Marshall of Illinois; Morgan of New SEC. 3. In the prosecution of slaves for York; Morris, Shaw, and Smith of Illinois. crimes of higher grade than petit larceny, The Americans who voted with the Repub- the legislature shall have no power to deprive them of an impartial trial by a petit

licans were Crittenden of Kentucky; Davis of Maryland; Marshall of Kentucky; jury. Ricaud of Maryland; Underwood of Ken- SEC. 4. Any person who shall malitucky. A number of those previously ciously dismember, or deprive a slave of classed as Anti-Lecompton Democrats life, shall suffer such punishment as would voted against their colleagues of the same be inflicted in case the like offence had faction, and consequently against the bill. been committed on a free white person, These were Messrs. Cockerill, Gwesheck, and on the like proof, except in case of Hall, Lawrence, Pendleton and Cox of insurrection of such slave. Ohio; English and Foley of Indiana; and Jones of Pennsylvania. The Americans who voted against the bill were Kennedy of Maryland; Anderson of Missouri; Eustis of Louisiana; Gilmer of North Carolina; Hill of Georgia; Maynard, Ready and Zollicoffer of Tennessee; and Trippe of Georgia.

Lecompton Constitution.

Free Negroes.

Bill of Rights, SEC. 23. Free negroes shall not be allowed to live in this state under any circumstances.

ARTICLE VIII.-Elections and Rights of
Suffrage.

4

SEC. 1. Every male citizen of the United States, above the age of twentyone years, having resided in this state one

The following are the political features year, and in the county, city, or town in of the Lecompton constitution:

ARTICLE VII.-Slavery.

SEC. 1. The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction, and the right of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same, and as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever.

SEC. 2. The legislature shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of the owners, or without paying the owners previous to their emancipation a full equivalent in money for the slaves so emancipated. They shall have no power to prevent emigrants to the state from bringing with them such persons as are deemed slaves by the laws of any one of the United States or territories, so long as any person of the same age or description shall be continued in slavery by the laws of this state: Provided, That such person or slave be the bona fide property of such emigrants: And provided, also, That laws may be passed to prohibit the introduction into this state of slaves who have committed high crimes in other states or territories. They shall have power to pass laws to permit the owners of slaves to emancipate them, saving the rights of creditors, and preventing them from becoming a public charge. They shall have power to oblige the owners of slaves to treat them with humanity, to provide for them necessary food and clothing, to abstain from all injuries to them extending to life or limb, and, in case of their neglect or refusal to comply with the direction of such laws, to have such slave or slaves sold for the benefit of the owner or

owners.

which he may offer to vote, three months next preceding any election, shall have the qualifications of an elector, and be entitled to vote at all elections. And every

male citizen of the United States, above of the state at the time this constitution the age aforesaid, who may be a resident shall be adopted, shall have the right of voting as aforesaid; but no such citizen or inhabitant shall be entitled to vote except in the county in which he shall actually reside at the time of the election.

The Topeka Constitution. The following are the political features of the Topeka constitution:

Slavery.

Bill of Rights, SEC. 6. There shall be no slavery in this state, nor involuntary servitude, unless for the punishment of crime.

Amendments to the Constitution.

SEC. 1. All propositions for amendments to the constitution shall be made by the General Assembly.

SEC. 2. A concurrence of two-thirds of the members elected to each house shall be necessary, after which such proposed amendments shall be again referred to the legislature elected next succeeding said publication. If passed by the second legislature by a majority of two-thirds of the members elected to each house, such amendments shall be republished as aforesaid, for at least six months prior to the next general election, at which election such proposed amendments shall be submitted to the people for their approval or

rejection; and if a majority of the electors | rejected it by a majority of 9,513, and Kanvoting at such election shall adopt such sas was not admitted under the Lecompton amendments, the same shall become a part constitution.

of the constitution.

