The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1857-12-27

herein is the issue AS to the power of the legislature TO
call convention, it win be that the senator comes
IN direct conflict with the views of Gov Walker who in
his Inaugural address held that the legislature he
power ordained for that purpose But the most start
ling doctrine involved in the position of the honorable
senator is the assumption that it is the right and duty Of e
FEDERAL goumea 10 inepose baree e people Of Troyy and
their otrn local representatives This never could have been
sound or safe practice to any State Territory but
it is utterly out of the question under the organic act
for Kansas, which has committed all domestic and
Internal affairs to the people 70 be regulated sin their
own way"
Itis no matter Of pleasure to me to recur 70 the un
pleasant difference between the honorable senator and
myself the other day touching the consultation of sen
aors at his residence In july 1856 the policy of the
Toombs bill but however agreeable the task justice
TO myself requires that should do So especially since
the character Of that conference has been misunderstood
In certain quarters Nothing was further from my mind
than to aude to any social confidential interview
The meeting was not of that character. Indeed it
semiocal and called to promote the public good My
recollection clear that left the conference under the
impression that it had been deemed best to adopt meas
ures to admit Kansas State through The agency Of
popular election and that for delegates to the CON
yention. This impression was the stronger because
thought the spirit of the bill nnged upon the doctrine
of non-intevenon, to which had great aversion but
with the hope OF accomplishing great good and
movement had been made in that direction in the Terri
tory waived this objection and concluded to support
the measure have few items of testimony to the
correctness of these impressions and with their subs
sion shall be content.
have before me bill reported by the senator from
Illinois, the 7th of March, 1856 providing for the ad
mission of Kansas State, the third section of which
reads as follows
That the following propositions be- and the hereby
their acceptance rejection which accepted by conven
ton and ratified by tho people at the election for the adoption OF the
constitution shall bo obligatory tho United States aud the said
satc Of Kansas"
The bill read in place by the senator from Georgia on
the 25th OF Je and referred to the Committee ON Ter
ritories contained the section word for word Both
these bills were under consideration at the conference
ferrcd to; but sir, when the senator from Illinois
ported the Toombs bill to the Senate with amendments
the next morning did not contain that portion of the
third section which indicated to the convention that the
constitution should be approved by the people. The
words and ratified By the people al The election for The adoption
Of the constellation bad been stricken out. Who struck
these words out for what purpose they omitted
is not for me to But, sir, l cannot be per
suaded that it intended thereby to secure to the
people of Kansas the right to vote the constitution
know the senator assumed the other day that wherever
the law is silent the subject the inference is in favor
Of submission but sir, full examination Of the pre-
cedens bearing that point mas shown that the
of the proposition has the weight OF authority and
that which he has laid down tho rule Of precedent has
seldom, If ever, happened Indeed, failed to discover
single instance in which the people have voted the
preparatory constitution where the act of Congress was
silent the subject But, yielding this point how is
the senator to reconcile this position with the under
standing of the subject he has clearly indicated
clsion that where the law is silent the subject the
constitution must be submitted vote of the people
why did the senator insert the clause which have al
ready quoted in his bill of the 7th of March and why
did he insert similar provision in the law for the adms
sion of Minnesota Then again. if by striking these
words out of the bill Of the senator from Georgia its i'm
port in no wise affected why were they stricken
out !? 4 #4ft
Such sir were the facts and circumstances which led
to believe that the Toombs bill to bring Kansas
into the Union without vote the constitution. Pos
sbly my impressions not warranted but be that
it may, cannot be persuaded that the senator intended
to to the people the right to vote the constu
ton by striking from the bill the words making that pol
icy necessary that the convention would have been
bound to extend that opportunity to the people simply
because the act of Congress said no such thing But
enough this point Now let me proceed to more
important branch of my remarks.
In order to proper understanding Of the subject under
discussion it is necessary to start with clear view of
the relations existing between the Territory of Kansas
and the federal government The organic law declares
that the Legislative authority of the Territory shall extend
all rightul subjects of legislation )" and also that the
people shall be left perfectly free TO form and regulate
their domestic institutions in their way, subject only
to the constitution of the United States "
hold that the extension to the people Of the opportu
nifty Of forming and regulating their Institutions, by
designating the times and places where they may meet
and elect delegates and where the delegates shall
bic when elected, and how they should proceed is
rghtful subject of legislation and that the legislature Of
Kansas bound matter of duty, to respond to the
almost camorous demand of the people for change from
THEN territorial to State government manifested for
two years past portion Of whom had attempted to erect
the Territory into State in the most irregular and even
unlawful manner they had also right to take notice
OF the manifestations of willingness tho part of Con-
gress expressed in 1856 to receive the Territory the
Union even with her then meagre population.
Ihold also that there but two sources of govern
mental authority for the people of Terrorythe one is
in Congress the other the people themselves and that
when Congress, in the of Kansas has conferred
upon the people all the legislative authority with which
they invested the people entirely unrestraned
in the matter of institutions of government, except by the
constitution of the United States 1t needs argument
then, TO show that the people of Kansas have right,
under the organic law, to adopt any measures they
may deem proper to change their form of government;
that in doing this they have right to delegate their SOW
eeign authority to representatives to any extent they
peaseo the extent only Of preparing forms of govern
ment for their supervision acceptance and ratification
to the extent of making and adopting constitution and
State government for admission into the Union that
where there is limitation in the original grant of
thoriy the latter of power may be exercised
that the sovereignty of tho people is nalenable and
must revert TO them after having performed the functions
for which delegated and that therefore the people
at all times clothed with authority to alter and amend
their forms of government; but to hold that the people
cannot delegate their sovereign authority to make laws
for their and enjoyment, is to discard whole
representative system and the practice under since the
government began. And to say that laws made
less the popular is taken upon them oppressive
wanting in authority is to lay down rule which would
require the submission Of all the statutes TO the popular
vote Indeed, this principle, the Declaration of In
dependence, the Bill of Rights the constitution of the
United States might be called acts Of oppression for
neither received the saction of popular vote.
~.