Muscatine weekly journal. [volume] (Muscatine, Iowa) 185?-1890, 1857-12-19

authorities IN an insnlting and arbitrary man
ner, which requires redress. A demand for
these purposes, viii be made in firm. but
conciliatory spirit This will the more prob
ably be granted it the Executive shall have
authority to use ether means In the event Of
. refusal; this is accordingly recommended.
1t Is necessary to state in detail the alarm.
Ing condition OF the Territory of Kansas at
the time ct my Inauguration. The opposing
parties then stood in hostile array against
each other, and any accident might have re-
lighted the flames Of civil war. Besides. at
this critical moment Kansas was left with
ont Governor by the resignation Of Gov.
Geary.
On the 18th of February previous, the
Territorial Legislature had passed law
providing for the election Of Delegates On
the Sd Monday Of June to o Convention to
meet on the 1st Monday of September for
the purpose Of framing Constitution pre-
paratory to admission into the Union. This
law was in the main fair and just; and it is
to be regretted that all the qualified electors
had not registered themselves and voted un-
der it's provisions.
At the time of the election for delegates,
an extensive organization existed in the
Territory, whose avowed object it was, if
need be, to put down the lawful Govern.
ment by force, and to establish a Govern
ment of their own under the so-called Tope-
ka Constitution. The persons attached to
this revolutionary organization abstail.e ed
from taking any part in the election.
The act of the Territorial Legislatureshn
omitted to provi lie for submitting to the
people the Constitution which might be
framed by the Convention and in the excl
red state of public feeling throughout Kan
sas an apprehension extensively prevailed
that a design existed to force upon them Il
Constitution 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 good citi-
zens in support Of the territorial laws, to
| express an opinion on the true construction
of the provisions concerning slavery con-
tanned in the Organic Act of Congress of the
S0th May, 1854.
Congress declared it to be ":he true in
tent and meaning of this act 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 domestic institutions in their own
way" Under it Kansas, =" when admitted
as State" WAS to ''be received into the
Union" with or without slavery, as their
Constitution may prescribe at the time OF
their admission.
Did Congress mean by this language that
the delegates elect ed to frame a constitution
should have authority finally to decide the
question of slavery, or did they intend by
leaving it to the people that the people of
Kansas themselves should decide this ques-
ton by direct vote? On this subject
confess had never entertained a serious
doubt, and, therefore, in my instructions to
Governor Walker on the 2Sth March last,
merely said that when 6 a constitution shall
be submitted to the people of that Territory,
they must be protected in the exercise of
their right of voting for or against that in
strument, and the 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. From this have always carefully
abstained. Entrusted with tue duty of to
king " care that the laws be faithfully exc
cuted," my only desire was that the people
of Kansas should furnish to Congress the
evidence required by the organic act, wheth
er for or against slavery and in this man
ner smoothe their passage into the Union
In emerging from the condition of territori-
al dependence into that of a sovereign State,
it was their duty, in my opinion, to make
known their will by the votes of the major
ity, on the direct question whether this inn
portant domestic institutio on should or should
not continue to exist. Indeed, this was the
only possible mode in which their will could
be automatically ascertained.
The election of delegates to convention
must necessarily take place in separate dis
tricts. From this cause it may readily hap
pen as has often been the case, that a major
ity Of a people of State or Territory are
on one side Of question, whilst ma ority
of the representatives from the several dis
tricts into which it is divided may be upon
the other side. This arises, from the fact
that in some districts delegates may be elect
ed by small majorities, whilst others those
Of different sentiments may receive ma ORR
ties sufficiently great not only to overcome
the votes given for the former, but to leave
a large majority of the whole people in d.
rect opposition to a majority Of the dele
gates. Besides, our history proves that in
huence may be brought to bear on the rep
resentative sufficiently powerful to induce
him to disregard the will Of his constituents.
The truth is, that no other authentic and
satisfactory mode exists of ascertaining the
will of the people of any State or Territory
on an important and exciting question like
that of slavery in Kansas, except leaving ii
to direct vote. How wise then was it for
Congress to pass over all subordinate and
intermediate agencies, and proceed directly
to the source Of all legitimate power under
our institutions!
How vain would any other principle prove
in practice! This may be illustrated by the
case of Kansas Should she be admitted
into the Union, with constitution either
maintaining or abolish slavery, against the
sentiment Of the people, this could have no
other effect than to continue and exasperate
the existing agitation during the brief period
required to make the constitution conform
to the irresistible will of the majority.
The friends and supporters Of the Nebras-
ka and Kansas act, when struggling on a
recent occasion to sustain its wise provis-
ions before the great tribunal of the Ameri-
can people, never differed about its true
meaning on this subject. Everywhere
throughout the Union, they publicly pledged
their faith and their honor that they would
cheerfully submit the question of slavery to
the decision of the bona fide people of Kan
sas, without any restriction or qualification
whatever. All were cordially united upon
the great doctrine of popular sovereignty,
which is the vital principle Of our free in
situations. Had it then been insinuated from
any quarter that it would be sufficient
compliance with the acquisitions of the or
ganic law for the members of convention,
thereafter to be elected, to withhold the
question of slavery from the people, and to
| substitute their own will for that of a legal
ly ascertained majority of all their constit-
uents, this would have been instantly re-
! iected. EyerYWhere thew remained true to