The New York Herald Newspaper, December 18, 1857, Page 1

THE NEW YORK HERALD. WHOLE NO. 7778. MORNING EDITION—FRIDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1857. AFFAIRS OF KANSAS. GOV, WALKER’S LETTER OF RESIGNATION. Meeting of the Kansas Legisla- ture. MESSAGE OF ACTING GOVERNOR STANTON, PRO-SLAVERY STATE CONVENTION. Nominations for Governor and Lieut. Governor, &e., &., ke. GOV. WALKER’S LETTER OF RESIGNATION. The following is the letter of Hon. Robert J. Walker ro sicomy the oflice of Governor of Kansas :— Wasnrneron Ciry, Dec. 15, 1857. Bow. Lewis Cass, Secretary of State :— Su—I .esign the office of Governor of the Territory of. Kane, {have been moat reluctantly forced to this con- clusion, after anxious and careful consideration of my duty to my country, to the people of Kansas, to the Presi- dent of the United States, and to myself. The grounds assumed by the President in his late mes- sage to Congress, and in recent instructions in connection ‘with the events new transpiring here and in Kansas, ad- monish me as Governor of that Territory it will no longer be in my power to preserve the peace or promote the public welfare. At the earnest solicitation of the President, after ro- peated refusals, the last being in writing, I nally accept- ed this office upon his letter showing the dangers and ffii- eulties of the Kansas question, and the necessity of my undertaking the task of its adjustment. Under these cir- cumstances, notwithstanding the great sacrifices to me, personal, political and pecuniary ,I felt that I could no more refuse such a call from my country, through her ‘Chief Magistrate, than a soldier in battle who is ordered to the command of a forlorn hope. laccepted, however, on the express condition that I should advocate the submission of the constitution 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 on my acceptance of this office, of the 26th of March last, and reiterated in my inaugural address of tho 27th of May last, as follows:—‘‘Indeed I cannot doubt that the Con- vention, after having framed a State constitution, will submit it for ratification or rejection by a majority of the then actual bona fide resident settlers of Kansas.’’ With these views, well known to the President and the Gabinet, and approved by them, I accepted the appoint. ment of Governor of ; My instructions from the President, Ahrough the Secretary of State, under date of ‘the 30th of March last, sustain the regular Legisiature of the Territory in assembiing a Conveution to form a con. stitution, 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 ex- ercise of their right of voting for or against that instru- ment, and the fair expression of the popular will must not De interrupted by fraud or vioience. repeat, then, as my clear conviction that uniess the Convention submit the constitution to the vote of al! the actual resident settlers of Kansas, and the election be fairly aud justly conducted, the constitution will be, and ought tw be rejected by Congress.” ‘This inangural most distinctly asserted that it was not a question of slavery merely, which I believed to be of litle practical importance then in its application to Kansas, but of the entire constitution which ald be submitted tothe People for ratification or rejection. These were my words ‘on that subject in wy inaugural:—*‘It is pot merely shall slavery exist in or disappear {rom Kansas, but shall the great principles of self-government and State soverciguty ‘be maintained or subverted ” Tn that inaugural J proceed further to say, the people “may, by a subsequent vote, defeat the ratification of the constitution.” I designate this “a great constitutional right,’ and add ‘ that the Convention is the servant, and not the master of the people.”’ In my official despatch to you of the 2d June inst, a copy of that tuaugural ad- dress was transmitted to you for the further information of the President and his Cabinct. No 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 franknes#, that my instructions io favor of a submission of the constitation to a vote of the people, were ‘general and unqualified.” By that ina gural and a subsequent address 1 was pledged to the peo- ple of Kansas to oppose, by all lawful means, the adoption of any constitution which was pot fairly and fully submit- ted to their vote for ratification or rejection. These pledges I cannot recall or violate without personal dis- and, therefore, it is impossible for me to support what called the Lecompton constitution, because it is not sub- mitted to a vote of the people for ratification or rejection. { baveever unifornily maintained the principle that sovereignty is vested exclusively in the people of each State, and that it performs its ret and highest function im forming @ Staye government and Stato constitution. ‘This highest act of sovereignty, in my judgment, anly be performed by the people themselves, De delegated to conventions or other intermediate bodice Indeed, the whole doctrine of the sovereignty of con: ‘ventions, as distinct from that of the people, of conven- tional or delegated sovereignty as contra distinguished from Stato or popular sovereignty, has ever been discard od by mo, and was never heard of to my knowledge during the great canvass of 1853. Incoed, this ts the groat principle of State sovereignty maintained by the Virginia end Kentucky resolutions ¢@f 1798-0, sustained ot tho people in the great political rovolution of 1800, and embraced in that amendment to tho fed eral constitution, ad 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 fo the people. The reservation to “the States” ig as sep. arate States in exerciving the powers granted by their Plate constitutions, and Uhe reservation to “the peop.e”” lato the