Marshall County Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1855-1859, 1858-01-14


The present dispute about Kansas is one
of the most improbable and uncalled for
that ever occurred in this country. 1t is
not pretended that the South is to gain
any thing by the acceptance Of the Lecomp-
ton constitution; on the contrary, she is
certain to lose friends, influence and credit
by insisting on it. Even success in the
measure is impossible. The sentiment in
the free States is unanimous, for the ex
ceptions are SO few as to be Insignificant.
The Democrats everywhere stood in the
longest and bitterest contest upon the doc
trine of popular sovereignty. They
pledged themselves to literal fulfllment of
their promise, in every way that words
could be employed. This was the very
bulwark of their strength before the peo-
pie. Had i; been charged that constitu-
ton would be made by convention, and
not fairly and fully submitted to the popu
lar vote, they would have denied it ..indig
nantly and repudiated it; otherwise, they
would not have carried single State. 1t
is simply impossible that they can recede
now. They must forfeit the confidence Of
the masses to do so, and sacrifice their
principles. When they promised that the
people of Kansas should frame their own
institutions, thev meant the people, not a
convention, ass inning to represent them.
They were SO understood everywhere. 1t
is no wonder. then, that they now resist
what is proposed to be done. They can
not, as consistent men, do otherwise. 1t
is idle to try to amuse the public with the
idea hat any party in the free States will
support the administration of Kansas with
this Lecompton constitution. A few Sen
ators and members of Congress may vote
for it; but they will be without support at
home.
Had a constitution for Kansas been
fairly submitted to the people, and ratified
pro-slavery or antislavery, not a word of
opposition from the Northern Democracy
would have been heard but they are
pledged to it's submission.
The position Of Douglas ought to open
the eyes of all parties on this subject. He
is neither mistaken nor frightened. He
knows perfectly well what he is doing. He
cannot go before his people on any ether
ground. He would stultify himself to do
So There is but one voice from his State,
and that dictates the course he is taking.
He would be false to his antecedents and
promises, and false to his State, if he oc-
cupied any other ground And why should
the South occupy any other position? Did
not the Democracy,of the South talk rs
earnestly about the right of the people of
Kansas to frame their own institutions as
the north? Was not this doctrine every
where preached, and what is the South to
lose by it? What do we expect to gain
by forcing constitution upon the people,
who challenge it as an act of usurpation;
who oppose it. to all appearance, by large
majority.
1t is idle to tell us that Congress is
bound by the act of Territorial authorities,
and thus undertake to shift the response
bility of an acknowledged wrong upon the
Lecompton Convention. Congress never
authorized such convention to be called,
and it is with that body to grant the prayer
or not. We should therefore like to know
why any difficulty is made on this subject.
Why not pursue the usual safe and consti-
tutional course? Pass an act enabling
Kansas to call convention that will be a
legal body. and require the Constitution to
be submitted to the people, as was done in
other cases. This will be according to
promise, literally and faithfully. No one
can then cav that We have denied to the
people of Kansas the right of self govern
ment. No one can pretend that we vio-
late the rights of States or persons by this
course.
We know that some Of our cetempora-
ries very honestly and sincerely advocate
the admission of Kansas at once; but we
ask, why? 1t must lead to an angry and
protracted agitation; and if we insist upon
it, we shall have very few friends in the
free States. If we succeed, we shall alien
ate friends and gain nothing; if we fail,
which is about certain, it will be still
worse.
The Democratic party is the only organ
ization left that is national; why insist upon
an issue that will sectionalize it--an issue
of no possible use. We apprehend that
some of the advocates of this Lecompton
business are quite consistent in pursuing
their purpose. They think that dissolu-
Itiop Of the Union is but a question Of time,