Delegate, the Convention assembled, and then proceeded ❘ not violate the Constitution of the United States and the to complete their work.

Now let us stop to inquire how they redeemed the pledge to submit the constitution to the people. They first go on to make a constitution. Then they make a schedule, in which they provide that the constitution, on the 21st of December-the present month-shall be submitted to all the bona fide inhabitants of the Territory on that day, for their free acceptance or rejection, in the following manner, to wit: Thus acknowledging that they were bound to submit it to the will of the people; conceding that they had no right to put it into operation without submitting it to the people; providing in the instrument that it should take effect from and after the date of its ratification, and not before; showing that the Constitution derives its vitality, in their estimation, not from the authority of the Convention, but from that vote of the people, to which it was to be submitted for their free accept ance or rejection. How is it to be submitted? It shall be submitted in this form: "Constitution with Slavery, or constitution with no Slavery?" All men must vote for the constitution, whether they like it or not, in order to be permitted to vote for or against Slavery. Thus a constitu tion made by a convention that had authority to assemble and petition for a redress of grievances, but not to estab lish a government-a constitution made under a pledge of honor that it should be submitted to the people before if took effect-a constitution which provides on its face, that it shall have no validity except what it derives from such submission-is submitted to the people at an election where all men are at liberty to come forward freely, without hindrance, and vote for it, but no man is permitted to record a vote against it!

That would be as fair an election as some of the enemies of Napoleon attributed to him when he was elected First Consul. He is said to have called out his troops and had them reviewed by his officers, with a speech, patriotic and fair in its professions, in which he said to them: "Now, my soldiers, you are to go to the election and vote freely, just as you please. If you vote for Napoleon, all is well; vote against him, and you are to be instantly shot!" That was a fair election. (Laughter.) This election is to be equally fair. All men in favor of the constitution may vote for it, all men against it shall not vote at all. Why not let them vote against it? I presume you have asked many a man this question. I have asked a very large number of the gentlemen who framed the constitution, quite a number of delegates, and a still larger number of persons who are their friends, and I have received the same answer from every one of them. I never received any other answer, and I presume we never shall get any other answer. What is that? They say, if they had allowed a negative vote, the constitution would have been voted down by an overwhelming majority; and hence the fellows shall not be allowed to vote at all. (Laughter.) Mr. President, that may be true. It is no part of my purpose to deny the proposition that that constitution would have been voted down if submitted to the people. I believe it would have been voted down by a majority of four to one. I am informed by men well posted there -Democrats-that it would be voted down ten to one; some say by twenty to one.

But is it a good reason why you should declare it in force, without being submitted to the people, merely because it would have been voted down by five to one if you had submitted it? What does that fact prove? Does it not show undeniably that an overwhelming majority of the people of Kansas are unalterably opposed to that constitution? Will you force it on them against their will, simply because they would have voted it down if you had consulted them? If you will, are you going to force it upon them under the plea of leaving them perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way? Is that the mode in which I am called upon to carry out the principle of self-government and popular sovereignty in the Territories-to force a constitution on the people against their will, in opposition to their protest, with a knowlege of the fact, and then to assign as a reason for my tyranny, that they would be so obstinate and so perverse as to vote down the constitution if I had given them an opportunity to be consulted about it?

Sir, I deny your right, or mine, to inquire of these people what their objections to that constitution are. They have a right to judge for themselves whether they like or dislike it. It is no answer to tell me that the constitution is a good one, and unobjectionable. It is not satisfactory to me to have the President say, in his message, that that constitution is an admirable one, like all the constitutions of the new States that have been recently framed. Whether good or bad, whether obnoxious or not, is none of my business, and none of yours.

It is their business, and not ours. 1 care not what they have in their constitution, so that it suits them and does

fundamental principles of liberty upon which our institutions rest. I am not going to argue the question whether the banking system established in that constitution is wise or unwise. It says there shall be no monopolies, but there shall be one bank of issue in the State, with two branches. All I have to say on that point is, if they want a banking system, let them have it; if they do not want it, let them prohibit it. If they want a bank with two branches, be it so; if they want twenty, it is none of my business; and it matters not to me whether one of them shall be on the north side and the other on the south side of the Kaw River, or where they shall be.

