t led to universal
iDqniry, What is this Popular Sovereignty
which is so vehemently asserted Is it re
ality or a sham Is it the old doctrine hand
ed down to us by our fathers in the immortal
Declaration, or is it some modern counterfeit,
got up to serve base party necessities q szsys
! We looked forthe description of the specific
given by the Patentee himself. We inquired.
How does ''.my doctrine of popularity SOW
Eereignty," described in '.my Kansas-Nebraska
Bill" agree with or differ from the doctrine of
the Fathers of the Republic embodied by
Thomas Jefferson in the Nations creed of hu.
man rights .-- 80.
We read Mr.. Douglas Wooster Speech, and
we found him positively asserting that he
never uttered any such nonsense as that ter
ritory was a sovereign power" How then,
We asked, can there be popular sovereignty in
a territory Where there is no !" sovereign
power" can there be any sovereignty Of the
people 7 Why talk. then. of popular sover-
eighty in territory Clearly it seemed for
no honest purpose
We songht TO know what rights Mr.. Doug
las did claim for the people OF territory
We found his own statement in Senate Re
port. mad. by himself as chairman of the com
miitee on Territories. and quoted by him in
that same Wooster speech. s'The sovereignty
of Territory" he says in that report remains
in abeyance, suspended in the United States
mitted into the Union as a State. In the
meantime they are permitted to exercise and
enjoy, all the rights and privileges of self
gorernment to be exercised in subordination
| TO the Constitution and in obedience TO the or.
ganic law." vat Of .o1sa ret.4 7r-v e
Here we have it. This is the Douglas doc
trine of Popular Sovereignty-the " right ol
self-government in subordinatiou to the Con
stitution and in obedience to the organic law
THE people of Territory have noSovereignty.
1t is suspended--it is not very clear where
but certainly suspended. 1t cannot be vested
in the People until they come into the Uninn
as State. 'ln the meantime, land q very
mean time it is--'they are admitted,-how
Igracious that is-'to exercise and enjoy the
rights of self-government in snbordination to
the Constitution and in obedience to the or
Iganic law, pass over, Tonight, the limita
tion of tsubordination to the Gonstitrtion.-
Though the whole wickedness of the bred
tScott Decision is covered up in it,-and ask
tyour attention to that other Imitation 'obed
lence to the organic law, Hai yfi,jsa t-
ltT The people of territory must obey 'the
organic law They have only such rights o
self government as they may exercise in ODE
dience to that. II - t=r.7iila go ii h.f
The Popular Sovereignty taught by Jeff.r
son consisted in the derivation of the powers
of government f ON the consent of the gov
lerned. There can be no genuine popular SOW
|eleignty, according to his teaching, where the
people do not institute their own government
frame their own .organic law s=a-ae
/ Now, how is it with ing doctrine 2 Why
my doctrine refers the power of organizing
1.-THE government of the Territories to Congress
MIR. Douglas himself framed the organic &C
the fundamental law-the Constitution o
Kansas and Nebraska. Congress, by enact
nent. gave it being and vitality Neither tht
people of Kansas nor the people of Nebrask'
were consulted at all about their Institutions
The consent Of the governed had nothing tt
do with the powers ofthe government Tho>
powers are derived in Kansas and Nebrask
and every other territory, from the act of Con
4 gress which Mr.. Douglas calls the organic law
When he says, therefore, that the rights Q
self-government are to be exercised in obedi
eIee to the organic Nv, he says, in reality
they are to be exercised in obedience to Con
lgress. 94ia j. sAE a. laa-s s# r os
What kind of popular sovereignty have W
here Does not this sham cut rather sorr
figure by the side of the grand old verify c
Thomas Jefferson !? -E3 as a u
I'd Bnt now let us look into ing Kansas-Ne
braska bill and see what powers of self-goy
ernment the people may exercise 'in obedienc
to the organic act Every really self-goverr
q ing people must exercise through agents az
4 pointed by itself, in such form as itself ma
prescribe, legislative, judicial and executiv
h powers. In other words. it must make, col
fstrue and execute its own laws. 81 az;sj
q Now we have already seen that with th
making of its fundamental law the people
Kansas or Nebraska had nothing whatever t
do Mr. Douglas and Congress made it,
But, passing over this, how much Legislative
judicial and executive power does the organ
act allow to the peoplef 1t vests the legisl
tive power in the governor and legisla!i1
lassembly ; fixes the number of members
a each branch of the legislature provides #
4 their pay determines how many days the
= may sit; and then. subjects all their acts
@ the veto of the Governor. Not much pop
4 lar sovereignty here Not much power
self-government in obedience to the organ
act,' where no bill can become law witho
the approval Of the Governor. unless passe
; by vote of two-thirds of the members
each House! But this is not the worst Of
The Governor, thus made constituent ell
ment of the Legislative Power, and clotht
with the perogative of the veto is not elect.
by the people of the territory, but appoint,
BY the Federal Government through the Pre-
ideni. Thus we see that this organic act
lows the people next to no Legislative powt
j What Executive power does it give them 7.
n None whatever. That power is vested iu
Governor, or in his absence, in o Secretary, al
both are appointed by the President. Whe
then, finally, does the organic act vest the 1
, lpreme judicial power ? In Supreme Coui
Do you say then, We'll, the people certain
elect their own Judges If you do, yon a
mistaken for the Judges are all appoint
u, by the President. What powers of self-go
/, ernment, then, repeat, have the people Of
territory in obedience to the organic law ?.
No executive power. no judicial power, al
, practically. no legislative power. except
, subjugation to the Federal Executive.