Weekly American. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1858-1858, 1858-05-22

The President had anticipated that the const
tuition itself, in whole, and not in part, TO be
submitted to the people. The Governor had SO
contemplated, and had so assured and promised
the people The President regrets that it was
only submitted in part. He regrets that the entire
constitution not submitted Though he ac-
cepts as an equivalent the partial submission, he
regrets that it was not submitted as whole
The Territorial Legislature, after this consttu-
ton was published, Immediately passed law TO
have vote taken upon the entire constitution
the very course which the President had preferred
and to which Mr.. Walker pledged himself What
do they do but carry out and act in perfect accord
ance with the wishes and opinions of the Presi-
dent and Governor? And yet the President, who
was for general submission, and would have pre-
ferred it, says the act Of the Legislature in accord
ance with his opinion, is mere nullity. Why?
Because, he says, by the previous acts OF the peo
pie and of the territorial government the Territory
was so far prepared for admission into the Union
as Site. That is the reason. lie gives 20 ap-
plication of it, but announces as reason that it
was SO far prepared because the constitution had
been made ready to be offered to Congress, though
that con titution had not vet bsga submitted 10
the people when this law was passed. That was
her condition that was the preparation she had
made. The only preparation was, that under the
authority of previous Territorial Legislature, a
convention had been held, and constitution made
and published.
That was the condition of her preparation; and,
because Of that preparation, the President says
that the Territorial Legislature had power
whatever to pass law to take popular vote
upon the adoption Of that constitution, to see
what the people thought of il; to collect the evil
dence of The public will What could the Terri
torial Legislature do, to satisfy themselves, to
satisfy the country to satisfy the just rights OF
the people, but to say vote shall be taken on the
Ill ,oIl
dc clare their assent to, or disapprobation Of, this
constitution as ali entire instrument? What is
there in the preparation above referred TO to pre-
vent it? What force had the constitution?
Could the constitution, unaccepted by you, uil-
authorized by you, paralyze and annihilate the
legislative power whith your act of Congress
had conferred upon the territorial government?
Does not that power, and all that power, remain
as perfect as when you granted it? And could
the power which your act gave be diminished or
lcssened by any act Of mere territorial authority?
1t is palpable that il could not No matter what
act might be done by the people of Kansas, call it
by what name you please-law Of the Territorial
Legislature, constitution made by the people-no
matter by what name you call 1.-THE supremacy
Of the Government Of the United States remains
untouched and unimpaired and all the power Of
territorial Legislation which it gave may be exer
cised by the Legislature .
OF what avail is this constitution until accepted
by Congress, and the State admitted upon it?
Whom does it bindY Is it anything more than
proposition by the people of Kansas that 1--WE shall
be admitted with this instrument, which we offer
as our constitution" What more is il? Does it
bind anybody Where does it derive its author
ity? The organic law authorized no legislation by
a convention. The convention could exercise no
legislative power which Congress had given, be-
cause Congress gave its power to a Territorial
Legislature, to be elected in a certain manner, and
! to be exercised in certain manner. The conven-
ton could exercise no legislative power. 1t bound
no one 1t did not bind the future State; for until
| you accepted it. what prevented the people from
| calling convention the next day. and altering or
| modifying it according to their own vewsY Is
there anything Of reason, of argument, or Of law,
to support such proposition as that the people
are restrained from making another constitution
b. cause they have proposed one not yet accepted
and acted upon by Congress? l think not.
| In my judgment, we have precedent which
| shows am right in this view Of the subject The
case is this: Wisconsin, then under territorial
| government, presented herself here with State
| constitution, and asked for admission into the
| Union as a State. Congress admitted her, but ON
tie condition that her constitution should be sub
! ntted TO a vote of the qualified electors Of the
Territory-and, if assented 70 by the people, that
the President should announce that fact by prOcll.
nation, and that thereupon, and without any fur
ther proceedings on the part of Congress, her adj
mission should be complete and absolute. This
was the case Of Wisconsin this her state Of prep
dratioi What under these circumstances, did
| the people of Wisconsin do? Did they proceed
according to this act Of Congress, and submit their
constitution again to the people, as required by
said actS No, sir; they passed that act by, called
another convention, applied to Congress at a sub
| scquent session, and were admitted into the Union
as a State
Was not their state OF preparation greater than
tie preparation Of the Territory eff Kansasy Here
Wisconsin was not only in a state Of preparation,
by having made constitution, but that constitu-
ton had received the appreciation Of Congress,
and she bad been conditonally admitted into the
Uuion as a State. Yet she considered that even
under these circumstances, she was at full liberty
TO avail herself or not TO avail herself Of that
ditiondi admssion-and concluding not to decline
il, she made another constitution, aud was there
upon admitted by Congress.
If they could 10 that, II, prepared they we're,
that preparation did not preclude them from making
another constitution how Is this less state Of prep
aration on the part OF Kansas, to preclude the Ter
! ritoria egisature, not from performing the high
act of calling convention, but simply OF taking
another vote on a constitution which was yet 10
be- proposed TO Congress? Can any reason be
sIowuP No, sir, none. That constitution was, In
my judgment, iuoperative and OF gentlemen who
|
il have operated MS binding on the people Of Kan.
sasy Suppose circumstances had occurred which
had prevented any application to Congress for
years, how long would this instrument have
tanned its vitlity and retained its vgor and au-
thortyp One yearY Two yearsg Three years
Four ycarsS Low longS Suppose the president,
Calhoun had put this Instrument in his pocket
and kept Il there all the days Of his life, would
it all the DAYS Of his life have restrained the people
of Kansas from taking other steps aud calling
other conventions, and making other censtitutonsY
II its authority would not have continued life
time, how long could il contnucp No man can
set limit and the conclusion, therefore, is that IL
never had any binding inaueuce--at any rate,
never such binding influence (ahd that is al am
required 10 show) rs to have prevented the peo-
pie, if they had changed their minds after making
the first constitution, from calling another con-
vention, and resorting to all means necessary for
the establishment OF another constitution, and then
to offer it to you. 1t IS theirs TO OFFER and ours
to dispose Of aud they free up to the last mo-
ment 10 make known to Congress what is their
will and what is their determination in relation TO
the fundamental law Of the State which they are
about to establish.
Ia not this all perfectly clear to our reason
Are there any fctons of law; are there any tech
nicaties springing out of these instruments, gov.
emng their force and effect, TO prevent this con-