Marshall County Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1855-1859, 1857-12-10
Kansas and the COnstitu-
tiOnal Convention.

the history of Christianity and Popular
Freedom down to the meanest truth of sci
ence.
We should not, then, regard, with any
degree of surprise, the long struggle which
must attend the complete triumph Of the
great doctrine of Popular Sovereignty
Once permanently established, as it one
day vii! be, it will be monument of per-
pc ual honor to the American Republic; up-
til that time, let none of its advocates lose
any of their zeal. but meet every difficulty
with becoming spirit, never, in the least.
suffering themselves to compromise those
principles for which they have so long con-
tended
These suggestions seem aprepos of the
present condition of Kansas affairs. a
new difficulty has sprung up IN that quar-
ter, which the most sagacious had not an
ticipated; and that, too, at the very time
when we had fondIy hoped that the great
question contained in the Kansas -Nebrasks
Act would be finally and forever settled
That Convention, In whom we thought we
saw the salvation of Kansas, instead Of car
rying out this doctrine to the strictest let
ter, saw fit, liz their mighty wisdom, TO
adulterate and retrench, until, instead of
the genuine, a spurious article was offered
to the people.
Little harm, however, could have re-
suited from this, had the entire Democra-
cy stood firm to Their trusts and pledges,
and with one voice repudiatod the action
Of that Convention. But such is not the
case. a few of the leading Democratic
journals, and we are happy to say only
fer. have seen fit to endorse this action
At the head of these stands the Washing
ton Union, around which, as a common
center. few lesser lights revolve.
1t needs but few words, and less logic, to
show the Inconsistency of such course.
The Democracy have always stood firmly
pledged TO the principles of Popular Sow
ereignty. In the campaign of Sc they re-
newed their ale glance to that doctrine in
terms not to be mistaken, and President
Buchanan was placed in the seat he now
occupies OH this. and only this, issue.
How, then, in the face Of all this, could
any &C that Democracy, at the very mo-
ment when this principle was TO have its
still greater triumph in KANSAS, turn round
and repudiate the Same by indorsing the
Calhoun Convention? We can account for
his in only two ways: either they grossly
lnisjudge the true import of the Kansas
Nebraska Act, or else it is dabolic at
tempt at the destruction Of that unanimity
IN the Democratic ranks. which, hitherto
in whatever tide of opposition, has carried
hem safely over.
Charity would dispose us to accord to
them the former reason.
But let us for a moment examine the
true issue in this question, which is now
creating an excitement scarcely less than
the great monetary crisis itself.
In accordance with legislative act the citi-
zens of Kansas elected Convention for the
express purpose of framing Constitution
This done, their duties were at end. But
they transcribed the bounds of what was
only an implied power, and not only franz
ed, but adopted the entire Instrument, save
one clause. which they graciously conde-
scended to submit to the people. This was
the question Of slavery or no slavery.
Admitting that this was the most impor-
tant clause, yet it does not in the least ex-
cuse their conduct. If the Kansas Nebras-
ka Act required the submission of single
clause it required the submission Of the
whole. There is no chance here for rein
ed distinctions. 1t demands that all the
citizens shall have the right to vote On each
and every article of their constitution with
out reserve. giving no preference to the
slavery question above any other. Ifit did
anything less than this, it would be libe
on its face.
If, then, the members of the convention
wish to screen themselves ON the ground o.
being the representatives of the people. We
would ask then, why submit any clause o
tie constitution? why submit the slavery
question even, if your will, as their repre-
seniatives, is the expressed will ofthe PEG
pie. Let them take whichever horn of thu
dilemma they choose, their position is alike
untenable.
The whole question now turns on wheth
er the Lecompton convention shall be sus