Crawfordsville Review, Crawfordsville, Montgomery County, 2 January 1858 — Page 1

n^maa

MW SERIES-VOL. II, NO, 24,

TUB SCOTT LEGION.

We Were not wHo stood Z'it Before tho iron eJoot th* day, '1 Yetmany aslant spirit won

Id

Give half Tear*, if he bnt could" Btv« been with ur»t Monterey. ..

Kow here, now. there, the shot is hailed In deadly drifts of fiery spray ,v Tet rtoi a single soldier qnai led When wounded comrades round them

Their dying shoat at Monterey •Jtoi -V'And on, still otj,rt)tir columns kopt Y" Through wallstif flame its withering way,

Where fed the dead, tho living slept Still charging on tho .guns -whicL swept t^r Tho slippery streeU of Monterey.

'^The foe himself recoiled aghast,When, striking where ho strongest lay, Wo wboped its flanking batteries past,

Arid braving full their murderous blast, Btormel home the towers of Slonterey.

Ont banners on these turrets wave, And there theevening bugles play, '!Where orange boughs above their grave

Keep green tho memory of tlie brave Who fought and fell at Monterey.

.Wo are not many—we who pressed Besido the bravo wlio fell that day •_ But who of us has not confessed

He'd ra ther share their warrior rest, Than not have been at Monterey.

LIVE FOR SOMETHING.

L'tvo for something be not idle— Look about thee for employ Eit not down to useless dreaming—

Labor is tho sweetest joy. Folded hands are over weary, Selfish hearts are never gay, Life for thee hath many duties-

Aetivo be, then, while you may.

Bcattcr blessings in thy pathway I Gentle words and cheering smiles Better than gold and silver,

With their grief dispelling wiles. A« the pleasant sunshine falleth

1

Ever on tho grateful earth, £o let sympathies and kindness

Gladden well the darkened earth.

Hearts there are oppressed and weary, Drop tho toar of sympathy, -"Whisper words of hope and comfort, .'«• Give, aud thy reward shall be

Joy, unto the sonl returning From this perfect fountain head Freely, as tlicu givest, fihall the grateful light be shed.

GOVERNOR WALKER'S LETTER OF RESIGNATION. "WashingToy, Friday, Dec. 15. To 1Ion. Lewis Cass, Sccrctary of State:

I resign the officc of Governor of Kansas. I'have been most reluctantly forced to this conclusion after anxious and careful consideration of my duty to the country, to the people of Kansas, to the President of the Uuited States and myself. The grounds assumed by the President in his late message to Congress and in the recent instructions in connection with the events transpiring here and in Kansas, itdmonish that us Governor of that Territory, it will no longer be in my power to preserve peace or promote the public welfare.

At the earnest solicitation of tho President, after repealed refusals, (the. last being in writing) I finally accepted this office upon his letter, shewing the dangers an.l difficulties of the Kansas question, and the necessity of my undertaking the task of adjustment.

Under these circumstances, notwithstanding the great sacrifices to nis, personal, political and pecuniary, I felt that I could uo more refuse such a call from niv coon try, through, her Chief Magistrate, than a soldier in battle who ordered to command a forlorn hope. I accepted, however, Upon the express condition that I should advocate the submission of the con stitution to a vote of the people for ratification or rejection.

Those views were clearly understood by the President and all his Cabinet. They were distinctly set forth in my letter of acceptance of this office, on the 26th clay of March last, and reiterated in my inaugural address, on the 27tli day of May last, as follows: "Iudced, I cannot doubt that tho Convention, after having passed a State constitution, will submit it for ratification or rejection by a majority of the bona fide resident settlers of Kansas."

With these views, well known to the President and his Cabinet, aud approved by them, I accepted the appointment of Governor of Kansas.

My instructions from the President, through the Secretary of State, tinder date of the 13th of March last, sustain the regular Legislature of the Territory, in assembling a Convention to form a constitution, and they express the opinion of the President that when such a constitution shall be submitted to the people of the Territory, they must be protected in the exercise of their right of voting for or against that instrument.

