Marshall County Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1855-1859, 1857-12-24

ity of this convention assembled at Lecomp-
ton. 1t was not an unlawful assemblage
like that held at Topeka; for the Topeka
constitution was made in opposition to the
Territorial law, as thought, intended 10
subvert the government without the con-
sent of Congress, but, as contended by
their friends, not intended to subvert the
government without the consent OF Con-
gress. If their object was to subvert It
without the consent OF Congress, it was an
act of rebellion, which ought to have been
put down by force. If it was a peaceablo
assemblage simply to petition and abide the
decision of Congress on the petition, 1t was
not an unlawful assemblage. hold. how
ever, that it was an unlawful assemblage-
hold that this Lecompton convention was
not an unlawful assemblage; but on the 9TH
hand, hold that they had no loyal power
and authority to establish government.-
They had right TO petition for redress Of
grievances. They had o right in that petit
ton to ask for the change Of government
from Territorial to a State government
They had right to ask Congress to adopt
the instrument which they sent to US az
their constitution; and Congress, fit tho't
that paper embodied the will of the people
OF the Territory, fairly expressed, mil ght, in
its discretion, accept it as constitution,
and admit them into the Union as State;
or, if Congress thought it did not embody
the will of the people of Kansas, it might
reject it; or, if Congress thought it was
doubtful whether it did embody the will of
the people or not, that it should send it
back and submit it to the people to have
that doubt removed, in order that the pop
ular voice, whatever it might be, should
prevail in the constitution under which that
people were to lire.
So fas as the act of the Territorial Legis-
lature of Kansas calling this convention,
was concerned, | have always been under
the Impression that it was fair and just in
its provisions. have always thought that
the people should have gone together ca
nsasse and voted for delegates, so that the
voice expressed by the convention should
have been the unguestioned and united voice
of the people of Kansas. | have always
thought that those who staid away from
that election stood in their own wrong, and
should have gone and voted, and should
registered list, so as to be voters. | have
always held that it WIS their own fault that
they did not thus go and vote; but yet il
they chose, they had right to stay away.
They had right to say that that conven.
ton, although not an ulawful aesemblage, is
not legal convention to make a govern
ment, and hence we are under no obliga.
tion to go and express any opinion about it.
They had right to say if they chose, I'VE
will stay away until we see the constitution
they shall frame. the petition they shall
send to Congress; and when they submit it
to US for ratification we will vote for it if we
like it, or vote it down if we do not like it,
| say they had right to do either. though
| thought and think vet, as good citizens.
they ought to have gone and voted; but
that was their business and not mire.-
Having thus shown that the convention at
Lecompton had 90 power, no authority TO
form and establish government, but had
power to draft petition, and that petition,
if it embodied the will of he people of Kan
sas, ought to be taken as such an expose
of their will, yet, if it did not embody their
will, ought to be rejected--having shown
these facts, let NE proceed and inquire
what was the understanding of the people
of Kansas when the delegates were elected?
L understand. from the history of the trans
action, that the people who voted for del
cgates to the Lecompton convention and
those who refused To- vote-both parties
understood the Territorial act to mean that
they were to be elected only to frame con-
stitutio1. and submit it to the people for
their ratification or rejection. | say that
both parties in that Territory, at the time of
the election of delegates, so understood the
object of the convention Those who vo-
ted for delegates did so with the understan-
ding that they had no power to make gov
ernment, but only to frame one for submis-
sion; and those who staid away did so with
the same understanding.
Now for the evidence. The President
of the United States tells US. in his mes
sage. that he had unequivocally expressed
his opinions, in the form of instructions to
Gown. Walker. assuming that the consti-
tuition was to lie submitted to the people for
ratification. When we look at Governor
Walkers letter of acceptance Of the Office
OF Governor. we find that he stated express
ly that he accepted it with the understand
ing that the President and his whole Cabi-
net concurred with him that the constitu-
ton, when formed, was to be submitted to
The people for ratification. Then look into
he instructions given by the President of
The United States. through General Cass.
he Secretary of State, to Governor Walk.
sr, and you there find that the Governor is
instructed to use the military power to pro.
ect the polls when the constitution shall
De submitted to the people Of Kansas for
heir free ratification or rejection. Trace
he history little further, and you viii
ind that Governo Walker went TO Kansas
Ind proclaimed, in bis inaugural and 10 his
speeches at Topeka and elsewhere. that il
vas the distinct understanding. not only Of
Il y Il Il H. u