The Kanzas news., 1858-01-16
Vol. I---NO. %.

took erect, constitution Whlcn proTlueS,
on its face, that it shall have no validity
except What it derives from such submis-
sion-is submitted to the people at an elec-
ton where all men are at liberty to come
forward freely without hinderance and vote
for it, but no man is permitted to record a
vote against it.
That would be as fair an election as some
of the enemies of Napoleon attributed to
him when be was elected First Consul
He is said to have called out his troops, and
had them reviewed by his officers with a
speech, patriotic and fair in its professions,
in which he said to them: ''Now, nv sol
diers, you are to 90 TO the election and vote
freely just as you please. If you vote for
Napoleon, all is well; vote against him, and
you are to be instantly shot" That was
fair election. (Laughter.) This election
is to be equally fair. All men in favor of
the constitution may vote for it-all men
against it shall not vote at all. Why not let
them vote against it? presume you have
asked many a man this question. l have
asked a very large number of the gentlemen
who framed the constitution, quite a number
of delegates, and sIill larger number of
persons who are their friends, and l have
them. never received any other answer,
and 1 presume we never shall get any other
answer. What is that? They say if they
allowed negative vote the constitution
would have been voted down by an over
wbelming majority, and hence the fellows
shall not be allowed to vote at all. (Laugh-
ter.)
Mr.. President, that may be true. 1t is
no part of my purpose to deny the propo
sition that that constitution would have been
voted down if submitted to the people 1
believe it would have been voted down by
majority of four to one. I am informed
by men well posted there-DemOcrats-
it would be voted down by ten TO one; some
say by twenty to one.
But is it good reason why you should
declare it in force, without being submitted
to the people, merely because it would have
been voted down by five to one if you had
submitted it? What does that fact prove?
Does it not show undeniably that an over
whelming majority of people of Kanzas are
unalterably opposed TO that constitution
Will you force it on them against their will
simply because they would have voted it
down if you had consulted them? If you
will are you going to force it upon them un-
der the plea of leaving them perfectly free
to form and regulate their domestic institu-
tions in their own way? Is that the mode
in which I am called upon to carry out the
principle of self-government and popular
sovereignty in the Territories-to force a
constitution on the people against their will,
in opposition to their protest, with a knowl-
edge of the fact, and then to assign, as a
reason for my tyranny, that they would be
so obstinate and SO perverse as to vote down
the constitution if 1 had given them an op-
portunity to be consulted about it?
Sir, deny your right or mine to inquire
of these people what their objections to that
constitution are. They have right to Judge
for themselves whether they like or dislike
| it, 1t is no answer to tell me that the con-
stitution is a good one and unobjectionable.
It is not satisfactory to me to have the Pres
ident say in his message that that constitu-
ton is an admirable one like all the consti-
tutions of the new States that have been re-
Gently formed Whether good or bad, wheth-
er obnoxious or not, is none of my business
and none of yours. 1t is their business and
not ours. / care not what they have in
their constitution, so that it suits them and
does not violate the Constitution of the Uni
ted States and the fundamental principles of
liberty upon which our institutions rest.
am not going to argue the question whether
the banking system established in that con-
stitution is wise or unwise. 1t says there
shall be no monopolies, but there shall be
one bank of issue in the State, with two
branches. All | have TO say on that point
is, if they want banking system let them
have it; if they do not want it let them pro-
i tHar
branches, be it so; if they want twenty il
is none of my business, and it matters not
to me whether one of them shall be on the
north side and the other on the south side
of the Kaw river, or where they shall be.
So it is in regard to the free negroes
| They provide that no free negro shall be per-
mitted to live in Kanzas. l suppose they
| have a right to say so if they choose; but if
| lived there should want to vote on that
question. We, in Illinois, provide that no
more shall come there. We say to the 9TH
er States, "take care of your own free ne
groes and we will take care of ours" But
we do not say that the negroes now there
shall not be permitted to live in Illinois; and
l think the people of Kanzas ought to have
the right to say whether they will allow
them to live there, and if they are not go
ing to do so, how they are to dispose of them.
So you may go on with all the different
clauses of the constitution. They may be
all right; they may be all wrong. That is
question on which my opinion is worth
nothing. The opinion of the wise and pa
triotic Chief Magistrate of the United
States is not worth anything as against that
of the people of Kanzas. for they have q
right to Judge for themselves; and neither
Presidents, nor Senates, nor Houses of Rep
resentatives, nor any other power outside o.
Kanzas, has right to judge for them
Hence it is no justification, in my mind, fol
the violation of a great principle of self
government, to say that the constitution you
are forcing on them is not particularly OBJ
1 nnxinr1S or l. erceIlant In itS ,,roriSions