The fair expression of the popular will must not be interrupted by fraud or violence. I repeat, then, as my clear conviction, that unless the Convention should submit the constitution to the vote of all the actual resident settlers in Kansas, and the election be fairly aud justly conducted the constitution will be and ought to be rejected by Congress. This inaugural most distinctly asserted that it was not the question of slavery merely, which I believe to be. of little practical importance then in its application to Kansas, but the entire constitution, which should bo submitted to the people for ratification or rejection.

These were my words on this subject in my inaugural: .-,'It -is. not merely, shall Slavexyexist in or disappear from Kansas, but shau^t&s-great principles of self-gov-ernment and State sovereignty be maintained or subverted

In that inaugural I proceed further to •ay, the people "may bya subsequent vote defeat the ratification' of-the Constitution." I designate "a groat constitutional right," and'add, "that the .Convention is the servant and not the maBtet of the people."— In my official dispatchtoyoa of the 2d June last, a oopr of thit ioaagural' iddreas was toAiatad to you for the farther informatioD WttfPftadMt nil Us CaMne'tP Ne •. e^Jri'T

exception was ever taken to any portion of that address.- On the contrary, it was distinctly admitted by the President in his message, with commendable frankness, that my instructions in favor of a submission of the Constitution to a vote of the people were "general and unqualified."

By that inaugural and a subsequent address, I was pledged to the people of Kan-? sas td oppose, by all lawful ipeans, the adoption of any Constitution which was not fairly and fully submitted to their vote for ratification or rejection. These pledges I cannot recall or violate without personal dishonor and the abandonment of fundamental principles arid, therefore, it is im possible for me to support what is called the Lecompton Constitution, because it is not submitted to a vote of the people for ratification or rejection.

I have ever uniformly maintained the principle that sovereignty is vested exclusively in the people of each State, and that it performs its first aud highest function in forming a State Government and Constitution. This highest act of sovereignty, in my judgment, can only be performed by the people themselves, and cannot be del1 egated to Conventions or other immediate bodies.

Indeed, the whole doctrine of the sovereignty of Conventions as distinct from that of the people, of conventional or delegated sovereignty as contradistinguished from State or popular sovereignty, has ever been discarded by me, and was never heard of to my knowledge during the great canvass of 185G. Indeed, this is the great principle of State Sovereignty, maintained by the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798-9, sustained by the people in the great political revolution of 1800 and embraced in that amendment to tho Federal Constitution adopted under the auspices of Mr. Jefferson, declaring that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The reservation to "the States" is as separate States in exercising the powers granted by their State Constitutions, and the reservation to "the people" is to the people of the several States, admitted or inchoate, exercising their sovereign right of framing or amending their State Constitution. This view was set forth in my printed address, delivered at Natchez, Mississippi, in January, 1S33, against the Nullification, which speech received the complimentary sanction of the great and good Madison, the principal founder of our Constitution, as shown by the letter of Hon. Charles J. Ingersoll of Philadelphia, as published in The Globe at Washington in 133(5. By this clause of Federal"constitutional sovereignty of the people, each State is clearly reserved, and especially their own exclusive right to form in its entirety their own State Constitution, I shall not enter fully into the argument of this question at this period but will merely state that this is the position I have ever occupied, and my reasons for entertaining the opinion are clearly and distinctly set forth in a pamphlet, published over my signature on the 13th of June, 1856, and then extensively circulated from which I quote as follows: "Under our confederate system sovereignty is that highest political power which, at its pleasure, creates governments and delegates authority to them. Sovereignty grants powers, but not sovereign powers, otherwise it might extinguish itself by making the creature of its will the equal or superior of its creator. Sovereignty makes Constitutions, and through them establishes governments. It delegates certain powers, distributing the exercise of the granted powers among the legislative, executive and judicial departments. The Constitution is not sovereign, because it is created by sovereignty. The Government is not sovereign for the same reason, much less any department of that Government.

Having defined sovereignty, we must not confound the power with its source or cxercise. That is. sovereignty is one thing and where it resides or how it is to be exercised is another. Under the system of European despotism sovereignty was claimed to reside in king3 and emperors, under the sacrcligious idea of tho "divine right of kings," and tho blasphemous doctrine was that sovereigns, in legitimate sueces-

a

sion, although stained with crimes and performed

of the Almighty. Our doctrine is just the

reverse, making the people the only source of sovcreigu power. But what people With us sovereignty rests exclusively with the people of each State. By the Revolution each colouy acting for itself alone, separated from Great Britain sanctioned tho declaration of Independence.

