ME DOLLAR PER ANNUM INVARIABLY IN ADVANCE. TOWANDA : gljursibflt} fllominn, December 21,1857. SPEECH OF HON*. S. A. DOUGLAS, In the Senate, Dec. 9, 1857. On motion of Mr. DOCOI. AS. the Senate resumed the of.r.M'ler.itien vf the motion made by him Yesterday, to print the PreriJent'a me-sage and accouipiuiyiag docu ments. with fifteen thousand extra copies. Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, when yesterday the President's message was read at the Clerk's desk, I heard it bat imperfectly, ami I was of the impression that the President of the United States had approved and en dorsed the action of the Lecompton convention in Kansas. Under that impression, I felt it civ duty to state that, while i concurred in the general views of the message, yet, so far us it approved or endorsed the action of that con vention, I entirely dissented from it, and would avail myself of an early opportunity to state nu reasons for my dissent. Upou a more careful and critical examination of the mes sage, I am rejoiced to find that the Presi d .it of the United States has not recommend ed t! at Congress shall pa the course C ingress should pursue with regard to the constitution there formed Tiie message of the President has made an argument —an unanswerable argument in my opinion—against that constitution, which shows clearly, whether intended to arrive at that re < lit or not, that, consistently with his views an 1 his principles, lie cannot accept that con ■■titutioti. lie he has expressed his deep mor '. "cation and disappointment that tuc consti tution itself has not been submitted to the people of Kansas for their acceptance or rejec t ea. He informs us that he has unqualitied , expressed his opinions on that subject in his v.ructions to Governor Walker, u.-outiling, as !\ nutter of course, that the constitution was tr he submitted to the people before it could we any vitality or validity, lie goss fur t.ior. and teil> us that the example set by Con in the Minnesota case, by inserting a t.• it: the enabling act requiring the cou ;\ou to be submitted to tne people, u-uiit to become a uniform nt!e, not to be departed f >in hereafter in any case. On these various j- vpisitions I agree entirely with the Presi .". '.i;e United and lam prepared ■ to sustain that uniform rule which he ask> to pursue, in ail other cases, by taking the M ->'a pro v.-ion as our example I rejoice, on a careful perusal of the nies tvre. t • find so much ies> to dissent from than I was under the impression there was from hasty reading and the imperfect hearing of ' - ~g- in the fir-t instuiKT i i effect, -s the document to the Congress of the ted States —as the Constitution of the 1" . States refers it—for us to decide upo.i :u.i r . or responsibility. It i proper that -. old have thn< referred it tons as a mat " r C- v .!gres-iooal action, and not us no Aha sTrution or Kxecntive measure, for the - i- 3 tr. it tlie Constitution of the United N '.."is - :v- tliat " Congress may admit new vat - to the Union."' Ilence we find the K j ie-tlon bi '• -- ii- now, not a* an ad -tration measure, but as a measure cotulug ' re us as for our free notion, without any ' v v:' !i nd itiou or interference, directly or in : ".e:ly, ly the A Inim-t at on now in jk>s * .of the Federal tiovernmeut. Sir. 1 - 1 t v examine this qucstiou calmly and : > -ee whether or n>c we can proiverly : • e Kansas into tiie Union with the con ?'■ a fortneai at Lvcomptoti. 1 • President after expressing h s regret t'• > :ideation and disappaint iient, that -tiUKiott hal not Ix-cn submitted to tue j ein pursoauce of hi* iifructions to Gov. v'.ier and in pur-u in.-e of Governor W.!k --i-*nrances to the jteOj!e. says, however, a" 'j riie K uisas-Nebraska act the slavery . i o: : 'y was required to ba referred to p 1 'pie. and the remainder of the coustitu vi- tth i* reoui etl to Lk> sub.initte l '• <1 . i i i - • - v.e-sges that, as a g\nera! ru'-*, on - A -" i principles, th-* whole ceustitatio i ... -u'cnitted ; but accord ng to h s uti ' - • gof the organic act of K t.;.- ts, there ••in :ratire obligation to tiie 7 . -t:on for their approval or di-xjv T * ut no cb'ignt: >n *o sn'miit the enthr : - 4 In other words, he regards the a the Nebraska bi.'