The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-03-04

Vls{sa Tor lts payment-not for the last one tnat
has not been made to this day and under law
| OF congress, which the chairman of the Commit
tee on Finance well understands, the President
catnot apply money thus appropriated for the
servife OF the current year, from last July untii
the aext July, to the payment of preceding
destfor a Legislature whose term Of office had
exrised.
| nut admitting the legality of the Legislature,
usre2ing though it was, and admitting also that
1t TAD been recognised by Congress, nothing fol-
lows; except that its action was advisory. So was
the action of the Topeka Legislature. The peo-
pie we're not bound by one more than the other;
| one gas not more rebelious than the other; one
haG as much force as the other, because the sub
strstpm the authority from Congress to the Legis-
lature to call Convention and prescribe rules for
that Convention, was wanting.
HI am right in this position, the only question
that remains is, does it fairly represent the peo-
| pie OF Kansas Does the vote, taken under these
circumstances at that particular period OF time,
represent the will of the people Of Kansas, fairly
| expressed? have commented on that. 1t is
questio of fact and it is question of fact for
US 70 settle; and we are not precluded by the as
ser0tn that here is legality on one side and ille
gals, on the other Have the people of Kansas,
by airy act of theirs, under any circumstances at
any slime, manifested clearly to the Congress of
| the United States their desire that the Lecomp
| ton Constitution should be accepted, and that
| they should come into the Union as a State I'M
| der ISL That is the question submitted to us as
| the tribunal to decide it. What have we against
| it? What have we to reply2 To what facts can
we appeal, as an answer to any allegation that it
| was sol We have in the first place the admitted
| unflyness and dishonesty of the whole proceed
| ingg from the beginning. l have adverted to
| thei1 aud they matter of history. If it was
supposed that they would fairly represent the will
| of thu people of Kansas, land it was designed
they should y why not submit the whole Constitu-
| ton fairly to them2 Why present to them two
slave Constitutions and bid them take their choice
betsten those two? Why accompany those two
with an oath to support one or the other, both
being abhorrent to large portion of the people
of Linsas2 Why place the question in that
fornI9 If it was the will of the people, if they
had any idea that majority of the people of
KanS.s would sustain it, why not submit the
quetcon fairly to the people of Kansas, without
any Of those restrictions? 1t is not a sufficient
answer to satisfy my mind, to say that all legal
forms have been complied with Why was it not
donel
Az Dther answer is made in the thunder tones
of the last vote of the people of Kansas, when,
the question being submitted to them by the Legis
latu-e now existing in that Territory, they threw
ma j9rty of over ten thousand votes against that
Const tutionl Is that no answer Shall we not
receive it as proof?
part cular matter, said, in answer to the inquiry
which now make, why the present Legislature
might not repeal the Convention law, or might
not order new vote to be taken on the Consti-
tutiSn, to ascertain what is the will of the people
of Kansas, that its power was exhausted. What
power was exhausted Where do they get any
powsr on the subject He admits that they had
no poger from the Congress of the United States.
There was no enabling act no power to frame
n Constitution had heen conferred IN them from
any Quarter whatever; and yet he says the power
was exhausted. The power that they assumed
was exhausted; but, if it is in the power of
Legal Legislature of Kansas to call Convention,
and have the action of the people on a portion
OF the Constitution, is it not in the power of
another Legislature of the same Territory Of Kan
sas 10 call meeting of the people, in due form,
to pass upon another question connected with
the Eatne subject, and the whole subject If he
had saown US where the power was derived
from, il he had shown that the Congress of the
United States had ever conferred any power
the Legislature of Kansas to act on that ques-
ton, il would be one thing; but denying that,
and admitting that no such authority was con-
ferre1 he yet says, in answer to a question put
by the honorable Senator from Wisconsin, Mr..
DOoEnTLE, the power was exhausted / should
like t. have him, or some other Senator show
me, t,rd show the country, whence was the der
lvatlot OF this power; and to answer the ques-
ton dscisvely, if they had none conferred on
them, how they could exhaust that which they
never possessed? and why the existing Legisla-
ture has not the same right and authority to put
the question to the people of Kansas, that the
previous Legislature had 2
The President and the honorable Senator from
Georgia agree on one point, and that is, as to
who S;e the people; and agree with them. The
people, in the language of this law, and as we
understand it with reference to suffrage those
peopl, who are legally qualified to vote. Such
questions, also agree with them, are not to be
settles in mass meeting and without form, but
are to be settled in due form by those who have
the Authority to exercise the right Of suffrage
But tais statement, which was argued at such
length and which nobody would ever think of
denyi- avoids the true question at issue. The
quest IN at issue Isl whether fair opportunity
has been accorded to this very people to exercise
the right of suffrage on this question; and thai,
the President and the Senator from Georgia, who
under Sskes to defend the message, have not dis
cussee- at much length. They assume IL;
they 4 re it for granted we deny it. Whatsis
the ara Hment to sustain it Simply that, in as
certaih,ng the will of the people, in the form
prescribed, at the time prescribed, with refer
ence - the Lecompton Constitution, all the
forms Ct law prescribed by the Legislature have
been Complied with. | dislike, exceedingly to
hear, al the sole answer to such allegations, that
the thi1g was formally done.
The honorable Senator from Georgia is an
eminept lawyer, and he knows that to be no an
swer il courts of law. 1t is no answer to an al
legatio1 of fraud to say that the forms have been
compi ID with and, as a matter of history, we
know Ia there is no more dangerous mode of
attack ig the liberties of people, than under
the forms of law. 1t has been we'll remarked
that, for hundreds of years. Rome was a tyran-
ny, exercising at the same time the forms of re-
publican institutions. Tyrants always keep up
the for ms as long as they able, when defraud-
ing tbs people of their rights, because in that
name, they are able to prevent, perhaps, that
outbreak which would follow a resort to abso-
lutte physical force. Charles the First lost his
head for tyrannizing under the forms of law
James, his son, lost his throne for the same rea-
son; ind our ancestors wrested this country
from Great Britain for attempting to tyrannize
over them under the forms of law. Yet this is
the only answer that is made" here is a legal
FORM" The Legislature thus forced on the peo-
pie of Kansas assumed to appoint a time for a
COnVe ttion to provide mode of voting; and
that Convention assumed to make Constitution
They assumed to put it to the people; they pre-
scribe6 their own forms, and followed out their
own manner of doing it and now, when we
come forward and say, that from the beginning
to the end they designed to defraud and did
defrauJ the people of Kansas, the answer is,
"We cannot GO into that subject, for it was all
done ,inder legal form" My reply is a very
simple one that fraud vitiates everything.
What were these forms2 Let us enunerate
them in distinct order, so that they may be I'M
derstocd by the people. A Legislature was forced
on the people of Kansas in due form, by Mis-
souri, invasion. Does the honorable Senator from
Missouri q do not see him in his seat) want