Each colony having thus become a State and each adopting for itself its separate State government, acted for itself alone under the old Continental Congress.— Each State acted for itself alone in acceding to the Articles of Confederation in 1778, and each State acted for itself alone in framing and ratifying each for itself, the Constitution of the United States. Sovereignty, then, with us, rests exclusively with the people of each State. The Constitution of the United States is not sovereign, for it was created by States, each exercising for itself that highest political power called sovereignty.

For the same reason, the Government of the United States is not sovereign, nor docs it exercise sovereign powers. It exercises only 'delegated powers,' as declared by the Constitution, and those powers only which are granted by that instrument. Delegated powers are not sovereign powers, but are powers granted b^ sovereignty. Sovereignty being the highest political power, cannot be delegated. It is indivisible, it is a unit incapable of partition. Hence the jgreat error of supposing that sovereignty is divided between the States and the United 8ates. TheConstitution

of the United States is the 'supreme law,' and obligatory as such, but a law is not sovereignty but an act of sovereignty.—• All laws imply law maker's, and in this case those who framed and ratified this "supreme law" were those sovereignties called the States, each acting exclusively for itself, uncontrolled by any sister State except by the moral force ot its influence and example. The Government of the United States, possessing, as we have shown,, no sovereignty but only delegated powers to them alone, it must look for the exercise of constitutional authority in the Territories as well as the States, for there is not a single poWer granted by the Constitution to this Government in a Territory which is not granted in a State, except the power to admit new States into the Union, whichj as shown by Madison papers, the framcrs of the Constitution, as first demonstrated in my Texas letter, refused to limit our then existing Territories.In the Territories then, as well as the States, Congress possesses no sovereignty, and can exorcise only the powers delegated by the Constitution and all the powers not thus granted are dormant or reserved powers belonging in common Territory to all the States as co-equal joint tenants there of that highest political power called popular sovereignty. It will be perceived that this doctrine that "sovereignty rests exclusively with the people of each State," that "sovereignty cannot be delegated," that "it is inalienable, indivisible," "a unit incapable of partition," are doctrines ever regarded by me as fundamental principles of public liberty and of the Federal Constitution. It will be seen that these views which I have entertained were not framed to suit any emergency in Kansas, but were my lifelong principles, and were published over my own signature twelve months before my departure to that Territory, and when I never thought of going to Kansas. These rights I have ever regarded as firily secured to the people of "all the Territories," in adopting their State Constitution by the Kansas and Nebraska bill. Such is the construction given to that act by Congress in passing the Minnesota bill, so justly applauded by the President. Such is tho construction of this Kansas act by its distinguished .author, not only in his late most able argument, but in addresses made and published by him long antecedent to that date, showing that this sovereign power of the people in acting upon a State Constitution, is not confined to the question of Slavery, but includes all other subjects, embraced in such an instrument. Indeed, I believe the Kansas and Nebraska bill would have violated the right of sovereignty reserved to the people ot each State by the Federal Constitution, if it had deprived them, or Congress should now deprive them of the right of voting for or against their State Constitution.— Tho President, in his message, thinks that the rights sccured by this bill to the people, in acting upon their State Constitution, arc confined to the Slavery question but I think, as shown in my address before quoted, that "sovereignty is the power that makes Constitutions and Governments," and that nos only the Slavery clause in a State Constitution, but all others, must be submitted.

The President thinks that sovereignty can be delegated—at least in part I think that sovereignty cannot be delegated at all. The President believes that sovereignty is divisible between conventions and people, t) be exercised by the former on all subjects but slavery, and by the latter only on that question whereas, I thiiik that sovereignty is indlicncihlc, indivisible, a unit, incapable of partition, and that it cannot be delegated, in whole or in part-.—J It will not be denied that sovereignty is the only power that can make a State Constitution, and that it rests exclusively witn the people, and if it is inalienable and cannot be delegated, as I have shown, then it can only be exercised by the people themselves, under our Government. We have no sovereigns but the people. Conventions arc composed of "delegates." They arc mere agents or trustees, exercising not a sovereign but a delegated power, and the people are principles. The power delegated to such Convention can properly only extend to framing the Constitution, but