!. as havingoi '.de l - fs "pi ai of the slavery cluu-e. a d jrovid i sp-it wi of that question in a ~ d fferrnt from that in which other do • * hval. as contrad -tinguished from should be deckled ritr. '"-'R lossy with profnmd respect for ' * - .ieutof the Un ted States, that I eon- T et iat oo this point he he ho coraraittcl ; err\rr. an error whhrh lie* at the •-" vn of his whole argument on this yj •• r I can well under-laod how that dis • ra - ,j statesman ca'oe to fall in*o this er . n{ * ' n country at the time bill was jm-red : be was not a : 4 "ty to the cootroversr. and the discussion j 4 "' "* place daring its passage. He was .Id* the honor and the d'goitv o-untry with great wisdom and distinc jj V 1 * * foreign coort. Thus deeply engros>- •L* 4 *koie energies were absorbed in con ,B - ?reat d pkvmatic qaestion* that d - attenticn from the mere territorial .Jt ? disenssions then goiu* on in -bena* e the House of Represeotn •>v." xj - the people at home. Under be may well bare fallea * " 9wd fjnd tmecTa.' git is THE BRADFORD REPORTER. in regard to the object of the Nebraska bill aud the principles asserted in it. The President, in bis message, has made a:i unanswerable argument in fivor of the princi ple which requires this question to be sent back. It is stated in the message, with more clearness and force than any language I can command ; but I can draw your attention to it aud refer you to the argument in the mes sage, hoping that you will take it as a part of my speech—as expressing my idea more forci bly than I aiu able to express it. The Presi dent suys that a question of great interest, like the slavery question, cannot be fairly de cided by a convention of delegates, for the rea son that the delegates are elected in districts, and in some districts a delegate is elected by a small majority ; in others by an overwhelm ing majority ; so that it often happens that a majority of the delegates are one wav, while a majority of the people are the other way ; and therefore it would be unfair, and inconsistent with the great principle of popular sovereign ty, to allow a body of delegates, not represent ing the popular voice, to establish domestic in stitutions for the mass of the people. This is the argumeut to show that yon cannot have a fair and honest decision without submitting it to the popular vote. The same argument is conclusive with regard to slavery. IJat, Mr. President, is estimated in the mes sage that although it was an unfortunate cir cumstances much to be regretted, that the Leco npton convention did not submit the con stitution to tiie people, yet perhaps it may be treated as regular, because the convention was called by a Territorial Legislature which had been repeatedly recognized by the Con gress of the United States as a legal body.— 1 beg Senators not to fall into an error as to the President's meaning on this point. He docs not say, lie does not mean, that thS con vention had ever been recognized bv the Con gress of the United States as legal or valid On the contrary, he knows, as we here know, that during the last Cougress 1 reported a bid from the Committee on 011 Territories to au thorize the people of Kansas to assemble and form a coustitntion-for themselves. Subse quently, the Senator from Georgia [Mr. TOOMBS] brought forward a substitute for my biii which, after having been uioditicd for him and myself in consultation, was passed by the Senate. Jt is known in the country as "the Toombs bill.' It authorized the people of Kansas Territory to assemble in convention and tonu a constitution preparatory to their admission into the Uniou as a State. Taat bill, it is well known, was defeated in the House of R preventatives. It matters not, for the purpose of this argument, what was tiie reason of its defeat. Whether the rea son was a political one whether it had reference to the then existing contest for the Presidency: whether it was to keep open the slavery ques tion ; whether it was a conviction that the bill a mid not be carried out ; whether it was he- cause there were not people euougii in K I?I --sas to justify the formation ot a Slate : —no matter what tiie reason was, the Hou*e of Representatives refused to pass that bill, and tliu- denied to tiie people of Kansas the riaht to form a eoust tuiiun uud State govern ment at tliis tin. 1 . S> far from tiie Congress of t!c United States having sanctioned or te- galized the eoovent'on which assenibb'd at L •- ecuipton, .t expr --ly w.theld its assent. Tn • i—cut ha* n-t been given, either in express terms or by implication ; ami being withheld, this Kansas constitution liasju-t *uch validity an I ju*t such authority as the Territorial Le gislature ot" K insas could impart to it without the assent, aud iu opposition the known will, of Congress. No v, sir. let nc a-k what s the extent of the authority of a Territorial Legislature a* t> calling a constitutiona! con-'oniio > without the asseut of Congress ? Fortunately this is not a new question ; it does not i ow arise for the first time. When the Topeka constitu tion was presented to the S mute neariv two iears ago, it was referred to the Committee 0:1 Territories, with a variety of measures re lating to K insas Tne committ a made a full < report upon the wliole subject. That report reviewed all the irregular cases which had oc- ' earrcd iti history in the admission of uew States. The committee went on the supped tion that wlKMiercr Congress had pissed an enabling A< t authorizing the people of a Ter ritoiy to form a State Constitution, the eon-! ventiou was regular, and p?