The star of the north. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1849-1866, 1858-02-17
The Policy and Principles Of the Democracy.

|
controversy which it is thereby proposed to
foreclose has been the staple of all the re.
publican campaigns, in the States and
throughout the Union, since the passage OF
the act repeating the Missouri Compromise
and providing for territorial government in
Kansas. AT the first blush, it was resolved
by our opponents TO go to the people upon
the single question of the restoration of the
compromise. Hence the measure was bit
terly assailed as a violation of faith, and the
principle of popular sovereignty, which
was substituted for the Missouri restriction,
was equally denounced as subversive ofthe
settled policy of the American Union. But
1t was soon found that there was no vitality
in the issue they had made. They turned
TO Kansas as. a field of profitable labor. They
organized aid societies and filed the Terri
tory with paid emissares who obeyed in.
structions not TO vote and 10 throw every
( obstacle in the way of organizing and oper-
ating territorial government. They set up
a revolutionary government at Topeka, for
which they claimed the allegiance of the
people. Through period of nearly four
years all efforts to pacify them have proven
unavaing and now as last resort, when
Congress proposes TO receive them into the
Union, we are met by declaration that TO
do so will defraud them of their rights and
violate fundamental principle of our dem
ocratic system.
We do not regard it as necessary 10 re.
count the events TO which we have briefly
referred. If there are any persons in the
democratic party who do not believe that
the territorial Legislature, on the 10th of
February, 1857, had full power TO provide
Tor and direct the election of delegates TO
convention in June following, we do not
know them. That Legislature was the off
spring of the act of 1s54-the famous Kan.
sas Nebraska act of Senator Douglas
which called it into legal being. 1t existed
by virtue of the authority of Congress and
the people of Kansas who elected the mem.
bers thereof. If there were persons who
did not vote at such election, greater or less
in number, their omission 10 perform their
duties must not be pleaded against the legal
authority OF those who did vote, and the au-
lhority which the latter thereby conferred
upon their representatives.
But we go step further. We charge
those who refused TO vote as acting with the
carrying out instructions sent to them by a
political party out of the Territory. Refusal
to vote was the enactment of Il party of the
republican programme by which The great
canvass of 1856 was conducted. Refusal
to vote was intended to embarass and de-
teat all efforts 10 settle and adjust the fretful
question of slavery, which was the only
question about which any interest was felt
here or there. Refusal to vote was premed-
ltated treason against the peace of the coun.
try, and gave birth to all the frightful civil
commolions in the Territory.
Under these circumstances, and with
these facts uttered by every dem0eratic
press and orator throughout the country, it
is little short ofinsult 10 appeal 10 the demo-
cracy Tor either sympathy or consideration
Tor the parties who thus not only neglected
to perform the high duties imposed upon
them, but accompanied that refusal with re.
peated and wholly unjastifab!e efforts to
overthrow our party in Kansas and through
out The Union.
Again the June election called out an
unusually small vote. 1t was conducted in
the usual way, and its results announced by
legal authority. The law of the 10Th Feb
ruary authorized the delegates thus elected
to frame constitution for the people of
Kansas. The authority to do this was in
legal form, plenary in scope, and wholly
without limitation touching the question of
the submission of their work 10 the people.
Gov. Walker; Mr.. Douglas, and Mr.. Stanton,
all concur that up to the assembling of the
constitutional convention everything had
been done in obedience 10 lawful authority.
When did the convention oversep legal
bounds Did the refusal 10 submit invali.
date the election? Was the convention
legal body, and the constitution they framed
by express authority illegal and void? lfit
was illegal, was it for the reason alone that
it was not submitted? To test this last in
quiry, we have only TO answer that the act
of the 18th of February was silent on the
subject. Then, if we abandon the logical
line, and run off upon another track, and
| claim that the constitution was void without
submission, because the people had a right
to sit in judgment upon their own organic
law, we are equally at fault; for what else
was the election of 10Th February but ver-
dict in the advance touching the matter? p
There were ten precedents of non. submis-
sion amongst the Sta'es of the Union. But
in the Kansas case the people had prejudged
and condemned every democratic effort at
Cancellation and adjustment. The question
must be kept open-il was again 10 feed
the republicans in the presidential election
of 1860. Kansas could defeat adjustment,
and submit 10 perpetual alarms and TO the
sacrifice of all its high interests, in order TO
vitalize and stimulate into existence party
which derives all its sustenance from kim
dred aeitations. Under such circumstances
and with an endless catalogue of vexatous
devices in that agltated Territory yet untold,
by which the democracy has been menaced
aud almost crushed, are we now to witness
the men OF our party, in or out of office,
yielding 10 the demand of such people 10
ha hpurI at tho vary polIs thav hnva so