Crawfordsville Review, Crawfordsville, Montgomery County, 20 February 1858 — Page 2

4

•p!SSS==Si===S=3= in their own tray, subject only to the Conatltutiotfof the United States. Popular sovereignty audi the right of selfcgovernmentin the people of Kansas, th€n,is not a nn opto question now.' It was closed by the positive tnactmtftJl offMs law,~declaratoryof their rights. True, the people were, of course, to cxcrcise this soyereignty of eclf-government in a practical and usual mode. They were cot left to priwary assemblies, to mobs, or aggregate meetings. The American mode of sclfgovernment is by conventional, representative, or municipal bodies. But all these lodies ore but agents, and representatives. "When they "form and regulate," they still *, form and regulate for the people, and not for themselves. Their acts, at Jast, are but the acts of the people, and their deeds bnt£the deeds of the people. V* hen, therefore, a Convention send a Constitution to

Congress to be approved, and it goes up not as their act and deed, but as the act and deed of the people, done and performed by them as their agents the question, then is always—not whether the act and deed is the act and deed of a Convention, but is il the act and deed of the people?

and this, no matter whether the instrument goes up from the Convention proclaiming, or from the ballot-box of the people voting it. By the very Kansas act itself, it is obliged to be the act and deed of the people— thcir.«, theirs, and none others Whether it proceed from them directly, or through their representatives.

And for these reasons, I had no difficulty in determining that the act of 1854, the Kansas and Nebraska law was an "ambling act." It created no right not pre-ex-isting—for popular sovereignty is self-ex-isting—but declared and admitted and recognized in the people the right of selfgovernment, to form and regulate all their domestic institutions in their own way, consistent with paramount law.

Under this law they were formed into nn organized Territory and under territorial law they formed a Convention to make a Constitution of State Government, with view to admission into the Union. All this was legitimate and, as to how the election of members to the Convention should be held, and how contested elections were to be determined—all matters of this sort wer?left to themselves, without the right of intervention froin any quartor. I avoid inquiring into the frauds which may have been perpetrated, and which, doubtless, were perpetrated on both sides, in the election to constitute a Convention.

But that body, however legitimate or however fairly or unfairly constituted, was not empowered to make a constitution and to proclaim it, without submitting it to the people before it was submitted to Congress as the act and deed of the people of Kansas. And herein is the first point of differcncc with the President, lie says that if the Convonlion was not prohibited from proclaiming it without submission to the

5[coplc,

they had authority to proclaim it.

say that it is a settled Democratic principle of American institutions "(hat (he powers not delegated by the people arc reserved to (hem." But this point of .difference docs not arise in this ease for, as 1 will show presently, whatever power the Constitution had in this respect, they did not pretend to exercise it or to claim it, but r.s a representative body and not a primary, submitted the work of their agency, their Constitution, to their principals, the people.

In my letter dated the 10th November, oddressed t» the edit«JVs of the Richmond Fnyvircr, I took the ground that there was no authority delegated by the people to the Convention of Kansas to proclaim a Constitution without submitting it to the people for ratification or rejection by them "yet," said that, "if upon precedent, the Convention ot' Kansas adopted a republican form of State government, and reported it to Congress, without submitting it to the people" I agreed in "accepting it. and in receiving in Kansas as a State, slave or free, into the Union." This letter was writteu on the 19th of November, 1857, nud on the 24th of the same month, live days afterwards, I saw for the lirst time, published in the Richmond Enquirer, the echcdulc of the Lecompton Constitution.

The publication of this document presented the subject under a new phase, adverted to by the President in his message of December, 1857. The result of the election in Kansas had still to be ascertained, and certainly it could not be clcarly said what were the President's conclusions on the a(Tairs of that Territory. His Argument fairly admitted and claimed for the people the right of passing on the work of the Convention, and his conclusion seemed to be reserved. His counsel was not "dark," or "double," or dubious but he was uncommitted to any practical conclusion by his December message, and I suppose that the friends of the administration would be loft free to take ground according to their conscientious convictions, on a full development of the whole subject.

Mere than a month had elapsed since the publication of the schedule. I had full time to understand the provisions of this submission to the people, and was prc-

iiarod

to take the grounds occupied in my ettcr to the Tammany Society, dated the 30th December last.