io of the several States, admit or ia choate, exercising their sovereign right of framing or amending their State constitution, is view was set forth in my printed address delivered at Natchez, Missis sippi, m January, 1833, against the nullification, which speech received the complimentary sanction of the great and good Madison, the principal founder of our constita tion, as shown by the letter of the Hon. Charles J. Inger- soll, of Philadelphia, as published in the Globe, at Wash- ihgton, in 1836. By this clause of Federal constitutional of the le each state is clearly re » aud ‘capecially. heir own exclusive right in ite CF their own State constitution. Tshail not enter fully Into the argument of this question at this late period, but will merely state that this is the Sie ver occupied, and my reasons for enter- ig Unis opinion are cl co oeebgpeses = Dose forth in ted pamphlet, published over my signature on the ‘of Jane, 1856, and then extensively circulated, from which I quote as follows:— Under our confederate system, sovereignty is that bigh est political power which at its pleasure creates govern- Mente, and delegates to them. posta of powors—otherwiso it re 4 grants powers, bat net sover: might extinguish itself by making the creature of ite will ‘the equal or superior of its creator. Sovereignty makes constitutions, aud throug} thom establishes governments. Tt delegates certain powers, distributing the exercise of ‘the granted power among the legisiative, executive and am departments. The constitution is not sovereign, ause It is created by sovereignty. The government is is not sovereign, for the same much dese any department of that ing defined “ y"” we must not confound wer with ite sourceor ite exercise. That is, sovereignty despot fems sovereignty was claimed to reside in kings and em- ES der the sacreligious idea of the ‘divine right of ings,’ and the blasphemous doctrine was, that sove- reigns in succession, although stained with 08 crimes and blackened with infamy, were clothed by the deity hs ig wo sod og a noth! vileges grant yy tho crown. Sucl m@eurd and impious to which the lo been compell submit by the bayonet thority of ignorance and su; the people were mere cip! detties, the sole ‘of the Almighty. ers, and crowned heads sub: ves on earth of the governing Our doctrine is just the reverse, j¢ the only source of sovereign power. With us sovercicnty rests exclusive! people of each State. Ny tho revolution, eacl colony itself alone separated from Great Br@ain, and sanctioned the Declaration of Independence. Rach colony having thus become a Mato, and each for itself its separate State government, acted old continental Congress. Fach ‘alone in acceeding to the articles of ‘State acted for itself alono $F He alte a 53 i i # é Hi i gs 3 po. wereignty. For the same reason, government'of the United States is not sovereign, a it exercise any revereign owere; it exareiees “delegated powers,” as declare’ by the constitution, those roy Which are granted by that inatra- Del ers are not sovereign powers, but vemmars ranted by sovercignty. Sovereignty being hig! political power, cannot be delegated. It is indivisible, it is unit, incapabdle of par. |. Hones ‘t error of supposing that sovereignty te divided ‘between the Statos and the United States. The constitution of the United States is the ‘ supreme law,” and obligatory as such; but & law is not sovereignty, but an act of sovereignty. All Jaws imply law makers, and in this caso those who framed and ratified thie “supreme law’ were those sovercigh- ties called the States, cach acting oxclusively for itself, uncontrolled by any sister State except by the moral force Of its influence aud example, The government of the ff i exgugue i PRICE TWO CENTS. United States possessing, a8 we have chown, no sovereign- ty, but only delegated powers, to them alone it must look for the exercise of constitutional authority in the Territo- ries ay weil as the States, for there is not a single power granted by the constitution to this government in a Terri- tory which is not granted ina State, except the power to admit new States into the Union, which, as shown by the Madison papers, the framers 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, Cong! e8 no sovereignty, and can exercise only the powers delegated by the constitution; and all the powers not thus granted are dormant or re- served powers, delonging in common territory to the States as co-equal, joint tenants there, ©” that highest political power called popular sovereignty. It will be perceived that this doctrine that “sovereignty makes constitntions,’” tha! “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 theee views which [have entertained were not framed to suit any emergency in Kansas, but were my life long principles, apd were published over my ownsignaturetwelve months before my departure to that Territory, and when I never thought of going to Kansas. These rights I have ever re- gurded as fully secured to the people of “all the Territo ries,” 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 dill, so justly applauded by the President. Such is the construction of this Kaneas act by its distin guished author—not only in hia late most able argument, but in addresges made and published by him long antece- dent to that date, showing that this sovereign power of the people, in actingiupon a State constitution, is 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 4 of sovereignty reserved to the people of each State by the federal constitution, if it bad deprived them, or Congress should now deprive thern, of the right of voting for or against their State constitution. The President, in his message, thinks that the rights secured by thia billl to the upon their