Finally, and after continued agitation, SEC. 3. When more than one amend-more peaceful, however, than that which ment is submitted at the same time, they characterized the earlier stages of the strugshall be so submitted as to enable the gle, the territorial legislature of Kansas electors to vote upon each amendment called an election for delegates to meet and separately. No convention for the forma- form a constitution. They assembled in tion of a new constitution shall be called, convention at Wyandot, in July, 1859, and and no amendment to the constitution reported a constitution prohibiting slavery. shall be, by the general assembly, made This was adopted by a majority exceeding before the year 1865, nor more than once 4000, and under it Kansas was admitted to in five years thereafter. the Union on the 29th of January, 1861. The comparative quiet between the reSubmission of Constitution to the People.jection of the English proposition and the Schedule, SEC. 2. That this constitution adoption of the Wyandot constitution, was shall be submitted to the people of Kansas at one time violently disturbed by a raid for ratification on the 15th day of December next. That each qualified elector shall express his assent or dissent to the constitution by voting a written or printed ticket, labelled "Constitution," or "No Constitution;" which election shall be held by the same judges, and conducted under the same regulations and restrictions as is hereinafter provided for the election of members of the general assembly.

The Douglas Amendment. The following is the Douglas amendment, which really formed the basis of the bill for admission:

"It being the true intent and meaning of this act not to legislate slavery into any state or territory, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States."

The bill which passed on the 4th of May was known as the English bill, and it met the approval of Buchanan. To the measure was attached "a fundamental condition precedent," which arose from the fact that the ordinance of the convention accompanying the constitution claimed for the new State a cession of the public lands six times greater than had been granted to other States, amounting in all to 23,500,000 acres. In lieu of this Congress proposed to submit to a vote of the people a proposition specifying the number of acres and the purposes for which the money arising from their sale were to be used, and the acceptance of this was to be followed by a proclamation that "thereafter, and without further proceedings from Congress the admission of the State of Kansas, into the Union, upon an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever, shall be complete and absolute." The condition was never fulfilled, for the people at the election on the 2d of August, 1858,

made by John Brown at Harper's Ferry, with a view to excite the slaves to insurrection. This failed, but not before Gov. Wise, of Virginia, had mustered his militia, and called for the aid of United States troops. The more radical anti-slavery men of the North were at first shocked by the audacity of an offense which many looked upon as an act of treason, but the anxiety of Virginia to hang Brown and all his followers who had been captured alive, changed a feeling of conservatism in the North to one of sympathy for Brown and deeper hatred of slavery. It is but fair to say that it engendered hostility to the Union in the South. The right and wrong of slavery was thereafter more generally discussed than ever. The talent of the South favored it; while, with at least a large measure of truth it can be said that the talent of the North opposed it. So bitter grew the feeling that soon the churches of the sections began to divide, no other political question having ever before disturbed the Union.

We have not pretended to give a complete history of the Kansas trouble either in that State or in Congress, nor yet a full history of the many issues raised on questions which were but subsidiary to the main one of slavery. Our object is to show the relation of the political parties throughout that struggle, for we are dealing with the history of parties from a national view, and not with battles and the minor questions or details of parliamentary struggles. The contest had cemented the Democrats of the South as it had the Republicans of the North; it divided both the Democrats of the North and the Americans in all sections. John Bell, of Tennessee, and Sam Houston of Texas, recognized leaders of the Americans, had shown their sympathy with the new stand taken by Douglas, as early as 1854. Bell, however, was less decided than Houston, and took his position with many qualifications. Houston opposed even the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and made the last speech

f

against it in the Senate. He closed with these words:

"In the discharge of my duty I have acted fearlessly. The events of the future are left in the hands of a wise Providence, and, in my opinion, on the decision which we make upon this question must depend union or disunion."

The Charleston Convention.

