The Sun.
London, England, 1857-12-21 00:00:00

consider the attack upon her as unjustifiable, and
as calling for satisfaction from the Paraguayan

government.
Citizens of the United States also, those who were
established in business at Paraguay, have had their
property seized and taken from them, and have
otherwise been treated by the authorities in an in-
sulting and arbitrary manner which requires redress.
Demands for this purpose will be made in a firm
but conciliatory spirit. This will the more pro-
bably be granted if the Executive shall have
authority to use other means in the event of a re-
fusal. This is accordingly recommended.

THE SLAVERY QUESTION.
It is unnecessary to state in detail the alarming
•condition of the territory of Kansas at the time of
may inauguration. The opposing parties then stood
in hostile array against each other, and an accident
might have re-lighted the flames of civil war.
Besides, at this critical moment, Kansas was left
rithout a governor, by the resignation of Governor

G' nary.
On the 19th of February previous the terri-
tcrnial legislature passed a law providing for the
election of delegates on the first Monday in Sep-
tember, for the purpose of examining a constitution
preparatory to admission into the United States.
This law was in the main fair and just, and it is
to bet regretted that all the qualified electors had
not registered themselves and voted under its pro-
vision•s. At the time of the election for delegates, an
exteneive organisation existed in the territory whose
avowed. object it was, if need be, to put down the
lawful government by force, and to establish a go-
vernment of their own under the so-called Topeka
constitution, The persons attached to this
revolutionary organisation abstained from taking