State constitution, are con- question; but I think, as shown in my voted, that “ sovereignty is the p ver address, before ihat makes constitutions and governments,” and that uct only the slavery clause in a State constit but ail oth must be submitted, (he Presiaent thinks that sovereignty can be delegated, least in part: 1 think that sovereignty cannot be dele- tat all. Tho President believes that sovereignty is n conventions and people, to be exer- avi ible bet cased by the former on all subjects but slavery, and by the latter only on that question; whereas, I think that sovereignty is inalienable, indivisible, a unit, incapable of partition, and that iteannot be delegated in whole or in part. It will not be denied that sovereignty is the only power that can make a State constitution, and that it rests: exclusively with the people; and if it is inalienable and can- not be delegated, as T have’ shown, then it can only be exercised by the people themselves under onr govern- ment. We know no sovereigns but the people. Conven- tions are composed of delegates. They are mere agents or trustees, exercising not a sovereign buta delegated power, and the people are the principals. The power delegated to such conventions can properly only extend to framing the constitution, but its ratification or rejection can only be performed by’ the power whose sovereignty alone rests—namely, the people themselves. We must pot confound sovereign with delegated powers. The provisional authority of the Convention to frame acon- stitution, and submit it to the people, is delegated power: but sovereignty alone, which rests exclusively with the people, can ratify and put in force that constitution, and this is the true doctrine of popular sovereignty ,and I know of no such thing, nor does the federal constitution recog: nize it as delegated or conventional sovereignty. The ent, in a very lucid passage of his able message, gives unanswerable reasons why the people and nat con: Ventions should decide the question of slavery in framing a State tion. He says very truly, that (rom the ne- cessary division of the inchoate State into districts, a ma- jonny of 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 im the State constitution, and why should the question of slavery alone override and extinguish the doctrine of po- pular 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 objec- tions to the Lecompton constitution are equally strong whether Kansas under ite provisions should be made a free or slave State. My objections are based upon the violation of the right of self-government and popular so- vereiguty, and of forcing any constitution upon the people against their will, whether it recognized free- dom or slavery. Indeed, the first question which the people ought to decide in forming a gov- ernment Yor an inchoate State is, whether they will ebange or not from a Territorial toa State government? Now, 08 no onegwho with me denies federal or Territo- rial sovereig»ty, will contend that a Territorial Legislature is sovereign or represents sovereignty, or that such Legis- lature, a mere creation of ress, Can transfer sove- *reignty which it does not to a Territorial Conven- tion, this change from a Territorial to a State governmen can only be made by power where sovereignty rests Yet State government is forced upon lo of Kansas by the Lecompton constitution, and But besides the change from a Territorial te government, which the people alone havea right to make, in framing @ State constitution there are many other momentous questions included in that instrument. It involves all the powers of State government. Where is the bill of righte--the Magna Charta of the liberties of a free people—the legislative, executive and judicial func- tous, the taxing power, the clective franchise, the great tion of education, the sacred relation of husband and , parent and child, guardian and ward, and all the rights adfcting life, Hiberty ‘and property? There is also tho question of State debts, of banks and paper money, and whether they shall be permitted or prohibited. As all free governments, as stated by Mr. Jefferson, depend upon “the congent of the governed,” how can it be known whether the people would assent to the constita- it be submitted to their vote for ratification or But if acquiescence can de presumed in any cave, surely it cannot be in thatof Kansas, whero #0 many of the delegates violated their pledge to submit tho constitution iteelf to a voto of the people, where the delegates who _— the constitution represented scarce- ly one-tenth of the people, and where nearly one-half of the counties of the Territory were disfranchised, and that by no fault of theirs, and,did not and could not give 4 ringle vote atthe election of delegates to the Coaven- tion. I have heretofore discussed the subject mainiy on the question that conventions arc not sovereign, and cannot rightfully make a State constitution without its submission to a vote of the people for ratification oF rejection. Yet surely even those who differ with me on this point, inust concede, especially under the Kaneas- Nebraska bill, it js only such Conventions can be called sovereingn as have been truly elected by the people, and represent their will. On reference, however, to my address of the 16th of September last, on the day’ qualification question, acopy of which was itnmediately transmitted to you for the information of the President and Cabinet, ft is evident that the Lecompton Convention was not such a body. That Convention had vital—not tochnical—defects, in the very substance of its organization under the Territorial law, which could onl; cured, in my judgment, as set forth in iny inauguralgand other addresses, by submission of the constitution