The daily press. (Cincinnati [Ohio) 1859-1859, 1859-05-10
Popular VS.. squatter sOvereIgnty-PrO-

Popular Vs. Squatter rSoVerelgnty-PrO-
prtetary Titles.
What is POPULAR SovEREIGNTY2-and
what is SoUATTER SovEREIGNTY2 They
are phrases which, doubtless in the opin-
ions of those who use them, mean some
thing but what do they mean? As be-
tween the newspapers of the two parties
the ADMINISTRATIONS and the OPPOSITION
the former, with each, means OUR doc
trine, the latter, YOURS. We ere in favor of
the sublime principles Of Popular Sover-
eighty; you are in favor of the false, in
cendiary, seditious and diabolical dogmas
of Squatter Sovereignty: VADE RETRO
SATHANUs. Well, but, honest friend, what
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Mean!
Why, the rule of the people, of course.
Rule over whom? Over themselves-who
else2 And what do you mean by squat
ter sovereignty Why, the rule of the
squatters, to be sure Over whom
Over themselves. People over people,
squatters over squattersP Yes The one
you think right, the other wrong? Yes;
the DRED ScoTT case--Never mind the
DRED ScoTT case; answer me this: What
is the difference between squatters and
people: are they not both human beings,
created equal and endowed with certain
inalienable," and all that sort of thing;
and the one as likely to understand its
own civil wants as the other? The nat
ural answer to this question is few hard
names, and sudden recollection of i'm
portant business The fact is, in the
minds of the majority of those who EN-
ploy them, the two phrases are simply
terms Of appreciation and of reproach
and, beyond this, have no distinct mean
ing whatsoever-and never had
The new editor of the Washington Cor
stitution-late Union-with that hardi-
hood which is so often the companion of
extreme folly in an article entitled "Pop-
ular Sovereignty VS.. Squatter Sover-
eighty" has attempted to define the two
things in their present political phases,
and to draw the proper line of distinction
between them; and he has succeeded
greatly to the satisfaction of several
whose brains are as shallow as his own
As, however, there is attached to his Civ
ings out the seal of official auth henticity
his definitions have conventional if not
an actual value, and we have endeavored
out of a multiplicity of words, by elimin
ating the unnecessary, to reduce them to
as compact form as possible. They
stand thus:
POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY is right which
accrues to the people of Territory
when the number of actual residents
therein shall justify the formation of a
constitution with view to its admission
as q State into the Union" to decide
whether or not they will, by law, permit
slavery within the same.
SoUATTER SOVEREIGNTY is that which
would confer upon the first settlers of a
Territory absolute and unlimited power
over the property rights Of all future i'm
migrants
AT present it is not designed to discuss
in detail, the correctness of either of these
definitions, nor to inquire whether, rela-
lively to each other, they stand upon the
proper ground. There is, however, one
point in which they both agree; and
which embodies either fundamental
truth, or fundamental error: we allude
to the idea that government may possess
a legitimate power over the property Of
individuals.
1t would seem as if only the most no
meopathic portion of common sense, and
its most transitory employment in reAec
ton upon the subject, would be sufficien
to convince any person that no form oil
province of government ever had, or car
have, the slightest imaginable just power
over the proprietary title, to make or tc
unmake, to strengthen, to weaken, or tc
transfer. That which man owns is his
and this without, and even in spite Of
Legislation. Government can only take
cognizance of his title in a Judicial form
and that simply to inquire whether OF
not it exists: and this fact is so palpable
in all the transactions of life, that il
would seem as if a man must be more
than ordinarily dull not to find it the mo
ment he begins to inquire. The proprie
tary title is, and must be, absolutely and
invariably beyond the reach of govern
mental power: and it is 50 in Nations, in
States, and in Territories. The form OF
government, OF of no government, the
place whence 1t smanateS, or the manner