San Andreas independent., 1858-05-22
Lecompton-First and Last.


after having occupied the daily attention
of Congress since the middle of Decem-
ber, been illustrated by Gov. Walkers
letter and Judge Douglas speeches, des-
canted upon at length by the Press of the
United States and Europe, voted upon
by both houses of Congress, and inciden-
tally by nearly every Legislative body in
the Union, and cast upon the table of the
House of Representatives at Washington,
there to moulder in company with kim
dred rubbish, at last comes in for kindly
notice in the columns of the Cdlaverds
Chronicle. They who refused to fatter
or espouse their friend in life, now, when
they behold him "with din, stony eye,
stretched cold before them in the arms of
DEATH" are touched with pity, and join
in the general requiem around the grave.
This course has at least the virtue of
charity for its sanction, and presents a
pleasing contrast to Antony's declaration,
that,
The evil that men do lives after them
The good is oft inferred with their bones"
1t is doubtless better to keep alive, in the
memory of men, what little good the au-
thors and advisers of the Lecompton
Pronunciamento did in Kansas, than to
be eternally harping upon their SINS
The latter are all so plain and patent
that further illustration would be unchar-
table We have no desire to disturb the
slumbers of the "ilustrious dead" or
"draw his frailties from their dread
abode" But this we do say
"After our death we wish no other herald,
No other speaker of our living actions,
To keep our honor from corruption,
But such generous chronicler as this is"
Our ncighbor, however, though lavish
enough of panegyric in his epitaph, is, it
seems to us, quite unkind to many wor-
thy relations of the deceased. 1t will
hardly be believed that all those who, in
Kansas defended the Douglas Walker
Interpretation of the "Kansas- Nebraska
Act" in opposition to the dicta of the
President and his imperious allies, were
necessarily either "poor deluded followers
of Henry Ward Beecher," or guilty of
"Topeka treason" Where does the
Chronicle find its definition of treason !?
Treason is "the levying war against the
Government and adhering to its enemies" 2"
Did the Convention at Topeka do either
of these things against the United States?
Not at all. They met quietly, formed a
Constitution, adjourned and made its
provisions public; and this was an hon.
ester procedure than the Lecompton bu-
siness, for the latter body exercising the
functions Of Privy Council, refused to
publish what they did. Happily for the
country the Constitution of the United
States, anticipating the Chronicle, defined
treason some seventy years ago. When
We are told that they, (meaning the anti
Lecomptonites,) "have ignored the pow
ers of Congress in the Territorial Gov
ernment," what powers are meant? If
the frauds and usurpations of the Nulli-
fers who composed the brain and muscle
of the Lecompton Convention, are refer
red to, we desire to know whether Con-
gress authorized these things-armed
bands of rufhans driving voters from the
polls, ballot-box stufing, legislation that
disfranchised half the Territory, and so
on, to the end of the disgusting nara
tive? and if so, where was the great
crime in IGNORING such usurpations?
To "ignore," under the circumstances,
was precisely the duty of freemen. But
if it is meant that they have ever ignored
any act of Government, under the strict
letter and spirit of the " Kansas-Nebras-
ka Bill" then we most respectfully dis
sent from the correctness OF the PROPOSE
ton This is just what the President
and his peculiar friends, the Nullifers,
strove with might and main to do; but
thanks to high-souled incorruptible
House Of Representatives, they were
thwarted
After the masterly letter from Cover
nor Walker and the irrefutablc logic in
Douglas first speech in elucidation of the
subject, the Chronicle will pardon us if
we dissent from its ideas on popular
Sovereignty" Douglas and Walker be-
lieve, with the Fathers of the Constitu.
ton, that sovereign" power, under our
form of Government, resides in the peo-
pie alone; and that only portions of that
"sovereignty' may be delegated. Our
neighbor broadly asserts his opinion as
follows, apparently perceiving no distinc-
fion harween USovereion novarv ,,,l Al