While I have no right to expect to be consulted on that point, I do hold that the people of Kansas have the right to be consulted and to decide it, and you have no rightful authority to deprive them of that privilege. It is no justification, in my mind, to say that the provision for the eligibility for the officers of Governor and Lieut.-Governor requires twenty years' citizenship in the United States. If men think that no person should vote or hold office until he has been here twenty years, they have a right to think so; and if a majority of the people of Kansas think that no man of foreign birth should vote or hold office unless he has lived there twenty years, it is their right to say so, and I have no right to interfere with them; it is their business, not mine; but if I lived there I should not be willing to have that provision in the constitution without being heard upon the subject, and allowed to record my protest against it.

I have nothing to say about their system of taxation, in which they have gone back and resorted to the old exploded system which we tried in Illinois, but abandoned because we did not like it. If they wish to try it and get tired of it and abandon it, be it so; but if I were a citizen of Kansas I would profit by the experience of Illinois on that subject, and defeat it if I could. Yet I have no objection to their having it if they want it; it is their business, not mine.

So it is in regard to the free negroes. They provide that no free negro shall be permitted to live in Kansas. I suppose they have a right to say so if they choose; but if I lived there I should want to vote on the question. We, in Illinois, provide that no more shall come there. We say to the other States, "Take care of your own free negroes and we will take care of ours." But we do not say that the negroes now there shall not be permitted to live in Illinois; and I think the people of Kansas ought to have the right to say whether they will allow them to live there, and if they are not going to do so, how they are to dispose of them.

So you may go on with all the different clauses of the Constitution. They may be all right; they may be all wrong. That is a question on which my opinion is worth nothing. The opinion of the wise and patriotic Chief Magistrate of the United States is not worth anything as against that of the people of Kansas, for they have a right to judge for themselves; and neither President, nor Senates, nor Houses of Representatives, nor any other power outside of Kansas, has a right to judge for them. Hence it is no justification, in my mind, for the violation of the great principle of self-government, to say that the Constitution you are forcing on them is not particularly obnoxious, or is excellent in its provisions.

Perhaps, sir, the same thing might be said of the Topeka Constitution. I do not recollect its peculiar provisions. I know one thing: we Democrats, we Nebraska men, would not even look into it to see what its provi sions were. Why? Because we said it was made by a political party, and not by the people; that it was made in defiance of the authority of Congress; that if it was as pure as the Bible, as holy as the Ten Commandments, yet we would not touch it until it was submitted to and ratified by the people of Kansas, in pursuance of the forms of law. Perhaps the Topeka Constitution, but for the mode of making it, would have been unexceptionYou have no right able. I do not know; I do not care. to force an unexceptionable constitution on a people. It does not mitigate the evil, it does not diminish the insult, it does not ameliorate the wrong, that you are forcing a good thing upon them. I am not willing to be forced to do that which I would do if I were left free to judge and act for myself. Hence I assert that there is no justification to be made for this flagrant violation of popular rights in Kansas, on the plea that the constitution which they have made is not particularly obnoxious.

But, sir, the President of the United States is really and sincerely of the opinion that the Slavery clause has been fairly and impartially submitted to the free acceptance or rejection of the people of Kansas, and that, inasmuch as that was the exciting and paramount question, if they get the right to vote as they please on that subject, they ought to be satisfied; and possibly it might b

Sir, I am opposed to that concern, because it looks to me like a system of trickery and jugglery to defeat the fair expression of the will of the people. There is no necessity for crowding this measure, so unfair, so unjust, as it is in all its aspects, upon us.

