Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1857-12-31


Conventions can properly only extend to the ,
framing ola Constitution, but its ratification {
or rejection can only be performed by the {
power where sovereignty alone rests, name
iy, the people themselves. We must no,
confound sovereign with delegated powers.
The provisional authority Of convention 10
frame a constitution and submit 1t TO the
people is delegated power; but sovereign {
~ alone, which rests exclusively with The
people, can ratify and put in force that con-
stitution. p.lH}li y 49, t.4t,
And this is the true doctrine Of popular
sovereignty, and know Of no such thing, !
nor does the federal constitution recognize
it as delegated or conventional sovereignty.
The President, in very lucid passage Of
his able message, gives unanswerable rea-
sons why the people, and not conventions,
should decide the question Of slavery in
framing State constitution. He says veryI
truly that from the necessary division of the
inchoate state into districts, a mejolty Of the
delegates may think one way, aud the PEG.
Pile another, and that the delegates Gas was
the case in Kansas, may violate their pledg.
es or fail 10 execute the will of the people.
And why does this reasoning apply with
equal force 10 all other great questions em-
bodied in a State constitutions; and why
should the question Of slavery alone over
ride and exting,ish the doctrine Of popular
sovereignty and the right Of seli-gevernrnent2
Most fortunately this is no sectional ques-
ton, for it belongs alike 10 the States add
milied or inchoate, Of the South as Of the
North. 1t is not question of slavery, but
Of State rights and Of State and popular
sovereignty and my objections TO the lie.
compton constitution are equally strong,
whether Kansas under its provisions should
be made free or slave Slate. My objec-
tions are based upon violation Of the right
Of self. government and OF State and popular
sovereignty, and of forcing any constitution
upon the people against their will whether
it recognzend freedom or slavery. Indeed,
the first question which the people ought TO
decide, in forming Government for an in
choate state, is, whether they will change or
not from territorial 10 State Government.
! Now as no one who, with me, denies fed.
eral or territorial sovereignty, will contend
that territorial legislature is sovereign, or
represents sovereignty, or that such legis-
lature Ia mere creation Of Congress) can
transfer sovereignty which it does not pos
sess, TO territorial convention, this change
from territorial TO a state government can
only be made bv the power where sove-
reignty rests-namely, the people. Yet a
state government is forced upon the people
Of Kansas by the Lecompton constitution,
whether they will il or not, for they can on
ly vote FOR the constitution, and not against
it. But besides the change from terrific
rial to state government, which the peo.
pie alone have right to make in framing a
state constitution. there are many other mo-
! mentous questions included in that instru-
, ment. Iinvolves all the powers Of state
, government. There is the Bill Of Rights,
, the magma charts of the liberties of free
r people; the legislative, executive and judi
7 cial functions;the taxing power; the elective
franchise;thegreut question 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 permitted or prohibited. As all
| free government. as stated by Mr.. Jefferson
j in the Declaration Of Independence, depends
e upon "the consent Of the governed" how
can it be known whether the people would
f assent 10 the constitution unless it is SUBJ
nitted TO their vote for ratification or reiec-
=" ton? But if acquieseence can be presumed
P in any ease, surely it cannot be in that Of
Kansas, where so many of the delegates VII
olated their pledge 10 submit the constitu-
!, ton itself 10 vote Of the people, where the
: delegate who signed the constitution repre-.
:, sented scarcely one-tenth of the people, and
: where nearly one-half the counties Of the
territory were DISTINGUISHED, and (by NJ
: fault of theirs) did not and could not give I
+ single vote at the election for delegates to the
. convention?
a He the proceeds 10 show that the Lecomp
: ton Convention was an irregular and illega
d body, in thus: that in nineteen out Of the
thirty. -four counties in the Territory, there
. was no census; in fifteen there was no re
f gstry; the law providing for both, and no
r having been complied with, no votes wer,
# given, and says he:
Surely, then, it cannot be said that such
Convention, chosen by scarcely more thar
: one-tenth OF the present voters Of Kansas
: represented the people OF that Territory
), and could rightlully impose Constitution
= upon them without their consent. Thes,
> nineteen counties in which there was NJ
> census, constituted majority of the coun
II ties of The Territory, and these fifteen coun
u Ties in which there was no registry gave
c much larger vote at the October election
F" even with The six months qualification, thai
, , the whole vote given TO the delegates VIII
, signed the Lecompton Constitution on tn
+" 7lh Of November last. II, then, sovereign
j. ~ can be delegated and conventions, as sue
y are sovereign, which deny, surely it mus
" be only in such cases MS when such conven
!" licns are chosen by the people, which W
&c have seen was not the case, as regards tn
> late Lecompton Convention. II was for this
70 among other reasons, that in my inangura
'e and other addresses, insisted that the Con
, stitution should be submitted 10 the peopl
l. by the Convention, as the only means G
&c curing this vital defect in its organization
u 1t was, therefore, among other reasons