**es*;?d all tiie au thority which Congress had delegated to it : but whenever Congress had faded or retused to }a ss an enabling act, the proceeding was irregular and void, unless vitality was impart ed to it by a subsequent act t<>Co:i,gr --* adopt ing and confirming it The friends of the To- ; j>eka constitution n-i-'.cd that although th - r proceedings were in . gular. there were not so irregular ut that Congress coa! 1 cure the er ror by ad sitting Kun*a* with that const.tu tion. They cited a variety of cases, arav.g-: others the Arkansas case. In my report, sanctioned by every member of the Commit tee on Territories. except the S.nator fro® j Vermont, Mr. Col: aver* I r: view ed the Arkr< is case a- well as tiie o'h-.r*. a id af firmed tiie doctrine estabiisiied by Genera! Jackson's admiuistration and enunciated in the opinion of Mr. Attorney General Butler, a part of which opinion was copied into the re port and published to the country at the ( time. * * * * * * Having thus shown that the contention at I.ec* rapt ion had no power, uo authority to form ami establish a government, but had power to draft a petition, il it embodied the will of the people of Kansas, ought to he taken j as such an exposition of their will yet, if it did not embody their will ought to be reject ed — having shown tlies? facts, let roe proceed and inquire what was the undemanding of the ptopie of Kansas, when the delegates were elected ? I understand, from the history of the transaction, that the people who Toted for delegates to the Lecomptou convention. and those who refeed to vove—both partiw—un derstood the Territorial act to mean that they were elected only to frame a constitution, ad sahas't it to the people for the*? rmtiScaUot <9* rwjwtior I esy that bfth jwrri* : n Hmt Tcr PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY AT TOWANDA, BRADFORD COUNTY, PA., BY E. O'MEARA GOODRICH. ritory, at the same time of the election of del egates, so understood the object of the conven tion. Those who voted for delegates did so with the understanding that that they had r.o power to make a government, but only to tVarae one for submission ; aud those who staid awav did so with the same understanding. Now for the evidence. The President of the United States tells us, that he had une quivocally expressed his opinions, in the form of instructions to Governor Walker, assum ng that the constitution was to be submitted to the people for ratification. When we look in to Governor Walker's letter of acceptance to , the offi.-e of Governor, we find that lie stated expre.ssiv that he accepted it with the under standing that the President and his whole Cab inet concurred with him that the constitution, when formed, was to be submitted to the peo ple for ratification. Then look into the in structions given by the President of the Uni ted States, through Gen. Cass, the Secretary of State, to Governor Walker, aud you there find that the Governor is instructed to use the military power to protect the polls when the ■ constitution shall be -übinitted to the people of Kansas for their free acceptance or rejec-1 tion. Trace the lrstury a little further, aud you will find that Governor Walker went to Kansas and proclaimed, in his inaugural and iii his speeches at Topeku. and elsewhere, that it was the distinct understanding, not only of himself, hut of those in higher power than him i self—meaning the President and Ins Cabinet —that tlie constitution was to be submitted to the people for their free acceptance or rejec tion, and th it lie would use all the power at his command t defeat its acceptance by Con gress, if it wore not thus submitted to the vote of the people. Mr President, I am not going to stop and j inquire how far the Nebraska-bill, which said the people should be left perfectly free to form ' their constitution for themselves. authoriz?the President, or the Cabinet, or Governor Wal-1 ker, or any otiier territorial offi.er, to inter fere and tell the convention of Kansas whether | they should or should not