Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-07-28
Brownson ON Popular soveroisnt,

The July number of Bropnsons Quarterly
ReUiew, a Catholic journal, has an article on
popular sovereignty, from which we extract
the following: -".
We hold that we Of the North have no
right TO be political abolitionists, for in our
States slavery does not exist, and the Federal
Government has no power over IL in any Of
the States. We have no right to get up
political party in non-slaveholding State
for the abolition of slavery for there is in
such State no subject on which such party
can act, and to act ON itpolitioelly in another
State is not permitted, for II is in violation of
the principle that all the States in the Union
stand on an equal footing. We have no
right to get up q Federal party, or a party to
force the Federal Government to abolish it
in the slave States for the States in forming
the Union reserved the question of slavery
to themselves in their separate and indepen-
dent capacity. All political abolitionism is
contrary, therefore, either TO the Federal
| Constitution or to the mutual equality or in
dependence of the States. The abolition Of
slavery is legitimate question for political
parties within slaveholding States, but never
within nontslaveholding States. Whatever,
| then, may or may not be our views of slavery,
| we who belong to non-slaveholdipg States
have no right to make it political question,
| OF the basis of q political party, either State
or Federal. We may say slavery Is an evil,
a sin, but that is q moral question, and under
| our system of government not to be reached
| by political action. So we may say Presby-
terianism or Methodism is an evil, q sin, and
one that will ultimately bring down the judg-
ments of God upon the people that sustain it,
| but we have not therefore the right to form n
political party for its suppression.
Furthermore, though strongly opposed to
the extension of slavery beyond the limits oi
the present slave holding States, we hold
that we have no right to form and support O
political party for the prevention through
the action of Congress of its extension tC
new territory. The Territories of the Union
are the common property of all the States
and Congress has no right TO pass any act OF
ordinance that prevents the citizens of ont
State as well as those of another from enter
ing and settling them with their property
Congress has no right to discriminate be
tween different species of property, but j
bound to regard as property, whatever i
: property by the laws of the States, or any
one of the States. Here we agree entirel,
with the Southern statesmen and hence w
deny to Congress the constitutional right
either to authorize or to prohibit slavery il
the Territories no less than in the State
themselves. The only doubt we could enter
tain on this point arises from the fact, tina
till quite recently, Congress has uniformly i
claimed and exercised the power to permit o
to exclude slavery. Should not this fact b
! taken as evidence that Congress has tn
power, at least by prescription But tn
doubt must vanish the moment that we re
feet that the Federal Government is one q
express powers under written Constitution
and that no prescription can authorize the eS
! ercise of power not expressly conceded it b
I the States creating it. if.rt 'H
/. | xua moi ha
lican party, but also from what is understoo
|. at the North to be the doctrine of the North
ern Democrats headed by Mr.. Douglas. Th
Republicans generally hold that Congress, i
1 organizing the Territories, may either perm
/ or forbid slavery till the Territory becomes
State. Mr.. Douglas is understood to den
i this power to Congress, and to assert it fc
4 the people of the Territory, under the hea
of what is called 'squatter sovereignty
/ We know nothing more discreditable to
sill man who has had the honor to be u Judg
e even in an inferior Court. II is decided
opposed to that clear, logical understanding
boastel not in vain, by the people of Il
e Green Mountain State, and especially by OF
u | Windsor County, from which both he an
II we hail. The people of a Territory have n
powers except such as are conferred by Coz
q gress in the organic act, and Congress cs
: confer no power which it does not itself po
3 sess; memo dat quod non habet. Squatter so
ereignty is q fiction, and fiction of tn
ultra-Democratic school which justifes Jol
g Browns raid into Virginia. Congress cs
u not authorize another to do what it has l
/ right to do ITSELF and Mr. Douglas s doetrin
if conceded, supposes Congress has the pow
to permit or prohibit slavery in the Territ
4 ries7--in principle the doctrine of the Repu
n lican party, or else that the people are sove
eign without reference to legal organization
-. llwhat we call John Brownism.
s. If we believed Congress had the powe
IS we should Of course demand its exercise
It prevent the further, extension of slavery, f
we claim to be heart and soul an anti-slavel
;, man. But not believing it has the power, v
"a deny the right of any class of American cit
e zens, to form a political party, for the Q
II press purpose of exercising it through Co
gress. -. --.---.-.---...--.
Ie So far we go with the Democratic par
e South, and dissent from both the Republica
S, and the Douglas Democrats. The Republi
ans, on this point, we believe are wrong, b
they are Ineligible, logical, aud are su
rs tanned by the most uniform practice of Co
= gress, ever since we had a Congress. If tn,
Il err it is in respectable company, their errC
as far as an error can be, is respectat
d error. The Douglas Democrats are Meth
/ one thing nor another, "neither fish n
a flesh, nor yet good red-herring." 1t
wolves the error OF filibusterism, and
analyzed and reduced to some degree of co
81 sistency, it will be found to be John Brow
IS ism. ..i-l... ..r...4 o.. .a.4
THE SUCCESS OF SERVANT IN CALIFoRNl
1t The German papers relate that recently the
4 n IL C. L II. ~. ~