Preble County Democrat. [volume] (Eaton, Ohio) 1857-1859, 1858-04-08


to a committee with special Instructions
t to inquire what more was necessary to
enabling the State to enter the Union.
The committee reported that nothing
more was necessary, that as soon as the
laws of the United States had been ex-
tended over the State, and district
court established with judge, marshal,
and attorney, the State was as complete
ly one of the United States of America
as any of the original thirteen. 1 say
the outrage in the case of Missouri, was,
that her Senators and Representatives
were not sworn. The Republican
members contended at the time, that
Missouri was a State of the Union, un-
justly deprived of her representation in
Congress, as will appear from an exam
ination of the reported debates. Fin
ally, however, it resulted in the famous
of May 2, 1921, by which,
under joint resolution, the Senators
aud Representatives were admitted. 1
After the case of Missouri, more than
quarter of century elapsed without an
other enabling act by Congress-; and
during that time Maine, Michigan, Ar
kansas, Iowa, Florida, and Texas, en-
tered the Union. The next enable act
was in the case of Wisconsin, August
g, 1876. That would have been suffic-
lent, when complied with, to entitle her
Senators and Representatives to be
sworn; but the convention of WISCONSIN
altered the boundaries of the State, and
therefore it was necessary to apply to
Congress for consent to this alteration.
This appears by the joint resolution
for her admission, March 3, 1S47. The
next case was that of California. which
-wus admitted in September, 1850
State received not only without an ena
bling act, but without any previous ter
ritorial organization.
OF the eighteen new Safes, eight had
|enabliug acts, and ten had not. The
majority Of instances is against an ena-
bling act; the history of the question is
against it. Where do Senators find a
power in the Congress of the United
States to prescribe the assembling of a
convention aud the formation Of State
constitution? 1t is not given in the
Constitution of the United States. Our
power is to admit new States; and we
can as we'll admit them with constitu-
tion already formed as upon a constitu-
tuiou formed at our express instance
The justification for an enabling act,
when first proposed during the admins
tration of Mr.. Jefferson, was, that Con-
grcss admitted the State upon condi-
ton to be complied with afterwards. I
therefore repeat that the convention act
of February 10, 1857, passed by the
Legislature of Kansas, is as regular as
authoritative, as perfect in every re-
respect, as if the other House Of Congress
had agreed to the Toombs bill, which
we passed in July, 1856. The conven-
ton originated, then, under an act to
which l, in common, with all my polit-
ical friends in this body, gave unquali-
fed appreciation.
Now, sir, it seems to me individually,
speaking for no one else, meaning no
imputation on any one else, that two
questions remain to those who voted for
the paciGcation bill, as we called it in
1857, namely: First, has the act of the
Territorial Legislature of February 10,
1857, been substantially pursued? Sec
ond, has anything siucc transpircd in
the history of Kansas which ought to
require some additional provision, some
special provision, before her full admis-
sion into Union?
Under the first of these questions
arose the difficulty to which adverted
on almost the first day of the session, to
wit, an allegation that nineteen counties
of the Territory were not represented in
the convention which formed this con-
stitution. / am free to say, that if
such an omission had been even the
result of accident, I should have con-
sidered it fatal objection; should have
considered that the convention did not
comply with the character of its organi-
zation; but, with all the information
which I can derive, am brought to
this conclusion that with the excep-
ton, think, of four of those counties,
they were merely nominal districts of
country laid off. with names given, but
with practically no population. AS to
the four counties which had population,
it was by the fault of the inhabitants.
not BY the fault of the officers that the
census was not taken, resulting from
the fact that those inhabitants had given
their adhesion to what has known as the
Topeka constitution and form ofgovcrn-
ment-a constitution and form of gov
ernment which Congress had rejected
but in which they preserved.
A remarkable fact occurs with refer
ence to one of those counties-the coun-
ty of Anderson. 1t was alleged that
the people of the county proceeded to
take census therein, and to elect &
delegate, at their own instance. This
delegate attended the constitutional con
vention. To be sure, he was a super
numerary, the full number of sixty
having been apportioned, by Mr.. Stan
Eton, to the other counties However
he petitioned to be admitted as a dele.
gate. His petition was referred to {
committee. The committee reported in
favor of his admission, and the moment
this report was made, the petition was
withdrawn
Iknow it will be said that the dele
Egate could not legally sit there. Sup.
pose that to be true, the people of An.
derson county could not complain ot
his admission; mono could complain but
the people Of the other counties but