The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1857-12-23

In expressing this opinion is was far
from my intention to interfere with the de-
cision Of the people of Kansas either for
or against slavery From this I have al.
ways carefully abstained. Intrustsd with
the duty Of taking scare that the laws be
faithfully executed" my only desire was
that the people of Kansas should furnish
Congress the evidence required by the or.
ganic act whether for or against slavery;
and in this passage into the Union. In.
emerging from the condition of territorial
dependence into that of sovereign State
it was their duty, in my opinion. to make
their viii. By the votes Of the majority, on
the direct question whether this important
domestic institution should or should not
continue to exist. Indeed, this was the
only possible mode in which their will
could be automatically ascertained.
The election of delegates to conven..
ton must necessarily take place in separ-
a.e districts. From this cause it may
readily happen, as has often been the case
that q majority of the people of State
or Territory are on one side of the ques-
|tion, while majority of the representa-
tives from the several districts into which
tits divided may be upen the other side.;
This arises from the fact that in some dis
tricts delegates may be elected by small
majerities, whilst in others those of differ.
ent sentiments may receive majorities sufi-
ciently great not only to overcome the
votes given fer the former, but to leave q
large majority ofshe whole people in di-
rect opposition to q majority of the dele
gates. feea II
Besides, our history proves that inau-
ences may be brought on the representa-
tive sufficiently powerful to induce him to
disregard the will of his constituents. The
truth is that no other authentic and sat-
isfactory mode exists of ascertaining the
will of . majority of the people of any
State or Territory on an important and
exciting question like that of slavery in
Kansas, except by leaving it in a direct
vote. How wise, then, was it for Con-
gress to pass over all subordinate and in
termediate agencies. and and proceed di-
reetly to the source ofall legitimate pow
er under our institutions.
/ How vain would any other principle
prove in practice. This may be illustra
4 ted by the case of Kansas. Should she b,
admitted into the Uuion, with q, eonstita
tion either maintaining or abolising slave
1 ry, against the sen,iment of the people
: this could have no other effect than to con
tinue and TO exasperate the existing agita
ton, during the brief period required Il
4 make the constitution conform to 10 ire
{ sistible will of the majority
The friends and supporters of the Ne
braska and Kansas act, when struglin,
/ on recent occasion to sustain its wis
, provisions before the great tribunal of tn
Il American people, never differed about it
true, meaning OH this subject. Every
) where throughout the whole Union the
publicly pledged their faith and their hon
or, that they would cheerfaly submit tn
D question of slavery to the decision of th
bona fde people of Kansas, without an
E restriction or qualification whatever A
were cordially united upon the great doc
trine of popular sovereignty, which is th
i, vital principal of our free institutions.
eli Had it been insinuated from any qua
f ter that it would be a sufficient compliane
: with the requisitions of the organic la
: for the members of convention, therea
d ter to be elected, to, withhold the que
: tion of slavery from the people. and
o substitute their own will for that of q ],
e gally majority Of all their co.
stitueuts, this would have been Instant
q rejected. Every where they RENAME
= true to the resolution adopted on eel
: brated occasion, recognising, ''the rigl
= |of the people of all the territories incl
!, ding Kansas and Nebraska-actir
!. through the legally and fairly expresse
n will of . majority of actnal residents, al
= whenever the number of their inhabitan
: justiGes it, to form q constitution, with
. without slavery, and be admitted into Il
= Union upon terms Of perfect equality wi
:. the other States" 3i,a.s4 IS
~ The convention to frame constit
r. for Kansas met on the FIRST Monday
in September last They were called t
= gether by virtue of an act of the territ
a rial legislature, whose lawful sxisten
!. has been recognized by Congress in diffe
:. ent forms and by different enactments :
; A large proportion of the citizens of Ka
= :, sas did not think proper to register thu
= names and to vote at the election for d,
- egates; ;7butan opportunity to do this ha
- ing been fairly afforded, their refusal
- - avail themselves of their right could
- [no manner affect the legality Of the CO
!. yention. 6
i. This convention proceeded to frame
IA constitution for Kansas, and finally q
8 ljourned on the 7th day Of November
). But little difficulty occurred in the &c
~ ~ rentfon, except on the subject of slave
s. s. The truth is that the general provisions
- our recent state constitutions are so 81
~ - ar-and, may add, sol excellent I'll
- the difference between them is not ess.
= tial Under the earlier practise of ,
~, overnment no constitution framed