for all State officers on the third Tuesday of January, 1856. The third section of the schedule is as follows:

"The general assembly shall meet on the 4th day of March, A. D. 1856, at the city of Topeka, at 12 m., at which time and place the governor, lieutenant-governor, secretary of state, judges of supreme court, treasurer. auditor, state printer, reporter, and clerk of supreme court, and attorney-general, shall appear, take the oath of office, and enter upon the discharge of the duties of their respective offices under this constitution; and shall continue in office in the same manner, and during the same period, they would have done had they been elected on the first Monday in August, A. D. 1856."

The elections for all these officers were held at the time specified; and on the fourth day of the present month, the new government was to have been put in operation, in conflict with the Territorial government established by Congress, and for the avowed purpose of subverting and overthrowing the same, without reference to the action of Congress upon their application for admission into the Union.

ordinary privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States. Among these, is the right to assemble and to petition the government for the redress of grievances; in the exercise of this right, the inhabitants of Arkansas may peaceably meet together in primary assemblies, or in conventions chosen by such assemblies, for the purpose of petitioning Congress to abrogate the Territorial government, and to admit them into the Union as an independent State. The particular form which they may give to their petition cannot be material, so long as they confine themselves to the mere right of petitioning, and conduct all their proceedings in a peaceable manner. And as the power of Congress over the whole subject is plenary and unlimited they may accept any constitution, however framed, which in their judgment meets the sense of the people to be affected by it. If, therefore, the citizens of Arkansas think proper to accompany their petition with a written constitution, framed and agreed on by their primary assemblies, or by a convention of delegates chosen by such assemblies, I perceive no legal objection to their power to do so, nor to any measure which may be taken to collect the sense of the people in respect to it; provided, always, that such measures be commenced and prosecuted in a peaceable manner, in strict subordination to the existing Territorial gov ernment, and in entire subserviency to the power of Your committée are not aware of any case in Congress to adopt, reject, or disregard them at their the history of our own country, which can be pleasure. fairly cited as an example, much less a justifica"It is, however, very obvious, that all measures comtion, for these extraordinary proceedings. Cases menced and prosecuted with a design to subvert the have occurred in which the inhabitants of par-force in its place a new government, without the conTerritorial government, and to establish and put in ticular Territories have been permitted to form sent of Congress, will be unlawful. The laws estabconstitutions, and take the initiatory steps for the lishing the Territorial government must continue in organization of State governments, preparatory force until abrogated by Congress; and, in the mean to their admission into the Union, without ob- time, it will be the duty of the governor, and of all the Territorial officers, as well as of the President, to taining the previous assent of Congress; BUT take care that they are faithfully executed." IN EVERY INSTANCE THE PROCEEDING HAS ORIGINATED WITH, AND BEEN CONDUCTED IN SUBORDINATION TO, THE AUTHORITY OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ESTABLISHED OR RECOG NIZED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Michigan, Arkansas, Florida, and California, are sometimes cited as cases in point. Michigan was erected into a Territory in pursuance of the ordinance of the 13th of July, 1787, as recognized and carried into effect by acts of Congress subsequent to the adoption of the Federal Constitution. In that ordinance it was provided that the Territory northwest of the Ohio river should be divided into not less than three nor more than five States; "and, when ever any of said States shall have sixty thousand free inhabitants therein, such State shall be admitted, by its delegates, into the Congress of the United States on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever, and shall be at liberty to form a permanent constitution and State government.'

In pursuance of this provision of their organic law, the legislature of the Territory of Michigan passed an act providing for a convention of the people to form a constitution and State governinent, which was accordingly done in obedience to the laws and constituted authorities of the Territory. The legislature of the Territory of Arkansas, having ascertained by a census that the Territory contained about fifty-one thousand eight hundred inhabitants, at a time when the ratio of representation in Congress awarded one representative to each forty-seven thousand seven hundred inhabitants, passed an act authorizing the people to form a constitution and ask for admission into the Union, as they supposed they had a right to do under the treaty acquiring the Territory from France, which guarantied their admission as soon as may be consistent with the Federal Constitution. Upon this point your committee adopt the legal opinion of the Attorney-General of the United States, (B. F. Butler,) as expressed in the following ex

tract:

"But I am not prepared to say that all proceedings on this subject, on the part of the citizens of Arkansas, will be illegal. They, undoubtedly, possess the

