Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1857-12-04
THE MISTAKE ON THE KANSAS QUESTION.

Those of our Northern Democratic coteuporares,
who seem so determined in their violent opposition
~ the admission Of Kansas under the action Of the
Lecompon Convention, are evidently allowing their
Jealous advocacy Il tho principle Of popular sose
r-guty to lead them off from tho original question.
That the will Of The people is and shall be supreme,
is undoubtedly I'll. one great cardinal canoD, not
only U. Democratic faith, in party sense, but also
ot al republican government. IL Is universally ad.
mted TO be so The Constitution OF the United
Saes the separate polily Of the several States the
various divisions end sub. divisions in our system OF
government, from tho election Of President to
choice Of the magistrates and constables OF coun-
ty, all attest illustrate and enforce that great perya
ding and Indispensable principle Unpopular sovereign
ty which constitutes the Of the free nst'
tutious Of our country The discussion Of this prnci.
plea is, therefore, altogether irrelevant, except when
it is necessary to support some practical claim or
right which, in certain instances it may involve. or
when il s III danger oil being sacrificed to the preiu-
dices aud selfish desgUs of those who are afraid to
abide its exercise. That JUS. such all exceptional In
stance has been afforded in the Kansas controversy,
We willingly admit but that question has passed the
stage when popular sovereignty was the chief point
to be discussed and, after all that has been said and
done, il Is brought back at last to its original merits.
The Nebraska BILL boldly unequivocally and empha-
tcally proclaimed the principle Of popular sovereign
ty not because there existed any apprehension either
at tn. North in tho South that the people of the
territories we're not and would not be allowed to adopt
such State Constitutions ss they might prefer; not
that there WIS any doubt that The popular will would
be supreme in the future as it had been in the past
with reference to general matters OF leglsistion
but because there existed Federal law preciudng the
exercise of the principle of popular sovereignty or
The subject of slarery IN The Territories North Of
certain hne of latitude. 1t referred altogether and
exclusively to the institution of slavery. And in de-
clsring that the will Of the people should deermlnine
the organic law Of all the territories, when they were
prepared to apply for admission Sovereign States,
Congress did nothing than affirm principle,
which accords with the interests and rights OF sil
sections and of the whole country 1t was, how
ever, necessary 10 make this re.alirna'ion in order
to abrogate Federal law that had already violated
it, and thus enab.e the Sovereignty of the people TO
be exercised on a question on which it was then
obstructed aud violated by The Missouri Com
promise. Whether the people OF Kansas should
or should not adopt or reject slavery as they
might elect has BEEN and is sti!l the question The
principle Of popular sovereignty was the medns-the
exercise OF the will Of the people in regard to The
institution of slavery, is the end. That end has oeen
attained. And to contend farther for the means by
which it was accomplished, is to abandon the original
question: and go off in the ruless pursuit OF an ao
straciion. !Sarery no siarcry IN haHsas, as the
people prefer is the practical question OF the contro
versy. 1t has been decided according 10 the princl
ples of the Nebraska act. And in regard TO other
in tine Constitution, while it would have
been far better We think, for them all to have been
submitted to the popular vote, neither the Nebraska
Kansas BILL the proracted and excited controver
on Kansas affairs, has had any especial reference
TO them. The game is played OUT and all that leg
lnatey remain. TO be done, is for the people OF the
territory to decide for themselves whether they will
accept slavery or not. and for Congress to admit Kan
s,s into the Union ss d sovereign State.