Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1858-02-17
TBEPREsIDENr ON LEcoMPToN.


[.ecompton Constitution is two-fold, one part,
m our Judgment. answering and completely
Iestroyinc the other. Without denying, what,
indeed no living man is hardy or silly enough |
10 DENY. tnat an immense, an overwhe Inning
majority Of the people of Kansas are uncom-
opposed to the constitution ne
would thrust upon them, he contends, hrst, /
that the majority haven't expressed their OPP |
position to that constitution in conformity
with established forms, and, secondly, that.
after Kansas is admitted under 1t, the majority |
can. if they please, rescind or overturn IL |
trithOut anu regard to established FORMS ihlS
is the pith and substance of his message. II
will be seen at glance that the Yiilalnous ooc-
ument cuts its own throat.
The reasoning of the message, We repeat,
is suicidal. The argument is a nullity. Ii,
as Mr.. Buchanan says, the majority OF the
people of Kansas, after its admission into the
Union as q State, may at once abolish the con-
stitution, in utter and rightful defiance OF It's
own provisions, and form another, to suit
themselves, why may they not form constl-
tuition 10 suit themselves now 2 Are the eS-
tablished forms of Territorial organization,
imperfect and irregular at best, more sacred
than those of finished State organization,
sanctioned, as such, by the supreme authority
of the nation Is the sovereignty OF Ier-
ritory q higher and more awfnl thing than tlat
of State Is it unlawful and revolutionary
ture, and perfectly legal to trample upon the
constitution of State Certainly more
unqualified and pitiful absurdity never entered
or came out of the head OF any sane man.
The truth indiSputably is that the privileges
which the President comedies to the majority
Of the people of a State, in accordance with
what he calls the ssfundamental principles of
American frecdom,'' belong exclusively, if
they belong anywhere under the sanction OF
government, to the majority of the people OF
d Territory, in the organization OF state.
Then if ever, the mere non observance OF
strict legal forms is not an uDpardonaoie Oh
fence against authority, and does not Vitlatc a
clear and undoubted expression of the popu-
lar will. When organized as State. however,
and admitted into the Union, the majority OF
the people are bound by the fundamental law
of their organization as fully as the minority,
| for whose protection mainly, indeed, constl-
| tutionS are devised. The contrary doct'i inc,
| which Mr.. Buchanan asserts, is uDquestiona-
| bly, one of the most pernicicus heresies ever
hatched in the brain of Locotocoism.-
But our business at present is with its direct
and fatal opposition to the other half OF Mr..
| Buchanan's argument rather than with its
| intrinsic falsity. We shall refer to that on
another occasion. The force of the opposl-
| tion TO which have alluded must impress
every careful reader cf the message. 1t is
entirely destructive. The message logically
amounts to nothing. Like the lrishman S
! snake, it has swallowed itself.
If the truth must be told, Mr. Buchanan
| doesn't fairly take hold of the true issue IL
the case. He blinks, lodges the decisive
point. The real question presented to him
| and his party is manifestly not whether the
majority of the people of Kansas have in time
past been guilty of grievous informalities and
of still more griev0us follies, for this is cheer
fully allowed by thousands OF the most zeal
Gus opponents Of his policy, but whether the
majority of the people of Kansas, an over
whelmiDg majority of them, are not earnestly
aud vehemently opposed to the constitution
| which he urges Congress to impose upon them
This, under common justice well as the a
vowed principles Of himself and Of his party
is the prominent, the controlling issue raised by
| LecOmpton. 1t is purely question of pop
ular sovereignty, OF the right of self-govern
| ment in the Territories, and all the cob-web!
| of chcanery and of technical pleading which
| Mr.. Buchanan throws around il do but height
en- the enormity of his treachery to that ''sa
cred right They neither obscure the ISSUE
nor screen his guilt. What if the majority o
the people of Kansas did frame and adopt th
Topeka constitution, and contumaciously re
| fuse, in several signal instances, to recogniz
the authority of the Territorial Legislature
What if, under extraordinary prOvocation, the
did exhibit refractory ard fac.ious spirit
What If, stung by sense OF defrauded rigll
| and of insulted manhood, they did show them
selves in various things more obstinate tina
wise? Laying out Of view the peculiar rigt
conferred upon them by the ''fundameuti
principles of American freedom which the
! surely possess in the Territorial condition q
least as perfectly as they will possess it in tn
condition State, have they not al lengt
come down from these questionable heights {
{ contumacy SO far TO express their will !
relation to the Lecompton constitution in til
exact manner prescribed by the Territori;
President himself? Most undoubtedly the
{ have. And the result of that expression is
majority against the Lecompton constitUtio
| of three or four to one. The fact OF the OF
c position of vast majority of the people {
Kansas to the Lecompton constitution is
settled thing. 1t is a fixed fact. And it
j fixed by law. 1t is not only actual but forma
c 1t is unquestioned and unquestiouable. I'll
: President does not dispute it. He does n'
doubt it.
> Why, then, in the face OF this legally a
e certained and tremendous majority, does Il
Y President seek to drive the Lecompton col
:, stitution down the throats of the people
| Kansas Why, in view of the large discrI
tion of Congress over the entire subject, doe
he treat the Lecempton constitution, that mis-
rable offspring of force and fraud, as thin
!, which the forms of inhexible law had rende
t ed too sovereign and holy to be rejected
q the solicitation of the people, even thoug
. their prayer should rise from the length al
= breadth of the Territory, and fill the Unic
: with its imploring accents Why, in til
a teeth of the doctrine of popular sovereignt.
e on which he was lifted to his present ofiici
elevation, does he disown the admitted, inco1
testable viii of the people of Kansas, an
d take to his arms the choice of a wretched ar
4 unscrupuious minority, which has nothing
recommend it but the shadow of formalit
l. aud which even the substance would not MAX
l. obligatory upon Congress- Why does he G,
ert his cunning to find excuses for stultifyir
himself in the eye of mankind We ha,