The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1857-12-26

! Oy tner primary G>SeHoileS, vi " ~'h
vention of delegates chosen by such assem-
lilies, perceive no legal objection to thei
power to do so, nor to any measures whici
NAV be taken to collect the sense OF the peo
pIe in respect to it; provided, always, thai
such measures be commenced and prose
! outed in peaceable manner, in strict subor
dination to the existing Territorial govern
ment. and in entire subServiency to the
/ power Of Congress to adopt, reject, or disre-
| gard them, at their pleasure"
! While the Legislature OF Arkansas had no
power to create a Convention to frame a
constitution, as legal constitutional body,
yet, if the people chose to assemble under
such an act of the Legislature for the pur-
pose of petitioning for redress of grievances,
the asscmblagc was not Illegal 1t was not an
unlawful assemblage; it was not such an as
sembage as the military power could be
used to disperse, for they had right under
the Constitution thus to assemble and pet-
ton. Buff they assumed to themselves the
right or the power To make government,
that assumption was act OF rebellion
which Gen. jackson said it was his duty TO
put down with the military force Ct the
country.
If you apply these principles TO the Kan
sas Convention \ OF find that it had pow
er to do any act as Convention forming
government; you fnd that the act calling 1t
was null and void from the beginning; you
find that the Legislature could confer no
power whatever on the Convention. The
Convention was simply an asscmblage Of
pcaceable citizens, under the Constitution of
the United States, petitioning for the redress
Of grievances, and thus assembled. had the
right to put their petition 10 the form o! a
constitution if they chose; but stu 1t was
only peti-ion-having the force Of a peti-
tion-which Congress could accept or rej ect
or dispose Of as IT saw proper. That Is
what understand to be just the extent Of
the power and authority of this Convention
assemj.e ed at Lecosnpton. It was not an
ualaw.u assem- lsge like that held at Iopc-
ka: Tor the Topeka constitution was made in
opposition u the Territorial law, as |
thought, intended to subyert the govern
ment without tie consent Of Congress; but
As contenlcd 10y their friends, not intended
10 snbyeri lie government without tic con-
sent Of CauEr, IS, Il was an act or rebellion,
which ought to IA " been put down by
force. Ii il was "a peaceable a>stmblagc
simply to petition and abile the decision of
Congress Oh the petition, it WAS not an un-
lawful assesnb'sGe. bold, however, that i
was an uhIaw IA as>cub'a.e. | hold that
tbs L.comptjon Convention was not an IN
lawful asscubage; bat, on the other hand,
| hold that they hal no legal power and au-
thority to establish a government. They
had right to petition for a re,lres, Of griev-
ances Th.y had a right in that petition to
ask for the change OF government from a
Territorial to State government. They
had a right to ask Congress to adopt the in
Tr-fsg.~e
s;itut;0n; and Congress, if it thought that
pape- cmboiTed the viii Of the people Of the
Territory, fairly expressed, might, iu its dis
erection, accept it as constitution, and ad-
nit them into the Union as State; or II
Congress thought it did not embody the will
Of the people Of Kansas it might reject ii;
or IL Congress thought il was doubtful whe-
thor it di3 crubody the will Of the people or
not, thcu Il should send il back and submit
it to the people to have that doubt removed,
in order that the popular voice, whatever it
might be, shou.d prevail in the constitution
under which that people were TO live.
So far as the act OF the Territorial LegiSla-
ture of Kansas ca!iir z this Convention was
concerned, | have always been under the
impression that it was fair and just in its
provisions. have always thought the peo-
ple should have gone together en- DlGsse and
voted for delegates, SO that the voice ex-
pressed by the Convention should have been
the unqucstioned and united voice Of the
people of Kansas. | have always thought
that those who staid away from that election
stood in t.eir own wrong, and should have
zone and voted, and should have furnished
their names to te put on the registered list,
so as to te voters. | have always held that
i, was their own fault that they did not thus
20 and vote; but yet, if they chose, they had
a right to stay away; they had a right to
saw that that Convention, although not an
unlawful asscmblagc, is not legal Conyen-
ton to make government, and hence we
are under no obligation to 90 and express
any opinion about II. They had right to
saw. if they chose, :" We will stay away uhtil
we see the constitution they shall frame, the
petition they shall send to Congress; and
when they submit it to US for ratification we
will vote for it if we like il, or vote it down
if we do not like it." say they had right
to do either, though | thought. and think
vet. as good citisens, they ought to have
zone and voted but that was their business
and not mine:
Having thus shown that the Convention
at Lccompton had no power, no authority to
form and establish a government, but had
power to draught petition; and that peti-
ton. if il embodied the viii Of the people OF
Kansas, ought to be taken as such an expo
sition of their VIII, yet, if it did not embody
their will, ought to be ejected-having
shown these facts, let me proceed and in
uuire what was the understanding OF the
people of Kansas when the delegates were
elected? l unde rstand, from the history of
the transaction, that tbs people who Vot>d
for delegates to the Lecompton Convention
and those who refused to vote-both parties
understood the Territorial act TO mean
that they were to be elected only te frame a
constitution, and submit 1t TO the people Tor
their ratification or rejection. say that
both parties in that Territory, at the time OF
the election of delegates, so understood the
object of the Convention. Those VINO voted
for delegates did so with the understanding
that they had no power to make govern
mcnt. but only to frame one for submission;
aod those who staid away did SO with the
same understanding. '-
| !, Nov- for the evidence The President of
the United States tells us, in his message,
that he had une9aivocally expressed his
opiniops. in the form Of instructians to Go-
vernon Walker, assuming that the constitu
ton was to be submitted to the people Tor
ratihcation. When We look in Governor
| Walkers letter Of ace eptance of the office OF
| Governor, we find that he stated expressly
| that he accepted it'wiih the understanding
| that the President and his whole Cabinet
! coucurred with him that the constitution,
when formed, was to be submitted to the
people for ratification. Then look into the
! instructions given by the President of the
United States, through Gen. Cass, the Sec
| retary of State, to Governor Walker, and
YOU there find that the Governor is instruct
ed to uselihe military power to protect the
polls when the constitution shall be submit
! ted to the people of Kansas for their free ac'
.ceptance or rejection. Trace the history a
! little further, and you will find that Govern.