Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1858-04-21


Now, sir, repeat the opinion expressed
heretofore, from what saw in the terrific
iy early in the season, that at the time
that registry was made in April, before
the spring emigration could have passed
to the back part of the Territory, there
were not more than six to eight hundred
voters in all Of these counties. That is
the answer to the question which the SEN
ator propounded; and trust have con-
vlnccd him that the defects in the regis
try could not have been sufficient to im-
pair the legal or moral effect of the cleo
tion for delegates.
But it is said that mcagrc vote was cast
Tor delgatcs, and that is true: but that
does not impair the force or effect of the
election. Gov. Walker gave the discon-
tents full notice on this point lie told
them that they would be responsible whe-
ther they voted or not. That any other
doctrine would lead to anarchy. And
there never was trucr sentiment. We
must either accept or reject this doctrine;
if we reject it and hold that it requires an
active agency on the part Of the olector to
give consent, then we lay down doctrine
that would lead to anarchy in probably cv-
cry State in this Union. in my own State
on this principle, the fundamental law
could be repudiatcd any day. That State
contains five hundred thousand voters; at
the last election certain amendments were
adopted to the constitution, and the whole
vote for and against it did not exceed one
hundred and thirty eight thousand votes :;
and the highest affirmative vote reached
only one hundred and seventeen thou
sand who thinks of doubling the author
ity Of those amendments On this
principle-and none other can he counte-
nanced-the Lccompton convention had
more complete authority, | venture to
say, than any other similar body which
preceded it.
Now, sir, as to the action of the conven-
ton. The only objection raised worthy Of
note is that it did not submit the entire
constitution to a vote of the people.
have said, heretofore that, at the time,
preferred they should do so but never
regarded the mode Of making the consti-
tuition aS q reason why the Territory should
or should not come into the Union as q
State. 1t was moro important to know
that what the people did was right in it.
self than to inquire into the way in which
that right thing had been done. They
had full authority TO do it their own
way The right of the people in conven-
ton, by delegates, to make and adopt a
Constitution; was conceded even by Gov.
Walker This was one of his special rea
SONS for urging the people to vote for del
cgates. think adoption by popular vote
a good mode Of making q constitution.
certainly do not think it is the only good
way. 1t is not tho way in which the con-
stitutions Of nearly all the original States
of this happy confedcracy were made in
the earlier and purcr days of the Republic.
My own cherished State, than which there
Is not happier or greater in the Union,
did not make her fundamental law in this
way prior to the year 1898, when amend
mcnts to that instrument were submitted
to avotc Of the people, and adopted by a
minority Of the voters of the State.
did hold, Mr.. President. that the spir-
it of the compromises Of 1850, and the or
ganic act for this Territory looked to the
decision Of the question of slavery by some
direct action Of the people; that there
was a general understanding throughout
the country that the question of slavery
shonld not come back to Congress unac.
companied by an expression of popular
will. did, therefore, regard the LcCOmp.
ton Constitution as under special obliga.
tions to submit the question of slavery to
vote of the people. But never thought
we outsiders had the power to dictate ON
even that point, and there never was a
time when | would not have said that the
submission of the veXed question of sla.
very is all that the people of other States
had any right even to inquire into; much
less have they right to dictate a mode OF
making n Constitution as q condition on
which the people who are to live under it
may become State? Yet this high-hand-
ed dictation has been attempted by those
who call themselves non intcrventionsts,
That vcxed question was presented; that
question was votcdupon. Now, Mr.. Pres.
idcnt--
Mr.. Doolittle-Upon that point will the
Honorable Senator allow me to put ques.
ton?
Mr.. Biger-Ccrtainly
Mr.. Dooiittlc-Was the slavery qucs-
tion in fact submitted to the people ot
| Kansas?
Mr.. Biglcr-Undoubtcdly it was. hold
Mr.. President, that if the majority of the
people had voted down the slavery arti
Gle, that, in its own language, in the Ian,
guagc Of the schedule thereafter slavery
shall not exist in the new State of Kan
sas," the institution would have been abol
ished, and there would have been com,
plete authority in the Legislature to have
wiped out the remnant of slavery tha
had previously been planted in the Terri
| tory.
Mr. Doolittle-I desire to ask the Soma
tor, does not the schedule expressly cstab
lish that property in slaves in the Terrific
ny shall not be interiorcd with?
Mr.. Biglcr-T The property value in slavc
is protected. ! never heard anybody ever
in Kansas object to that. But the Senate
is certainly aware that there is anothe
provision in the Constitution, which say
that the Legislature shall not emancipat,
the slaves without remuneration to thu
owners; they shall not interdict the immi
grafton of slaves into tho Territory solon!
as similar persons are held in bondage il