That letter was deliberately written, was kept in my possession for days, was rewritten, and put forth with firm purpose to serve the Administration and the eouutry. I saw a formidable opposition, tlioroughly organized, in the Democratic ranks of those opposed to Mr. Buchanan's nomination, bent on driving from his support every Northern Democrat on the Kansas question, and every Southern Democrat on the fillibustering Pucnta Arenas question. I 6aw a faction of extremists who arc bent on rushing the South, slavery, Democracy, and the Union, on the basses of the buckler of popular sovereignty and upon the moral sense of the whole country, and losing the moral prestige of a minority of the Union who arc demanding justice and equality to a majority against a minority of people in Kansas. 1 felt that I might interpose & timely blow to save the Administration from the dilemma of holding its Northern friends to the hard necessity of denying popular sovereignty and of withholding justice and equality from the people at the polls, in a Territory where selfgovernment and. perfect freedom of election were guarantied by the very act organizingit. No Northern man could strike teat blow with effect, and I felt the moral obligation to strike for "justico, even to my own hurt." I saw what would be the effect upon me, personally that misrepresentation and abuse would follow, and many of my best friends would condemn the apparent rashness of the act-. In all this I

have not been disappointed. But now that the thunders hare rolled over my head, and/1 see the fid! effect* even beyond my anticipations—the effect of a special message from the President—his authority wielded against the position which I devo-1 tedly assumed for his defense—I calmly survey the subject again, and instead of retreating, advance on the'position I have assumed. In November I said that if the Convention had proclaimed the Lecompton Constitution without submitting it all to the people, I would accept it as a legitimate and dc facto instrument. But now that it has been submitted in the manner and form of the eleventh and fourteenth sections of its schedule, I repeat the position of my Tammany letter, and would adopt it only subject to a fair and legal vote of the people of Kansas, to be prescribed bj their Territorial Legislature— not by Congress.

In reviewing the message, I pass over all that is said respecting the rebellion and usurpation of the Topekaites. Their course has been violent and unlawful in the extreme. I claim, on the other hand, that their opponents in Kansas have actcd under lawful authority that they have proceeded under the act of Congress and of territorial organization, and that up to the point of the schedule of submission of the Leeonipton Constitution to the people, their acts were de jure and dc facto rightful in the legitimate sense. But what has that to do, legally or logically, with the issue—Is the Lecompton Constitution the act and deed of the people?—Is its schedule republican? 7f insurrection and rebellion were arraying themselves against law and order in a Territory, all I can say is that they ought to have been arrested and punished long ago by the Federal Executive of the United* States. When the whiskey insurrection broke out in Pennsylvania, would it liave authorized a lawful Convention in that State to have submitted a Constitution to the people in such, a schedule as allowed men to vote for it but wot against, it as allowed one man to vote down 1,000 men all having equal rights as pretended to submit one question alone, and yet submitted it in such away that in order to vote for or against that, the people were obliged ^0 vote for and not against something else which might be obnoxious or odious to them —as insulted and oppressed them with a test oath, the most odious instrument of tyranny, to supporta Constitution, if adopted, before it was adopted, and then, after being forced to gulp the oath in order to vote at all, to have the vote not countcd because it was against and not for what he was sworn to support, if adopted against his will

JNo.

Gen. Washington put down

the insurrection, and he would have made it no excuse for fraud, injustice, inequality or oppression on the part of others who were acting under the color of lawful authority. So the Topekaites ought to have bccu made to submit to lawful authority

Constitution. Is it not plain, then, that the object was not to submit apart oiOy, but to force the adoption of the whole

The whole was not fairly submitted.-— One thousand voters went to the polls nine hundred and ninety-nine v^ers might desire to vote against the Constitution, and one for it the one would be counted, and nine hundred and ninety-nine would not be counted.

The part as to slavery, which was submitted fop alternate voting, for and against was not fairly submitted. One thousand pro-slavery men might go to the polls, desiring to vote for slavery, but against the Constitution their votes could not be counted, and one frec-soiler, who voted for the Constitution and against slavery, would be counted, and over-come the nine hundred and ninety nine. It is idle to say that this was as fair for one side as the other for, though this be equally true as to the nine-ty-nine free-soil voters against the one proslavery voter, yet this would only prove the case to be one of a donbl»instead of a single injustice. It proves only it was a wrong, injuriously affecting botli sides and the whole people, and not a part only.

