The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1857-12-05
kan.as Constitution and the Press.

So far as our knowledge extends, there
are not half a dozen of respectable demo-
cratic papers in the free states that have
ventured directly to approve the action OF
the Kansas Constitutional Convention in re-
fusine to submit their work to a vote OF the
people. or that recommend the admission OF
Kansas as state with that abortion as her
constitution. But the northern democracy
are not alone in dcnouncing the work of that
! Convention. There are no two ADLER or more
influential democratic papers in the South
than the Richmond Enquirer and the Lou
| isville Democrat, and these also, as decided
| " as any northern democratic paper we are
acquainted with, condemn the action Of the
Kansas Convention. Many other southern
democratic papers, from which it is yet too
early to have heard an expression, we have
! no doubt vii! take the same course. W,
suhjoin extracts from the papers we have
named.
From the Louisville Democrat.
We arc Of opinion that the refusal to sub
NIT the constitution entire to the popular
vote, will be fatal to its reception by Con-
firess. When here may be 4 doubt as to
whether the people approve the constitution,
il is just abont certain it will not be sane
toned by congress; especially rs this con-
stirution, if it is not misrcprcsented, cannot
be amended until 1861, and not then, with
out two thirds of the legislature concur in
calling a convention. The plea got up is
that this convention are the people, and
have in their hands the sovereignty of the
territory. There is Il great mistake. Kan
saS is not state yet, and there l. no sove-
reignty about The convention. But if there
was. the people are to settle the institutions
of Kansas; not the people by fiction of
law, but the real people. 1t is idle TO set
up the plea that the people were there in
the convention in their sovereignty, when
the pc pie there have, as yet. no sovereign
ty TO be represented; and therefore, could
not be there in a sovereignty that does not
exist.
Indeed, it would be rather difficult to
show that this convention is a legal body at
all. If congress- in the exercise of its dis
cretion, should accept the constitution and
admit the state, it would cure all defects,
but as the case stands, what legal claim to
act has this convention in Kansas, unless
the organic act authorized the territorial
legislature 10 cali a convention to make
constitution? We believe this power was
not conferred by the organic act upon the
territorial legislature.
This leaves the whole matter at the dis
erection Of congress, not bound by any pre-
viouS act. If the state is admitted with this
constitution, congress must take the respon-
sibility of legaliZing what has been done,
and make itself responsible for the conven-
t on; otherwise, without the authority Of
law. Congress has done this in two instaEc-
es. at least; but then there was no question
that the whole people of the territories con-
cerned approved the constitutions formed
and desired admission under them. The
case here seems to be quite different. The
Is not submitted TO the people;
and no reason can be given for the omission, /
except the apprehension that it might be
voted DOWN. VIII the other states run the 1
risk Of dragging state into the Union that /
does not wish to come in on the conditions /
They cannot do il; and we may !
safely predict they eil not do it.