Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1858-04-07
SPEECH OF hon. }. D, c. ATKINS.

Mr. CHAIBMAE: Conforming 70 practlce mot
unusual in this House. shall pass by the immedi-
ate subject that now claims the attention Of the
committee and shall proceed at once to the adVoca-
cy Of the admission Of Kansas into the Union with
what is generally styled the Lecompton Constitution.
Kansas has become as "a thrice-told tale, vexing /
the dull ear Of drowsy man. and yet 1t ranks IN
importance before all other questions before this |
Congress The peace aud tranquility Of the country,
the harmony Of the Democratic party, and above |
all the future policy which the dominant section OF
this country will foreshadoW, if not establish, BY
their acion on this subject towards the weaker sec
ton, are grave and momentOus questions, involved
in this controversy, the proper adjustment OF Wcn
isof the deepest concern to the patriot and states
man this adjustment can be effected BY me lmns-
date admission Of Kansas.
Kansas has occupied prominent poslllou III
Congress- and before the country since us tefIi.o
rial organization; so much has been salu anu wiz
ten Of elimination and recrlmlnauon Det"eeh Lhe
different parties-has been made by fanatics ahu
demagogues the fruitful mother Of discord' even 10
kindling the flames Of civil war, that 1t is dthcult
70 discuss the various issues growing out Of that
Territory. without INDUCING in bitterness and re-
proacb Not so with myself, l am not nursing
NV wrath to keep It warm" have pent-up
7 vonId sooner ask truce in this imbroglio, as
the newspapers style it, for the moment, until we
car reason together calmly and deliberately as be-
comes the Representatives Of the people, intent on
truth and Justice alone We are told in the sacred
writings that ga soft answer turneth away wrath"
and am sure that the absence Of passion is neces
sary to the proper investigation of any proposition
about which the human intellect may differ. We
all have indigenous ideas-ideHs that derive their
ooloring from the influence Of particular locah-
ty; but we should never allow them TO become SO
intensified by prejudice that truth cannot always
overcome and vanquish error deeply regret that
there is difference Of opinion in the ranks Of the
northern Democracy on this question: and It is to
them, in q spirit Of kindness, that would address
myself there not being single member OF either
branch Of Congress from the North, outside OF the
Democratic party, to whom the South could appear
in behalf Of her constitutional rights. Who Goes
not know that it would be a work Of suPererogalon
TO appeal to the Republican partyT Though one
were 10 rise from the charnel-hOuse Of death, and
speak as never man spake, he could not make the
least imprint upon their Obdurate political oonscenl
ces.
The principal objections urged by that portion OF
the Democracy who oppose the admission Of Kansas,
may be summed up under two heads: hrst, that
there was no enabling act" Of Congress, author
zing the Territorial Legislature to call convention
for the purpose Of framing constitution, prepare
tory to It's admission as State and, secondly that
the constitution as entirety, was not submitted
70 the people for their ratification rejection.
Mr. Chairman desire to examine these two OBJ
| iectlons in the order in which they are stated.
This is said to be progressive age. New Princi-
pies and ideas are being constantly evolved IN sci
epce and ethics and why notin politics! If we ad-
vance as rapidly in the next decade as We have Ia
the last in the usurpation Of power by Congress,
not warranted by the Constitution, or consistent with
the inalienable rights Of American freemen, as Is
contended for by certain party, who can say that
not only the Territories, but the States themselves
! viii REQUIRE the assent of Congress to change or
amend their own organic law! What, sir, IS an en-
! abIing act? Il is defined, l believe, by political
| Iexioographers TO be simply giving the assent Of
Congress TO an organized Territory to throw off its
territorial FORM and to frame its organic law, with
! 4 view to admission an equal footing with the
| other States do not think the objection can be
urged with auy force against this application; since
the very terms Of the Kansas Nebraska act provide
that the people Of the Territories shall have eXclus
i've jurisdiction and control their own domestic
affairs, not conflicting in any way with the Federal
/ Constitution. 49,
| The distinguished Senator from Illinois said in
the Senate in July, 1856, that all power which 1t
is competent or possible for Congress to confer on
the Terriori Legislature is conferred by that act;
and vet the same Senator now stands IN a position
asking Congress TO confer still further 1t Will not
be denied unless 1t be done by the advocate OF IN
| sduterated suustter sovereignty, that the people
cannot exercise this control until they come make
their organic Law; then the language OF the set
IL being the true intent and meaning OF this act
not to legslate slavery into any Territory, or pro
hibit il therefrom, but to leave the people Thereon
perfectly free to form and regulate their own domes-
tic affairs in their own way subject only to the FED
| ersl Constitution" contemplated that the people
| would form and regulate their own institutions IN
their own wav without any further legislative per
mission from Congress; that is make their constl-
tuition and prepare to put Oh the dignity anu sove-
| reignty Of g State, and ask OF congress Ihat the
| door of admission be opened. This Kansas has
| done What need, then, had KansasfOr an enabling
act when the law Of her territorial birth declared
| she had the power already TO do that which
| an enabling act only authorized her to do I!