The truth is, there was obviously a sinister and anti-republican purpose in thus giving an unfair election as a part, coupled with no election as to the whole. It was to force the people to adopt the Constitution framed by the Convention. No man was allowed to vote for slavery who did not also vote for the Constitution and no man was allowed .'o vote against slavery who did not vote for the Constitution.— He might reject slavery or adopt it, provided he would vote for the Constitution and if lie voted against- the Constitution, his vote for or against slavery was not-al-lowed to be conn ted

This was not all. The 14th section is worse than the iniquity of the 11th Section 14th. "Every person offering to vote at the aforesaid election, upon the said Constitution, shall, if challenged, take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, and to support this Constitution, if adopted, under tire penalties of perjury under the territorial laws.',

The Democratic party had just-come out of severe and doubtful conflict with the Know Nothing secret society, the most-odi-ous feature of which was a "test oath."— Now behold an honest, peaceful, law-abi-ding citizen approaching the polls in Kansas under the schedule I imagine myself an ultra under this clause of this schedule I am anxious, Southern slaveholder put to the ordeal of a challenge very anxious, to record my vote for my right to hold the chief part of the little property I own I am told that I have the right, by the grant of the high Lecompton Constitution, to vote for or against property in slaves I approach the polls to exercise the right: I am challenged the Bible is held out to me to swear first to "support the Constitution of the United States I ask, why impose on me that oath I urge

but no one can contend that they forfeited that the obligation is binding on me withtheir elective franchise or their freedom of out the oath—that I love and obey "the choice to approve or disapprove, to ratify'Constitution of the United States, and that or reject,* an organic law when submitted I it is made the supreme law of the land, to them. But were Topekaites alone op- binding of itself, but being unwilling to posed to the Lecompton Constitution ?—i support that instrument, and anxious to No. Some pro-s avery men were opposed vote for my property, I assent to swear to it and lh:s schedule deprived them of! to support it. But I am told I must, in'the their sovereign rights as well as the Tope- jsecond place, swear also to support the Lckailcs. Law-abiding citizens, as well as eompton "Constitution, if adopted, under rebels, were competed to vote for and not the penalties of perjury under the Terriagainst this Constitution, or not to vote at! torial Jaws." I redden into wrath under all. The wrong of the Topekaites will not! the insult of such an oath tendered to a justify the wrong of the Lccompton Con-1 freemen at the polls—to support a constivention, nor cure the dcfccis of the Le- tutiou, if adopted, before its adoption. I compton schedule. What is that schedule? I denounce the obstacle to my freedom of

Its 11th section reads -election. It is in vain I must take it or "Before this Constitution shall be sent I leave my property unprotected. I suppose to Congress for admission into the Union |—'.lie supposition is almost intohrable—[ as a State, it shall be submitted to all the take the oath lam then, and only then, white male inhabitants cf this Territory, granted the privilege of voting. I vote for slavery, but against tho Constitution, I am

I'ui^fipproral or disapproval, as follows The "Presidentof this Convention shall, by proclamation, declare that on the 21st day of December, 1857, at the different election prccinets now established bylaw, or I then disfranchised, I go away maddened which may be established as herein pro- to violence by injustice, inequality, andlfnvided, in the Territory of Kansas, an elcc- suit and injury. Is that my act and deed'? tion shall be held, over which shall preside Is that republican If Caligula was a tythree judges, or a majority of three, to be appointed as follows: The President of this Convention shall appoint three commissioners in each county in the Territory, whose duty it shall be to appoint three

then'tokl that my vote cannot be countcd, yet I am sworn to support, if adopted, what I have voted against. Stung bv insult and

rant for posting laws too high to be read by the Roman people, what does this deserve to bo called, which puts the whole and a part together, so that a minority for the whole may prevail over a majority tor or

judges of "election in the several precincts against the part Is it not the very hoof their respective counties, at which elcc- cus-pocus and legerdemain of keeping the tion the Constitution framed by this Convention shall be submitted to all the white male inhabitants of the. Territory of Kansas in the said Territory upon that day, and over the age of twenty-one years, for ratification or rejection, in the following manner and form,"

Now, it must surely be admitted that is a plain submission of the whole Constitution framed by the Convention. The submission of the whole Constitution is repeated twice in this clause, in a way not to be mistaken. And yet is it not strange that Mr. Buchanan should have made the mistake of saying in his message that the whole of the Lceompton Constitution was not, and that a part, the slavery clause alone, was submitted to the people.' Will it be said in reply that the whole was submitted only sub modo, after a specified manner ar.'d form Well, let us look at the manner and form the manner and form is: "The voting shall be by ballot. The judges of said election shall cause to be

Zs it answered that this was in substance but a submission of a part, for there was a form approving or disapproving, ratifying or rejecting slavery I beg pardon, and won't repeat that it was an odious discrimination to me to allow slavery alone to be disapproved and rejected, aud nothing else. But, passing that by, is it not plain, I re ply, that uo one was allowed to vote for or against slavery, a part, unless he would also voteybr the Constitution, the whole of it without exception Any one might vote to reject or adopt slavery, provided he would vote to adopt the Constitution, and no one was allowed to vote for or against slavery who did not vote for the whole

promise to the ear of the people and breaking to their hopes I tell you tliafc no proud, free people will stand insult and outrage like this, and such despotism is enough to drive peaceful and good-citizens to violence for a redress of grievances.— Out tiie question is not whether the Lecompton Constitution has been opposed unlawfully, but is it the act and deed of the sovereign people, whose it purports to be —and is it republican in its submission by the schedule of the Lecompton Constitution And mark, too, that this test oath is applied when the constitution is to be sent to Congress from a Territory for approval. After taking this oath, the casuist may determine whether he could, if the constitution be adopted, oppose it before Congress, though lie voted against it at the pol's.

