The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1859-07-20
STANDING TO THEIR GUNS.

Pennsylvania The Committee, composed
of forty-three leading Democrats, had as
sembled June 29th, at Harrisburg to con-
suit upon and prepare an exposition OF
the views and sentiments of the Democ-
racy of the State, and the points then and
there agreed upon were put into the form
Of an address by Robert Tyler, Esq,
lawyer residing in Philadelphia, native
of Virginia, sound Democrat and a
worthy son of Ex-President Tyler There
is, consequently, good reason to assume
that the address truly represents Demo
cratic opinions as held by the party in the
Iron State.
The address begins with a review Of
the Democratic platform, showing that
the Democracy of to-day is the Democracy
of sixty years ago, and concludes with a
fair and mplimentary notice of the adj
ministration of Mr.. Buchanan. AS will
be seen from the portion quoted, the style
is moderate but distinct, clear, compact
and mcthodical.
Whatever difference of opinion there
NAV be between the Democrats of Penn.
sylvania and those of Louisiana will be
found in the extract and careful exam
nation of it will show that the difference
is small.
They recognize the diversity of senti-
ment upon the new Territorial question
and denouncc in fitting terms the de!ha'
gogueism by which it is sought to con-
fuse and mislead the popular mind.
They boldly proclaim and advocate the
principle of popular sovereignty and
clearly draw the distinction between it
and the spurious, indefinite, yagrant
and accidental political idea of Squatter
Sovereignty.
While they hold that the Federal Gov
eminent is supreme and sovereign over
the Territories, they distinguish between
that legal and Constitutional supremacy
and the illegal, unlimited and despotic
power claimed for the Federal Govern
ment by the Black Republicans or Wilmot
Provisoites.
They assert the duty Of the Federal
Government "to respect, with strict i'm
partiality, the rights and interests of all
; parties concerned, these parties being The
States and people Of the States respectively"
They distinctly deny the power OF Con-
/. gress to authorize Territorial Legislature
i to do what it has not itself the Constitu-
tional power to do, and they illustrate the
monstrous conclusions to which a contra.
ry doctrine must lead.
They oppose special Congressional leg.
islation for the protection of slave Oh
other property in a Territory at the time
of organizing such Territory tut hey en-
phaticaAy assert the po,eer and the daty q
Congress to put DOM resistance to ITS acts, "ol
to judicial decisions in their proper logl
cal and legal consequences" or to any
thing else which the Federal Government
may do Z" in and by virtue of the Constitu
tional authority of the United States
over the Territories
They are not willing to legislate until
Legislation is made necessary by the lille
gal, factious and turbulent acts of the
people of Territory, because they are
unwilling to assume in advance that thei
conduct will be otherwise than legal an(
peaceful
They deduce the right of the people o
any State to hold and enjoy any species
Of property in any Territory from the in
h trinsic, indefeasible, eternal Democratic
v PR lciple that The States are equals
The Democrats of Pennsylvania STAN
ON THE SAME FOUNDATION OF THE CoNsTrTr
u u rIoN AND THE Law, WHICH sTERNIy AND JUsrL
. DENY THE ARBITRARY POWER OF ONE SET O
II SETTLERS TO coNFIscArE THE PROPERTY OF AN
y OTHER SET" '
d The whole difference, therefore, betwee
70 the Democrats of Pennsylvania and thos
g who demand immediate Congressiona
e legislation for the protection of the right
&c dc slaye-owners in Territories, is reduce
to a mere question of policy or necessity
,R They recognise these rights they pre-
" claim the power and duty Of the Feders
a. Government to maintain them they onl
,f ask that furthe: Intervention sha
10 be deferred until the bad conduct of tn
70 people of Territory render it necessary