for the ratification of the poo- ple. On reference to the Territorial law under which the Convention was assembled, thirty-four regularly organized countice were named as clection districts for delegates to the Convention. In each and all of these counties it was required by law that a census be taken and the voters rey red, and when this was com pleted the delegates to the Convention ehould be appor- tioned accordingly. In nineteen of these counties there was no census, and therefore there could be no such ap- intent there of delegates upon such census. And in ifteen of these counties there was no registry of voters. These fifteen counties, including many of the oldest or- gaaieed comntion fa the itory, were entirely lefranchised, and did not give, (by no fault of their own,) conld not give solitary vote for the delegates to the Convention, This resuli was super induced Za the fact that the Territorial Legislature ap- pointed the sheriffs and probate judges in all these counties, to whom was assigned the duty by law of mak ing this census and registry. These officers were political partizans, dissenting from the views and opinions of the people of these countics, as was proved by the election in October last. These officers, from want of funds as they aileged, neglected or refused to take any census or make any registry in these counties, and therefore they wero cntirely 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 in augural address, in reference to those countics where the voters wore fairly rogistered and did not vote, In such counties, where full and free ity was givon to re- gister and vote, and they did not chooro to exer. cise such a privilege, the question is very difforent from those countiee where there was no census or registry, and no vote was given, or could be giver, however anxious the — might be to participate in the election of delegates to the Convention. Nor could it be said these counties: |, for wherever they endea- vored, by a sul census or registry of their own, to supply = this occasioned = by Psi neglect of the Territorial the delegates thus chowen were rejected by tho Convention. I repeat, that in nineteen counties out of thirty-four, there was no census. In fifteen counties ont of thirty four there wae no registry, and not a solitary yote was given, or could be given for det to the Convention in any of there counties. Surely, then, it cannot be said that such a Convention, chosen by scarcely more than one-tenth of the present voters of Kan. sas, represented the people of that Territory, and could rightly impose a constitution upon them without their consent. These nineteen counties, in which there was no census, constituted a majority of the coun. ties of the Territory; and these fifteen counties, in which there was no registry, gave a much tai vote at the October election, even with the six months qualfication, than the whole vote given to the Lecompton constitution on the 17th of November last. If, then, sovereignty can ‘be delegated, and the Convention, aa auch, are sovereign, which I deny, surely it must be only in such cases as when such conventions are chosen by the ote: which we have econ was not the case pr Lecompton Convention. Tt was for this other reasons that in my inacgural and otber addresses I insisted that the constitution should be submitted to the people by the Convention, as the only means of curing this vital dofect in its organization. It was, therefore, among other rea- sens, that when, as you know, the organization called the ‘Topeka State governtrent’” was made, and as a conse quence, an inevitable civil war and conflict must baye en sued, those results were proyented by my assuring (n0} the abolitionists, as has been erroneously stated, for my addrers was not to them, but to the people of ‘Kansas,) them that in my Judgment the constitution would be su)- mitted fairly and freely for ratification or rejection by Weir vote, and that if this was not done I would unite with them, (the people) as 1 now do, in lawful opposition to such procedure, ‘Tho power and responsibility being devolved exclusive- ly upon me by the President of using the federal army in ansas to suppress insurrection, the alternative was dis- tnctly presented to me by questions propounded at To- peks, of arresting the revolution by the slaughter of the people, or of preventing it, together with that civil war which must have extended throughout the Union, by a #0- Jemn assurance then givon, that the right of the people to frame their own government so far as my power extend- ed should be maintained, But for this assurance, it # a conceded fact that the Topeka State government, then assembled in legislative session, would bave been put into immediate actual operation, and that a sanguinary collt- sion with the federal army and civil war must have en- gued, extending it is feared throughout the Union. Indeed, the whole idea of an inaugural address origina- ated in the alarming intelligence which had reached Wash- ington city of perilous and incipient rebellion in Kansas. ‘This insurrection was rendered still more formidable on my reaching the Territory by the near approach of tho assembling of the revolutionary State Legislature, and the very numerous mass conventions by which it was’ sustained. In truth, I had to choose beiween arresting that insurrection, at whatever cost of American blood, by the federal army, or to prevent the terrible catastrophe as I did, by my pledges to the people of the exertion o all my power to obtain a fair election and tho submissioa of the constitution to the vote of the le for ratification or rejection. My inangural and other addresses were, therefore, in the nature of proclamations, 60 0! tesued by pr: ts and governors, with a view to pre- vent, as they did in this caso, civil war and insurt Now, by my oath of office | was sworn tosupport the eoustivition of the United States, which I have shown, in my judgment, required the submission of the constitution to the vote of the people. 