New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-05-03
An IMPORTANT MAMIE STO.
POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY vs.. SQUATTER
SOVEREIGNTY.
From The Cor.htpiiou, Ap,a sota.

From he CoHstfhfi0H, 1pyhJh.
1t is essential to the intelligent discussion of any
question that the precise Specification OF the phrases
employed should be clearly and accurately defined,
and the hopeless confusion Of ideas exhibited in the
illusions Of many of cotemporaries upon the lead
ing political topic of the day furnishes conspicuous
Illustration OF this automatic truth. We will not do
our opponents the injustice of assuming that this con-
fusion of the phrases have presed to our article
is the result Of lack of discrimination On the
trary as the doctrine Of Popular Sovereignty"
rightly understood must necessarily prove az popular
as that of "Squater Sovereignty is OdOus, from It's
unconstutonaty, the use of the two phrases iniis-
crninately argues rather adroitness useful enough
TO those whose principles will not bear analysis.
But is there any foundation for assuming the con-
yertibty Of these terms And is ii fair TO charge
that one is an advocate OF . Sluatter Sovereignty
becase he has given IN his adhesion 10 the doctrine Oh
" Popular SOvercigDty2' We think not. Popular
Sovereignty and Squatter Sovereignty doctrines
not only Distinct but anagonstc and the distinction
is SO clear, the antagonsm 20 palpa6le that he who
runs may read This we propose briefly to show.
Mr.. buchanan, in his letter of acceptance and in his
Inaugural Address has furnished the cleares possible
definition of Popular Sovereignty In his letter OF ac-
ceptance he says: "The people of Territory, Ike
those of State shall decide for themselves whether
Slavery shall or shall not exist in their limits; and
in his Inaugural he says ~ difference OF opinion
has arisen TO the point OF time when the people ut
Territory shall decide THIS question for themselves
This is happily Of but little practical Importance
" Though il has ever been my ndivld
nal opuion that under the Nebraska act, tho
apprOpriate period will be when the number OF actual
residents in The Territory shall justify the formation
" of constitution with view 10 It's admission a.
State into the Union This Is Popular Sovereignty
in the Territories 1t recognizes the exercise by Ter
rtoral Legislature OF every power consistent with the
provisions Of the Constitution but It does not recognize
HE exercise Of any power Inconsistent with the rights
of the people Of the States, in whom resides the ut-
ell he
all the common territory of the United STATES.
Squatter Sovereignty on the contrary, recognizes
the night of those Whatever may be Their num-
herr who nav have squated on the public domain IN
advance Of the public surveys, and without the own
eship Of one acre Of the soil, TO elect Legislature
which shall undertake to prohibit Slavery within
Territory, and thus practically deprive nearly hsl
Of the partners i'll this coniederacy OF States Oh tue
right Of emgratng with their property To any portion
Of their vast and extended domain. In other words,
this Squatter Sovereignty confers the first settlers OF
Territory absolute and unlimited power over the
propeYty-rights Ui all future mmg grants.
Thus understanding the matter, we proclaim, nm
hcsiatngly that; while shall ever advocate Popu-
lar Sovereignty, will wage an eternal war on
Squaiter Sovereignty. While the ONE doctrine IS
inst constitutional and in conformity with the spirit
Of our institutions the other is unjust unconsttu-
tional and in violation of the equality OF the states
The one is the doctrine of the Democratic party; the
other il the doctrine of the dSorganlzerS aud BOXERS
who seek TO divide and destroy the Democratic party,
II was in pursuing Of this train of thought we were
led into expression which has been perverted TO mean
the very opposite of our intentions We said, lew
days ago: The principles emblazoned on the Dem
ocratic banner are, 'Non-nterventon, by Congress
or by Territorial Legislatures, either to establish
9 or prohibit Slavery in the Territories, and the
projection of slave property therein, Us loug as
the Territorial condition shall remain by the judi.
- cary under the Constitution of the United Sistes.
The plain meaning of this is, that Congress cannot
and therefore should not attempt to establish or pro-
hbt Slavery in any Territory, and that the Territorial
Legislature, deriving al IL powers Of legislation
from Congress, cannot and should not, attempt to
establish or prohibit Slavery in the Territories. But
since the Constitution of the United States pro
,ec,s all Of is people in the enjoyment of al
their rights of property, whenever they may
be found in Territory common to ali the states,
protection to that property i duty OF those in
vested with the power OF local Legislation, and II II
the duty of the Judiciary To set aside Etrsendy
legislation which is calculated TO destroy or impair any
right Of property. We consider these seli-eYident
propositions. But il is said IN some quarters that the
people Of the Northern States will not sustain this IN
depreciation OF ihepowers of people in Territory
IL this be true f'rhcA friH brej, the people
of the Northern Staes ready to at aside the Con-
situtOn destroy the equality of the States and pre-
selt e. their brethren Of the South the alternative Of
~ on 70 dishocOE the vIpd.C atOn " tleI