Clarksville chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1857-1865, 1859-02-04
Friday, February 4th, 1859.
Popular Sovreignty---its Ten
....i dency.

sovereignty, as we'll as in an unrestricted
popularsovreignty-both democratic hum
bugs-are rapidly merging the Govern
ment into mobocrscy. And so manifest
has this truth become, that we find even
the Washington Union confessing it in
these words;
"The written constitution was designed as
chart and rule limiting aud restraining, not only
the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judc ary
In the exercise Of their functions by its supreme
mandates and inhbtons, but putting bit and
rein upon the people also. II acknowledged the
sovereignty Of the people but 1t reduced the SOW
sreign people themselves TO a meet, proper, and
dutifui subordination to the higher authority of
law. Indeed, IL may be said without exaggeraion
that the express object Of written constitution
was TO repudats the pet dogma of modern times
which Is usually expressed by the Phrase popular
sovereignty" by which il is meant to assert the
license Of majorites to trample laws and constitu-
ton under foot-the right Of the people in mass
10 commit any wrong upon individuals or minori-
ties-and to invoke In their justification, against
oil constitutional and legal restraints which may
stand in their way, the "higher law" Of Gods
will or the peoples will the del or Tor popui
may best salt their argument"
So says the Union; and as if to make
its meaning more explicit, and the applica-
ton of the text more pointed and direct,
st adds. HMuch is said of legislative
nsurpation and Of judicial usurpation !;
bat more dangerous than all to free gov
eminent is popular usurpation." This is
every word true; and yet with cowardice
that shirks responsibility, and dares not
prefer country to party, the Union not
only fails to hint at a remedy, but stud
iously avoids any allusion to the corrupt
agencies by which these evils are wrought
In vain did the authors OF our govern
ment limit the sovereignty of the people
by written Constitutions, as a protection
to the rights Of minorities, if the broad
doctrine of popular sovereignty is to be
reduced to practice; and it can matter
little to the victims of oppression whether
their wrongs are the work of single
dsspot, or of lawless mob. No matter
whether power be vested in one man, or
in multitude, that power must be restrc-
ted, or there can be no security to in
dividual rights, and an unrestricted
majority will ever prove as fatal to liberty
as an unlimited monarchy. These truths
are selfevident, and no less SO are the
causes that are producing the evils of
which the Union complains-the dangers
impending over the Republic, from "the
despotism of the populace."
Concediug the truth of the Unions re-
marks, the next enquiry is-who is to
blamep They, of course, who have ad-
miuistered the Goyernment-the demo-
Gratis. We might, were it necessary, go
back to that one Of the resolutions of
$3.50, which declares each State its own
judge of the constitutionality of federal
Law, thus ignoring the Supreme Court, and
trace, by regular graduation, the steps which
have led to (what the Uaion calls) "the
accumulation of arbitrary power in the
hands of the populace = but the history
Of the past few years presents proof
enough of the truth of our charge. 1t
was but the other day, that the present
locOfoco Executive declared that majorities
can not tramel themselves by written
Constitutions-Making the same but the
playthings Of popular caprice-and the
disorganizing sentiment was re-echoed
from every corner of the Union, and hailed
- an emenatiOn of political wisdom
And even the Washington organ, which
now SO earnestly deplores "the pet dogma
ofmodern timeswhich is usually expressed
by the phrase popular sovereignty" had
not one word to say against this mOustrOus
doctrine.
More recently still, Stephen A. Douglass
has taught that the rights of the South,
in the Territories, may be crushed by
unfriendly territorial legislation, and that
the decisions of the Supreme Court, up
holding those rights, may be nullifed by
treating them with silent contempt. Was
the promulgator of this nefarious doctrine
rebuked as a disorgsuizer2 So far from
it, his late passage through the South,
was a continuous triumphal march,
Everywhere he was welcomed, with &C.
clamation, by crowds of admiring partzau'
who heed not the baleful tendency of his
teachings if party can but continue tc
triumph, To these, and their kindred
democratic doctrines, may be clearly traced
the rapid debasement of public morals
aud,--in the language Of the onion
"the accumulation of arbitrary power il
the hands of tho populace at the expense
of the constitutional rights of individuals
and minoHtics." The rescue of fugitive
\ slaves, at the North the revival of th'