American union. [volume] (Morgantown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1855-1859, 1858-03-12
THE ssAwsAs QUlswrow.

The whole country is almost tired
Of the name of Kansas and everything
connected with the Kansas imbroc,io,
but since the Democracy have made
the support of the hecompton consti.
tuition with all its attendant consequent
ces y test Of Democratic party faith, it
may be well to let our readers see
what is thought Of the difficulty by
some of our Southern contemporaries.
The advocates Of the Lccompton con-
sttution have endcavorcd to impress
upon tho people CT the South that the
question as to the admission Of the
Territory as State, is merely pro .sla-
very Kansas CT trcoso:l Kansas. This
is not the question. Whether Kansas
shall be II free o. n slave State has
long since been decided, and even the
most strenuous Locomptonites have
yielded the point. 1t is already de-
term!ncd that Kansas shall be free
soil State. It only remains to be de-
clded whether she shall come into the
confederacy as rYccsoi State by virtue
of the revolutionary doctrine of Dorr-
ism advocated by Mr.. Buchanan and
his supporters, or whether she shall be
admitted upon the principles of popu.
lar sovereignty and States rights in
cuicated by the thcroy of our govern
ment and the spirit Of our institutions.
We need not seek in the Kansas Ne
braska legislation for the doctrine Of
popular sovereignty. Its origin is con-
temporaneous with the origin of our
republican form of government. Those
who look for it in the Kansas Ncbras.
ka bill, are bewildcred and confused.-
They find there mongrcl and janus
faced doctrine that is in fact the cause
of all the trouble which has succeeded
that most unfortunate cnactmcnt.-
The true doctrine in reference to the
right of tho people Of State or Of
Territory to control their own domestic
affairs, including slavery, was estab-
llshed long, long before the Kansas
Nebraska BIZ was thought of by the
trixters of the Democratic party
The organic law Of Kansas contained
only a spurious counterfeit ofthe States
right principle upon which depends the
sovereignty of every State in the con-
ic32racy North or South.
A candid review Of this question will
certainly show that it is no mere pro-
slavery or anti-sIavcTy issue, but tho
great question Of States right is alb
solutcly involved, and, strange as it
may appear those who are opposing
the admission Of Kansas under tho Lee
compton constitution arc actually up
on the side which it is manif:s.Iy tie
interest of the South most pcrtinac;ous-
~ to uphold. The recognition Of the
principle involved is important to every
Southern State. 1t matters not how
the new State Of Kansas may deter
mine its domestic condition, whether
for or against slavery, tile right of the
people TO adopt such constitution as
they may approve is that upon which
rests the safety Of al tic sl1vcholdirq
States from the interference Of the Fed,
crai Government. tits this right that
is now involved, and this right alone.
We would have our readers view it
calmly and without prejudice, rcmom-
berjng that even the warmcst Lccomp-
tonitca havo conceded that rs soon as
they have forced tho Lccompton con-
stitution upon the people Of Kansas,
they may change it in defiance Of any
restriction it may contain, and make it
rs antI-s'oYery as they please. The
whole question is simply this, whether
Congress has the right to force upon
the people Of territory constitution
obnoxious to a majority of its popnla-
zion, or whether the people have the |
right to form for themselves q State !
constitution which majority Of them
approve. II the Southern States
choose to coincide with tho Aministra.
ton in It's present action upon this
question, they will soon he themselves
convinced that they have committed an
act Of sulcIdc. --I2uisyWe JomnaL