Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-04-20

IS cissto cuarchy, slsos sod eoniasio.; re 'sIa
right could be acknowledged consistently WIN 'ns
existence OF representative government ".en ama
yet it is precisely this which is claimea ~ LIE "s
The very existence of free representative
itself requires that you should insist ths, ~ u,nID"yi
who could control if they would. must Do goVeihsa
by the minority who do vote, IT they lnsnAe.sr-'e
fused to act. This ia necessary because the 'Ioseth
meut must 90 on; and You must presume hga'hs' %"
arrhy, and save civil soci-ty from lis eS''s'
IL is nothing, then. that these persons re'uS' ~
vote n a time when they might nh'r '.e ST.
know that it is said, 10 relation Ia lHr question WIG,
ther there should be a Convention, That mere "sie
some tests Teuuired; but the salne cannon De saw vi
regard to that election in which members OF the Con
vention were chosen. The msJority' IL IL sAs ~
could have controlled things "a they desired. u
right thus TO control has never been olsputeu' ' na.
right has never been taken away lrom nsm, o ~
when they come here and claim more anu einrm lne
right by refusing TO act and refusing 10 a.senasse
their legal duties, to create q state oi aoareny lua
community, they claim what never can oe' ano hs'ei
ought to be accorded to them.
In regard to the other objection, that eome ol Tue
counties we're unrepresented, it has been 80 tuliy ana
comDlstely answered that I think | need not take up
your time by further adverting 10 II; lot d Seen
shown that it was a minority of the peopie, q !. oe'',
who lived within them; that, il the census were nol
taken there. it was because the Free stare party
wOuld not permit il TO be taken; ana tna', IN any
point Of view, there we're not persons enough lu lne-e
counties to have affected seriously the representative
character of the Convention.
| come now to the other class oil oe!ectors' 10
those who object to the authority of this Convention
because it wanted the support of an enaoL"e ac' u
the part of Congress. What, let me ask are the
functions of an enabling sctl An enabling act l, IN
the first place, q declaration on the part Oh congress,
that within certain boundaries there 10 d peopie Hno
are sufficiently numerous and mstured as q society 10
claim admission into the Union, if they present a
Constitution republican in its form. II 10 also an III.
vitation to those people thus to maet and present tneir
Consultation for admission. When they 90 lnh''
Congress is bound in good faith to pass whatever iu1'
Their acts may be necessary, III oraer 10 autl.' 'ien
into the Union. But, Mr. President, all that Is ne
cessary in order to Justify the admission, Ia that mere
should he the application OF a people VINO, wi'hin
proper boundaries, are sufficiently numerous ana SUI
6ciently matured ~ q society to qualiiy Them LOT en-
traucs into the Union, and that their Cons'ituuon
| should be republican in is form. Whenever thai
| case is presented, there is the justification Tor Con
gress to enter into the compact with the STATE wh!ct
ia necessary in order to admit ii; 8 oompsct 10 WHICH
there are two parties-the people OF the STATE apply
ing for admission on the one hand, and the Congress
of the United States agreeing to admit it on the
other. The difference between the two cases 10, ina
in the one Congress is morally bound by its previous
pledge, and in the other it acts merely upon the pro
stances under which it is made. As a proof that
il 40, we have been referred, over and over again, 1
the numerous instances in which States have Deel
admitted without any enabling act.
Let lis proceed now TO the other objection, that TIT
Constitution ia not TO BIZ considered IA the act ot th'
people, because it was not submitted NJ a whole u
that people for their ratification. This idea proceed
on the supposition thar il is not competent to the peo
pie of q State TO express their sense OF thtIr ihlerest
aud their wishes on tho subject OF a Constitution
through the means of representatives in Il ConVen
ton; that il lie not competent 10 q people to meet am
declare that they wish 10 conide their whole poWe
in this Convention, and that their act, whatever /
might BIZ, should be final. To assert this, is to ds
clare that there is no capacity IN representatives. I
represent the We've and interests OF the people, Or
cause. if there be- q capacity in representatives. thu
TO express their wishes and interests, surely the peO
pie have The right TO express themselves in whateve
practical mods they may Themselves prefer. II In
capacity be admitted, no man can doubt the right o
the people 10 sny that the acts of their representa-
tives shall be FINAL and conclusive. L. then, We IN,
there il not a capacity in a representative aaS-mo!.
TO .xpress the opinions and wishes of the people Il
regard to matters Of constitution, ia il not ubviou
that that capacity does not exist in relation TO matter
of law1 And the result would be that a populs
form of government ia only possible in those com
munities where there 10 a small number Of people
and where they can meet and deliberate ogsther.
