The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-05-13
POSITION OF rARrIxs.


Shall they be reversed? The Administration
is on the defensive, on the Lecompton issue, and
we all anticipate the verdict of the country.
We hold it to . severe account. Are the BE.
publicans willing to sink this issue, and raise
another, on which they shall stand arrsyed, a.
the opponents of free Statesf If 30, let them
vote against the admission of Oregon and Min
nesota.
A strange attitude-the champions Of free
labor resisting the increase of free-labor States
What though the new States do present them
selves as Administration States, have you any
right to keep them out on that ground ?
Would the People sanction such policy?
What though in Minnesota the election for
members of Congress were carried by fraud
The Constitution was not carried by fraud, but
adopted by the whole people, with the exception
of few hundred voters. Is it ft to reject their
almost unanimous act done without fraud, in one
case because, inHanother act, it is alleged that
one of the parties committed fraudf Besides
not on the question of the admission of the
State, but on the application of the representa-.
tives for seats in Congress, can the allegations
of fraud be heard and examined.
What though Minnesota does admit to suf-
frage persons of foreignbirth, who have taken the
oath of naturalization, resided in the country
one year, and within the State four months, has
she not a right to do so 1? Has not every State
a right to determine the qualification of its own
voters2 Away with the assumption which would
invest the Central Power with the right to die.
tate to the States who shall be voters | And,
after all, what great evil in this alien suffrage,
as it is called? A German goes into Minnesota,
buys farm, settles with his family, becomes an
industrious cultivator, contributes to the wealth
of the State, pays taxes, and, yet, because he
has not been five years in the country, you would
debar him the right of selfgovernment You
would tax his property, but give him no voice
in representation We do not believe in that
doctrine.
In the case of Oregon, you would exclude
her, because, under Administration influence,
she has adopted a provision excluding free col.
ored persons. That provision is mean and wick.
ed-more of an insult, however, than Hardship,
for it will prove, as similar provisions in other
free States have proved, dead letter. But,
how are you to remedy it by postponing the bill
till next December, and keeping her under
the same influence which begot the monstros-
ityP The same Constitution will again come
before you. Will you reject it, and remand
her to her Territorial condition? How long be-
fore you can generate sound Republication I'M
der the brooding wings of the Administration
If you hope to bring about better state of
sentiment in Oregon, make free State of
her, Danish the Federal Executive as far as you
can, and give the friends of justice there q
chance to organize sound Party, without
being crushed as they have been.
Here, also, Republicans are committed by
previous action. The Free-State men of Kan
sas did not exactly incorporate into their Topeka
Constitution, a clause excluding colored PEG.
pie, but they did adopt separately an article,
instructing the first Legislature, under that
Constitution, to exclude them and yet there
was not q Republican in Congress who did not
vote to receive Kansas into the Union, with
that Constitution and that provision. They
would not sink the greater issue in the less
they would admit Kansas, knowing that sound
reforms could be more readily effected under a
State organization than under Territorial.
Were we one of the class thus prescribed, we
should say, admit Oregon-better make her
free State, than keep her slape Territory.
The Anti-Slavery men in Oregon will have a
better chance for success under Free-State
organization, than they have now under q
Slave-Territorial organization.