On the 11th day of January, 1839, a committee of the constitutional convention of Florida addressed a memorial to Congress, in which they state that, in 1837, the Territorial council passed a law submitting to the people the question of "State" or "Territory," to be decided at the election of delegates to Congress in the month of May of that year; that a decided majority of the suffrages given at that election was in favor of "State;" that the legislative council of 1838, in obedience to the expressed wishes of the people, enacted a law authorizing the holding of a convention to form and adopt a State constitution; that the convention assembled on the 3d of December, 1838, and continued in session until the 11th of January, 1839: and that, on behalf of the people of Florida, they transmit the "constitution, or form of government," and ask for admission into the Union. It is also stated in the memorial that in 1838 a census of the Territory was taken, in obedience to a law passed by the Territorial council, and that this census, although taken during the ravages of Indian hostilities, when a large portion of the inhabitants could not be found at home, showed an aggregate population of forty-eight thousand two hundred and twenty-three persons, which the memorialists insisted furnished satisfactory assurance of a sufficient population to entitle them to admission, according to the treaty acquiring the country from Spain, and the then ratio of representation, which awarded a member of Congress to each 47,700 inhabitants. Congress failing to yield its assent to the admission of Florida for more than six years after this constitution was formed and application made, the people of Florida, during all that period, remained loyal to the Territorial government, and obedient to its laws, and did not assume the right to supersede the existing government by putting into operation a State government until the assent of Congress

was obtained in 1845.

The circumstances connected with the forma

tion of the constitution and State government of Cailfornia are peculiar. During the Mexican war the country was conquered and occupied by

our troops, and the civil government administer- | policy, adopted by the people of California, must ed by the military authorities under the war- originate solely with themselves; that, while the power. According to an official communication Executive of the United States was desirous to protect of General Persifer F. Smith, acting governor of them in the formation of any government republican California, to a committee of citizens of Santo Congress, yet it was to be distinctly understood that in its character, to be, at the proper time, submitted Francisco, under date of March 27, 1849, with the plan of such a government must, at the same holding his "recognition and concurrence" in time, be the result of their own deliberate choice, and their proposition "to organize a legislative as originate with themselves, without the interference sembly, and to appoint judges and other minis- of the Executive." terial officers, and to enact suitable laws to establish principles of justice and equity, and to give protection to life, liberty, and property," it appears that the President of the United States (Mr. Polk) and his cabinet officially promulgated the following opinions as the decision of the Executive on the points stated:

"I did not hesitate to express to the people of those Territories my desire that each Territory should, if prepared to comply with the requisitions of the Con-thority and supremacy of the existing local gov stitution of the United States, form a plan of a State ernment of the Territory, under the advice, and Constitution, and submit the same to Congress, with with the approval, of the executive government a prayer for admission into the Union as a State; but of the United States. Hence the action of the I did not anticipate, suggest, or authorize the estab- people of California in forming their constitution lishment of any such government without the assent and State government, and of Congress in adof Congress; nor did I authorize any government-mitting the State into the Union, cannot be cited, agent or officer to interfere with, or exercise any influence or control over the election of delegates, or over any convention, in making or modifying their domestic institutions, or any of the provisions of their proposed Constitution. On the contrary, the instructions by my orders were, that all measures of domestic

from the position assumed by either party to the unfortunate controversy which arose in the State of Rhode Island, a few years ago, when an effort was made to change the organic law, and set up a State government in opposition to the one then in existence, under the charter granted by Charles the Second of England. Those who were engaged in that unsuccessful struggle assumed, as fundamental truths in our system of government, that Rhode Island was a Sovereign State in all that pertained to her internal affairs; that the right to change their organic law was an essential attribute of sovereignty; that, inasmuch as the charter under which the existing government was organized contained no provision for changing or amending the same, and the people had not delegated that right to the legislature or any other tribunal, it followed, as a matter of course, that they had retained it, and were at liberty to exercise it in such manner as to them should seem wise, just, and proper.

Without deeming it necessary to express any opinion on this occasion, in reference to the merits of that controversy, it is evident that the principles upon which it was conducted are not involved in the revolutionary struggle now going on in Kansas; for the reason, that the sovereignty of a Territory remains in abeyance, suspended in the United States, in trust for the people, until they shall be admitted into the Union as a State. In the mean time, they are entitled to enjoy and exercise all the privileges and rights of self-government, in subordination to the Constitution of the United States, and in obedience to their organic law passed by Congress in pursuance of that instrument. These rights and privileges are all derived from the Constitution, through the act of Congress, and must be exercised and enjoyed in subjection to all the limitations and restrictions which that Constitution imposes. Hence, it is clear that the people of the Territory have no inherent sovereign right, under the Constitution of the United States, to annul the laws and resist the authority of the territorial government which Congress has established in obedience to the Constitution.

use of similar means in the slaveholding States, to produce directly the opposite result. To these causes, and to these alone, in the opinion of your Committee, may be traced the origin and progress of all the controversies and disturbances with which Kansas is now convulsed.

