Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-12-19

sovereignty - but delegated powers - 20 them
alone it must look flr the exercise of constitu-
tinnal authority in the Territories, as well as in
the States; for there is not single power grant.
ed by the Constitution to this government in
Territory which is not granted in a State, except
the power to adult new States into the Union,
which, as shown by the Madison papers, the franz
ers OF the Constitution, as first demonstrated
In my Texas letters, refused to limit our then
existing Territories.
In the territories then, as we'll as the States,
congress possesses no sovereignty, and can only
exercise the powers delegated by the Constitu
ton, and all the powers not thus granted are dor.
mant or reserved powers, belonging in common
territory TO all the States eoequal joint tenants
there Of that highest political power called popu;
lar sovereignty. 1t viii be perceived that this
doctrine, that sovereignty makes constitutions,
that sovereignty rests exclusively with the people
OF each State, that sovereignty cannot be dele
gated, that it is inaliehable, indivisble a unit
incapable of partition, doctrines ever regard.
ed by men as fundamental principles Of public
liberty and of the federal constitution.
1t will be seen that these views which l have
entertained were not framed to suit any emer.
gency in kanzas, but were my life long princi
pies, and were published over my own signature
twelve months before my departure to that Terri
tory. and when had never thought OF going to
Kanzas
These rights have ever regarded as fully Sc.
cured to the people Of all the Territories in adj
optng their State Constitution, by the Kanzas
and Nebraska bill Such is the construction Civ
en- to that act by Congress, in passing the Min
nesota bill, 50 justly appanded by the President.
Such is the construction of this Kanzas act by its
distinguished author, not only i'll his late most
able argument but in addresses made and pub.
lished by him long antecedent to that date, show
ing that the sovereign power of the people in act.
ing upon State Constitution is not confined to
the question of slavery, but includes all other
subjects embraced in such an instrument. In.
deed, [ believe the Kanzas and Nebraska bill
would have violated the right of sovereignty re-
served to the people of each State by the federal
Constitution, if it had dreYived them, or Con-
gress should now deprive them of the right of
voting for or against their State Constitution.
The President in his message thinks that the
rights secured by this bill to the people, in acting
upon their State Constitution, are confined 30 the
slavery question; but think. as is shown in my
address before quoted, that 90 sovereignty is the
power that makes constitutions and govern
ments, and that not only the slavery clause in
State Constitution, but all others, must be sub
mitted, The President thinks that sovereignty
can be delegated at least in part; / think that
sovereignty cannot be delegated at all. The
President believes that sovereignty is indvisible
between conventions-and people. to be exercised
by the former on all subjects but slavery, and by
the latter only on that subject; whereas, think
that sovereignty is inalienable, indvsible, inca
pable Of partition, and that it cannot be delegated
in whole or in part.
1t will not be denied that sovereignty is the
only power that make a State constitution,
and that it rests exclusively with the people, and
if it is nalienable and cannot be delegated, as
L have shown, then it can only be exercised by
the people themselves. Under our government,
we know no sovereigns but the people. Conven
tions are composed Of delegates; they are mere
agents or trustees, exercising not a soveregnbut
delegated power, and the people are the princi-
pals. The power delegated to such conventions
can properly only extend to framing the constitu
ton, but its ratification or rejection can only be
performed by the power which elects, where SOW
ereignty alone rests-namely, the people them
selves.
We must not confound the sovereign with the
delegated power The provisional authority of
the convention TO frame constitution and SUBJ
NIT it 10 the peepi4,is is delegau power but SOW
ereignty alone bieh rest, exclusively with the
people, ratify it and put in force that consti-
tuition, and this is the doctrine of popular sOver
eighty aud know no such thing, nor does the
Federal Constitution recognize il, as delegated or
conventional sovereignty The President, in
very lucid passage of his able message, gives un
answerable reasons why the people, and not con-
entions, should decide the question Of slavery.
He says, in framing State constitution, very
truly, that from the necessary division of the in
choate State into districts, majority Of the del
egates may think one way, and tho people
another, and that the delegates as we'll, as was
the case in Kanzas, may violate their pledges or
fail TO execute the will of the people.
And why does not this reasoning apply with
equal force to all other questions embodied in the
State constitution and why should the question
of slavery alone override and extugush the doc.
trine of popular sovereignty and the rights of
self government Most fortunately, this is no
sectional question, for it belongs alike to the
States, admitted or inchoate, OF the South as of
the North. 1t is not question of slavery. but of
States riuhte Df Sfatp and
And my objections to the Lecompton constitu-
ton are equally strong, whether Kanzas, under
its provisions, should be made free or slave
State. My objections are based upon the viola
ton of the right Of selgoFernment and popular
sovereignty, and Of forcing any constitution upon
the people against their will, whether it recog-
nized freedom or slavery Indeed, the first ques.
ton which the people ought to decide in forming
government for an inchoate State, is, whether
they will change or not from a Territorial to
State government.
Now, as no one, who, with me, desires federal or
territorial sovereignty, will contend that terri
torial Legislature is sovereign, or represents SOW
ereignty, or that such Legislature, mere crea
tion of Congress, can transfer sovereignty. which
it does not possess to territorial convention.
This change from a territorial to State govern
ment can only be made by the power where SOW
ereignty rests-with the people. Yet a State
government is forced upon the people oil Kanzas by
But, besides the change from a territorial
State government, which the people alone have
right to make, in framing State constitution
there are many other momentous questions in-
eluded in that instrument. 1t involves all the
powers OF State government. Where is the Bill
of Rghts-the Magma Charta Of the liberties Of
free people, the legislative. executive; and judi
cial iuuctions-the taxing powers-the elective
franchse--the great questions of education--the
sacred relations of husband and wife, parent and
child, guardian and ward-and all the rights
affecting life, liberty, and property There is,
also, the question of State debts--of banks and
paper money-and whether they shall be permit
ted or prohibited.
AS all free governments, as stated by Mr.. JEFF
ferson, depend upon "the consent OF the gov
erned," how can it be known whether the people
would assent to the constitution. unless it be
submitted to their vote for ratification or reiec.
ton But, if acquescence can be presumed in
any case, surely, it cannot be in that Of Kanzas,
where SO many Of the delegates violated their
pledges to submit the constitution itself to vote
of the people, where the delegates, who signed
the constitution, represented scarcely onetenth
of the people, and where nearly one-half Of the
counties of the territory were DISTINGUISHED, and
that by no fault of theirs, and did not, and could
not give single vote at the election Of delegates
TO the convention.
have heretofore discussed the subject mainly
on the question that conventions are not sover-
eign, aud cannot rightfully make State consti-
tuition without its submission to a vote Of the
people for ratification or rejection Yet, surely,
even those who differ from me must concede, es
pecially under the Kanzas-Nebraska act, it is
only such conventions can be called sovereign as
have been truly elected by the people, and rep.
resent their will.
On reference, however, to my address Of Sept.
10th last, on the lday OF the qualification ques-
ton, a copy Of which was Immediately transmit
ted to Won for the in formation or the President