The Kansas herald of freedom., 1859-06-11


Oregon. The Republican party in the
House, without one exception, SO far as |
know, voted for the Enabling Act, inviting
Oregon to come here, with Constitution,
to be admitted as a State. l have no
disposition, and there is no need, to in
quirehere what is thepopulation of Oregon;
for, as Republican, l am pledged to no
rule on the subject. l opposed, as did
my colleague, and my friends on this
side of the House. the restriction which
was put upon the Territory of Kansas
We protested against it then, and protest
against It now. We have no sympathy
whatever with that restriction, and are
ready, at any time, to gve an honest vote
for its repeal.
Another objection is urged against the
clause in the Constitution of Oregon
which excludes negroes and mulattoes
from that Territory and, in addition,
provides that they shall not bring any
suit therein. 1t is said that this is in
contravention of the Constitution of the
United States This do not admit
But what if it is? The Constitution
presented by the people of Oregon is not
submitted to our vote. We cannot amend
it; all we have to do about it is to see
that it is republican in form. If it is un-
constitutional, it is not in the power of
Congress to impart to it the least vitality,
and it will fall by its own weight. But
gentlemen argue here, as if we could by
our votes give life and power to an in
strument in violation of the Constitution
of the United State. Sir, this argument
is weak and futile. Congress itself de-
rives its own vitality from the Constitu-
ton, and how can it impart a greater
vital force than it has received ? The
stream cannot rise above its source.
But should the Constitution of Oregon
be proved unconstitutional before the
proper tribunal, then. sir, will it follow
that we have violated our oaths, by ad-
mitting Oregon into the Union with that
organic law ? By no means. We have
not sworn that the people of Oregon shall
support the Constitution Of the United
States. We have sworn to support it
ourselves, not that anybody else shall do
so.
But, sir, this provision is no more hos
tile to the United States Constitution
than are the laws of Indiana and Illinois
which exclude free negroes and mulat-
toes from their boundaries. Certainly
not. 1t is no more to exclude the suit Of
the negro man, than to exclude the man
himself Is the negro less than his suit?
l contend that he is greater than his suit
The creator contains the less, and the
statutes of Illinois and Indiana are as
unconstitutional as is the provision OIL
the Oregon Constitution. But it does
seem, at the first view, that it was &
wanton and unprovoked outrage upon the
rights of these men who are excluded
from that State. l think there is rea
apology for the action of the States o
Illinois and Indiana. They are in close
proximity to the institution of slavery
They are under the shadow of the dyine
tree of slavery, and its decaying limb
are constantly threatening to fall upol
their heads; and l cannot censure then
for taking such means as they see fit, Il
protect themselves from such imminen
peril. l am not disposed to call int,
question the right or constitutionality o
their action
Is there no apology, then, for the reopl
of Oregon ? Have they committed
wanton and unprovoked outrage upon tn
rights of negroes and mulattoes, in ex
Guiding them from that Territory ? sa,
that there is an apology, and that it con
sists in this : they believed that the,
were obliged to choose between fre'
State Constitution with this provision
and slave State Constitution without il
There were three parties in the Territor
at the time this Constitution was mad
} and adopted. There was the Free Stat
J party, which was composed of Free Stat
Democrats and Republicans. There wa
the Pro-slavery party, in favor of slav
} State. There was, between these two,
, very considerable party, supposed to hol
, the balance of power, and that party
, may characterize as the anti-negro party
They said that they would sooner vot
r for a slave State than for free Stat
, with Constitution admitting free negroe
= and mulattoes. They preferred to .hay
, slaves in Oregon rather than free negroe:
) and it was for the purpose of securin
> their vote for free State that the RI
D publicans and Free State Democrats il
. serted and advocated this provision. Tn
, leading Republicans of that Territor
l advocated the adoption of the Constitr
. ton containing this provision. Mr.. L.
! gan, who received every Republican vol
for United States Senator, advocated, o
, the stump, the adoption of the Constitl
| ton with this clause.
: What was the vote ? Why, sir, tn
; clause of the Constitution had majorit
of seven thousand FIVE hundred and fft
nine votes while the Constitution itss
had majority of only four thousand vote
: The Democratic majority in the Territor
i as shownin the election of a Representati'
to this House, was only one thousand 81
D hundred and thirteen votes. Then it
). proved by the official record, that Il
Republican party combined with the Ere
5 State Democratic party to sanction an
!. ratify this provision of the Constitute
! which is here called in question. The
7 Z is also abundant evidence, outside of IL
). record, to satisfy any one that such is Il
{ fact. This, then, is The apology for Il
: action of the people of Oregon on tn
|, question. What Republican, or VIII
: friend of free States, is justified, und
I these circumstances, in voting to exclut
the people of Oregon from this Confet
5 eracy on account of this provision, Whit
is only an expedient, and not thing (
practical use? 1t is very easy, at th
9 distance, to censure the people of Orego
and to pronounce judgment against ther
but such judgment may be neither wi
nor just.
Then at the balance let's be mute,
We never can adjust it;
Y What's done we partly may compute,
4 But know not what's resisted
5 But, sir, there is another objection urg,
t from certain quarters, with great pert
Q nacity. mean the objection to the So
5 frage Of aliens. The Constitution
= Oregon, in respect to alien suffrage,
i certainly more stringent than the law
II some Of the States of the Union, al
b less stringent than that of others. 1t
the same as the Territorial law has be,
= during the last ten years. 1t requires