submit the question to trie people. I am not going to stop to in quire how far they were authorized to do that, ' it being my opinion that the spirit of the Ne braska bill required it to lie done. It is suffi cient for ray purpose that the Administration of the Federal Government unanimously, fliat the administration of the territorial govern ment, in all its parts, unanimously understood the territorial law under which t ie convention i was assembled to mean that the constitution j t > be formed by that convention should be sab-! milled to the people for ratification or reive- ' tion, and, if not confirmed by a majority of the people, should be null and void, without ! coining TO Congress for approv Not cn'y did ti.e National <_i jVe-n.mcnt ana the territorial government so ind>r.-Ta id the | law at the time, 1 at, as 1 have a'r a ly stated the people of the Territory so underst >J it.— As a further evid ace o i that point, a largo number, if not a majority, of the delegates were j instructed in the Humiliating conventions to *ut mit ti.e eons'i atiuii to the people forrutifi cation. 1 know that the d!• gate- !r mDoug las county, eight in number, .Mr. Calh->un, prv<- id- nt of '.lie en. n'ioi:, be g among theui. were not only ustructeJ tiiuj to ?u :.i t the question, but t'i y -ia.io-i and p'lbi!- 1 •d, while candidates, a writicu pledge that they would submit t t> the people for ratification. I know that men. h g'> in authority and in the confidence of tuc territorial and National Gov ernment, eanvas-ed every part of Kansa* dur ' ikjt the election of delegates, and each of then pledged themselves to the people that no snap judgment was to be taken : tost tfie consti t tut.o.i was to Ijc rubuiittcd to the people for acceptance or rejection : that it would he void nui*.-- that it was done ; that the A huiu'.stra tioii would spurn and -corn it a- a vl 'ation of tiie pr.:.vipic> on which it came into |>.nrer, and that ■ Democratic Congress would hurl it from their presence as an in-ult to Democrats who s*o>>d j iedged to see tne ]x-opie itit free lo fo. ai tiit.i' uonies'ic institutions for ti. 'tis Ives, j Not only that, sir, but up to the time wh-n the convention assembled, on the I-: •*' sv*p ! tember, so far as I can learn, it was trader-to 1 everywhere lout tiie constitution was to lie suir mitu-d for ratification or reject.on. Tney met, i however; ou the 1-t of scjk®brr, and aqjouru- ( .ed r.nti! after the October election. I think it was wise a d fwnliiit that they -bou! i iiave ;id" UTitd. They wk did wish to bring a ijquil i tioa into that election w.ik-h would d vide the Democratic party, and weaken our < h;uic- s or success in the elect on. I wa- rejoiced when I saw that they did adjourn, so us not to show their hand on any question that would divide and distract the pirtv until after the election. , During that recess, wii.lv the coiiviiiinii w.i alourned, Governor Ransom the Democratic . candidate for CuMttli. run"c.g aga:n-t the j present delegate faun tfint Territory, was can vassing i very part of K e.*t* in f-tvor of the . doctrine of sub in tting the eon-: Tution to the iKople. declaring that the Democratic party were in favor of such suhfii.sston, and lis u it was a slander of the 1>! u-k Republicans to imi tate tiie charge that tire Democratic party did not intend To carry out that pledge in good faith. Tims, up to the time of tne meeting of I the convention, in October last, the pretense . wa* kept up. tiie profession was openly made. . aad bcheTed by me, and, 1 th xigiit believed >v them, that tiie convention intended to submit a constitution totlic people.and did not attempt to put a government in operation without such ] submission. Tue election being ewer, the Deia . ocratic party being defeated by an overwhelm ! ing vote, the Oppositiou having triumphed, ' and got }x?-sessioii of both branches of the Le gislature, and having Heeled their territora! IVlcgate. tiie contentiou asscmided, and tbea proceeded to complete their work. Now let us stop to inquire bow they redeem ed the pledge to submit the constitution to the 1 people They 6rst go on and make a consti tiitioo. Then tbey make a scbedtde. io which ther provide that the ooasUtotion, oo the a Ist of December —tne present month— shall be submitted to all the 4o*a fM inhabitants of ! the Territory oo that day, for their free ac rr hs " REGARDLESS OF DT HUNCIATIOIT T .OM ANY QUARTER." to wit : —thus acknowledging that they were bound to submit it to the will of the people, conceding that they had no right to put it in to operation without submitting it to the peo ple, providing in