Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes County, Ohio) 1856-1865, 1857-07-16
win Buckanan sustain Walk-

We do not believe he will 1t said that
already two members Of the Cabinet de-
mand the recall Of Walker; and if the
pressure from the South continues he will
be compelled to give way to il or lose the
support Of the South to his administra-
ton.
The recent article IN the Union on this
subject is given out IS being authoritative.
It is rather remonstrance with the South,
than rebuke of it, for being too hasty in
its condemnation; and the counienance it
gives 10 Walker is of the coolest kind. 1t
says:
ave repeat that the Constitution of
Kansas must come from the people OF
Kansas. Other power to make such an iu-
strument there is not under Heaven.
But the Georgia convention, without de-
nying this great principle, seems to think
that the Constitution of Kansas ought not
to be submitted to direct vote of the peo-
pie in their primary capacity. We ad-
init that this is not in all cases a sine qua
non. 1t is fair presumption (if there be
not circumstance to repel it) that a conven-
ton of delegates chosen by the people will
act in accordance with the will of their
constituents. When, therefore, there is no
serious dispute upon the Constitution, Ell
ther in the convention or among the people,
the power Of the delegates alone may put
it in operation. But such is not the case
in Kansas. The most violent struggle this
country ever saw upon the most important
issue which the Constitution is to deter
mine, has been going on there for several
years, between the parties so evenly bal
anced that both claim the majority, and so
hostile to one another that numerous lives
have been lost in the contest. Under these
circumstances there can be no such thing
as aseertaining clearly and without doubt
the will of the people in any way, except
by their own direct expression of it at the
polls. A Constitution not subjected to
that test, no matter what it contains, will
never be acknowledged by its opponents to
be anything but fraud. A plausible CO
lor might be given to this assertion by the
argument that the members of the con-
vention could have no motive for refusing
to submit their work to their constituents,
except a consciousness that the majority
would condemn it. We confesss that we
should find some difficulty in answering
this. What other motives could they
hayea
We do most devoutly believe that un-
less the Constitution of Kansas be sub
mitted to direct vote of the people, the
unhappy controversy which has heretofore
ragged in that Territory will be prolonged
for an indefinate time to come. We are
equally well convinced that the will of
the majority, whether it be for or against
Slavery, will finally triumph, though it
may be after years Of strife, disastrous to
the best interests of the country, and dan
gerous, it may be, 10 tho peace and safety
of the whole Union.
Again: This movement of the Terrific
rial authority to form 3 Constitution is
made, not in the regular way, in pursuance
of an enabling, and authorizing act of the
Territorial Legislature itself. Nay, it has
been begun and carried on in the teeth of
q refusal by Congress to pass such an act.
This irregularity is not fatal. There are
other cases in which it was overlooked
But it can be waived only in consideration
of the fact that the people have expressed
their will in unmistakable language. If
we dispense with the legal forms of pro-
ceeding we must have the substance.
We think, for these reasons, that Gov.
Walker, in advocating submission of the
Constitution to a vote of the people, acted
with wisdom and justice, and followed the
only line of policy which promises to set
lie this vexed question either righffully or
In this respect be has done |
nothing wo. thy of death or bonds.
But who are the peoplee What shall
be the qualifications of voter on the Con-
stitution when it comes to be submitted |
We answer that this is for the Convention
10 settle. Those who think that the Con
Eention might declare the Constitution in
full force by virtue of their own will, can
hardly deny that they might append to it
3 condition requiring il to be first approved
BY the people. If they can do this, they
,an also say what classes of persons shall
be counted as being part of the people.
The Convention that formed the federal
Constitution exercised this power when
hey referred it to their constituent 1.-THE
States1 and prescribed that their approba-
ion should be given or withheld by State
Conventions. The Constitution of Vir-
,inia was submitted to the votes of men
by the Convention for the
inst time. Of course the Kansas Conven-
ion will see that every proper guard is
brown around the legal voter, and that his
IONA fide intention to remain in the Terri
ory is tested by previous residence of
uficient length. We should say that the
qualifications required to make legal vo-
or under the Constitution ought to entitle
IN inhabitant to vote uponit-for. or against
is adoption" |
The last paragraph looks very little like
Walker. That gentleman has
'ledged himself to the people of Kansas,
and assured them that in doing so he was
citing under instructions from the Presi-
ent,) that the Constitution shall be sub.
nitted to vote of oil the bona 6de set
lers in Kansas; but Mr.. Buchanan after
Walker to make this pledge,
nounces through the Union that the Con-
ention which is to frame the Constitution
must decide who shall vote upon its accep-
ance. This is equivalent to saying that