better if we would accept it, and put an end to the ques- 1 If Kansas wants a Slave-State Constitution, she has a tion. Let me ask, sir, is the Slavery clause fairly sub-right to it; if she wants a Free-State Constitution, she has mitted, so that the people can vote for or against it? Sup- a right to it. It is none of my business which way the pose I were a citizen of Kansas, and should go up to the Slavery clause is decided. I care not whether it is polls and say, "I desire to vote to make Kansas a Slave voted down or voted up. Do you suppose, after pledges State; here is my ballot." They reply to me, "Mr. of my honor, that I would go for that principle, and Douglas, just vote for that constitution first, if you leave the people to vote as they choose, that I would now please. "Oh, no!" I answer, "I cannot vote for that degrade myself by voting one way if the Slavery clause constitution conscientiously-I am opposed to the clause be voted down, and another way if it be voted up? I by which you locate certain railroads in such a way as to care not how that vote may stand. I take it for granted sacrifice my county and my part of the State. I am that it will be voted out. I think I have seen enough in opposed to that bauking systein. I am opposed to this the last three days to make it certain that it will be reKnow-Nothing or American clause in the constitution turned out, no matter how the vote may stand. (Laughabout the qualifications for office. I cannot vote for it." ter.) Then they answer, "You shall not vote on making it a Slave State." I then say, "I want to make it a Free State." They reply, "Vote for that constitution first, and then you can vote to make it a Free State; otherwise you cannot," Thus they disqualify every Free-State man who will not first vote for the constitution; they disqualify every Slave-State man who will not first vote for the constitution. No matter whether or not the voters state that they cannot conscientiously vote for those provisions, they reply, "You cannot vote for or against Slavery here. Take the constitution as we have made it, take the Elective Franchise as we have established it, take the Banking System as we have dictated it, take the Railroad lines as we have located them, take the Judiciary System as we have formed it, take it all as we have fixed it to suit ourselves, and ask no questions, but vote for it, The first Territorial Legislature passed an act or you shall not vote either for a Slave or Free State." In in 1855 to take the sense of the people on the other words, the legal effect of the schedule is this: all those who are in favor of this constitution may vote for or call of a Convention to form a State Constituagainst Slavery, as they please; but all those who are tion, at the election in Oct., 1856. Accordingly, against this constitution are disfranchised, and shall not an election was held at which about 2,500 votes vote at all. That is the mode in which the Slavery proposition is submitted. Every man opposed to the consti- were polled, the Free-State men not voting. At tution is disfranchised on the Slavery clause. How many this election, a new legislature was elected, all are they? They tell you there is a majority, for they say Pro-Slavery, which met in Jan., 1857, and in the constitution will be voted down instantly, by an overwhelming majority, if you allow a negative vote. This conformity with the vote of 2,500 at the precedshows that a majority are against it. They disqualifying October election, passed an act providing for and disfranchise every man who is against it, thus the election of delegates on the 15th of June, referring the Slavery clause to a minority of the people of to meet in convention in September following. Kansas, and leaving that minority free to vote for or against the Slavery clause as they choose.

Let me ask you if that is a fair mode of submitting the Slavery clause? Does that mode of submitting that particular clause leave the people perfectly free to vote for or against Slavery as they choose? Am I free to vote as I choose on the Slavery question, if you tell me I shall not vote on it until I vote for the Maine Liquor Law? Am I free to vote on the Slavery question, if you tell me I shall not vote either way until I vote for a Bank? Is it freedom of election to make your right to vote upon one question depend upon the mode in which you are going to vote on some other question which has no connection with it? Is that freedom of election? Is that the great fundamental principle of Self-Government, for which we combined and struggled, in this body and throughout the country, to establish as a rule of action in all time to come?

Let me ask you, why force this Constitution down the throats of the people of Kansas, in opposition to their wishes and in violation of our pledges? What great object is to be attained? Cui bono! What are you to gain by it? Will you sustain the party by violating its principles? Do you propose to keep the party united by forcing a division? Stand by the doctrine that leaves the people perfectly free to forin and regulate their institutions for themselves in their own way, and your party will be united and irresistible in power. great principle, and the party is not worth saving, and Abandon that cannot be saved, after it shall be violated. I trust we are not to be rushed upon this question. Why shall it be

done?

Who is to be benefited? Is the South to be the

gainer? Neither the North nor the South has the right to gain a sectional advantage by trickery or frand.

On the 2nd of Feb., 1858, the President transmitted to Congress the Lecompton Constitution, accompanied by a special Message strongly urging the admission of Kansas as a State under this constitution. statement in regard to the origin of the Le(The following is a brief compton Constitution :)

Soon after this, Gov. Walker went to Kansas, and published an address to the people in which he assured them of his determination to use every means in his power to prevent all disorder and violence. He persuaded the Free-State men to go to the polls and vote. An objection which they urged was, that in 19 out of the 38 counties no registry had been made, and that in 15 out of the 19 no census had been taken, so that it was impossible for the people to vote in those counties. These facts are confirmed by Gov. Walker and Secretary Stanton.

The election for delegates to the Convention was held on the 15th of June. The Free-State men did not vote, for the reason just mentioned, and also (as they stated,) that they had no confi dence in the officers who were to hold the election, and because the Constitution which might be formed, must, in the opinion of Gov. Walker, be submitted to a vote of all the people for ratielection or not. fication or rejection, whether they voted at this The entire vote for delegates

was only about 2,200.

tion at Lecompton, Sept. 5th, but soon adjourned The delegates elected assembled in Convenover to October, to await the result of the Territorial Election on the first Monday of that month.

