The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1859-01-13

II pIOIDaltIUU
lection by the citizens OF the Territory relative to the
public lands legitimate subject of contract between
Congress aud any State fthe proposition was accepted
they to put the machinery of their State government
In motion II rejected they TO form State govern
ment d whenever their population would entitle
them to representative IN Congress They wisely re-
jected the prorostioh seY wisely not because OF the
quantity Of land offered thc. iot possibly more may
be offered them but wisely because OF the few tas
payers upon whom all the burdens of State government
would devoye They acted wisely, likewise, because
Loyalty. in recognizing tie bill the law and voting
under IL instead of dsegardlng and dsying II as they
had previous laws The hill reduced the ahtont OF land
to lc given the new State from twenty 10 four
million Yet u las heed called q iribe offer
ed the citizens of the Territory % ihduee theu to
accept the Lecompton constitutional u land vas
any ndnccment either way, 1t was a bribe 10 m
duce them to refuse that instrument less than the
four million acres then offered them, there was no
probability Oh ttsit tcirg offered hereafter while by
delaying admission until et torfilaon entitled them
TO ctnnd il right they stood soca e'ahcp 70 pb
tln With the passage of The conference I,3 ief
compton and anti iccompton ceased to be an issue among
democrats leaving, however, between them and re-
pnbicans the opposing principles OF sovereign power on
the SIDE and popular sovereignty the other to
the arbtainent OF future elections Iecor1pon ceased
to be issue, but ao effort was made 70 ian
ufcte political capital out of il it had beenan
effort though il was past and dead ISSUE to gavanze
into il sutcency OF vitality to make il minister to the
ambition revenge Of certain politicians They wished
to made it "a good enough Morgan until after cleo
ton In the ptoBtloR OF this effort certain opinions
have been eniicdted which must OF teselves beconc
issues whefevef they maintained During the late
| canvass, among other opinions announced by tile
talented senator from Illinois, Nj. Douglas, he
appears to have committed himself 10 implied oppos
ton the right of people to delegate power to con-
yention TO adopt well frame constitution This
IL Inconsistent with the principle TO which lie processes to
have dedicated his political lic is Inconsistent with his
past declarations, and makes his recent declarations m
consistent with each other for while protesting to be
he fl
him in opposition TO the right upon which our govern
ment is bascdthe right of the people to act through
representatves-to to delegate their power.,s3 -h@ .Tt
He likewise opposed the English bill, declaring among
other statements designed arguments against it, that
the population Others had deemed sufficient for slave
State he should hold sufficient for free State thus dis
ngenuously and by ndreotion charging that those who
in voting for the English BILL voted for the admission OF
Kansas With Population not sufficient to strictly entitle
it to admission did for tG sole reasI That Il ptesert
cd savehoding cconsttutoh He knew, and the rec
ord shows that before the vote in Kansas upon adop
tion rejection of the slave clause in the constitution
was or could be known to them, several senators
from both North and South had avowed their intention
to favor the admission of the Sate let the result OF
that vote be what it might All democrats were anxious
the agtated question of Kansas policy and politics
should be disposed oshould longer form exciting
and dangerous element In national politics be re-
frcd for future controversy and final settlement eScu
sively the people of that Territory. majority In
Congress willing for this purpose to admit IL
Sate although by doing SO Before 1t had the population
required by existing apportionment for representative
in Congress- they wond do injustice to their own States
Failing however; to promptly and forever dispose of
Kansas Matters dn element In national politics, by adj
mmg the embryo State they still determined that
themselves and the country should enjoy rest from
the constantly agitation of those affairs and
especially from the annual efforts of factions in the Ter
ritory to procure its admission They determined
that something than desire to stop the
clamor of such factions, and of their sympathizers
in the Satestbat equitable right to admission
H. ,a tie Ma Uprrlnr
ask admission right until it has a suicienty Of popu-
ation to entet under existing apportionment, to a
representative in Congress- The correctness of this prin
cpe has always been recognised and it has usually been
acted upon though not always rgidly enforcedthat is
the population of Territory asking admission has been
frequently estimated than accurately enumerated
but scarce Territory has been admitted with an es
mated population materially less than the existing ap
portionment required for member of Congress This
principle Congress determined 60 enforce In any future
application from Kansas, trust it will and in all flu
ture applications from whatever Territories IL n emil
nenty right The present apportonment requires 93
inhabitants Of any district within State before that dis
trict elect member of Congress and no State how
great its population, have more than two sena
tors. learn however, that the republican members of
the Indiana legislature have selected two gentlemen to
represent them as outside lobby members of the Uni
ted States Senate They have done injustice to those
gentlemen in not donating money out of their own pock
cts appropratng it out of the State treasury to de-
fray their expenses to and from Washington True,
attempt obtain the money in the latter would
find no in the State constitution but const
tuition, State national however adverse its provisions
to their policy has ever hitherto prevented attempts
upon the part of the republicans of Indiana legsla
lures 10 attain their objects No district with less than
93 900 inhabitants can have member Of Congress. No
State have than two senators. Yet faction
within Kansas and party spirit without have sought to
create that Territory State with representative and
two senator's while il hos but about so 900 inhabitants
Look the injustice of such TO other Sitcsour
own for example II the Vice President dies the
electoral colleges fail TO elect one, the Senate elects. II
the electoral colleges fil to elect President Congress
elects him. voting by States, each State having but
vote In either OF these events Kansas il admitted
would with so 900 inhabitants be equal 10 Indiana with
its million and a half
Another opinion boached during the late controversy
by the senator who originated il is in reference TO the
effect of the Kansas Nebraska bill He has placed
new construction upon the bl previously unheard
of, and its language does not sustain The bill
enthusiastically endorsed by the entire democracy of the
nation because of their supposition supposon justified
by it's language and sustained by its author until recent
lythat IL gave to the people of those Territories the
right to form and regulate their institutions in their
way subject only to the constitution. In this sup
position the author of the bill has recently assured the
public they mistaken and that the bill permits the
people only the exercise of right they previously pos
sesseda right guaranteed by the constitution aud Of
which no bill can deprive then,--viz the right of petit
ton That they have right to form and regulate their
institutions without the previous assent OF Congress
without enabling act" That in forming their do-
mcsc institutions they subject not only TO the
sttuton, but TO such time aud IL may be tho
pleasure of Congress TO dictate a.
Some Of his inudicious friends have denounced the
majority of the Senate for dispong him from the chair
manship OF the Committee Territories and sought 10
excite sympathy and create political capital for him
out Of the act Custom and indeed almost q legis-