The press. (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1857-1880, February 22, 1858, Image 1

THE PRESS,
PUBLISHED DAILY, (SUNDAYS EXCEPTED,)
HY JOHN W. FORNEY.
OFFICE, NO. 417 CHESTNUT STREET.
DAILY PRESS,
Tarns& CMS PER WINS, payable to the carriers
Moiled to gobletiltoreout of the city at AIZ DOGLERII
run Amnon j Po on DOLLARS FOR SIGHT MOTU j THRIR
DOLLARS FOR Six MOSTREI, invariably in wham) for the
time ordered.
TAT-WEEKLY PRESS,
Mailed to Subscribers out of the Oily at Tunas Dot•
sag PER ANNUM, in adVEZICEI.
WEEKLY PRESS.
Tex WBBXLY PRIM will be sent to Subscribers by
mail, (per annum, in advance,) at 82 00
Whree Ooplee, " it 5 00
Five Copies, Si ,c - 8 00
Ten Copies, g, 12 00
"
Twenty copies, " " (boon° address)._ 20 00
Twenty Copies ; or over, " (to address of each
subscriber), each 1 20
For a Club of Twenty-one or over, we will send an
xtra copy to the getter-up of the Clu b.
j]:7 Postmasters are requested to act as Agents for
WasitLY PlBB5.
IVARBURTQN's INIMITABLE
00 - URINES FOR Tilt ERSE
Embrace an the points neoessary to
GENTEEL EFFECT,
and all thedetaili and Weer elegancles which %wart
0011 FORT, AND DURABILITY.
Gentlemen are invited to eall and examine.
cw2s-em 490 OHISTIsTUT Street
Otalts.
FAIRBANKS'S PLATFORM WALES.
FAIRBANKS & EWING,
MASONIC HALL, 716 CHESTNUT STREET,
ja26-Stn
Watches, itu3elrp, ar.
BAILEY & CO., CHESTNUT STREET,
Manufacturers of
BRITISH STERLING- SILVER WA 3,
Onder their ineeeetion, on the premises exolouitv ely
Citizens end Strangers are invited to visit our manu
factory
WATCHES.
tlenatantly on hand a splendid stook of Superior
Watches, of all the celebrated makers.
DIAMONDS.
Necklaees, Bracelets, Brooches, Rar-Rings,
Zlager-
Rings, and all other articles in the Diamond line.
Drawings of NEW RESIGNS will be roads free of
charge for those wishing work made to order.
RICH GOLD JEWELRY.
A beautiful seeortutent of all the new styles of Tine
Jewelry, anal SA Monte, Stone and Abort cameo,
Pearl, floral, Otwrbtenole, Mundane,
Lava, he., &a.
SHRYFIELD CASTORS, BASKETS, WAITERS, he.
Liao, Bronze and Marble ()LOCKS, of newest styles,
and of superior quality. aul-dtw&wly
aE. CALDWELL & 00.,
• 482 CHESTNUT Street,
Have reeeived, per estimate, new styles
Jewelry, Glietelnins, fleet Chains.
Splendid Pans, Hair Pins.
Pratt Stands, Sugar Beekcie.
Jet Goode and Plower Vases.
Coral, Lava and Mosaic Seta.
Sole Agents In Philadelphia for the sale of Merles
Frodahant's LONDON TIME-KEEPPRS. delo
SILVER WARE.-
WILLIAM. WILSON & SON.
MANUFACTURERS OF SILVER WA RR,
(ESTABLISHED ]912,) •
B. W 005555 FIFTH AND 01111557 OTRIETB.
$ large ageortneent of SILVER W ARE, of every de
■eriptioa, eos3etantly on hand, or made to order to match
any pattern desired.
Importers of Sheffield and Birmingham imported
VOSS. se3o-d/twly
jS. JARDEN & BRO. •
MANUP/OTURERSAND 1111.0117 W Of
SILVER-PLATED WAKE,
Ho. 804 Chestnut Street, above Third, op stain,)
Philadelphia.
Constantly on hand and for sale to the Trade,
SEA SETS OCOMUNION SERVICE SETS. WINS,
PITCHERS, GOBLET_ ,t 3 ODDS, WAITERS, BAS
KETS, CASTORS, KNIVES, SPOONS, FORKS,
LADLES, &a., Ae.
Gilding and plating on all kinds of metal. 88E-ly
Olontn•
U.S.
TREASURY NOTES
7 0 2 Mt .r
RIGIreSI T RATES,
BY
CRONISII ar, CO,
fe2-1m 40 South THIRD Street
glublications.
PHYSICIANS' POCKET DAY-BOOK
MOH 13158.--Just published and for ease by
C. J. PRIOR & 00. p
No. 88 South SIXTH Street, above'Chennut.
The Day-Book contains an Almanac, Tables of coin-
Kimble° Medicinal Doses, Peisous and their Antidotes,
Irritiah and French Medicinal Measures, Atomic
Weights and Combining Proportions, Articles of Diet,
Comparative Thermometric denies, Baths--Simple and
Medicinal, Tables of Doses of all the principal pre
parations of the Pharmacopia, Visiting List and Index,
Elanka for Monetary Engagements, Bank Account,
Nurses' Addresses, Bills and Accounts asked for, Vac
eiossiec and Obstetric Engage. tits, English, Trenoh,
and American Medlaal Periodic:'
Being prepared with the co-operation of several
jminent members of the Trpfession, the Publishers
*nut that this little Manual will all a want hitherto
unanpplied, and with a view to its future improvement,
will be happy to reeelvs any suggestions respecting
eAtlitinn Ae-
The above are prepared for 25 and b0 — pstienis,_ any
bound in various styles. ]al
spay and Cuesleo.,
SOAP AND CANDLES.
REMOVAL from 18T SOUTH FOURTH STREET,
to my Manufactory, 10 and 14 HELM STREET, be
tween Lombard and South, and Front and Second
Streets.
Thankful to my numerous Weeds for their past favors,
I solicit a continuance of the same, havinganlarged my
-manufactory so as to enable me to have constantly on
;hand a Targe stock of well-eassoned Soaps, free from
, Fish Oil; Palm, Variegated White Honey, Castile,
and
:all kinds of toilet Soaps, Chemical Olive Soap of pure
:material, Settled Pale, and Brown Soap, English Sal.
;Soda and Pearl Starch, Sperm, Adtunantine, and Tallow
=Candles of all sizes constantly on hand. Having
:adopted the cash system , I am enabled to sell my gouda
tat the lowa% prime. F. cONwAY.
Philadelphia.
8.---Cash paid for Tallow and Grease. no 14-Sm
%gnctiltural 3mpLements.
GARDEN•SEEDS f GARDEN SEEDS !-
A very large and well-selected stock, warranted
freehand genuine.
Wholesale and Retail Seed and Implement Warehouse,
No. 627 MARKET Street, below Seventh.
fe-18 BOAS, SPANGLER, & 00.
vUMMINGS:B UNRIVALLED HAY,
V STRAW, AND FODDER CUTTERS. —Pratt's
Horse Rakers, Grain Fans. Horse Powers and Thresh
ers, Farmers' Boilers, Neweham's Patent Boiler for
Steaming Feed for Stock, and every other article suita
ble for Farmers' use.
BOAS, SPANGLNK. & CO.,
Implement and Seed Warehouse,
627 MARKET Street, below Seventh
KETCHUM'S REAPER AND MOWER
FOR 7.8.53.—The improvements are a reel, spur.
gearing, new arrangement for lowering and raising cut
ter-bar, improved guards, improved knives, strength•
ening of frame, &c. sole Agents,
BOAe, - SPANGLEit, Sc 00.,
felB 627 MARKET street, below Seventh.
4E burational.
LEX. M. GOLDSBOROUGH, ORGAN
mt and Professor of the science of Music, would be
:thappytohave pupils on the Organ, Piano. Melodeon, Se—
rraphim , and Singing. Moe 1121 MARKET btreet, above
_Eleventh. telo-Im*
SNYDER LEIDY. JAMES M. LEIDY.
• TO PAM LEIS AN HOIIIiB WITH PROFIT,
GO TO
LEIDY BROTHERS' BUSINESS ACADEMY,
—Nos. 145 and 1.50 SIXTH Street, near RAGE, the first
nstablished INSTITUTION in this city for
imparting exclusively
BUSINESS KNOWLEDGE viz:
- "MERCANTILE ARITHMETIC, WRITING AND
BOOK. KEEPING.
ACADEMY OPEN DAY AND EVENING.
Especial attention given to
jal9-Sru ORNAMENTAL WRITING.
Stationern.
WANK BOOKS AND STATIONERY.
DAVID Ef. HOGAN, Blank 11.91 Manufacturer,
Etationer mad Printer, No. 100 WALNUT Street. is pre
.pm-ed tt all ttmee to furnish, either film the shelves
.or make to order, Hooka of every desciiption, suitable
for Itanks, Public Meek Merchants, and whers, of the
best quality of English or American Paper. and bound
in various styles, in the most substantial manner.
Orders for JOB PRINTINfi of every dernription.
Engraving and Lithographing executel 'NCI., ',licitness
and deepatch.
A. general assortment of English, French ay.!' Ameri
can Stationery.
Concerning Mr. Hogan's contribution to the Franklin
Institute, the Committee say—" This dhoolay of blank
books for banking and mercantile use is the best in the
rothibition. The 'selection of the material is good, the
workmanship most excellent, and their finish and ap
pearance neat and appropriate." no2o-tf
BEATRICE CENCI.-
JAMES R. EARLS
WILL OPEN,
ON JANUARY 23D.,
The beautiful
STATUE
"BEATRICE CENCI,
RLEEPING, ON THE EVE OF HER EXECUTION."
MISS 'HARRIET UOSISIER
ADMISSION, TWENTY-FIVE CENTS
EARLE'S GALLERIES,
BIG INIZOTNIIT 13TREET,
PHILADELPHIA
FICTRAORDINA2Y REDUCTION IN
the price of DOCTOI.I. MATTSON'd ELASTIC
SELF-SYRINGES, which, for compactness, Whew:icy,
and durability, have never been equalled. These in
struments cannot get out of order t and can be used by
both sexes and for children. A committee of eminent
Roston physicians have reported that they are " Taa
BUT KNOWN."
PRICE, ONE DOLLAR ONLY!
