Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1860-08-09
Popular Sovereignty.

This much-abused principle seems to be the
object of more than its share of derision. It is
now claimed by the Douglas party to be their
all-governing principle, and is interpreted by
their platform Of principles, laid down at
Charleston and Baltimore, as follows:
Resolved, That it is in accordance with the
Cincinnati platform, that during the existence
OF Territorial Governments the measure of re-
strlction, whatever it may be, imposed by the
Federal Constitution on the power of Terrific
rial Legislatures over the subject of the domes-
tic relations, as the same has been or shall
hereafter be finally determined by the Supreme
Court of the United States, should be respected
by all good citizens, and enforced with prompt
ness and fidelity by every branch of the Gener-
al Government"
Now this is not Popular Sovereignty, nor
Squatter Sovereignty, in any true sense what
ever Popular Sovereignty is giving the peo-
pie of Territory full power to decide upon
their affairs the same as State,-to decide for
or against Slavery, as they please, and as such
has gained all the popularity it has Popular
Sovereignty, subject to the Supreme Court,
composed of a Pro-Slavery body, is Popular
Sovereignty endorsed by Douglas and his Balti =
more Convention, and is as purely and simply
Slave-Code as the Breckenridge platform
The Supreme Court has decided that no Terri
tory can abolish Slavery, and the above resolu-
ton makes it a duty to enforce the decision.
So those who think they are supporting Popu-
lar Sovereignty, when hurraiDg for Douglas,
are grossly deceived. While the present Court
exists, it cannot be applied to the Territories. -
The popularity of Popular Sovereignty, at the
North, is owing to the fact that it is supposed
that if left entirely free to control their own
domestic institutions, the people of every Ter
ritory would, under it, abolish Slavery at once,
as illustrated by the action of the Kansas and
Nebraska Legislatures. But the phase ofPop-
ular Sovereignty which is upheld by Douglas
and his party, would as ofectually doom Ter
ritory to Slavery as Slave-Code.
Did the people fairly and candidly consider
the truth of Popular Sovereignty, there would
be no defenders for it among those opposed to
Slavery; for just as soon as it was thought
that the effect of Popular Sovereignty was
going to pass laws protecting Slavery ina Ter
ritory, just so soon it would be denounced.-
And such is quite likely to be the result in
Southern Territories, Or Utah. The majority
of the settlers will be Pr@-Slavery, and the
Mormons can legaliEe their institutions, and
the Shareholders theirs, under this principle,
while both are like 1shninel in the sight o.
God.
As the matter stands, Popular Sovereignty in
the Territories is a mere catch, a mere decep.
ton. For instance, see the regult in Kansas
where the Territorial Legislature has twice
abolished Slavery, and the bills been vetoed by
its Governor. In order to make any Popular
Sovereignty efectual, you must change the Su
premc Court, and then it will require etcrna
vigilance to keep the President right The
better way is to confne Slavery where it is, by
the election of Lincoln and Hamlin.