Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1858-09-12

The bQiHl6 atteAi pts 70 justify ar DELL fVte
against the admission of Kansas with the Leoomp-
ton Constitution, in defiance Of The instructions Of
the Legislature, on the ground that majority Of
the people Of the territory we're opposed to that
constitution. This was The argument urged by Mr.
BELL and the whole body Of Black Republicans at
the last session Of Congress against The admission OF
Kansas, and the opponents Of slavery have always !
found some similar excuse for voting against every
Slave State which ever offered to enter the cOnfed-
eraoy. They we're as earnest in their efforts to ex-
olude Arkansas and Missouri, as they have been TO
exclude Kansas always placing their opposition on
some other ground than the real one-their unre-
lenting hostility to slavery. We have commended,
and stiIl contend, that the motive which influenced
the vote Of the opposition the admission Of Kan
sas vas dissemination TO prevent any new Slave
State from coming into the Upion. The people Of
Kansas had elected delegates TO convention au-
thOrized to form constitution. The delegates met,
formed constitution, and submitted the slavery
clause thereof to the people A majority Of those
voting approved the constitution, and when they
asked admission as State, Congress had no right
to enquire how many Of the people had refused TO
VOTE but was compelled oreceEe the State with the
constitution which it presented If the opposite
doctrine is maintained it will lead to the assump-
tion of power by Congress whenever State claims
the right TO come into the Union to reject her app
cation on the pretezt that majority Of the people
do not approve the constitution which she pre-
sents Under this doctrine, no Slave State win
ever be admitted into the Union, for there viii
always be some to contend that pro>slavery
constitution has not received the sanction Of
the people. The constitution Of Kansas was as
regularly and legally formed that of any State IN
the Union; it was endorsed by a vote Of the people
on the 2lst of December and the fictitious refusal of
the free>soilers to vote did not give Congress the
power or the right 20 reject her application. The
doctrine Of the Democratic party, the principle Of
popular sovereignty, maintains the right Of a ma
jOrity Of the citizens of territory to regulate their
domestic institutions, but the refusal Of part Of
them to vote must not be allowed to defeat the viii
Of the people, as expressed at fair and legal elec-
ton. Congress had no right to go behind the &C
ton Of the convention which framed the Lecompton
Constitution, and the vote of the people thereon
and say that majority Of the people were opposed
admission. It was compelled, under the constitu-
ton, to admit the State whenever itpresented con-
stituiion republican in its provisions and legally
formed.
The Banner argues that Mr.. BELL did right to
disregard the wishes of his own State and vote to
exclude Kansas from the Union, because at the cleo
ton in August last majority voted against the
English proposition. Now tits possible that major
ity Of the people Of Tennessee if they should all
vote, might be opposed to our present constitution,
and might be in favor of calling convention to
change it. But does the Banner think that the next
Legislature would be justified in proceeding on that
presumption to call convention to charge cur cons
stitutiOn Mr. BELL in opposition TO the wishes Of
his State in disregard Of the legally expressed will
Of the people Of Kansas and in defiance of the con.
stitution of the United States, voted to exclude a
slave State from the Union It is for that vote that
we oensure him It makes no difference ifthe peO-
pie of Kansas had changed their constitution the
day after it was admitted, it would not excuse Mr..
BELL and his Black Republican allies for refusing
to recognize the right of slave State to come into
the Union on terms Of equality with free States.
The South has cause to regard him as an enemy to
her institutions when he unies with the abolition
lists to resist the recognition Of this right It'll
right for which all true Southern men are willing to
Law down their lives and they will not submit to a
violation of it. either by traitors at home or BY en-
emies abroad Our forefathers fought The battles
of the revolution to resist an unjust eXaction, al
though its amount not equal 10 the cost OF the
war for a single week. Shall their descendants be
told that we must not contend for plain and une-
quivOcal constitutional right because We shall make
nothing by it? We soOrn such sOrdid considera-
tiOns. We repudiate tho dishoBorabls and coward
ly policy. We will maintain the equality Of the
South in the Union, Though il should require the
sacrifice of a thousand such men as JOHN BELL, tC
maintain it. Should we pursue the policy indicated
BY the Banner AID Mr. BELL, the South will soOn
have no rights to defend, as she will have no one
willing to defend them.