1 was sworn, also, to take care that the Kansas and Nebraska bill should be faithfully executed, which bill, in my judgment, as heretofore stated, required that the ~ constitution should be submitted to the vote of the people, and T was therefore only performing a solemn duty when, as Gov- ernor of the Torritory, to whose people my first obliga- tions were due, I endeavored to secure them these re- sults. The idea entortained by some, that | should see the federal constitution and the Kansas-Nebraska bill otherthrownand disregarded,and that, playing the part of @ mute in a pantomime of ruin, I should acquiesce by my silence in such a result, especially where such acquies- cence involved, as an immediate consequence, a disas- trous and sanguinary civil war, seems to me most pre- [ nreckige Not a drop of blood has beeu shed by the federal troops in fKansas during my administration; but insurrection and civil war, extending, I fear, throughout the country, were alone prevented by the course pursued by me on those occasions; and the whole people abandon ing revolutionary violence, were induced by me to go for the first time into a general and peaceful election, These important results consti- tute a sufficient consolation for all the unjust as- saults made upon me on this subject. I do not nnder- stand that these assaults have ever received the slightest countenance from the President. On the contrary, his message clearly indicates an approval of my course up to the present most unfortunate difference about the so- called Lecompton constitution. Jussmuch, however, as this difference is upon a vital question, involving practical result 4 new instructions, it is certainly much more respectiul to the Presiderit, on my part, to resign the office of Governor, and give him an opportunity of tilling it, as is his right under the constitution, with one who concurs with him in his present opinions, rather than go to Kansas and force him to remove me by disobedience to his imstructions. This latter course,im my judgment, would be incompatible with a proper respect for the chief magistrate of the Union, inconsistent with the rules of moral rectitude or propricty, and could be adopted with no other view than to force the President to remove me from office. Such a course, it is alleged, would present me to the pub- Kie as a political martyr in the defence of the great princi ple of self government; but to go to Kansas with any such purpose, or with a certain knowledge that such a resuit must follow, would be alike unjust and improper. only alternative, then, is that ofa respectful resignation, in the hope that ‘Kansas und our beloved country may bo shielded from that civil war with which I foar both are threatened by any attempt to force the so-called Lecomp- ton constitution upon the people of Kansas. J state it as a fact based ona long and intimate association with the people of Kansas, that au overwhelming majority of that le are opposed to that mstrument, and my letters state that but one out of twenty of the press of Kansas sus- tain it. Some .oppose it because so many counties were disfranchised and unrepresented in the Convention; some who are ——— to paper money, because it au thorises a bank of enormous capital for ‘Kansas, nearly unlimited in its issues aud in the denomination of its notes from one dollar up and down; some because of what they consider a Know Nothing clause, by requiring that the Governor shall have becn 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 whether any more slaves may be im ported, and then only npon that issue by voting for th constitution to which they are opposed —and they regar this as but a mockery of the elective franchise and a pe rilous sporting with the sacred rights of the peopl; some oppose it because the constitution distinctly recognize + and adopts the Oxford fraud in apportioning legia- lative members for Johnson county apon the frau dulent and fictitious returns so falsely called from that precinct, which tion of tha frand in the constitution is abhorrent to the moral sense of the people. Others oppose it because, although in other cases the presidents of conventions have been authorized to issue writs of election to the regular Terri torial or State officers, with the usual os and with th established precinets, and on the adjudication of the re in this case unprecedented, and vice regal powers in to the president of the convention to make the the judges, and to decide finally upon the re From the grant of these unusual and enormons precinct turns. powers, and from other reasons connected with the re turns of Oxford and McGee, an overwhelming majority of Kansas have no faith in the validity of these returns, and therefore will not vote. Indeed, disguise it as we may to ourselves under the influence of the present excitement, the facts will demonstrate that any attempts 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 Cheering | myo e of the people of Kausas, that it will not settle the Kansas question or localize the jesue—that it will, Ifear, be attended by civil war, ex tending perhaps throughout the Union, thus bringing thie question back again upon Congress and before the people in its most dangerous and roy ry ‘The resi. dent takes a different view of the subject in his message, and from the events occurring in Kansas as well as here, it is evident that the question ts ig from theories into Practice, and that as Governor of Kansas | should be com pelled to carry out new