, 1860-04-24
President uuehannn'B Construction
of Hts Walker Letter.

The Washington Constitution furnishes the
following agreeable construction Of Mr.. Du-
chanun's letter to Robert j. Walker, recently
published:
wc arc heartily rejoiced that the Covodc In
QUESTION have ob:alned possession Of the pri-
vu,e letter addresse by the President 10 Guy-
crnor Walker On the 1ath Of .,uly, 1857. Eari.
ons rumors concerning the contents Of this let
ter hare been long in circulation, which will all
be instantly dissip ipated by the perusal Of the
letter itself; and we take pleasure in laying it
before our readers to-day.
The object of the Covode inquisition, doubt
loss. is to involve the President in m inconsis-
tency in first having strongly recommended to
the Convention to submit the Lecompton Con-
stitution, after its formation, to the people of
kausas, and in afterwards recommending the
adoption Of this Constitution to Congress, a.
though it had not thus been submittea.
The Convention did act in pursuance of the
advice Of the President, SO fur as to submit the
all-,mpo1tant and absorbing question Of slavery
to the people. About the remaining provisions
Of the Constitution there Was never any con-
test. These the Convention declined to submit
to The people. The President at no period ever
withheld The expression Of his earnest desire
that the Constitution should he submitted to the
people. After the Convention had refused to
do this, IN entirely new question then urose,
namely, should the President disregard and nuf.
lify the Constitution framed By the Convention,
and determine not to submit it to Congress be-.
cause they had acted contrary to his adTice ?
This lie could not do with his deep convictions
of duty II is one thing for the President to
advise the members Of Convention or legis.
lative body 10 act in particular n,anner; but It
is another and quite different thing for him to
annut their lawful action because they did not
think proper to follow his advice. In his mes.
sage to Congress OF the 9Th Of December, 1865,
he employs the following language:
alt is true that, IS m individual, had ex-
pressed an opinion, both before and during the
session Ct the Convention, in fayor Of submit
ting the remaining clauses Of the constitution,
ns we'll Us that concerning slavery, to the peo-
pie. But acting in IN official character. neither
myself nor any human authority had the power
to rcjudgc the proceedings Of the Convention,
aud dccial the constitution which it had framed
to be nullity. To hare done this would hare
been a violation Of the Kansas md Nebraska
act, which left the people Of the Territory per-
fcctly free to form and regulate their proceed
ings in their own Way, subject only to the Con-
stitation OF the United States 1t would
equally hare violated the great principle Of
popular sovereignty, n the foundation Of our
Institutions, to deprive the people Of the power,
if they thought proper to exercise it, Of contid-
Ing to delegates elected by themselves the trust
Of framing consultation, without requiring
them TO subject their constituents to the trouble,
expense and delay Of second election. It
would bare been in opposition 10 many preced-
ents in onr history, commencing in the very
best age Of the Republic, Of the admission Of
Territories rs States into the Union, without a
previous vote Of the people approving their
constitution