its ratification or rejection can onl}^ be

by the power

blackened with infamy, were clothed by ty alone rests—namely, the people themthe Deity with absolute power to rule their selves. Wo must not confound sovereign subjects, who hold nothing but the privi-

with

loses granted by the crown. Such were authority of the Convention to frame a the absurd and impious dogmas to which the people of Europe, with few exceptions have been compelled to submit by the bayonet supported by the more potent authority of ignorance and superstition. Under this theory the people were ciphers, and crowned heads sub-deities the sole representatives on earth of the governing power

where sovereign-

delegated power. The provisional

Constitution, aud submit it to the people, is delegated power, but sovereignty alone, which rests exclusively with tho people, can ratify and put in force that Constitution. And this is the true doctrine of Popular Sovereignty, and I know ot no such thing, nor does the Federal Constitution recognizo it as delegated or convcn-

(tional

sovereignty. The President, in a

very lucid passage of his able message gives unanswerable reasons why the people and not Conventions should dccide the question of Slavery. He says very truly, that from the necessary division of the inchoate State into districts, a majority ot the delegates may think one way and the people .another, and that the delegates, as was the case in Kansas, may violate their pledges, or fail to execute the will of the people. And why does not this reasoning apply with equal force to all other questions embodied in the State Constitution, and why should the question of Slavery alone override and extinguish the doctrine of Popular Sovereignty and the right of self-government. Most fortunately this is no sectional question, for it belongs alike to the States admitted or inchoate, of the South'as of the North. It is not a question of Slavery, but of States' Rights, of State and Popular Sovereignty and my objections to the Lecompton Constitution are equally strong whether Kansas, under its provisions, should be made a Free or a Slave State. My objections are based upon the violation""of the right of selfgovernment and popular sovereignty and of forcing any Constitution upon the people against their will, whether it recognizes freedom or slavery. Indeed, the first question which*tEejpeople ought to decide in forming a government-for an inchoate State is, whether they will change or not from a Territorial to a State GOTenment^'Now, as no one who with me

denies Federal or Territorial sovereignty, will contend that & Territorial legislature [is sovereign, or represents sovereignty, or. I that such Legislature, a mere creature of

Congress, can transfer sovereignty, which it does not possess to a Territorial Convention. This change from a Territorial to a State Government can only be made by the power where sovereignty rests with the people. Yet State Government is forced upon the people of Kansas by the Lecompton Constitution, and not against it. ifut besides the change from a Territorial to a State Government which the people alone have a right to make. In framing a State Constitution there arc many other momentous questions included in that instrument. It involves all the powers of State Gov ernment. Where is the bill of rights, the Magna Charta of the liberties of a free people—the legislative executive and judicial functions, the taxing power, the elective franchise, the great question of education, the sacred relations of husband and wife, parent and child, guardian and ward, and ail the rights affecting life, liberty and property. There is also the questions of State debt, of banks and paper money, and whether they shall be permitted or prohibited. As all free government, as stated by Mr. Jefferson, depends upon "the consent of the governed," how can it be known whether" the people woiild assent to the Constitution, unless it be submitted to their vote for ratification or rejection?— But if acquiescence can be presumed in any case, surely it cannot be in the case of Kansas, where so many of the delegates violated their pledge to submit the Constitution itself to a vote of the people, where the delegates who signed the (joristitut-ion represented scarcely one-tenth of the people, and where nearly one-half of tho counties of the Territory were disfranchized, anrl that by no fault of theirs, and did not aud could not give a single vote at tho election of delegates to the Convention. I have therefore, discussed tho subject mainly on the question that conventions are not sovereign, and cannot rightfully make a State Constitution without its submission to a vote of the people for ratification or rejection. Yet, surely, even those who differ with me on this point must concede, especially under the Kansas-Nebraska act, it is only such Conventions can be called sovereign as have been truly elected by the people, and represent them well. On reference, however, to mj* address of the IGth of September last, on tho day-quali-fication question, a copy of which was immediately transmitted to you for the information of the President and Cabinet, it is evident that the Lecompton Convention was not such a body. That Convention had vital, not techuical, defects in tiie very substance of its organisation under the Territorial law, which could only be cured, in my judgment, as set forth in my inaugural and other addresses, by submission of the Constitution for the ratification of the people. On refercnop to the Territorial law under which the Convention was assembled, thirty-four regularly organized counties were named as election districts for delegates to the Convention In each and all of these counties it was required by law that a census be taken, also the voters registered, and when this was completed the delegates to the Convention should be apportioned accordingly. In nineteen of these counties there was no census, and therefore there could be no such apportionment there of delegates upon such census. And in fifteen of these counties there was no registry of voters.— These fifteen counties, including many of the oldest organized counties in the Territory, vfe're entirely disfranchised, and did not give (by no fault of their own), and could not give, a solitary vote for tho delegates to the Convention1. The result was superinduced by the fact that- the Territorial Legislature appointed all the Sheriffs and Probate Judges in all these counties, to whom was assigned the duty by law of making this census and registry. The officers were political partisans, dissenting from the views and opinions of the people of these counties, as w^s proved by the election in October last. These oflieers, from want of funds, as tliey alleged, neglected or refused to take' any census, or make any registry in these couuties, and therefore they were entirely disfranchised and could not and did not give a single vote at the election for delegates to the Constitutional Convention. And here I wish to call attention to a distinction which will appear in my inaugural address in reference to those counties where the voters were fairly registered, and did not vote. In sitch counties where full and free opport\ nit3r was given to register and to vote, aud they did not choose to exercise such a privilege, the question is very different front those couuties where there was no census or registry, and no vote was given, or could be given, however anxious the people might be to participate in the election of delegates to the Convention.— Nor could it be said these counties acquiesced, for wherever they endeavored, by a subsequent census or registry of their own, to previous neglcct the delegates thus chosen were rejected by the Convention.