But I am beseeched to wait till I hear from the election on the 21st of December. I am told that perhaps that will put it all right, and will solve the whole difficulty. How can it? Perhaps there may be a large vote. There At this Territorial Election, both parmay be a large vote returned. (Laughter.) But I deny ties nominated candidates. At the request of that it is possible to have a fair vote on the Slavery Gov. Walker, 2,000 U. S. troops were in the TerClause; and I say that it is not possible to have any vote ritory, and they were stationed so as to protect on the Constitution. Why wait for the mockery of an the polls as much as possible. Over eleven thousand votes were polled, after rejecting But I am told on all sides, "Oh, just wait; the Pro-2,800 as fraudulent and irregular, 1,600 of which Slavery clause will be voted down." That does not obviate any of my objections; it does not diminish any of were returned from the Oxford precinct, where, them. You have no more right to force a Free-State according to the census, there were but 43 voters, Constitution on Kansas than a Slave-State Constitution. and twelve hundred from McGee County, where

election, when it is provided, unalterably, that the people cannot vote-when the majority are disfranchised?

zo poll was opened. The result of this election | to which they owe allegiance, and have been all the time was, the Free-State party carried the legislature and the delegate to Congress.

all the time been endeavoring to subvert it and to estab in a state of resistance against its authority. They have lish a revolutionary Government, under the so-called The Convention reassembled in October, ac- Topeka Constitution, in its stead. Even at this very cording to adjournment, and formed the Consti- moment, the Topeka Legislature are in session, Whoever has read the correspondence of Gov. Walker with tution now so famous as the Lecompton Consti- the State Department, recently communicated to the tution. When it became known that the Con- Senate, will be convinced that this picture is not overvention had refused to submit the entire con- any portion of the military force of the United States drawn. He always protested against the withdrawal of stitution to a vote of the people for ratification from the Territory, deeming its presence absolutely or rejection, and had submitted only a proposi- necessary for the preservation of the regular Governtion in regard to Slavery, and that in a form and ment and the execution of the laws. In his very first under a test oath which would prevent the Free-dispatch to the Secretary of State, dated June 2, 1857, he State people from voting, there was great excitement in the Territory, threatening bloodshed. Under these circumstances, Acting Gov. Stanton called (Gov. Walker had resigned) an extra session of the Territorial Legislature. The legislature assembled Dec. 17th, and passed an act to submit the Lecompton Constitution fairly to a vote of the people on the 4th of January next, following, the time fixed by the Lecompton convention for the election of State officers under that constitution.

On the 21st of Dec., the vote was taken in the manner prescribed by the Convention, and resulted as follows:

"For the constitution with Slavery" "For the constitution without Slavery

Total vote

6,793

says:

"The most alarming movement, however, proceeds from the assembling, on the 9th of June, of the so-called Topeka Legislature, with a view to the enactment of an entire code of laws. Of course, it will be my endeavor to prevent such a result, as it would lead to inevitable and disastrous collision,

and in fact renew the civil war in Kansas."

This was with difficulty prevented by the efforts of Governor Walker; but soon thereafter, on the 14th of July, we find him requesting General Harney to furnish Lawrence, and this for the reason that he had received him a regiment of dragoons to proceed to the city of authentic intelligence, verified by his own actual observation, that a dangerous rebellion had occurred, involv ing an open defiance of the laws, and the establishment of an insurgent government in that city. In the Governor's dispatch of July 15, he informs the Secretary of State that

"This movement at Lawrence was the beginning of a plan, originating in that city, to organize insurrection throughout 6,266 the Territory, and especially in all towns, cities and counties 567 where the Republican party have a majority. Lawrence is the hotbed of all the Abolition movements in this Territory. It is the town established by the Abolition Societies of the East, and, while there are respectable people there, it is filled by a considerable number of mercenaries, who are paid by Abolition Societies to perpetuate and diffuse agitation throughout Kansas, and prevent a peaceful settlement of this question. Having failed in inducing their own so-called Topeka State Legislature to organize this insurrection, Lawrence has commenced it herself, and, if not arrested, the rebellion will extend throughout the Territory." And again:

Jan. 4th, 1858, in accordance with the act of the Territorial Legislature, the people voted as follows:

For the Lecompton Constitution with Slavery

66

66

without "

188 24 10,226

Against the Lecompton Constitution

"In order to send this communication immediately by mail,

Being over ten thousand majority against the I must close, assuring you that the spirit of rebellion pervades Lecompton Constitution.

PRESIDENT BUCHANAN'S LECOMPTON MESSAGE.

the great mass of the Republican party of this Territory, instigated, as I entertain no doubt they are, by Eastern Societies, having in view results most disastrous to the Government and the Union; and that the continued presence of Gen.