66

and minority of the committee, again made opposite and conflicting reports on the question of slavery in the Territories. On this question the committee had divided from the beginning, the one portion embracing the fifteen members from the slaveholding States, with those from California and Oregon, and the other consistThese sentiments were shared by many ing of the members from all the free States Americans, and the great majority of them east of the Rocky Mountains. On all other drifted into the Republican party. The questions both reports substantially agreed. Abolitionists from the beginning of the The following is the report of the majorstruggle, allied themselves with the Repub-ity made on this subject by Mr. Avery, of licans, a few of their leaders proclaiming, North Carolina, the chairman of the comhowever, that this party was not sufficiently mittee: Resolved, That the platform advanced in its views. adopted by the Democratic party at Cincinnati be affirmed with the following explanatory resolutions: 1st. That the Government of a Territory, organized by an act of Congress, is provisional and temporary, and during its existence all citizens Such was the condition of the parties of the United States have an equal right when the Democratic national convention to settle with their property in the Terrimet at Charleston, S. C., on the 23d of tory, without their rights, either of person April, 1860, it being then the custom of or property, being destroyed or impaired the Democratic party, as it is of all major- by Congressional or Territorial legislation. ity parties, to call its convention first. It 2d. That it is the duty of the Federal Govwas composed of delegates from all the ernment, in all its departments, to protect, thirty-three States of the Union, the whole when necessary, the rights of persons and number of votes being 303. After the ex- property in the Territories, and wherever ample of former Democratic conventions else its constitutional authority extends. it adopted the two-third rule, and 202 votes 3d. That when the settlers in a Territory were required to make nominations for having an adequate population form a President and Vice-President. Caleb Cush-State Constitution, the right of sovereignty ing, of Mass., presided. From the first a commences, and being consummated by radical difference of opinion was exhibited admission into the Union, they stand on among the members on the question of slavery in the Territories. Almost the entire Southern and a minority of the Northern portion believed in the Dred Scott decision, and held that slave property was as valid under the constitution as any other class of property. The Douglas delegates stood firmly by the theory of popular sovereignty, and avowed their indifference to the fact whether it would lead to the protection of slave property in the territories or not. On the second day a committee on resolutions consisting of one member from each State, selected by the State delegates, was named, and then a resolution was resolved unanimously "that 'this convention will not proceed to ballot for a candidate for the Presidency until the platform shall have been adopted." On the fifth day the committee on resolutions presented majority and minority reports. After a long discussion on the respective merits of the two reports, they were both, on motion of Mr. Bigler, of Pennsylvania, re-committed to the Committee on Resolutions, with a view, if possible, to promote harmony; but this proved to be impracticable. On the sixth day of the Convention (Saturday, April 28th,) at an evening session, Mr. Avery, of North Carolina, and Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, from the majority

an equal footing with the people of other States, and the State thus organized ought to be admitted into the Federal Union whether its constitution prohibits or recognizes the institution of slavery."

The following is the report of the minority, made by Mr. Samuels, of Iowa. After re-affirming the Cincinnati platform by the first resolution, it proceeds: "Inasmuch as differences of opinion exist in the Democratic party, as to the nature and extent of the powers of a Territorial Legisla ture, and as to the powers and duties of Congress, under the Constitution of the United States, over the institution of slavery within the Territories, Resolved, That the Democratic party will abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States upon questions of constitutional law."

After some preliminary remarks, Mr. Samuels moved the adoption of the minority report as a substitute for that of the majority. This gave rise to an earnest and excited debate. The difference between the parties was radical and irreconcilable. The South insisted that the Cincinnati platform, whose true construction in regard to slavery in the Territories had always been denied by a portion of the Democratic party, should be explained and

order: Resolved, That the citizens of the United States have an equal right to settle with their property in the Territories of the United States; and that, under the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, which we recognize as the correct exposition of the Constitution of the United States, neither the rights of person nor property can be destroyed or inpaired by Congressional or Territorial legislation.'

