The Potter journal. [volume] (Coudersport, Pa.) 1857-1872, 1859-10-13
4plltiral,
1he Kansas Question.

The adoptiop Of the State Constitution
,of Kansas, and that by decisive majori
~ of the isARbitants, of which we Fave
Aceounts by telegraph, will ipqtshe Dem
locrats IN tie Aext Congress in rather ar
awkward predicament. Many of the
Southern Democrats had no little ado Ia
aEecoasilAag 4eir constituents to the vote
(which they gave for the English bill.
The English bill was regarded, in many
PARTS of the South, as q pusillanimous
surrender Of the rights of SHAREHOLDERS
rights which required that Kaasss should
pc iSceived into the Uascq as asIavehold-
ing State, aud upder the Iieconptoa Con-
stitqtion, whct6ef the iqhabitarts wish
ed it or not, Bat how can those who
thought the Enelish bill thus defective,
tolerate the settiag aside ct Que of its
proyisi9ss, which, in yictdiag the main
puiqt of showing the people of Kansas
10 be hcapa, yeG still implied a marked
political superiority ia a slaveholding
over u uoa-siaFehcldiag population? If
Kansas was willing to come into the
Epion qadcx a slaVetosding Constitution,
manufactured for her by BorderR Rufiap
Convention, she would be accepted at
onoc, withegt stopping to consider the
punber yf her iRdabitants. If she did
not cheese thus 10 bow the neck to slave.
holding dictenoa, she was to be punished
for it BY kei@g Kept in a Territorial con-
dition till such time as it should have
been asccrtsiaed by census, duly and
legally sskea; that the population Of the
Territory equaled or exceeded tho ratio
0f representation required for a member
of the House of Representatives Of the
Congress OF the United States when, and
not before, as the act expressly provides,
she might proceed to hold Convention
and to frame State Constitution.
This discriminating provision in favor
sef slaveholding and against freedom, was
distinctly made a test question between
tlro two parties. The Republicans, and
all those opposed to this attempt to cram
the Lecompton Constitution down the
throats of the people of Kansas, insisted
that they should have the right, after re-
jecting the Lecompton Constitution. i'm.
mediately to call another Convention and
TO frame State Constitution to suit
themselves. A provision of this sort was
containedin Mr.. Crittenden's amendment
offered in the Senate, and in Mr.. Mont
gomery's substitute which pressed the
House. The injustice and unreasonable
ness Of the proposed discrimination was
ngain and again pointed out In vain
was it insisted that if the people of Kan
ras were numerous enough to come in un-
der Q slaye-holding Constitution, they
were numerous enough to como in as
Free State. Ele Democrats would
listen to nothing of the sort, and they in
sisted upon putting into the bill the re-
stFiction above stated.
The present Constitution has been
formed, however, sithout any regard to
that restriction. The people of Kansas
have proceeded to hold Convention. and
to adopt Constitution without stopping
to take census, and thereby ascertain
ing that they have the number of inhab-
itants demanded by the English bill. Ii
remains to be seen what the Democrats
will do by way of reply to this disregard
of a proyision upon which they SO siren
uopsly insisted Will they quietly ad-
NIT the neW State, in the face and eyes
of their own provision, thus tacitly ac-
k"pwledging their former injustice, or
viii they insist upon carrying that IN
just provision in.o effect!-Ac,c Yorh