The following is the President's special Mes- Harney is indispensable, as was originally stipulated by me, sage, of Feb. 2nd, 1858.

I have received from J. Calhoun, Esq., President of the late Constitutional Convention of Kansas, a copy duly certified by himself, of the Constitution framed by that body, with the expression of the hope that I would submit the same to the consideration of Congress" with the view of the admission of Kansas into the Union as an Independent State." In compliance with this request, I herewith transmit to Congress for their action the Constitution of Kansas, with the ordinance respecting the public lands, as well as the letter of Mr. Calhoun, dated at Lecompton, on the 14th ult., by which they were accompanied. Having received but a single copy of the Constitution and ordinance, I send this to the Senate.

with a large body of dragoons and several batteries."

On the 20th of July, 1857, Gen. Lane, under the authority of the Topeka Convention, undertook, as Gen. Walker informs us,

"To organize the whole Free-State party into volunteers, and to take the names of all who refuse enrolment. The professed object was to protect the polls at the elections, in August, of a new insurgent Topeka State Legislature. The object in taking the names of all who refuse enrollment is to proved by the recent atrocities committed on such men by the terrify the Free-State Conservatives into submission. This is Topekaites. The speedy location of large bodies of regular troops here with two batteries is necessary. The Lawrence insurgents await the developments of this new military organ ization."

In the Governor's dispatch of July 27, he says that "Gen. Lane and his staff everywhere deny the authority of the Territorial laws, and counsel a total disregard of these enactments."

A great delusion seems to pervade the public mind in relation to the condition of parties in Kansas. This arises from the difficulty of inducing the American people to realize the fact that any portion of them should be in a state of rebellion against the Government under which they live. When we speak of the affairs of Kansas, we are apt to refer merely to the existence of two violent political parties in that Territory, divided on the question of Slavery, just as we speak of such parties in the States. This presents no adequate idea of the true state of the case. The dividing line there is not between two politi-ducted without collision and bloodshed." cal parties, both acknowledging the lawful existence of the Government, but between those who are loyal to this Government and those who have endeavored to destroy its existence by force and by usurpation-between those who sustain, and those who have done all in their power to overthrow, the Territorial Government established by Congress. This Government they would long since have subverted had it not been protected from their assaults by the troops of the United States. Such has been the condition of affairs since my inauguration. Ever since that period, a large portion of the people of Kansas have been in a state of rebellion against the Government, with a military leader at their head, of most turbulent and dangerous character. They have never acknowledged, but have constantly renounced and defied, the Government

Without making further quotations of a similar character from other dispatches of Governor Walker, it appears, by reference to Secretary Stanton's communication to Gen. Cass on the 9th of December last, that

"The important step of calling the legislature together was taken after I (he) had become satisfied that the election ordered by the Convention on the 21st of December could not be con

So intense was the disloyal feeling among the enemies of the Government established by Congress, that an election which afforded them opportunities, if in the majority, of making Kansas a Free State according to their own expressed desire, could not be conducted without collision and bloodshed. The truth is that, up to the present moment, the enemies of the existing government still adhere to their Topeka revolutionary constitution and government. The very first paragraph of the message of Gov. Robinson, dated the 7th of December, to the Topeka Legislature, now assembled at Lawrence, contains an open defiance of the laws and Constitution of the United States. The Governor says:

"The Convention which framed the Topeka Constituțion originated with the people of Kansas Territory. They

have adopted and ratified the same twice by a direct vots, also themselves. That Convention is now about to be elected by indirectly through two elections for State officers and mem-you, under the call of the Territorial Legislature created, and bers of the State Legislature; yet it has pleased the Adminis- still recognized, by the authority of Congress and clothed by tration to regard the whole proceeding as revolutionary."

This Topeka Government, adhered to with such treasonable pertinacity, is a government in direct opposition to the existing government prescribed and recognised by Congress.

it, in the comprehensive language of the organic law, with full power to make such an enactment. The Territorial Legisla ture, then, in assembling this Convention, were fully sustained by the act of Congress, and the authority of the Convention is distinctly recognized in my instructions from the President of the United States."

