The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1857-12-03
THE SOUTHERN PRESS,
From the Richmond (va) South. a
THE KANSAS CONTROVERSY AT AN END
THE "ENQUIRER'sr DILEMMA.

From the Richmond (va) South a
THE KANSAS CONTROVERSY AT AN END
THE "ENQUIRER'sD DILEMMA.
The people are tired of the Kansas contro-
versy, but of course they want to know the issue
of struggle which has engaged so much of
public interest for the last three years.
Briefly, then, the Convention has finished its
work, and adjourned sine die. 1t has construct
ed complete system of State Government, and
has made careful provision for it's actual organ.
ization. There will be doubt among different
persons in regard to some of the details of the
fundamental law, but in the main and in its
more essential features it is worthy of all ap-
probation. 1t guarantees the security of the
slave property now in the Territory, in the
event even that Kansas shall not adopt the in
stitution. The Issue of Slavery or no Slavery
is left to the decision of a popular vote. But
the Constitution is not submitted for ratifica.
ton or rejection. The vote is to be taken only
upon the Slavery question; and in either, event
the Constitution is to be sent to Congress with
an application for admission into th6Union.
Thus does the Convention assert its absolute
power in the matter by the most emphatic acts
of supreme control. A solitary issue is referred
back to the polls, but the body of the Constitu.
ton is to be transmitted to Congress, without
giving the people an opportunity to adopt or
reject it. And the Washington Union is in
ecstasies over the result-thereby betraying an
equal satisfaction on the part of the President.
Indeed it is notorious that the action of the
Kansas Convention is accepted by the Admin
istration, and that the admission of the Terri.
tory will be urged by the Executive.
Here, then, we find the Administration com.
mitted to two important principles-frst, that
the power of the Convention is absolute in the
organization of a State Government; and, sec.
ondly, that the formality of popular ratifca-
ton is not essential to the legitimacy and valid
ity of the Constitution.
The Philadelphia Press denies both these
opositions-maintaining that the Convention
has no alternative but to submit the Constitu.
ton to the people, and that the absence of such
formality would justify Congress in refusal to
receive Kansas into the Confederacy. The
Press, therefore, is perfectly logical and consist
ent in denouncing the action of the Conven
ton. Hear it:
awe publish this morning the schedule
adopted be the Kansas Constitutional Conven.
ton. Contrary TO what we conceive to be the
true intent and meaning of the Kansas Nebras
ka Act, the resolutions of the Cincinnati Plat
form, the Inaugural Address of Mr.. Buchanan,
the recommendations of Governor Walker, the
pledges of many of the members of that Con
vention, the general expectations of the coun.
try, and in defiance of the true principles oil
liberal Democratic government, that body has
refused to submit lis work fairly to the citizens
of Kansas. There is no honest submission oil
the new Constitution to the action of the peo
pie. 1t is provided that they may vote for the
Constitution with Slavery or for the Consti
tuition without Slavery but they cannot vote
against the Constitution, no matter how much
they may be opposed to its provisions. They
are not allowed an opportunity of saying wheth
er they do or do not desire the document fran
ed by this Convention to be their fundamental
law, and by the abnegation of this privilege
they are deprived of the full exercise of that
right of forming their own institutions to which
they are entitled by every consideration of JUS.
tice and right"
We will not pause to take issue with the
Press on its several propositions touching the
power of the Convention and the submission
of the Constitution. We deny them utterly
and contend that by the Kansas Nebraska Act
the Cincinnati Platform, and the Presidents
Inaugural, the organization of a State Govern
ment for Kansas is left exclusively to the Con.
vention, without any other restriction or limit.
| alton on its power than a conformity to the
principles of the Federal Constitution. Still
we are bound to acknowledge, in view of It's
| peculiar opinions, that the Press is logically
| correct in repudiating the action of the Con
| vention.
How is it with our neighbor of the Enquirer2
That paper agreed with the Philadelphia Press
in its construction Of the power of the Conven.
ton, and the necessity of popular vote upon
the Constitution. The Enquirer denies that
the Convention may refuse to submit its work
to the people, and insists that the absence OF
tha TN v0ulH Off -,
ing the Constitution. But the Convention does
decline to submit the Constitution to a popular
vote. Only an incidental issue is thus submit
ted, while, as regards the body of the Constitu-
ton, the people of Kansas are not allowed the
alternative of adopting or rejecting it. They
only vote upon the question of SLdcery or no
Slavery; and whether they vote yea or nay the
work of the Convention is valid and conclusive
They have not a single word upon the general
spirit or the particular details of their State
Government. Whether they will or no, the
Constitution is to be sent to Congress, with an
application for the admission of Kansas into
the Union.
Now, it is obvious that the principles which
the Enquirer holds to be essential are violated
by the action of the Kansas Convention. If
the Convention is bound to submit any part
of its work to the will of the people, it is bound
demand a vote upon the Constitution, they have
a right to demand vote upon every one of its
provisions. If Congress may reject the Con-
stitution of Kansas in default of popular rati.
fcation, here is certainly case for the exercise
of the power. For, beyond all dispute, the
principle of an absolute right on the part of the
people to pass upon their Constitution is vio-
lated by thoAction of the Kansas Convention,
which only provides for a popular vote upon a
single issue; and, if Congress may interfere
against the authority of the Convention, surely
1t may interpose to guarantee the people an
opinion on the body of the Constitution as well
as upon an incidental enactment.
So the Enquirer is in another awkward di.
lemma. 1t must either renounce its own prin
ciples, or else break with the Administration ;
for the Administration endorses the action of
the Kansas Convention. Will our neighbor
join the Philadelphia Press, the New York
Herald, the Tribune, and every other Black
Republican journal, in denouncing the Conven
ton and repudiating its action? Or will it
forswear its principles, and stick to the Ad-
ministration? We await reply.
From the South-side Democrat of November 81