instructions differing on a vital question from received at the date of my appoint- ment. Such instructions I could not execute consistently with my views of the federal constitution aud of the Kan- ‘sag and Nebraska bill, or with my pledges to the of Kansas. Under these circumstances no alter ive is left but to resign the office of Governor of the Territory of Kansas. No one can more deeply pond than myself this necessity, but it arises from no change of opinion on my part. ‘On the con trary I should moet cheerfully have returned to Kansas to carry out 6 instructions, and thus preserve peace in the Territory, and finally settle the Kansas ques: tion by redeeming my pledges tothe people. It is not my intention at thie time to discuss the peculiar cireurn- stances and unexpected events which have modified the opinions of the President upon a point so vital as the submission of the constitution for ratification or re jection by the vote of the —much leas do 1 desire’ any controversy w the President on this subject. Yet, however widely my views may dif. fer from those entertained by him on thie question—views which I have held all my life, and which, as involving fundamental principles of public liberty and ‘of the con- stitution, are unchangeable—yet, ax regards all thoae great measures which, [ trust, will constitute the policy of his adminietration in other , it will give me leasure, as a private citizen, to yield my cordial support. have said that the slavery question as @ practical taeue had ont aes from Kausas long before my arrival there, the question of self government had been sub- stituted in [ts place. On some future occasion I shall dis- eipate the delusion which bas prevailed upon this subject, and show that after three years experiment, when I ar- rived in Kansas, there was less than three hundred slaves there and the number constantly diminishing—that, ae proved by the official records of Congress, published and authenticated by those distinguis! ‘Southern, statesmen, John C. Calhoun and J Davis, the winter climate even of Eastern Kansas is colder than that of New England, and that the proslavery ter ritorial convention of Kansas consolidated with the Ee slavery Territorial Legistatare on the 4th of January 1857, nearly five months before my arrival there, did abandon the slavery issue because, as set forth by one of their number, the proslavery party was ina small and ad mitted minority, and the co-operation of the free State democrats was invited as the only hope of success, not to make Kansas @ slave State, which was conceded to be impossible, but to make it @ conservative demo- cratic free State, Even as late as the 8d of July 1867, when the Democratic Territorial Convention assembled at Lecompton in consequence of the laws of the climate, and the well-known will of the je, none contended that slavery could be establiehed there; nor ‘was it until my Southern opponents interfored in the af- fairs of Kansas, and by denunciation, menace and other. wise, nided ata critical period by several fe feral office. ers of Kansas, including the Surveyor General, and President of the Convention, with his immense nage, embrac! ‘man; hundred employee Eeervesel, ead, eat believe, wihout the “know: ledge of approbation of the President of the United States, produced the extraordinary paper called the Lecompton constitution, Yet this act of intervention by the foderal officers to defeat the will of the poople seems to be sustained by my ite, whilst my intervention, ae it is called, in obedience to my duty and oath of office to eupport the federal constitution and to take care that our organic law should be fairly executed by endeavoring to yt Fe Kansas their right under that aot, is de nd calurnniated. It fe sul more remarkable tha pothetical remarks made by me as cegarde climate in its connection with ite influcue wpon the question of slavery in Kansas after that — issue been abandoned there, which views were for consolidating the union between the conservative, the free State and pro-slaver, democrats, so as to prevent the confiscation of the em: if number siaves then held in Kansas, have been nounced by many a Southern Senators who, when the Kansas and Nebraska bill was pending in Con- gress, and when such remarks from them if ever, might affect southern emigration, were then loudest in pro. claiming that because of its climate Kansas could never @ slave State, Indeed, it seome that all sons in and out of Kansas, whether in public or private life, may publish ‘what opinions they please in regard to these questions except the Governor of that Territory, who has #o little power and n9 patron- age. And now be pleased to express to the President my deep regret as regards our unfortunate difference of opinion in relation to the Lecom| constitution, and to say to him that as infallibility not belong to man, however exalted in intellect, parity of intention or posi- tion, yet if he has committed any errors in this respect, may they be overruled by a superintending Providence for the perpetuity of our Union and the advancement, the honor and interest of our beloved county. Ju now dissolving my official connection with your de- partment, I beg leave to tender you my thanks for your constant courtesy aud kindness. Most respectfully, your ob’dt serv’t, R S WALKER. MEETING OF THE LEGISLATURE. (From the St, Louis Republican, Dec, 14.] ‘The train from Jedferson City last night brought down a very large number of passengers from the upper part of this State and Kansas, Many of them arrived at Jefferson on the Florida, from St. Joseph. The Legislature met ‘on the 7th, but there was no quo Tom present, and there was an adjournment to the next day. rf ‘Tuesday there were eleven member Council, and twenty-one in the House. 