Preble County Democrat. [volume] (Eaton, Ohio) 1857-1859, 1858-03-18

-AS SAtOANSoJ az JIG GALAO
much further; and it was quite fashion
able, when I had the honor of member
ship in the Ohio Legislature, many
years ago, to submit acts of legislation
to the people. But the practice was
found to be Objectionable, and because
nobody could be made responsible for
such legislation. Accordingly, our
present constitution, adopted in Sep
TENDER, 1851, declares that no law Eek
cept IN relation to common schools and
banking ~companies) shall ever be sub
mitted to a popular vote. Your citizens
of a State, therefore, which has, unc-
quivocally and even contemptuously,
trodden the new version popular SOW
ereignty" under foot; and still your
Senators and Representatives in Con-
gross are instructed to compel its accep-
lance by the State of Kansas.
l call this a new version, Cat last,) that
Congress can compel the States to form,
adopt, or ratify their constitutions or
their laws in a manner different from
that which they have themselves provi-
ded. I never heard of it until Robert J.
Walker became the Governor of Kan
sas Territory; and I will no more agree
to it, as one member of the democratic
party, than 1 would vote for his cele-
brated Bankrupt Law. This doctrine
is not to be found in the Kansas Ne
braska Bill. If I had so understood four
years ago, I should have denounced the
bill as warmly as I then supported it.
My opinion was, and still is, hat in the
respect as we'll to the Territories as to
the new States, we had an alternative
between popular sovereignty. and
Congressional domination-the Black
Republicans upon one side asserting the
unlimited power of Congress to prescribe
the domestic institutions of the new
States and the Territories: and the Dem
ocratic Republicans-the followers of
Jefferson. Madison and Jackson-asscr-
ting that no such power had been con-
ferred on Congress, and, therefore. re-
manned with the States and the people.
Now, as it seems, we have to learn that
popular sovereignty" is not opposed to,
but identified with, Congressional dom
nations; and that Congress ought to pre-
scribe in what manner, by what sane
ton, the people of a new State must
adopt their constitution and form of
government.
Gentlemen, this can never be a Dem
ocratic doctrine. 1t is a doctrire OF
Federalism revived-of unlimited Con-
gre.sional authority over the States and
Territories. 1t was not derived from
the Kansas-Ncbraska Bill, but from the
Wilmot Proviso. 1t is not to be found
in the Cincinnati Platform, but in the
platform of Observation-Disclosures adopt
ed at Philadelphia, in june, 1856. 1t
is not the. doctrine upon which James
Buchanan was elected, but the doctrine
upon which Col. Fremont was defeated.
There have been allegations made as
to the manner which the convention at
Lecompton; was constituted; that the
people, in many counties, were disfran-
chised: and, thus, that the convention
was not regular, nor its proceedings
valid. These questions are legitimate;
these l desire time and opportunity to
examine, and, as the truth might be, one
way or another, to have voted. But the
Ohio Legislature prevented me from
reaching those questions; it commanded
me to refuse admission to the State of
Kansas, unqualifedly, without tue least
regard to them.
l must say nevertheless, that from all
[ can learn, these allegations of disfran-
chisement, in fifteen or nineteen coun-
ties, are without any solid foundation.
They are only some of the enormous
falsehoods which have been circulated,
in reference to Kansas, for the last three
years:
"And never yet did Irsu-rccticn want
Such water colors to impaint his cause"
That many of the qualified electors in
Kansas refused to permit a registration
of their names, and so refused to vote in
the election for delegates, is certainly
true. They did this with their eyes
open to the consequences; they were
warned again and again, they derided
alike the warning and all fear of the
consequences. Having thus suffered a
iu Judgment to pass by mere default, they
must seek relief or amelioration, not
from the hands o Congress, but through
an amendment of the constitution after
Kansas shall have peer admitted into
the Union.
Others exclaim that the president and
! Congress intend to "force" a constitution
upon the people of Kansas; but this, GER
tainly, is either a pervertion of language
or a confusion of ideas. The President
and Congress lave no concern with the
constitution of Kansas, its various pro-
NlSlOHS, U IuS LlCbhON VI ~
if the constitution be republican in
form-be, in other words, subject to re-
vision, control or amendment, by the
people. The petition of Kansas, through
her convention of delegates, is not that
Congress will accept, approve or pass
judgment upon the constitution, but on
ly that Congress will admit her, as a
State, into the Union. Whatsoever is
Objectionable in her onstitution--wheth-
err in respect to African slavery, to
banks, to railroads, to the apportion-
ment Of members of the Legislature, to
the qualification of a Governor or any
other oRcer-can be remedied by the
people, at their own will, "in their w
way at their own time, but never ought
to be the subject of Congressional inter
ference.
The shortest way, therefore, the best
way; the only complete way in which
Kansas can find peace and ample redress,
a balm for all her wounds, together with
permanent prosperity, is that which the
President now recommends. Let her