Bold by the dozen and half gross to the Trade, at
Mattson & Co.'s prices, at SAMUEL BIDES'S
Laboratory arm Pharmacy,
TWELFTH and CHESTNUT Ste.
COLLECTIONS
V Made on all seawalls points hi the United iltatee
at satisfactory rates
ja26-1m
eI9TTON- 200 bales good Middling to A
11../ MingA: Cotton. in store end for sale by
& bfACALISTR,
Tie Wr* Wstor. straw!
TOOD'S BOWEL 11
NORTH CIORNIR NINTH AND BROWN Ea
OYITNNA in slintylell. Bandy, Win% tip,
tral-Pai IL estrAxteadent
VOL. I. NO. 173.
Ett 1-iress,
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1858.
At s meeting of the Democratic State Commit
tee, held at Buehler's Hotel, Harrisburg, January
19, 1858, it was
Resolved, That the next Democratic State Con
vention be held at Harrisburg, on the 4th day of
March next.
Pursuant to said resolution, delegates from the
several Senatorial and Representative distriots of
the State will eonveno in the Hall of the House of
Representatives, at the Capitol, on THURSDAY,
MARCH 4, 1858, at 10 o'clook A. M., to nominate
candidates for Judge of the Supreme Court and
Canal Commissioner, and for the transaction of
such other business as pertains to the authority of
snob Convention.
C. R. BUCRALEIV, Chairman
J. N. IhrTcninsopr, 1 Secretaries.
R. J. HALDEMAN,
Report of Senator Douglas from the
I am constrained to withhold my assent from the
conclusion to which the majority of the committee
have arrived, for the reason that there is no stifle
factory evidence that the Constitution formed at
Lecompton is the act And deed of the people of Kan
sas, or that it embodies their will. In the absence
of all affirmative evidence that the Leoompton
Constitution does "moot the sense of the people to
be affected by it," and in opposition to the over
whelming majority recorded against it at a fair and
valid election held in pursuance of law, on the 4th
day of January, 1858, it is argued that the Lecomp
ton Convention was duly constituted with full au
thority to ordain a Constitution and establish a
Government, and consequently the proceedings of
that Convention must bo presumed to embody the
popular will, although such presumption may be
rebutted and overthrown by the most conclusive
evidence to the contrary.
Inasmuch, then, as the right of Congress to ac
cept the Lecompton Constitution, and impose it
upon the . people of Kansas, in opposition to their
known wishes and recorded votes, rests solely upon
the assumption that the proceedings were techni-•
cally legal and regular, and that the regularity
of the proceedings must be made to override the
popular will, it becomes important to inquire
whether the Convention was duly constituted, and
clothed with full power to ordain a Constitution
and establish a State Government to the exclusion
of the organic act and Territorial Government es
tablished
by Congress.
It is conceded that on the 19th day of February,
1857, the Territorial Legislature passed a law pro
viding for the of delegates to a Convention
to form a Constitution and State Government, and
that the Couvention, when assembled in pursuance
of said set, was vested with all the powers which
it was competent for the Territorial Legislature to
minter, and which, by the terms of the act, was
conferred on the Convention, and no more. Did
that Territorial act have the legal effect to author
ize the Convention to abrogate or suspend the Ter
ritorial Government established by Congress, and
substitute a State Government in its place?
The committee, in their reports, have always
held that a Territory is not a sovereign power;
that the sovereignty of a Territory is in abeyance,
suspended in the United States i n trust for the
people when they become a State '
that the Uni
ted States, as the trustee, cannot be divested of
the sovereignty, nor the Territory bo invested
with the right to assume and exorcise it, without
the consent of Congress. By the Kansas-Nebras
ka act the people of the Territory were vested with
all the rights and privileges of self-government on
all rightful subjects of legislation consistent with,
and in obedience to, the organic act; but they
were not authorized, at their own will and plea
sure, to resolve themselves into a sovereign power,
and to abrogate and annul the organic act and
Territorial government established by Congress,
and to ordain a Constitution and State govern
ment upon their ruins without the consent of Con
gress.
It would seem, from his special message, that the
President is under the impression that the Kansas-
Nebraska act, from the date of its passage, on the
30th of May, 1854, when there were not five hun
dred white inhabitants in the whole country, au
thorizing the people of those Territories respec
tively,. or " any portion of the same," at their own
,sovereign will and pleasure, " W proceed and form
'a Conetitutiou in their own way, without an express
'authority from Congress," and to suspend the au
thority of the Territorial Legislature, at least to
the extent of depriving it of the power to submit
a Constitution .to the people for ,ratification or
rejection, before it should be deemed the not and
.rman_. eie, -meet prz—
found respect for the opinions of the President, I
must be pardoned for expressing my firm conviction
that neitherthe provisions of that act, nor the history
of the measure, nor the understanding of its au
thors and supporters at the time of its enactment,
or at any period since. justifies or permits the con
struction which the President has placed upon it.
It is certain that President Pierce, who signed and
approved the Kansas-Nebraska act, and whose
Administration was a unit in support of the mea
sure at the time of its enactment, did not under
stand that it authorized the people of each or
either of those Territories " to proceed and form a
Constitution in their own way, without an express
authority from Congress," from the fact that on
the day of 1856, he sent in a special mes
sage to Congress, in which he recommended an
enabling act for Kansas as the appropriate legis
lative remedy for the evils complained of in that
Territory.
His recommendation is in these words ;
" This, it seems to me, can be best accomplished by
providing that when the inhabitants of Kansas may
desire it, and shall be of sufficient numbers to consti
tute a State, a Convention of delegates, duly elected by
the qualified voters, shall assemble to frame a consti
tution, and thus prepare, through regular and lawful
means, for its admission into the Union as a State. I
respectfully recommend the enactment of a law to
that effect. I recommend, also, that a special appro
priation be made to defray any expense which may be
come requisite in the execution of the laws or the
maintenance of public order in the Territory of Kan-
The message of President Pierce containing
this recommendation was referred to the Commit
tee on Territories by the Senate, and afterfull ex
amination and mature deliberation, this commit
tee, on the 12th day of March, 1856, made an ela
borate report in explanation and vindication of
the principles, provisions and policy of the Kansas-
Nebraska ant, and arrived at the conclusion that
the recommendation of the President furnished
the appropriate and legitimate mode of cue
ducting,, the principles , provisions, and poli
cy of the act to a successful and final consumma
tion, by the passage of an act of Congress autho
rizing the people of Kansas to hold a Convention
and form a Constitution and State Government,
46 when the inhabitants of Kansas may desire it,
and shall be of sufficient numbers to constitute a
State."
-
The committee, in their report, responded to the
President's recommendation In the following lan
guage:
if In compliance with the first recommendation, your
committee ask leave to report a bill authorizinWthe Leg
islature of the Territory to provide by law for the elec
t.ou of delegates by the people, and the assembling of a
Convention to Win n Constitution and State Govern
ment, preparatory to their admission into the Union on
an equal footing with the original gtates, as soon as it
shall appear, by a census to be taken under the direction
of the flovernor, by the authority of the Legislature,
that the Territory cm:talus 93,420 inhabitants—that
being the number required by the present ratio of repre•
sentation for a member of Congress."
Thus it appears that the committee who wrote
and approved the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and the
President who approved and imparted vitality
to it by his signature, did not mean by that act to
authorize or recognise the right of the people
of a Territory with a few hundred or even a few
thousand population, whenever they pleased to
form a Constitution and State Government, with
out an express authority from Congress; " but, on
the contrary, it clearly appears that the authors
of the act understood and intended it to be con
strued and executed as meaning, that while the
people of those Territories remained in a Territo
rial condition, they should exercise and enjoy all
the rights and privileges of self-government in con
formity with the organic act, and that when they
should hive the requisite number, " to constitute
a State," and should desire it, Congress would
give its assent in a subsequent act to authorize
them to form a Constitution and State Govern
ment, and to come into the Union on an equal
footing with the original States, in all respects
whatever. President Pierre did not specify the
number which he deemed necessary to constitute
a State, nor did the Cincinnati Convention, on the
"celebrated occasion" referred to by the Prost
dent, in his annual message, designate the precise
number which entitle the people of all the Terri
tories, including Kansas and Nebraska, " to form
a COnstitution with or without slavery, and be
admitted into tho Union upon terms of per
fect equality with the other States ;" but it is
evident from the language employed that they did
not understand the right of admission to have ac
crued from the date of the organization of each
Territory, nor when there were a row hundred or
a few thousand inhabitants, nor at whatever time
the people of the Territory should feel disposed to
claim the privilege without reforenoe to numbers;
but when, in the language of President Pierce,
"They should be of su f ficient numbers to consti
tute a State;" or in the language of the Cincinnati
Platform, as appears in the extract copied into the
annual message of the Presinent, "whenever the
number of their inhabitants justifies it ;" or in
the language of the Committee on Territories in
the report to which I have referred, ito soon as
it shall appear by a census " that the Terri
tory contains 9:1 7 429 inhabitants, that being
the number required by the present ratio
sf representation for a member of Congress."
So it appears that each of these authorities (if
1 may be permitted to use such a term in this
connection) excludes the idea that sTerritory may
proceed to form a Constitution and State Govern
ment whenever it pleases, without the consent of
Congress and irrespective of the number of its in
habitants; and sustains the position that a Terri
tory is not entitled to admission, according to the
principles of the Federal Constitution, until it
eontailis population enough to constitute a State ;
and that it is the province of Congress, instead of
the Territory, to determine what that number shall
be: while the Constitution of the United States
does not, in terms, prescribe the number of in
habitants regnisito, yet, in view of the foot
that representation in the Rouse of Representa
tives is to be in the ratio IA Federal population,
and that each State, no matter how small its popu
lation, is to be allowed one Representative, it is
apparent that the rule most consistent with fair-
nets and justice toward the other States, and in
..harmony. with • tbt general .Eljnoiples of the
'Metal Vonititutivt, to: fitiwt yOllO, aveording.to
DB3X.BL & 00
i
s I )
s tr "
\-\ S' I ( ; ' •
• ,
~ tit
Vet
(2 fdani, 1111 IA
•
70 0
• 4%101
'10),44 ;doomq7
. j •
XV
_
• : r r
,
. •
_
- - - -
ault ) r.
•
STATE (KONVENTION.
