The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-08-05

merely for municipal purposes; and
when State has grown into rightful
sovereignty, when that sovereignty which
has been kept in allegiance demands
recognition, when a community is formed
there, social compact created, SOW
ereignty born as it were upon the soil,
then Congress is gifted with the power
to acknowledge it, and the Legislature,
only by mere usage, sometimes neglected,
assists at the birth of it by passing a
precedent resolution assembling a Con-
vention.
But when that Convention assemblies
to form Constitution, it assemblies in
the highest known capacity of a people,
and has no superior in this Government
but State sovereignty; or rather the
State sovereignties of all the States
alone can do anything with the act of
that Convention. Then if that Conven-
ton was lawful, if there is no objection
to the Convention itself, there can be no
objection to the action of the Conven-
ton; and there is no power on earth
that has a right to inquire, outside of
its acts, whether the Convention repre-
sented the will of the people of Kansas
or not; for Convention of the people is,
according to the theory of our Govern
ment, for all the purposes for which the
people elected it, THE PEOPLE, bona
fde, being the only way in which all the
people can assemble and act together.
| do not doubt that there might be some
cases of such gross and palpable frauds
committed in the formation of Con-
vention, as might authorize Congress to
investigate them, but | can scarcely
conceive of any. And when State
knocks at the door for admission, Con-
gress can with propriety do little more
than inquire if her Constitution is re-
publican. That it embodies the will of
her people must necessarily be taken
for granted, if it is their lawful act. |
am assuming, of course, that her bound
aries are settled, and her population
sufficient.
If what / have said be correct, then
the will of the people of Kansas is to be
found in the action of her Constitutional
Convention. 1t is immaterial whether
it is the will of majority of the people
OF Kansas nolU, or not. The Conven-
ton was, or might have been, elected
by majority of the people of Kansas.
A Convention, elected in April, may
well frame a Constitution that would
not be agreeable to majority of the
people of new State, rapidly filling up,
in the succeeding January and if Leg
lslatures are to be allowed to put to
vote the acts of a Convention, and have
them annulled by subsequent influx of
immigrants, there is no fnality. If you
were to send back the Lecompton Con
stltution, and another was to be framed,
IN the slow way in which we do public
business in this country, before it would
reach Congress and be passed, perhaps
the majority would be turned the other
way. Whenever you go outside of the
regular forms of law and Constitutions
to seek for the will of the people, you
are wandering in Wilderness wilder
ness of thorns.
If this was minority Constitution, |
do not know that that would be an OBJ
lection to it. Constitutions are made
for minorities. Perhaps minorities ought
to have the right to make Constitutions,
for they are administered by majorities.
The Constitution of this Government
was made by minority, and as late as
1910 a minority had it in their hands,
and could have altered or abolished it /;
for, in 1910, six out of the twenty-six
States of the Union held the numerical
majority.
The Senator from Illinois has, upon
his view of the Lecompton Constitution
and the present situation of affairs in
Kansas, raised a cry of popular SOW
ereignty." The Senator from New York
Mr.. SEWARD yesterday made himself
facetious about it, and called it "squat
ter sovereignty" There is popular
sovereignty which is the basis of our
Government, and | am unwilling that
the Senator should have the advantage
of confounding it with "squatter SOW
ereignty." In all countries and in all
time, it is we'll understood that the
numerical majority of the people could,
if they chose, exercise the sovereignty
of the country but for want of intel
ligence, and for want of leaders, they
have never yet been able successfully to
combine and form a stable popular
Government. They have often attempt
ed it, but it has always turned out, in
stead of a popular sovereignty, pop
uIace sovereignty and demagogues,
placing themselves upon the movement,
have invariably led them into military
despotism.
| think that the popular sovereignty
which the Senator from Illinois would
derive from the acts of his Territorial
Legislature, and from the information
received from partisans and partisan
presses, would lead us directly into pop
utace, and not popular sovereignty.
Genuine popular sovereignty never ex-
listed on firm basis except in this coun-
try. The first gun of the Revolution
announced a new organization of it,
which was embodied in the Declaration
of Independence, developed, elaborated,
and inauguratcd forever in the Consti-
tuition of the United States. The two
pillars of it were Representation and
the Ballot box. In distributing their
sovereign powers among the various de-
partments of the Government, the peo-
pie retained for themselves the single
power of the ballot box; and a great
power it was. Through that they were
able to control all the departments of
ha Al