1 izod by electing CW, Babcook, Prosidi Secretary, GA. Colton, Assi-tant Ser Engrossivg Clerk, ane divers other oftic G. W. Deitzler, was olected President, C.F. Carrier, Chie” Clerk, and a full set of officers Wo hear from the Territory that there was intense ex- citement among «i classes of people, and it is hardly pro- bable that the parly oppozed to the Lecompton Conven. tion will will pernvit ap eloction to be held on the 2st at all, Jun Lane, with three or four hundred of his myrmi- dons and followers, were eucampeil near Lecompton, os tensibly to keep the peace, but realy io it seems to us, the members of the Logislatt. cure such action av they desire with refereuce to the Le- compton constitution. Many threats of a determination to drive Gen. Calhoun, and all the members who were con- cerned with him in the formation and submission @f the constitution, out of the Territory, and even to take their lives, have been made, but no outbreak of this kina had deen attempted. News of the dismissal of Mr. Secretary Stanton, and of the appointment of General Denver in bis stead, had not reached Kansas, but the impression of our informant is that it will bring things toan issue in the Territory at once. Perhaps when they find that the President has adopted his course, and will employ all the means at his comunand to sustain the legally constituted authorities and enactments, they may hesitate about bringing matters to a bloody termination, as they declare they will do, “regard- Jess of consequences.” ACTING GOY. STANTON’S MESSAGE. Lxcomrton, Dec. 8, 1857. Feicow Crnizexs oF Tae Cocncit. aN» Housk oF RePRRSEN- TATIVES— In the absence of the Governor, who, by leave of the President, has gone for a short time’ to Washing. ton, on important public busixess, and while thus tempo. rarlly clothed by the organic act with all the powers and duties of the chief executive office of the Territory, I find myself compelled by a vense of duty to call you together, in order that you may adopt prompt legislative measures to avert the calamities which imminently threaten the public peace. From the representations of majority of Your own bodies, as well os from other information of an authentic character, have reason to know that recent events have produced a profound agitation of the public mind, and that a sense of wrong and injustice, whether well or ill founded, and an apprehension of greater evils to arise therefrom, have aroused the people of the Terri tory to a condition of dangerous excitement. The pro- cacdings of the late Constitutional Convention are the im- mediate cause of this trouble and alarm. The law passed at the last session of the Legislative As- sembly, providing for the organization of a Convention to frame a constitution for the government of Kansas as ‘one of the States of the Union, was adopted at a period when, unfortunately, the people of the Territory were di vided’ by a bitter hostility resulting from the previous state of Commotion and civil war. In consequence of this embittered feeling, and the mutual distrust naturally thereby engendered, one of the parties, constituting a large majority of the people, refrained almost entirely from any participation in the proceedings instituted under the law aforesaid. The census therein provided for was imperfectly obtained from an unwilling poople in nine- teen counties of the Territory; while in the remaining counties, being also nineteen {n number, from various causes no attempt was made to comply with the law. In some instances people and officers were alike ayerse to the proceeding; in others, the officers neglected or re- fuced to act; and in some’ there was but a stnal! popula- tion, and no efficient organization enabling the people to secure a representation in the Convention. Under the operation of all these causes combined, a census list was obtained of only nine thousand two hundred and fifty-one legal voters, confined to precisely one-half the counties of tho Territory, though these undoubtedly contained much the larger part of the population. At the election which fellowed, in pursuance of the law, only two thousand two hundred persons—being less than one-fourth of the red voters—porticipated in} any manner in the choice of delegates, cither by voting for those elected or for other persons, ‘The average aggre gute vote in favor of the successful candidate was about eighteen hundred. it thus appears that in the election of the 1th of June last for delegates to the Convention, the great mass of the people refrained from voting, and left the whole proceed. tng, with all its important consequences, to the active mi. nority, under whose auspices the law had been enacted and also executed, so far as that could be done by the executive officers without the concurrence ef a majority of the people, ‘That the refusal of the majority to go into the election for delegates was unfortunate is now too apparent to be Genied. It has produced all the evils and dangers of the present critical hour. It has enabled a body of men, not actually representing thejopinions of the people, though regularly and legitimately clothed with their autnority, to prepare for them a form of government and to withhold the greater part of its most important provisions from the test of popular judgment and sanction. It has created the present profound excitement, consequent upon the ay prehension that Congress may admit the State under this consutation, and that the people of Kansas may be thas: forced to submit to the operation of a fundamental law in J adoption of which they lave had no actual partic! pation, Tt ie not my purpose, nor ix it necessary, to inquire how far either of the parties into which the peuple are unhap- pily