The Washington union., 1857-11-29
POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY INDICATED BY THE

Some of our democratic cotemporaries seem to hes
itae in giving cordial support to the adminstra-
ton ON the Kansas question on the ground that it
would be inconsistent in them to acquiesce in the
course of the convention after having heretofore ad-
vocated the submission of the whole constitution to
the people Of Kansas. We are sure that no one was
more earnest in approving the policy of submitting
the constitution to the people than were and that
no is anxious to maintain his political
sistency than we are. Yet there considerations
of high duty to the country which relieve from all
apprehensons of being justly chargeable with a
want of constancy in adhering to positions when
give to the administration our jealous support in
its determination to sustain the action Of the Kansas
convention.
In deciding how far Gov. Walker and those who
concurred with his policy of submitting the consti-
tuition for ratification rejection now bound to
go in opposition to the action of the convention it is
essential to keep in view the circumstances and OBJ
jects which originated that policy. We do not sup
pose that any seriously contends that subms-
sion of new constitution for popular approval or
disapprova is necessary element of the doctrine of
territorial self-government. Every such case must
depend its own peculiar circumstances. If the
preliminary steps for convention attended with
restrictions on the powers Of the delegates they
have the unqnestionabe discretion to make cOnsti-
tuition absolute to make it subject popular rat
fcaton or rejection, as they please. There was no
such restriction imposed upon the Kansas conven-
ton and therefore, abstract question Of power,
they had the discretion to submit their work or not
IN IN ,nal Rnf hilaf
this abstract right existed there were peculiar cir
cumstances which suggested to Gov. Walker the pro-
priety Of adopting the policy of submitting the
stitution; and in the propriety Of that suggestion
we cheerfully acqresced.
We think that Coy. Walkers policy substan-
tally carried out by the convention when they sub
mited the only real subject which gave rise to that
policy to the popular judgmenths question achefhs,
the people Of the Territory should hare slavery not
achea they became Stale
1t cannot be denied that according to the constitu
ton made and it's schedule the bona dc inhabitants
of Kansas have the privilege Of coming into the
Union as a free or slave State We reject the
merest twaddle the pretence that there cannot be
free and fair exercise Of the elective franchise.
Those who rely on such pretext can have no conf
dencs in the solemn pledges of the President to
cure the full exercise Of this right at any cost.
Neither can they have any confidence in Congress,
for they must know that if fair expression of the
popular will should be prevented, either by fraud
force Congress would at once reject the constitution
and send the question back. We are warranted,
then in assuming that the convention have secured
to the people the right to adopt reject slavery,
they may choose; and IRE affirm thai IN dong they
hare Substantially carried out the great principle Of popu-
lar soceregnty, because It IS historically and morally true
that this great doctrine eagraed upon the democratic
creed nth erdusive reference to the question Of stauey.
To sustain this position we have only to quote the
law of the democratic party this question adopt
ed by the last National Democratic Convention at
Cincinnati II is as follows:
Resolved That we recognise the right of the people of
all the Territories including Kansas and Nebraska acting
through the fay-expressed will of the majority of actual
residents and whenever the number of their inhabitants
justi6es It, to form constitution with without do
mestic slavery, and be admitted into the Union upon
terms of perfect equality with tho other States 2
Can any one deny that the Kansas convention have
provided that the people of the Territory may, "by
the tdrly-ezpyessed M of the majority Of actual resi-
dents, come into the Union State 'mih arith
out domestic slavery" and that they have the oppor
tunity Of being admitted into the Union upon terms
Of perfect equality with the other StatesS Y Is not
this article in the democratic platform practical
commentary tho text Of the Kansas act Is it not
historically true that the text of the Kansas act
drawn with the special purpose Of securing to the
people of the Territory the right to haze not 70 hare
slarery as they pleased But for the question of sla
very il will be conceded by all that the country
would never have been agitated and conyused upon
the doctrine Of territorial popular sovereignty. Who
will affirm that Gov. Walker was sent to Kansas
with any oher distinct object than that Kansas might
become free or slave State as the actual residents
might determine? When in his inaugural and in
his Topeka speech, he pledged himself to insist on
having the constitution submitted to the people Of
the Territory, did he not make that pledge with
an eve to the settlement of the slavery question,
which was the only one that was at the bottom of
the troubles there Although his language was that
The constitution should be submitted venture the
confident opinion that the only idea in his mind con-
nected with that submission the slavery ques-
ton. II was his earnest purpose to carry out the
principle of the Kansas BILL Of the Cincinnati plat
form, of Mr. Buchanan's inaugural, and of Mr.. Bu-
chanans instructions, and the great prominent and
controlling idea involved in all these documents was