I repeat that, in nineteen counties out of thirty-four, there was no census. In fifteen counties out of thirty-four there was no registry, aud not a solitary vote was given, or could be given, for delegates to the Convention in any one of these counties. Surely, then, it cannot be Said that

CRAWFORDSVILLE, MONTGOMERY COUIfTy, INDIANA, JANUARY 2, 1858. WHOLE NUMBER 804.

thte and other reasons that in my inaugu- and in' the denomination of its notes from ral and other addresses I insisted that the Constitution should be submitted to the people by the Convention, as the only means of curing the vital defect in its organization. It was, therefore, among other reasons, that when, as yon know, the organization called the "Topeka State Government" was made, and, as a consequence an inevitable civil war and conflict must have ensued, these results were prevented by my assuring, not the Abolitionists, as has been erroneously stated, (for my address was not to them, but to the people of Kansas,) that, in my judgment, the Constitution would be submitted fairly and freely for ratification or rejection by their vote and that if this was not done, I wo'd unite with them (the people) as 1 now do, in lawful opposition to such procedure.

The power and responsibility being devolved exclusively upon me by the President of using the Federal army in Kansas to suppress insurrection, the alternative was distinctly presented to me, by the question propounded at Topeka, of arresting revolution by the slaughter of the people, or of preventing, together with that of civil war, which must have extended thro'out the Union.

My solemn assurance was then given that the right of the people to frame their own government, so far as my power extended, should be maintained but for this assurance it is a conceded fact that the Topeka State government, then assembled in legislative session, would have been put into immediate actual operation, and that a sanguinary collision with the Federal army and a civil war must have ensued, extending it is feared, throughout the whole Union.

Indeed, the whole idea of an Inaugural Address originated in the alarming intelligence which had readied Washington City of a perilous and incipient rebellion in Kansas.

This insurrection was rendered still mors formidable, upon my reaching the Territory, by the near approach of the assembling of the revolutionary State Legislature, and the very numerous mass conventions by which it was sustained.

In truth, I had to chose between arresting that insurrection, at whatever cost of \mericari blood, by the Federal army, or to prevent the terrible catastrophe, as 1 did by my pledges to the people of Kansas the exertion of all my power to obtain a fair election and the submission of the Constitution to the vote of the people for a ratification or rejection

Now, by my oath of office.-1 was sworn to support the Constitution of the United States, which I have shown, in my judgment, required a submission of the constitution to a vote of the people.

I was sworn also to take care that the Kansas-Nebraska Bill should be faithfully executed, which bill, in my judgment, as heretofore slated, required that the constitution be submitted to tho vote of the people, and I was, therefore, only performing my solemn duty, when, as Governor of the Territory, to whose people my first obligations were due, I endeavored to secure to them these results.