Committee on Territories
the ratio of population for the time being, is
sufficient for a Representative in Congress. A re
ference to the debates which have occurred in all
the cases touching the sufficiency of population in
the admission of a State, will show that the dis
cussion has always proceeded on the supposition
that the rule I have indicated was the true one,
and the effort bad been on the one side to prove
that the proposed State had sufficient population,
and on the other that it bad not the requisite num
bers to entitle it to admission in substantial com
pliance with that rule.
In view of these facts, I respectfully but firmly
insist that neither the principles nor the provi
sions of the Kansas-Nebraska act, nor of the Cin
cinnati platform, justify the assertion that it was
the intention to abrogate this wise and just rule,
and establish In lieu of it the principle that " all
the Territories, including Kansas and Nebraska,"
have a right, whenever they please, and with
whatever population they may happen to possess,
" to proceed and form a Constitution in their own
Way without an express authority from Congress,"
and demand admission Into the Union on the plea
that the organic set was an enabling act. I do
not insist that Congress, in the exercise of a sound
discretion, may not depart from the rule to which
I have referred, and make an exceptional case of a
Territory under peculiar circumstances, as the
Senate proposed, and the House of Representatives
refused to do with Kansas in July, 1856 ; but in
such a case, if any can be shown in our his
tory, it must be regarded as a concession by
Congress, and not the recognition of a right in the
Territory.
That the Senate concurred with President Pierce
and the_
- Committee on Territories that the Kansas-
Nebraska act did not authorise the people of those -
Territories to proceed and form a state Conetitu;
tion whenever they chose, without the consent of
Congrees ; and that the passage of an enabling act
by Congress was the appropriate and legitimate
mode of carrying into effect the principles, provi
sions, and policy of the Kansas-Nebraska act, when
those Territories respectively should have the re
quisite population to entitle them to admission
into the Union as States, according to the princi
ples of the Federal Constitution, as guarantied by
the treaty acquiring the country from France, is
made apparent by the fact that on the 2d day of
July, 1856, in pursuance of the said recommenda
tion of the President and report of the Committee,
the Senate passed an enabling act for Kansas, en
titled "An art to authorise the people of the
Territory of Kansas to form a Constitution and
State Government, preparatory to their .adniis
thin into the Union on an equal
. footing with the
original States." I quote from Senate Journal,
page 414.
4 . Ordered, thlt the bill be engrossed and read a third
time. The said bill was read the third time.
" On the question, Shall the bill pass? it was deter
mined in the affirmative—yeas 33, nay. 12.
cc On motion by Mr, Seward, the yeas and nays being
desired by one-fifth of the Senators pres3nt,
" Those who voted in the affirmative are
"Aleimrs. Allen, Bayard, Bell of Tenn., Benjamin,
Biggs. Bigler, Bright. Brodhead, Brown, Cass. Clay,
Crittenden. Douglas, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Geyer,llunter,
Iverson, Johnson, Jones of lowa, Mallory, Pratt, Pugh,
Reid, Sebastian, Slidell, Stuart, Thompson of Ky.,
Toombs ' Toucey, Weller. Wright, and Yulee.
" Those who voted in the negative are :
"Messrs. Bell of N. II , CoHamer, Dodge, Durkee,
Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Hale, Seward, Trumbull,
Wade, and Wilson.
" So it was
" Resolved, That the Nil pass, and that the title
thereof be as aforesaid."
From this official record, it appears that no
Senator voted against the enabling act for Kansas
in 1856, who had either advocated or voted for the
Konins-Nebraska act in 1854; while it is proper
to remark that those Senators who did vote against
this enabling act justify their opposition upon the
ground that the provisions of the bill, and the
time and circumstances under which it was pro
posed to press it, were not in accordance with their
views of public policy and duty, and not upon the
ground that the organic act was a sufficient ena
bling act to authorize the people of the Terri
tory to ordain a Constitution whenever they
pleased. Greater significance and importance
are imputed to these recommendations, re
ports and votes, in favor of an enabling not for
Kansas, in view of the fact that a few mouths pre
viously the Territorial Legislature had taken the
preliminary steps for calling the Lecompton Con
vention, by ordering an election to be held a few
months thereafter for or against the Convention
while the effect as well as the design of the ena
bling ant, thus recommended by the President and
passed by the Senate, would have been, if it had
passed the souse and become a law, to arrest and
put an end to the irregular and unauthorized pro
cowlings on the part of the Territorial Legislature.
and to substitute in piece of it a regular and legal
mode of proceeding under the authority of Con
gress.
llad the enabling act become a law, whereby the
people of Kansas would have been authorized to
assume and exercise the sovereign power of estab
lishing a Constitution and State Government, the
proceeding would have been regular, lawful, and
in strict conformity with the true intent and mean
ing of the Kansas-Nebraska act. Then the people
of Kansas would have become a sovereign power,
elothed with full authority to establish a Constitu
tion and state Government in their own way, sub
ject only to the Constitution of the United Retell.
But if the proposition be true, that sovereign power
alone can institute Governments, and that the toy
ereignty of a Territory is in abeyance, suspended
- to the mitten MUMS In mist fur the people when
they become a State, and the sovereignty cannot
be divested from the bands of the trustee and
vested in the people of the Territory without the
assent of Congress, it follows as an unavoidable
consequence that the Kansas Legislature, by the
act of February 19,1956. did not and could not
confer upon the Lecompton Convention the sover
eign power of ordaining a Constitution for the peo
ple of Kansas in the place of the organic, law passed
by . Congress.
The Convention seem to have been conscious of
this absence of sovereign power on their part, and
seek to supply the deficiency by referring the Con
stitution to the people at an election on the 21st of
December last, "for ratification or rejection,"
with the further provision that " this Constitution
shall take effect and be in force from and after
its ratification by the people, as hereinbefore pro
vided."
I will quote some of the trOYleions on this point:
"Before this Constitution sent to Congress asking
admission into the Union as a state, it shall be sub
milled to all the white male inhabitants of this Terri
tory, for approval or disapproval as follows," &c.
And again :
" At which election the Constitution formed by this
Convention shall be submitted to all the white mane in
habitants of the Territory of Kansns, in said Territory,
upon that day, and over the age of twenty-one years,
for ratification or rejection,in the following manner and
form," kn.
And further :
, t Sim. 16. This Constitution shall take effect and be
in force from and after the ratification by the people, se
hcreinbefors provlklea. ,s
From these provisions it is clear that the Con
vention did not openly assert and exercise the au
thority to ordain and establish the Constitution by
virtue of any sovereign power vested in that body,
but referred it to the people for ratification or re
jection under the supposition that the popular will,
expressed through the ballot-box, might impart
vitality and validity to it. But before the time
arrived for holding the election on the ratification
or rejection of the Constitution, as provided by the
Convention, the Territorial Legislature interposed
its authority, by the passage of a law providing
that said Constitution should bo submitted to the
people for ratification or rejection, at a fair elec
tiom, to be held, in conformity with the laws of the
Territory, on the 4th of January, 1808. The rea
son for this legislative interposition, by which the
vote on the Constitution was, in effect, to be post
poned from the 21st of December to the 4th of
January, and then held and conducted, and the
returns made, in the manner prescribed by law,
may be deduced froillothe following facts :
1. That, while the Convention recognised the
right of the people of Kansas to " ratify" or " re-
Jeri" Said Constitution, and provided thap it should
not take effect nor be submitted to Congress for ac
ceptance until so ratified, at an election to be held
for the purpose of "ratificatton." or " rejection,"
yet the mode of submission prescribed by the Con
vention was such as to render it impossible for the
people to reject it at said election, even if there
should be but one person offering to vote for it, and
20,000 against, since no person was to be permitted
to vote unless ho would vote for the Constitution,
and those who should offer to vote against the Con
stitution were to be excluded from the polls, and
deprived of the privilege of voting at all at said
election.
2. That the mode of submission prescribed by
the Convention did not fully present the question
to the people to be decided at that election whether
Kansas should be a slaveholding or a non-slave
holding State, for the reason that while there were
known to be many pro-slavery men residing in the
Territory who were anxious to vote in favor of
snaking Kansas a slaveholding State, but were at
the same time irreconcilably opposed to that Con
stitution, and while it was also known that there
were many free- tats man resident in the Terri
tory who were equally opposed to the Convention,
whether the slavery clause should be retained or
excluded ; yet the Convention had promised in
effect that no pro,slavery man should vote in favor
of making Hansel a alavebolding State, unless he
at the same time recorded his vote in favor of the
Constitution ; nor should any free-State man vote
in favor of making Kansas a free State, unless he at
the same time would record his vote in favor of
the Constitution.
3. That inasmuch as the Convention did not pos
sess any legislative power, it could not prescribe,
and did not attempt to provide, any penalties or
punishments for illegal and fraudulent voting, or
for false and fraudulentroturns, except by a vague
and vain reference to the Territorial laws.
4. That the schedule of the Constitution hail
taken the whole management of the said elootion
out of the bands of the Territorial officers, and
placed it in the hands of commissioners, judges,
and clerks, to be appointed by and under the
authority of the president of the Convention ; and
even if the Territorial laws could be construed as
applicable to the persons so appointed to conduct
this election, yet fraudulent and spurious, and
forged returns could be made with impunity, as
had been the case in other elections, for the reason
that, by some singular omission or inadvertence,
the election laws of the Territory failed to provide
any penalties or punishment for such offences.
Do not these facts furnish sufficient reasons to
justify the Territorial Legislature in interposing
its authority, as it did on the ITtli of December, in
the passage of a law which, in effect, postponed
the election on the ratification or rejection of the
Constitution until the 4th of January, and provi
ded that on that day a fair election should be held,
at which any legal voter in the Territory might
record his vote for or against the Constitution, and
for or against the slavery article, fully and uncon
ditionally, and also made wise and effective pro
visions to protect the ballot-bex and returns from
fraud and violence,
The result of the election on the 4th of January
on the ratification or rejection of the Leoompton
Constitution wait officially announced by the Go
vernor and presiding officers of the two houses of
the Legislature of the Territory, in the following
proclamation •
In accordance with the provisions of an adt entitled
An act submitting the Constitution framed at Lo
compton, under the act of the Legislative Assembly of
Kenelle Territory, entitled An act to provide for
taking a seams and election of delegates to a Conven
tion,' passed Feb. 19, A. D. 1557 , the undersigned
'sminilthoo the following as the official vete of the iket-
PHILADELPHIA. MONDAY. FEBRUARY 22. 1858.
ple of Rause Territory, on the questions as therein
submitted on the 4th day of January, 186 B:
Against the Le- For the Lec'n For the Lec'n
COUNTIEB. compton Con- Cone , ” with Con, without
stitution. Slavery. klavery.
