rights because we were not born in England. To deny a man's right to participate in the political power because he was not, in our estimation, born in a noble country, is just as aristocratic as to deny him that right because he was not born of noble blood-we refuse to accord the right on the ground of his humanity, and this done, it matters not what arbitrary conditions we may attach to it. If not having been born in a particular place is to be regarded in the abstract as working a forfeiture of political rights, we do not see why not having been born in another place would not have the same effect. Thus, by following the rule, no human being could claim any political rights whatever, for no man could reasonably claim to have been born in every place. Still it seems to be important that some rule for the regulation of the right of suffrage should, for this as well as for other purposes, be adopted; otherwise, multitudes of voters might be imported from an adjoining state or territory and admitted to vote by virtue of their being in the territory on that day. Every actual resident is entitled, by virtue of his humanity and the relations about to be formed between him and his new sovereign, to have a voice in forming the compact; for he is compelled to be a party to the transaction. But what shall constitute a residence is a question which ought to be settled in some way. How is it to be done? We do not hesitate to answer that it cannot be settled in any manner which shall be absolutely authoritative; for among Republicans the right of suffrage lies at the foundation of all state laws and must be exercised before any law can exist to regulate it. The only regulation, therefore, which can exist must be adopted by general consent and enforced by the same authority. If a majority sufficiently strong determine to exclude the minority from a participation in the founding of the government on account of their nativity, color, or for any other cause, they can do it, whether American citizens exclude the previous subjects of other governments, or the subjects of other governments exclude Ameri

can citizens; and we can see no remedy in either case, but by the rejection of the constitution by Congress, which would be hard to procure if it were sound in its principles and framed and adopted according to the will of a majority; for this is the authority upon which Congress must ultimately act if they look for any authority whatever from the people.

This primary regulation might be adopted by a convention chosen for this and similar purposes, but the same question would arise in choosing delegates to this convention; or, in other words, the question to be settled would arise in respect to who should be allowed a voice in settling it. So with every attempt to settle this question by the only adequate authority-the people the question itself comes up as the previous one, and cutting itself clean of all restrictions, demands to be decided by universal suffrage. If universal suffrage be conceded for this purpose the point is gained and it may as well be conceded for all other purposes. But should a majority impose conditions and restrictions the minority would be bound by it, if the majority could enforce their regulations.

It must be evident, therefore, that for the people in their primary capacity to adopt any regulation upon the subject would be attended with many difficulties. The next best authority is their chosen representatives in the territorial legislature. They, by a recommendatory act (for this is all it can be called) require, as a qualification to vote for delegates to form a constitution, a residence of six months in the territory as evidence of actual settlement. Had this act been adopted gratuitously by the legislature, and had [it] not passed under popular review, its authority would have been more exceptionable. But the principle has been made the test question in two general elections and the action of the legislature has been triumphantly sustained as a wholesome, primary regulation to be observed when the emergency shall arise.

STATE GOVERNMENT-No. 1

[November 25, 1845]

The question of forming a constitution and organizing a state government for Wisconsin is becoming one of general interest, so far as our observation has extended. The subject has been discussed at some length by correspondents of the Mineral Point Democrat and Southport Telegraph, both urging reasons in favor of the immediate adoption of the measure. The Milwaukee Courier is also in favor of immediate state organization, and proposes more summary measures than we have before seen advocated.

That a majority of the people are in favor of moving in the matter we are inclined to believe, though we do not consider it as reduced to an absolute certainty. As to the modus operandi, different opinions are entertained by those who agree upon the main question. Some would go no farther than to petition Congress for a law providing for the taking of a census and an appropriation to defray that expense and the general expenses of forming the constitution, to take effect whenever a majority of the people of the territory shall vote in favor of state government. Others would have our legislature call for a vote of the people at an early day, say by the first of March, decide upon the number of delegates which shall compose the convention, apportion them in the same ratio as the members of the legislature are now apportioned, and in the same act authorize the governor, in case the vote should be in the favor of the measure, to order an election of delegates and call the convention together as early as the first of May, submit the constitution to the people for their ratification as soon after the adjournment of the convention as an election could be called, and send it up to Congress in season to be admitted during the approaching long session of that body. Others, again, would take the consent of the people for granted and have

our legislature, without further ceremony, provide for the adoption of a constitution.

From present appearances we presume that each of these plans will find advocates among the members of the legislature. Racine, Walworth, and Rock will probably be in favor of more summary measures than the middle counties. Iowa will, we think, be in favor of the medium course, and also this and a portion, at least, of Milwaukee district. The North will doubtless be for proceeding with the greatest deliberation and may perhaps oppose any measure except to petition Congress for aid in the matter. Grant will probably, for the most part, be opposed to any action whatever until the so-called alien law is repealed. We may be mistaken, but we apprehend that these are very nearly the sentiments of different sections of the territory. That some measures preparatory to a state organization will be adopted by our legislature at the approaching session, there can be no doubt; but what those measures will be may be regarded as very uncertain; but we are inclined to the belief that summary measures will not succeed.

As to the main question of state government or no state government, our own opinion is that if Congress would deal with us in good faith and support the government they have established over us it would be better for us on many accounts to remain a territory for four or five years longer. It is a sound maxim in political economy that the ability of a state to sustain itself respectably depends more upon its wealth than its numbers. The first settlers of our western territories are always persons in low or, at best, in moderate circumstances-generally poor. In the settlement of a new country by poor men, who migrate to it because they are poor, however rapid may be the influx of population, time is indispensably necessary to the accumulation of wealth, and wealth is indispensably necessary to sustain an efficient and respectable government. A hundred thousand men who have nothing to pay can pay no more than one such The same number of men, possessing in the aggregate

man.

but one hundred thousand dollars clear of their liabilities, cannot justly be called upon to contribute more for the support of the government than one man possessing the same amount of property. We are, either as an organized territory or [as] a settlement, not yet ten years old. Our farmers are struggling hard and depriving themselves of every luxury and very many of the common comforts of civilized life that they may get their farms under cultivation and the necessary buildings erected upon them. Our merchants and mechanics are practicing the same rigid economy, induced by similar necessities. Our county and town authorities are going to the utmost limit of taxation to build roads, bridges, and county buildings. Under these circumstances additional taxation cannot but set heavily upon most parts of the territory. We believe that our readers will agree with us that ten years hence 50,000 of our inhabitants (embracing an average of the wealth of the country) will be better able to sustain a state government than 150,000 are or would be now; and that a territory twenty years old, with only 50,000 inhabitants, would be regarded as young enough to enter the Union.

Political as well as pecuniary objections might be raised against the measure on the ground of our youth. We believe that a territory at ten years old, whatever may be its population or wealth, is scarcely better qualified to assume the responsibilities of a sovereign state than is a boy of the same age to assume the responsibilities of a sovereign man. We might assign many reasons in support of this position, and would proceed to do so, did not objections exist against our remaining much longer in our present condition, which to us appear to be paramount to every consideration which can be urged in favor of it upon the last-mentioned ground. Although we are, as a territory, young in experience, strangers among ourselves, possessing but limited resources for the support of a state government, and moreover possessing no legal right to state sovereignty but by the permission of Congress, yet the treatment we are receiving from the