But, sir, think it will not be difficult to show tha
this principle is impractiosble, and could not possibl
be- executed. IL you must have the sense of tn
people 10 regard to a Constitution, in order to max
IL their will and make it valid, then you must nc
submit it as a whole, but must submit il in parts; 20
must submit il, proposition by proposition, to gathe
their will precisely because, although they mlsf
prefer the instrument, when submitted az a whole, I
the old form of government, il does not follow ths
they are in favor of all the provisions which II COZ
tains. Ii, thsn, you should submit IT to them, pr"pr
sition by proposition, this result might follow: tn
after the maioriSS had struck out such parfs rs the
dirIiked, the Constitution, 10 a whole, would turn on
10 be a very different thing from what anybody ha
expected or desired. Then you would be forced I
re.rubmit il again, or call another Convention I
change the form in which i; is la bs presented q secon
,;,,.. 10 ,ro,IJ ,hup hu fnunl. that. In q lHrpH rOu
muuity, it would he Impossible 10 take the sense c
the people on the different paris Of the Constitution
/ say, therefore, thatit would be impossible to carr
ont this doctrine in order to ascertain the popula
will on the subject OF their Constitutions.
But, sir, Congress is to send il back, and requir
its submission az a whole. Let me ask you whs
right has Congress TO send this Constitution back
and require its submission TO the people, Vt the people
through their representatives, say they do not destr
il to be thus submitr+df The right 10 require thi
r~atifying vote must reg. with those people. or IT mus
r.st with the Congress of the United States. Ii can
not b.. in both; and il ihs Congress OF the Unite
States can say it shall be submitted, il mus, also de
clare 10 whom il j. To b. submitted; it must prescribe
tn. body poliiic. " may provide that it must be suo
United, not merely 10 whites, but to negroes, to In
dams, and 10 aliens; and 10 thus prescribing who shai
lie the body polite, and who are the voters to GecId'
upon It, they may determine that no Constitution shal
be brought here that does not permit an absolute
equality among those races. That is g matter no
within the jurisdiction Of Congress, but within that o
the people Of this inohoste State, who are acting II
the capacity of the people of a State. To deny then
such a right would be 10 deny their equality with thu
other States Of the Union. 1t may be- said that tbt
people of a Territory have no such sovereignty, True
but the people of q State DO poasess 1t, and II Congres!
agrees to their application, is act OF admission relnte'
back, and recognises their action rs that OF the peo
pie Of a State.
Not only. then, ia this doctrine in the latitude If
| ,pb;oh, IL ia Ipil doun imnraptjpahlp hnt | affirm tlA
the submission which was made was the very flares
that could possibly have been offered. The grea
question OF division among them was in regard 70
slavery. Who can doubt thatf This was the only
question submitted. II the Constitution had beer
submitted "a a whole, you could not have asoertalnec
their aenss accurately 10 relation TO the great matter
Of dispute. An anti slavery man might, ptrhsps
have voted for the Constitution, because there were
other provisions which he liked and a pro slavery
man might have voted against il, because there ~ert
other PROVISIONS which he disliked; but when yot
presented it to him to determine that question. ant
that question only, you took the precise expression
of the popular voice III regard to that subject.
know, sir, it has been said that the question was
not submitted because tho people were required Il
vote for the Constitution before they could express
an opinion on the subject Of slavery. That say
with all Difference 10 the respectable Gen'l-'j-n wh'
have maintained the proposition, sseIns 10 me To- o.
mere verbal bubble. Why air, what wac IL Tor "hici
the voter wa responsible when he voted under thi
submissinn7 He was responsible only for expressing
an opinion in regard to that matter which he v"t'
could affect, and not for any declaration Of sentimen
az to other provisions in the Constitution which hi
vote could not Affect and what was there IN that IN
strumsnt which bis vote could sfect1 Surely 1t wa
only the subject Of slavery itself.
Well, Mr.. President, to confirm this action OF tbt
Lecompton Convention, we have the fact that somt
eleven or twelve thousand persons-l VIII NOT d.
precise as to numbers-voted for the ofncers VINO
were to compose the new Government under THU
Constitution, and that they did 80 not merely with
simple assent to the Constitution, but with the express
decls' alton that they would support IT, for they wer.
not allowed to vote until they agreed TO sustain the
Constitution-that il to cay, 10 sustain j., il adopted
until it should be legally changed or abolished. Such
in my opinion, was the pledge when fhirly conStrn-d
Against all this, We ara referred to tbs vhte winch
was taken on the ith January, under the law ct the
Territorial Legislature, as evidence that the people
Of Kansas are opposed TO this Constitution. Mr
President, | deny that this vote is an element IN Inc
argument. 1.-THE Convention at Laconpton Was valid,
il its acts were authorized, then this Legislature had