Republican vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1857, 1857-11-14
LoYD's, Essex Co., VA,
a. % 1QET

Oct. %, 1857.
Messrs. SAM'L. 7. WALKER, JoHN T. HAIR
RIs, JOHN IL. WARrNANN, NJ Ii. HAIR
EIs, Il. 4. STANDS,
Gentlemen: | have received your letter
enclosing me the resolutions adopted by a
Democratic meeting in Rockingham, on the
10th of October, with request that
would respond to them. The subject matter
of these resolutions is 50 fully covered by
my letter to the Hon. Shelton +. Ieake,
which was not published at the time of your
meeting, that any othcr answer, on my part,
is perhaps unnecessary. But as there seems
to be a difference Of opinion between us
with regard to your fifth resolution, a far
ther explanation may be proper. If | I'M
derstand your resolution, we agree on the
j principle that the people of Kansas alone
kave the right to form their State institu-
tons according to their own pleasure, pro-
vded they be republican in their character
extend, too, the limitation upon the power
of congress in regard to the rejection of a
State applying for admission even farther
than you do, fer / maintain that upon this
issue it can raise no question in regard to
the Constitution, should it be republican in
its character, if the people of the new State
acting through their convention have made
and adopted it in the manner prescribed by
these their authorized representatives. But
from your fifth resolution dissent entirely.
j That the people of Kansas have the same
rights with the people of any other State in
! this Union, with regard to the formation OF
their State constitution, we must all admit:
that they can delegate to convention called
for this purpose the same power which may
be delegated by the people of any other State,
is also clear, that they might limit the pow
er conferred on such convention by allow
ing them only to form constitution to be
submitted to the people afterwards, for rat
iieation or rejection, or that they might e.
lect convention with a general authority O.
yer the subject, can hardly be denied. 1t is
for the people Of the Territory about to be
come State to say in which of these ways
they will constitute their convention. Such,
understand to be the extent and purport of
your third resolution, in which, with that
understanding, l cordially concur. If then
the people of Kansas have these rights, the
question arises as to what they intended by
electing Convention with general power
and without any limitation imposed by them
selves.
The practice of the States and the reason
Of the case, both prove that it is to be treat
ed as general delegation of their soyer-
eighty, under which tie convention may
lar vote, according to its own views of pro-
pricty. If the people of Kansas, acting as
an inchoate State, imposed no limitation up
on the trust, it is not for any third party
outside of the Territory to affix it. If they
can, in one case, they might in all, and
Congress, as it seems to me, might exercise
the very power which you so properly deny
to it, in your fourth resolution. As has
been well said, by distinguished states
man of Pennsylvania, either this Con-
vohtion is clothed with sovereign power, or
it is nullity." If it be legitimate Com
vention, it is the people who speak through
it; and it is for them to say what ac-
ton is to be final in regard to the Constitu-
ten which it FORMS To say otherwise, i'll
my opinion, is to limit the power Of the
people Of 'kansas, whose plenary jurisdic-
ton over this subject we all admit. But
this fifth resolution does not stop with re-
curing the application Of Kansas for admis-
sion as State to be rejected, because the
Convention did not submit the Constitution
for ratification by the people-it goes much
farther, and claims for Congress the power
of prescribing who are to exercise the right
of suffrage, when the people pass upon the
question of ratifying their own State Con-
ystituticn. Here it is in totidem eerbis:,
"Resolred, That Kansas, in forming her
Constitution, ought to submit the same to
the bona fle iahabitants thereof, for adop-
ten CT rejection, and the failure to do SO is
ia violation of TIE spirit and letter Of The
act creating her Territorial Government, to
the residents of Kansas, for endorsement. ="
Congress thus undertakes to say, not on
ly that the Constitution shall be submitted
for a further vote, but to whom. Ii, then,
the convention of Kansas should submit its
Constitution to popular vote, but estab-
fish qualification for the right of outrage
different from that which you say Congress
must require, the State must be rejected,
and the Constitution, although thus ratified,
is to be returned othc Presidents Of Kan
sas for endorsement"
The most significant act of sovereign
power is perhaps, the regulation of the right
of suffrage and the power over this subject
must be exclusive, wherever it resides. L
Congress possesses it, then the people of the
inchoate State cannot have il, and if the
people of the new State cannot say whC
are to pass upon its own Constitution,
then its equality with the other States il
disparaged and destroyed. But this is moi
all ; if its right to equal powers and priyilo
gcs with the other States be denied, and i
Congress can regulate the highest of its Pc
ltieal rights, mean that of suffrage, wha
is to prevent it from regulating all the 9th
er political rights and relations of its PEG
pic, slavery included? If Congress ma!
exercise this right of sovereignty over PEG
pie in the very act of forming its State Con
stitution what is TO be the limit to Its pew