But it is urged in the message that the people, if opposed to slavery, might have voted it out of the Constitution on the 121st of December. I deny that they could

kept two poll-books by two clcrks by them have voted for or against slavery under appointed. The ballots cast at said election shall be endorsed 'Constitution with slavery,' and 'Constitution irith no slavery,' Sic. There is no other form touching this point but this and is it not plaiu-still that the whole Constitution was submitted by the fonu as well as by the preceding clause embodying the principle of entire submission. The whole was submitted in formas substance, but the form of submission was made to contradict the priuciplc of submission. The principle was submission of the whole for "approval" or 'disapproval," for "ratification or rejection," but the form was for "approval" and "r^ification" alone, and there was no form for "disapproval or rejection."

this schedule, unless they voted also for the Constitution. As 1 have said, nine hundred and ninety-nine might have gone to the polls and voted for or against slavery, and yet have been out-voted by one man, if they voted against the Constitution ar.d the one voted for it. In a word, uo one who voted against the Constitution could vote at all. IIow unfair, then, to urge that those who were opposed to the Constitution, though for or against slavery, staid away from the polls on the 21st of December, and let the election go by default Could they have voted at all if they were against the Constitution Could they be counted for or against slavery, unless they voted for the Constitution Why hold the people responsible for not attending the polls, wheu, if they had attended them, they were not allowed to vote but in one way, uot all allowed to vote their own way, and the miuority of one was given the majority of one over a thousand?— Do you call this election Election has which of the hco "at least to choose."— But here there was no alternative, but in respect to slavery, ahd that was not allowed unless you voted the one way .on the Constitution. Such monstrous injustice and inequality never offended the moral sense of freemen before in this country.— I cannot agree with the President, therefore, wbao lie says "'It is impossible that

any people could hare proceeded with more regularity in the formation of a Constitution than the people of Kansas have done." The people of Kansas hare not been allowed to hold a fair, free, and full election at all, though the whole" Constitution was pretended to be submitted to them. No, not upon the part which the President says was alone submitted to them.|v j)

You sec, gentlemen, that I arrive at these facts from the face of the record—from the schedule itself. I don't go into Kansas for evidences of fraud or any other fact I don't go behind the schedule which is annexed to the Lecompton Constitution itself. It shows on its face a fact stronger than any proof, that the people did not vote—it shows that it was impossible for them to vote their sovereign wi?l in a fair,free and full election. Such an election cannot possibly be held under such a schedule. This, Congress is bound to look at. I am bound inccrtain cases to cause the seal of this State to be affixed to papers for the purpose of authentication.— I have no election. If the paper is proper to be certified, I must affix the seal. But suppose that in the act of authentication, by affixing the seal, it appears to me that there is doubt whether the paper is the act and deed of the party whose act and deed it purports to be Must I not inquire.whether it be the act and deed of the party If I affix authentication to what is not his, I may do him irreparable damage. But suppose that it appears on the face of the paper itself that it couldn't his act and deed—that he was not left a free agent.—' Am I bound to certify that- to be his act and deed, which not only is not-, but could not be his act and deed Now, as I said in November, if the Convention had proclaim-

If Congress receives and adopts it as a State Constitution for Kansas under these circumstances, will not Congress be intervening to impose a Constitution upon a people which is not theirs Will they

f!y

there would be roused to anew and more fearful form than ever, and remain still in Congress, the Cabinet, and the country universally. I proposed, on the contrary, in ray Tammany letter* that Congress sho'd not decide the question of fact, but refer it back to the Territorial Legislature for submission under territorial law, to the whole of the legal voters, under a fair, free and full election. This was dope both in the case of Wisconsin, and of Michigan, under cases involving the principles of this case of reference and submission. This imposes no condition of admission, but receives the State into the Union provisionally—provided only that the Constitution is the will of the people, fairly and legally polled.

