The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1858-02-20

| On the part OF others VINO were acting uu
der the color of lawful authority. So tn
Topekaites ought to have been made to sub
nit to lawful authority; but no one cal
contend that they forfeited their electiv
franchise or their freedom Of choice to ap
prove or disapprove, to ratiIy or reject, al
organic law when submitted to them. Blu
were Topekiates alone opposed to the lie
compton Constitution Nc. Some pro
slavery men were opposed to it, and this
schedule deprived them of their sovereign
rights as well as the Topekaites. Law-abid
ing citizens, as well as rebels, we're compel
ed to vote for and not against this Consti
| tuition, or not to vote at all. The wrong o
the Topckaites will not justify the wrong Of
the Lecompton Convention, nor cure the
defects of the Lecompton schedule. What
is that schedule?
! Its l1th section reads:
1" Before this Constitution shall be sent to
Congress for admission into the Union as a
State, it shall be submitted to all the white
male Inhabitants of this Territory, for ap-
| sident of this Convention shall, by procla-
nation, declare that on the 2Ist day of De-
cember, 1857, at the different election pre-
cincts now established by law, or which
may he established as herein provided, in
the Territory of Kansas, an election shall
be held over which shall preside three
judges. or a majority of three, to be appoint
/ ed as follows: The President of this Con
ventiOn shall appoint three commissioners
in each county in the Territory, whose duty
it shall be to appoint three judges of cleo.
ton in the several precincts OF their respect
i've counties, at which election the Coastitu-
ton framed by this Contentioa shall be
submitted to all the white male inhabitants
Of the Territory Of Kapsas in the said Ter
ritory upon that day, and over the age Of
twenty-one years, for ratification or rejec-
ton, IN the following manner and form, &c.
Now, il must surely be admitted that is
plain submission Of OF the nh0te Consttu-
ton framed By the Convention. The sub
mission OF the whole Constitution is repeat
&C twice in this clause, in a way not to be
mistaken. And yet Is it not strange that
Mr. Buchanan should have made the ms
take of saying in his message that the whole
OF the Lecompton Constitution was not, and
that part part, the slavery clause alone,
was submitted to the people Will it be
said in reply that the whole was submitted
only suj Btoio. after specified manner and
form: Well, let us look at the manner and
form; the manner and form is:
THE voting shall be by ballot. The
Judges of said elections shall cause to be
kept two poll-books by two clerks by them
appointed. The ballots cast at said election
snail be endorsed, ~ Constitution cjtA slare-
ry," and " CoHstituttrp 0iA no siacery,"
6c.-There is no other form touching this
point but this; and is not plain still that
the whole Constitution uas submitted by
tue form rs well as by the preceding clause
embodying the principle of entire submis-
sion: The whole was submitted in torn.
substance, but the form of submission was
made contradict the principle of submission
The principle was submission Of the whole
iticdti0a," or rejectioh,' but the form was
for approval and ratification alone,
and there was no form FOR ''ais1pprocck" or
" "rejection."
Is it answered that this was in substance
but a submission Of a part. for there was
form approving or dIsapprovIng, ratrryrns -
rejecting slavery: beg pardon, and won't
repeat that it was an odiUus discrimination
to me to allow slacerv alone 10 bn disapprov-
ed and rejected and nothing else. But pass
ing that by, is it not plain, reply, that no
one was allowed TO vote for or against slave
ry, a part. unless he would vote for the con-
stitutor, the whole of il without exception:
ANY one might vote to reject or adopt slave
ry, provided he would vote to adopt the
Constitution, and no one was allowed 10
vote for or against slavery who did not vote
for the whole Constitution. l. it not plain,
then, that the object was not TO submit
part only, but to force the adoption Of the
whole:
The whole was not fairly submitted One
81 ,l 70 ha aali
hundred and ninety nine might desire to
vote against the Constitution, and one for
it the one would be counted, and nine
hundred and ninety nine would not be
counted.
The part as to slavery, which was submit
ted for alternate voting, for and against, was
not fairly submitted. One thousand pro-
slavery men might go to the polls, desiring
to vote fIr slavery, but against the Consti-
tn ion their votes could ot be counted and
one ee-soler, who voted for the Constitu
ton and against slavery, would be counted,
and overcome the nine hundred and ninety
nine. 1t is idle to say that this was as fair
for one side as the other; for, though this
be equally true as to the ninety nine free
soil voters again>t the one pro-slavery voter
vet this would only prove the case to be
one Of double instead OF single injustice.
1t proves only it was wrong, Injuriousiy
affecting both sides and the whols people,
and not part only.
The truth is, there was obviously sniS- !
ter and antirepublican purpose in thus Civ.
ing an Unfair election as a part, coupled
with no election as TO the whole. 1t was to
ferce the people to adopt the constitution
framed by the Convention. No man was
allowed to vote for slavery who did not also
vote for the Constitution and no man was
allowed to vote against slavery who did not
vote for the Constitution. He might reject
slavery or adopt it, provided he would vote
for the Constitution and If he voted against
the Constitution, his vote for or against
slavery was not allowed to be counted.
This was not all. The l4th section is
worse than the the iniquity of the llth.
Sec. IA Every person offering to vote
at the aforesaid election, upon the said Con-
stitution, shall. if challenged, take an oath
to support the Constitution of the United
States, and to support this Constitution, if
adopted, under the penalties of perjury un-
der the territorial laws"
The Democratic party had just come out
of severe and doubtful conflict with the
Know Nothing secret society, the most
odlous feature of which was a test oath"
Now behold an honest, peaceful, law-abiding
citizen approaching the polls in Kansas un-
der the schedule; l imagine myself an ultra
under this clause of the schedule; l am an
xious, Southern stakeholder put to the or
deal Of challenge, We y anxious, to record
my vote for my right to hold the chief part
of the little property l own; am told that
have the right, by the grant of the high
Lecompton Constitution, to vote for or
against property in slaves; l approach the
POOLS to exercise the right; l am challeng-
ed !; the Bible is held out to me to swear
first to "to support the Constitution Of the
United States;'' ask, why impose on me
that oath; urge that the obligation is
binding on ME without that oath-thae l
love and obey the Constitution OF the Y. B..