The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1860-07-19

ma It would be sufficiently protected by Local 1880.
The result has shown that slavery now prevAiis
exactly where IL would have been established ,ie ms
souri, compromise line had never been repealed ous o
been RS the South demanded from 1916 until rooo OK
tended 10 the Pacific ocean that portion Of the Territory
Of New Mexico north Of 50 deg 80 mn oeng an equlva
lent for the arid regions Of California sou VI the same
line
Practically therefore, the whole dispute has been set
tied SO that when Senator Brown OF mississippi demand
ed at the OF Congress- just concluded that the
laws of Kansas prohibiting slavery ahoud DO annulled
his demand was only seconded by Senator Johnson OF Ar
i.s %ssn ss S e aSS
bill for abrogating the laws Of New Mexico in favor Of
slavery all the democratic representatives, in Congress-
members agreed in resisting IT, Tho fact is notorious
also, that by the assistance Of Mr. Thayer Of Aassachu
sets and others Of his party in the the democrats
and Southern oppositionss enabled " defeat
Der OF Territorial bills containing the wlmot provso. 1t
was evident, therefore, when National Convention
dom Of the democratic party adherng TO the doctrine
OF non-inervenon' through overy trial and reverse
would soon be rewarded by triumph less signal than
that which attended opposition 70 Ba ank Of the
United States and devotion the principles Of the in
dependent Treasury act IT. in the estimation OF all,
resolutions, so called, declaring that Congress
ought TO Intervene for the protection Of slave pro-
perty in the Territories '.when necessary" the
express abolition Of slavery in Kansas by Territorial act
did not constitute case Of necessity for such ntervcn
ton, what possible could arsef No democrat
will deny the obligation OF the federal government TO
suppress Instructions within Territory and to enforce
rs against Territorial enactments final Judgment
of the Supreme Court OF the United States Nor 1t
be denied that may IN certain extreme cases
beyond the power Of redress by judicial nerposton
woke or amend charter Of Territorial organization For
what useful purpose then was the agitation of 40 DANCE
rous question rene we'd by President buchanan in his
last annual message or insned by The resolutions OF
Senatorial caucus and finally thrust upon the Democratic
National Convention at CharlcstonY -
Rxrrsxs poR Altering rpy eTNcrySAr, VI ,rroRx
II is said in excuse that the principles enumerated by
the supreme Court OF the United States, In the Of
bred Scott lead 10 the conclusion that TERRITORIAL Iegs
ature has no more authority over the subt OF slavery
than Conpress and that CONGRESS- equally with The Terri
oraI legislatures h under obgation 10 nrotect as we'll
the as the title OF slave prrv in the Terrific
wsy auo,ber aSn,d s h. NO s one
question was presented by the record of red Sot case
nor argued by counsel At the bar and Whatever the CON
ing the opinions delivered by the several Judges that
conclusion Cannot he so clear Of doub ne 10 srsan, him
IN censuyng those who with nm eonai deair 10
The Truth have atsainsJ sno,her co,cls,on We ,rs,
a agree Thai N tire S,,nrere Cur, All MOI n,enJ ~ 40
eide that question las many believe il would be an
Kansas Nebraska hil, 10 commas the democratic nsrtv
as a national orenn]zaton' 10 either side whereas
the court did so intend nothing n more csrtan than tai
uhoncrcr ,he nnes,,r shaif a,s,;nc,, ; aa , S s
fairly aroued the conr will ex ,rass ;,s in
language so plain as 20 command universal
has been carried into fn execnton and batcver nd
mept II mas hereafter nronouncc in cas denend5s on
the validity or nyadity OF must he
ana w,n So axocr,aa y,,h srI Iaci. e as o'
Pf cvidcntv until so,re Trr;,or;si acy;sia shs S
its snsc,osr,, have soo ,aira a. ;nh, r y
and n AS the authors of the senate, a
have declared by their votes the case of Kansas be not
proper case for h s dicnIt m
imagine any other in which necesstv for such intsryen
ton win arise ~ 'N' 0
m ons and aSs M S
form is rendered susceptible of two This
pretext is merely plausible The platform has no double
meaning and hui one sensible II declares
against Intervention plainly openv and nm
c9uvocably but refers the question what powerful any
can for the probibon or
the adjudication OF the Supreme Court of the United
states Democrats may differ what the should
decision may be- 10 carry that decision into effect
IL has been argued also In sruch as ono dutv of 20.
vernmept Is the protcctop of pronertv In return for tho
allegiance of its subjects that the federal nvern
ment cannot abdicate authority with respect
crc,se mower of for the nroiction
Of property as wen as persons within them This PROMO
siton Also is merely plausible It ignores the fact that
Conrress must have and has ALWAYS exercised choice
Of instrumcntahtcs II ignores the fact also that the
duties of have been divided under our Anne
ran sysm into those of federal and those Of State Ter
racter All these taken together coustute the govern.
mont of which, and of which only the proposItou can
,rIv c and unless Wa adout the p.virrs n,
the old federal Marty which our father, ropud atcd n 1928
IToa and 1900 Ne must that the of the
United states can afford any PROTECTION except IN fede
raj 40 nroncr,v NJ anv ali other
duties on protecton having been wisely coned 10 state
or territorial and in some cases TO merely municipal au
tbor,tes IA he true undoubtedly that ali forms
Of nyooe,tv rccoon,zsJ by the laws of the reSn.c.
live States oompos,ne our confederation are on.
itIed 10 equal regard nv their common federal aren't
but 10 aflrm that il shall, under the preteuce
OF protecting A right of property ustlrp any power
moi clearly delegated bv tho states IN the 10 ms of their
compact with each lotber Is TO affirm A doc
triue nought with the most fatal oopse,uonceS The
question h moi whether propery IN slaves or any other
form OF propertv shall ba protected in the states or IN the
Terrtorcs or sewbcre The question & by which OF the
divisions of with us aud To What x
tcnt oy each this protection shall be afforded II Is
therefore involving the whole ground OF diff
ference between the Democratic party and the yar rus
by which in the history ofour country the demo
ATTIC party has been opposed The st inclination of
ever democra, should be TO resist as FAR he can
llv the exercise of any power by the federal govern.
mert within the states within the TERRITORIES any
where clse until clear and definite delegation such
power by the several States can proven from the
ruare or necessary import OF the constitution of the
United states
We have thus endesvored 10 show you, fellow citizens
that the conduct of the party with
TO the subject OF slavery IN the Territories,
has been distinguished for moderation, tor wise
and wholesome statcsrsanship, for regard 20
the limited nature of the federal government, 10
the rights o. the states aud the people 10 the
uesce the welfare the continual preservation OF thai
tnion which has made u a miracle among tie nations