Leavenworth ....1,997 10 3
Atchison 530 4 .
Doniphan 561 1 2
Brown 187 2
Nensaha 238 1
Marshall ... 88
Riley 287 7
retawatomie .... 207 2
Calhoun 245
Jefferson 377 1
Johnson ..... ..... 302 2
Lykena 358 1 1
Linn 510 1 3
,
Bourbon 268 66
Douglas 1,647 21 2
Franklin 304
Anderson 177
Allen 191 I 4
Shawnee . 822 28 a
Coffee 46.5 4
Woodgon. 60
Richardson . 177 1
Breckenridge ~.. . 191
Madison 40
Davie 21 _
Totals ......10,228 138 24
Some precincts have not yet sent iu their return*, but
the above is the complete vote received up to this dat.
J. W . DENVER,
Secretary and Aeting Governor.
C. W. BABCOCK,
President of the Council. -
G. W. DEITZLEIL.
Speaker of the house of Representativec,.
Jan. 26, 1858. • •
From this official proclamation, it appears that
the Lecompton Constitution was repudiated and
rejected by the people of Kansas, at that election,
by a clear majority of ten thousand and sixty-four
(10,064) votes.
It is proper. however, to remark that, notwith
standing the Legislature had provided bylaw that
the vote on the ratification or rejection of the
Constitution should take place on the 4th day of
January, the friends of that instrument, in disre
gard of the law, held an election on the 21st of
December, under the pretended authority of the
Convention ; and that it appeared from a procla
mation signed by C. W. Babcock, president of the
Council, and by W. Deitzler, Speaker of the
Muse of Representatives of the Territory, who
were present by invitation of John Calhoun, pre
sident of the Convention, at the counting of the
votes, that six thousand one hundred and forty
three (6,143) votes were returned "for the Con
stitution with slavery," and that five hundred
and eighty-nine (589) votes were returned " for
the Constitution with no slavery ;" showing a ma
jority of five thousand five hundred and seventy
four (5,574) votes cast at that election for " the
Constitution with slavery," as presented to Con
gross fobiecoptanco.
It is a o stated, in the same proclamation, that
" more than one-half of this majority was oast at
these very sparsely-settled precincts of the Terri
tory, two of them in the Shawnee Reserve, on land
not open for settlement, viz:
Oxford, Johnson county 1,266
Shawnee, Johnson county 729
Kiokapoo, Leavenworth county 1 017
" From our personal knowledge of the sentiments in
and around the above places. we have no hesitation in
saying that the great bulk of these votes were fraudu
lent, and, taking into view the other palpable but less
important frauds, we feel safe in saying that, of the
whole vote polled, not over 2,000 wore legal votes polled
by the citizens of the Territory."
But assuming this election to have been fair and
valid, although not held and conducted according
to law, and assuming the returns to have been
genuine, and the voters to have been all citizens
of the Territory, notwithstanding the recent de
velopments of the enormous frauds at the polls,
and in the returns—assuming all this, let us see
how the matter stands when we compare the re
sults of the two elections. At the election on the
4th of January the majority againik the Constitu-
tion was 10,064. At the election on the 21st of
December the majority in favor of the Constitu
tion, as presented to Congress, was 5,574; showing
a clear majority against the Constitution, on COM
parison of the returns of the two eleotions, and
supposing each to have been fair and legal, of
4,490. If from this calculation we deduct the
fraudulent votes according to the statements of the
presiding officers of the two houses of the Legisla
ture, who were present at the opening of the polls
and the counting of the votes by the invitation of
the president of the Convention, and we have a
majority of more than 8,000, or four to one of all
the legal voters of Kansas in opposition to the
Constitution.
The manner in wh , ich the advocates of the Le
eompton Constitution hope to avoid the force of
this overwhelming verdict against it by the people
of Kansas is explained in the following passage
from the recent special message of the President of
the United States, which contains all that he says
upon the subject : -
" It is proper that I should briefly refer to the elec
tion held under an set of the Territorial Legislature, on
the first Monday of January last, on the Lecompton
Constitution. This election was held after the Terri
tory had been prepared for admission into the Union ea
a sovereign State, and when no authority - existed in the
Territorial Legislature, which could possibly destroy
its existence, or change ita character. The election,
which was peaceably conducted under my instructions.
involved a strange_ inconsistency. large reejority at
the persona who voted against the Lecompton Constitu
tion were, at the very same time and place, recognising
its valid existence in the most solemn mad authentic
manner, by voting under its provisions. I have yet
received no official information of the result of this
election."
It is to be regretted that on the 2d day of Feb
ruary the President had received no official infor
mation of the result of the election held on the
4th day of January, which was published in the
" proclamation " to which I have referred, and
was republished in the newspapers of this city and
of New York as early as the 30th of January, from
which proclamation the President would have
learned, if he had received it, that the people of
Kansas had repudiated and rejected the Leoomp
ton Constitution by more than 10,000 majority at
that election. It seems, however, that the Presi
dent attaches no importance to the overwhelming
vote of the people dgainst the constitution, for the
reason that he supposes "this election was held
after the Territory had been prepared for admis
sion into the Union as a sovereign State, and
when no authority existed in the Territorial Legis
lature which could possibly destroy its existence
or change its character." By what authority had
the Territory been prepared for admission into the
Union ? Certainly not by the authority of Con
gress, for I have already shown that Congress
withheld its assent when asked by President
Pierce in a special message to grant it.
Was it by authority of the Territorial Legisla
ture? It is a peculiar doctrine that a Territorial
Legislature may assemble a Convention without
the ascent of Congress, and empower the Conven
tion, when assembled, to abrogate or impair the
authority of the Territorial Government estab
lished by Congress, of which the Legislature is a
constituent part.
The question does not now arise for the first time
in the history of our country. It arose under the
Administration of Gen. Jackson, on the right of
the Territorial Legislature of Arkansas " to pre
pare that Territory for admission into the Union
as a sovereign State, without any express autho
rity from Congress," and, after mature delibera
tion, Gen. Jackson delivered the decision of his
Administration upon the proposition, through Mr.
Butler, his Attorney General.
I quote from the opinion :
•
" To suppose that the legialat've powers granted to
the General Assembly include the authority to abro
gate, alter, or modify the Territorial Government es
tablished by the act of Congress. and of which the As
sembly is a constituent part, would be manifestly ab
surd. The act of Congress so far as it is consistent
with tlia Constitution of the United States, and with
the triffity by which the Territory, as a part of Loui
siana, was ceded to the United States. is a supreme law
of the Territory; it is paramount to the power of the
Territorial Legislature, and can only be revoked or
altered by the authority front which it emanated. The
General Assembly, and the people of the Territory, are
as much bound by its provisions, and as incapable of
abrogating them, as the Legislature and people of the
American States are bound by and incapable of abro
gating the Constitution of the United States.
"It is also a maxim of universal law, that when a par
ticular thing is prohibited by law, all means, attempts,
or contrivances to effect such a thing are strongly pro
hibited. Consequently. it is not in the power of the
General Assembly of Arkansas to pass any law for the
purpose of electing members to a Convention to form a
Constitution and State Government, nor to do any other
act, directly or indirectly, to create such new Govern
ment. Every such law, even though it were approved
by the Governor of the Territory, would be null and
void. If passed by them notwithstanding his veto, by a
vote of two-thirds of each branch, it would still be
equally void."
Thug it appears that under the Administration
of General Jackson, the doctrine Obtained, and I
have never hoard its correctness questioned until
the present session of Congress, that a Convention
assembled under the authority of a Territorial
Legislature, " without any express authority from
Congress," had no right or power to prepare the
Territory for admission into the Union as a sove
reign State, and thereby abrogate or impair the
authority of the Territorial Legislature over all
rightful subjects of legislation consistent with the
organic stet. If this view of the subject be correct,
it. follows, necessarily, that the Lecompton Con
vention, in forming the Constitution, did not, by
that act, and could not by any act impair, dimin
ish, or restrain the authority of the Territorial Leg
islature, and hence that the Constitution formed
at Lecompton and presented to Congress for accept
ance, should be considered and treated like any
other memorial or petition, which Congress may
accept, reject, or disregard, according to the facts
and circumstances of the case. This point was also
considered and decided by General Jackson's Ad
ministration in the Arkansas case, as appears by
the following extract from the same opinion of
Attorney General Butler :
" But I am not prepared to say that all proceeding'.
on this subject ou the part of the citizens of Arkansas
will be illegal.
"They undoubtedly possess the ordinary privileges
and immunities of citizens of the United Stater. Among
these is the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for the redress of griev
ances.' In the exercise of this right the inhabitants of
Arkaneae may peaceably meet together in primary as
semblages, or in Convention chosen bysuch assemblies,
for the purpose of petitioning Congress to abrogate the
Territorial Government and to admit them into the Union
as an independent State. The particular form which they
may give to their petition cannot be material, so tong as
they confine themselves to the mere right of petition
ing, and conduct all their proceedings in a peaceable
manner; and as the power of Congress over the
whole subject is plenary and unlimited, they may ac
cept any Constitution, however framed, which, in their
judgments, meets the sense of the people to be affected
by tt. If, therefore ' the citizens of Arkansas think
proper tonecompanytheir petition by a written Consti
tution, framed and agreed on by their primary assem
blies, or by a Convention of delegates chosen by such as
semblies, I perceive no legal objection to their power to
•do so, nor to any measure which may be taken to col
lect the sense of ,;the people in respect to it, provided
always thatsuch measures be commenced and prosecuted
in a peaceable manner, in strict iseherdinaisoa to the
existing Territorial Government, and in entire subser
viency to the power of ongress to adopt, reject, or
disregard them, at thei r pleasure.
"It is, however, very obvious that all measures com
menced and prosecuted with a design to subvert the
Territorial Government, and to establish and put in
force in its place a new Government, without the con
sent of congress, will be unlawful. The laws estab
lishing the Territorial .Government must continue in
forte until abrogated by Congress i and in the mean
time it will be theslut h y of the Governor and of all the
Territorial officers, as well as of the President, to take
care that they are faithfully executed."