And why impose this Constitvtion of a minority on a majority? Cui bono? Does any Southern man imagine that this is a practicable or sufferable way of making a slave State? Who believes now that Kansas will be made a slave State, or kept one for any time, by the admission of this Constitution? Who will carry a slave there now to become a bone of contention in a border war? the sport of violence and fraud and force like that which has so long endangered person and property, and political franchise in that unhappy battle ground of sectional feuds? To what end is this thing to be done, if speedily it is to be undone with State authority, created to drive slave property from the Territory.

Wc have proudly, heretofore, contended only for equality and justice but if this be wantonly done without winning a stake —the power of a slave State hereby—it will be worse than vain. It will be snatching power per fas aut nc fas, to be lost "speedily" with the loss of something of

ed this Constitution, and sent it to Con-'far- more worth than political votes—our gross, icithout submitting it at all to the people, then Congress would have simply the evidence of the Convention, the representative and agent, that this was the authorized instrument of their principals —the people. Evidence to the contrary wouldn't have appeared in the record and on the return itself. And we wouldn't have been authorized, if you please, to go behind the return of the Convention or to have taken evidence aliunde, or admitted a plea to matter debars the record. But the Lecompton Convention submitted their Constitution to popular approval or disapproval, ratification or rejection. It purports to be the act of the people—not of the Contention only, but the people also. The Convention did not fully and finally adopt it, and this schedule shows that the people did not, because they could not, as it was proposed. It is then, neither the act of the Convention nor of the people.— It is, in fact, adopted by neither, and couldn't be by the latter.

moral prestige^ If we are not willing to do justice, we can't ask for justice if wc can't agree to equality, wo must expect to be denied it It is our bull goring ths an-ti-slavery ox. Suppose we had had a majority of slaveholders in that Territory suppose a minority of abolitionists had gotten the census and registry into their hands and had kept fifteen out of thirty-four counties out of the Convention suppose they had formed a Constitution with a clause prohibiting slavery, .and had sent it to Congress without submitting it to a majority of the legal voters or suppose they had submitted all parts of the Constitution to the popular vote, except the one clause prohibiting slavery, knowing it would be voted down if submitted to the majority of the people suppose "such a boot ou the other leg" had been submitted to Congress and wc had then heard the absoluteness of a Convention contended -for by Black Republicans, demanding of Congress to sustain the doctrine of "legitimacy," I tell you that every Southern man would have been in arms and would have been roused to the shedding of blood, rather submit to Congress fastening upon a majority of proskivcry people an arbitrary rescript of a mere Convention, unauthorized to proclaim

not arbitrarily intervene to decide a quos tion which belongs to the people of Kan- its Constitution without an express grant, sas alone—to all and Till alike allowed by i'J'his is the same principle, accompanied by iaw to vote. Have all and all alike been trickery and fraud. "\Vc are willing to do allowed to vote Were tnoso who did unto others as wc would have them do unvote allowed to vote against the Constitu- to us." The Southern people ask tor no

tion as well as for it We arc told that we arc to shut our eyes to the record. What evidence have wc, then, that it is a Constitution at all? Wc are told then, that this is int the time to raise the question, de facto, whether it is the act and deed of the people of Kansas. When would be the time, when was the time if it be not th*thne®now, to inquire whether this is a genuine Constitution of the people of Kansas, and whether it is or not republican, when these, and these only, are the questions before Congress

Why, ifc.is asked, has the issue of fact been delayed so long I answer, how could the issue be made up before the returns were made, and the evidence appeared on the record submitted to Congress?

injustice, no inequality. "r "\Ve are told that "prompt admission" of Kansas as a State will end the agitation iu Congress and localize it in Kansas. What is the Kansas question? Is it local in Kansas? No. It never can be local again. It has pervaded all places and all classes in our country. Let Congsess endorse this schedule of- legerdemain, let the South insist on it, let the Northern Democracy be required to consent to the njustice, and the precedent bccomes ot universal application and citation against us for all time. Not only will tlic example plead, but it will be r. plea in continuous eases of similar import and danger, rising successively as long as our vast territories to the Pacific shall be filling up. It comes up again and again, every year, for territories extending from Messilla Valley to Dacolah. Platter not ourselves, then, that

Ah! but we are told that it is inexpedient to raise this question at all: that expediency requires Congress to decide the question. When was it morally dctermiu- any mode of adjustment- will do because it

ed that tho policy of this nation should be governed by cxpedienc}- rather than by justice or right But what right has Congress to set up its decrees of expediency over and above the sovereign rights of a people to free and fair elections Is expediency to be carried so far as to allow Congress to intervene so as (o set .Us will over the will of the people of Kansas, or to substitute its will for theirs, and to give minority Constitution to a majority

is tho "speediest" for Kansas. It is r.!l essential that the settlement shall be just and right and equal. If not, it is sure to be mischievous to that party which has snatched power without right, and done wrong that good may come of it. To do justice is always the best policy. If all would "demand only what is right and submit to nothing that is wrong," injustice and oppression could never be perpetrated or tolerated. The ulterior effects of

