The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1858-02-17

will not believe it in advance oe the fact
itself Is it for that reason The honorable
Senator thinks this whole matter should
be reversed, the whole subject thrown
back. and complete revival of the COM
plica;ion of difficulties that have beset US
on our western border2 Is it because of
this anticipated fraudP I have shown is
cannot be because of the want of an ep-
abling act for be has voted the there way
in several instances. l have shown thas
it cannot be for the want Of submitting
the whole question TO the people, because
be has voted the other way in several
other instances | have shown that this
convention was legally and constitutionally
called That he admits. have shown
that the legal presumption is, that they
reflect the will Of the people. Is there
then any rebuttiug evidence! There is
nothing else in the preceding part of the
argument to justify his now separating
from us, and, when we come to this .bifur-
Gated road, his takinS the left hand. Is
there any reason why he should do it on
this simple, anticipated idea of fraud, on
which there is no particle of evidence be-
fore as? No; The legal presumption
stands unassailed. The legal presnmp-
tion is still! potent enough 10 justify our
ASTON on it, and We must act on it.
In the next place, I have shown that
the convention was under no obligatiou,
imposed either by law or usage, to sub-
init the constitution to a vote of the peo-
/ pie Further, have shown, think. that
a majority of the States entered the
Union with constitutions not previously
submitted to the people. If Kansas has
copied the example set by majority Of
its elder sisters, surely nothing will be
urged in complaint against Kansas be-
cause it did not follow the minority 1t
is true, l heard the Senator comnending
the rule, which he says-is found in the
Minnesota bill.
Here will remark that. as far as l
have examined the law-and | have ex-
smined every case I could-I fnd, from
the beginning of the Government, in l7s9,
down TO tho present day, there never was
a prerequisite, even where Congress pass
ed an Grabbing act, hat the result of the
convention should be submitted to the
/ people, save In the Minuesota bill. Il
was not in he Ohio bill; it was not in the
| Ibdiana 5ilf,it was notsin the Illinois bill;
it was not in the Alabamn bill; II was not
in the Mississippi bill. The other States
we're formed on their own responsibility,
/ without an enabling act. In poue of
those ena bling acts-not even in the Wis
4 consiu bill-Was there n provisioe reqnir--
. lug the Constitution to be submitted 10
the people In no bill, l,save one, thai ev-
er passed Congress was any such provision
contained If the convention of the
Territory of Kansas deemed it proper to
copy the example which Congress had set,
which majority Of sister States had set,
can see in this no cause of objection to
Kansas at our hands.
Again, | have shown that the only
question about which there is any conto-
yersy is separately submitted 70 a fair
vote of the people. About this have no
| doubt or controversy. The only question
that has been bone of contention, that
has been the cause of stirring up strife,
that has been made the prstext for assaults
, on different sections Of this UDiou-that
one single, important question, Is submit
| ted 70 a fair vote of the people. What
the result of that vote will be il is impos-
sible for me to fertell This much, bow.
egor, can with propriety say If a ma
jerity of the people there are determined
not to have African slaves. it would be
folly, by any scheme, by any trick, to get
up constitution adverse to the will of
the majority; and hence am glad this
slavery question is fairly submitted. Al
; though | greatly prefer having no consti +
tutional and no legal barriers, though of
subscribe most heartily to the doctrine
| climate, of production, and of vocation,
and think it the only sound solution of
this question within the limits of the i ed
eral Union, still my opiuion is not to be
SET up as pictorial to influence others. It
| is but my individual propriety | shall
act upon it so far as am able As.it is
/, thus submitted, it is TIE only question Of
j controversy. Who is it that complains Of
. any provision 10 the Kansas constitution
aud who is it shat could complain of =
: provision in that copstitut on, who did
not have fair opportunity to make it
2 otherwise, il he.is in the majority and
if he is in the minority, let him complain
and guash his teeth In vain. Mincrities
are expected to comp ain but it is the
, duty of minorities to submit as gracefully
as their feelings will we'll permit. fthey
were the majority, they had the opportu-
nifty to make it otherwise. If they did
not choose to exercise their right, it is
their fault and their misfortune. IT the
mai jority haye exercised their legal rights
in an honorable, upright, and fair manner,
they are not to be forced to give way to
fractions minority.
have also SHOWN there IS no legal oo-
lection, and no prudential consideration,
to prevent the admission of Kansas How,
then, are We to act on this subject? Are
we to go back and travel over the detail
of circumstances that o CURED in Kansas,
so far as presented in the Presidents
message? 1t is unnecessary. except so
far as they bear on the fairness of this
convention, the fair opportunity for the
free expression of the will of the people.
Whether the Presidents reasoning be
right or wrong, let it pass. Il ought to
} commend him for his patriotism, for his
! disinterested view, and for the sound con-
: clusion at which he arrives With this
! commendation. and with this support,
whe ther he is right or wrong in saying
: the law requires the slave branch of this
controyerted matter to be submitted to q
vote Of the people, I shall not utter one
| uard of oou plaink