If these unfortunate troubles have resulted, as natural consequences, from unauthorized and improper schemes of foreign interference with the internal affairs and domestic concerns of the Territory, it is apparent that the remedy must be sought in a strict adherence to the principles, and rigid enforcement of the provisions, of the organic law. In this connection, your Committee feel sincere satisfaction in commending the messages and proclamation of the President of the United States, in which we have the gratifying assurance that the supremacy of the laws will be maintained; that rebellion will be crushed; that insurrection will be suppressed; that aggressive intrusion for the purpose of deciding elections, or any other purpose, will be repelled; that unauthorized intermeddling in the local concerns of the Territory, both from adjoining and distant States, will be prevented; that the federal and local laws will be vindicated against all attempts of organized resistance; and that the people of the Territory will be protected in the establishment of their own institutions, undisturbed by encroachments from without, and in the full enjoyment of the rights of self-government assured to them by the Constitution and the organic law. In view of these assurances, given under the conviction that the existing laws confer all the authority necessary to the performance of these important duties, and that the whole available force of the United States will be exerted to the extent required for their performance, your Committee repose in entire confidence that peace, and security, and law, will prevail in Kansas. If any further evidence were necessary to prove that all the collisions and difficulties in Kansas have been produced by the schemes of foreign interference which have been developed in this report, in violation of the principles and in evasion of the provisions of the Kansas-Nebraska act, it may be found in the fact that in Nebraska, to which the emigrant-aid societies did not extend their operations, and into which the stream of emigration was permitted to flow in its usual and natural channels, nothing has occurred to disturb the peace and harmony of the Territory, while the principle of self-government, in obedience to the Constitution, has had fair play, and is quietly working out its legitimate results.

It now only remains for your Committee to respond to the two specific recommendations of the President, in his special message. They are as follows:

"This, it seems to me, can be best accomplished by providing that, when the inhabitants of Kansas may desire it, and shall be of sufficient numbers to coustitute a State, a convention of delegates, duly elected by the qualified voters, shall a-semble to frame a constitution, and thus prepare, through regular and State. I respectfully recommend the enactment of a lawful means, for its admission into the Union as a law to that effect.

In tracing, step by step, the origin and history of these Kansas difficulties, your Committee have been profoundly impressed with the significant fact, that each one has resulted from an attempt to violate or circumvent the principles and provisions of the act of Congress for the organization of Kansas and Nebraska. The leading idea and fundamental principle of the KansasNebraska act, as expressed in the law itself, was to leave the actual settlers and bona-fide inhabitants of each Territory "perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." While this is declared to be "the true intent and meaning of the act," those who were opposed to allowing the people of the Territory, preparatory to their admission into the Union as a State, to decide the Slavery question for themselves, failing to accomplish their purpose in the halls of Congress, and under the authority of the Constitution, immediately resorted, in their respective States, to unusual and extraordinary means to control the political destinies and shape the domestic institutions of In compliance with the first recommendation, Kansas, in defiance of the wishes, and regardless your committee ask leave to report a bill authorof the rights, of the people of that Territory, asizing the legislature of the Territory to provide guaranteed by their organic law. Combinations, in one section of the Union, to stimulate an unnatural and false system of emigration, with the view of controlling the elections, and forcing the domestic institutions of the Territory to assimilate to those of the non-slaveholding States, were followed, as might have been foreseen, by the

"I recommend, also, that a special appropriation be made to defray any expense which may become requisite in the execution of the laws, or the maintenance of public order in the Territory of Kansas.”

by law for the election of delegates by the people, and the assembling of a convention to form a constitution and State government preparatory to their admission into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, so soon as it shall appear, by a census to be taken under the direc tion of the governor, by the authority of the legis

they were Territories, to wit: Tennessee, Ala bama, Mississippi, Florida, Louisiana, Arkansas and Missouri.

On the 6th of March, A. D. 1820, was passed by Congress the act preparatory to the admission of the State of Missouri into the Union. Much controversy and discussion arose on the question whether a prohibition of Slavery within said State should be inserted, and it resulted in this: that said State should be admitted without such prohibition, but that Slavery should be forever prohibited in the rest of that country ceded to us by France lying north 36° 30' north latitude, and it was so done. This contract is known as the Missouri Compromise. Under this arrange ment, Missouri was admitted as a slaveholding State, the same having been a slaveholding Territory. Arkansas, south of the line, was formed into a Territory, and Slavery allowed therein, and afterwards admitted as a slaveholding State. Iowa was made a Territory, north of the line, and, under the operation of the law, was settled up without slaves, and admitted as a free State. The country now making the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska, in 1820, was almost or entirely uninhabited, and lay north of said line, and whatever settlers entered the same before 1854 did so under that law, forever forbidding Slavery therein.

see cause of a result unfavorable to their hopes.