If we apply the principles to Kansas which re
ceived the sanction of General Jackson and his
Administration in the Arkansas case, it becomes
apparent that the Looompton Convention had the
right to assemble under the protection of that
clause of that, Constitution of the United States
which secures to the people the right " peaceably
to assemble; and to petition Government for the
redress of grievances;" and in the exercise of this
right of. petition they might "pray Congress to
abrogate thrTerritorial Government. and to ad
mit them into the Union as an independent State,"
provided " they confine themselves to the mere
right of petitioning, and the Constitution en
closed in their petition meets the sense of the
people to be'effeeted by it," and also that " such
measures be commenced and prosecuted in a
peaceable _manner, in. strict subordination
to the miting Territorial Government, and
in entire sWsersneney to the power of Congress,
to adopt, reject, or disregard them, at their plea
sure' but 'that the said Convention could not
establish a Government, or ordain a Constitution,
or do any other act under pretence of " preparing
the Territe:-y for admission into the Union as
a sovereign Otate," calculated or intended to abro
gate,,iinpai,, or restrain the legislative power of
the Teriritory over all rightful subjects of legisla
tion consistent with the organic act. If these prin
ciples be se :And—if the doctrine of Gen. Jackson's
Edniinistre4on in the Arkansas ease be correct, the
President is mistaken in supposing that the Le
comPlon Constitution did or could do any act de
priving thilTerritorial Legislature of the power
and right le pass a law referring the Constitution
to a vote of!the a people on the 4th of January, with
the view ascertaining the essential and all-im
.
porismiock
r!
. -t, whether ' it .meets the sense of the
people Wll5
~f Acted by it." The power of the Ter
ritorial 14 , ,isieture over the whole subject was as
fall and *%.)solute on the 17th day of December,
when the fi.w was enacted providing for the sub
mission of the Constitution to the people at the
election on the 4th of January, as it was on the 19th
day of February, 1857, when the Legislature passed
the act cowling the Lecompton Convention into ex
istence. ' . .
The Convention was the creation of the Territor
rial Legislature; was called into existence by its
mandate.‘efertved whatever power it possessed
from its eanctment, and was bound to conduct all
its procendings-"rn strict subordination to the
existtng Territorial Government," as well as "in
entire subserviency to the power of Congress, to
adopt, reject, or disregard them, at their pleasure."
Such being.the case, whenever the Legislature as
oertaine&.that the Convention, whose existence
depended, upon its will, hal devised a scheme to
force a Constitution upon t people without their
consent, and without any authority from Congress,
and which; was believed to be repugnant to the
feelings and hostile to the interests of the people
to be affected by it, it became their imperative
duty to interpose anti exert the authority conferred
upon them by Congress in the organic act, and ar
rest and prevent the consummation of the scheme
before Mond gone into operation.
The Legislature deserves credit for the prompt
ness, wisdom, and justice which characterized its
proceedings in this respect. The members were
familiar with the wishes of the people, having
been (dieted after the Lecompton Convention as
sembled, and before it concluded its labors. and at
the eratof an exciting canvass, in which the origin
and organization of the Convection, the circum
stancesAnder which the delegates were elected and
their pledges to submit the Constitution to the
people for. ratification or rejection, and the various
provniOmwhich were to be incorporated into the
Constitution, wore all fully and freely discussed by
both purges before the people. The Legislature
not only passed the act of the 17th of December
authorising the people to vote for or against the
Constitution before it should be sent to Congress
for aOceptanee, but in order to prevent any action
by Congress before the people should have an op
penalty of making their wishes known in any
antloritatere and legal from, the following pream
ble tied resolutions were adopted, as published in
the pitblie - prints by the unanimous vote of the two
bong.
cc Pritinblo and Joint Rtsotutions en relation to
tki Constitution framed at Lecompton, Kansas T. 1.-
rilcry, en the 7th day of aYovember, 1601:
likereas, A small minority of the people living in
ninhteen of the thirty-eight counties of the Territory,
availed themselves of a law which enabled them to ob
street and defeat a fair expression of the popular will,
did. by the odious and oppressive application of the
proidsiens and partisan machinery of said law, procure
the return of the whole number of delegates of the Con
stitutional Convention recently assembled at Lecomp
ton : and
Whereas, By reason or the defective provisions or I
said law, in connection with the neglect and misconduct
of the authorities charged with the estimation of the
same, the people living within the remaining nineteen
counties of the Territory were not permitted to return
delegates to said Convention, were not recognised in its
organization, or in any other sense heard or felt in its
deliberations; and
Whereas, It is an axiom In political ethics that the
people cannot be deprived Of their rights by the negli
gence or misconduct of public officers; and
.• Whereas, rt minority, to wit: twenty-eight only of the
'sixty menibers of said Convention,have attempted, by an.,
unworthy contrivance, to-impose upon the whole people
of This Territory 11.C011gtitUtiOa without consulting their
wishes, and easiest their will ; and
ThelDeMbere of said Conventilaare re.
fused 'to ettinnit their action for the apprB CARP
proval tat voters of the Territory, and in thus acting
e defied the well-known will of nine-tenths of the
voters thereof; and
Whereas, The action of a - fragment of said Convention,
representing as they did a small minority of the voters
of the Territory, repudiates and crushes out the dis
tinctive primiple of the "Nebraska-Kansas Act," and
violates and tramples under foot the rights and the
sovereigntyof the people; and
Whereas,Prom the foregoing statement of facts, it
clearly appears that the people have not been left free
to form andregulaie their domestic institutions in their
own way," but, on the contrary, at every stage in the
anomalous tproceedings recited, they have been pre
vented front so doing : therefore, be it
Resolved, By the Governor and Legislative Assembly
of Kansan Territory, that the people of Kansas being
opposed tosaid Constitution. Congress has no rightful
power under it to admitsaid Territory into the Union as
a State. aqd the Representatives of said people do here
by, is their name and-on their behalf, solemnly protest
against such admission.
Resolved, That such action on the part of Congress
would, in the judgment of the members of the Legisla
tive Assembly, be an entire abandonment of the doe
trite of non-intervention in the affairs of the Terri
tory, and a litillbtitution is its stead of Congressional
intervention in behalf of a minority engaged in a diere
pmable attempt to defeat the will and violate the
lilts of the majority.
esolred, That the people of Kansas Territory claim
th right, through a legal and fair expression of the
wit! of a majority of her citizens, to form and adopt a
Cor)ditutiou for themselves.
Resolved, That the Governor of this Territory be
re4ested to forward a copy of the foregoing preamble
audresolutions to the President of the United States,
theTresident of the Senate, the Speaker of the House
of lepresentativee, and to the Delegate in Congress
Cron the Territory."
In the face of all these evidences that the Le
ool4pton Constitution is nattha act of the people
of tansas, and does not embody their will—that
it was formed by a Convention under an ant of the
Territorial Legislature without the consent of
Corgress—that the sixty delegates composing the
Cortrention were chosen by nineteen of the thirty
eight counties in the Territory, while the other
nireteen counties were entirely disfranchised
without any fault of their own, by the failure or
wand of the officers whose duty it was under
the law to take a census,
and register the
voters in order to entitle them to vote for dole
gates—that the mode of submission to the peo
ple for "ratification or rejection," as preacribed
by the Constitution, was such as to render it
impassible for the people to reject it, for it
allowed no person to vote who would not vote for
the Constitution, and excluded from the polls all
persons who desired to vote against it—that the
only reason assigned or believed to exist for not
allowing the people to vote against the Constitu
tion, as well as for it, is, that a large majority of
the people were known to be opposed to it, and
world have rejected it by en overwhelming ma
jority if they had been allowed an opportunity—
that the mode of submitting the " slavery ilitiOle"
Was such that no man was permitted to Tote for
mating Kansas a slave State unless he would vote
forthe Constitution at the same time, nor was any
mat permitted to vote against making Kansas a
slaje State unless ho would vote for the Constitu
tion—that by this system of trickery in the mode
of submission a large majority, probably amount
ing to four-fifths of all the legal voters of Kansas,
were disfranchised and excluded from the polls
on the 21st of December—that in order to pre
yed the injustice and wrong intended to be
perpetrated by the trickery resorted to in this
mode of submission, and to secure in place of it
a fair and honest election, the Legislature on the
17th of December passed a law providing for such
an election on the 4th of January, at which the
while people should have an opportunity freely
arKi unconditionally to vote for or against the
Consaitution, and for or againSt the "Slavery Hr
aa they pleased; that at said election, a
majority of more than ten thousand of the legal
voters of Kansas repudiated and rejected the Le
compton Constitution; that the election on the
4th of January was lawful and valid, having been
fairly and honestly oonducted under and in pur
suance of a valid law which the President was not
only bound to respect, but to see faithfully executed,
the same as all other Territorial laws which aro
not inconsistent with the Constitution of the
United States, and the organic act of the Ter
ritory ; that the election on the 21st of De
ceuber was not valid and binding on the people of
the Territory, for the reason that it was not held
in pursuance of any law of the Territory, or of the
United States, nor under the authority of any
body of men duly authorized to make laws, I re
peat that, in the facei.of all these facts, showing
conclusively that the Lecompton Constitution is
not the act and deed of the people of Kansas, and
does not embody their will, we are told by the
Piesident of the United States that, " To the people
of Kansas the only practical difference between
admission or rejection depends simply upon the
feat whether they can themselves more speedily
change the present Constitution if it does not ac
cord with the will of the majority, or frame a
second Constitution, to be submitted to Congress
thereafter."
