Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1857-12-25
the RICHMOND ENQUIRER.
Rx1DAY, DECEMBER rs. 1857.
MIR. DOUGLASS POSITION.
~ RICHIE e. DUNNAvANT.

NIX. DOlULaS . fOSllloN.
Mr.. Douglas delivered himself on the 9th instant Of
hs views he entertained in relation TO the Lecompton
SConsti,u,ion He had better have awaited the result
Stf the vote on the Constitution which occurred on
the 2lst But regarding 1t as mere matter Of taste
and not Of eIpediency he willing to throw h''nse
Sto the breach and declare in advance Of the ac'oh
@, the people Of Kansas his opinion OF what u Al
ao;ion ought to be. We shall have no quarrel win
hun on this point though must express our dee'dea
Interpretation of his great haste to make MS post'on
known. All things considered, it would have BEEN
e think fs;rer and better not in advance to set the
.asI of his renrobstiop upon the Constitution, whether
It be adopted with or without the slavery feature.
Mr. Douglas objects to the mode OF submission adopt
ed: CONSTITUTION with slavery, or Constitution with
no slavsry" 1t trammss he says. the expression OF
the public opinion. While all men are at liberty to
come forward freely without hiudrsnce and vote for
the Constitution. no man is permitted to record
vote sgainst /:
THAT would be as fair an election some of the
enemies Of Napoleon attributed 10 him when he was
elected First Consul. He ia said to have called out
his troops and had them reviewed by his officers with
speech patriotic and fair in s professions in which
he raid to them: Now, my soldiers, you are to go to
the election and vote freely just as you please Ii you
vote for Napoleon, all 10 veil; vote against him. and
you srs to be- instantly shot," That a fair cleo
t,on. This election ITO be equally fair. All men in
favor of the Constitution may vote for ii-an men
against it shall not vote az all. Why not let them
vote sgsinst III
We admit the mode adopted was not the happiest
I. might have been more explicit II might have
been wider in its provisions II would seem that the
question of "the whole Constitution not the whole
Constitution" should have been submitted; but who
IL damaged by the form adopted who has any cause
tocompainl Was it not a foregone conclusien-a
matter which had been decisivey determined 6y
every Kansas voter-that Constitution was to be-
framed and offered? Was thsre any difference OF
opinion on that point And in the submission made,
the only question which by possibility could be re-
Sa-ied as matter OF the last Importance, was fairly
AID fully presented and that question would have
been determined, the question of rejection or adop
ton Of the Constitution would in any event have bet
determined with it.
Judge Douglas presents bis views with hs accus
toned ingenuity and ability; no has made out plau
sibls case; but after all he has said can say, he will
not pretend that any actual difference In the result
will be occasioned by the manner in which the sub
mission has been made. The slavery issue was the
paramount ISSUE and no person, adequately informed
in the recent history Of the Kansas question: will for
u moment doubt that every voter, in deciding tor or
against the Lecompton Constitution it been 30
submitted-would have been determined by his views
on the slavery question.
Judge Douglas says it is nothing to the purpose
that the Consultation is an excellen; one. Here
again, We conceive he is in error. as an abstract
proposition We readily assent to the oplulon express
ed that We have right to force even good Con-
s,i,u;iou upon an unwilling people. l'ut this Is not
doue here or even attempted. If the Constitution
has been adopted with the slavery clause, the act
of the people of Kansas; if that clause has been
jsc,ed il is still their act. They aud they alone, are
the actors aud upon their action will depend the
organic law under which they shall live. Again
Judge Douglas speaks as il the Constitution adopted
we're thing OF perpetual exisence-as if the people
Of kausas had not the power al any time, deemed
suitable by themselves. TO revoke it. Shall We, even
II the Judge be- right, better tho matter by saying, IN
the action of Congress, that the people OF Kansas
shall not have the Constitution they have adopted
H.v. our representativesin Congress any more right
TO SAY that the citizens of Kansas shall NOT have the
Constitution they prefer if republican, than they
have TO say that Kansas shall have Constitution
which they do not prefer AT the least the Judge
must select one OF these two diemma. IN his present
position. He might avoid them both by allowing the
Kansas citizens to settle the question in their own
ysy and, when the matter Of their admission as a
Safe into the Union is presented i'll Congress- to vote
20. or against 1t tbs Constitution presented does or
do. not conform to the republican standard.
We are not willing yet to join in the hue aud cry
against the Senator from Illinois. The sober second
thou hit may bring about change OF WE'VE; and in
former tmss he has proved himself 80 firm and fast
friend Of the South and of the Union that we do not
can no. ye, believe, that be will needlessy array
himself against the positions aud principles to the
advocacy of which he has devoted the energies Of