The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1860-02-25
Jhe Daily gnnrmal.
EVANSVILLE, IND.
naF- The Enquirer COMPLAINS against this

4&S 1u6 enquirer COAnplnAuS dIIASb tLllS
paper on account of the alleged injustice
which it thinks we have, i" deliberately and
Intentionally, or through stupidity" done il,
in charging that statement had appeared
in that paper to the effect that squatter sove-
reignty was long since exploded That
paper also says it knows the amenities due
from one journalist to another but doubts
whether we do.
Now, neighbor, we imagine that we are
about as we'll posted in the amenities
and proprieties as yourself but we are not
Pharisaical enough to boast of this feature
of our character on the street corners. But
you must excuse US if We fail to implicitly
rely on your immaculate sense of justice,
after you have stated that {" the journal ad-
mits its anxiety to have the fugitive slave
law amended, ;" when we distinctly disclaim-
ed any such anxiety and after you have
80 misrepresented Col. Lanes position in
regard to the fugitive slave law; and, more
especially, after your talk yesterday morn
ing, about our " deliberate and intentional
mis-statement " and our " stupidity" Neigh
Dor, we rather think that honors are easyV
around your way, in these little political
matters .--.---a e--@a+ s&e
We have no desire to misrepresent the
Enquirer or any other public or private
source of opinion. When we can't ac-
complish our purpose-the advancement of
the cause of truth-without the use of petit
FORGERY, we shall quit writing. Therefore,
we copy entire the paragraph in which is
embodied the conclusion we have attributed
to the EnQuirer-that squatter sovereignty
is long since exploded. We leave it to the
good sense of every reader, and rely upon
every rule of fair construction, to prove our
position, that the clause we quote from the
Enquirer amounts to the humiliation of
squatter sovereignty, SO far as our neigh
Dor is concerned. Read the paragraph
we quote:
"The idea of the citizens of the State
being entitled to the same rights and fran
chises when they move to the Territories
that they enjoyed in the States, has been
exploded some time. 1t mal1esit obligatory
upon Congress to enforce the rights of citi-
zenship of the negro who removes from New
York or Massachusetts, to any of the Terri
tories" --~
AS we remarked in a former number of
the paper-"we have already quoted the
clause where this assertion was made, to-
gether with another taking opposite grounds.
Both seem to be complete Propositions
For the satisfaction of the editor of the
Enquirer, (who may have overlooked the
clause when we copied it, we state that he
viii find it in the Daily Evansville Journal
of February 21st, 1860, at the top of the
third column on the first page. We are
thus particular, for fear it may be again
overlooked
The whole paragraph, as given in this
article, we did not then copy, for the reason
that the first clause is a complete PROPOSE
ton in itself, and cannot be qualified by the
succeeding sentence, because Congress can
not enforce any rights of citizenship the
negro may enjoy in New York and Massa-
chusetts when they remove to the Territories.
The reason is that, according to the decision
of the Democratic Supreme Court of the
United States, negroes cannot become citi-
zens under the Constitution. Does the En-
quirer desire to nullity the decision of its
own Court?
For this reason, therefore, the latter sem
tence quoted now, Is of no force at all, eth
er to qualify or complete the first clause
that we quoted on the 21st inst; and hence
ITSELF and it was unnecessary to quote
further.
We admit, that in the article containing
the paragraph, the Enquirer seems to be
dealing with a subject rather beyond its
strength of logic; and that, in consequence,
its reasoning is most wofully confused.
This is evidenced by the fact that in the
very next paragraph, as we have heretofore
stated, the proposition we quote in this ar
ticle is directly contradicted. The truth is,
the Enquirer is in an embarrassing position,
having spoken for and against the pet prin-
ciple of its Idol in adjoining paragraphs o.
the same article. So much for the justice
of a charge of stupidity" against us
coming from paper that can not deal with
its most familiar topic without running into
"confuson worse COMPOUNDED"
We now ask our readers to examine care
fully the paragraph quoted from the Enquirer
and decide for themselves whether it doe!
not pronounce squatter sovereignty long
since exploded. 1t must be borne in mint
that the very essence of squatter sovereignty
as harped on by the Democracy in 1856
was-a man is as capable of governing him
self when he goes to territory as when hC
remains in State, and has the same rights
R@-Col. Henry S. Lane calls the Fugi
tive Slave Law the monster of all iniqui
ties" How do you like that, neighbour
Enquirer.