The idea was entertained by some that I should sec the Federal Constitution and the Kansas-Nebraska Bill overthrown and disregarded, and that, playing the part ot a mute in a pantomime of ruin, I should acquiesce by my silence. In such a result,, especially where such acquiescence involved, as an immediate consequence, a sanguinary civil war, it seems to mo most preposterous. Not a drop of l.-lo'jd has

.loning.revolutionary violence, were indue ed by me to go for the first time into agencral and peaceful election. These important results constitute a .sufficient consolation for all the unjust assaults made upon me on this subject.

I do not understand that these assaults have ever received the slightest countenance from the President on tl his message clearly indicates an approval of tu

supply this defect occasioned by be incompatible with proper rcspect for the fclave Sta.c, which u. neslcct of the Territorial officers Chief Magistrate of the Union, and incon- possible, but to ma _e sistent With the rules of moral rectitude Democratic rree ». taic. and propriety, aud could be adopted with As late as the 3d of no other view than to force to remove me from office.

Such a course, it is alleged, would present me to the public as a political martyr in the defence of the great principle of self government but to go to Kansas with any such purpose, or with a certain knowledge

such a Convention, chosen by scarcely more that such a result must follow, would be

than one-tenth of the present voters of alike unjust and improper. My only alter- oral officenoluers of Kansas, including the Kansas, Territory Constitution sent there was no census, constituted a majority of the counties of the Territory, and these fifteen counties in which there was no registry gave a much larger vote at the October election, even with the six months' qualification, than the whole vote given to the Lecompton Constitution, on the 17th of November last. If, then, sovereignty can be delegated, and the Convention, as such, are sovereign, which I deny, sjtrely it must be only .in such cases as when such Conventions are chosen by the people, which we Have seen was not the case as regards Jhe Lecompton Convention. It was for

threatened, by any attempt to forcc the so-called Lecompton Constitution upon the people of Kansas. I state it as a fact, based on a long and intimate association wita the people of Kansas, that an overwhelming majority of that people are opposed to that instrument, and my letters state that but one out of twenty of the press of Kansas sustain it. Some oppose is because so many counties were disfranchised and unrepresented in the Convention. Some, who are opposed to paper money, because it authorizes a bank of enormous capital for Kansas, nearly unlimited in its issues

one dollar, up and down. Some, because of what they consider a Know-Nothing clause, by requiring that the Governor shall have bscn twenty years a citizen of the United States—some because the elective franchise is not free, as they cannot vote against the Constitution, but only on the single issue whither finy nlcrre' slaves may be imported, and then only upon that issue by voting for the Constitution to which they are opposed and they regard this as but a mockery of the elective franchise and a perilous sporting with the sa cred rights of the people—some oppose it because tlie Constitution distinctly recognizes and adopts the Oxford fraud in apportioning the Legislative members for Johnson County upon the fraudulent anil fictitious returns, so falsely called, from that precinct, which recognition of tlfat fraud in tlie Constitution is abhorcnt to

The President takes a diiFjr'c'rit view of the subject in his message. From the events occurring in Kansas, as well as here, it is evident that the question is passing from the theories into practice, and that, as Governor of Kansas. I should be compelled to carry out new instructions, differing on a vital question,

My Inaugural and other addresses were, from those received at the date of my apthcrefore, realiy in the nature of proclamations so often issued by the Presidents and Governors, with a view to prevent, as thev did in this case, civil war and insurrection.

poiutiuent. Such instructions I could not cxecute consistently with my views of the Federal Constitution, of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill or with my pledges to the people of Kansas.

Under these circumstanccs, no alternative is left me but to resign my office as Governor of the Territory of Kansas.

No one can more deeply regret than myself this necessity, but it arises from no change of opinion on my part. On the contrary, I should most ohecrfully have returned to Kansas to carry out my original instructions, and thus preserve the peace of the Territory, and finally settle tlie Kansas question by redeeming my pledges to the people.

