Year: 1859

that govern with


This is the view of the matter taken by majority Of
democrats IN Congress. Others, however, coincide with
the republicans that the laws were not binding or IL
they were, such frauds perpetrated TO viate
the elections under them They therefore, united with
the republicans In requiring the Constitution 10 be
turned for adoption rejection by those who had refused
to acknowledge the laws exercise the elective fran
chise. This most democrats opposed attempt by
Congress to set aside all laws and forms OF law in the
Territory and aid those to govern who had deod the
constitution and law and refused To vote They opposed


it the establishment principle that would create


new sra In our government by making voters the
governing power instead of Law stdlng voters by per
hitting any election OF any legislation under an cleo
ton TO he negatiyed by those who fctiousy refused
to participate in the election They opposed it because it
was in violation Of the democratic doctrine Of nonn
teryention The true question before Congress not
one for or against popular sovereignty has been indus
tously sought to create the impression, but one of IN
tervention nonnterventon II Congress has the right
to intervene and send back constitution because it has
rot been submitted to popular vote, when the law pro-


vidng for framing it did not roqnirc such SUBMISSION it
has equally the right under the circumstances 20
send il back because it has been submitted equally the


right to send it back because of any provision disaste


to the majority las slave anti slave, bank or i'm
ternal improvement clause equally the right to fix
time, place. and qualifications for voting upon IT,


1t is all Intervention, by whatever called, or
upon whatever pretext justified. The pretext may
to-day be commendable perhaps, as in this case,
In favor Of liberty but admit the right, and



pressive Those Of opposed H. such summary inter


yenticn in the affairs of Kansas y sending back its


suon after it had to us in legal MANNER and
through legal channel were denounced opposed to
popular sovereignty and parties to cheat and swndle


Is II strange, when such charge has been made, and
thundcred III during last summer canvass that
we should hurl 1t back upon its author? In 1855
Mr. Douglas sustained and voted for the Toonbs bill,
which provided for the formation and adoption OF con-


stuton for Kansas by convention without submission
to popular vote In 1857 he opposed constitution,
null aud void cheat aud swndle, because it had not
been submitted In 1865 his popular sovereignty
consisted in forcing constitution upon people without
permitting them the privilege of voting upon tin de-
nynS them by act of Congress the right of requiring
that constitution be framed for them should he sub
mted for their approval or dsapproval In 1887 his
popular sovereignty consisted in sending back consttn
tion and forcing them to vote upon it after it had been
framed and adopted in accordance with his views in
ls556 One year he laid down rto for tlie adoption
OF the people of Kansas in framing State government
and the next year condemned them for having adopted
his rule. The majority in Congress Furthermore OPP
posed to sending back the constitution for the that
such course confctcd with their ideas Of popular
eregnty As different ideas appear to be entertained OF
the precise latitude of meaning of this term may be
we'll to so back to the period of s first Introduction into
Congress term expressive of policy, and see what
that policy was, and its extent Soon after the 'Wilmot
proyso was introduced in Congress il became popular


in the North. Indeed it contained captivating doc


rine for this section proposing IL did, that the
ercgn power the Territories the existence of whrh


IL recognised In Congress- should he exercised solely for
benefit by giving the entire possession of them, TO
the exclusion of southern feowciti Northern
democrats did not meet the issue the proviso presented
promptly as it should have been met. Several northern
democratic conventions and politicians partially entire


y endorsed it before full discussion convinced them OF


its unconstitutionality and sectional unfarness, And
when such discussion came IL came too late to con-
vince prior to the next ensuing presidential cleo
tion, all who professed to belong to party,
and many such united with the Van Buren, deec-
in he nast tAlrb ma dpV
full lessonsf Must we have another detection in 1860
under another heretofore prominent democrat! During
the discussion of the prooso power in Congress- P2u
lar sopegy advocated its antagonist The latter
then became for the first time prominent term in poll
tics expressive of particular policy opposed to
other policy. The policy to which it is opposed is the
right of Congress to fix for all future time the domes
tic institutions of State while in territorial condition
The policy of which is the expression is to leave the
formation and regulation of their domestic institutions to
the people of the Territories themselves Upon this all
democrats united. There remained, however, differ
among them relative to the time at which the right


in the people of Territory to form their nsttutons
could be exercised whether at any and ali times through
their territorial legislature, only in the act Of framing


constitution to become independent State IL must
be remembered that Territories usually organ


lied when they contain but very few white inhabitants.
Some of the party contcnded that these few could de
eide the institutions of the Territory and State to be
formed from IT, This known squaner sovereignty.
II opposed unconstitutional and unfair. Unfair,
because it permitted the few whom locality interest
political policy first sent into territory to control it for
all future and especially because it enabled them to
oluc either section interest prejudice might dictate
either by establishing particular institution or by pro-
hbiting it, IL opposed unconstitutional, mas
much it merely proposed to transfer the power claimed


for Congress by the advocates of the proco from that
body TO the territorial government TWAS well said that
Congress calls territorial government into being and


is its guardian during its existence that it give the
ward greater power than itself possesses that the
ward must wait until it arrives at maturity, and is about


60 become independent before it decide its permanent
institutions IL we'll said that territorial govern
nent is the creature Of Congress derives its powers from
Congress, and can have greater power than that
body possesses; while State government is The work
of the people, derives its powers from the people,
and in framing il they not limited by any such con-
gressional restriction the poso and limited only
by the constitution This is popular sovereignty proper
and is sustained by the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott
decision, 1t prohibits any interference by Congress for
against either section in Territory places them both
there upon Che equality; rests the rights of both
with the constitution and courts during the existence of
territorial government, and with the people, subject to
the constitution when State government supersedes The
territorial Popular sovereignty is government of the
people, restrained only by such limitations constitu
ton and laws they have previously enacted may impose
il is right guaranteed by constitution and decreed
by courtsa right above and beyond any party plat
form and which such add 20 take from. II
is right older than Mr. Douglas and for the dis
covery of which he claim oroat to it for the
exclusive frtherance of his ambition II is liberty with
law not the liberty of riots mobs unrestnined license
and crime To apply IL TO SUCH they existed in Kan
sas is only the abuse of term not the legitimate app
cation of correct principle The name Of popular
ereigny be desecrated have been the names OF
religion and liberty During the wars Of religious fana
csm in Europe and Asia thousands massacred in
the of the Lord and his holy religion During the
French revolution the guotine busy pouring out