Daily national Democrat., 1860-11-03
Address to the Democracy by the Yuba
County Central Committee.

turned their arms against each other, and so
bitter Is their antagonsm, that they would
move the earth to compass the destruction of
their former friends and allies. However
much such state Of things is to be regretted,
the issue having been made, it must be met
a portion of the leaders Of the party have
as we believe, without cause, refused to be
governed by established usages, and seeded
altogether from the organization. They have
without authority or precedent, factiously
established Sectional party. having for its
object the protection of the interests Oft par
ticular section and to maintain this point,
have nominated a candidate for President,
and Vice President, in opposition to the regu-
lar nominees of the Democracy, against W nom
they inveigh in most bitter terms,
Next to the urceasing eudeavor TO deceive
the Democratic masses as to the real issue
the great labor Of the Seceders seems to be
to justify themselves for boiling, at the
Charleston and Baltimore Conventions They
insist that minority Of the Conventions zen
deavored by preliminary manGuyer to force
upon the majority the recognition of prin-
ciple unsound in itself and repudated bv
nearly all the Democratic States in the
Union" These are words used in an address
issued by the Federal Office holders in San
Francisco to the Democracy of California,
and i'll substance the language fall who have
advocated the Secession movement.
What, then, is this principle? The answer
w hl in bo ,t,n }
lar Sovereignty" The term means nothing
more nor less, than the right of the People 10
govern themselves under the Constitution
a more limited Specification however has been
ascribed to it, and it is urged that the latter
is adopted 10y Mr.. Douglas, and was by him
forced upon the Conventions. This conclusion
drawn from the following passage in his
Freeport speech at matters not what the
Supreme Court may hereafter decide, as to
the abstract question whether slavery may
or may not 80 into Il Territory under the
Constitution, the people have the lawful
means to introduce or exclude it as they
please, for the reason that s!aUery cannot erist
a day or an hoeT any chere uniess 10 is sup.
ported By locaJ police reguiations" Those
local police regulations can only be estab~
lished by the local Legislature; and if the
people are opposed TO Slavery they will
elect Representatives to that body who will.
10y untriendly legislation, ctfeetually prevent
the introduction Of it into their midst IT, on
the contrary, they are for it, their legislation
will favor its extension.
There is nothing in the above but a natural
truism. If the people of a Territory are
permitted to legslate for themselves under
the Constitution las the Kansas n ebraska Act
seems to be intelpreted) they can Just as
effectually exclude Slavery, by refusing or
neglecting to throw about it the eXtpaordi-
nary protection required to keep slaves in
sutjection, as by passing laws actually pro-
hibitiDg it, Mr.. Douglas does not pretend
that the people of Territories have the right
to prohibit slave property from being brought
into the common Territory but, merely that
they may adopt such police regulations as to
make slavery Improbable, or by neglecting
to legislate for it, render it impossible for
masters to retain their slaves. The people
cannot be compelled to legislate f,yorably for
what they do not want, nor can they be pre-
vented from legislating unfavorably. This
is all there appears to be in the extract quo.
ted from Mr.. Douglass Freeport speech
But, 1t is eontended the Platform contains
the "oquatter Sovereignty heresy." If to
view the question of Popular Sovereignty as
the original principle on which our govern
ment is founded, and to torecognize the doctrine
that all political power is derived immed-
ately from the people, then perhaps the
charge may he well founded
In comparing the regular and irregular
Democratic Platforms put forth at Baltimore.
it will be found that all of the Resolutions
contain the same sentiment, nearly gerJatia,,
except the first and second Resolutions in
the regular Platform, and the first, second
and third Resolutions of explanation In the
irregular Platform.
The first paragraph in the first Resolution
of each atlirms the Resolutions adopted by
the Convention at Cincinnati.
The second paragraph in the first Resolu-
tion and the second Resolution in the regular
Platform, refers to the government of Terri
tories, and distinctly declares that the Demo.
cratic party will abide the decision of the
Supreme Court in all questions relating to the
government of the Territories
The first, second and third explanatory
Resolutions in the irregular Platform refer
to the same subject, but in way of deter
mining the construction hich shall be
placed upon the Cincinnati Resolutions and
the Constitution of the United States, IN all
matters touching slave property in Terri
tories.
We repeat, the first takes the Cincinnati
Resolutions and the Constitution as they are,
and, as per agreement when the Kansas-Ne-
braska bill was passed. relerall Judicial ques
tions arising under them to the Supreme
Court; while the latter insists on fixing Il
sectional construction upon the two instru-
ments whenever they refer to Slavery and
the government of Territories.
The one declares that Congress shall pro-
tect persons and property in Territories and
wherever else its Constitutional authority
extends"
The other contends that theSupreme Court
of the United States shall determine the
power of Territorial Legislature and the
power and duty Of Congress under the Con-
stitution over the institution of Slavery within
the Territories
This latter seems to have been the spirit Of
the compromise of 1850, which was agreed to
by both of the then existing great National
parties, with the hope and expectation of
driving the discussion of the slavery question
out of the Halls of Congress. The doctrine
of Non Intervention was then advocated both
North and South, and only the ultra Aboli-
tionists and Southern Secessionists objected
to it, In 1854 the Missouri Compromise was
repealed to give full scope and force to this
doctrine, all of the Southern Senators, with
one or two exceptions, demanding it. These
demands were conceded by the Northern
Democracy because they believed them Just,
and were in accordance with their ideas Of
Equality.
In 1856, the National Convention which
met at Cincinnati again affirmed this doctrine
and made it the great issue involved in the
contest of that year Non-intervention by
Congress in the affairs of the Territories was
the cardinal doctrine Of the Democracy