Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-01-28

On Thursday we said, the Democratic Platform !
of Tennessee does not demand Of Congress a slave
code for the Territories The Banner in an article
headed, @THE TENNESSEE DEMOCRACY ENDORSING SQUAT-
TR SOVEREIGNTY extracts the foregoing remark OF
ours and proceeds:
Douglas says the Territorial Legislatures can in
effect exclude slavery from the Territories, by un-
friendly legislation The mass OF southern De
mocracy claim that it is the duty OF Congress to
leysate to protect the Shareholder IN the IefTlto-
ries AGAINST such -uhfriendly legislation IN the
TERRITORIES. Douglas denies this power, and the
Democracy Of Tennessee comedies the CORRECTNESS OF
his position fer it ed0es not demand Of Congress
slave code for the Territories
Then. according to the Banner, because the De-
rnocracv Of Tennessee DO not demand slave code
for the territories they endorse Squatter Sover-
eighty and "concede the correctness of Mr.. DoUG-
LAS position" which is says the Banner, that the
Territorial Legislatures can in effect exclude slave
nv from the territories by 'unfriendly legislation
Mr.. QUAuEs the Opposition Representative from
the Nashville District, few days ago, when cues
toned about slave code, said IN Congress:
Sir. I am one Of the Southern Opposition, and l.
for one, hold that the people Of the State which
have the honor in part to represent, have the right
under the Constitution Of the United States 20 move
to and settle on the common Territories Of the Uni
CLaltos anu 70 Win lllcuA L44e4E w
gether with their other property; and should the
Territorial Legislature enact law depriYing them
Of their legal and constitutional rights IN and to
their slaves, theu the persons whose constitutional
rights of property are thus violated have the right
under the Constitution Of the United States, to call
on every branch of this Government. executive, ju
dcial and legislative, to protect them in their con
stitutOnal rights thus violated. But sir, would
not pass law protecting these constitutional rights,
in advance of such violation. necessity for this
1Tcn 1 ~
as f0ndiy hope, peace and quiet are again restor
ed and would not legislate for remote cOntngen-
cv And while I would MAINTAIN with unwaYering
frmness all the constitutional rights Of the South
in relation slavery, believe that the further ag-
itaton of that question tends to practical good to
any portion of common country, and should
therefore cease. both here and elsewhere; regard
inrthe principle as settled that the people of the
Territories when they come TO form a constitution
and establish State government, shall decide the
question of slavery for themselves but not until
then But as a Southern man, ] viii never yield
the abstract constitutional right Of my constituents
TO be protected IN their rights Of property IN our
common Territories should an occasion ever arise
for its exercise and they may choose to assert It.
Mr. QUARLEs explicitly states that he would not
pass lag protecting the constitutional rights Of the
people Of Tennessee to move or to settle on the
common territories Of the United States with their
slaves and other property, IN advance Of a viola
ton Of those constitutional rights by the territorial
legislation. A necessity for this call may never
arise" says Mr. QUARLzs land I would not legis-
late for a remote contingency" Mr.. QUARLEs not
only does no. demand slave code, but loOdd not
pass q Ialo - of that kind in advance of viola
ton of the constitutional rights of his Southern
constituency. According to the Banner, its Con
gressona representative endorses sqlp1ter SouereigR
Ia" and comedies The correctness Of Hr. DOUGLAS
position that the territorial legislatures can in eff
feet exclude slavery from the territories, by I'M
friendly legislation" Mr.. SroEEs, the Opposition
representative from the mountain district said the
other day, he would not vote for Speaker for any
man who indorsed squatter sovereignty. If the
logic Of the Banner be sound Mr.. QUARLEs could
not get the vote Of his Southern Opposition col
league Mr. ErHERDGE also stated not only that he
did not demand a slave code, but that if any terrific
rial legislature organized under an act similar to
the Kansas aud Nebraska law, were to prohibit
slrUeu BY LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENT he l0Odd not cote
for Congressional slaus code, to introduce slavery
among them. What kind of sovereignty does Mr..
EHERmGG inGOrse, we respectfully ask Of the Ban
nsr? Since according to the reasoning of the Ban
Her the failure to demand a Congressional slave
code in the Endorsement OF squatter sovereignty we
wouldbe pleased to know whether the BannerdemaHd
slaUs code or Observation-Disclosures qlaiisr Sousegaty2
As the Banner is regarded as the organ Of Mr. BELL
and is presumed to know his political views, we
would be pleased to know Of the Banner, whether
Mr. BELL demands q sJaUe code whether he IN
dorses squgitsr sovereignty, OF does he think the
less said about the matter the better We are
patient, and if the Banner cannot respond imme-
diatelv we will endeavor to wait until the 22d Of
February.