Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1860-08-02

power viii be courted nor their necessues
by democratic administrations. Me- shall u
no efforts for union where they to be recognzed Du1
war upon any faction under their treacherSus ru anu
nothing but faction will follow their lead
In peace, but when come again
| come with banner, brand and how
as leader seeks his mortal foe ,
Much said the subject Of non ara
srnaIter sovereignty as eTmed and there bas been
much more said upon them than has been understood ny
those who have said would be we'll Tor the po
ticaI pies who chatter hppanty upon me suGt
their lesson before they pirate IT, Inc
principles which really have no re- to each othe
entirely different have been strangely ana uhpa
donaby coRfounded but will state the true definitions
each separately Non means that there should
intervention to extend or prohibit slavery IN the Ter
ritories but that the people OF The States and the nn
rights to carrying their slaves with them when
held by the courts belonging to them quatte
ty claims the sovereign right OF the people OF lelrofy 10
exclude tie introduction of slavery from the Territory by
hostile territorial egatlon regardess OF tEe
given the Constitution by the decisions OF the supreme
Court Before The bred Scott decision tins was an open
question: since that decslon 1t Is SO no longer Inc
plainly this noinerVenton by Congress and qualhed
popular sovereignty proposed such territorial legislation as
should be in Difference TO- subject to- ana IN harmony VII
the decision Of the Supreme Court the great question
Squaer soqeregn dedes the authority of the courts and
the of the territorial legislature to eXonde
slavery from the Territory ny law absolutely ~
the Construction given to the Constitution by the Court
1t has been often said vi truth that was the frat to
introduce the principle of nonnteveDton and qualified po
puar sovereignty into Congress for the government OF the
Territories When the doctrine has been regarded with dis
favor it has been assigned to but when it has been
|
ants. 1t has been said, but enormously that
advocate if net the author of the doctrine OF squat
% oad nnnnr soHeregU that is with
right of the people egislate in harmony with the Con
vocate for believer in the doctrine Of squaer sovet
eighty and hold to be an cnt aosnrdlty tor t
Constitution of the United States.
The resolutions which introduced in 1897, proposing
nOnnterventon in the Territories, and suggesting the pn
cple of popular sovereignty in qualified FORM proposed
shown by the speech which followed he introduction,
that the territorial legislature should keep in view such
st ucgn as Sh ud be given to the Constitution by the au
preme Court and eate in harmony with and IN declaa
tory obedience to it. They brought to a vote
because practical involving TIE precise question:
under consideration after their Introduction and
In l848 Hr. Calhoun, myself and others upon the
committee charged with BILL known the Clayton Com
bill should he framed upon the principle OF ntevent on
and framed, and passed the Senate but was,
CT fepresenratye The only difference between Mr. Gal
houn and myself upon the subject then any other time
caraory form tie right Of the citizens of all the States
go the Territories with their property slave pro-
or denying his position proposed, as it unsettled
question: and strictly belonged to the Judiciary, to leave
king that the South had such entire confidence ii the
position that they willing stand upon noninteryen
lion, and await utcia construction OF the Constitution,
and of their rights in the Territories The position Of Mr.
Calhoun has since been fully vindcated and sustained by
! the bred Scott decision.
The corr promise measures 1870 were based upon the
same non9terventon idea and while they We're under dis
to state my position there in speech upon the floor as fol
lows:
intention, either directly indirectly favor by voice
the extension of slavery, the restriction of slavery
subject whatever Nor Influenced in this conclusion by
the local laws Of the Territory in question, either natural
artlfcial-the laws of nature the laws OF and, for
ali the purposes of the present action will not inquire
what they are in either respect will stand upon the true
principles Of in the boaCest possible
fur n"nnterventions sake, to uphold the fund imena
principles Of freedom aud for other and viii leave
the people Of the Territories and of the States to such rights
ana privileges a. are theirs under the Constitution and laws
of the United States without addition dinuuton from
such rights by the action Of Congress-.
The Kansas and Nebraska bill, except disturbance
Of the Missouri line, contained principle whatever
but copied the Intervention principle which had
been recognised by Congress- awaited the judicial
sructi0n Of the Constitution.
After the passage of all these the bred
scot decision by the Supreme Court OF the United States
pronounced after unusual labor and deliheraoD
ing the Constitution and the rights of citizens of States
the Territories Mr. Calhoun and other Southern
had contended and thus settling the question forever
laws. The substance of the decision was this
The territory thus acquired s acquired by the people Of
the regent and trustee Federal Government Congress
exercise power the rights of proper
t. OF citizen the Territory which prohibited hy
Constitution. The Government the citizens whenever
the Territory Is opened To settlement, hota with
their respective rights defined and limited by the Congress-
Congress has 40 right to prohibit the citizens Of any par
tcular state States from taking up there while per
ms citizens of other States to do Nor has right to
give privileges 10 one class OF citizens which refuses TO
arother lie Territory acquired fer their equal and
II II.
upon equal and the terms.
Every citizen has right take with HIM into the Ter
United States recognises property The Constitution OF
R Gned states recognise s slaves property aud pledges
Federal Government to protect it. end Congress
exercise any authority property Of that descrp
ton than may constutonaly property of
any other kind The act Of Congress therefore, prohibiting
citizen Of the United States from taking with him slaves
when he removes the Territory in question to reside is
an exercise OF authority private property which
warranted by the Constitution and the of the plain
til by ls owner to that Territory gave him title free
Now ii all had cquesced in decision like good CHI
sbad yielded willing aud cheerful obedience
10 as an auhe3tc construction of the fundamental law
~ the highest tribunal the question of slavery Terri
torres would have bean at rest and the democratic party
means was resorte1 10 to evade it. Rampant abolonsn
more manly than its aoconplces in mischief openly de-
nounced and defed it, as it is wont to do ali legal obs
cies 10 the c0nsummaon OF its dstempered idea-dem
agogusm inflated itseftapstc:sm foamed and trimming
was not deCidedand all these combined together sought
deny to the citizens of the slave the benefits Of The
aeEI ra0a.t th the nth IN theory or nEsee9e
awaiting in good faith the decision Of the before this
Hfed with nonineryention and the acknowledgment and
practical execution OF according its fair and equitable
The south did object to Mr. Douglas because of his
principles OF non Intervention, because doctrines
often and go pompously alleged: but their opposition 10
him arises say nothing of his unfortunate conroversay
WIN e administration from his advocacy OF what they
regard as most rank and mschevous error squatte
sovereignty heresy; conending does as we have all
lCLsCdHutuS DECISION OF the Su-
prem Court in the bred Scott case holding all citizens
with their property to be admitted there equal terms
slave property ncludeda territorial legislature NAV by
its enacted law exclude slave property Territory
mus virtually investing territorial legislature with power
to annu this provision of the Constitution as construed nv
the highest legal tribunal known to the law.
Inese are the articles Of creed proposed by Mr. Douglas
to which the South object In the celebrated CAMPAIGN de-
bate with Mr. Lincoln previous to the bred Scott decision
IN answer to certain questions proposed by Mr. Lincoln
Douglas answered as follows:
The next question propounded to BY Mr. Lincoln is
can the people of Territory in any lawful way against
wishes OF the United States exclude slavery from their
limits prior to the formation of State constitutional an
sWer alphabetically Mr. Lincoln has heard me answer