This would be intervention with a ven- adopting the Lecompton Constitution, witl: geance, in the teeth of non-intervention, its schedule annexed, will be worse than so much claimed for by those who advocate referring back tho question to the Tcrrito-

ter not make it too apparent in the South that "prompt admission" would most speedily unmake the slavery there which was restored by the Dred Scott decision. But this was not the President's fair meaning. He meant to say only that it was in his opinion the speediest way to obtain a fair vole by the people. In other words, Congress is to do a thing in order that it may-

Why do it to be

this Constitution rial decision. It will arraign the Admin But the President offers an inducement 1st ration and the Democracy and the South to the anti-slavery party in Kansas by say- f°r demanding more than is right, and for ing: "If a majority of them," (the people forcing resister.ee to wrong. It will be of Kansas) "desired to abolish domestic jacS'"o the lion of a majority whilst the slavery within the State, there is no other hand ot a minority is in its mouth. It will correspondent of a Southern paper, repossible mode by which this can be effect-1 return the chalice to our »wn lips when the f„rr

ed so speedily, as by prompt admission." K™sns question again and again arises in |C1

This hint is somewhat dangeroug in point NTorth Texas, in New Mexico, in Mesilla of policy. It cuts both ways. It might! Valley, and in all our boundless domain of in be asked whether this commends itself to unsettled and last settling territory. It pro-slavery gentlemen who arc advocating drive from us thousands of honest the "prompt admission." Some of them I Democrats in the North, who can willingly once repealed laws protecting and cstab-lstand by us for justice and equality, but lishing slavery in Kansas. They had bet- "'bo must leave us when we demand more and refuse justice aud equality to others.

It will raise the Black Republican flag over the Capitol in the nest struggle for power, and that, then, will raise the last' dread issue of u?iion or disunion! Are not some aiming to drive us to such extremities as will raise that issue past being relaid?''

be immediately undone! Why do it to be as the friend of Mr. Buchanan and his Adundone? Is Congress to give the Terr:- ministration. Ihey have my best wishes tory a Constitution obnoxious to a majority

overnment before anno Domini 1S64?— authenticating this instrument by the arbitrary intervention of Congress, every sort of question of vested right and bounden sovereignty would arise. By "leaving the people perfectly free" to elect their own form of government without fear, force, fraud, or intervention, those issues and woree would be avoided. The agitation in Kansas would be intense, to adopt this Lecompton instrument, and the excitement

For niy part, gentlemen, I address you

aI'd

warmest friendship, and I would save

in order that-that majority may have State both from danger aud defeat. I trust in sovereignty to put it to the tortures of its their pure and patriotic motives, but I reiudignaTion? Why not rather allow the gard much more the Democracy, the South sovereign people directly and at once to and the Lnion, and I am anxious for their select for themselves the form of govern- fate. As for myself, I fear nothing when ment they prefer, instead of submitting to firmly standing on the right, in spite of fhc slavery question their passions an instrument which the ar- friends or foes. »aa^nZ

gunient admits they abhor? Would it be I rcccivcd your letter yesterday morn- war'lne present winter has been the less trouble, or take less time, to refer the ing and have written this in great haste, most singular for years. December and and spring-like. The monuiiscold. with excellent sleigh-

matter baek to their decision, and to avoid to be in time for the mail this evening.— January were warm the issues which might and would arise un- You will please see that it is correctly pub-1present

der an adopted and admitted Constitution lished. I have not time to revise and con-! which undertakes to bind the sovereignty of the people not to change their form of

cinSr

y'

YOUNG AMERICA.—A few days since a mother in the poor-house at Taunton gave birth to a child weighing eigbt pounds, the mother being eleven years old, and the

father bnt fourteen. The mother herself was born in the poor-house. Sim

E E I E W

CRAWFORDSVILLB

Saturday Morning, Feb. 20,1858.

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY MORNING BY CHARLES H. BOWEJf. 1

15?"The Crawfordsvillc Review, furnish eil to Subscribers at *1,50 in advance, or 82, if not pnid within the yenr.

S. II. PATIVI.V. Soiivh East corner Columbia and Main streets. Cincinnati, Ohio is our Agent to .troenre ad vcrtiscmcnts.

I A I O N

LARGER THAN ANY PAPER PtBLISIIED IN Crawfoi dsville! Advertisers call up and examineonr list of

SUBSCRIBERS.

DEMOCRATIC STATE TICKET.

