Year: 1860

MARYsvILLE, Oct. 18th, 60.


Mn. EDITOR Il very recently arrived in
California from Ohio, and perhaps am not
very well posted in California politics, but
from what can learn, We in the States, have
II wrong opinion of California. 1t was gem
orally conceded that this State was one of the
strongholds of Breckenridge, and would give
her vote for him. 10y all parties. But find
in California, as in many other States that
the erroneous doctrine taught by the Breck
Democracy is pretty generally denounced by
the people. l am well convinced that their
doctrine is erroneous and absurd in the high
est degree. And the vain attempt of their
orators to prove the validity of those doc
trines exposes their erroneousness


l attended the Breck meeting last night in
this place, and must say, that the speakers
extirely failed in producing any argument
that would advance the cause of Breck.-
And they certainly said nothing that would
convince Douglas man that he was wrong
But he (the speaker certainly did make some
very false statements, one of which was that
they were opposed to two parties, who wish
to rule slavery out of Territory. Now,
suppose, when he speaks of two parties, he
means the Douglas and the Lincoln parties
and what he says of the former is false, for
every one ought to know that Douglas and
his adherents advocate non-intervention with
slavery in the States or Territories by Con.
gress or any other power and that he and
all sound Democrats are willing that slavery
shall exist in the Territories or States, if the
majority of the people want it, or rice versa
But the gentleman told us, last night, that
they were also in favor of noninterv ention
by Congress or the Territorial Legislature
either; but he agrees that they (the terrific
ries) have right to act upon the slavery
question when their population is great
enough to form State Constitution, and
that, as the Territory is common property,
the people Of the States have a right to 90
there with their property, and that the
right of property in slaves must be protected
by Congress. lie declared that Congress
could repeal every law passed by the Terrific
rial Legislature (Republican doctrine in '56) ;
and further declared that the territories are
not sovereign, but derive all their power from
Congress-tried to prove that the territorial
organization is the creature of Congress-
Then" said he, "of course Congress is the
creator" Then he came to the logical con
clusion that the creature Ohe territorial or
ganization) could not exist without the crea-
tor (Congress). But if the territorial organ
ization is in reality the creature of Congress
We have at least cne instance in which the
creature has existed without the creator.


California organizized without any action
on the part of Congress, and the first Cover
nor was elected by the people, and no one at
that time denied them the right


The territories stand in the same relation
to the States that the colonies did to Great
Britain. Britain claimed the colonies as her
property The United States claims the ter
ritories as her property. The mother coun
try denied the sovereignty of the colonies;
and each one of the colonies declared them
NNA'N w " SO'NlSl anu llOlli Ah"t ICElNu
acted as such. And before the Union was
formed, each State or colony possessed more
rights than they did afterwards. They uni-
ted for protection against invasion, and in
forming that union, surrendered certain rights
to Congress, such as declaring war, levying
taxes &c. and now, in reality the territories
stand in the same relation to the United
States. A territory cannot be forced to form
constitution and be admitted into the Uni
ted States. 1t appears that she can dc as she
pleases She might form a State Coustitu-
tion, preparatory to admission, and declare
the territory free, and yet remain territory
for years. Every man, most assuredly has
arightto carry his property into territory,
but they must make their own laws for its
protection. claim that if the people of any
locality consider anything is nuisance they
have right to remove it, slaves, whiskey or
nnything else. When | say the people,
mean the majority.


The Opposition still declare that Douglas
was not regularly nominated, The gentleman
last night even said that Douglas never re-
ceived any Democratic votes, but that Breck
received them all Shame, shame | say, for
4 man to make so false statement to an in
telligent assembly. But l honestly think
that Breckenridge got no Democratic votes
Because, when men deny the right of the
people of a State to regulate their domestic
institutions their own way, l doubt their
Democracy. Those men ought to learn what
Democracy is, and ought also to know that
all the power is with the people first. The
people derive no rights from Congress, but
Congress gets her power from the people


But what of the nomination ? Why, sir,
Mr. Douglas received 1914 votes by ballot,
which was over two thirds of the votes cast
and, according to the former usages of the
party, he was then fairly nominated but,
by acelamation, he received 2l2t votes, be.
ing over two-thirds of the whole Electoral
College. But it is said that they didn't all
vote. Now, according to parliamentary
rules, all that do not vote in the negative
yote in the Affirmative, and there we're no