The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1857-12-30

exceptional one that position and apply TO Il
The same rule always previously applied under gov
eminent 70 all other questions Of domestic policy They
designed In fact subject that one question
same control and the usages which all Others
subjected They did contemplate either the
argement or dminuton of the powers previously posses
se ON other questions neither expansion contrac
tion of those powers They left all other powers in
a quo TO be exercised they previously had BEEN only
placing this among them. But find effort
being made to 30 consrue them as TO make them sub
yesiye OF the past usages of the government to make
them limit the power previously possessed by our
people, by compelling them 10 exercise II In manner
and one only We find effort being made In fact
TO so construe them to deny TO delegated authority
the right form organic lava right hitherto often
exercised This denial is explicitly made by Gov Walker
in his recent sorry to say somewhat egotstica
esto one in which he susains his position by quoting
from himself only to support it, He makes this denial
explicitly According To his opinion the constitutions Of
than half the States Of this Union and the
constitution of the United States itself unconstitu
ona because in the OF the former they have been
formed by conventions called by acts of territorial egsa
and because in the latter in with the for
mer they have become operative without any previous
action upon them by apopular VOTE Most fortunately
for his opinion is not the law of the land
otherwise, majority of the most populous and wealthy
States of the Union would be resolved at into ter
ritoral condition, and the Old Thirteen would be
compelled to fall back either upon their original articles
of confederation their colonial charters.
1t was not to my knowledge intimated by any person
anywhere during the discussion of the Kansas BILL that
it the intention to construe that BILL Is de-
caed to initiate innovation into the past usage
of government by requiring the submission of every
distinct proposition In new State constitution to the
popular vote after such constitution has been legally
framed by authorized convention, necessary con-
dton precedent TO the recognition OF that constitution
here The Missouri line restriction upon the right
of self government, upon the doctrine of popular
eregnty nasmuch it denied to the people north of
that line any control whatever over the question OF
slavery The Kansas act repealed that line and therefore
annued the denial, placing that question in the same
category with Others of domestic character subject to the
popular will leaving that will to be exercised as be-
FORE in whatever chose either through delegates
or by direct vote. @
The recognition of popular sovereignty by the repeal of
the Missouri line consisted in the fact that 1t placed the
question of slavery where all others previously did
provide did it contemplate did its supporters
imagine did its author intimate that it contempla
ted the submission of every bank proposition, every inter-
nal improvement pa every school system, every cleo
ton qualification in new constitution to the people,
before the people by and for whom it formed should
be admitted into the Union Any attempt at that time
to shape its language place that construction on it
would have been resisted Il venture, for the truth
of this assertion TO appeal to those about who acted
with its author ut the time of its ntroducton not only
an uncaledor and unnecessary innovation upon the
past usage of the government but as in conflict with that
very popular sovereignty which its author then SO ably
advocated and for which he now dcclams by denying to
the people their right to delegate their power and
thority al @}ft s}aa si4Ia a@
II the constitution of Kansas comes here as told
it WILL without submission to the popular vote
shall regret the fact much any gentleman this
floor any citizen throughout the republic; but yet If
it here under such circumstances 1t will not be
isolated exception to general rule. Whence this new
born anxiety to the in which that particular
constitution shall come before Congress The rule,
the contrary has been quite the for, the
ator from Missouri Mr. GREEN SO ably told us few days
since majority Of the new States, Indiana, Ohio and IL
linois included have been admitted with constitutions
which had not previously received the popular sanction
and complaint followed either from the States Con-
gress Such of submission has heretofore met the
sanction Of the senator from Illinois himself do not
make this allson to convict him of inconsistency be-
know not and not whether he has been in
consistent not As he well said, yesterday 1t has
bearing whatever ON this question: and if attempts to
convict each other OF are to constitute the
staple argument this question: fancy very few of
will escape unscathed. This of submission has
before met his sanction both positive and implied posi-
tive in his having voted for the admission of States with
constitutions similarly formed and similarly presented
implied in his having jointly with Others framed per-
mssory act for Kansas without providing for the submits
sion of the constitution it contemplated to the people, be-
fore that constitution came here If that permissory act
had passed both branches Of Congress- and become law
the result would have been precisely what it now is.
Enlanatng, it did, from democratic source--the
senator from Georgia Mr. TooMs and the senator from
Inosit met the unqualified opposition of the opposite
republican party Thatopposition would have been
esedin Kansas precisely has their opposition to every
other proposition not enanating from the Topeka faction
precisely has their opposition to the territorial law call
ing convention namely by their refusal to the
election Of delegates to convention. Such has been
the policy and Of the Topeka faction within
sas and their abettors and sympathzers without They
have constantly refused to recognise any law in Kansas
except IL the work of the sefconsuted law makers
of their faction They have refused to obey any law
there hold it worthy of obedience except the will of
that faction Their refusal to vote at the election of del
egates under the congressional peImssoy act would
resulted precisely has their refusal to vote under the
territorial act The kind of constitution would have
been formed and presented here in the manner,
without previous submission. The then would
have been chargeable to Congress- especially the demo-
cratic portion, and particularly the authors of the bill
Now it is chargeable to the people of the Territory
present case, it would have been in the former be-
present constitution had come here under the congress
sonal pemssory act it would that act had passed.
in all probability, it is scarcely to be believed that it
would have met the reception it has now from the
same source that demand would have been made by
the senator from Illinois that it should previously be
submitted to the people /; that he would have been
prompt to condemn his work he is that of
others ss ifassI
1t is objected to this constitution that it formed by
convention called into existence by territorial legisla
ture-a body which those making the objection believed
not possessed Of the right authority to make the
call In my estimation this objection might have been
well taken in the earlier days of the republic but is
late to take now after the orcpeated recognition
this right by admitting States whose constitutions
have been similarly framed and presented. Usage, it
need not be said, becomes in Legislative matters law.
Moreover the Kansas organic act itself retes this OBJ
lection giving, it does, to the people of that Territory
the right to form and regulate their domestic nsttu