Daily Iowa State Democrat. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1856-1859, 1859-06-22
Slavery In the Territories -SauatecP Soves.
eighty and Conversational Protection.

The following article from the New
Orleans Courier, emoodies, we believe.
the position which the Democracy of
the nation will assume in the Charles
ton Platform, respecting slavery in the
Territories. 1t repudiates Squatter
Sovereignty, accepts the bred Scott
decision, and opposes Congressional
legislation to protect slavery in the
Territories, relying upon the courts as
ample protection to Southern rights !:
"SLAvERr IN TERRlroRIEs.-Up to
the time Of the repeal of the Missouri
Compromise, that black line of insult
to the Southern States stretched along
parallel Of latitude, and of itself leg
islated against the existence of slavery
in the territories north of it. That in-
suit was removed, and replaced by q
long debated and we'll considered law,
amounting as far as any law can to
another compromise, that the people
of the Territory, whatever its geo.
graphical position might be, should de-
termine for themselves whether slave
ry should or should not be allowed
among them. This was called "Squat-
ter Sovereignty" by the extremists of
the Northern and Southern States :;
who argued that the first ten or twelve
men who settled IN territory, could,
under this law, determine its status
forever. The Northern Abolitionists
in particular, kno wing the existing and
necessarily increasing predominance Of
the North in Congress. were extremely
indignant and bitter at the removal of
the power Of legislation on the subject
Of slavery from the federal govern
ment.
When the great Democratic party
came to define its position on the matter
the whole idea cf"Squatter Sovereign
ty" became absolete-.for it fully settled
the doctrine that squa tiers or other in
hdbitants of Territories had no rigAt
to determine the question at all and
that the poaOer arose at the same time
Of the tormat ton Of the Contribution of
the incipient State, and not before
The question then arose, what we're
the rights Of shareholders in terrific.
ries before the constitution was FORM
ed : Our democratic party and the
Supreme Court decided that they
were perfect under the Constitution.
It is now proposed by some, who
doubtlessly suppose themselves good
Southern men, that Congress should
be called upon to legislate in protec-
ton of the rights Of shareholders in
territories.
We cannot subscribe to this doctrine.
Having solmnly settled that Congress
should not legislste slavery into or out
Of any territory, or in any way inter.
vene in the matter-having, after q
severe struggle, at last succeeded In re-
moving the whole subject from federal
suthority-we Of the Southern States
are the last to try aud. return it there.
1t will only give . handle to Abolition
agitation, aud undo oil We have done
without any practical effect.
II the Inhabitants Of any Territory
are in feeling opposed to slavery, what
would be the effect Of Congregational
legislation in it, supporti Laws Of
Congress for the benefit Of slavery
could no more b enforcod than the
fugitive dave law Il Massachusetts,.
Pfaetieally, slavsry VIII g into places
Where Ne ishahllaa1D vast - asd Win
iseleo sbe4hwa ;a7 M
j kM Wst1h Wills = ss1Aaeue 81
/ y;