Arkansas true Democrat., 1860-08-18


 not be dlvested by any power. From which mg,or, Impossibility of divestiture by ana power on earth, results this minor, includ. ea Tn It, that Congress- cannot divest it; which Is the precise question in this case" nat IS the Dred Scott decision, it seems to me. Is not the other minor equolly in cluded-that territorial legislature cannot?
 It IS very evident, that to authorize an accidental majority of legislature elected oy the residents of territory, to abolish slavery by an ordinary legislative act, would operate its almost total exclusion.l The struggle to obtain or annul that ma Jonty would be incessanl, during every moment of the existence of the territory: and no holder of many slaves would, if he were sane, embark in plantin9 q whose his property and the fruits of his labor were thus to be always in jeopardy.
 If the theory of squatter sovereignty should be established as an accurate expo- sltion of the constitution, and as the settled policy of the Country, it will be idle for the South to expect any future addition to the number of slave States. Let this be the settled policy, and it will needs have great and often controlling influence upon the action of the South in regard to many matters of national concern-will greatly sway 1t in the decision as to peace and war, and so perhaps imperil the national honor as to the acquisition of new territory, the creation of territorial governments, expen. ditures for the territories, extinguishment of Indian titles, the authorizing territories to take steps to become States. Continu- ally the slavery question will obtrude itself into Congress; and it will be found, as in like cases it always has been found, that men cannot avoid blinking it, nor get lion out of their path by shutting their eyes, and trying to convince themselves that he Is no longer there There can be no confederation by Congress, without non-intervention by the territorial legisla- lures. The South asks for bread, and squatter sovereignty offers 1t a stone. Agi- tation in the territories will create agitation in Congress and the doctrine of popular sovereignty and the principle of n-inter- vention cannot exist together.
 Then another step will be taken The principle of popular sovereignty will be applied to the District of Columbia. Why not? All MT. DOUGLAS glittering gene ralities will apply quite as well there as they did to Kansas, and it will be so easy, with little aid from the treasury, to send down thither, out of the swarming north ern hive, voters enough to.settle the ques- tion as a republican Congress desires.
 Then, on the same principle that the constitution does not carry slavery any where, and that the laws of q State from which man emigrates do not follow him, or protect his rights beyond the limits of the State, it will bye and bye be concluded that no compensation shall be demanded for slaves taken by foreign nation. If Congress is powerless to prevent the abo- lition of the lawful tenure which holds the slave to labor, when he is in the common territory, how can it assert the validity of that tenure against foreign enemy, who sets free the slave on the high seas
 Then it will come to be held, that slave escap;ng into territory where slavery no longer exists, cannot be reclaimed, but is free-the constitution requiring States only to give up such fugitives. / the people ot' c territory com a5otish s}ogery slaoe toh'ang retuge Mere is as free and sate as he woutd 6e in England; and so territory or pro- vince can effect that which sovereign State cannot Why will southern men, blinded by their admiration of a man, not reflect on the logical consequences of his doctrine?
 These are my opinions; and compelled by them, regard it as a sacred duty to vote for no candidates who do not, at least in the main, avow them as their creed.
 should have preferred to postpone the consideration of this question, until the Re publican party had been broken up and would have been disinclined to see 1t stirred at Charleston. But 1t has been raised, and being raised, nothing remains for us but to meet and settle it. l cannot say it was not wisely raised 1 cannot say 1t was not ne- cessary to raise it. It is very possible that if I had been there, and had endeavored to postpone it, 1 should have committed an error. I let that all pass, as now of no importance. Great questions for the most part force MenaselDes upward, and compel present consideration.
 At any rate, this question is not an ob- stroction In the time of Mir. POLK. the North refused to extend the Missouri lineto the Pacific, and prohibited slavery in that territory by an avowed and ostentatious ex-
 
 stitution to do so. 7Aen the question of our rights in the territories ceased to be an abstraction, and became Hue question: Kansas has, by an act of her legislature, un- dertaken to repeal all laws protecting sla- very there. Is it an abstraction, whether those laws shall stand? The House of Re- presentatives lately passed bill to annul the acts of the New Mexican legislature which give protection to slavery. Is that an abstraction?
 The Declaration of Rights, or amend. ments, appended to the federal constitu tion, were in large measure distractions; and yet the States insisted upon them, as the condition of their adoption of the con- stitution. Parties and churches divide upon distractions, men die for them, and States set armies in the field for them; and if these doctrines pere distractions, still 1t