It is usurpation of the same character as it would be for a portion of the people of any State to undertake to what would be the consequences if they did not partici The Governor also clearly and distinctly warns them establish a separate government within its limits for

The people of Kansas, then, he

This

the purpose of redressing any grievance, real or imag-pate in the election. inary, of which they might complain against the legiti- says, mate State Government. Such a principle, if carried into "Are invited by the highest authority known to the Constiexecution, would destroy all lawful authority and pro-tution to participate freely and fairly in the election of deleduce universal anarchy. From this statement of facts, has performed its entire appropriate function, when it extends gates to frame a Constitution and State Government. The law the reason becomes palpable why the enemies of the gov- to the people the right of suffrage; but it cannot compel the ernment authorized by Congress have refused to vote for performance of that duty. Throughout the whole Union, the delegates to the Kansas Constitutional Convention, however, and wherever free government prevails, those who and also, afterward, on the question of Slavery submitted abstain from the exercise of the right of suffrage authorize by it to the people. It is because they have ever refused those who do vote to act for them in that contingency, and absentees are as much bound, under the law and Constitution, to sanction or recognize any other Constitution than that where there is no fraud or violence, by the act of the majority framed at Topeka. Had the whole Lecompton Constitu- of those who do vote, as if all had participated in the election. tion been submitted to the people, the adherents of this Otherwise, as voting must be voluntary. self-government organization would doubtless have voted against it, be- would be impracticable, and monarchy or despotism would cause, if successful, they would thus have removed the remain as the only alternative." obstacles out of the way of their own revolutionary Constitution; they would have done this, not upon the consideration of the merits of the whole or part of the Lecompton Constitution, but simply because they have ever resisted the authority of the government authorized by Congress from which it emanated. Such being the unfortunate condition of affairs in the Territory, what was the right as well as the duty of the law-abiding people? Were they silently and patiently to submit to the Topeka usurpation, or to adopt the necessary measure to establish a Constitution under the authority of the organic law of Congress? That this law recognized the right of the people of the Territory, without an enabling act of Congress, to form a State Constitution, is too clear for argument. For Congress "to leave the people of the Territory perfectly free" in framing their Constitution "to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States," and then to say that they shall not be permitted to proceed and frame the Constitution in their own way, without express authority from Congress, appears to be almost a contradiction in terms. It would be much more plausible to contend that Congress had no power to pass such an enabling act, than to argue that the people af a Territory might be kept out of the Union for an indefinite period, and until it might please Congress to permit them to exercise the right of self-government. This would be to adopt, not their own way, but the way which Congress might prescribe. It is impossible that any people could have proceeded with more regularity in the formation of a Constitution than the people of Kansas have done. It was necessary, first, to ascertain whether it was the desire of the people to be relieved from their Territorial dependence and establish a State Government. For this purpose, the Territorial Legislature, in 1855, passed a law for taking the sense of the people of the Territory upon the expediency of calling a Convention to form a State Constitution at the general election to be held in October, 1856. The "sense of the people" was accordingly taken, and they decided in favor of a Con

vention.

It is true that at this election the enemies of the Territorial Government did not vote, because they were then engaged at Topeka, without the slightest pretext of lawful authority, in framing a Constitution of their own for subverting the Territorial Government. In pursuance of this decision of the people in favor of a Convention, the Territorial Legislature, on the 27th of February, 1857, passed an act for the election of delegates on the third Monday of June, 1857, to frame a State Constitution. This law is as fair in its provisions as any that ever passed a legislative body for a similar purpose. The right of suffrage at this election is clearly and justly defined. Every bona fide citizen of the United States, above the age of twenty-one, and who had resided therein for three months previous to that date, was entitled to a vote. order to avoid all interference from neighboring States and Territories with the freedom and fairness of the election, a provision was made for the registry of qualified voters, and in pursuance thereof, nine thousand two hundred and fifty-one voters were registered. Gov. Walker did his whole duty in urging all qualified citizens of Kanas to vote at this election. In his Inaugural Address on he 27th of May, he informed them that

In

"Under our practice, the preliminary act of framing a State Constitution is uniformly performed through the instrumentality of a Convention of delegates chosen by the people

It may also be observed that at this period any hope, if such had existed, that the Topeka Constitution would ever be recognized by Congress must have been abandoned. Congress had adjourned on the third of March previous, having recognized the legal existence of the Territorial Legislature in a variety of forms, which I need not enumerate. Indeed, the Delegate elected to the House of Representatives under a Territorial law had been admitted to a seat and had just completed his te m of service the day previous to my inauguration. was the propitious moment for settling all the difficulties of Kansas. This was the time for abandoning the revolutionary Topeka organization, and for the enemies of the existing government to conform to the laws and unite with its friends in framing a State Constitution. But this they refused to do, and the consequences of their refusal to submit to the lawful authority, and vote at the election of delegates, may yet prove to be of the most deplorable character. Would that the respect for the laws of the land, which so eminently distinguished the men of the past generation, could be revived! It is a disregard and violation of law which has for years kept the Territory of Kansas in a state of almost open rebellion against its Government-it is the same spirit which has produced actual rebellion in Utah. Our only safety consists in obedience and conformity to the law. Should a general spirit against its enforcement prevail, this will prove fatal to us as a nation.

