Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-04-20

d,6 70 dHofQ tnBtE SSGiO ISufooS ~ lio
re sre not to infer that, because 1t Is plain they could
have carried out their will had they chosen 10 ooeo;
If this majority did exist. they could nave ptevee:en
any Convention. II 1t did exist after q ConVenuon
was called, they could have elected their own ns'h'
bars, and made the Constitution what they pleased
II. after the Constitution was formed and suonnieo,
,bsv had chosen to do go, they could have stricken
nnt that feature of slavery which presented to the'r
,,;nd. IN. only real objection to il. They come h1fr'
,b.,.fore. moi Ia complain that their will WA defeat,
cd. far. in that event, they would have been shti,'ru
~ the respectful consideration OF Congress Ivy
mako no such complaint, because such was he' te
f,c,. hrt they come here to complain because nc
,r;Il not aore. IN ssy thst a majority OF the people
nrder a commemorative government shall, ny re-
fu.ing 10 vote. and by refusing 10 dlschsrse the" ~
ties under the law, create q state OF anarchy u oon
fusion, and put an end 10 al Tse anoh = demand "A
try to which they belong. lie sucn q ueuioa n 90
thai, entitled TO respectl Can there Dc any e5u"y
which should induce US to regard eucn aclam. -
they came here to say that q majority mao W. ooep
allowed to vote on the question OF ms ~,
# thew came here to say that a majority mao mol oeen
allowed TO elect the members to this convention
| there might be something in the complaint inooIu,
there would be good cause OF remembrance; oul u
il not their objection, as | understand It. lheir C'W'
paint. I repeat, il that We Will not agree that 'Ney'
nv refusing TO act at all, shall produce a state oil anar-
chy. of chaos, aud confusion in that Territory.
But. sir, SUPPOSE that we We're 10 lay aside all law
all the Prescriptions as TO legal evidence anu ehuen'
vor TO ascertain the natural equity OF the case, III or
der that We might conform to i'll do not say II @oula
be safe, or proper, or right to do that; but | VIII sup,
pose we were endeavoring so to act.Tmst Wouu
be the equity which we should consult! Inc equly
IL. that the will of a majority Of those who are coma
fde inhabitants Of Kansas, who intend to make a
common fortune with that Territory, and who are
guided 10 reference to it's constitution by a view 10
lis interests, should be respected. But suppose u were
proyed-I will make the case a supposed one
that most of those composing this majority consisted
of persons who did not cast thsir votes in reference
to tho interests Of Kansas, but in reference to undue
outside influences in Massachusetts, or Missouri; cup
nosa il were proved that this numberw WAS not com
nno..d of hama tide residents, who intended to live per
nauentIy in Kansas but that many OF them were ps'-
SONS who would leave the moment affairs were regu-
larly settled; suppose 1t were proved, 700, that many
of them we're maintained by money furnished from
without the Territory OF Kansas. for The purpose OF
keeping up q state OF disorder and confusion would
any man say that, in equity, the votes OF such persons
we're entitled to any more respect here, because they
happened TO be cast in Kansas, than IT they had been
given by assemblsges in Massachusetts, or in Nilsson.
ri7 Surely not. IL there not strong circumstantisl
evidence to prove that such must have been the case
with many of those voters ltit was their desire 10
settle the matter in reference to Kansas interests, and
they did constitute a majority, why did they not vote
for members of the Conven,ion1 Why did they not
make the Constitution conform TO their wishes ! They
had the power TO do 30 under the laws why dd
they fail7 How are we to account for 1t, unIess We
suppose that they desired TO keep this question open
with all is agitations, no matter what might be the
expense or the injury to the people OF Kansas or The
destruction OF the interests oi that Territory I III We
can suppose that. ] ask, IA | did before, are they en-
titled to our respect upon any consideration Of equity
which may be alleged!
But, Mr.. President,,I take another view of it. Sup
pose that this wrong was about to be perpetrated >
suppose that in the admission OF Kansas We were go.
ing to bring into the Union a people, the majority OF
whom did not desire the Constitution under which 1t
ia admitted, il Is q wrong which carries lts own reme-
dy with it. 1t will carry lie own remedy immediately
and swiftly, because the main subject Of grievance,
as We all know, il that of slavery, and the Lecompfon
Constitution itself allows a majority Of the Legislature
To enancipste the slaves, provided they will pay for
them; aud is there any civilized Government in the
world which would elnancipatr slaves without paying
for them Did not the EnglisI and French Govern
nents compensate th- OWNERS! Would the L-gisla
tura of any State fmanripaie The negroes Without
paving Tor them What would be the burden on That
Territory of paying for some one hundred. or Two
hundred, or perhaps three hundred nrgroes ] Ia IL q
matter to b. considered when they could thus accom-.
plish their wishes and give pace to the country at 90
small an expense and shall We say that We will keep
I IN all the complications and agitations OF this ques.
