Daily national Democrat., 1858-09-19
Lecompton Constitution dead Cock In
fhp PIT.

LeCOmptOn COnstltutloh a. NN~N ~ON-- 80
the Pit.
1t is now distinctly proved, and in man
ner against which no possible bubble can
be raised. that the Lecompton Constitution
was never the act and deed of the people of
Kansas. This was all that was ever conten-
ded for by the Douglas party. We all said,
from the beginning, that the people had moth
ing to do with the framing of that Constitu-
ton, that they had voted it down at a fair
and legal election, called by a legitimate leg
islature Of the Territory, on the 4th of Jan
uary, 1858, and that it was perfectly idle to
assert that that instrument had any sort of
legitimacy about it, We said further, that
the doctrine of popular sovereignty was VIC.
lated, hagrantly and inexcusably violated, if
a constitution, which the people had not only
had nothing to do with but had positively
rejected, were forced upon Their. The Bu
chanan apostates from the true Democratic
faith pretended to think that the Lecompton
Constitution Vds the act and deed of the peo-
pie, and tried to force it upon them. They
met with formidable opposition, and were
signally defeated, in their attempt at Lecorlp-
tonism pure. The principle of popular SOW
ereignty, as construed by Mr.. Douglas and
and the Democratic Party at large, triumphed
in the House of Representatives. Forced
to acknowledge the supremacy of the prin
ciple. the President and his adherents then
resorted to a miserable eXpcdient, by which
they would in effect yield the principle but
in such a manner and with such conditions
as would secure the original object, to-wit ::
the admission of Kansas under Stare con
stitution Any way would satisfy them, by
which they could make Kansas a Slave State.
Now, the Douglas men cared nothing, wheth.
er Kansas were a Slave State or a Free State
they were contending for the observance.
faithfully, Of the great, leading principle of
the Democratic Party. They wanted the
people to vote upon their organic law, with.
out any restrictions whatever-without any
inducements or imidations-without the
influence of either promises or threats. But
termined to make Kansas Slave State, if
possible. So they apparently yielded the
principle for which Douglas was contending,
and offered, in effect, to let the people have
a sort of vote upon the Lecompton Constitu
tion, but, at the same time, put the PROPOSE
ton submitted in the English Bill in such a
shape that it would be a decided personal
advantage to thousands of persons to accept
the Lecompton Constitution, with its slavery
clause, however obnoxious to them the con.
stitution as an entirety might be They
would not agree to submit the constitution
fairly upon its merits, but they must present
inducements for its acceptance, and annex
penalty for its non-acceptance-de declaring
that Kansas should stay out of the Union,
for an indefinite length of time, unless she
came in under a slave constitution. Why
this distinction in favor of slave States over
the free? Is this Democratic doctrine? No
sir, the Democratic doctrine is that The peo-
pie of Territory shall decide for themselves
whether they shall have a slave constitution
or free constitution, and that without any
whatever, either in the way of
rewards or punishments, from the General
Government The General Government, in
making any distinctions whatever, either in
favor of free States or slave States, is not
itself upon Democratic princi
pies, and that Administration which makes
these distinctions is, in no respect, Demo
cratic Administration.
Are the Lecomptonitos now satisfied, since
the people, on the I'd of August last, again
voted down the Lecompton Constitution, by
a majority of ten thousand, are they now
satisfied that the Lecompton Constitution is
not the act and deed of the people?
= 4loA !. Al.