the instrument that it should take effect from and after the date of its rati fication, and not before ; showing that the i constitution derives its vitality, in their esti mation, not from the authority of the conven tion, but from that vote of the people to which it was to be submitted for their free accep tance or rejection. llow is it to be submit ted '! It shall be submitted in this form : i " Constitution with slavery or constitution with no slavery." All men must vote for the constitution, whether they like it or not, in or der to be permitted to vote for or against sla very. Thus a constitution made by a conven tion that had authority to assemble and peti tion for a redress of grievances, but not to es tablish u government—a constitution made un der a pledge of honor that it should be sub- \ milted to the people before it took effect ; a i constitution which provides, on its face, that j it shall have no validity except what It derives j from such submission—is submitted to the peo- j pie at an election where all men are at liber-1 ty to come forward freely without hiuderauce j and vote for it, but no man is permitted to re j cord a vote against it. That would lie as fair an election ns some of the enemies of X;i|>o!eoii attributed to him when he was elected first Consul. He is said to have called out his troops and had them reviewed by his officers with a speech, patriot ic and tair in its professions, in which he said to them : " Now, my soldiers, you are to go to the election aud vote freely ju-t as you please. If you vote for Na{oieou, all is well ; vote against him, and you are to be instantly shot." That was a fair election. [Lausrhter.j This election is to be equals fair. All men in fa vor of the constitution may vote for it—all niei! against it slia.l not vote at all Why uot let them vote against it ? I presume you have asked many a man this question. I have asked a very large number of the gentlemen wiio framed the constitution, quite a number of delegates, and a still larger number of per sons who are their friends, aud I have receiv ed the same auswer from every one of them. 1 never received any other answer, and I pre sume we never shall get any other answer.— What is that ? They say if they allowed a negative vote the cou-titutiou would have been voted down by an overwhelming majori ty, and heuce the fellows shall not be allow ed to vote at all. Laughter.] Mr. President, that may be true. It is no part of my purpose to deny tiie projiosition that that co istitution would have been voted down if submitted to the people. I believe it would hare been voted down by a majority of four to one. iam informed by men well post ed there—Democrat;—that it would be voted d >w!i by t n to one ; some say by twenty to one. But is it a good reason why you should de clare it in force, without being submitted to the people, merely because it would have been voted down bv five to one if vou had submit- t-.'u it ? What does tiiat fact prove ? Daes it not show imd.uiably that AW overwhelming majority of t i;e ]>eopie of K .nsas are unaltera bly oppose Ito that constitution ? Will vou force it on them agaiii>t their will simply be cause they would have voted it down if you had consulted them ? If you will, are you go ing to force it upon them under the plea of leaving them perfectly free to form and regu late their domestic institutions in their own way : I- that the mode in which lam called u;>on to carry out tiie principle of self-govern ment and popular sovereignty in the Territo ries—to force a const.:t.ou oa the people against tiK-ir will, in opposition to their pro test, with a knowledge of the fact, and then to assign, as a reason for my tyranny, that they would be so ohstwiate and so jiervcrse a to vote down the constitution if I had given them an opjiortunity to lee consulted about it? ST, 1 deny your right or mine to inquire of these people what tiieir objections to that con stitutiou are. Thev have a right to judge for themselves whether thev Ike or dislike it. It is no answer to teii me luat the constitution i a good one a.iJ uno'>i-ct'.onub!e. It is not >at:sfa.*tory to me to have tbe President say in his message thnt t:e constitution is an ad mirable one, hkc aii the constitutions of the isew states that have been recently formed.— Whether good or bad., whether obnoxious or n i- none of sny LU-.M-> and none of yours It is their bu-.'n- and not ours. 1 care no: what tin j have in their constitution. so that it - liis them u i do -s not violate the Consti tution of the United States and thflfllidiaii tal principles of liberty up >u which our ii-sii tirtitni rest. I am not going to argue tin* ■ueMabO whether the banking system estab lished in that constitution is wise or unwise. It .