!, ton because they ara unwilling 10 make even thst
. email eIertion in order TO carry out their wishes I
a This matter, it seems TO me, cannot be considered by
gentlemen who have been complaining that the will
|, of the people of Kansas has been disappointed. In
r tina second section of the seventh article, the Lecomp.
I ton Constitution provides that 'the Legislature shall
D have no power TO pass laws for the emancipation Of
I slaves without the consent Of the owners, or without
Il. paving the owners, previous 10 their emancipation, a
inll equivalent in money for the slaves 40 eInancipa.
{ ted" Ia not the power 10 emsnclpste npon compen-
y safion expressly given by Theses words
/ It hss been raid, however, that tbs question Of
/ slavery was not the only one In regard to which there
I, Wa controversy and that The peopl. might desire 10
, change the Constitution itself. | believe there is Il
4 large majority in Congress, a large majority every.
where, who think that The people ct Kansas will have
f the right to change this Constitution even before
lS64-not for the reason given by the President Of
' the United States, for | am not one of those who be-
lieve /, is not in the power OF q Convention to limit
the right of it's successors ss 10 a change, THAT is
for a limited period Of fime,) or to prescribe the
mode in which 1t shall bs donei but decline to think
there IL no provision for the case before 1864. II
there be no provision, it stands like all other Stalesin
cousimiN CASH; and then, with the assent of the tx.
istiug government 10 The cell Of q Convention such
n body could change the Constitution.
Whether this De 20 or not ii will depend on the
peopI. nj Kansas Themselves 10 say; because If Their.
be a majority who believe they have the right, aud
who desire TO change il. that naicrity will get po4.
session Of the Legislature, and there will then be
harmony between the existing government ind the
new one called into beiDg under the Second Cons'i.
Intinn. The same majority would control them both
and il there were harmony between hnth, there is no
one who could apply to the General Government for
it's interference. The Gaze in which a Legislature
would apply for Federal interference. under such cir.
cumstances, is when there 10 On old government
which lie contesting with the new for authority and
jurisdictions; but no such case could arise here, BIO
cause the same majority would rule them both.
II this By so, if this people would have the power
10 GnanR6 1nelT IOUEIlIutiDH, L HEX VI t0ey COulQ NOT
remedy the evil much more readily and completely
after they were brought in rs a State, than If they
were remanded and cent back to their Territorial
condition7 If they came In act on this subject IA n
State, they would act on it in reference to Kauaas'
intereats and feelings alone. They would not be dis.
turbed by the fear that unless their Constitution should
suit tbs views of n maiori'y Of Congress, they would
not be admitted but being,in the Union, they would
have nothing to consider except the interest of Kan
sss itself. They would, therefore, come to q conclu.
sion much more readily, and under much .ounder
and safer Influences than II they were to attempt it
after they we're remanded to a Territorial condition.
say, then, sir, that il it be the great object Of
their wishes to be enabled TO govern Kansas accord.
ing to the wishes of a majority, and they do consti.
fute such a majority, that the readiest and easiest
mode of gratifying that desire, is to admit kansas as
a State into the Union. We do the majority no wrong,
therefore, by such an admission; but, 90 the contrary,
we afford them the most certain and eahieet mode of
occurring their rights.
The argument, then, IA il seems 10 ha, s'ands thus:
We na hound to take the evidence of the popular
will. according Ia the forms OF law as prescribed in
snch cases, Blu il We are bOnnd "a take this evil
dence in conformity with law, then Kansas ia entitled
to admission under th. Lecnmpton Constitution. II
il he said on thu other hand, that 10 do tha: would be
IN inHic: g wrong on the majority of The people of
Kansas who do not desire such a Constitution. the
snsver il. tina, if il does inAict a wrong it will afford
them the means of rightine themselves more speedily
and easily than any other mode which can be de.
y,sad. All thew could claim would be the right to
mouId thejr institutions according to the wishes Of the
majority. A majority could mould those institutions
much more readily and safely, and under much
soundpr Influences, after they were admitted as a
State, than if they were sent back to their Territorial
condition.
Whv. then. cir, should any party resist the admis.
sion OF Kansas under the L"compton Cona'itutionl
MOI becausa they desirs TO make IL n free State, for il
this majority exists it ia manifest they would mike it
a free State If they desired. They could max" il 10
through their Legislature alone. They could make 1t
ao in the opinion Of most persona by n change OF thu
Constitution. They could make it 30 readily npd e1.
peditiously. The Opposition cannot be made for
that renson. 1t must either he because those who op.
poss It desire to keep the question open for political
pnruoses, or elae because they are unwilling to ad
mif,' even for a moment, any State which ~tolerates