The Buchanan County guardian. (Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa) 1858-1864, 1859-03-10
SqUatter Sovereignty.

ocratic dogmaofSquatter Sovereignty was
acheat-a thing of convenience doc
trlne originated and sustained by the bogus
democratic leaders, only to blind the PEG
pie to the real intent of the slavery prop.
uganda, and to give them another lease
of the government. Democrats univer.
sally admit that it, and it only, carried
the contest Of 1856, and that without it,
not q single Northern State would have
given her electoral vote for the candidates
of the Cincinnati Convention. Self-gov.
ernmcnt for the people of the Territories,
was The rallying cry throughout the
North, of the supporters of JAMES Blu.
cHASAN, and this was distinctly announ.
ced to mean the right to regulate cacl
and all domestic institutions in the Ter.
ritories the same as in the States
the right to adopt, or exclude, slavery
from the Territories, just as the people
thereof deemed proper. Well, the cheat
was successful, and as soon as successful,
was abandoned. The Supreme Court
soon decided that the people of Terri
tory could have no soyereignty-just as
the Republicans had previously contend
ed. It, however, went farther, and in :
sisted that neither Congress or the terri
torial government had a right to regulate
the question Of slavery in the territories
that that institution was under the spe-
cial protection of the Constitution, and
could not be interfered with-nay, must
be protected. This view of the decision
was strongly combatted by a few non-in
terventionists at the North, they contend
ing that it promul gated no such doctrine,
but that it simply affirmed Meir position,
that the subject was one wholly under
the jurisdiction of the people of the ter
ritory, and beyond the powers of Con-
gross. Upon this point, Northern Dem
ocracy has, up to this time, been enabled
to make a respectable stand, but from it
they have at last been driven by their own
friends.
On the 22d Of February, the Legisla-
tive Appropriation Bill being before the
Senate, Mr.. HALE offered an amendment
repeating the restrictive clause in the
English Kansas Bill. Upon that motion
a very interesting debate ensued, princi-
paIly participated in by the Democratic
Senators, in which the South unanimous
ly repudiated the Popular Sovereignty
dodge, and while asserting the sovereign
~ OF Congress over the territories, per-
emptorily demanded that that sovereign
~ shall be exercised for the protection of
slave property therein.
Mr.. BRowN, Of Mississippi, said that
lie neither wanted to cheat or be cheated,
and he therefore wanted to define his po-
sitlon, as to the great contest in 1860,
and hoped others would do so. He con-
tended that the Constitution gave him the
right to take his slaves into any territory
of tie United States, and to have them
protected there. If the territorial legis-
ature, which is the creature of Con-
sress, refused his property the proper
protection, he would come and demand
it from Congress. When the constilu-
ton tells him that it will award him pro-
lection, he deemed that it meant adequate
protection, or else it was none at ALL
This constitutional guarantee it was the
duty OF Congress to see enforced, and if
lis creature, the territorial lauislain~~
hsneu IN us duty, then Congress itself
must enforce it. He said : We have
right Of protection for our slave property
in the territories. The Constitution, as
expounded by the Supreme Court, awards
it.. We demand it, and We mean to have
it.' a4a al
Mr.. Dogo1As, in FsRllyy, ssas idf no more.
ne protection granted to other property
should be to it--no more, no less. If
that is inadequate, ii is the misfortune Of
those who own that peculiar species of
property. lie also said that it was dis
lnctly understood that the doctrine of
the Nebraska bill was, that the people of
2 territory, like those of State, Should
decide for themselves whether or not
slavery should exist within their limits.
Mr.. BUcHANAN's letter, accepting the |
nomination, proved this to have been his
view " No state in the North" he said. |
" would have ever voted for Mr.. BUcHAN
AN, but for the fact that he was under
stood to occupy that position." and he
also added that a democratic candidate
San never carry one upon the opposing
doctrine.
Mr.. Days said that "not the breadth
If one hair would l (he) follow the SEN
tor Mr. DoUGLAs) in the career which