Democrat and sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1853-1866, 1858-03-24


every Que of these advantages is secured by
act of the Legislature. The Topeka move
ment had neither to give it the semblance of
a legal commencement, or to make it any way
serve the act of the people of Kansas. And
yet Senators and politicians who clamored for
the admission of Kansas under the Topeka
Government, now hold up their noses IN aston
ishment at the outrage Of admitting the State
because no enabling act had played God
Father to the Lecompton Constitution.
But, sir, speaking Of bling acts, brings
me to the next objection urged against the
admission of Kansas-and that is, that the
whole constitution was not submitted to the
people for their approval or rejection. [ say
that this is suggested by the consideration of
the subject of enabling acts, because the Ian
guage Of those acts possesses a peculiar sig
nifcance
read in section 4, ofthe act of April Is,
1918, tor the Territory of Illinois:
land be it further enacted, That the mem
bers of the convention thus duly elected, be
and they are hereby authorized, to meet at
the seat Of government of the said Territory,
on the first Monday of the month of August
next, which Contention, when met, shall
first determine by majority of the whole
number elected, whether it be or be not cx-
pedient at that time to form a Constitution
and State government for the people, within
the Territory, and if it be expedient, then
the Contention shall be, and hereby is. au-
thorized to form Constitution and State
government; or if 1t be deemed more expedi-
ent, the said convention shall provide by or
dinance for electing representatives to form
Constitution or form of government, which
said representatives. shall be chosen in such
and &. oil
meet at such time and place as shall be pre-
scribed by the said ordinance, and s5taU hen
form for the people Of said Territory q Con-
Stitution and State Goreramem. Provided,
That the same whenever formed shall be re-
publican"
This language, with immaterial variations,
is employed in the enabling acts for other Ter
ritories. 1t had been used for Ohio 1t was
used for Indiana and Missouri In but one
case. [ believe, did any enabling act ever
require the submission of constitution to q
popular vote.
This form. thus repeated in every enabling
act but one that has been passed speaks the
common understanding of the country, that
the people may delegate the power to form
for them a Constitution With the great
precedent Of the adoption of the Constitution
of the United States before them, 1t is not
strange that Congress should have so frequen-
tly recognized this right Nor is it strange
that the very first act ever passed for tie
admission of a State should contain recital
'Fthat whereas 4 convention Of delegates
chosen by the people of the said district ot
Kentuckey, have petitioned Congress to con
sent that on the first day OF June, 1892. the
said district should be formed into anew State
aud received into the Union by the name oi
the State of kentucky =; therefore BE it fur
/ thcr enacted aud declored. That upon the
aforesaid Ist June, 1892, the said new State
/ by the name and style of the State of Ken
| lucky, shall be received and admitted into thc
! Union as a new and entire member of th,
! United States Of America"
There,sir, is the first act ever passed Cor tn,
admission of new State into the American
! Union. The act was passed by men VIII,
knew what self government meant Many 0
/ them had fought 10 It's support The act re
ceived the approval of Washington An,
we do notrcad that the admission Of nev
/ slave State in 179I on the mere petition Q
! a convention of delegates, convulsed the coun
/ try ofo-dangercd the perpetuity of our institu
| tions.
Two weeks after Washington had sicne,
! this act, he approved the act for the admission
:
! existence without enabling act from Con
! gress and without a submission of her cousti
tuition to avote of the people 1t might b,
interesting to pursue the history of the admis
sion of other States, and refer to the fact tha
| the States of Tennessee, Ohio, Indiana. Mis-
/ souri, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi and Al
ALBANIA, as well as Kentucky and Vermont
! being majority of those admitted since tht
constitution adopted, were received into
the Union without ratification, by the peopl,
| of their several constitutions But the sub
! ject, as is well known to those present, ha4
/ been SO completely exhausted, and the argu
ments drawn there-from so powerfully enfor
! ced by Senator Green, of Missouri, that
shall content myself with mere reference t
! his able speech and report. It is enough t.
] say that lie has shattered the assertion that
J submission of the constitution to a popula
/ vote is essential to the admission of her as :
! State into the Union. What then is tn
result of all this accumulated mass of prcce
dents We find that majority of the State
! admitted since the adoption of the COnstitu
| tion have not come in with constitutions rati
/ fed by popular vote. We find that wher
enabling acts have been passed there has bee,
/ but one case, that of Minnesota, in whicl
! slch an admission has been required w
find that in one case, that of Michigan, th
assent of the people to her prescribed boun
daries has been required to be given By
conyention Of delegates And we find tha
whether the constitutions have or have no
been ratified by a popular vote, the acts o
resolutions Of admission have referred solel,
| to the action of the Convention as the basis Q
! the consent OF Congress.
It is ia vain for any one, however giftec
| by nature, however Strong in intellect, O.
/ fortified with courage to attempt to overthrow
/ the conclusion, from this array Of precedent
! that the mere fact of the non submission o
the whole constitution of Kansas, is no grounC
/ for the rejection Of the State.