Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1860-05-18
1,)olitilal.
THE POINT IN DISPUTE.

4 y
lnnati in 1886 has since received two d.
metrically opposite constructions by diff
erent sections of the democracy of the
alton. By one set of men living at the
sorth, ii is commended that it means that
congress shall have no power to establish,
'rohlblt, or exercise any control what
ver over the institution of slavery in the
territories of the United States that
Inhabitants OF the Territories may al any
ime after the passage of their organic
Ict, and no matter what their number,
dispose Of the question finally for them
se.ses; aud that territorial legislatures
sseate3 by act of Congress may by non
action or aDfrieDdly Legislation prevent
eatlEsns Of the Southern States from set
ilaur wltbln tbeir limits with their pro-
psgIiys ard tbGs exercise powers which
dhe Congress wfsdelh created them does not
paasaas ind eEra8a exercise. The Ter
raawlas iihsg asM1s. are the common
iGsgerry ct nl siss SErsss. Congress has
30 iigaa 90 sscsslasa o. preaibi, negro
slavery there ssss the territorial legisla-
i-rsa Rasse ezassczeSts Congress may re-
peal, A. ID a1ay repeal the organic act of
every Territory. can, by refusing to pass
The necessary laws for the protection of
slave property. or by the imposition Of
such taxation on the negroes as will
to prohibition Of their importa-
ton into the Territory, render itimpossi-
bic for any slaveowner to bring his slave
property into such Territory
BY the entire population of seventeen
States of the Union, casting one hundred
and twenty. seven democratic votes in the
electoral college by large portion oil
the democracy of other States /; by all the
democratic senators in Congress, with
two or three notable exceptions by nine.
teen out of every twenty democratic
members of the House of Representa-
tives; by the President Of the United
States elected in 1856 on the Cincinnati
platform, and by every member of hi
Administration and finally, by the Su
preme Court of the United States, the
highest judicial tribunal in the land, -
it is held and positively asserted that nei
Their Congress, nor territorial! legisla
ture, nor any other power than the peo
pic Of Territory whoR tl.y fsame tht
constitution under which they are admit
led into the Union az State, can ex
clude slavery from any territory Of tb
United States but that all the Terrific
ries being the common property of all tn
States, are open to every citizen Of th,
Republic to settle there with his proper
ty,-the slaveowner with his slaves a
well as the agriculturist with bis oxel
and farming implements and that if tn,
territorial legislatures in excess of thei
power or in neglect of their plain duty
commit any act, or refuse to commit an,
act, by which the proprietary rights o.
the slaveowner in his slaves is impaired
or destroyed, it is then the bounden duty
of Congress to interfere, not, for the es-
adjustment or prohibition of any domes-
tic institution in the Territories, but for
the protection of property recognised by
the Constitution of the United States.
Between these two opinions, it is OBJ
vious to everybody there is a vital differ
ence. We have not misstated nor ex-
aggcrated it. Those who maintain the
first or squatter. sovereignty interpreta.
ton Of the Cincinnati platform live in
States where slavery does not exist, where
for the most part abolitionism is the pre-
dominant sentiment, and where no inter
est, feeling, or prejudice is damaged by
the acceptance of their construction Of
the constitutional powers Of territorial
Most Of those, on the other
hand, who stand by the second or con-
Interpretation of the creed Of
the party live in States where slavery
does exist, and where it is believed that
because they own a species Of property
which the federal compact has distinctly
recognised and declared to be entitled TO
the same protection as any other proper
ty, they are not TO be excluded from the
public domain in violation Of that com
pact aud Of their equal rights in the
Union which it cemented.
We have no doubt as TO which Of these
conflicting interpretations Of the Cincin-
natl platform is the true one. The squat
ter sovereignty Interpretation we unhesi-
tatlngly pronounce to be false, uncon-
and dangerous to the peace
and welfare of the Union while we be-
lleve that the Interpretation which the
Executive, the Supreme Court Of the
United States, the democratic members
'f both houses Of Congress, all the dem
'cratic States, and large numbers Of
democrats in the Northern States have
adopted and approved, is that which
alone is consistent with the creed of
The democratic party, and which must
be recognised and accepted if the integ.
rity Of the party and Of the Union is to
be preserved.
The squatter- sovereignty men insist
that it is enough for the party now 10 re-
affirm the Cincinnati platform without
any agreement as 10 It's true meaning
that IL isnot "egpedieaC 10 defue in pre-
else language the creed ofthe party and
thatit is arrogant and exacting on the
part Of the Southern States, TO require
that their constitutional rights should be
acknowledged and protected against de-
struction or abridgement. We maintain
that it is always expedient 10 do right
and tell the truth that lodging trickery
and sobtorfuge are never expedicnt that
the Southern States ask for nothing more