On a subsequent day (May 3d), Mr. Russell informed the Convention that this resolution had, "he believed, received the approbation of all the delegations from the Southern States which remained in the Convention, and also received the approbation of the delegation from New York. He was informed there was strength enough to pass it when in order."

Mr. Howard, however, in vain attempted to obtain a vote on his resolution. When he moved to take it up on the evening of the day it had been offered, he was met by cries of "Not in order," "Not in order." The manifest purpose was to postpone its consideration until the hour should arrive | which had been fixed by a previous order of the Convention, in opposition to its first order on the same subject, for the balloting to commence for a Presidential candidate, when it would be too late. This the friends of Mr. Douglas accomplished, and no vote was ever taken upon it either at Charleston or Baltimore.

votes, 202 votes being necessary to a nomination.

Until 1824 nominations had been made by Congressional caucus. In these none participated except Senators and Democratic States, and Representatives from Democratic Congressional districts. The simple majority rule governed in these caucuses, because it was morally certain that, composed as they were, no candidate could be selected against the will of the Democratic States on whom his election depended. But when a change was made to National Conventions, it was at once perceived that if a mere majority could nominate, then the delegates from AntiDemocratic States might be mainly instrumental in nominating a candidate for whom they could not give a single electoIral vote. Whilst it would have been harsh and inexpedient to exclude these States from the Convention altogether, it would have been unjust to confer on them a controlling power over the nomination. To compromise this difficulty, the two-thirds rule was adopted. Under its operation it would be almost impossible that a candidate could be selected, without the votes of a simple majority of delegates from the Democratic States. This was the argument of its friends.

It had now become manifest that it was impossible to make a nomination at Charleston. The friends of Mr. Douglas adhered to him and would vote for him and him alone, whilst his opponents, apprehending the effect of his principles should he be elected President, were equally determined to vote against his nomination.

Before the balloting commenced Mr. Howard succeeded, in the face of strong opposition, with the aid of the thirty-five votes from New York, in obtaining a vote of the Convention in re-affirmance of the In the hope that some compromise two-thirds rule. On his motion they re- might yet be effected, the Convention, on solved, by 141, to 112 votes, "that the Pre- the motion of Mr. Russell, of Virginia, sident of the Convention be and he is here- resolved to adjourn to meet at Baltimore on by directed not to declare any person Monday, the 18th June; and it was "renominated for the office of President or spectfully recommended to the Democratic Vice-President, unless he shall have re- party of the several States, to make proceived a number of votes equal to two-vision for supplying all vacancies in their thirds of the votes of all the electoral col-respective delegations to this Convention leges." It was well known at the time when it shall re-assemble." that this resolution rendered the regular The Convention re-assembled at Baltinomination of Mr. Douglas impossible.

The balloting then commenced (Tuesday evening, May 1st), on the eighth day of the session. Necessary to a nomination, under the two-thirds rule, 202 votes. On the first ballot Mr. Douglas received 145 votes; Mr. Hunter, of Virginia, 42; Mr. Guthrie, of Kentucky, 35; Mr. Johnson, of Tennessee, 12; Mr. Dickinson, of New York, 7; Mr. Lane, of Oregon, 6; Mr. Toucey, of Connecticut, 2; Mr. Davis, of Mississippi, 14, and Mr. Pearce, of Maryland, 1 vote.

The voting continued until May 3d, during which there were fifty-four additional ballotings. Mr. Douglas never rose to more than 152, and ended in 151

more on the 18th June, 1860, according to its adjournment, and Mr. Cushing, the President, took the chair.

Immediately after the reorganization of the Convention, Mr. Howard, of Tennes see, offered a resolution, "that the Presi dent of this Convention direct the sergeant-at-arms to issue tickets of admission to the delegates of the Convention, as originally constituted and organized at Charleston.' Thus the vitally important question was distinctly presented. It soon, however, became manifest that no such resolution could prevail. In the absence of the delegates who had withdrawn at Charleston, the friends of Mr. Douglas constituted a controlling majority. At the