Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-09-19

Maj. w. HI. Polk aud Squatter Sovereignty.
We learn that Maj Polk in his efforts for the
DoUG1As cause, is announcing wherever he goes,
that he carrying the flag that he did in $50,
when he was a candidate for elector on the BUcHAS-
AN ticket If Maj. Polk means by that that he IN
1856 advocated the doctrine of Territorial interview
ton now preached by Mr. DOUGLAS, VIC, and thous-
ands of others who heard him IN that canvass, beg
leave respectfully to dissent from his statement
Let the candid severity of history determine the
question. Although the UNION AND AMERICAN may
now be deeried by the DOUGLAS leaders, as it ever
has been by the ardent admirers of 'Sam" and JOHN
BELL, Mai Polk viii not gainsay that when it advo-
Gated his cause in 1885, it reflected to considerable
extent the Democratic sentiment of Tennessee. To
show the view entertained by large portion of the
Democracy of this State upon Squatter Sovereignty
or Territorial Intervention in the last Presidential
canvass we make the following extract from the
UNION AND AMERICAN Of July "a, 1856:
g The Patriot has Intercepted us several times
after the following manner which we have omitted
to notice simply because we had other engagements
more important:
Dd Mr. Buchanan when he said t.t sbis leri,lstion il
in accordance with them has simply declared that the people
Territory like those Of STATE snail Thetb
- $780,, - ~ - .,.l1 - 80 -
endorse sauatter sOTereignty?'
We answer most unhesitatingy No. Mr.. Bu-
cEanan intended no such thing. Whatever may
be the construction of others, Mr. Buchanan is
known to have expressed in unmstakable language
his opinion that the people of a territory could
neither establish nor prohibit slavery until they as
Senlbed IN cORUeEtioR TO form Constitution, prepare
tory to their being admitted into the Union as a
State. What has been denominated "SqHatter Sow
erelgnty" is, that territorial legislature may es-
tablish prohibit slavery. The phraseology of
Mr.. Buchanan's letter which seems to puzzle our
neighbOr is, that ~ the people of Territory, like
those Of State. shall decide for themselves this
question:" We fully endorse the language of Mr..
Buchanan. The people of a territory can and ought
to decide this question. But when can they do it?
WHEN THE PEOPLE TERRITORY ASSEMBLE IN CON
vENTIoN To FRAME A CONSTITUTION THAT IS THE TINE,
AND NOT TILL THEN, say those who disbeeve in
Squatter Sovereignty. Are they not still the people
of territory when through their representatives,
they assemble in convention to form a Constitution
preliminary to their admission into the Union a
State? Are they not still the people of territory
even after that convention has adjourned and until
Congress has recognized their action as compatible
with the laws and Constitution of the United States!
The disorganizers in Kansas recently called Conven-
ton and framed Constitution prohibiting slavery
| That was not Squatter Sovereignty because done in
| convention when they went to frame Constitution
Yet the people of Kansas are still the people Of
territory and Congress has repudaed the action OF
| their convention rs informal and fraudulent Who
denies that the people of territory, when they as
sembe in convention may not exercise this power
| Does the Patriot? No man N the South dare deny
| it. Mr.. Fillmore gives the power to Congress and
maintains that Congress should prohibit slavery In
the territory. Does the Patriot deny that such was
| his position in l847, when ran for Comptroller
IN New York? We want an answer"