Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes County, Ohio) 1856-1865, 1857-10-01

support as a rightful law-making power
from the President of the United States /?
This case is too fragrant. The facts are to
notorious. No truly Independent, self-re-
lying President, who understood his official
prerogative, and his duty under the Con-
stitution, would have hesitated to disregard
even direct act of Congress so tyranical
and oppressive and appeal to his country
and the world for his vindication.
But no such trying emergency was here
presented. With the solemn decision of
the House of Representatives, after a long
investigation. that the Legislature of Kan
sas had no authority, and that its laws
were no laws-with that diree, positive
and unimpeachable evidence before you,
your Memorialists cannot but express their
surprise that you have relied upon your
construction of indirect, inconclusive acts
of that same body as evidenee of the Leg
islature. They know of no rule of law by
which you can set up constructive, inferen-
tial evidence against direct and positive ev-
idence from the same source. But this
proof you pass over in utter silence.
Abiding to the condition of the Terri
tory, you speak of the course which you
adopted as absolutely necessary" and
ask whether "you would not have sheen
Justly condemned had you left" what you
assume to be the Government and its ad-
ministration 'impotent, and thus have suf-
fered it to become an object of contempt
in The eyes of the people. Our first reply
to this view of the case is, as before, there
was no (Territorial government in Kansas
to be executed, as you suppose. And
again, We say the usurped government
ought to have been rendered impotent, and
to have become an object of contempt in
the eyes of the people, as it has become
But further, Congress has passed law
for the establishment of a government in
this Territory, with this formal and posi-
tive explanation, that the people Gn the
Territory be left perfectly free to form and
regulate their domestic institutions in their
own way. Why, then, could the Cover
nor of Kansas have been appointed at any
time, acting under your authority, and
with an army under his control, who would
have suppressed all internal violence and
contention, and "left the people free to form
and regulate their domestic institutions" ="
&c, as well as employ the army to act the
absurd and farcical part of a posse comita-
tus, to enforce, under your DIRECTION, terri
torial laws which had no pretense of au-
thoritys Without saying who were or
who were not, the responsible originators
of the troubles in Kansas, can it be doubt
ed that the Pr sident long before this time,
by the course now suggested, or some other,
might have put an end to their troubles /?
Has he not power to "take care that the
laws"-and of course, that the law of Con-
gress. respecting Kansas-"be faithfully
executed"
You have introduced several topics into
your reply, as that of slavery, the decision
of the Supreme Court in the case of Dred
Scott, with others, on which your Memo
rialists have said nothing now, except to
express their dissent from your opinions.
1t is needless to prolong this discussion.
Your whole vindication, if it has any
ground, rests, in the view of your Memo
rialists, upon one palpably false assump-
ton: That whatever claims to be gov
ernment de facto, without a pretense of
its proceeding from any rightful law-mak
ing power, is entitled to your support
The world has not seen usurpation
which this principal would sanction. If
adopted in the administration of our Gov
ernment it must involve, sooner or later,
its destruction.
Nathaniel W. Taylor, S. G. Hubbard,
Theo. d. Woolsey, John A. Blake,
Henry Dutton, VIM. H. Russell,
Chas. L. English, A. N. Skinner,
John II. Brockway, Chas. Robinson,
Eli w. Blake, G. A. Calhoun,
Benz. Silliman, jr, Joel Hawes,
Thos. A. Thatcher, Leonard Bacon,
J. A. Davenport, H. G. Kingsley,
Worthington Hooker, Benz. Siliman, sen.
Philos Blake, Charles Ives,
Amos Townsend, Josiah H. Gibbs,
T.. D. n