It is not my intention to discuss at this time the peculiar circumstances and unexpected events which have modified the opinions of the President upon a point so vital as a submission of the Constitution for the ratification or rejection by vote of the people, much less do 1 desire any controversy with the President on this idelv

show that alter three years when I arrived at Kansas than

300

upon a vital question, involving practical results and new instructions, it is certainly more respectful to tlie President, on my part, to resign the office of Governor and lislature on the 4th of January, 1851, neargiving him an opportunity of filling it, as ]y iive months before my arrival thurc, did his right under the Constitution, with one abandon the slavery issue because, as set who concurs with him in his present opiu- turth by one of their number, the Pro-Sla-ion, rather than go to Kansas and force him very party was in a small and admitted mito remove mc by disobedience to his in-jnority, and the co-operation of the hrcestructious.

N

This latter course, in my judgment, wo'd hope of success not to

ervr's®r

slaves there, and the number con- p0

conceded to be im-,

at a

It is still more extraordinary that the hypothetical remarks made by-me, as regards the climate in its connection with its influence on the question of slavery, hr Kan.sas.aftcr that issue had been abandoned there—which views we're Consolidating tho union betweerf the conservative Free-Stale and Pro-Slavery Democrats—so as to pre-, vent thtf confiscation of the small number, of slaves then held in Kansas, have been denounced by many distinguished Southern Senators, who, when the Kansas and Nebraska bill w^s pending in Congress, arid when such remarks from' tbeW, if even they might affect Southern e"mi£ration, wero the loudest in proclaiming that because of its climate Kansas could never Lecomo a slave State.

Indeed, it seems that all persons, in and out of Kansas, whether in publicf or private life, may publish what opinio: .? they please in regard to these questions, except

the moral sense of the people. Others !!C Governor ot that lei ruory, v.io has so oppose it, because, although in other cases power and no patronage. the Presidents of Conventions have been authorized to issue writs of clcetion to tho regular Territorial or State officers, .with the usual judges and with the established precincts and on the adjudication of the irns in this case unprecedented and vice regal powers arc given to the President of the Convention to make the precincts, tho judges, and to decide -Gnaliy upon the returns. From the grant of these unusual and enormous powers, and from other reasons connected with tho retffnJ.? of Oxford and McGec, an overwhelming majority of the people of Kansas have no faith in tho validity of the returns and will not vote. Indeed, disguise it a3 we may to ourselves, under tlie influence of the present excitement, tho facts will demonstrate that any attempt by Congress to force this constitution upon the people of Kansas will be an effort to substitute the will of a small minority for that of an overwhelming majority of the people of Kansas that it will not settle the Kansas question or localize tho issue that it will, 1 fear, be attended by civil war, extending, perhaps,-throughout the Union, thus bringing this question back again upon Congress and before "the people, in its most dangerous and alarming aspect.

Be pleased to express to the President my deep regret. u=i regards our unfortunate difference of opinion iir relation to the Lecompton constitution, and say to him, thai as infallibility docs not belong to man, however exalted in intellect and purity of intention or position, yet, if he lias committed any error's in this respect-, may they be overruled by the superintending Providence, for the perpetuation of our Union and the advancement of the honor and interest of our beloved country.

In now dissolving my official connection with your department, I beg lcavo to tonder to you my thanks for your constant courtcsy and kindness.

Most respectfully, your obedient servant. ROBERT J. WALKER*

One Rev. Mr. Smith officiates at a church down at Boscawen Plain, in the State of New Hampshire, he has been terrible in his denunciations of those "Democratic" doctrines tt'hich deny the equality of the negro. A correspondent of the New Hampshire Patriot relates the following a9 having happened in that church

A few Sabbaths since a negro aa woll clad and as respectable in his appearance as the average of his race, came along a short time after the morning service had commenced, and seated himselfon the steps outside the church and commcnced reading his bible, and listened to the service. lie remained during the intermission, and none of the negro-worshippers chosing to invite him to a scat, he bid fair to get no better1 accommodations in the afternoon. But the sexton, recollecting that the minister had told him to seat all straugers in his pew, conducted him to Mr. Smith's pew. Aftor the service there was a tempest the minister expressed great indignation— he was insulted tho leading parishoners voted tho society insulted, and llicy promptly beheaded thesexton, whose place i3 to be supplied by some faithful servant who will know the folly of testing the truth of abolition friendship for the ncgrO