There is a (( practical difference" far more im
portant than the mere question of time, and there
are principles involved infinitely more important
than the practical difference. There is a serious
difference, in practice as well as in principle,
whether the people of Kansas shall be permitted
to make and adopt the Constitution under which
they are to live, and with which they are to be re
eeived voluntarily into the Union, or whether
Congress will force them into the Union against
their will, and with a Constitution which they
have repudiated by an overwhelming majority of
their votes at a fair election held in , pursu
ance of -law, and then maintain it by Fe
deral bayonets. If it be true, as repre
sented by the President, that " ever since the
period of my (his) inauguration, a large portion
of the people of Kansas have been in a state
of rebellion against the (Territorial) Govern
ment ;" that they have never •aoltnewledged,
but have constantly renounced andldefied, the Go
vernment to which they owe allegiance, and have
been all the time in a state of resistance aga•nst
its authority ;" that " they would long since have
subverted it, had it not beenioroteoted from their
assaults by the troops of the United States ; that
Gov. Walker considered at least two thousand
troops under the command of Gen. Harney were
necessary for this purpose •" and that "1 (the
President) papa beta oblird in some degree to
interfere with the expedition to Utah, in order
to keep, down rebellion in Kansas;"---I repeat
that, if these statements be a fair and impar
tial representation of the character, feelings,
and purposes of the people of Kansas, • does it
follow, as a logical and natural consequence
from these premises that, " the speedy admission
of Kansas into the Union," with a Constitution
to which they are unalterably opposed, and
which they have repudiated by an overwhelming
majority of their votes at a fair election held in
pursuance of law, " would restore peace and quiet
to the whole country ?" that" domestic peace will
be the happy consequence of its admission," and
that "I (the President) shall then be enabled to
withdraw the troops of the United States from
Kansas, and employ them on other branches of
service where they are much needed !" If it be
true, as alleged, that "a large portion of the people
of Kansas are in a state of rebellion against the Go
vernment," and that the rebels so far outnumber
the law-abiding citizens, that they would "long
sines have subverted the Territorial Government,
had it not been protected from their assaults by
the troops of the United States;" and that "they
have all the time been endeavoring to subvert
it, and to establish a revolutionary Government"
in its place, and that "up till this moment the
enemies of the Government still adhere to
their revolutionary plans and purposes, with
treasonable pertinacity •,"—if these allegations, so
gravely set forth by the President in his special
message, be true, do they furnish satisfactory evi
dence to authorize the belief, or even grounds for
hope, that "the speedy admission of Kansas into
the Union" with the Lecompton Constitution
" would restore peace and quiet to the whole coun
try," and Ibat " domestio peace will be the happy
consequence of its admission ?" It is to be la
mented that the President does not seem to com
prehend the nature and character of the contro
versies which have so unhappily disturbed the
peace and marred the prosperity of Kansas, and the
grounds upon which they claimed to be justified in
the course they have pursued. During the whole
period from the 30th of March, 1855, when the first
annual election was held for members of the Le
gislature and other officers in that Territory, until
the general election on the first Monday of Oc
tober, 1857, the free-State party, so called, did
boldly, firmly, and persistently refuse to recognise
the Territorial Legislature of Kansas as a legally
and duly constituted legislative body, with au•
tin:way to pass laws whieh wore valid and binding
on the people of Kansas, but were elected by four
or five thousand citizens of the adjoining State of
Missouri, who are said to have invaded the Terri
tory on the day, and a few days previous to the day
of election, and dividing themselves into small par
ties, and spreading over all the inhabited parts of
the Territory, took possession of the polls and drove
away the peaceable, legal voters, and thus forced
a Legislature upon the people of Kansas against
their will and in violation of the Kansas-Nebraska
act.
These are the allegations and grounds of justifi
cation urged by the free-State party in Kansas
during the period to which I have referred. It is
no part of my present purpose to inquire how far
these allegations are sustained by the facts; nor
what number of the election districts were con
trolled by these illegal votes; nor the principles
of law applicable to the facts, or the legal conclu
sions properly resulting from them. These ques
tions were all fully considered and elaborately
discussed by me in a report from this committee
on the 12th day of March, 1856. I refer to them
now not for the purpose of re-opening that discus
sion, or of changing the conclusions to which I
then arrived, but with the view of showing upon
what grounds the free-State party claimed that
they were justified in withholding their allegiance
to the Territorial Government until a fair opportu
nity was afforded the people of the Territory to
elect their own Legislature,in pursuance of the orig
inal law; and thatfrom the day on which the mem
bers elected in October assembled and organized as
a legislative body, all the opponents of the Leeorap
ton Constitution have recognised the Territorial
Government as valid and legitimate, acknowledg
ing their allegiance to it, and their determination
and duty to sustain and support it. Tho October
election becomes a memorable period in the history
of Kansas, for the additional reason that it marks
the date where the Leoomptonites changed their
whole line of pelioy, and formed the scheme of
forcing the Constitution on the . people without
their consent, and of subverting the authority of
the Territorial Legislature without the consent
of Congress. Up to this period it had been
generally understood and conceded that the Con
vention had been called for the purpose of
framing a Constitution and submitting it to
the people for ratification or rejection, and of
sending it to Congress for acceptance only
in the event it should be first ratified by a majori
ty of all the legal voters of the Territory. Upon
this point there is no room for doubt that the Pre
sident and the Cabinet concurred with the people
of Kansas that it was the duty of the Convention
to submit the Constitution to the people fairly and
unconditionally, for ratification or rejection, be
fore it could be considered the act and deed of the
people of Kansas, and that its ratification by the
~people must be a condition precedent to the amis
. sten of Kansas into the Union by Congress: • The
President, in his instructions to Governor Walker,
through his Secretary of State, under date of
March 20, said •
ti When' such Co mditution should be submitted to
the people of the Territory, they must be protected in
the EXt,reiSe of their right of voting for or against
flat iitxt,ument,aua the fairilpresmion of the popular
will meat not be i nterrupted fraud or violence."
Governor Walker, in h offioial despatch to
the Secretary of State, under date of June 2,
said :
'• On one point the sentiment of the people is almost
unanimous, that the Constitution must be submitted,
for ratification or rejection, to a vote of the people,
who shall be bona fide residents of the Territory neat
And in his inaugural address to the people of
Kansas, Gov. Walker said :
With these views, well known to the President and
Cabinet ' and approved BY THUM, I accepted the appoint
ment of Governor of Kansas. My instructions from the
President, through the Secretary of. State. under date
of the 80th March last, sustain the regular Legislature
of the Territory in assembling a Convention to form a
Constitution. And they express the opinion,yf the Pre
sident, that whoa such Constitution shall be submitted
to the people of the Territory, they must be protected
in the exercise of their right of voting for or against that
instrument, and the fair expression of the popular will
must not be interfered with by fraud or violence. I re.
peat, then, as my clear conviction, that unless the
Convention submit the Constitution to the vote of all
the actual resident settlers of Kansas, and the election
be fairly and quietly conducted, the CONSTITUTION
WILL 88, AND MORT TO 88, REJECTED BY CONORESS."
These official papers, containing the most solemn
and unequivocal assurance en the part of the Pre
sident, the Cabinet, and the Governor, that the
Constitution would be submitted to the people for
ratification or rejection, and that, in the event it
should not be so submitted, it "2a211, and ought to
be rejected by Congr:ss." were published and
spread broadcast over the Territory prior to the
election of delegates to the Convention, for the
purpose of satisfying the people that, although
they had been unjustly and foully treated in the
apportionment of delegates, by the disfranchise
ment of nineteen counties, and the imperfect
and unfair registration of voters in the other
nineteen counties, yet the great wrong would not
produce any injury in the end, for the reason that
the Convention was not compelled to submit
the Constitution to the people for " ratification"
or " rejection," and that, unless it should be
thus submitted at a fair election, " ate Con.-
stitution will be, and ought to be, rejected by
Congress." The people relying on these solemn
pledges of the President, the Cabinet, and the
Governor, supported by the assurances of all the
Government officers in the Territory, and affirmed
by the Democratic party unanimously, in their
resolution endorsing thepoliey of Governor Walk
er, and nominating Governor Ransom for Con
gress, and confirmed by
in. Senators and Representa
tives Congress who visited the Territory, and
gave similar pled ges in their speeches to the peo
ple, were lulled into a false and fatal security,
under the belief that the great wreng perpetrated
in the apportionment for the election Of delegates
would be corrected and rendered harmless by the
submission of the Constitution to a vote of the peo
ple, at a fair election, for ratification or rejection.
Thus the matter stood when the election took
place, on the first Monday of October last, and
resulted in the total defeat of the Democratic
party, and the triumph and elcotion of free
State men for the Legislature, for Congress,
and for county officers. This election dissipated
the last ray of hope on the part of the pro-slavery
men of making Kansas a slaveholding State by a
fair vote of the people on the ratification or rejec
tion of the Constitution, for the obvious reason
that while it was conceded that the whole free-
State party (so called) would vote to a man against
a pro-slavery Constitution, it was well known that
at least one-half of the Democratic party would
vote the same way on that question, thus proving
by the data funr:shed by that election that four
fifths, if not nine-tenths, of the people were in
favor of making Kansas a free State. The Le.
compton Convention assembled and organized on
tho first Monday in SeptegWone month previ
ous to the election, and after appointing the com
mittees and transacting some preliminary busi
ness, adjourned until after the election, for the pur
pose of avoiding a division in the Democratic party,
by disclosing the character of the Constitution, un
til they should ascertain the relative strength of
parties in the Territory. The result of the election
demonstrated, beyond all controversy, that an im
mense majority of the people of Kansas were op
posed to making Kansas a slave State, and that, if
the Convention framed and presented a slave• State
Constitution for approval, it would inevitably be
rejected at the election. Under these circum
stances, the Convention determined that, instead of
conforming their action to the known wishes of the
people of Kansas, they would form a slave-State
Constitution, and submit it to the people in such a
form as to render it impossible for them to reject
it, by allowing those to vote only who would vote
for it, and excluding from the polls all who pro
posed to vote against it. By this disreputable
trick they hoped to save themselves, the President
and his Cabinet, and all who co-operated with
them, from the disgrace of violated pledges, at the
same time that they defrauded the people of Kan
sas of the sacred rights of self-government guar
antied by the organic act, by forging a Constitu
tion upon them, without their consent and their
wishes. It is but just to remark that the moment
this scheme of trickery and fraud was promulgated, a
large majority of the Democratic party,includ
ing the bettor portion of the pro-slavery party, who
had acted with the LeCOMptOnileB up to that time,
instantly withdrew their confidence and support,
and denounced the measure as a base betrayal of
the rights of the people.
The Lecomptonites were loyal to the Territorial
Government so long as they filled the offices and
controlled its power ; but the moment they were
defeated at the elestion, and the power passed into
the bands of their opponents, they rebelled
against it, defied its authority, and devised schemes
to destroy its existence. Thus they provided :
"This COnstitUtiOn 'shall take Whet and be in
fermi from and after its ratification by the people,
as hereinbefore provided ;" that is, from and af
ter the election on the 21st December, when the
people were_permitted to vote for it, but not
against it. In this mode they propose to abro
gate and subvert the Territorial Government es
tablished by Congress, by putting in force a State
Constitution without the consent of Congress.
