Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-07-28
Brownson on suunt,or sovercisnty.

article from the July number of Brownson's
Quarterly Repieie, a Catholic journal, on
squatter sovereignty. There seems to be the
same diversity among Catholic as other
Journals in regard to Mr.. Douglas. The New
York FFeemdns journal is so ardently for
Douglas that il declares that New York is
sure to go for him. In politics no one is re-
garded as friendly to a candidate unless he
constantly afirms that he will carry any
State that may be named, and is sure to be
elected. The Cincinnati Enquirer is an af-
fecting instance of this fidelity toward Doug
las. The FIeemdns Journal, since it has
taken to politics, has come fully into the
political habit.
The article of Mr.. Brownson is good ar
gument against what is called popular sover-
eighty that is the right of the majority to
ensave the minority-for that, we take it, is
the principle Of the thing-but it is written
under an error as to the position of Mr..
Douglas, which does him injustice: that is,
that Mr.. Douglas means by popular sover-
eighty that the people of the Territories may
exclude slave property. We have been q
tolerably close observer of Mr.. Douglass
political declarations, and we do not think
that any such doctrine can be made out from
any thing that he has ever written or spoken.
At the outset of the popular r-sovereignty
doctrine, when all there was of it was in
jected into the bowels of the Nebraska Bill,
he said that the power of the people to ex-
clude slavery was judicial question. The
only judicial question that can be in regard
TO slavery in the Territories, is as TO the ma
ture of the right of property in slaves. If
decided to be of the same nature as other
property, it follows, of course, that it can no
more be impaired by legislation than other
property. In his speech at New Orleans, De-
csmber 1858, Mr.. Douglas declared that the
whole question was settled.
Slaves are regarded as property, and placed
on an equal footing with all other property.
Hence, the owner of slaves, the same as the
owner Of any other species of property, has a
right TO remove to any Territory and carry
his property with him"
This covers the whole ground for if Il man
has a right to take his property into Terri
tory be has a right to adequate government
protection in holding it there, and a govern
ment which did not give this, would have nc
claim to the allegiance of its citizens. So in
his recent speech in Albany, Mr.. Douglas re-
iterated the same declaration, as follows
THE Dred Scott decision declares that slave
property in the Territories is the same as
other property; and stands upon the same
footing" This settles the question. Nc
government on earth can destroy rights o
property. The Constitution, Judiciary, Con.
gress, President and Territorial Legislature
combined, could not deprive person of hi
right TO poor scallawag mule or COW; on the
contrary, all are bound to protect him il
holding that property. Mr.. Douglas comedies
this, and by putting slavery on the same
footing as other property, he means that it is
supreme over constitutions and laws.
We repeat that Mr.. Douglas has never
said nor written that Territorial Legisla-
ture may exclude slavery, while he has af.
frmed all the principles which show that il
con not. We admit that thing called popu-
lar sovereignty was contrived, that was
much like the good old ladys prescription Of
elder bark, which would operate as an emetic
or cathartic accordingas the bark was scraped
up or down, but the emetic or abolition OPP
Grafton, which has been attributed to it, is
anodyne of the kind was thought necessary
for the Northern States, and Mr.. Douglas
would have allowed every patient to scrape
the bark for himself in order to suit the op-
Grafton to the local nature of the complaint.
In this he would have acted like skilfuI
physician, ministering to the whims, no.
lions, and Imagination Of the patient.
But other political doctors could not
trust this mild treatment; they must have a
decided operation at once, and it is rather re-
narkable that the abolition construction
which was given to popular sovereignty, was
due to the South, rather more than to the
North. Senator Davis, himself, was very
good abolition, popular-sovereignty man, on
bis New England tour. Among the rest, Mr.
Breckinridge came over into the free States
IL 1855, ardent as youth and Southern sun
could make him, and with that zeal and
facility of adaptation which have so distin-
glished him in his political aspirations, he
proceeded to abolitionize the doctrine OF
popular sovereignty, to help his present
emergency.
Thus in his speech at the immense mass
meeting Of the people of Indiana and Illinois
at Tippecanoe battle-ground, he said:
'The people of the Territories, under the
Kansas Nebraska act, have the full right tC
establish or prohibit slavery, Just as Stat'
would, which principle is as old as Repub
hcan Government ITSELF"
Again, in his speech at indianapolis, h,
said;
II am connected with no party that has 70
It's object the extension of slavery or witt
any to prevent the people of State or Ter
ritory from deciding the question of its ex
istence or non-existence with them for them
selves"
In this way the Douglas great principle {
popular sovereignty has been abOlitionizet
to answer the temporary purpose of Souther
politicians, and then it is cast of, and NJ
Douglas, who never pretended that SLAYER
could be excluded by his great principle {
popular sovereignty, is held responsible fc
the perversion and abuse of it,
We have admitted that popular sovereignt
was contrived TO serve political necessit,
but the Douglas popular sovereignty had tn
sovereignty of the people left out, and was
harmless anodyne. 1t is not becoming
Al. i'll a.