Randolph County journal. [volume] (Winchester, Randolph County, Ind.) 1855-1862, 1858-03-04
GEORGE BANCROFT ON THE LIE.
COMPTON CONSTITUTION


FELLOW CrrrzESs:-The proper solu-
tion of the question before the country,
which, in some of its aspects. is the
most momentous that has been pre-.
sented since the adoption of the Fed.
eral Constitution, is self-evident; but
that solution has been so thwarted
that it is made necessary to revert to the
first principles and to take counsel of
the People, who are the source of wis
dom and power. We are assembled
tonight, not in hostility to the Ad-
ministration. We venerate the Presi-
dent for his age and past services, and
desire to remove out of his path the
great obstacle to his present useful
ness. Still less are we at variance
with the South. We have never fear
ed to sustain the South on any ques-
tion in which the South was in the
right, and We are justified in asking its
cooperation to prevent a great Nation
al wrong which, if consummated, will
injure its friends. Far from opposing
Democracy, we come here tonight to
uphold it, by freshening in our minds
the love of Justice and Freedom, with
out which Democracy is delusion.
We are assembled to protest against
forcing the Lecompton Constitution
upon the people of Kansas against
their will. Bear with me, fellow citi-
zens, if, in the fewest possible words,
l speak to the facts in the case, to the
right, and to the means of redress.
AS to the facts of the case. the Le-
compton Constitution was authorized
in advance by no one branch of the
General Government. The Senate of
the United States passed bill for a
Convention in Kansas, having in view
very different mode of procedure
The House, by different vote, declar-
ed itself willing to accept the real and
true opinion of the majority of Kansas,
however it might be expressed.
The President, through his agent,
the Governor of the Territory, vetoed
the bill for the Convention. The Sen
ate, the House, the President of the
United States, are all innocent of the
Lecompton Convention. The people
of the Territory never elected that
Convention, and never had an oppor-
tunity to do so. The lists of voters
were made out by partisan officers,
who acted under no penalties for neg
lect of duty. Fifteen counties, by no
fault of their own, had no possible op-
portunity to vote at all. The Conven-
ton, therefore, never had even a pre-
text for binding the people. Before
the Convention did its work a new
election for Kansas Legislature took
place and. thanks to Walker and
Stanton, false, fraudulent and forged
returns were rejected, and Legisla-
ture was formed of unquestioned legal
ity. The Convention, knowing the
true will of the people, in defiance of
that will, refused to refer the Constitu-
tion to the people, sequestered their
inalicnable rights, and made them
selves masters. They acknowledged
that such a reference should have
been made at least on the Slavery
clause, and then they framed sched-
ule which made no true reference even
of that clause, but disfranchised all
except those who would acknowledge
their usurpation, and were willing to
take test oaths to support it. The
Convention further assumed most ex-
traordinary power, and sought in ad-
vance to nullify and render void the
acts of the newly elected Legislature.
They did what they could to show ap-
probation of the fraudulent vote which
Walker and Stanton, with the appro-
val it is to be hoped, of the President,
had rejected. Moreover, it ordered an
election of State officers, under their
unrati6ed Constitution, without re-
quiring an oath of the election officers,
or affixing a penalty on fraudulent
voting or forged returns; and they,
moreover, directed returns to be made,
not to the Governor or the legal Legis-
lature, but to one man alone. the Pres
ident of their Convention; man hold
ing a most lucrative office and large
patronage under the General Govern
ment; clothed with power to judge at
his discretion all returns of Legis-
lature before which he might become a
candidate for office; bound by no oath
to fidelity, and exposed to no legal
penalty for the abuse of his trust
We hold. then, that the Convention
has no claim to the sovereignty in
Kansas but by usurpation; that it had
in no wise the sanction of Congress,
nor of the President, nor of the people
of Kansas, and was but cunning de-
vice to defraud that people of its SOW
ereignty.
The cardinal point on which the
great question turns is this: Is the Le-
compton Constitution the choice and
will of the people of Kansas? / say it
is not, and l shall prove it. The first
witness is the Convention itself; they
were urged to refer the matter to the
people; the President in his high Of
flee pledged himself over and over,
and over again, to the appreciation of
that course, and by the authority and
with the knowledge of the President,
the Governor, and officers of the Presi-
dents appointment, quieted the dis
contents of the people of Kansas by
advocating the necessity of such SUBJ
mission before the Constitution could
claim any validity. And yet the Con-
vention refused to submit its doings to
the people; thus coniessing lis con-
sciousness that its work would be re-
iected.