It is further to be observed, that in the performance of this novel experiment, it was provided that all white men who became inhabit ants in Kansas were entitled to vote without regard to their time of residence, usually provided in other Territories. Nor was this right of voting confined to American citizens, but included all such aliens as had declared, or would declare, on oath their intention to become citizens. Thus was the proclamation to the world to become inhabitants of Kansas, and enlist in this great enterprise, by the force of numbers, by vote, to decide for it the great question. Was it to be expected that this great proclamation for the political tournament would be listened to with indifference and apathy? Was it prepared and presented in that spirit? Did it relate to a subject on which the people were cool or indifferent? A large part of the people of this country look on domestic Slavery as "only evil, and that continually," alike to master and to slave, and to the community; to be left alone to the management or enjoyment of the people of the States where it exists, but not to be extended, more especially as it gives, or may give, political supremacy to a minority of the people of this country in the United States government. On the other hand, many of the people of another part of the United States regard Slavery, if not in the abstract a blessing, at least as now existing, a condition of society best for both white and black, while they exist together; while others regard it as no evil, but as the highest state of social condition. These consider that they cannot, with safety to their interests, permit political ascendancy to be largely in the hands of those unfriendly to this peculiar institution. From these conflicting views, long and violent has been the controversy, and experience seems to show it interminable.

In 1854 Congress passed an act establishing two new Territories-Nebraska and Kansas-in this region of country, where Slavery had been prohibited for more than thirty years; and, instead of leaving said law against Slavery in operation, or prohibiting or expressly allowing or establishing Slavery, Congress left the subject in said Territories, to be discussed, agitated, and legislated on, from time to time, and the elections in said Territories to be conducted with reference to that subject, from year to year, so long as they should remain Territories; for, whatever laws might be passed by the Territorial legislatures on this subject, must be subject to change or repeal by those of the succeeding Many, and probably a large majority of this years. In most former Territorial governments, nation, lovers of quiet, entertained the hope, it was provided by law that their laws were sub- that, after 1850, the so-called Compromise Meaject to the revision of Congress, so that they sures, even though not satisfactory to the Free would be made with caution. In these Terri-States, would be kept by their supporters, and tories that was omitted. made by them what they were professed to be, The provision in relation to Slavery in Ne-a finality on the subject of the extent and limitabraska and Kansas is as follows: The eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri into the Union (which being inconsistent with the principle of non-intervention by Congress with Slavery in the States and Territories, as required by the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures) is hereby declared inoperative and void; it being the true intent and meaning of this act not to legislate Slavery into said Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to revive or put in force any law or regulation which may have existed prior to the act of 6th March, 1820, either protecting, establishing, prohibiting, or abolishing Slavery."

Thus it was promulgated to the people of this whole country that here was a clear field for competition-an open course for the race of rivalship; the goal of which was, the ultimate establishment of a sovereign State; and the prize, the reward of everlasting liberty and its institutions on the one hand, or the perpetuity of Slavery and its concomitants on the other. It is the obvious duty of this government, while this law continues, to see this manifesto faithfully, and honorably, and honestly performed, even though its particular supporters may

tions of slave territory; more especially after the assurances contained in the Inaugural Address of President Pierce. This hope was fortified with the consideration that at that time Congress had, by different provisions, settled by law the condition of Freedom or Slavery for all the territory of the United States. These hopes have been disappointed, and from this very provision for repose has been extracted a principle for disturb. ing the condition of things on which its foundation of finality rested-that is, the permanence and continuance of the then existing condition of legal provisions. The establishment of the territorial governments for Utah and New-Mexico, without a prohibition of Slavery, was sustained by many on the ground that no such provision was required for its exclusion, as the condition of the country and its laws were a sufficient barrier; and therefore they sustained them, because it would complete the series, and finish the provisions as to Slavery in all our territory, and make an end of controversy on that subject: yet, in 1854, it was insisted by the friends and supporters of the laws of 1850, and it is actually asserted in the law establishing the territorial government of Kansas, that the laws for New-Mexico and Utah, being of the Compromise Measures, adopt and contain a principle utterly at war with their great and professed object of finality; and that, instead of completing and ending the provisions of congressional action for the Territories