any part in the election.
The Act of the Territorial Legislature bad omitted
to provide for submitting to the people the consti-
tution which might be framed by the convention,
and in the excited state of public feeling through-
out Kansas an apprehension extensively prevailed
that a design existed to force upon them a consti-
tution in relation to slavery against their will.
In this emergency it became my duty, as it was
my unquestionable right, having in view the
union of all citizens in support of the territorial
law, to express an opinion on the construction of its
provisions. Concerningslavery, it has been the prin-
ciple of Congress neither to introduce it into any ter-
ritory or state, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to
leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and
regulate their domestic institutions in their own
way. Under this Kansas was admitted as a state
to be received into the union, with or without
slavery, as their constitution might prescribe at the
time of their admission. Did Congress mean by
this language that the delegates elected to frame a
constitution should have authority finally to decide
the question of slavery, or did they intend, by
leaving it to the people of Kansas, that they them-
selves should decide this question by a direct vote
On this subject I confess I had never entertained
a serious doubt, and therefore, in my instructions
to Governor Walker of the 28th March last, I said
that when a 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. A fair expression of the popular
will must not be interrupted by fraud or violence.
In expressing this opinion it was far from my
intention to interfere with the decision of the people
of Kansas either for or against slavery. This I have
always carefully abstained from. Entrusteel with
the duty of taking care that the laws be faithfully
executed, my desire was that the people of Kansas
should furnish to Congress the evidence required by
the Organic Act, whether for or against slavery. And
in this manner, on their passage into the Union in
emerging from a condition of territorial depend-
ence into that of a sovereign State, it was their
duty, in my opinion, to make known their will by
the votes of the majority on the direct question
whether this important domestic institution should
or should not continue to exist. Indeed, this was
the only possible mode in which their will could
be authentically ascertained. The election of
delegates to convention must necessarily take
place in separate districts. From this cause it may
readily happen, as has often been the case, that a
majority of the people of the state or territory are
on one side of a question, whilst a majority of the
representatives from the several districts into which
it is divided may be upon the other side. This
arises from the fact that in some districts delegates
may be elected by majorities, whilst in others those
of different sentiments may receive majorities suffi-
, ciently great not only to overcome the votes given
' for the former, but to leave a large majority of the
whole people in direct opposition to a majority •i
the delegates. Besides, our history proves that in-
fluences may be brought to bear upon the represen-
tative sufficiently powerful to induce him to disre-
gard the will of his constituents. The truth is that
no other authentic and satisfactory mode exists of
ascertaining the will of a majority of the people of
any state or territory about an important and ex-
citing question like that of slavery in Kansas, ex-
cept by leaving it to a direct vote. How wise then
was it for Congress to pass over a subordinate and
intermediate agency, and proceed directly to the
source of all legitimate power under our institu-
tions. How vain would another principle prove is
practice ! This may be illustrated by the case of
Kansas, should she be admitted into the union with
a constitution maintaining or abolishing slavery
against the sentiments of the people. This could
have no other effect than to continue to ex isperate
the existing agitation during the brief period re-
quired to make the constitution conform to the
irresistible will of the majority.
The friends and supporters:of the Nebraska and
Kansas Act when struggling on a recent occasion
to sustain its wise provisions before the great tri-
bunal of the American people, differed about its
true meaning on this subject. Everywhere through-
out the Union they publicly pledged their faith and
honour that they would cheerfully submit the ques-
tion of slavery to the decision of the bona fide
people of Kansas without any restriction or quali-
fication whatever. All were cordially united upon
the great doctrine of popular sovereignty, which is
the vital principle of our free institutions. Had
it then been insinuated from any quarter that it
would be in sufficient compliance, with the requisi-
tions of the organic law for the members of a con-
vention thereafter to be elected to withhold this
question of slavery from the people, and to substi-
tute their own will for that of legally-ascertained
majorities of all their constituents, it would
have been instantly rejected. Everywhere they
remained true to the resolution adopted on a cele-
brated occasion, recognising the right of the people
of the territories including Kansas and Nebraska,
acting through the legally and fairly expressed
will of a majority of actual residents, whenever the
number of its inhabitants justifies it, to form a con-
stitution with or without slavery, and be ad-
mitted into the Union upon terms of perfect
equality with the other States. The Convention
to frame a constitution for Kansas met on the fifth
Monday of September last. They were called to-
gether by virtue of ,tri act of the territorial legisla-
ture, whose lawful existence had been recognised
by Congress in different forms and by different
enactments. A large portion of the citizens of
Kansas did not think proper to register their names
and to vote at the election for delegates, but an
opportunity to this having been fairly afforded,
their refusal to avail themselves of their right
could in no manner affect the liabilities of the
Convention.
This Convention proceeded to frame a constitu-
tion for Kansas, and finally adjourned on the 7th
day of November. But little difficulty occurred in
the Convention, except on the subject of slavery.
The truth is that the general provisions of our
recent state constitutions are so similar, and I may
say so excellent, that the difference between them
is not essential. Under the earliest characteristic
action of the Government, no constitution framed
by the Convention of a territory preparatory to its
admission into the Union as a State, had been sub-
mitted to the people. I trust, however, the example
set by the last Congress, of requiring that the con-
stitution of Minnesota ould be subject to the ap-
proval and ratification of the people of the proposed
State, may be followed on future occasions.
I took it for granted that the Convention of Kan-
sas would act in accordance with this example,
founded, as it is, on correct principles ; and hence
my instructions to Governor Walker in favour of
submitting the constitution to the people, were ex-
pressed in general and unqualified terms. In the
Kansas Nebraska Act, this requirement, so accept-
able to the whole constitution, bad not been in-
sorted, and the Convention were not bound by its
terms to submit anyother portion of the instrument
to au election except that which relates to the do-
mestic institution of slavery. This will be rendered
cle sr by a simple reference to its language. It wa,
not to legislate slavery into any territory or State,
nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people
thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their do-
mestic institutions in their own way. According
to the plain construction of the sentence, these
have an appropriate reference to slavery. Do-
mestic institutions are limited to the family.
Tne relation between master and slave, and a
few others, are domestic institutions, and are en-
tirely distinct' from institutions of a political cha-
racter. Besides, there was no question then before
Congress, nor has there since been any serious ques-
tion befose the people of Kansas, of the country,
except that which relates to the domestic institu-
tion of slavery.
The Convention, afarr an angry and excited de-
bate, finally determined, by a majority of two, to
submitthe question of slavery to the people. Though
at the last 43 of the 50 delegates present affixed their
signatures to the constitution, a large majority of