The Potter journal. [volume] (Coudersport, Pa.) 1857-1872, 1859-10-06

vested with the right to assume and ex-
ercise ii, without the consent of Congress =
That is precisely what the Republicans
say. That the powers of Territorial
Legislature are just what Congress con-
sents to and grants; and that the power
exercised by Congress oser the question
of slavery in the Territories from the
adoption Of the Constitution down to the
organization of Oregon, may and ought to
be exercised until all of the territory of
the United States shall be free. The
reason why Congress ought to prohibit
slavery in the Territories noO as it did
in the days of Washington and Jefferson,
is thus stated bv the ~ T. Independent !:
"Slavery is crime the system of
slavery, SIS it exists in these Uuited States,
is moral wrong, sin before God, a
crime against man, aud no government
has a right to commit crime, to sanction
iniquity. Mr.. Douglas may not be capa-
BILE of feeling the force of this argument,
but it is the only argument which is real
| ly valid against the extension of slavery.
For this same reason Congress has the
right to prohibit slavery in every terri
tory under its jurisdiction. Upon merely
technical legal grounds, Mr.. Douglas
denies the right of the Federal Govern
ment to interfere in any way with the
question" either to establish, to protect,
to abolish, or to prohibit slavery" But
if company of Druids in Nebraska ter
ritory should offer human sacrifices in the
name of religion if worshipers of Moloch
should set up their rites in Washington
territory, and should roast children alive
in a heated brazen iael if a companion
of free negroes residing in New Mexico
should revive the African custom of slay-
ing fifty or a hundred persons npon the
death of their head man, the Federal
Government would interfere to prohibit
and abolish such practices, for these are
crimes against human nature, crimes
against society, incompatible with state
of civilized life. Slavery is such crime !;
a crime against nature, against humanity,
against God; and every civilized COM
muuity Is bouhd to aoolish it, or OF pro-
hibt it. The grand fallacy of Mr. Doug
lass argument lies in gno.ing that fact.
Indeed, he even recognizes the right Of
property in human beings, and compares
the slave to horse, an OK, or a piece of
dry goods. But every mans moral sense
unless that moral sense has been oblit-
Grated BY political sophisms-teaches him
that it Is crime to treat a man as a
chattel, an article of merchandise, Ey-
cry man knows that no majority OF num-
bers in the community where he. dwells,
can have right to make him and his chill
dren slaves Mr.. Douglas treats the ques-
tion of slavery as if it had no moral bear
Ings, as if it were wholly at the option
of any community to establish slavery or
to prohibit it. lie says, " If the people
of territory desire slavery, all they have
to do is to pass laws sanctloElng and pro-
tecting it. If the people of New Mexi-
CO waut slave-code, they have a rtght
to it" But a people in their organic
capacity have no more right to commit
a crime, than an individual has no force
of majorities, no sanction of " local laws"
can give that right Nor can others sit
idly by, and see one portion of a commu-
nifty commit crime against another por-
ton, and not protest against that crime
in the name OF humanity, of religion, and
of God.
Let no friend of liberty be deceived by
Mr.. Douglass fiction of /" popular SOW
ereignty;" nor by the like sophistrles
about :. free labor" and free soil for ,rhitc
men. The battle of freedom in this ma
ton must be fought on the high ground
of moral principle. Better lose ten elec-
tions than abate one iota of that principle
for taking political sophism.