Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1857-12-23
EXTRACTS FROM MIR. DOUGLAS SPEECH.

"Having thus shown that the Convention at
Lecompton had no power, no authority, to
form and establish government, but had pow
er to draft petition, and that petition, if it
embodied the will of the people of Kansas,
ought to be taken such an exposition of
their will, yet, if it did not embody their will,
ought to be rejected shown these facts,
let me proceed and inquire what was the un-
derstanding of the people of Karsas, when the
delegates were elected understand; from
the history of the transaction, that the people
who voted for delegates to the Lecompton
convention, and those who refused to vote
both partes-understood the Territorial Act
to mean that they were to be elected only to
frame constitution, and submit it to the peo-
pie for 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 who voted
for delegates did so with the understanding
that they had no power to make government,
| but only to frame for submission and
those who staid away did SO with the same un-
| derstanding.
Here MIR. Douglas shows from the instruc-
! tion of the President and numberless promi-
ses and solemn pledges by Democrats, that the
people of Kansas were assured that they should
have a full and fair vote on the whole Consti-
tuition. After demonstrating this clearly and
satisfactorily, he goes on and says
Now let us stop to inquire how. they redeem
ed the pledge to submit the constitution to the
people. They first go On and make consti-
tuition. Then they make a schedule, in which
! do flott
| of December-the present month-shall be
submitted to all the bona fde inhabitants of
the Territory on that day, for their free accep-
tance or rejection, in the following manner, to
wit thus acknowledging that they were
bound to submit it to the viii of the people,
conceding that they had no right to put it into
operation without submitting it to the people,
providing in the instrument that it should take
effect from and after the ratification, and not
before showing that the constitution derives
its vitality, in their estimation, not from the
authority of the convention, but from the vote
of the people to which it was to be submitted
for their free acceptance or rejection. How
is it to be submitted 1t shall be submitted
in this form :-ssConstitution with slavery or
constitution with no slavery" Ill men must
uofe for the constitution, lrhether they like it or
NOT, in order to be permitted to vote for or a.
gainst slavery. Thus constitution made by
a convention that had authority to assemble
and petition for a redress of grievances, but
not to establish governments constitution
made under pledge of honor that it should
be submitted to the people before it took eff
feet; a constitution which provides. ON its face
that it shall have no validity except what it de
riyes from such submission-is submitted tt
D the people at an election where all men are a
liberty to come forward freely without hin
drance and vote for it, but no man is permit
ted to record a vote against it.
r That would be as fair election rs some O.
the enemies of Napoleon attributed to hin
when he was elected First Consul. He is sale
to have called out his troops and had them re
a viewed b. his officers with speech, patriotic
= and fair in its professions, in which he said tc
h them: esNow, my soldiers, you are going t.
the election, land vote freely just as you please
T If you vote for Napoleon, all is well vote
e gainst him, and you are to be instantly shot. >
r That was fair election. (Laughter.) Thi
), election is to be equally fair. All men in ia
e vor of the constitution may vote for it-al
: men against it shall not vote at all. Why no
let them vote against it? l presume you hav
IS asked many man this question. Ihave aske'
n a very large number of the gentlemen VIII
y framed the constitution, quite number of del
T. egates, and a still larger number of person
"a who are their friends, and have received tn
= same answer from every one of them. neve
'r received any other answer, and presume W
J, never shall get any other answer. What
J. that They say if they allowed negativ
of vote, the constitution would have been vote
y down by an overwhelming majority. and henc
ID the fellows shall not be allowed to vote at al
a Mr.. President, that may be true. 1t is
ID part of my purpose to deny the propositio
that that constitution would have been vote
n down if submitted to the people. l believe
X would have been voted down by majority {
IS four to one. 1 am informed by men well po
ted there-Democrats- it would be vote
down by ten to one; some say by twenty to one
~ But is it a good reason why you should d'
:, clare it in force, without being submitted
the people merely because it would have pee
~ voted down by five TO one if you had suomi
" ted it? What does that fact prove? Does
not show undeniably that an overwhelming iii'
20 iority of the people of Kansas are unaiteraoi
h0 onnosed to that constitution WIN you 1ore
II on them against their will simply becau:
a. thew would have voted it down if you had col
ts shifted them If you will, are you going
.t force it upon them under the plea OF leavir
:, +bam perfectly free TO form and regulate the
fhoi NJ