Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1860-10-26

by investing the people of territory with
the power to pass their own local laws on
all subjects, when they had formed their Lee
gislature-laws themselves amenable to the
criticism ofjudicial sagacity and change or alb
rogation of the edicts ofthe Supreme Courts
it would not be their duty, as honest rep
resentatives of the peoples interests, to
stand by such a law as the Kansas Nebras-
ka Bill, which drives from national as
sembage the discussion Of question that
will agitate the whole country, to that field
where the people are Immediately interested
in the discussion thereof? Let not the peo-
pie Of the South and Moth forever be agi-
tated on these questions, which can be bet
ter and more advantageously and more just
ly considered and determined by those alone
interested, subject to the supervision Of the
federal judiciary
We think we have proved the first prop
osition, and pass on to the consideration Of
the second-That Congressional Intorven-
ton is incompatible with the existence ofthe
National Democratic party.
Opposition to Wimot Proyisoism, and a
desire to do justice to the citizens Of every
portion of the Union, rallied the copserva-
tive men Of every party and every section,
upon the floor of the U. S. Congress, into
one close, fearless, compact phalanx. These
men, consisting chiefly Of Southern Demo
Gratis. and Northwestern Democrats, the
latter led on by Stephen A. Douglas, Of Il
linois. whilst they in common were inspired
with hatred to abolition usurpation, and q
fervid love Of country, disagreed upon one
question in connection with slavery in the
territories. They all admitted and agreed
alike that the territories Of the United States
were the common property Of the people Of
the several States of the Union-that this
territory was subject to settlement by the
North and South with every species of prop
erty recognized and established in thsse diff
ferent sections-and that territory, when
| it petitioned to be admitted as State into
the Union, should not be rejected because
the institution Of negro slavery had been "a
dopted in the Constitution Of such territory
asking admission as a State. In all this
they stood directly at defiance with Black
Republicanism. Agreeing upon all these
positions, they differed alone as to the time
when the people Of Territory had the con-
stitutional power to abolish slavery, or to in
stitute it-one portion Of the Democracy
asserting that when a territory had legis-
lature capable of enacting laws, that then a
majority of the people could determine the
question for themselves, to suit themselves;
and another portion Of the Democracy con-
tending that the people of territory could
| alone pass upon this question as to the nom
existence of slavery when they came with
the Constitution Of State in their hand,
claiming admission as State into the Con-
federacy. There was point Of diversity
then as to the time when, constitutionally,
the people of a territory could fully manage
their own affairs, especially on the subject
of slavery. But this diversity existing as
to constitutionality, there was no difference
among tho chiefm men Of the North and South
as to the ultimate conclusion Of the whole
matter. Whilst said Messrs. Davis and
Cobb and Orr, Substantially, not literally,)
''we believe the legislature Of q territory
cannot, constitutionally, enact laws adverse
to slavery, yet it has the power, BY non
Legislation for its protection, to operate as
prejudeially upon its interests as If it had
the power in reality to abolish it. 1t has
no positive power to prohibit, yet il is capa-
Bile Of negative position, which will result
in the same thin e." Under this view Of
the case, (see Hunter and Mason's speech
on the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the whole
Democracy, feeling a common sympathy
upon all cardinal points Of faith, agreed to
transfer the subject to the decisions of the
people Of the territory, subject to the super
vision oe the Supreme Court Of the U. S.
"a supervision permanent, perpetual in its
power to modify Or nullify, and capable, in
| its right to demand the assistance Of every
branch of government to aid in carrying
into operation its edicts, of correcting any
wrong within the reach Of the strong arm
Of the law. IF one portion OF the Democ-
racy is ght in its constitutional construc-
ton. the Supreme Court stands by it; if the
other is right, the Supreme Court stands by
it. The spirit Of this agreement was incor-
porated in the kansas-Nebraska bill Of
1854, the most universally popular act in
the South ever considered by Congress on
| the subject Of slavery The Kansas Ne
braska bill was adopted and Incorporated as
d puma III tAG OAACiIn"O pldttolitI, dIN u y
on it all the Northern Democracy and South
ern Democracy stood firmly and boldly a.
midst the political tempests which ragged g.
round it in 1856. This national Demo-
cratic idea and agreement comprehended in
the Kansas-Nebraska act, Congressional in
tervention proposes TO overthrow, to nullify
this National Democratic platform to a.
bandon fo2 one upon which not only the
North western Democracy cannot, in con-
sistency with their honest opinions, stand,
and which, by direct agreement, it was de-
termined they should not be required to
stand, but which large portion Of the
Southern Demo acy repudiate as unwieldy
and missbapen in its proportions, and inex-
pedient and unwise in its assumptions and
demands.
An abandonment of national ideas must
break up the National Democratic party--a
breach Of an honest agreement, a Congress
sional compact, must break up the Demo-
cratic party-denunciation and abuse Of the
ideas Of the North western Democrats, must
drive them from relations Of amity and
brotherhood with those who indulge in de-
nunciation and abuse. And thus, eventu-
ally that great Democratic party, which has
been the aDaunt-coawrier of the mighty ar
my Of human progress, toiling up the rug
ged ascents Of civilization in this nineteenth