For Secretary of State.

... DANIEL McCLURE,of Morgan. For Auditor of State, •_ JOHN W. DODD, of Grant.

"For Treasurer of State,

NATHANIEL E. CUNNINGHAM, of Vi-o.

For Superintendent of Public Instruction, SAMUEL L. EUGG, of Allen.

For Attorney General,

JOSEPH E. McDON.ALD, of Montgomery.-

For Judges of the Supreme Court. bAMt'KL E. l'KRKlNS, of Marion. ANDREW DAVISON, of Decatur.

JAMES M. -ITANNA, of Vieo. JAMES L. WORDEN, of Whitlev.

CJOV. WISE and HON. GEO. BANCROFT. We present this week the able and convincing letters of these two distinguished men on the Lecompton Constitution, to the exclusion of our usual variety. MR. BANCROFT was Secretary of the Navy under Mr. Polk, and afterwards Minister to England under the same administration, and his views arc but in anticipation of history. The letter of Cov. Wise is full, complete and unanswerable, lie also held high office under Mr. Polk, being Minister to Brazil under that administration.

It is becoming very fashionable in certain quarters to stigmatize as Black Republicans every man who raises his voice against- this unparalleled swindle—(he Lecompton Constitution. In order to expose the full enormity of such unmeanins slang, it is only neccssary to ask—is IIFXRV A. WISE,' the Govcrmr of Virginia, a Black Republican

The Lecompton Constitution can never get through under these mighty protests.

Til TIvKItt: HAUTE JOURNAL.

This paper is pursuing a very singular course in not hoisting the Democratic State ticket. If it designs leaving the party and repudiating the nominations of the 8thof January last, it should have the manlines3 to avow it in place o? observing a neutral and an ominous silence. We are as much opposed to the Lecompton swindle as Cookcrly, yet wc have never dreamed of repudiating the ticket or throwing in the way the slighesf. obstacle to its triumphant election. As much as we differ with Mr. Buchanan in regard to his policy upon the Lccompton Constitution, we arc nevertheless a supporter of his ad-

if the presidential p.aain to-morrow v,

election should

were to occur chcori

'•.11

vote for him as we did in 185G. We trust that friend Cookcrly will not allow his zeal in his opposition to Lccompton to overcome his judgment. If lie persists in his present course he will cn!y give aid and comfort to the eon::on enemy—Black Republicanism.

£@'*It is now slat.-d that since the discovery of the forged election returns (under Calhoun's wood-pile) that the Regent intends giving certificates to the free Stale candidates. But he still persists in refusing to make them out until Kansas is admitted under the Lecompton Constitution.

to

(u:a facf

S!IVS kaf

n"-

f|lC Senate

Committee on Territories, notwithstand-

,,

r,

suuc of the case is about this: Calhoun is

time, has a secret understanding with

Southern men, that when the State is admitted, he will give certificates to the proslavery party, and thus defeat the will of the people. This is much more likely, than that Southern men are not influenced by

1

present month is cold

dense it. Very truly, yours, HENRY A. WISE. __ SINGULAR STATE OF PARTIES.—Thewing To John W- Forney- David Webster, Dan-

of the

'F5" knl™»s

Democratic party in New York,

known as the "softs," who went off after an Buren and the abolitionists in 1848, are now the supporters of the Lecompton Constitution while the Hon. DANIEL S. DICKINSON, and the party then known as the "hards," who have always been the firmest and soundest of National Demoorata, are advocating the other side of the question.

It has always been a Damberatio

doctnhe that all power, nM erprwJf^riSi' ed to any representative body,* is raafcrred to the people This maiiid teemsrf late to have been reversed^ The Leeolapton* ites contend that as the act of the Legislature which brought Uie Constitutional Convention of Kansas into being', did not ezpressly provide for the submission* af ^tke Constitution to the people, it-was therefore' not binding .upon the Convention to submit their work to the popular approval Try this view of the question by. tfefbtahote quoted Democratic maxim, and see nhefe you will land! We hold that it ^aa^-the du ty- of the Convention- to make provision for submitting the Constitution to" tne people, unless the law which created them .expressly conferred upon them the power to make and put in force a Constitution independently of the people's will. It is true, the Legislature had no authority to do any such thing—but they certainly had more right to do it than the Convention had, for the Legislature created the Convention, and the creator is always superior to the thing created. The truth is, sovereign power resides alone with the people in a free country, and any attempt to deprive them of it, is not warranted by the geniu3 of our institutions, and is the first step towards despotism. S f-

