New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-05-22

rbliZe0 ctzcnb could Only anOrut1 W
principles of international law, and lot in accordance
with our municipal regulations. The only place
where the right was disputed to protect citizens was IN
the Territories, where the United States had exclusive
control. What was the whole machinery OF the Gov
eminent for unless to protect these rights 1t was
worth nothing unless il did The resolutions OF the
Senator from Mississippi only looked to the protectlon
OF the Constitutional rghs He went INTO the history
Of the government of the Territories since the iounda-
ton of the Government to show that the sovereign
power of the people Of the Territories was never
recognized He instanced Tennessee, where the
Judges took any State laws they pleased and enforced
them; and Louisiana where the President was an-
thorized TO appoint Governor, who should exercise
all the powers formerly possessed by the French Gov
ernorGenera for the protection OF the inhabitants IN
life liberty and religion. In lsO3 Congress vested All
power in the Governor and thirteen Councilors-not
Councillors elected BY the people. Where then he
asked, was Popular Sovereignty For fifteen years
the Federal Government were invested with the SUI
pree control the Territories. In 1914 Louisiana
was divided into two Territories and the Governor oil
Indiana and the Judges were authorized TO make laws
for the upper division. To talk OF Popular Sover-
eighty in regard to the people of the Territories was 10
deprive language of its meaning. This law OF 1901,
approved by jefferson, whom the Republicans claimed
as II cir political father, prohibited the Introduction oil
except by persons, citizens OF the United Staes
who went III for the purpose OF settling; Inns law
is in force this day except where If IL abrogaed by
State euacmens. Ii gave protection TO slave property
in the Territories where owned by the citizen Now
political platforms proposed to project everybody
citizens of their coHntry in their own Territories
The next acquisition was that of New-MeXco and
California and by treaty Congress was bound to pro-
tec these Territories the same as II did Louisiana No
doctrine of nOn-inervenon could free TINS OoVerh-
ment from the obligations imposed by the treaty
stipulatons and by the Constitution, 10 afford protec-
ton in these acquisitions. II the people IN these Ter
ritoies thus conquered and became sovereign by AN
act Of organization, II was the same whether
| they conquered us, or we them; in any event,
| thev were sovereign. This was absurdity on lts
face. They could deprive those who conquered them
| of any benefit OF the conquest On thaI ground the
South had objected 10 the mode in which California
was admitted He denied however, that the admis-
sion of California into the Union was effected under
the principles of Squat Sovereignty. She asked Tor
the protection Of Territorial Government, but, owing
10 the dscord in Congress, nothing was done, and
finally California with population OF ljOOV Amer
lean ffeemen came asking admission as State, and
her request was granted. She claimed no sovereignty.
MIR. Toombs then referred at length to the acts
Organizing New-Mexico and Utah, to show that Squat
| ter Sovereignty not recognized; and he also eN-
amined the KansasNebraska act to show that 1t was
intended 10 prevent intervention against Slavery lhey
agreed 10 organize the Territories, leaving the power
OF the people 10 be decided by the Supreme Court.
The decision had been made He demanded the bond,
and those who refused to abide by the decision OF tire
Court false 10 their pledge. The bred Scott de-
cison compelled all Democrats 10 yield 10 ITS terms III
spite of the compromise of 1885, in spite OF
the legislation of 1884 of the platform OF l636 lie
booted at the idea that because Congress could invest
| the Territories Win power 10 pIOtttt PlOPciF'
then they could destroy it. Congress after the pas
| sage OF the Kansas act, interviewed 10 set aside
tie oppressive acts of the Pro-Slavery Legislature
Of Kansas lie called all parties to respect the de-
csOn of the Supreme Court, and especially ON Demo-
| Gratis who had made bargain 10 do so. lie quoted
| from Mr.. Douglass speech Of July ,, 1876 IN which
he said if the Constitution carried Slavery let II 60 no
power earth could prevent IT,. Mr.. Cass held the
| same view. There misunderstanding as 10 the
meaning of the Kansas act, but there difference
as to the effect of the bill, growing out of different
view as to the effect of the Constitution, which 1t was
agreed TO leave to the decision OF the Supreme Court
Mr. Toombs repeated time and again that he called on
Mr. Douglas and his friends 10 stand mp TO their bar
GAIN and not 10 attempt 10 cheat the South oi s rgs
| by indrecon-by unirendly legislation. lie re-
| viewed al length the bred Scott decision, to show
| that il sustained 10 the fullest extent the right
! Of Slavery 10 protection in the Territories.
| lie had no idea that Mr.. Douglass prediction that
| the Union wond be dissolved If this doctrine was
| enforced would be fulfilled. lie Thought the Union
could stand little more than that. The Government
could not be destroyed. Justice and Truth would
preserve IT, But if the dissolution of the Union was
to result from this protection, let It come lie wo1id
adhere Government that refused TO grant MIN he
protection it owed him. Mr.. TOOmbs read from hr:
Douglass Freeport speech to show that he asserted
that the people OF the Territories could exclude slavery
in spite Of the decision of the Supreme Court which
was in direct opposition 10 his speech Of July, $500
| He accused Mr.. Douglas Of playing at the game OF
| Heads | WIN, tails You losei ana seek
| ing by craft and cunning 70 DO VIVA,
| manly effort. That was not the bargain, and the
Government could not be maintained without oDserv-
auce of good faith. If the Territories would not obey
| the fundamental law OF the land, ne Would TAKE the
government from them, and give them one that they
would He said the true issue had been avoided Inc
Senator from Mississippi Brown camored Tor a law
| that would do him good and The Senator ron lli-
nos camOred against law that would do INN no hlr
NOn-interveniiOn had been coniOunded win Sqaitler
Sovereignty and the rights of the South IN The Terri
tories with q slave code He cOntrOverted Mr. brown
poson that the Territories by the exercise OF taxing
| mower might keen slaves out. The slave code AZ
| forded no remedy lie would not give a code Of laws
| TO be administered by set OF men VINO III refusing
protection where il owed it, had showed themselves
| unfit TO be trusted. 80. ,.
In conclusion be called on hi National friends to put
tLe sta,up of dsapproval on the doctrine of SquaeT
Sovereig1,ty There was a CLEAN of light coming from
Chicago AciaOn had been deyoufed by his own dOgs'
He called on the Democracy TO unite against the COM
| mon foe.
| The last mart of Mr. Toombss speech was not very
well heard but understood indicating the action OF
the Southern delegates al Charleson, ana urging their
| return to Baltimore with the view OF uniuhg 10
Mr. HAMMOND Dem. S. c. read brief legal
argument against the doctrine OF Squatier Sow
| erelgnty. 80 - 49,.
ments in the speech of Mr. 1oombs relating to himself
| personally. a.Lo
| should vote for most of these resolutions. =.
Mr.. HALE rep, n. H. should not trouoie hilseh
| with what was the regular wing of the Democratic
party at Charleston but could tell his Northern Dem
ocratic friends that the Southern wing always womb
control il. They were sent here Tor pfacucai iegisi
ton not 10 discuss dogmas II Senators oouid ohly
get somebody sit aiongSlde, az sort OF tshuer u
read extracts these speeches would last TIL tile neat
| Presidential election. The great idea Of English
| libertv was freedom of the judiciary; the great
object of the Federal Constitution was the es-
| Enlistment Of an independent judiciary. lie
| CHARGED that the action Of the Democracy was TO