The Nevada Democrat., 1858-08-11
Resolutions OF the Two COnventions--The
Issue made up.

Resolutions OF the Two COnventions-The
Issue made up.
In our columns to-day we give the resolutions
adopted by the Conventions of the tive wings of
the party held at Sacramento. Both Conven-
tions, Il will be seen, endorse the Cincinnati
Platform, but differ as to its construction, and
upon the English Conference Bill the resolu-
tions make direct issue-the anti-Lecompton
Convention denouncing it, and the Lecompton
Convention approvingit.
As whole, we approve Of the resoulutions
adopted by the anti-Lecompton Convention.
By endorsing the Cincinnati Platform, they re-
cognize the right of the people Of ell the Terri
tories, .'acting through the legally aud fairly
expressed will of majority Of actual residents.
aud whenever the number of their inhabitants
justi6es it, to form a Constitution, with or with
out domestic slavery, and be admitted into the
Union upon terms of perfect equality with the
other States." This principle was thoroughly
discussed during the canvass Of 1856, was well
understood by the people to be a leading plank
of the Democratic platform, and was triumph
antly sustained by the election OF the Demo-
cratic candidate for the Presidency. The mass
es rallied to its support, expecting that it would
be carried out to the letter. But in the attempt
10 force the Lecompton Constitution upon the
people of Kausas-a Constitution which no one
pretends was the FAIRLY expressed will ofa ma
jority Of actual residents-the principle for
which the party battled in 1856; shamefully
disregarded
The English Bill, so far as it submits the Le-
compton Constitution to a vote of the people,
we regard as recognition Of the principle Of
Popular Sovereignty, and thus far approve of
it. 1t matters not practically, to the people of
Kansas, whether or not they put the word "Con-
sttution" on their ballots, when they come to
vote; they have at least the right to put such
words on their ballots as will either adopt or re-
ject the organic law, which was attempted to be
forced upon them. But it is difficult to imagine
how any one protesting to adhere to the Demo
cratic doctriue of non-intervention by the Fed
raj Government with the domestic institutions
of the Territories, can approve Of the condition
annexed to the English Bill. Finding it impos-
ssible to force the Lecompton Constitution
through Congress, the English Bill was at length
bit upon, which gives the people Of Kansas the
alternative to come into the Union now, with a
Constitution which they had already repudiated
or, in case they wished to form Constitution
for themselves, they must wait until their pop
ulation was sufficient to entitle them to q Rep
resentative in Congress. This is Intervention
in its most Objectionable form. If the popula-
ton Of Kansas is sufficient to entitle them to
admission under the Lecompton Constitution, it
is sufficient to entite them to admission under
q Constitution of their own making. AS the
people of Kansas were not consenting party
to the condition attached to the English Bill, we
hold that they are not bound to adhere to the
threatened alternative in case they reject the
Constitution but when they shall have reject
ed 1t, they will have the right to claim admis-
sion under another Constitution, provided il
has received the popular assent. When we
FIRST read synopsis of the English Bill, we
we're induced to regard II with some favor as a
measure of compromise between the two wings
Of the party, but the more we reflected upon it
subsequently, the less we liked it, for it must
be regarded as direct Intervention on the part
Of Congress in the domestic affairs of Terri
tory.
The first Of the three resolutions introduced
by the delegate from Suffer, and which were
adopted by the Lecompton Convention, takes
direct issue with President Buchanan. In his
annual message, the President recommended
that hereafter, in all cases, Congress should re-
quire that the Constitution be submitted to a
vote of the people previous to Territory be-
ing admitted as a State. The resolution re-
cognizes the right of delegates elected to form
q Constitution to determine whether or not
their work shall be submitted to the people for
approval or rejection; in other words. it ap-
proves. of the fraudulent and treacberOus man
ner in which the delegates acted who framed
the LecOmpton Constitution. We believe this is
the first instance in which body of men, pro-
Tossing to represent any considerable portion
Of the Democracy, have approved of the course
pursued by the Lecompton Convention, and it
was only as a matter Of "expedency" that the
Lecomptonites insisted that that Constitution
should be recognized by Congress US binding
upon the people of Kansas. The Popular Sow
ereignty Democrats, on the contrary. hold that
The people have, in all cases, the right to adopt
or reject at the ballot box, their organic Law,
and the delegates have no right to say whether
or not the people wish to vote upon it.
The resolutions adopted in the LecOmpton
are not Of q very positive charac-
ter, and ii is somewhat remarkable that they
failed to endorse the course of their representa-
tives, Messrs. Gwin and Scott or of those men,
bers Of Congress who favored the original pol
10y of the administration.
The SAN Francisco HERALD, on two or three
occasions has made false statements in regard
to the action Of the late Democratic Conven.