INSURANCE.—Wc wish fo call

the atten­

tion of the community to the Statement in our paper of the Phccnix Insurance Company, for which our friend James Hcaton is Agent. The Phccnix Insurance Company is one of the most reliable of tho Hartford Companies, and has maintained a reputation of the highest character for its integrity, promptness and liberality in settling losses, and offers to the public undoubted security-. ...... ...

fiS?" Wc notice that the firm of Campbcl, Galey & Ilartcrhavc engaged the services of that clever gentleman, JESSEEW. CUMBERLAND. lie will be found in the hardware department of their extensive establishment. ..r

SO?" Two "Democratic Committees"— one in New York and one in Boston—have passed resolutions endorsing 'Lecompton.' New York gave Fremont 80,12') majority and Massachusetts gave him 49,324 over Mr. Buchanan. These chaps in New York and New England are very forward in making "platforms" on which to place tho Democracy of such states as Indiana, Illinois, New Jersey, and California, but when you ask them to help clcct a democratic President they ain't about. Not they!

SS^Senator Brown thinks Douglas has left the Democratic party. It would be well to examine carefully if he has not carried oft the platform.and principles of tho party. We don't sec any thing cf (hem amongst his opponents at Washington.— Louisville Da,* cc re I.

SCIENCE IN SALVATION.—It is said that inS :n Fr.inc'tc) the rites of baptism have bee'i^perlormed wiih the parties going into the water in India rubber suits. ...

THUS. L. HARRIS.—.Major Harris of Illinois, whose resolution, referring tho President's special Kansas message to a select committee of fifteen, was adoftjd by 'he llor.se on Monday, was a gal ant soldier in'the Mexican war, is a gentleman

of decided abtiily and eloquence, and has ever been a most ardent Democrat. Ho represents the SpringGeld district. It iu amusing to hear the Washington Union call him a "renegade," because he insists that

ninistralion upon every other measure, and the people o• i\an.-.as shall be permitted to make their own constitu'.i'.n.—Detroit Free Press.

flSy-Tho prostitution of immigrant girls at tea, by the officers and crews of our 1 a.'kct-shps, has become so frequent that the Commissioners of Immigration have been impelled to a thorough investigation of the subject. They .'hid, after carefull examination, that since the establishment of steam communication with Europe, tho number of cabin passengers iu sailing ships has g.ieatly diminished, and in proportion to this diminution, the Captains and officcr3 vi sailing ships, treed from restraint, havo become .more liccntious and depraved.— it is now a matter of frequent oceurrenco for the master of a packet-ship to select from among hi? female passengers some unprotected girl, take her into his cabin, and by various artifices induce her to yield to his wishes. Following the example of their superior, the subordinate ofiiccrs and

crew

intend recommending the admission, happens that a score or more of young woiUii iu ViiJUiJit J.vciiiaaa aiiau uu* a slave State, is presumed will

as the question as to whether Kansas shall uicn,^who went on board the ship with un-

likewise and thus it frequently

bl.cillisi'cd

be a free or not influence shall vote on the question of admission.—! Ynrk Tribune. Now, in tho name of common sense, wha* other beauties arc there in the Lecompton Constitution to enlist Southern votes, if it is not its ultra pro-slavcryism?

iL

southern men in the way they

characters, are turned adrift

when they arrived here, to meet a fato

morc dreadfuI than dcatL

The true 'vnc'

A 3IAXOF MIXED TASTES.—BayardTaylor in a recent letter to the New York Trib-

sa-v's:

wisl1 il

8a6®s' salt-bathing,

understood that I

,, never set up for an ideal. Quite the con-

lrary Uy tastcs arc rcally of tho

holding out the idea that he intends to give kind, including rocking chairs,oysters, fast certificates to the free State men, to calm horses, Christy's Minstrels, lager bier, macdown Northern opposition, and, at the same

aron'»

Havana cigars, I1 lemish artists, sau-

picketed herrings, tho

raising of vegetables, New foundland dogscamp fires, sailors, lumbermen, uneduca,

ted men, and sinners generally,/

BERNIIISSEL.—The Washington

corres-

pondent of the Philadelphia Press, says that Mr. Burnhissel, the Utah delegate, gives a flat contradiction to the rumor that he haS*made any proposition to the President, or anybody else, that the Mormons should be allowed peaceably to remove to some island in the Pacific. Even if the rumor were true, there is not an island in the Pacific ocean capable of occupancy,' which is not covered by some sovereignty^ which must be taken into consideration in this matter, before any action is taken by this Government, and it is hardly probably. that other nations will care to have remove ed into their midst an evil which has given us a great deal of trouble.

t&"It is mentioned as a remarkable fact that the amount of paper money now in circulation issued by the banks of New York, is less than it was twenty years