Weekly Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1853-1861, 1856-06-05
LAFE DEvELIN, Secretary.
The Topeka Constitution ON Ats Merit

The Topeka Constitution on Ats Merits.
But few-we might probably say not any
sound and thinking men justify the mode
in which the free State party in Kansas.
formed the constitution under which it asks
admission into the Union. All that it can
claim to be is an emanaton from class of
the citizens of the Territory who act to-
gether in the same political organization.-
1t has none of the attributes of constitu-
tion. 1t was not framed under any legal
proceedings, or by men who had any official
election as delegates to convention. The
whole matter was a voluntary proceeding
Such citizens as chose to do so took part in
it, Just As they do in the caucuses and con-
ventions of any one of the political parties.
And the instrument called by courtesy
constitution, has just as much the attributes
of one as would similar paper formed by
Democratic, or Republican, or Know Nothing
State Convention in this State. Such a doc
ument thus prepared might be very judi
cious instrument, which it would be proper
for the people to adopt, but it would have
very slight pretensions to be regarded as the
fundamental law until it should have, in some
official form, received the popular approval.
There are some Of the presses which ordi-
narily sustain the Republican party and its
creed and candidates which have sufficient
regard for great principles of constitutions!
law to hesitate to lend their approval to
this revolutionary proceeding. Conspicuous
among them is the New York Times, the
language of which, on this point, as well as
in favor OF the passage of Senator DOUGLAS
bill for the admission of Kansas, we have
heretofore copied. The Times comes to the
defence Of its views, against assaults which
have been made upon them, in the following
language:
II the admission of Kansas under the To
peka constitution could be decided on its merit:
without reference to consequences, We have M
hesitation in saying We should oppose 1t. Th'
application, upon the face Of il, is irregular
and if more harm would not be done by insist
ing upon regularity than by waving it for ;h'
. time being, we should favor rejection of tn
present application, and compel Kansas TO seel
admission under the authority and with thu
preliminary sanction Of Congress. In thi
case, as our readers know the application come
from convention of delegates elected at tn
call Of party. and not Of Congress or the Ter
ritorial authority, and by the votes of only
portion Of the people.
The citizens of Kansas who called it acted il
entire contempt Of all formally constituted au
thority !; their action was outside of all govern
ment, and was q simple exercise of the powe
that inheres in every society where there is n
, law. Now our theory of the relations Of Tel
ritory to the Union does not permit us to regar
such action as legitimate. We believe tina
. Congress has sovereignty over the Territories
, that the people Of the Territories are bound t
obey the laws Of Congress-and that any actio
outside Of those laws and in contempt Of the
q authority is illegitimate and revolutionary.