The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-08-05
KANsAs-LECoMPT0N CONSTITUTION.
SPEECH OF HON. JAMES H. HAMMOND
OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
ON THE ADMISSION OF KANSAS

Delivered in the Senate ofthe u States March d. 1855
The Senate, as in Committee in the Whole
having under consideration the bill for the ad-
mission of the State of Kansas in the Union
Mr.. HAMMOND said:
Mr.. PRESIDENT: In the debate which
occurred in the early part of the last
month, | understood the Senator from
Illinois Mr.. DOUGLAS to say that the
question of the reception of the Lecomp-
ton Constitution was narrowed down to
a single point. That point was, whether
that Constitution embodied the will Of
the people of Kansas. Am | correct?
Mr.. DOUGLAS. The Senator is cor
rect, with this qualification | could
waive the irregularity, and agree to the
reception of Kansas into the Union under
the Lecompton Constitution, provided
was satisfied that it was the act and
deed of that people, and embodied their
will. There are other objections but
the others | could overcome, if this point
were disposed of.
Mr.. HAMMOND. | so understood the
Senator. understood that if he could
be satisfied that this Constitution en-
bodied the will of the people of Kansas,
all other defects and irregularities could
be cured by the act of Congress, and
that he himself would be willing to per-
init such an act to be passed.
Now, sir, the only question is, how is
that will to be ascertained and upon
that point, and that only, we shall differ.
In my opinion, the will of the people of
Kansas is to be sought in the act of her
lawful Convention elected to form a
Constitution, and nowhere else; and that
1t is unconstitutional and dangerous
to seek it elsewhere. | think that the
Senator fell into a fundamental error in
his report dissenting from the report of
the majority of the Territorial Commit
tee, when he said that the Convention
which framed this Constitution was
" the creature of the Territorial Legisla-
ture;" and from that error has proba-
bly, arisen all his subsequent errors on
this subject. How can it be possible
that Convention should be the creature
OF Territorial Legislature The Con-
Yention was an assembly of the people
In their highest sovereign capacity, about
to perform their highest possible act of
sovereignty. The Territorial Legisla-
ture is mere provisional Government /;
petty corporation, appointed and paid
by the Congress of the United States,
without particle of sovereign power.
Shall that interfere with sovereignty
inchoate, but still a sovereignty? Why,
Congress cannot interfere; Congress
cannot confer on the Territorial Legisla-
ture the power to interfere. Congress
rs not sovereign. Congress has SOW
erelgn powers, but no sovereignty:
Congress has no power to act outside of
the limitations of the Constitution no
right to carry into effect the supreme
will OF any people, and, therefore, Con-
gress is not sovereign. Nor does Con-
gress hold the sovereignty of Kansas.
The sovereignty of Kansas resides, if it
resides anywhere, with the sovereign
States OF this Union. They have con
TERED upon Congress, among other pow
ers, the authority of administering such
sovereignty to their satisfaction. They
have given Congress the power to make
needtul rules and regulations regarding
the Territories, and they have given
congress power to admit State
ddmsf,' not create. Under these two
powers, Congress may first establish