Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1858-02-11

NshS AAs91AA " EANN41hAAA AAAA y AaNlAiba
for my consideration. But l would hk,
to ask the gentleman from Virginia II hc
undertakes to say that this Kansas code
called a code Of laws, aud which this lie
compton Constitution expressly endorses,
islsw? Will the gentleman be 90 good
as to answer thatl
| Mr. CLEMENS. Who Is to decide
that question? Is Il The people Of Kansas
i Mr. BINGHAM. l will tell the gen.
tlemsn who is to decide that question. -
We are to decide It sir; and that gentle.
man, IN common with all Of US, is bound
BY his oath to decide It.
Mr. CLEMENS. Very well. I ad.
NIT that. [ come 10 another question.
Mr. BINGHAM. l only gave way to
the gentleman to ask me one Question, and
not to occupy my time. lie will please
excuse me. When | ge! through, ! will
Iifthe Gimmittee pleases, answer him ill
sundown.
Sic, the great right of self. f.goyernment
cannot now be set aside by the pusrie con-
celts Of demagogues, whether embodied in
aPresidents message or an instrumentmade
by eonspirators. The Lecompton Consti-
tuition directly contravenes this right Of
self'government and proposes TO legalize
forever the violation of life, and liberty and
property, and to establish a Government,
armed with this fatal power, against the
consent Of the governed. What colorable
apology can be made for this criminal con.
spiracy against the rights Of mankind-for
this attempt to repudiate the vital element
| Of American institutions? Surely none
can be found 10 the assertion Of the Pres.
ident, that "the requirement TO submit the
whole Constitution to the people was not
inserted 10 the Kansas. Nebraska act;' and
"Lbe Convention was not bound by its
terms to submit any other portion Of the
instrument 10 an election. except that
which relates to the domestic institution of
slavery" This is most remarkable language
to come from the Chief Magistrate Of the
American Republic. The requirement 10
submit the whole Constitution to the peo.
pie was not inserted in the organic act Of
Kansas; therefore, the convention Of dele
gates, the peoples servants, are not bound
to submit the Constitution which they
have framed to their masters, for their ap.
proya or disapproval! Is the servant great
sr than bis lord-the creature greater than
his creator? What are these delegates
but the servants Of the people? What
powers or rights have they, not delegated
by the peopIeG The right to frame a
State Constitution is inherent in the peo-
pie, and is inaienable. 1t was well said
on a memorable occasion, BY distinguish.
ed Senator, then representing with pre- EN-.
inent ability the State of Missouri:
"Conventions, to form State Constitu-
tions were original acts Of the people
They depended upon inherent and inaIien
able rights. The people of any State may,
at any time, meet in Convention, without
law of their Legislature, and without anv
provision or against any provision of their
Constitutution, and may alter or abolish
their whole frame of Government. The
sovereign power to govern themselves was
10 the majority. and they could not be
divested Oft Congressional Debates, vol-
Nae IL, p. 1856.
Mr. CLEMENS. Who said LhatY
Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Benton.
Mr. GROW. President Buchanan held
the same.
Mr. BINGHAM. That is true and l
shall notice that hereafter. That was De-
mocratic doctrine in 1886. when Michigan
applied to be admitted into the UDion.--l
Then, sir, the people might make a Con-
stitu.ion without Territorial law, because
the validity Of the act depended, not upon
any existing statute, but upon the inhe.
rent right Of the people--their great right
of self government, Of which they could
not be divested. If the words of the mes.
sage just cited mean anything, they do
mean that the people have not the inLe.
rent right of seIfgovernment: that their
right to reject Constitution, framed by
their delegates, depends upon require
ment in the organic act binding their DEL
egates TO submit the whole Constitution to
the people, and that all their rights in the
premises exist only by virtue of Federal
grant. This surely repeals the very words
Of the organic act of Kansas, which de-
cares that "tbe people of the Territory
shall be left perfectly free to form and reg.
ulate their domestic institutions in their
own way" They shall be left to form all
their domestic institutions--not merely the
"institution of slavery" as the President
says, but all their local and State inslitu.
tions The organic act, by its words, SIM
ply afirms the right of sell. government to
be in the people; it does not profess to con
fer any such right. A man not yet out of
the hon-book upon the law Of construc.
ton, ought to know that this organic Kan
sas act does not profess to, aud does not,
in fact, grant the people the power to
form their own domestic institutions. The
spirit of the act is, that it leaves the peo-
pie, as it found the people, perfectly free,
by virture of their own inherent right, to
form their domestic institutions in their
own way, subject only to the Consttu.
ton of the United States.
The gentleman from Mississippi Mr..
Lamar, following the assumption Of the
President, insisted that the organic act Of
Kansas was an enabling act. With all
due respect for th't gentleman, and with
as much respect for the President as he
permits me to entertain for him, beg
leave to say that the ascertain, that the Or
ganic act of Kansas is an enabling act, is
an after thought. The Presidents party