M'arthur Democrat. (McArthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1853-1865, 1858-03-18
Letter from Senator Pugh.
WASHINGTON, March 8.

requesting me TO attend the Democratic
meeting at GAINESVILLE, tomorrow night, was
duly received, and have to regret that my
engagements here are such as 10 forbid a
compliance with the invitation.
To profess my continued adherence to the
principles Ol;he Democratic party, as de-
clared in the Cincinnati Platform, would
seem to be almost superfuous. If the re-
cord Of nv votes and speeches, eyer since !
attained the estate of manhood, be not suf-
fcient aud even conclusive in this regard, ii
is hardly worth while to make the least pro-
testation. My hopes and my faith, in all
the future, depend on the success Of these
principles, and OF the organization by which
they are acknowledged.
In the present controversy relative to
Kansas, I believe that the opinions of Mr.
buchanan, expressed in his message of Feb
ruary 2, 1858, are not only in strict accord
ance with Democratic principles, but that
the opposition TO them in our own ranks is
based upon a serious and fundamental err
ror.
am not one of those who insist that the
opinions of President on any subject
should be followed blindly; but | will say
that, in my humble judgment, when Demo-
cratic Congressman diRer with Democrat
ic Administration they ought to be well as
sured of the correctness oil their own posi-.
tions, and withal, to avoid even the semb-
lance Of vndictiveness or factious opposi-
tion. For myself, (since the present Kan
sas controversy was inaugurated) | have
felt It due 10 M. Buchanin--to his eminent
station, his public services, his great abilities
and experience-due, likewise, to the senti,
nent OF the Democratic party Of Ohio and Of
the United States so emphatically expires.
sed in November, 1856, that should not en-
denVor in any degree to fOrestall the minds
ol my constituents against candid, thor
oTgh, deliberate examination Of whatever
: policy he might recommed.
II is said, however, that the convention
; of delegates assembled at LecomptOn should
have submitted the iphOle constitution OF
Kansas to a vote of the people, directly, for
approval or rejection, AMI that the failure
= to do this in the circumstances, amounted
{ to a breach of duty, and even violation Of
p written promises, On the part OF some or all
= of the delegates. This may be so; IneitheT
. deny nor affirm the assertion; but | do af.
u firm that il is no matter for the Congress Of
3 the United States to decide, nor even to eX-
n anime. Who authorized Congress 10 con.
!. troll the local affairs of the State o.
Kansas; TO dictate in what manner the
constitution of that State should be formed
: approved or ratified; to interpose, as mon
= itor. between the people Of that State and
r their delegates, lawfully chosen' Such in
V reference, in my opinion, would be unwar
Il rantable as well as Observation-Disclosures
: for The peace Of Kansas and doubly unior
II tunate for the peace Of the Union at large
= 1t would be to supersede, forever the sover
D eigny, the independence, the reserved
0 rights of the States, new and old, as guar
4, antced by the Constitution of the Unite
:, States. If Congress could control to tha
, extent the affairs Of new State already ad
: mitted into the Union! Are not the new
: States 10 be admitted let me ask. upon al
}. equal footing with the original States !
Thuse who di.ler with the President il
: respect to the case of Kansas must claim, a
5 n universal principle, that Congress has tn
b. power (and ought to exercise it) of relu
;. sing the admission OF a State into the Un
on-upon constitution regularly adopte,
: by her convention OF delegates and republi
can in form-merely because the const tn
q ton was not ratified by direct vote of tn
! people; and this although, the people. act
= ing through delegates choscnby thCmselve
have made no such requisitOn. II 80. wha
i will become Of our own State of Ohio, q
g we'll as the States Of Vermont, Kentucky
II Tennessee, Louisiana, Indiana, Mississippi
;, Illiuos, Alabama, Missouri and Arkansas !!
y All of them were admitted into the Uno
u with constitutions never submitted TO til
people. What will become of the lhirtee
: original States! They, gcther, formed tn
Union. but none of them submitted its ow
> constitution, or the Constitution Of the Uni
ted States, TO vote of the people. Cor
y gress never has required such a submis. 10
J. before this in the case of any new State -ur
j. less, indeed, come argument can be draw
:. from the "enabIing act' for Mnnesot'
!, February 26, 1857. | doubt whether fiv
% men in Congress knew that bill containe
such provision. Certainly, for cne, | di
j. not; supposedlt similar to all other enO
Il bling acts. That bill,as it now stands, pa
;, sed the House without having been printed
- under the operation of the previous question
!; 1t was debated alterward in the Senate,wit
d reference to the provision for alien suffrage
y but not a syllable was uttered, believe, a
Il to any requirements that the con -titution o
- Minnesota, when formed, should be submit
: ted TO the people The case, therefore, /
:, not authoritative; since, assuredly, no pre-
d cedent can conclude question not argued
If nor even noticed, by those who decided il
L Indeed, gentlemen, the distinctive excel
q lence of our Government in America ha
ever been their Representatives character =
'' The people do moi act directly. but throug
y delegates, representatives, or other agents
=, chosen in due form of law. This practice
" Of submitting constitutions to The people, 70
) approval or rejection. is entirely mod 'rn; i
never occurred to Washington, Jefferson
d Madison, Juckson, or any OF those great me
i who laid the foundation of popular sover
,f eighty before the Kansas-Nebrasko Bi
: had been lnyened The practice extended
: at one time, much further; and it was quit
U fashionable, when had the hnnor OF mtm
g bersip in the Ohio Legislature, many year
! ago, tO submit acts OF Legislation TO the pee
D.. PIE. But the practice was found to be oh
!. jeCtionaDle, and because nobody could b
l. made responsible for such legislation. Ac
}. cordingly, our present constitution. adOpte
}. in ptember, 1851, dec lares that no la'
k Except in relation TO common schools an
- banking comDnnipsl shall ever bp snhmittp