What is this but rebellion—open, marked, undis
piled rebellion? Where is the difference be.
TWO CENTS.
twoen this and the Topeka movement, which the
President denounces as a "revolutionary Govern
ment," organized in defiauoe of the authority of
the United States, which it was his duty to sup
press with the Federal troops. He says :
Topeka. Gemeromeot adhered to with such
treasonable pertinacity, is a G overning!, in direct op•
position to the existing Government prescribed and
recognised by Congress. 9
Might not the President have said, with as much
fairness and justice, that this Lecompton Constitu
tion, adhered to with such treasonable pertinacity,
is a Constitution in direct opposition to the exist
ing Government prescribed and recognised by
Congress? If it be said that the Topeka Consti
tution was framed and declared to be in force
without the consent of Congress, and therefore re
volutionary, it may be answered with equal truth
that the Lecompton Constitution was framed and
declared in force without the consent of Congress,
and consequently " revolutionary" for the same
reason.
But we are told that the Lecompton Convention
assembled under the authority of the Territorial
Legislature. It is true that it commenced its pro
ceedings under the sanction of the Legislature, and
terminated its action in open rebellion against the
authority of the Legislature.
When the Legislature, on the 17th of December,
interposed its lawful authority to prevent the Le
compton Constitution from going into effect until
ratified by the people on the 4th of January, and
accepted by Congress, the Lecomptonites defied the
authority of the Legislature established by Con
gress, and treated the law with contempt, refusing
to yield obedience to it, or respect its mandates, or
abide by the decision under it.
Thus it will be seen that from the time the Le
comptonites lost possession of the offices under the
Territorial Government by a fair election on the
first Monday in Goober last, in the language of
the President, "they have all the time beep en
deavoring to subvert it and establish a revolution
ary Government under the so-called Topeka (Le
compton) Constitution, in its stead." So it appears
that the Lecompton Constitution, as well as the
Topeka Constitution, was declared to " take effect
and be in force," not only without the consent of
Congress, but in defiance and contempt of the
authorityof the Territorial Legislature established
by Congress. Hence, if it be true that the To
peka Constitution was revolutionary, (and I have
always held that it was so,) for the reason that
it was declared to take effect and be in force
without the consent of Congress, and in de
fiance of the authority of the. Territorial Legisla
ture, it is undeniable that the Leeompton Consti
tution was "revolutionary" for the same reason,
and that the President of the United States was
under the same official obligations to maintain
law ever the Lecompton Constitution until
Congress should otherwise order and direct. Upon
what principles of fairness or justice, then, can it
be urged that we should admit Kansas into the
Union with the Lecompton Constitution? Cer
tainly not upon the ground that it is the act
and deed of the people of Kansas, and fairly
embodies their - will, for it has been con
elusively shown that it has been repudiated
by the people by more than 10,000 ma
jority, at a fair election, held in pursuance of
a valid law. Not upon the ground that
it was adopted "in strict subordination to
the existing Territorial Government," and
entire sebservienoy to the power of Congress
to reject or disregard it at their pleasure, as was
held by General Jackson in the Arkansas case to
be necessary ; for it has been shown, beyond all
controversy, that it was declared to take effect and
be in force, in defiance of the authority of the
Territorial Legislature, and without the consent of
Congress. But the speedy admission of Kansas is
urged by the President as a question of mere expe
diency, in order to restore peace and quiet to the
whole country, " and prevent a revival of the sla
very agitation." Upon this point the President
addresses a plausible and ingenious argument to
that portion of the ani-slavery feelings of the
country, which, overlooking the great principle of
self-government involved, opposes the Lecompton
Constitution mainly upon the ground that it re
cognises and establishes slavery in Kansas, and is
willing to adopt the shortest and quickest mode of
abolishing slavery, and making Kansas a free
State-
In order to reconcile this anti-slavery feeling to
the admission of Kansas under the Leeompten Con
stitution, the President presents and enforces by
argument the following propositions :
1. That it has been solemnly adjudicated by the
highest judicial tribunal known to our laws, that
slavery exists in Kansas by virtue of the Constitu
tion of the United States, and that Kansas is there
fore at this moment as much a slave State as Geor
gia or South Carolina.
2. That slavery can therefore, never be prohibi
ted in Kansas except yy means of a oonstitutional
provision, and in no other manner can this be done
so promptly, if a majority of the people desire it,
as by admitting it into the Union under the pre
sent Coastitution.
3. That the people will then be sovereign, and
can regulate their own affairs in their own way. If
a majority of them desire to abolish domestic sla
very within the State, there is no other possible
mode by which this can be effected so speedily as
'by prompt admission, and that the Legislature
already elected may at its very first session submit
the question to the vote of the people, whether
they will or will not have a Convention to emend
their Constitution, and adopt all necessary means
for giving effect to the popular will.
4. Inasmuch as the Leeempton Constitution pro
vides a mode of amendment- after the year 1884,
and thereby excludes the possibility of any lawful
change until that period, the President suggests
that Congress may remove this obstacle by insert
ing a clause in the act of admission annulling so
much of the Constitution as prohibits any change
until Sifter the year 1864, and requiring two-thirds
of each house of the Legislature to authorise the
people to vote for a Convention, and declaring the
right of the Legislature already elected to call a
Convention, by a majority vote, in violation of the
Constitution under which its members were elected,
and which they were sworn to support.
Let us read the President's language on this
paint:
4, 11, therefore, the provisions changing the Kansas
Constitution after the year one thousand eight hundred
and sixty-four could possibly be construed into a pro
hibition to make such a change previous to that period,
this prohibition would be wholly unavailing."
And again :
Ha majority of them [the people of Kansas] desire
to abolish domestic slavery within the State, there is
no other possible wode by which this can be effected so
speedily as by prompt admission. The will of the ma
jority is supreme and irreeistible, when expressed in an
orderly and lawful manner. They can make and un
make Constitutions at pleasure. It would be absurd to
say that they can impose fetters on their own power,
which they cannot afterwards remove. If they could
do this, they might tie their own hands for a hundred
as well as for ten years. These are fundamental prin
ciples of American freedom,and are recognised,l believe,
in some form or other, by every State Constitution;
and IF CONGRESS, IN THE ACT OF ADMISSION, SHOULD
TRUNK PROPER To RECOGNISE THEM, I CAN PERCEIVE NO
OBJECTION TO MO A 000RSIE.7,
The President can ptnceive no objection to Con
gress inserting a provision in the set admitting
Kansas into the Union, which abrogates and annuls
an imperative provision of the Constitution, and
declares the right of the Legislature already
elected to take initiatory 'steps to change it by a
majority vote, in the face of the provision in the
Constitution, that such steps shall not be taken
until "two-thirds of the members of each house"
concur, end not even in that case until after the
year 1864. What right has Congress to intervene
and annul, alter, or even construe, the provi
dons of a State Constitution, and license the
members of the Legislature to disregard their
sworn obligations to support the Constitution un
der which they hold their offices? Where does
Congress obtain its authority to tell the members
of a State Legislature that they are under no
obligations to respect and obey the Constitution
with which such State was admitted into the
Union, and that they may proceed to alter or abro
gate it. in a mode and at a time different from that
authorized and permitted in the instrument? If
the Leeompton Constitution be the act and deed of
the people of Kansas, and if it be accepted by Con
gress as such, and the State be admitted bite the
Union under it, I hold that there is no lawful made
on earth to change or amend it, except the one pro
vided and authorized in the Constitution itself. I
agree that " the will of the majority is supreme and
irresistible, when expressed in an orderly and law
ful manner." But the question is, when a Consti
tution has once become the supreme lawof a State.
what "lawful manner" is there of changing it,
except the one provided and permitted by the
Constitution? I agree with the President, also,
that "the people can make and unmake Consti
tutions at pleasure." But how ? In what man
ner is this to be done? There are two modes—
the one lawful and the other revolutionary
Wken a Constitution has once become the funda
mental law of a State, there is no " lawful man
.
ner"—there ca be no " lawful manner" of alter
ing, Changing, or abrogating it, except in porsu
&nee or its provisions, It is true that, the right of
revolution remains—that great inalienable right
to which our fathers resorted when submission was
intolerable, and resistance a less evil than submis
sion. Hence, if the Lecompton Constitution be ac
cepted ity Congress and the State admitted under
it, while there will be no "lawful manner" of
amending or abrogating it until after the year
1864, acid then only by the concurrence of two
thirds of each branch of the Legislature, in the
first instance, followed by a majority vote of all
the citizens of the State, and the concurrence of
the two houses of the next Legislature—all prior
to the election of delegates, and the assembling of
a Convention—yet the revolutionary right will
remain to the people of Kansas, to be resorted
to or not according as they determine for them
selves that it is a less evil to resist than to
submit to a Constitution which was never
their act and deed, and never did em
body their will, 1 .
_t may he true that under this
terrible right of revolution,if a majority of the
people desire to abolish omestic slavery within
the State, there is no other possible mode by which
'this can be effected so speedily as by prompt ad
mission ;" but if this "mode" be resorted to under
the impression that it will abolish slavery in Kan
sas more speedily" than any other possible, it
must be understood to mean revolution if success
ful, and rebellion in case of failure. Bt suppose
the line of policy indicated by the President should
be pursued—that Kansan be admitted under the
Lecompton Constitution—that Congress in the act
of admission recognise the right of " the Legisla
ture already elected, at its very first session, to
submit the question tea vote of the people whether
they will or will not have a Cenvention to amend
their Constitution, and adopt all necessary mea
awes to give effect to the popular will ;" suppose
all this to have been done, of what relief will it
be to the oppressed people of Kansas, unless Mr.
Calhoun should set aside the fraudulent re
turns from Delaware Crossing, or go behind the
returns and reject the fraudulent votes at Rieke
poo, or Shawnee, or Oxford, or other precincts, in
order to insure a majority in both branches of the
Legislature opposed to the Lecompton Constitu
tion, and in favor of an immediate change? Un
less the President is prepared to inform us that
this is to be done, it is worse than mockery to talk
about the right of the Legislature, " at its very
first session," to submit the question to the
people, and to insert a datum in the act of admis
sion declaratory of a right which can be exercised
osly in violation of the Constitution and by revo
lution ; and especially, if it is understood that, by
forged returns and fraudulent votes, a majority of
wombere are to be declared elected In both
KOTTO/c TO VORANDISTONDENTL
Oortespandents for 11 Tan Plass 1, will please bow in
mind iiiii followiag rules
Every communication meet be sooompanied by the
name of the wilier. In order to Insure aorrooligiesof
the typography, but one wide of a sheet should be
written upon.
