Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1858-02-18
Kansas in Congress.
THE PRESIDENTS MESSAGE,

We intended last week to 90 into detailed
review of the Presidents Message, which we
then published, and point out the many errors
and Misrepresentation in which it abounds
but as we were about going to press speech
from Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, came
to hand, which we found to be what we might
well expect from that Senator-adocumen that
covers the whole ground in a fair, impartial and
comprehensive manner. That speech will be
found in another column, and we shall, there
fore, on that account, say less of the Message at
this time.
The present position of the Free State men of
Kansas; their past history the frauds commit
ted upon them by reckless men, supported by
the Administration; is we'll understood by Sem
ator Wilson, both by observation and the record;
and he has very clearly set the matter in its true
light before the Senate and the country, and we
trust all our subscribers will avail themselves of
the privilege of reading his speech.
There is one subject, however, somewhat prom
inent in the Presidents Message, that Senator
Wilson omits to comment upon, and that is, the
keeping of 1000 soldiers in Kansas to maintain
Popular Sovereignty-an idea so inconsistent as
to deserve the ridicut and contempt of every hon
est man. Sovereignty that is maintained only
at the point of the bayonet must be any thing
but popular, and can have no lodging place in
the hearts Of the people.
When Gov. Walker went to Kansas, he enter
tanned Southern preudiees and bitter feelings
towards the Free State men. He believed the
false reports that had been put in circulation by
designing men to cover up their own frauds.
He communicated with the President on his
first arrival, and while laborng under these false
impressions. The President takes advantage of
this correspondence to help make out a case. If
he considers Gov. Walker good authority, why
not endorse his opinions and sentiments after he
became acquainted with the facts by personal OBJ
servation? Why quote the correspondence that
took place soon after his arrival in the Territory,
and say nothing of the seal of condemnation
which Gov. Walker afterwards placed both upon
the President and those reckless men in the ter
ritory who are endeavoring to fasten this Lecomp-
ton Constitution upon the people of Kansas
against their will? Gov. Walker and Secretary
Stanton were both from Slave States, and their
choice was to have Kansas Slave State They
were sent to Kansas by the President for that
reason. He meant that the South should be
satisfied at all events with the agents sent there
to accomplish the object for which they were
seeking. Is it to be believed fer moment that
those men would sympathize with such a law
less set of rascals as the President declares the
Free State men to be? Would they be likely
to be conniving at and even assisting such rebels
in an attempt to overthrow the Constitution and
Government? especially when the object of
those rebels was to root out and eradicate Slave
ry from the Territory, and Walker and Stanton s
wish was to have it remain and become more
firmly established.
On the other hand, is not the conclusion ire
sistible that the fraud and corruption was on the
other side, and when Gov Walker and Stanton
came to investigate the matter for themselves,
they found, as others before them had found
that the rights of the honest voters in Kansas had
been trampled upon; that large majority of
the people there were, and always had been, op-
posed to the laws forced upon them by fraud,
and the votes of a very small minority of actua
voters the popular will on one side, and few
desperadoes clothed by fraud with official power
on the other. Like high-minded men, they de-
termined to see the doctrine advocated and, as
they supposed, intended to be established on the
passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act, fairly car.
ried out By the authority of the President
and in accordance withAis own sense of Justice
Gov. Walker declared that the issue should be
left with the people of the Territory, rather
J than to few desperate men who found their
way into Constitutional Convention by mi.
nority vote.
This right, however, has been denied and the
plausible pretext substituted that the Legislature
can call a Convention and at any time alter the
Constitution. That suggestion may look fair on
, paper, but come to undertake a practical en-.
, forcement of the matter it may appear very diff.