Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1857-08-14
The Negro Question in Kansas.

The Negro Question in Kansas.
It will be recollected that some two or
three weeks ago we replied to a cores |
pondent from Troy, VT, who signed him
self Ligarius," and showed him that
majority of the Topekaites in Kansas,
voted to instruct their first legislature to
exclude free negroes from the State
Since then, " Ligarius" has forwarded
another long communication, requesting
US to publish it either in whole or part.
This we intended to do, as soon as we
could conveniently. But the writer, it
seems, became impatient. He could not
wait a reasonable time to see whether we
should publish his article or any portion
oft, and has accordingly caused the entire
communication to be inserted in the hide
pendent Standard, printeda at Irasburgh-
the editor introducing the communication
by saying that we would not publish it
which assersion, as we have already ex-
planned, is not correct.
Now, as to what we have stated rela-
tive to the Topekaites excluding free ne
groes from Kansas, we have substantiated
by quoting their own authoritis, to wit,
} J. H. Lanes proclamation announcing
; the state of the vote, &c. But " Ligarius -
, says we stated that the Topeka constitu-
ton contained prohibitory clause, and
as it did not have any such provision:
therefore we uttered wilful falsehood.
=. Not so fast, sir. We might have been
mistaken as to the constitution prohibi-
ton, and yet We were correct so far as
t regards the main fact This Ligarius'
: admits. In his reply to US, he says :
$50, then, as to your first question.
: whether you are not justified in saying
: that the Topekaites voted to exclude free
: negroes from the State I answer yes
for it is true. But you were not justified
in making the assertion which you did
4 that the Topeka Constitution prohibit.
: free negroes from living in the State, fol-
y it is unqualifedly false"
We maintain that we were substantial
ly correct in our statement of the mair
fact. The principle or policy of the To
pekaites to exclude free negroes, wa
quite as fully illustrated in their separate
vote on this question, as it would hav,
:. been had the Constitution contained sucl
clause. By submitting this to dis
- tinct vote, the decision was, in fact, NOR
&. emphatic, for the Topekaites had this on
issue directly presented to them, and the
IF voted by considerable majority to ez
clude negroes.
ut We still insist, then that the Republ
IL cans, who are such great sticklers for til
e. Topekiate party in Kansas, while at tn
Y same time they denounce in unmeasure
a. terms the bred Scott decision, and max
IS, high professions of regard for the Afr
I'd can race, are acting a very inconsisten
h if not hypocritical part. In the fir
h. place, these men have most wantonly {
n ignorantly misrepresentedt the bred SEQ
be decision. 1t does not deprive the fire.
ed African of certain rights which, as cit
IT. zens of State, we are bound to respee
mt But even if it did deprive them Of a
IN. rights, and decide that they were OUTLAW
wo from all State protection, we do not 81
ty, how the Topekaite party supporters cou
TO- reasonably find fault, when they revie
lst the acts Of their own special friends
ire Kansas, who voted that no free colort
Zee person should ever set foot on her SOIL
re North Star.
-he "Ligarius' can answer the above i'll
IN wishes to- ED. STANDARD.