We shall be greatly obliged to gootlemen in Pennsyl
vania and ether Stater fot eonbtibntietui giving the our
rant news of the day in their parbionlar localities, the
resources of the surrounding country, the immense of
population, and any Information that gall ba interesting
to the general reader.
branches of the Legislature, who are determined
to maintain the Lecompton Constitution, and resist
any and all efforts to change it. By the ex
press command of the Convention, the re
turns of that election were to be made up
to the president of the Convention " with
in eight days " after the election. On the ninth
day after the election, to wit, on the 13th of Janu
ary, the returns were opened and counted by Mr.
Calhoun, as appears by the proclamation of the
presiding officers of the two houses of the Legisla
ture, who were present, by invitation of Mr. Cal
houn, to witness the opening and counting of the
votes. More than a month has elapsed since the
returns were opened and votes counted, and Mr.
Calhoun being in this city, we are not permitted
to know the result of his deliberations ; whether
the rumor of yesterday that the anti-Leoompton
members were elected, or the rumor of to-day
that the Lecompton party bad triumphed, or
whether the policy is to withhold the decision
until the State shall have been admitted, and,
leaving each party to infer that the decision is
to be an thoh- favor, compel Congress to act in
the dark, and wait patiently to find out the re
melt of its action. But suppose there should be a
majority in both branches of the Legislature op
posed to the Leeompton Constitution, and in favor
of a change, what can they do toward relieving
the people of Renege from a Constitution they ab•
hor, since it is well understood that in consequence
of a large number of votes cast for the anti•Le
compton ticket having been returned to Gov. Den
ver instead of Mr. Calhoun, the Lecompton ticket
for Governor and State officers is to be declared
elected, thus rendering it morallyeertain that any
bill which the Legislature might pass, having
for its object a change in the Constitution, would
be defeated by the Governor's veto, it not
being anticipated in any contingency that the
opponents of the Lecompton Constitution would
have a majority of two-thirds in each
branch of the Legislature. Renee it must
be apparent to all that, in the event that Kan
sas is admitted under the Leoompton Consti
tution, any argument or proposition founded on
the idea that the people of Kansas will have
the opportunity of changing the Constitution by
peaceful means through the instrumentality of
the Legislature must in all probability prove
deceptive and delusive. In the event that the
deed shall be consummated, their only alterna
tive will be submission or revolution. Revolu
tions are sometimes peaceful and bloodless.
Constitutions and Governments have been
changed by revolution without violence or
bloodshed, but this is the ease only when the
public sentiment in favor of the change is
unanimous or approaches so closely to unanimity
as to silence all opposition. If this should
prove to be the case in Kansas, the people will be
able to re-assert their violated rights of self-go
vernment, and form a Constitution which will em
body their will, without violence or force ; but if,
in the progress of the revolution, they should
meet with determined resistance, civil war or un
conditional submission must be the inevitable
consequence. Do the history of this Lecompton
Constitution, the character and purpose of the
men engaged in the movement, and the means
employed to force it upon an unwilling people,
furnish us assurance that after they have realized
all their hopes by making the Chnstitution the
fundamental law of the State, unalterable until
after 1864, and then only by a two-thirds vote,
that they will, on the day they come into power
under it, permit it to be subverted and abro
gated by a revolutionary movement, when
they will have acquired the right, under the
Constitution of the United &Mee, to demand of
the President the use of the Federal army to put
down the insurrection, and protect the State
" against domestic violence?" When this demand
shall be made upon the President by the " Legisla
ture already elected, at its very drat session," oe
by the Governor "when the Legislature cannot
be convened," will he not consider himself bound
by his official oath, and in obedienoe to the Con
stitution of the United States, to use the Fede•
ral troops to protect the State against domestic
violence, by putting down the revolution and
suppressing insurrection, and maintaining the
authority of the Constitution, until lawfully
changed in the manner prescribed in the instru
ment? Or, if it could be converted into a judi
cial instead of a political question, and brought
before the Supreme Court of the United States
for adjudication, can any one doubt the decision ?
Would not the Court be compelled to decide
that the Constitution, having once become the
fundamental law of the State, must be respected
and obeyed as such until changed or annulled in
pursuance of its own provisions? Would not the
Court be compelled to declare as an inviolable and
universal rule of interpretation, that when a Consti
tution prescribes one mode of amendment, it must
be understood and construed as having thereby
precluded all other modes, and prohibited all
other means of accomplishing the same object?
Suppose the people of Kansas should attempt to
change the Constitution in a mode and at a time
different from that authorized in the instrument,
and should proceed so far as to adopt a new Con
stitution, and set up a State Government under
it by an overwhelming majority in antagonism
to the Constitution and State Government with
which Kansas was admitted into the Union,
which of the State Governments would the
Provident feel bound to recognise, and " protect
against domestic violence," when applied to in the
manner provided in the Federal Constitution 7 He
would be compelled to use the whole military
power of the United States, or so much of it as
shall be necessary, to put down rebellion, and
" protect the State against domestic violence,"
when properly applied to for.the purpose. Hence
the question will arise, and it is important to know
how it is to be decided, in the event there shall be
two State Governments in Kansas, in antagonism
with each other—the ono organized under the
compton Constitution—and the other established
by the people in opposition to the Lecomp
ten Constitution—which will the President re
cognise as valid and legitimate, and which
will he denounce as a " revolutionary Govern
ment, adhered to with such treasonable per
tinacity " as to make it his duty, under
the Constitution of the United States, to put
down the insurrection and crush out the rebel
lion with the Federal troops? It is important
that this question should be determined in order
that the people of Kansas may know how they are
to exercise that great indefeasible right of which
the President speaks when he says, "They can
make sad unmake Constitutions at pleasure."
Does he mean that Inalienable right of revolution
to which every people may resort, when their op
pression is intolerable, and submission is a less
evil than resistance ? If so, I fear that the bright
anticipations of the President would not be fully
realized when he imagines that the speedy admis
sion of Kansas into the Union under the Lecomp
ton Constitution " would restore peace and quiet
to the whole country," and enable him "to with
draw the troops of the United States from Kansas
and employ them on branches of the service where
they are much needed."
A fire in Elmira, N. Y., on Wednesday
morning, broke out in the upper story of the
building occupied by H. Korn as a clothing
store, on Water street, (river bank,) adjoining
Ulrich's lager beer saloon, and spread with
such rapidity that, in the course of two hours,
no less than fourteen buildings were entirely de
stroyed. They were all wooden structures, two
stories high, and some of them of no great value.
The entire loss is about $25,000 ; but we are happy
to state that the greater part of It is covered by
insurance.
The following were the principal sufferers ; Her
mann Korn, clothing store, loss $1,500 ; fully in
sured. Mrs. Geo. Pattinson, who owned {three
buildings, loss about $2,500 ; insured for $1,500. B.
D. Treadwell, boot and shoe store, loss is about
$1,200 ; insured for $900". Mrs. MoKendrie, milli
ner, estimates her loss at $2,500, on which she has
an insurance of $BOO. The buildings were owned by
B. L Gillett, and were valued at $1,500 ; fully in
sured. Win. Meeks, glazier; lost in glass, paints,
ke., about $l,lOO. Chas. Werner, clothing store,
loss about $1,700; fully covered by insurance.
Aim Rowe*, milliner, saved but little of her stook
and household furniture; she estimates her entire
lose at $4,000, on which she bee all insurance of
$1,500. W. Merwin, saddle and harness maker,
puts his loss down on building and stook at $1,800;
fully insured.
The clipper ship John Land, Capt. Beano,
arrived at New Bedford on the 16th, 101 days
from Honolulu, with the most valuable cargo ever
shipped from that port, consisting of 338.barrele of
sperm oil, 5,537 barrels of whale oil, and 320,969
pounds of whalebone, together with bides, wool,
and other merchandise. Tho veins of the oil and
bone, at present prices, is about $375,000.
There are in the borough of Chester, says
the Delaware Co. (Pa.) Republican. seventy
four widows, and one hundred and forty-four bache
lors, and only seventeen widowers. Our popula
tion is over four thousand, and the number of the
bereaved—inoluding the bachelore—is net, there
fore, very large.
A cotton manufacturing company is about
being organized in Downingtown, Pa., with a
capital of $300,000. The shares are $5O each,
and two hundred have already been subscribed.
It is the intention of the company to erect seam
works near the railroad, with dwellings for hands,
&e.
It is stated that the number of persons at
this time receiving alms in New York is more than
one-sixth of the entire population This number
is entirely supported by two of the remaining five
sixths, the other three barely supporting them
selves.
A boat belonging to the Sand Key, Florida,
light-house, was stolen on the night of the 6th, and
a party
i of fourteen slaves escaped in her, proceed
ing, it s supposed, to Nassau, N. P. Vessels sent
in search have, returned, discovering no trace of
the fugitives.
Dr. K. S. Dorgan was accidentally killed at
Winneboro, S. C., on Monday last, by the dis
charge of a gun in the hands of his son. • Tbo day
before, in the same place, Thomas L. King was
killed by falling down the stairs of the hotel in
which ho boarded.
Mrs. Fairfield, a young wife, was drowned
at Minbridge, Maine, an ice boat in which sho
was sailing in the evening having run into an open
place on the falls. She was carried under the ice
and lost; the rest of the party escaped.
On Tburialay afternoon last, a little daugh
ter of Mr. John Ford, of Washington, Pa., aged
about seven Tears, was burnt so badly from her
clothes catching fire that she expired in Rollie ten
or twelve hours after, in great agony.
The last number of the Freeman's Journal
(N. Y. Catholic paper) announces that the Popo
has granted indulgences to the army and navy
officers of the United States, to eat meat during
the approaching season of Lent.
The jury in the cue of Daniel Denny, tried
at Pittsburgh as one of the parties charged with
the murder of Henry Wei.man, returned a verdict
on Thursday of Et guilty of manslaughter."
William H. Stnith, recently convicted of the
murder of his wife, Frances, at St. Louis, was last
eek sentenced to be hung on the second day of
April next.
A poor mechanic, in Chicago, has lately be
come heir to an estate in Eogland, valued at oyez
1200,000.