| Did the patriots Of the Revolution require an ena-
bling act from George Ill to ordan TINS tneir
| Government, or was the Declaration OF Independ-
ence sufficient authority? Congress becomes a ty-
rant vhenlt transcends its own legal authority and
powers.
| But Is an "enabling act " necessary to the ad-
| mission Of a State? In other words, has Congress
the right to refuse State admission, simply because
its assent has not been previously given In order
to answer this question, satisfactorily, 1t Is necessa
| ~ to inquire where the sovereignty with which a
new State is invested resides during its territorial
pupilage. Does 1t reside in the States OF tins Con
federaCv or the people thereof? If so, how do they
proceed to confer it upon the new State! Ii cannot
be with them else 1t would forever remain with
them, for it has mode Of egress. Does II rest
| with Congress2 The Democratic party has taught
it in its creed the Supreme Court has decided that
it did not; for if 1t did then could Congress force
apv sort Of laws however obnoxious, upon the peo-
I q
side? l answer with the people Of the Territories,
restrained only by the Constitution. Sovereignty,
though in latent form, resides with the people, and
they alone are the tribunal to decide when they will
prepare to be recognized by Congress as a political
community clothed with the attributes Of STATE sOve-
reignty. 1t is not for Congress to suggest. Con-
ress has the power to admit reject 1t may Judge
! whether there is sufficient population to justify
| admission-whether the constitution Is republican
in form but that OptiOnary power does not require
the Territory ask the assent Of Congress before 1t
can proceed to organize itself as a Slate.
! / would remark, in that connection, that totally
dissent from Che doctrine which Is beginning to ind
supporters among that class Of public men IN this
| country who are called national men-but who would
be better denominsted cOnsOhdatlonlsts or central
izers-that the people Of State, or OF any poAtIcl
government can alter, amend or anuul, their organ
ic law. except in the mode prescribed by ITSELF
which is the supreme law; or by appealing to TIE
sacred right Of revolution, when government Is
| obnoxious tyraunical and oppressive.
| 1t is no time for southern men to embrace doc
trine which, sooner or later, may be commended as
| a poisoned chaice to our own ! ps' mold tha'
| the people of Kansas who made this constitution
are the only legal authority in the Territory and, as
| such, embOdy the sovereignty OF the Territory OF
State while those who oppose II are laWIess rebels
and outlaws who acting outside OF the law, and
consequently the representatives, not Of pohtl
cal sovereignty, but of mere brute force. The law
in this Government is our shield and protection. II
is intended defend the rights Of the minority; the
majority can take Of itself 1t Is for this rea
son that l cling TO the Federal Constitution with a
| reference that amounts almost to ldolatry. OuT
whole system admirably balances and adjusts the
relative rights Of the majority and minority, and is
especially illustrated by the respective powers Of
the two Houses Of Congress. For instance, Della
ware aud Rhode Island, in this House, are over
Swallowed sud overpowered by the superior force OF
] numbers from New York and Pennsylvania. Here
their power is unequal, except in the accidental
emergency which may devolve upon this House to
elect a President Of the United States. In that case
the rights of the minority protected. But, il
YOU would see those rights fully vindicated turn
vow eve to the Senate Chamber and the voice OF
Delaware is as potent that of the colossal State in
the enactment of law. She sits there encirCed and
enrobed in all the queeny dignity of Sovereignty
clothed with equal rights and privileges Of the
nroudpst of the sisterhood. The law of the Consti
luton is her shield, her panoply; and beneath it
she reposes in conscious security. After the people
have once formed constitution, and prescribed the
forms and rules by which II may be amended or al
tered, hold that to proceed to such alteration or
amendment in any other manner than the one pre-,