We acknowledge no master but law, and should we cut loose from its restraints and every one do what seemeth good in his own eyes, our case would indeed be hopeless. The enemies of the Territorial Government determined still to resist the authority of Congress. They refused to vote for delegates to the Convention, not because, from circumstances which I need not detail, there was an omission to register the comparatively few voters who early spring of 1857, but because they had determined, at all hazards, to adhere to their revolutionary organization, and defeat the establishment of any other constitution than that which they had framed at Topeka. The election was therefore suffered to pass by default, but of this result the qualified electors who refused to vote can never justly complain.

were inhabitants of certain counties in Kansas in the

From this review, it is manifest that the Lecompton Convention, according to every principle of constitu tional law, was legally constituted and invested with power to frame a Constitution. The sacred principle of Popular Sovereignty has been invoked in favor of the enemies of Law and Order in Kansas; but in what manner is Popular Sovereignty to be exercised in this country if not through the instrumentality of established law? In certain small republics of ancient times, the people did assemble in primary meeting, passed laws and directed public affairs. In our country, this is manifestly impossible. Popular Sovereignty can be exercised here only through the ballotbox; and if the people will refuse to exercise it in this manner, as they have done in Kansas at the election of Delegates, it is not for them to complain that their rights have been violated.

The Kansas Convention, thus lawfully constituted, proceeded to frame a Constitution, and, having completed their work, finally adjourned on the 7th of November last. They did not think proper to submit the whole of this Constitution to a popular vote, but they did submit the question whether Kansas should be a Free or Slave State to the people. This was the question which had con

vulsed the Union and shaken it to the very center. This was the question which had lighted the flames of civil war in Kansas and had produced dangerous sectional parties throughout the confederacy. It was of a character so paramount in respect to the condition of Kansas, as to rivet the anxious attention of the people of the whole country upon it and it alone-no person thought of any other question. For my own part, when I instructed Governor Walker in general terms in favor of submitting the constitution to the people, I had no object in view except the all-absorbing question of Slavery. In what manner the people of Kansas might regulate their other concerns, was not the subject which attracted my attention. In fact, the general provisions of our recent State constitutions, after an experience of eighty years, are so similar and excellent that it would be difficult to go far wrong at the present day in framing a new constitution. I then believed, and still believe, that, under the organic act, the Kansas Convention were bound to submit this all-important question of Slavery to the people. It was never, however, my opinion that, independently of this act, they would have been bound to submit any portion of the constitution to a popular vote in order to give it validity. Had I enter tained such an opinion, this would have been in opposition to many precedents in our history, commencing in the very best age of our Republic. It would have been in opposition to the principle which pervades our institutions, and which is every day carried into practice, that the people have a right to delegate to the representatives chosen by themselves their sovereign power to frame constitutions, enact laws, and perform many other important acts, without requiring that these should De subjected to their subsequent approbation. It would be a most inconvenient limitation of their own power, imposed by the people upon themselves, to exclude them from exercising their sovereignty in any lawful manner which they think proper.

be banished from the halls of Congress, where it has always exerted a baneful influence throughout the whole country.

It is proper that I should briefly refer to the election held under the act of the Territorial Legislature on the first Monday of January last on the Lecompton Constitution. This election was held after the Territory had been prepared for admission into the Union as a Sovereign State, and when no authority existed in the Territorial Legislature which could possibly destroy its existence or change its character. The election, which was peaceably conducted under my instructions, involved strange inconsistencies. A large majority of the persons who voted against the Lecompton Constitution were at the same time and place recognizing its valid existence in the most solid and authentic manner by voting under its provisions. I have yet received no official information of the result of this election.

As a question of expediency, after right has been maintained, it may be wise to reflect upon the benefits to Kansas and the whole country that will result from its immediate admission into the Union, as well as the disasters that may follow its rejection. Domestic peace will be the happy consequence of the admission, and that fine Territory, which has hitherto been torn by dissensions, will rapidly increase in population and wealth, and speedily realize the blessings and comforts which follow in the train of agricultural and mechanical industry, The people, then, will be sovereign, and can regulate their affairs in their own way. If the majority of them desire to abolish domestic Slavery within the State, there is no other possible mode by which it can be effected so speedily as by prompt admission. The will of the majority is supreme and irresistible, when expressed in an orderly and lawful manner. It can make and unmake constitutions at pleasure. It would be absurd to say that they can impose fetters upon their own power which they cannot afterward remove. If they could do this, they might tie their own hands just as well for a hundred as for ten years. These are the fundamental principles of American freedom, and are recognized, I believe, in some form or other by every State constitution; and if Congress, in the act of admission, should think proper to recognize them, I can perceive no objection.

