The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1858-04-20
IAND.A NDeoJgY 7 TsDAYM G,APnLa

not precedent for this amendment. u
the Minnesota case we substituted our,
selves for the Territorial Legislature
we called on the people to elect theii
delegates, subject to certain general pro
visions In this case the people of K an
sas have chosen their delegates under to
tally different provisions, under a direc,
tion to them TO submit the constitution
OF not, as they pleased; those delegats.
have met: their work is complete ang
now we are asked not to prescri hn;
original charter. but to violate tAe.s
ter which those delegates receiyed d.
rectly from the people. That case, there.
fore, does not warrant this amendment.
Then, on what ground is it that we are
asked to remand the constitution OF
Kansas to. vote of the people? Whence
GENES the suggestion that the conven-
| tion which met in Kansas was not as le-
gal as the convention which met in Ohio,
l OF III 1lllDOlS, VI III 4'11coOoAAt VI IL
| other of the States which have already
been admitted into tie Union, and none
of which submitted their first constitu
tion to q vote of the people On what
pretext is founded the argument that we
must not receive this constitution? 1t
is said there was a vote taken on the
4th of January, 1858, in which ten
thousand majority was given against the
constitution. Very well, sir; but was
that legal or an illegal vote? | think
il WAS an illegal vote; I think it has no
legal consequence whatever; 1 think it
was simply signiication of SO many
people, if they were duly qualified, that
they anted change of the constitu
tiop; but they did not express it in the
proper form, and those who were opposed
to change being under no obligation to
speak on that day, we cannot even ar
rive at any moral result, much less
legal one, from that vote. But / will
take gentlemen on their own ground; let
us say that it was full vote for the
adoption or rejection of the constitution:
then If the constitution vas rejected, it
is at an end; and by what right do you
set it on its feet again, and send it back
for another ratification? If there be
any force in the pretext that the vote
taken in January ppon the adoption or
rejection of-the constitution, under the
authority of the Territorial Legislature,
was legal, it shows that the constitution
is at an end, and SO much of the House
amendment as proposes to recognize the
constitution or set it up again for any
purpose, is a clear infraction of the will
of the people of Kansas. 1t cannot
stand on either leg, therefore.
But, sir, that is not the worst of it.
This House amendment does not, in
truth, refer the constitution of Kansas
back to the people of Kansas. Who
are the people of Kansas mean the
people authorized to vote for or against
this constitutions? The constitution. de-
6aes them. One part of the coustitu-
tion was submitted to the people one
part was ratified by every argument
which men can receive; 1 mean the
seventh article. That not only passed
the convention, but it passed the vote o
the people; and who were they? The
constitution tells US:
cat which election the constitution
framed by this convention shall be sub
mitted to all the white male inhabitants
of the Territory of Kansas in the said
Territory upon that day, and over the
age twenty-one years, for ratification
or rejection"
They are the people of Kansas; they
are the people defined by the constitution
of Kansas; they are the body of electors
to ratify or reject the constitution, aud
we have no right to substitute any other
body of electors greater or less than
that. Is the Seventh article to be over
turned by the vote of a larger or a
smaller number than provided there ?
/ If SO, we might as well unmake the
whole constitution of Kansas. To whom
does this amendment remit it? It 4f6s
vides:
"SEc. 4. And be 1t further enacted,
That in the election hereby authorized,
all white male inhabitants of said Ter
ritory, over the age of twenty one years,
who are legal voters, under the laws of
the Territory of Kansas, and none 9TH
ers, shall be allowed to vote.
What is the qualification for voter
under the territorial laws of Kansas!
That he shall be citizen of the United
States, and have resided six months in
the Territory.
Mr.. GREEN. That is not all Il
also says that he must never have inter.
fered, or been convicted of having inter
fered, with the execution of the fugitive
slave law. If SO, he is disqualified.
Mr.. PUGH. Better yet. There is
a test law: and gentlemen who have been
clamoring about test laws for Two years
are absolutely re-enactipg them by act OF
| Congress. But my attention was direct
ed to the other point the voters under
the territorial law are to be citizens o.
the United States who have resided six