Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1858-01-07

duty, IN my opinion, 10 make KNOW
their will by the votes Of the major
ity, on the direct question whetbe
this important domestic institution
should or should not continue to ex
ist. Indeed this was the only posi-
bic mode in which their will coult
be authenticallv ascertained.
The election Of delegates to
convention must necessarily taxi
place in separate districts. Fror
this cause it may readily happen
as has often been the case, that .
majority of the people Of State o.
Territory are on one side Of ques
tion, whilst a majority Of the repre-
sentatives from the several districts
into which it is divided may be upor
the other side. This arises from The
fact that some district delegates may
be elected by small majoritiss, whilst
in othe.s those of different senii
ments may receive malorities suffi
ciently great not only to overcome
the votes given for the former, but to
leave large majority Of the whole
people in direct opposition to ma
jority Of the delegates. Besides,
our history proves that influence
may be brought to bear on the
representative sufficiently powerful
to influence him to. disregard the
will of his constituents. The truth
is, that no other authentic and
and satisfactory mode exists of ascer-
tanning the will.of a majority of the
people Of any State or Territory on
an important and exciting question
like that of slavery in Kansas, ex-
cept by leaving it to a. direct vote.
How wise then, was it for Congress
to pass over all subordinate and inter-
mediate agencies, and proceed direct
ly to the source of all legitimate
power under our institutions!
How vain would any other princi-
pie prove in practice. This may be
by the case Of Kansas
Should she be admitted into the
Union with a constitution either
maintaining or abolislihg slavery,
against the sentiment of the people,
this could have no other effect than
to continue and exasperate the ex-
citing agitation during the brief
period required to make the consti
tution conform to the irresistible will
Of the majority.
The friends and supporters Of the
Nebraska and Kansas act, when
on recent occasion to
sustain its wise provisions before the
great tribunal of the American peo-
ple, never differed about its true
on this subject. Every
where throughout the Ilnisela they
Ouhliies';, pledged their fai..h. aud their
hssuvr that they would eheerfully
submit the question Of slavery TO
the decision of the bona fide people
of Kansas, without any restriction
or qualification whatever. All were
cordially united upon the great
doctrine Of popular sovereignty, which
is the vital principle Of our free
institutions. Had it then been in
sinuated from any quarter that 1t
would be sufficient compliance with
the acquisitions Of the organic law
for the members of a convention,
thereafter to be elected, to withhold
the question Of slavery from the
people. and to substitute their own
will for that Of legally ascertained
majority Of their constituents, this
would have been instantly rejected.
Everywhere they remain true to the
resolution adopted on celebrated
occasion recognizing "tbe right of
the people Of all the Territories,
including Kansas and Nebraska,
acting through the legally and fairly
expressed will Of a majority Of the
actual residents, and whenever the
number Of their inhabitants justify
It. 10 form a constitution with OF
without slavery, and be admitted into
the Union upon terms Of perfect
equality with the other States
The convention to frame a con-
stitntion for Kansas met the first
Monday Of September last They
we're called together by virtue OF an
act Of the Territorial Legislature,
whose lawful existence had been
recognized by Congress ir different
Torms anc different enactments. A
large portion Of the citizens OF
Kansas did not think proper to reg
ister their names, and to. vote at the