Year: 1860


canism and DOuglasiSm. Il iS well known
to all observing men in the nation, that
the mass Of the Catholics in this country
have ever been bitterly opposed to Abo-
Iitionism IN ell It's forms, and we hail this
article in che Catholic QuGTtSrtg as an in.
dicatiOn thst they ere determined to be
true to the cause Of the Constitution and
the equality Of the States In the future,
as they have been In the past


The keviesC'S arguments, IN our opinion,
are unanswerable; and IL any Lincoln or
Douglas organ dissents from them, we
should like to see Il ego in and get
squeezed:


1--WE hold that we Of the North, have
no right to be political Gbolitionists; for
in our States slavery does not exist, and
the Federal government has no power
over 1t in any Of the States. We have no
right to get up political party in non
slaveholding State for the abolition Of
slavery for there is in such State no sub.
ject on which such party can act, and
to act on it politically in another State is
not permitted, for it is in violation Of the
principle that all the States in the Union
stand upon an equal footing. We have
no right to get up Federal party, or
party to force the Federal government to
abolish II in the slave States, for the States
in forming the Union reserved the ques-
tion Of slavery to themselves in their sep


arate and independent capacity. All po-
liticAl abolitionism is contrary, therefore,
either to the Federal Constitution or to
the mutual equality or independence Of
the States. The abolition Of slavery IL q
legitimate question for political parties
within slave.holding States, but never
within non.slaye.holding States. What.
ever, then, may or may not be our views
Of slavery, we who belong to non-slave.
holding States have no right to make it q
political question, or the basis Of politi.
cal party, either State or Federal. We
may say slavery Is an evil, . sin, but that
is q moral question, and under our sys-
TEN Of government not to be reached by
political action. So we may say Presby-
teriauism or Methodism is an evil, sin,
and one that will ultimately bring down
the judgments Of God upon the people
that sustain 1t, but we have not therefore
the right to form political party for its
suppression.


"Furthermore, though strongly opposed
to the extension Of slavery beyond the
limits Of the present sIAve.holding States,


we hold that VIC have no right to form
and support political party for the pre-


ventiOn through the action Of Congress
Of its extension to new territory. The


territories Of the Union are the common
property Of all the States, and Congress


has no right 10 pass an act or ordinance


that prevents the citizens of one State Of


well as those Of another from entering and


settling them with their property. Con


grcss has no right to discriminate between


different species Of property, but is bound


to regard as property, whatever is prop


erly by the laws Of the States or any ont
OF the States. Here we agree entirely


with the Southern statesmen, and heuct


we deny to Congress the constitutions


right, either to authorize or prohibit
slavery in the Territories no less than II


the States themselves. The only doub


VIC could entertain on this point arises


from the fact that till quite recently


Congress has uniformly, in organizing 1
new Territorial government, claimed anC
exercised the power to permit or to ex


clude slavery. Should not this fact b.


taken Is evidence that Congress has thu
power, ct least by prescription But tht


doubt must vanish the moment we reflect


that the Federal government is one Of ex


press powers under written constitution


and that no prescription can authorize th'


exercise Of power not expressly conceded


it by the States creating it. Hero w


differ not only from the Republican party
but also from what IL understood at tn,
North TO be the doctrine Of tho Northern
Democrats headed by Mr.. Douglas. Th,
Republicans generally hold that Congress


IN organizing the Territories may eithe


permit OF forbid slavery until the Terrific


~ becomes Q State. Mr.. Douglas is un
derstood to deny this power to Congress
and to assert It for the people Of the Ter
ritory, under the head Of what is calle'
"Squatter Sovereignty" We know moth


ing more discrcditable 10 q man who no
had the honor to be . judge, even in o.
inferior court. 1t is decidedly opposed t
that clear, logical understanding, boaste
not in vain, BY the people of the Gree
Mountain State, and especially by Oh
Windsor county, from which both no an
! we hail. The people Of Territory hav
no powers except such as are conferre
by Congress in the organic act, aud Cor


gress can confer no power which it doe
not itself possess memo dGi Quod non ho
. bet. Squatter Sovereignty is fictior
and a fiction Of that ultra Democrat
school which justifies John Browns rai
into Virginia. Congress cannot author
ixe another to do what it has no right {
do itself, and Mr.. Douglas doctrine,
E conceded, supposes Congress has tn
, power to permit or prohibit slavery in th
, Territories, lin principle, the doctrine {
; the Republican party, or else that th
, people are sovereign without reference I
legal organisation, what we call job
; Brownism. If we believed Congress ha
the power, we should Of course deman
its exercise to prevent the further exter
, sion Of slavery, for we claim to be hear
and soul an anti-slavery man. But nc
believing it has the power, we deny tn
right Of any class Of American citizens, {
form political party for the express pul
= pose Of exercising it through Congress.
/ $50 far We 60 with the Democrat
party South, and dissent from both th
! Republicans and the Douglas Democrat
The Republicans on this point, We believ
are wrong, but they are ineligible, LOG
. ical, and are sustained by the almost Uni


form practice Of Congress, ever since "
, had q Congress. If they err, It is in N
i Ill THAR ovs,NR n Ear q