The Washington union., 1858-03-30
ANALYSIS OF THE DIRECTIONS TO THE GREAT
MEASURE OF ADMISSION.

MEASURE OF ADMISSION.
The present week will probably end the Kansas
controversy in Congress- 1t will certainly do 80 il
the Senate bin shall be adopted by the House upon
which we confidently rely. If, unfortunately, and
contrary to general expectation, that bill shall
fail in the House, and the subject shall again get
arift into the open of debate and agitation, none
can tell where the end of it will be- and foresee
the consequences to the government and to the
country.
We have lively confidence, however, in the pas
sage of the Senate bill by the House-in the attain
ment Of this consummation devoutly to be wished
Hoping and expecting this it is appropriate, on
the eve of final action, to reflect upon the objec
tons that have been urged to the measure about to
be consummatcd
That measure is the admission of Kansas under
the Lecompton constitution: lst admission; I'd,
under that constitution. All are agreed upon the
propriety of admission per The objection is not
to admission; it is all to the organic instrument un
der which the State is to obtain admission
And, strange to say, there are no specifications of
objection to that instrument itself True, there is
clause the slavery cause in the instrument against
which the sectional agtators of the North remon-
strate most violently; but the remonstrances of
these fanatics extend to slavery (f it be of negroes
everywhere and cannot be needed in a confederacy
of which half the constituent States are savehold-
ing. Except from these avowed fanatics there is no
objection to the constitution of Kansas account of
its slavery clause The head and front of the oppo-
ston to the pending Of admission is made by
men whose political consistency forbids them from
basng their resistance upon narrow and factious
ground as the slavery clause for, democrats and
national men until recently they estopped from
urging an objection that would be repudiated as
factions, fanatical, and revolutionary by half the
Union.
These heretical democrats are the leaders of the
opposition to the admission; the mouth-pioces
of the opposition-the catspaws of the fanatics.
Without their alliance the sectional party would be
impotent, imbecilc, and contemptible the measure
Of admission could not be delayed one day. They
are the bone and snew, the breath and life OF the
opposition--representin leading commanding sus-
tanning, and mpersonatng it. Yet they do not plant
their objection to the Lecompton instrument upon
its slavery clause.
But they object to the instrument. They do not
Lecompton constitution And thus we arrive at
another strange feature in this controversy. The
objection to the instrument is not to its terms OF
provisions az constitutions but to the constitution of
Lecompton, with reference altogether to the man
ner and circumstances of its adoption In other
words the objection is not to admission ITSELF or to
the Lecompton instrument constitution but TO the
manner in which it was adopted. 1t is ALI objection
of form, and not Of substance; of puncio, and not
OF merit.
True, we hear denuncations of the clause which
provides that after 1864 it shall require twohirds
of the Legislature to order constitution, as if
any change of the constitution before that year was
precluded; but the objection is mere pretext,
two-thirds Of all parties in Congress being agreed
that tho majority of sovereign people may
change their constitution at will. True, also, that
there were objections raised at first to provis-
ions of the constitution in regard to banks and
to the qualifications prescribed for Office but
these, too were pretexts, and died out Of
their own frvolity In fact the constitution Of Kan
sas is as good one any State in the Union can
boast.
1t comes at last therefore, to this, that the objec
ton to the pending measure, is not to admission IL
self or to the intrinsic merits of the instrument
under which admission is proposed; but is alto
gether objection of punctilio, form, and manner.
Tho admission itself being proper by universal ac-
acknowledgement, and the instrument under which it IL
proposed being az good one any State in the
world possesses, the case would seem to be closed
on its merits and the to be clearly proper
and expedent. But let pursue the opposition
into the field of pnnctilio, form, and mode, which
they have chosen to resort to.
There is great ortcry against frauds" But these
imputed frauds are alleged to have occurred in the
elections of October and January last The elections
of October were territorial elections and had refer
cnce to, or connexon with, the Lecompton constitu
ton, in any form or whatever. Frauds per-
petratcd IN them no more affect tant the consti-
tuition of Kansas than they do that of Massachn-
setts Of England. Besides Walker was at the
helm, and Walker corrected the imputed frauds
Of October. The January elections were cleo
tons Under the Lecompton constitution, er posi-
fncto aud could not, in the nature Of things have a
fccted the antecedent framing of the constitution.
The validity of the Lccompton instrument was no
more effected by the elections held in January subso-
aueny to its adoption and under its provisions than
Al. cJor,l constitufiOn was affected by the eec one