The Hillsdale standard. [volume] (Hillsdale, Mich.) 1851-1909, 1857-10-06
From the New Haven Daily Palladium, September g. 1857
mR. BUCHANAN AND HIS PEOPLE
PROGRESS OF THEIR CORRESPONDENCE.
AN EyE-oPENER FOR THE PRESIDENT.
Some Good Poin,s for His Next Message.

Some Good Poinls for His Next Message.
To his Ercellency Jams Buchanan, Pres'-
dent of the United States
In July last, . number of citizens of Con-
necticut addressed to you, as Chief Magistrate
of this nation, memorial on the affairs of
Kansas. To this you replied, under date of
Aug. Is, 1857, in manner which shows
that you misunderstood, to some extent, tho
ground taken by the memorialists, for we
would not impute to you the intention to
misrepresent them. As you have thought
proper to lay the memorial and reply before
the public, large part of the memoralists
have conferred on the subject, and have felt
themselves compelled again to address
you. We would remark, then, that the
main facts alleged in that memorial are eth
or passed over without denial or are explicit
ly avowed in your reply.
These facts are two: First, chat the run
damental principles of the Constitution OF the
United States and of our political institutions
is, that the people shall make their own laws
and elect their own ralers." Secondly, "that
Governor Walker of Kansas openly represents
and proclaims that the President of the Uni
ted States is employing through him walk
cry An army, one purpose of which is to force
tho people of Kansas to obey laws which are
not their own, nor of the United States; but
laws which is notorious, and established up
on evidence they never made and rules they
never elected" As to these two facts, the ma
terial facts alleged by your memorialists, anu
which chiefly require vindication from you,
they say that they find do denial of them in
your reply. They do not say that you have
attempted no vindication of your acts and do
ings through Governor Walker; but only, that
they can find in your reply no plain or expic-
IL denial Of The facts referred to-not even
what they consider tn, shadow of denial.
The facts stand in the memorial then, un-
contradcted, by what you evidently consider
q triumphant reply? Why is this? Are
these assertions on which the whole subject
at issue depends, untrue-and yet no denial
of them,-not a word to prove them untrue!
What, but that the facts, which they alleSe,
are notorious and undeniable.
As to the allegation respecting the funda-
mental principle of the Constitution, your
memoralsts hope, that the time is remote
when the enlightened citizens of this country
will deny that principle; though party zeal,
in its infatution, may one day, tramplc 1t IN
TIC uuSt, WHICH Ill slR VI VIZ '"ih' '~'S>''y
and Religion in exile, will together weep over
the discretion.
Your formal vindication next demands no
tice. ;,
OF this, your memorialists are compelled
TO say, that in their view, it is entirely grouhd-
less and unsatisfactory.
Resting it solely on what you call the
planest and most papable historical fact'
YOU say at the time of your inauguration
iyou found in fact the Government OF Nan
sas, rs well established rs any other territory.
You then ask. Was it my duty to sustain
this govcrnment-to prevent it from bcin2
overturned by force; in the language OF the
Constitution, to take care that The laws o'
faithfully executedw You then add: 'li
was for this purpose that ordered military
force to Kansas, to act as posse comt"pS II
aiding the civil magistrate to carry the Ia"
into execution" Here, then, Is the dlS'lhc'
admission and declaration on your part, thal
YOU ordered military force to Kansas, 10
the purpose of sustaining It's territorial laws
So far then, in respect to one matter oil tacl
YOU admit the assertion of your memor'
lists.
Your vinlication, then, rests upon the ASSET
ton that there was in fact, goVernmeh
in Kansas-such a government aa 1t was you
duty to sustain. The essential question "'
which the whole controversy turns is thu
raised; il is simply this:-Was there GOV
crnment, or were there laws IN Kansas IN
lust, proper, and authorized meaning ot Tn
language, "when you entered upon the dntl'
of the Presidential office on the 4th
March last z
If this can be proved to be true, your M
moralists will know something which the
have yet to learn. If it can be proved nc
true, ait will present memorial example
the truth that political prejudice Is bin
even to the existence of tho plalnest an
most palpable of historical facts" Nor
this all. 1t will show that you ordered q
army to Kansas to sustain 70 called goverl
ment which is not a government, ana Law
which are not laws.
Here you memoraists take the posltio
that nothing can be truly government
law which presents no evidence OF au'hort
and that nothing should be treated as go
ernment or law which presents no evlden
of authority.
Can anything which tramplcs under 10
NIL human rights, and is known outrage u
ON our constitution and our political insti'
t;on. whatever be its name or form, be just
regarded as government or law having
thority under our constitution! Can such
outrage be clothed with authority by fr
ident, Senate, Congress, or whole Congr
of Presidents? Can usurpation beget va
government or law, or impsrt that right
govern, which implies an obligation to obe
Il mig ght may make it matter Of Prude'
10 avoid its wrath by submission, but {
usurpation create an obligation to obey VIII
none exists?
Suppose the Great Mogul, or any other
rant, had established the same so-caiiei
eminent and laws of Kansas, by the sa
means by which, as all the world knows, Z
were established-by invasion and arms; "
any citizen of the United States call u
"govcrnment and laws" except inderlslon