The Kansas herald of freedom. [volume] (Wakarusa, Kan. Territory) 1854-1860, 1858-05-15

| INC POopio dnu VI tHc tcIIltOrlal govern
ment, the territory was so far prepared
for admission into the Union as State.
That is the reason. He gives no appli-
cation of it, but announces as a reason
that it was so far prepared because the con-
stitution had been made, ready to be Of
fered to Congress, though that constitu-
ton had not yet been submitted to the
people when this law was passed. That
was her condition that was the prepara-
ton she had made. The only prepara-
| ton was, that under the authority of q
previous territorial Legislature, eonven-
ton had been held, and a constitution
made and published.
That was the condition of her prepara-
ton and because of that preparation,
the Territorial Legislature had no power
whatever to pass law to take a popular
vote upon the adoption of that constitu-
ton, to see what the people thought of it
Ito collect the evidence of the public
will! What could the Territorial Legis-
lature do to satisfy themselves, to satisfy
their country, to satisfy the just rights
of the people, but to say vote shall
be taken on the 4th of January next,
in which all the people shall declare
their assent to or disapprobation of
this constitution as an entrie instru-
ment ? What is there in this prepa-
ration to prevent it :? What force had
the constitution? Could the Constitution
unaccepted by you, unauthorized by you,
paralyze and annihilate the legislative
power which your act of Congress had
| =.
Does not that power, and all that power,
remain as perfect as when you granted it?
And could the power which your act
gave be diminished or lessened by an act
of mere territorial authority =? Itis pal
pable that it could not No matter what
act might be done by the people of Kan
sas, call it by what name you please
law of the territorial Legislature, eonstitu-
ton made by the people-no matter by
what name you call 1.-THE supremacy Of
the government remains untouched and
unimpaired, and all the power of terrific
rial legislature which it gave may be ex-
ercised by the legislature.
THE CONSTITUTION MERE PROPOSITION.
OF what avail is this constitution until
accepted by Congress, and the State ad-
mitted upon it ? Whom does it bind ?
isit anything more than proposition
by the people of Kansas, that "we shall
be admitted with this instrum ent, which
we offer as our constitution ?'' What
more is it? Does it bind anybody =?
Where does it derive its authority :?
The organic law authorized no legislation
by convention. The convention could
exercise no legislative power which Con-
gress had given, because Congress gave its
power toa territorial legislature, to be
elected in acertain manner, and to be ex-
ercised in certain manner. The conven-
ton could exercise no legislative power.
It bound no one. Itdid not bind the fu-
ture state for, until you accepted it,
/ what prevented the people from calling a
convention the next day, and altering or
modifying it according to their own views?
Is there anything of reason, of argument,
or of law, to support proposition that
the people are restrained from making an
other constitution because they have pro-
posed one not yet accepted and aete
upon by Congress ? think not.
IOWA AND KANSAS COMPARED.
In my judgment, we have precedent
on our books which shows ann right in
this view, in the case of Iowa. She pre-
| sented herself here with a constitution,
| and asked for admission according to the
boundaries she had assumed and declared
in that constitution. Congress admitted
her, but conditionally only. Congress OBJ
jected to the boundary. It included a
portion of territory which Congress
thought properly belonged to the State of
Missouri. It admitted her however as a
State conditionally on condition that
she should hold another convention
and assent to the new boundary which
congress prescribed and upon that assent
being thus given, the President was TO
proclaim it, and without further proceed
ing she was afterwards to be State in the
Union. What did the people of Iowa
do Did they proceed according to this
act of Congress and call convention
simply for the purpose as required by the
act of Congress, of asserting to this al
tered boundary? !? No, sir, we hear no
more of that. They passed that act by,
called another convention, made another
constitution, applied to Congress, and
were admitted at a subsequent session.
Was not their state of preparation
greater than the preparation of the terri
| ory of Kansas Here Iowa was not only
in state of preparation, by having made
a constitution which with single excep-
ton had received the appreciation of Coz
gress, and she had authority to call an
other convention for the solitary and par
ticular purpose of asserting to the bound
ary. She passed it by, as she might well
do.
Is not all this perfectly clear to our rea-
son? Are there any fictions of law ? are
there any technicalities springing out of
these instruments. governing their force
and effect to prevent this conclusion ? Is
this constitution to be made up into lit
tie plea of estoppel against the people
4 Are the little rules which we are to gather
from Westminster hall-the little saws in
actions at law that do well enough to de-
eide little questions of aseaas and taus'
among a, B and C-to be applied as the
measure to those great and sovereign prin-
eiples on which States and people rest for
their rights and their liberties ? No, sir.
This is great political question, open,
free to be judged of according to Gods
truth and the rights of the people, unre-
strained, unencumbered. unimpaired by
any fiction or by any technicality which
could prevent the full scope of your JUS
tice and your reason over the whole sub
iect
Therefore, sir. this state of preparation
of the Territory of Kansas for admission
, into the Union has no effect. The argu-
ment is not applied the fact is merely
] stated that there is state Of preparation,
and there it would be necessary to stop
on any doctrine on that subject for, in
my own judgment, no argument can be