It is true that the people of Kansas might, if they had pleased, have required the Convention to submit the constitution to a popular vote, but this they have not done. The only remedy, therefore, in this case is that which exists in all other similar cases. If the delegates who framed the Kansas Constitution have in any manner violated the will of their constituents, the people always This has been done emphatically in the constitution of possess the power to change their constitution or laws Kansas. It declares in its bill of rights that "All politiaccording to their own pleasure. The question of Slavery cal power is inherent in the people," and all free governwas submitted to an election of the people on the 21st of ments are founded on their authority and instituted for December last, in obedience to the mandate of the Con- their benefit, and therefore have at all times an inalienvention. Here, again, a fair opportunity was presented able and indefeasible right to alter, reform and abolish to the adherents of the Topeka Constitution, if they were their form of government, in such manner as they may the majority, to decide this exciting question "in their think proper. The great State of New-York is at this own way," and thus restore peace to the distracted Ter- moment governed under a constitution framed and estabritory; but they again refused to exercise the right of lished in direct opposition to a mode prescribed by the Popular Sovereignty, and again suffered the election to previous constitution. If, therefore, a provision chang. pass by default. I heartily rejoice that a wiser and bet-ing the constitution of Kansas after the year 1864, could ter spirit prevailed among a large majority of these by possibility be construed into a prohibition to make people on the first Monday in January, and that they such change previous to that period, this prohibition did on that day vote under the Lecompton Constitution would be wholly unavailing. The legislature already for a Governor and other State officers, a member of elected may, at its very first session, submit the question Congress, and for members of the Legislature. This to a vote of the people, whether they will or not have a election was warmly contested by the parties, and a larger convention, to amend their constitution, and adopt all vote polled than at any previous election in the Territory. necessary means for giving effect to the popular will. It We may now reasonably hope that the revolutionary has been solemnly adjudged, by the highest judicial triTopeka organization will be speedily and finally aban-bunal known to our laws, that Slavery exists in Kansas doned, and this will go far toward a final settlement of the by virtue of the Constitution of the United States. unhappy differences in Kansas. If frauds have been com- Kansas is therefore at this moment as much a Slave State mitted at this election by one or both parties, the legisla- as Georgia or South Carolina. Without this, the equality ture and people of Kansas, under their constitution, will of the Sovereign States composing the Union would be know how to redress themselves and punish these detesta- violated, and the use and enjoyment of a Territory acble but too common crimes without outside interference. quired by the common treasure of all the States, would The people of Kansas have, then, "in their own way,' be closed against the people and property of nearly half and in strict accordance with the organic act, framed a the members of the Confederacy. Slavery can, therefore, Constitution and State Government, have submitted the never be prohibited in Kansas, except through the means all-important question of Slavery to the people, and have of a constitutional provision; and in no other manner can elected a Governor, a member to represent them in this be obtained so promptly, if the majority of the people Congress, members of the State Legislature and other desire it, as by admitting her into the Union under her State officers; and they now ask admission into the present constitution. On the other hand, should ConUnion under this constitution, which is republican in its gress reject the constitution, under the idea of affording form. It is for Congress to decide whether they will the disaffected in Kansas a third opportunity to prohibit admit or reject the State which has thus been created. Slavery in the State, which they might have done twice before if in the majority, no man can foretell the consequences. If Congress, for the sake of those men who refused to vote for delegates to the convention, when they might have excluded Slavery from the constitution, and who afterward refused to vote on the 21st of December, when they might, as they claim, have stricken Slavery from the constitution, should now reject the State because Slavery remains in the constitution, it is manifest that the agitation upon this dangerous subject will be renewed in a more alarming form than it has ever yet assumed. Every patriot in the country had indulged the hope that the Kansas-Nebraska Act would have put a

For my own part, I am decidedly in favor of its admission, and thus terminating the Kansas question. This will carry out the great principle of Non-Intervention recognized and sanctioned by the organic act, which declares in express language in favor of the non-intervention of Congress with Slavery in the States and Territories, leaving the people "perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." In this manner, by localizing the question of Slavery and confining it to the people who it immediately concerned, every patriot anxiously expected that this question would