Meigs County telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy [Ohio]) 1848-1859, 1858-02-16

peka State Legislature. The object in
taking the names of all who refuse enroll
ment is to terrify the Free State conserv-
atives into submission. This is proved
by the recent atrocities ommitted on such
men by the Topekaites. The speedy To-
cation of large bodies of regular troops
here with two batteries if necessary. The
Lawrence insurgents await The develop
ments of this new military organization.
In the Governors dispath of July 27,
he said:
'Lane and his staff everywhere deny the
authority of the Territorial laws, and coun-
sci q total disregardpf those. enaclmefts. -
Without making quotations. of similar
character from other dispatches Of Gov
ernor Walker. it appears by reference to
Secretary Slantons communication to
Gen. CasS on the 9th of December last,
that the important step of calling the
| Legislature together was taken after Gov
ernor Walker became satisfied that the cleo
ton ordered by the Convention on the
2 lst instant could not be cond ucted with
out collision and bloodshed. So intense
was the disloyal feeling among the enemies
Of the government established by Con-
gress that an election which afforded them
opportunities, if in the majority, of making
Kansas free State, according to their own
proiessed desire, would not be conducted
without collision and bloodshed The
truth is, that until the present moment
the enemies of. the existing government
still adhere TO their Topeka revolutionary
constitutional government. The very first
paragraph Of the message Of Governor
Robinson, dated 7th of December, to the
Topeka Legislature, now assembled at
Lawrence, contains an open defiance Of
the laws and constitution of the United
States. The Governor says:
"The Convention which framed the To-
peka Constitution originated with the peo-
pie of Kansas Territory. They have
adopted and ratified the same twice by
direct vote; also, indirectly. through two
elections Of State officers and members of
the State Legislature; yet it has pleased
the Administration to regard the whole
proceedings revolutionary"
The Topeka government, adhered to
with such reasonable perlinacity, is a gov
ernment in direct opposition to the exist
liz iii:; government presented and recognized
by Congress. ,
1t is usulpation Of the same character
as it would be for portion of the people
of any State to undertake to establish Il
separate government, within its limits, for
the purpose of redressing any grievance,
real or imaginary, Of which they might
complain, against the legitimate State gov
ernment. Such principle, if carried into
execution, would destroy all lawful author
ity, and produce universal anarchy. From
this statement of facts, the reason becomes
palpabe why the enemies of the govern
ment authorized by Congress, have re-
fused to vote for the delegates to the Kan
sas Constitutional Convention, and also,
afterwards, on the question of slavery,
cause they have even refused to sanction
or recognize any other Constitution than
that framed at Topeka. ....
Had the whole Lecompton Constitution
been submitted to the people, the adherents
of this organization would doubtless have
voted against it, bocause if success full they
would thus have removed the obstacles
out of the way of their own revolutionary
constitution. They would have done this,
not upon the consideration of the merits
of the whole or part of the Lecompton
Constitution, but simply because they
have ever resisted the authority of the
government authorized by Congress from
which it emanated.
Such being the unfortunate condition
of affairs in the Territory, what was the
right as we'll as the duty of the law-abiding
people? Were they silently and patiently
to submit to the Topeka usurpation, or to
adopt the necessary measure to establish
constitution under the authority of the
organic law of Congress? That this law
recognized the right of the people of the
Territory, without an enabling act Of Con
gress, to form State constitution is too
clear for argument.
For Congress "to leave the people of the
Territory pefectley free'' in framing their
constitution ''to form and regulate their
domestic institutions in their own way,
subject only to the constitution of the
United States" i" and then to say that they
shall not be permitted to proceed and
frame the constitution in their own way,
without express authority from Congress,
appears. to be almost a contradiction of
terms. 1t would be much more plausi-
bic to contend that Congress had no pow
er to pass such an enabling act, than to
argue that the people of a Territory might
be kept ont of the Union for an indefinite
period, and until it might please Congress
to permit them to exercise the right of
self government. This would be to adopt, !
not their own way, but the way which
Congress might prescribe. 1t is lmpossi-
BILE that any people could have proceeded
with more regularity in the formation of n
constitution than the people of Kansas
have done.
1t was necessary. first, to ascertain
whether it was the desire of the people !
to be relieved from Territorial dependence. |,
and establish ii State government. For
this purpose the Territorial Legislature,
in 1855, passed law for taking the sense
of the people of the Territory upon the
expediency of calling convention to from