THE LOCATION OF A LOVER'S HEART.— The position of the heart is supposed to be tolerably well understood, and yet there is a difference of opinion about the matter.—The tragic actor who, as lie rolls the "r" with the rattle of a horse-fiddle, exclaims —"This hea-r-r-r-rt!" and simultaneously clasps his right hand on his left breast, is understood to have hit it. But perhaps he is mistaken. We saw an actor the other evening who, in "suiting the action to tho word," indicated an entirely different locality for that important organ. The a£ene was something like this: Actor (roinanti-

subje'et: yet, however widely my views may differ from those eutei'lained by liiin on this question, as regard all tho.vj great I cally)—"The angel! I have her picture Democratic measures "which, trust, will here—I always wear it next my heart!"—

been shed by the Federal £?oops in Ivan-1 constitute the policy of his administration, and here he.produced the precious dagucrsas during my administration but insur- in other respects it will give me pleasure, I reotype—not from his bosom—but from a rcction and civil war, extending, I fear, as a private citizen, to yield my cordial pocket in the tail of 1 throughout the country, were alone pre-1 .support vented by the course pursued by mo upon I have said that the Slavery question. these occasions, and the whole people aban-

iis coat! There was

ime laughter about that time among tho iollier sort of spectators while the scnti-

.is a pratieal issue, had disappeared from mental and romantic were visibly shocked Kansas long before my arrival there, and by this unsuspected turn of fstage busithc question of self-government had been ncss," and hid their blushes in their handsubstituted in its placc. On some future kerchicf.— Boston Post. occasion I shall dissipate the delusion which has prevailed upon this subject, and experiment, ere were less

HISTORY OF A CANNON' BALL. At the commencement of tho action on board the President, frigate, a ball (an 18

J!UJ

contrary saintly diminishing that, as proved by t'ie President,* nd such was the forcc of tlie official records of Congress published (iic ha|] that it actually cut 'off, without

New England, and that tlie Pro-Slavery man, Mr. Montgomery, killed another, Mr. Territorial Convention of Kansas eonsoii- together with the quarter gunner, dated with the Pro-Slavery Territorial Leg-

State Democrats was invited as the only

shot) came over the waist clothes of

anj

akc Kansas a

finally lodged upon tho dcck, and was taken below by the narrator of this, and shown to the lieutenant, Mr. Dallas, who' took it in his hand and wroto on it with chalk, "Cousin, I have received your present, and will return it again clapped it in the gun himself, and fired the piece, and it is a remarkable fact that it actually kill-

et] sevcral

tj,„

it a conservative,

the President the Democratic Convention assembled at! Mr. Bird, referred to,

Lecompton in conscquencc of the laws,

climate, and will of the people, none con-' count of destruction on board the President tended that slavery could be established corresponds entirely with those furnished there, nor wished it, until my Southern op- to the family of Mr. Bird, by Commodore ponents interfered in the affairs of Kan-j Rodgcrs and others, soon after the engageIsas, and bv denunciation, menace and oth- ment.—Buffalo Courier.

so%"

pprobation

of the United States, produced the extraordinary paper called the Lecompton constitution.

Yet this act of intervention by the Federal officers to defeat the will of the people seems to be sustained by mjr opponents while my intervention, as it is called, in obedience to my duty and oath of office to support the Federal Constitution and to take care that our organic law should be fairly executed, by endeavoring to sccure to the people of Kansas their rights under that act, is denounced and calumniated.

of the officers and men on board

Jiclcidcrc, and finally lodged in tho

cu])in 0f

that vessel, and wa3 afterward

hung up in the Bclvidere's cabin as a globe

July, 1857, when dur'ng tlie war.—Portland Standard.

jW.

was

the brother of

A. Bird, Jjsq., of this city, and the ac­

Docolas in the Sknate.—The Washington correspondent of the Boston Post thu writes:

Jud:re Douglas is a man one cannot avoid, noticing on such occasions. He i3 a very restless man. lie comes in, drops into his seat, pulls a paper out of his pocket, reads three lines, forces his last cigar on Gv.in, who is going out to smoke, crosses over to Benjamin

and

gets another from

him, which he twists in his mouth and chews, offers his right' hand to llalc and his left to Pugh, leans familiary on Jones' shoulder, and strokes that sexagenarian senator's raven beard with a gentle witticism, drops into tho lobqy a moment and and then iuto his seat, to read three more linos of another newspaper.