The Minnesotian. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn. Territory) 1851-1852, 1852-02-21
WAsHINGroS, Feb. %, 1851.
Hon. II. III. &blsy, Delegate from the
Tor-,Jo-,, of 1E..,oatu

Hon. II. III. &bley, Delegate from the
Territory of Minnesota.
DEAR SIR: | have examined, though
briefly, the law organizing the Territory
of Minnesota, in relation to the questions
you PROFOUND in your note of yesterday.
| was surprised that any question of the
kind could arise in the mind of any one.
had been one of the committee that franz
ed the law in question, and presume
that no one of that committee ever doubted
that the legislative power of the Territory
extended to the entire limits OF the Ter
ritory, restricted only 10 ''rightful sub
jects of legislation. consistent with the
Constitution Of the United States, and the
provisions of this Act,' and subject to
the approval of Congress. Nothing of
course could be done by the Legislature
of the Territory in regard to the Indian
tribes, as this subject belongs exclusive
ly to Congress, but that the Territory, in
all its parts, was devoted to the same
legislative control, is proved by the
provision that every free white citizen
Of the age Of twenty lone years, who
shall have been resident of the Terrific
ny at the time of the passage of the act,
shall be entitled to vote at the first cleo
ton. All could vote; the consequence of
which is apparent-that all, in contempla-
tion of law, were to be represented
Subsequent Legislatures could regulate
the qualifications of voters, but in the
Territory, and in any part of it, the right
of voting would remain, and Of course the
right of representation.
This short view of the subject, answers
the points made in your note. The organ
ic law of the Territory regarded the entire
Territory in precisely the same light-all
parts of it entitled to representation
male citizens Of twenty-one years Of age,
being free, no matter where situated, or
living, being entitled to vote. The leg
islation over the whole Territory is a
complete right in the Territorial legisla-
ture, subject only to the restrictions i'm
piled in the exclusive right of Congress
to regulate the intercourse between the
Indian tribes. Excuse the imperfections
of this note, written in the midst of a
boisterous debate.
With great respect,
amaruly yours.
JAMES THOMPSON.
In the face of this conclusive reason
ing of the distinguished chairman of the
Judiciary Committee of the last House
Of Representatives, the newly imported
upstart, writing in the last Democrat, has
the temerity to assert what we have
quoted from him! And what is more,
he goes on to say, that the people residing
upon the ceded lands were defeated at
the last election-borne down by the vo-
tiers upon the unceded lands, in their ef-
forts 10 overthrow the apportionment
law; and that now there is 10 recourse
left, but to get Congress TO declare the
citizens upon the west side not entitled
TO representation! This is the kind of
Democracy preached by the Rice organ ;
and to that, among other ends, George L.
Becker is kept whining around the halls
OF Congress, and thrusting his hypocriti-
cal nose into the public business of Fed
eral officers here and there. We hope
our neighbor will have good time of it
when that same contemplated act of Con-
gress becomes law! Talk of the people
resident upon the ceded lands wishing
such law enacted! Why, the returns
Of the last election show that majority
of them voted to sustain the opportion-
ment act. Just to show the absurdity of
the thing, we will give the returns of last
October from all the coded counties. TAX
ing the highest candidates on either tick
ct as the test, and leaving out, for the sake
Of saving cavil, the returns from the dis
puted precinct Of Nokasippi, in Benton
county, and counting all OF Warren's il
legal votes at Swan river. Here they
are:
Appor. Anti.
Washington cornty, Toomis, Iol
| Is Greedy, los
| ChiSago Sc Loomis, 81
| I" Greedy, 81