The Kansas herald of freedom., 1857-10-17
Senator Buchanan vs.. rresiden. Buchanan.

Senator Buchanan vs.. Frssiden, Buchanan.
. In his late extraordinary letter to Presi- |
dent Woolsey, Prof. Silliman and others,
Mr.. Buchanan lays great stress on the act
of the bogus Territorial Legislature of
Kansas, providing for electing delegates to
convention to form State Constitution. |
He not only has no doubt ofthe authority
of that body of ruffians to pass lars for
such an object; but he goes out of his way
to eulogize the provisions of that "law''
as eminently 'fair and just" when he
must know and does know that three
fourths of the actual bona fde inhabitants
of Kansas were by that law disfranchised,
and that half the counties were the Free
State men are proportionally most numer-
Gus, were not included in any voting pre-
cinct whatever And this the President
of the United States stoops before the
slave power to pronounce ''fair and just"
And the refusal of the people to have any
part or lot in so obviously outrageous a
trick of the slaveocrats, he deDominates
"lawless resistance to the regular Terrific
rial Government" And declining to vote
under regulations that must insure the
triumph of the rufians, is made the ex-
cuse for ''employing the troops of the
United States,'' to Dragon the people
into submission
This may pass for good Democracy now.
But there was a time, even since Mr.. Bu-
chanan professed to be Democrat, when
such doctrine would have passed for moth
inc better than the rankeSt federalism
This not the first time a similar question
has arisen. 1t is not the first time MIR.
Buchanan has been called to decide on
the po,Cer of a Territorial Legislature to
''pass law'' for electing delegates to form
State Constitution. In the case of Mich
igan, two Constitutional Conventions were
held, and two Constitutions were formed
one by authority of the Territorial Legis-
lature, and the other by the authority Of
the people. Both were sent to Congress,
asking admission into the Union. 1t was
in 1885. and Mr.. Buchanan was then in
the q. S. Senate. So was Mr.. Calhoun,
at that time bitter and rnrelenting op-
ponent of the Democratic party. Mr.
Calhoun went for admitting the State un-
der the Territorial Legislative Constitu-
ton. Not so Mr.. Buchanan. He, with
the other Democratic Senators, went for
admitting the State under the Peoples
Constitution, which had been formed and
adopted in utter disregard of the Territorial
authorities; as emphatically SO as has the
| Topeka Constitution.
In the debate which arose, Mr. Buchan-
an took the very ground now occupied by
the friends of the Topeka Constitution
| that the PEOPLE are sovereign, and that
the Territorial Legislature have no right
aglsateUer to pass la,cs enabling tie people to
elect deleqates to Convention to form a
State Constitution. The People were
above the Legislature, and, they having
acted, it was the duty of Congress to re-
cognize them. Here is Mr. Buchanan's
language
Suppose we were to admit that their
| (the people's) proceeding had been irreg-
ular, ought that to exclude her from the
Union? On this subject we ought to act
like statesmen acquainted with the histo-
ry of our own country. We ought not to
supply the rigid rules of abstract political
science too vigorously to such cases. 1t
|
our infant Territories with parental care,
to nurse them with kindness. and when
they had attained the age of manhood, to
admit them into the family without re-
quiring from them rigid adherence to
FORMS The great questions to be decided
are: do they contain sufficient popula-
tion? have they adopted republican con-
stitution? aud are they willing to enter
the Union upon the terms which we pro-
pose?
q IF so, all the preliminary proceedings
have been considered but mere forms
| which we have waived in repeated instan'
ces. They are but the Scaffold of the build
ing, which is of no further use after the
edifice is complete We have pursued thi:
course in regard to Tennessee. to Arkansas
and even to Michigan. No Senator toil
pretend that their Territorial Legislature
haze ang right t0tateuer topass laacs e7abtsR.
the people to elect delegates to ConUealtiol
for the purpose Of forming State CO1asti
tuition. IT WAS An ACT OF UsURPATIo,
on THEIR PART"
This language applies. it viii be observ
ed, not to bogus Territorial Legislatures
imposed upon an Hn;rilling people b
fraud and violence; but to all Territoria
legislatures. Doubly and truly does
: apply to the Kansas Territorial Legisla
ture, which never was elected by the pee
pie of that Territory, and never represent
| ed their views or principles. No such on
t lection was made against the Legislature
named by Mr.. Buchanan. They wer
regular and legitimate. And yet, the ma
2 who now confesses TO employing tn
3 troops of the United States to comp'
Il obedience TO the Border Ruffian leglsi;
' ture of Kansas, H.cn pronounced simlls
: acts of the regular Territorial Legislature
S of Tennessee, Arkansas and Aichiga
: sAcTs or UsURPATIeE.
They are acts of usurpation. Neisn'
: under the Constitution or laws OF u
5. United States have Territorial le9lslatur
5 the slightest authority to take the init
tive in the formation of State. II
h forty delegates, more. or less, now asseI
!. bled at Lecompton, as a Constitution
n / Convention, have no more authority
n form q State Constitution for Kansas tn
-e have any other forty men, whether
Leeompton, Leayenworth or elsewhel
; Nor will any instrument that body ID
% agree upon, be, IN any respect. more rs
Dr. uIar, more legal, or more Constitution
,e than is the Topeka Constitution. Al
h the President has no more right TO e
l. ploy the army Of the United States TO
a. fend or sanction the proceedings OF
ssI Lecompton Convention, than he has TO e
n- ploy the army TO defend or sanction
b. equally numerous convention N any P
l. ton of Kansas. The act OF the Do
Ill Legislature. even admitting It not 70
Il bogus, wss passed, 70 use Mr. BHcnana
&. words above quoted. agithtsrt 0istisor
IL and Is neither more nerless than IAN