The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1860-07-05
Douglas and the Popular Sovereignty
Sham.

much to say about the doctrine OF non
intervention, and profess to stand upon
aplalIorm embodying the principles OF
popular sovereignty. Very many of the
supporters Of Douglas, honestly believe
these to be the doctrines for which the
party is contending, and although popu-
lar sovereignty is a vague and undefn-
able abstraction, yet the general idea
Of leaving the people Of the territories,
free TO fashion their institutions without
Intervention, has q speciousness about it
and looks plausible But those are
greatly deceived, who suppose that po-
pular sovereignty, as commonly under
stood by the masses Of the people, is
the doctrine of Douglas himself, Or is
in unison with the true Interpretation Of
the Douglas platform. The South have
always denied that such was the true
intent and meaning Of the Cincinnati
platform, and to save any future equl-
vocation on this point, the National
convention recently held at Baltimore,
atwhich Douglas was nominated, adopt
CO. an explicit Interpretation. Mr.. Wick
life Of Louisiana offered the following
resolution, which vas adopted by the
convention
Resolyea, That it is in accordance
with the Cincinnati Platform, that du>
ring The existence Of Territorial Gov
eraments the measure OF restriction,
whatever itmay be, imposedby the teN
deral Constitution on the power Of the
Territorial Legislature over the subject
OF the domestic relations, as the same
has been ar shaU hereafter be finally de-
.cgn1inod 6y the Supreme Court Of the
United States, should be respected by
sII good citizens, and enforced with
promptness and fidelity, by every branch
of the General Government.
This puts the question at rest, and
none need hereafter be deceived with
the popular sovereignty sham, except
those who are determined to be in spite
of the record. Every one who is fami,
liar with the Supreme Court decision i'll
the bred Scott case, knows that the
opinion was expressed, that no Terrific,
rial Legislature can interfere in the
right of property in slaves; and that
the Federal Government is bound to
protect such property from legislative
interference. This new and explicit in.
depreciation of the Douglas platform, is
full and complete surrendery of the
right of the people of Territory, to
determine that slavery shall not exist
within its borders. The doctrine of the
court is fully recognized, and the right
OF Shareholders to plant slavery in the
Territories, is conceded by the Douglas
convention. Stillwe suppose the friends
of Douclas at the North, will continue
to talk about non-intervention in re-
spect to the slavery question, just as i
nothing had happened at Baltimore, ex
tinguishing that polite al hobby.
But there is another noticeble fact
the doctrine Of popular sovereignty al
expounded by Democratic politicians il
Wisconsinand the Northwest generally
is not the doctrine of Douglas himself
The presses and the leaders of the party
are continually asking the question, ST
it not reasonable that the people o
the Territories, should be allowed tC
raoalate their own Institutions, includ
ing that of domestic slavery, withou
Congressional interven ton? Now MI
Douglas maintains no such doctrines
In no one of his numerous speeches
essays or letters, delivered or writer
with the view of defining his position
within the last two years, is there any
declaration affirming the right of thu
people Of q Territory, through their lie
gislature or otherwise, to prohibit or ex
clude slavery therefrom. Mr.. Dougla
has been repeatedly questioned on thi
point. but has never given direct ant
uneGuiyocal answer. He has said tina
"the sovereignty of the people of
Territory remains in obeyance, sus
pended in the U. S. Courts, in trust fo
the people," until admitted into tn
Union as a State. When Mr.. Doug
las was pressed by Lincoln, in the f;
nous Illinois campaign on this specif
point, he declared this to be : a CUES
ton for the Courts to decide" Dougla
does not say, the people of the Terrific
ries can exclude slavery by positive i
pislation no such declaration of sent
ment made by him, as we have alread
said can be found.
There is still another fact which de
fies contradiction; 1t is that Mr. Dougla
has nercr pretended that his so Gale
Popular Sovereignty doctrines, wer
ever intended to benefit Freedom. H
has said he did not care, ..whethe
slavery was voted up or downs" mor'
over, he has hoasted that this famou
hobby of his, has done more to exten
slave territory, than it has free territor.
This shameful boast was made on tn
floor of the U. S. Senate in speech o
the 10th CT May last; his language q
il appears in his printed speech is {
follows;