3d. The Douglas or truly conservative theory, resting upon the limited powers of the Federal constitution, as a compact of confederation, among sovereign and independent States, assumes that so far as the United States, _as a Nation_, are concerned, domestic slavery is neither a national good to be protected, nor a national evil to be crushed out; it is a local domestic institution, existing at the formation of the confederacy, in all the States, "under the laws thereof," and its good or evil, concerns only the local sovereignties or people with whom it exists or may exist. The Federal government not having been ordained or established to form or control the domestic institutions of the people of the confederated States, is equally powerless to destroy or to extend slavery. Its destruction or extension must be the work of local law, not of the Federal constitution, nor of Federal law made under it. Let us re-state the points: The Breckinridge or slavery extension party would _nationalize_ slavery, by making its existence commensurate with the obligations of the Federal constitution. The Lincoln or abolition party would _denationalize_ it, by destroying it by prohibition where it is not, and by starvation where it is. The Douglas or non-intervention party would denationalize it, by leaving the people in the respective localities, be they States or territories, to deal with it as they see fit. Therefore, Breckinridge would use the national government to force slavery on an unwilling people. Lincoln and Seward would use the same power to prevent a people who may desire domestic slavery from having it. Douglas would not use the same power, either to permit or destroy, but recognizing the right and capacity of the people to govern themselves, would leave them to decide _for themselves_ as to what domestic institutions they would or would not have. There can be no mistaking as to which of the three parties occupies the true democratic ground on this subject. To rightly decide that question, we have only to reach the central and fundamental idea of the nature of the Federal Constitution, upon which each party bases itself. The political history of the United States, since the Confederation, shows that as well in the formation, as in the interpretation and administration of the Federal Constitution, two parties have existed, representing two different political ideas--the one, State Sovereignty--the other, National Sovereignty, or, Confederation against Consolidation; or, democratic government in _the States_ against an Imperial government in _the Nation_.