The Washington union., 1857-12-02
DISAGREEMENT ON NON ESSENTIALS.


DISAGREEMENT ON NON ESSENTIALS
An opposition journal makes tho prediction that
the disagreement between the administration and
Gov. Walker TO the Kansas convention will result
in disruption Of the democratic party. Whether
"the wish is father to the thought in this matter
it is not material to inquire but have too much
confidence in the integrity of the democratic party
to fear any such catastrophe that predicted
Gov. Walker may feel himself personally so bound
by his declarations and pledges in Kansas to pre-
clude the possibility Of his acquescence in the
Of the convention but we unable to comprehend
how this fact is to impose an obligation on any por
ton Of the democratic party to oppose the admins
uston in its honest efforts to bring the troubles in
Kansas to final settlement by its early admission
State.
The administration has repestedly recognised the
validity Of the law of the Kansas legislature which
provided for calling convention Every bona jtde
inhabiant of the Territory had the right secured him
80 participate in forming the constitution by voting
for such delegates he might wish to represent
him The administration has again and again repu
dated the absurd assumption Of the black repub
cans that, because portion of the inhabitants de-
cned TO exercise their right TO vote for delegates,
therefore the convention not legal and valid
body authorized to make q constitution On the
contrary the administration has distinctly recognised
the convention as valid and has acknowledged its
obligation under the laws to see that their delibera-
tions should be unmolesei by factionists of ever,
kind
Because portion of the Kansas people refused to
vote and because it was asserted that the conyen-
lion represented only minority of the inhabitants,
the administration willing 10 SEQ the convention
provide for submitting the constitution made by
them to the ratification rejection of the whole
people The convention however, for reasons sat
isfactory to themselves and in the exercise Of a
legal discretion, saw proper to submit only one
clause for the ratification rejection of the people,
but that clause embraced tho only question involved
in the controversy out Of which grew the refusal of
portion Of the inhabitants to for delegates.
As the main essential matter of controversy was
submitted by the convention, the administration
could see no good reason why the failure to submit
the matters not involved in the controversy and not
therefore essentials in the dispute, should induce
them TO reject tho action Of the convention
OoNcihoT Ndhci uiHcip Will uie duHulouutlou
on this point and opposes the action Of the
ton. Is this such disagreement as should as
will distract and destroy the harmony and integrity
of the democratic partyS We think not. 1t is q
disagreement as to matter that never really In
volved in the Kansas question, and is, therefore,
difference Of opinion only between the President and
Gov. Walker, which does not in the least affect the
policy Of the administration.
What if democrat should prefer that the whole
constitution should have been submitted? win he,
because that has not been done, condemn the admin
istraton, dissolve his connexion with the party and
Join the black republicans, when by the course of
the convention the great essential object that he de-
sired has been secured? Will or can any good DEM
ocrat who is not embarrassed by personal commit
tails and pledges like Governor Walker, separate from
his party on difference that involves nothing but
non-essential point! We think that all true demo
Gratis will answer--the great principle involved in
the Kansas act was that the people should have
constitution with or without slavery, they pleas
ed. This right is fully secured by submitting the
slavery clause to them and we will not distract and
divide party because other matters never deemed
essential heretofore have not been submitted All
good democrats will regret the necessity in the ndi
vidual position Of Governor Walker which con-
strains him to oppose the action of the convention
and separate himself from the administration but the
great national democracy is not to be broken up on
a mere matter Of regret that distinguished demo-
crat cannot agree with the administration on ques-
ton Of policy that is not vital important.
Much of the error that now prevails as to the di-
vision in the democratic party the late action Of
the Kansas convention arises from hastily confound-
ing two very distinct classes Of objections. There
are many democrats who would have preferred to
see the entire constitution submitted and who would
have so voted as members Of that convention but
who recognise the legality of the convention and its
right to submit the whole or part There are 9TH
ers who denounce the convention as mere minority
body without the right make constitution unless
their entire work was submitted for the approval of
the popular Judgment The difference is marked and
vital. Tho former object to the action Of the con-
venton on nonessental point, and, therefore, are
not properly classed enemies of the policy Of the
administration. The latter object vital point
the legality and power of the convention to make
sonstitution-and hence they in danger Of being
properly regarded the enemies Of the sdministra
ton, nasmuch as the administration recognises the
lecrnlitv NJ tho convention and its RIGHT IN form