-ays there shah lie no monopolies, but there -ball lie oi ' bank of discou\t in the state, with two bra-v-hes Ail I have to say on that point i-. if they want a banking system let them have it ; if they do not want it let them i • .iMt it Ji they want a bank with two branches, bo it so ; .f they want twenty it is iK'iie of my bns;...-s>. and it matters not to tu whether one of them shall be on theaortli -Ue and the other on the south side of the Kaw nver. or where they shall be. While I have uo rigut to expect to be con sulted on that point. I do hold thai tlie pie of Kan? s Lave the right to be consulted and to decide it, and you have no rightful au thority to deprive them of that rrivilese It is DO justification, in my raird. to say that the provisions for the eligibility tor the offices of Governor and Lieutenant Governor require twenty years" citizenship in the United States. If men think that BO person should vote or hold office until he has been here twenty years they have a right to think so ; and if a ma jority of the people of Kansas thick that i>o man cf foreign birth should vote or held office unless be has lived there twenty years, it is their right to say so, and I haTe no right to interfere with them . it it their bo*iu>ss. not mine ; 'oat if I Hved there 1 should not be wil ling to have that provision in the constitution without befog heard opoa the subject, and i% bswad 'o record -**• poet*** I have nothing to say about their system of taxation, IN which they have gone back and resorted to the old exploded system that we tried in Illinois, but abandoned because we did uot like it. If they wish to try it and get tired of it and abandon it, be it so ; but if I were a citizen of Kansas I would profit by the j experience of Illinois on thai subject, and de I feat it if I could. Yet I have no objection to their baring it if they want it ; it is their bu siness, not mine. So it is in regard to the free negroes. They provide that 110 free negro shall be permitted to live in Kansas. % I suppose they have a right to say so if they choose ; but if I lived there I should want to vote on that question. We, in Iliiuois, provide that no more shall come there. We say to the other States, " Take care of your own free negroes and we will take care of ours." But we do not say ' that the negroes now there shall not be per mitted to live in Illinois ; and I think the peo- ' pie of Kansas ought to have the right to say i whether they will allow them to live there, 1 and if they are uot going to do so, how tLey are to dispose of them. So you may go 011 with all the different clauses of the constitution. They may be all right ; they may be all wrong. That is A question on which my opinion is worth noth ing. The opinion of the wise aud patriotic Chief Magistrate of the United States is nut worth anything as against that of the people j of Kansas, for they have a right to judge for i themselves ; and neither Presidents, nor Sena tors, nor House of Representatives, nor any other power outride of Kansas, has a right to judge for them. Hence it is no justification, 111 my mind, for the violation of a great princi- j pie of self-government, to say that the consti tution you are forcing on them is not particu-j larly obnoxious, or is excellent in its provisions. Perhaps, sir, the same thing might be said of the celebrated Topeka constitution. I do nut recollect it= peculiar provisions. I KNOW . one thing : we Democrats, we Nebraska rneu, would not even look into it to see what its provisions were. Why ? Because we said it was made by a political party, and not by the people ; that it was made in defiance of the authority of Congress ; that if it was as pare j as the Bible, as holy as the ten command ments, yet we would not touch it uutil it was submitted to aud ratia L d by the people of Kau-, sas, in pursuance of the forms of law. Per- j haps that Topeka but for the mode of making it, would have been unexcep tionable. Ido not know ; I do not care.— You have no right to force au unexceptiona ble constitution on a people. It does not initi-, gate the evil, it does not diminish the insult, it does not ameliorate the wrong, t.iatyouare forcing a good thing on them lam not wil ling to be forced to do that which I would do if I were left free to judge and act for myself. Hence I assert that there is no justification t to be made for this flagrant violation of popu lar rights in Kansas, on the piea that the con- ! stitution which they have made is uot particu-. lariv obnoxious. i but, sir, tne President of the United States is really and sincerely of the opinion that the slavery clause has been fairly and impartially submitted to the free acceptance or rejection of the people of Kansas and that, inasmuch as that was the exciting and paramouut ques tion, if they get the right to vote as they please- 1 on that subject they ought to be .