The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1859-01-26

power IN congress, pPEW NfsECgH'y was 1uNo-
Gated as ITS antagonist. The latter then became
for the first time prominent term in politics,
expressive Of particular policy as opposed 20
another policy. The policy 10 which i is op
posed is the right OF Congress to FIX ior all iH-
tuIe time the domestic institutions oia State
while in Il territorial condition. The policy Of
which it Is the expression is 10 leave the ioIma-
ton and regulation Of their domestic institu-
tons to the people OF the Territories themselves.
| Upon this all democrats united. There remain
ed, however, a difference among them relative
| TO the time at which the right in the people OF Il
/ Territory to form their institutions could he
exercised, whether at any and all times through
/ their territorial Legislature, or only in the set
of framing a constitution to become an ndtPc
dent State. 1t must lie remembered that our
! Territories are usually organized when they
contain but very few white Inhabitants Some
ofthe party contend tkat these few could decide
/ the institutions of the Territory ard State TO
| bc formed from il. This was known as s9uat
ter soucreiguty. 1t was opposed ss unconsttu.
| tional and unfair. Unfair, because it permitted
the few whom locality or interest or political
policy first sent into territory to control it for
all future, and especially because it enabled
! them to exclude either section as interest or
.prejudicc might dictate, either by establishing a
/ particular institution or BY prohibiting it. 1t
was opposed as unconstitutional inGsmuch as it
merely proposed to transfer the power claimed
/ for Congress by the advocates of the proUiso
from that body to the territorial government.
! 1t was well said that Congress calls territori-
al government into being, and is its guardian
during its existence that it can give the ward
no greater power than itself possesses; that the
ward must wait until it arrives at maturity, and
! - ! Iar,r I,
eide its permanent institutions. 1t was well
said that territorial government is the crca-
ture Of Congress, derives its powers from Con
gress and can have no greater power than that
| bodyy possesses; while a State government is
' the work the people derives its pOwcrsfronthe
and in framing it they are not: :mitd by yanypecPle
such congressional restriction as the prct'iHo1,
and are limited only by the constitution. This
| is popular sovereignty proper, and is sustained
! by the Supreme Court in the bred Scott decis-
! ion. 1t prohibits any interference by Congress
| for or against either section in q Territory;
place them both there upon the same equality;
rests the rights of both with the constitution
and courts, during the existence ola territorial
government, and with the people, subject to the
constitution, when State government super
Sedes the territorial Popular sovereignty is a
government Of the people restrained only by
such limitations Rs constitution and laws
they have previously enacted may impose. it
is right guaranteed by our constitution and de-
creed by our courts---a right above and beyond
any party platform and which none such can
add to or take from. 1t is right older than
Mr.. Douglas and one for the discovery ofwhich
he can claim no cuueat to use it Tor the exclusive
furthcrance his ambition. 1t is liberty with
law; not the liberty ofriots, mobS, unrestrain-
ed license, and crime. TO apply it to such, as
they existed in Kansas, is only The abuse Of a
term, not the legitimate application Of n correct
principle. The name of popular sovereignty
can lie dcsecratcd, as have been the names o
religion and liberty. During the wars Of rcli
gious ianaticSm in Europe and Asia, thousands
were massacred in the Eamc Of the Lord ard
his holy religion! During the French revolu-
ton the guillotne was busy pouli"g out limo
cent blood in the name OF liberty. In the name
OF liberty Napoleons | and III first acquired
the power which enabled Il EN- to establish
their respective tyranics Shall the name O
popular sovereignty lie similarly dcsecra'cd
made but cloak o cover the ambitious schemes
of one man, or mask or congressional tyran
ny? Such is its tendcncynow
The ordinance accompanying the Lecomptor
constitution claimed for the new State twenty
rrcss, as tho trustee Of government and the Gus
todan ofitS property, deemed the claim extray
acant. The Senate bill refused to admit it.
+ That bill failed in the House, and the confer
ence or English bill was reported. 1t was sus-
tanned by majority OF the democrats and
should have been satisfactory to all. On the
one hand, it did not claim the right to pcremp
torily send back the Kansas constitution. or SCI
aside the Kansas laws or interfere with Kansas
institutions; while, on the other it made a pro-
position for acceptance or rejection by the citi-
zcrs Of the Territory, relative to the public
lands, legitimate subject of contract betwccr
Congress ard any State. Ii the proposition was
accepted, they were to put the machinery o
their State government in motion; if rejected
they were to form n State government de nort
whenever their population would entitle then
to n representative in Congress They wisely
rejected the proposition. ! say wisely, not be
cause of the quantity OF land offered them. fc
possibly more may never he offered them, bu
wisely because of the few tai. payers upon whom
} al the burdens Of a State government wouIc
dcyolvc. They acted wisely, ikew wise bccauS,
Loyalty, in recognizing tho bill as the law, and
voting under it instead of disrcgarding and defy
ing it as they had previous laws. The bill re-
duced the amount Of land TO he given the new
! State from twenty four to four million acrcs.-
Yet it has hecn called bribc offered the citi
zcns Of the Territory to induce them to acc =
the Lecompton constitution! If land was an,
indictment either way, it was 4 brihe to induc
! them to refuse that instrument, MS less than th
four million acres then offered them, there wa
no probability of their being offered hereafter
, while by delaying admission until their popnla
tion entitled them to demand it as n right the,
r stood good chance 10 obtain more. With th
r passage Of Il c conference bin Lccompton ant
anti Lecomptcn ceased to be an issue anon
democrats--lcavng however, between then
! and republicans the opposing principles Of soy
$ creign power on the one side, and popular scy
r ereianty on the other, to the atbitlamcnt G
: future elections Lccompton ceased to be al
issue, but an cr past Jocfo effort was made Il
manufacture political capital out Of II as il hat
, bcen--an effort, though it was past and deat
issue, to Gayanize into it sutlicency Of yi;alit
to make it minister TO the ambition or revcne
r ofccrtan politicians. They wished to make
: "a good enough Morgan until after election. ~
In the prosecution Of this effort certain opinion
+ have been enumerated which must Of lhemselve
t become issues wherever they arc maintained -
G During the late canvass, among other opinion
announced by the talented senator from Illinois
: MIR. Douglas, lie appears 10 nave COMMITTED
, hmselfto implied opposition to the right of
r people to delegate power 10 a convention t
t adopt as well as frame constitution. This i
. inconsistent with the principle to which he pro
fesSes TO have dedicated his political e, is in
consistent with his past declarations and make
| his recent declarations Inconsistent with eacl
other; for while protesting to he tho special ad
! vocatc OF popular sovereignty, it places him il
S opposition to the right upon which our govern
/ ment is based--the right OF the people TO nc
: thro' reprcsentatves--to delegate their power
i LIE IikewisA nnnl,sed tho Enplish hill. declnr