The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1860-09-25
For the Western Democrat.

Mr. EDITOR: The doctrine of Sauatter Soyer-
eighty, expounded by Judge Douglas in his late
speech at Raleigh, is based upon absolute, inner
ent sovereignty in the people of the Territories,
than which there be greater political heresy
in the theory and practice of our system of govern
ment. And the simitude in the tenure of SOW
ereignty which the distinguished author of this
new doctrine attempts to establish in his Harpers
Magazine article, between these Squatters and
the people of the provinces prior to their separa-
ton from the government of Great Britain is far
fetched, illogical and without foundation in fact
In the case Of the provincialists, the sovereignty
OF the mother country was q unit and vested in
the crown; whereas, in the other, the sovereignty
of the Territories is lodged in thirty co-equa
coordinate, confederate, independent States whose
interests and institutions widely variant diver
sied, antagonistic in principle, and characterized
by continually increasing "irrepressible conflict,
waged by one section against the other.
If the comparison between the two cases estab-
lished perfect similitude in character, it might
still be argued that the resistance of the Coonists
justified only by its success, which it would
be vain and absurd to anticipate in the case of
Territory. Besides, the action of Congress-, in
legisating for the people of the Territories is cir
cumscribed by Constitutional guarantees which
cannot always be readily defined by the Supreme
Court of the United States, and is therefore differ
ent from the Legislation of the British Parliament
which was usually Influenced or dictated by the
prerogatives of the crown.
1t is the duty of Congress, under the Constitu-
ton, to "make all needful rules and regulations
respecting the territory and other property of the
United States, and nothing in this Constitution
shall be construed as to prejudice any claims Of
the United States, of any particular State"
And the Constitution further declares that Call
legislative powers herein granted shall be vested
in n EnnUroSS Of tha limited St.taS - that sINo
person shall be representative who shall not
have attained to the age of twenty five years, and
been years citizen of the United States"
it is very questionable whether Congress can right
fully transfer its legislative authority to the terri
toral legislatures since these may be composed Of
squatters and foreigners, who have not been
naturalized, who have resided in the country
only few months.
But since this doctrine has been sanctioned by
the practice Of the government for many years, we
will not now stop to impugn its soundness, SO long
the Territorial Legislatures do not abuse the
authority thus conferred upon them, either by
negleeting refusing to legislate for the protec-
ton more efectual regulation of any given
species of property. But whenever they do thus
abuse such authority it becomes the imperative
duty Of Congress TO intervene with it's power 50
far as to supersede the authority of the territorial
legislature by supplying whatever legislation may
be necessary for the more perfect enjoyment Of
rights in property, whether that property consists
in negro slaves, or otherwise. And the denial by
Congress of such Legislation would be papabEc
violation of the Constitution, such to justify the
Southern States in declaring their rights to be in
imminent peril. Because the principle involved
is the agis which shields the next largest interest
belonging to the people Of the Southern States
1t is clear that prior to the organization of the
territories, Congress is bound to take the same
care Of slave property in them that it does Of
the same kind of property in the District of Col
umbia, and if, after they organized, they neg
lect refuse to do so, then they forfeit their
legislative authority into the hands of Congress,
who are bound by every consideration of constitu-
tional duty and federal comfy supply it. W.