Year: 1859

There is q saving PoNeI III Do'iiVSi"''N pa"


cinles-we don't mean the bastard principles
Of ecomptonism-which will always hold
in check the fanaticism of either section of
the Union. But, there can be no doubt that
sectional Indignation, the moral
wrath of the people Tor whatever else you
nay call it) in the North is stronger to-day
han it has ever been before. From one end
Of the Free States to the other there is the
beat of a strong indignant pulse. What
does it mean2 Why this that the South
ern Democracy, which is the ruling party of
the South, has broken faith with the North
for the dominant party of the North acted
for that section in the great leading measures
of the day on this question of slavery. The


North looked upon the Missouri Compromise
as q treaty of peace between the two grand


divisions of the Union-a treaty which was


forever to be held sacred. The excuse of the


Democratic party for breaking down that


Compromise-and be it understood that we


fully Justify the repeal of that measure was,


that it was an unconstitutional act, for Con-


gress had no power to prohibit slavery in


one portion of the Territories and at the


same time to recognize it in another. Deep


seated as was the faith of the North in the


perpetuity of that basis of settlement. and


strong as was their desire to see the line Of


SO deg. 80 min preserved, yet they agreed


reluctantly and murmuringly, through the


Democracy which then represented them,
the abrogation of that great Comp:om
ise 1t was to them vast sacrifice in
deed, for they believed that they were
open to the domnancy of the
slave power" regions which were by solemn
to use their own language, "conse
Grated to Freedom" They yielded this great
point to the demand of the South, upon the
understanding that the subject of slavery
was forever thereafter to be settled in the
Territories by the will of the people there
assembled-that Congress was neither to
legislate for nor against the institution, but
that the people were to govern themselves
as far as this and all other domestic questions


were concerned, fully and completely. 1t


was urged by the opponents of the Demo-


cratic party in the North that this new Pop
ular Sovereignty policy was a mere deeep-
tion-a blind for the North, under cover of
which the "slave power" was to plant its
standard on ever foot of free soil outside the
limits of the already organized States. and
that the South did not intend to act in good
faith in carrying out the policy. The masses
Of the people, however. believed that this
policy was inaugurated in good faith and so
Toted for James Buchanan for the Presidency.
What was the result2 Why, no sooner was
he question tested than the South through
heir Lecompton members upon the floors of
congress, did show plainly to the world that
hey did not intend to keep good faith with
le North. With astonishing, damnable
nanimity, the SO called Democratic Represen
.tives Of the South voted for the endorse
lent of course of proceedings in Kansas
'hich were utterly violative of every prin-
iple embodied in the new policy to which
hey had agreed. At the very first test of
heir sincerity that was ever offered they
Inhibited total absence of every ingredient
f that quality, and went for the admission
f Kansas when they knew that the Constitu.
ion presented was obnoxious to the masses
# the people The North justly grew indig-
lant "W7ere is your doctrine of Popular
Sovereignty ?" they exclaimed. Where is
rour agreement to allow the people of tie
Territories to settle this question of slavery
for themselves" They we're answered with
himsy technicalitcs Technically, the Le-
compton Constitution was the deed of the
people technically it was legitimate in
strument, and technically. the principle Of
Popular Sovereignty had been carried out.
Oh, most miserable hypocrisy Most de


spcable treaehery! Not satisfied with this


violation of the agreement between the two


sections, under shelter of series of pitifu
and unmanly subterfuges. they now come
forth and contend that there is nothing in
the doctrine of Popular Sovereignty to him
der the enactment of slave code by Con
gress for the Territories, thus establishing
slavery everywhere, whether the people
want it or not


Is it any wonder that the North becomes
indignant Is it any wonder that the pulse
of popular feeling beats high and strong on
this question all over the North? One thing
is certain. if the North is indeed becoming
rapidly abolitionized, which we deny-for


although indignant. she is yet conservative


there is nobody to blame for it but the


South herself, or rather those men who have


assumed, under the pretended guise of De


moclacy, to speak for her. We assert it


boldly, that the North has reason to be an.


gered, and that she is justified in refusing, to


the last drop of her blood, to abate one lot or


little OF the tithe of hair from the full and per


feet Douglasor in other words Democratic


construction of the Kansas. Nebraska bill and


the doctrine of Popular Sovereignty Let


the North stand true to the Douglas Democ


racy and the Douglas Democracy will stand


true to her and to the letter and spirit Of


that great compact between the North and
South which was embodied in the Kansas.
Nebraska bin and promulgated broadly over
the country in the public prints and the pub
lie speeches ofthe Democracy in 1854 and
1856 What ever others may do, the Doug
las Democracy will remain true to their prin-
ciples


RICH QUARTz.-The San Andreas Indepen.
dent has received the following item from a
correspondent at Mokeumne Hill;