The Washington union., 1857-09-26

position Of government and laws by ruffian and yio-
lent invasion from another State Your memoriaists,
then strenuousy insist that the only principle ON whic
recognition can ever be justified is that there is some ey
dence be it less that the government PROCEEDS
FROM AUTHORIZED LAw-AAKING PowEh. Ana they lui-
ther insist that when such government WITHIN our own
borders under the supervision and control OF the federal
government and claiming to derive all its sanction rom
law of Congress EVIDENCE OF IT'S AUTHORITY MUST bh
CHAR AND But how Is il when there Is no such
evidence How is it when all the evidence is strong
against its authority How is it when there is the best
evidence the admits of decisive unquestionabe
proof that the soaled government has no other author
ity than rufansm and outrage Is such government
to be practically recognised, and that too, within the
limits of our repubcf There surely may be cases
in which it would be gross wrong to sustain territorial
government which has authority. And now, we ask,
what government could you refuse to sustain If not one
that had its origin in violent invasion of ruiians
from another State This fact in the present case can be
denied God, when His sun shineth in the heav-
law of Congress authorizing the formation of terrific
rial government That law declares that 'the true IN
tent and meaning of this act s to leave the people of
the Territory perfectly free to regulate their domestic In
stuons in their way subject only to the eonsti-
tuition of the United States To THE PEOPLE, and them
alone it expressly gives the right to make their own
government and laws. Here is sanction no authon-
ty, for government not framed by the people, but
founded solely on invasion Can this law enthrone in
rghtfu sovereignty bandits from neighboring State
AS well say that authorized them to seize every OF
Kansas tor their and behoo III can as Wel de-
prive the people of right of anoherof all rights
one Is it said that Congress authorized the esab
shment of government Yes but by the people,
not by marauders lis it further said that must adj
here to a general princple?' What principleH Why,
as your whole argument implies that government es
tabshed' is government to be recognised. We deny
such government in Kansas. Beware how you stretch
general principle, and make it unicersd Though one
may safely pass the Niagara river at all other points and
places but madman would attemptthe passage
the verge of the cataract
Your memoralists urge therefore, that the so-caed
government of Kansas claim sanction from the
act of Congress The evidence was all against il evil
dence known to the whole civilized world, apparent
the very face of the transaction and which must have
challenged your attention long before had taken the
oath of Office The very fact that the socaed govern
ent required support from the federal executive the
strongest evidence that it did not from the people,
and had lawful authority. This shows at once that
this government not in the lowest sense, what you
call established government " for it shows that it
not and could not be established without United
States army and therefore the army sent not,
you pretend to sustain government, but
for the purpose of establishing what not establisheda
government of rutfian authority
Nor could you have been ignorant that the House OF
Representatives had sent special committee of nvest
cation to the Territory, and thus acknowledged and
imed the propriey of strict inquiry into This pay On
the report of that committee the House of Representatives
authoritativey declared that the government of Kan
established by the terror of bowie knives and
vove and that it had been proved to have not shadow
authority And here your memoralists ask whether
palmer stronger evidence well be imagined?
When if not in such case ought the President to de-
government spurious and to refuse to aid
sustain it The laws of Congress tramped in the dust
the invaders from Missouri proved beyond cayil to be
the only authors of this government it not out
rageous wrong to hold Kansas subject to such usurpaon
by United States army The fires of rutfanism still
burn there smothered in the dreariness of their
desolaon and ready to be ronded in their fury by the
slightest movement for liberty and right the part of
the people, while the echo of their suerngs rings in
the of our national Executive
Let it be remembered that this government to
the people of Kansas not with the sanction of gray
tquity; yet has it come from any law of Congress-
its true and proper source: yet from the people
of the Territory yet from being fully establish
ed 1t is of recent origin and formation. 1t dates only
from the imposition of it by the rufansm from Missouri
upon the people who abhor and disown it. Every
who has, from the first, known its eraee has known its
origin and its nature Let it, then be taken sas it is
in its origin and its nature And what is it code of
laws oppressive unjust cruel outrageous, without par
ael created imposed by the usurpation of ruians from
Missouri and these laws and this government, with
out the least evidence to establish their authority but
with the most abundant proofs to the contrary you
proposing to sustain and execute by the United States
army You speak of numbers of lawess men," &C.
alluding evidently to the Topeka convention Be it
for the sake of argument But how does awless at
tempt to establish government justify or pallate
another attempt for the purpose2
Further In your reply you to your memorialists
to conoede in all its truth and force, the principle which
they maintain Thus you unequivocaly and justly assert
that for portion of the people of Connecticut to under
take to establish separate government within its char
tered limits for the purpose of redressng any grievance
real or imaginary would be usurpation, and add that
such principle carried into execution would destroy
all lawful authority and produce universal anarchy"
Your memoriasts fully subscribe to this doctrine But
what the act which you call surpaton in the sup
posedH What is it but setting up government claiming
authority, and laws demanding execution which, in the
nature of the case, claim authority and OPP
posed to existing authority If you would call this
usurpation in Connecticut, if it would destroy all
legal authority and produce universal anarchy" what is
this but the very act which Missouri invaders have perpe
trated in Kansas There government in Kansas
government under the constitution of the United States
Law there ALSO law for the organization of gov
ernment BY PEOPLE THE TERRITORY Right, too
there-the nviolable right of the people to make
their laws and elect their rulers In opposition
to that existing government in violation of that exist
ing law trampng upon those inherent rights, Missouri
invaders have set up bloody tyranny, which has in fact
produced anarchy and bloodshed If you condemn the
one, condemn the other also. Your memorialsts have
nothing to ask of you in this matter but consistency of
principle Condemn the same conduct in both cases
put down the usurpation in Kansas, and tho friends Of
truth, of justice and of the country would rejoice.
Yopr memoriasts again ask, whether well
be imagined to which the of authoritative govern
ment could be applied with palpable mpropriety
and unruth than to the territorial government of Kan
sas Might not political shameessness blush to
call it by such name, Was not the true and only
character of this known to yon and the whole
Dental canvass Did you not with the full knowledge
Of IT, accept your nomination. which you free to de-
cline and thus avoid the responsibility of executing those
did suppOse that the oath of Office