-atisfied j j and possibly it might be better if we would accept it. and put an end to the question.— Let me ask, sir, is the slavery clause fairly submitted, so that the people cau vote for or ag iiust it ? suppose I w ere a citizen of Kan sas, and should go up to the poll* and say, '■ I desire to vote to make Kansas a Slave State : here is my ballot."' Tbey reply to m* •' Mr. Dougla<, just rote for that constitution j first, if you please." " Ob, no I" I answer, I cannot vote for that constitution conscii-n- ; tiously. lam opposed to the clause by which . you locate certain railroads in such away a to sacrifice uiy county and my part of the ; State. lam opposed to that banking system, j 1 am opposed to this Know Nothing or Anaeri- j can clause in the couatituticu about tiie qua i- , hcation for office. I cannot vote for it '* — Then they answer, " You shall not rote on j making it a slave State.'' I thtn say, ** J [ want to make it a free State." They reply, j •• Vote for that constitution first, and then you I can vote to make it a free State ; otherwise ! you cannot." Thus ti.tr disqualify every free- State man who w:il not first vote for the Con- j .-titutkui : tiiey disqualify every slave-State man who will not first vote for the constito- > lion. No matter whether or not the voters; -ia'.e that they cannot conscicntioGsly vote for those provision?, thev reply. •' You cannot vote for or against slavery here. Take the I constitution as we have made it, take the dec- j live franchise as we have established it, take j the banking ;y-tera as we have dictated it, take the railroad Sines as we have ioeated them, take the judiciary system as we have formed it. t >ke it all as we bate fixed it to -uit and a-k no qoesrions, bnt vote . for it, or you -has! not vote either for a slave ; or free t??ate." In oth.r word*, tbe legal ef fect of the schedule is this : all those who are ir. favor of this constitution may vo*e for or against dxverv, as tbey pleas? ; bat ail those j who are n-t this constitution are disfran- ' chised. and shall not vote at all. That L the ra-xle in which the slavery proposition is sab- J mitred. Every man opposed to the constitu tkm is di>. r raa-; .-cd ou the slavery clause , How many are they ? Tr.-y tell you there is a major: y for they say the constitution will be voted down instantly, by an overwhelming majority, if you allow a negative vote. This shows that a are against it. They disqualify and dNfranchi.*" every roan who is agaiust it, thus referring th* slavery ciursM? to a in nority of the people of Kansas, and leav ing that minority free to vote for or against j the sfaTejr clause. as tbey chowcr. — Abandon that great principle, and the party is not worth saving, and cannot be saved, af ter it shall be violated. I trust we are not to Ire rushed upon this question. Why shall it be done 7 Who is to be ben-Sted 7 Is the South to be the gainer ? Is the North to be the gainer 7 Neither 'be North nor tbe South has the right to gain a sectional advantage by trickerv. But I ata le seecbed to wait until 1 hear from the election oc the 21st of December. I am told thst perhaps ibst will pot it all right, and will save the whole difficulty. How can it? Perhaf* there may be a large rote There may b? a large rote returned. [Laugh ter Bat I dei.y that it is possible to have a fair vote on the slavery claase ; and 1 aay that it is not impossible to have any rote on the con-titution Why wait for the mockery of an election when it is provided unalterably v.ut the people canco; vote —when the majori ty are disfranchised But I am told on all sides. " Oh. just wait; the pro -lavery clause w=.U be voted down."— That does not obviate any of my objections ; it docs not diminish any of them. You bare no more right to force a fn-e Spate constitu tion on Ransas than a constitution. If Kansas wants a slave-State constitution she has a right to it : if slie wants a free-State co istimtson .-he has a right to it. It is none of rot buvne-s which war the slarery clause i< decided I care rot whether it is voted down or voted np Do you suppose, after the pledge- of my Wkw that I won id go for that principle and Dave the people to vote as they choiee, tha; I would &