divided upon the proceedings in question was justi- fiable in the course pursued. ‘The only important question which seems now to concern the people, or their repre- sentatives, is, as tothe legal aud political effect of the facts as stated—whether they do or do not impose upon the whole people av obligation to accept the work of the Convention, and to acquiesce in its plan of adopting the constitution and sending it up to Congress for the adinis- sion of Kankas as a State into the Union? If a Convention, organised as this was,can be consi dered as embodying in itself the sovereignty of the peo- ple, the difficulty is undobtedly insuperable, and the omission of the majority to rote June is past all pre- sent remedy, Bot, in my judgment, such « position can- not be successfully maintained. The fundamental princi ple of ropular relf government, and especiall that “republican form’ which the constitution of United ‘States guarantees to every member of the confederacy. excludes the possibility of the delegation or transfer of their sovereignty, by the people, to any ai what ever. In its very nature, that sovereignty which erects governments and endows them with their legitimate pow- ers, can be exercised only by the people themselves. It fs 1 le of alienation, and is as insey ly inherent in the body of the people, as are personal identity and in- ndent will in each individual, people cannot divest themselves of it, any more than an individual can divest himeelf of his own moral responsibility. Any other theory would involve the ab- surdity of the possible subjection of the sovereign to its alert agent. For if the pee roe oy Ay actually dele. gated or transferred, it may evidently be used to enslave the eovereign people themselves. If the Convention could Pag poh pone ath ow A od Own authori. ty, it couk ily adopt rpetuate the most tyranni- al provisions: for if the conta, ‘as in this case, may ‘be made permanent until 1968, it might equally be made ‘tual and unalterable. In ite essential character, when about to frame a State government, the sovereignty of the people of a Territory e is identical with that of the people of a State, It must no- cessarily be equally as plenary ant independent, other. wite the new State would not stand upon an equality with the old ones, The perfect equality of all the members of the confederacy is the very basis of the federal constitu: tion. It is true that a Territory cannot become a State of the Union without the consent of Congress. But this dis- cretion on the part of Congress docs not imply the power to dictate institations to the people of the Territory, or in any way to restrain, or limit, or force their sovereignty in the exercise of ite high function of framing ite own State overament. The only rightful power which Congress & in the premises, isto determine when the new com munity is sufficiently mature to assume an independent government, and to recognise the identity of the people tn their new form of a State. lause of the constitution guarantecing to} the States a “republican form of government’ imposes the obligation to protect the le in their soverei) and to prevent its alienation, if ‘were possible, ture {rom the true republican form. Congress, . has no rightful power to accept a State government which has not received the sanction of the people who are to live under it, The attempt to exercise such a power would be ‘a pmin violation of the constitution. It would be none the less a usurpation because the people might afterwards re- gain their violated soy: ity. ‘The instances in which has recogniaed and re- coived new States without the actual submission of their constitutions to the vote of the people, are not erm noni 4 in conflict with the principles now asserted. Doubtless if the people of a Territory should quietly acquiesce in the adoption of a constitution passed fur them, they might thus give very satiefactory evidence of their appr . Bat ‘no instance can be found on record of a conatitution ac- cepted by Congroas against the will of a majority of the le, €x} in any distinct manner whatever. It je not intended herein to assume that the of the Territory are opposed to the constitution which is to be submitted, in a certain form, on the 2tst instant. It is sufficient for the occasion which now convenes the —_ lative Assembly, and for the purpose of this commun tion, that there is wide epread dissatisfaction, threat. ening to disturb the tranquility of the people. If there be any means of, Lpreventing the discord and possible violence which are 80 seriously apprehended as the result of the partial ancgimperfect election aathorized to be held at the time named, under the authority of the Constitutional Con. ‘vention, it is the solemn duty of the Legislature to ascer: tain and adopt the measures most effectual for that end ‘What sppropriate ‘and efficient meaanre can be adopted, in the exciting emergency, is a question not without diff culty, Some haye proposed « repeal of the act of the Inet | Legislature, under which the Convention assemb'e1 and formed ity fanctions. But inasmuey as that law has een pore executed, it is doubtful whether an act of repeal would have the effect intended. Itis certain that if the Constitution were to be really snbmitted to the peo- ple, and they should ratify it by their vote, a legislative repeal, between the dates of the submission and of the election, would not affect the validity of the sovereign act of ratification. ‘The true purpose which, in my judgment, ought to con- trol your legislation on the present occasion, and that which ig, perhaps, the most pertinent and practicable within your power, is to provide for the regular and legiti- mate exercise of the sovereignty of the people on those points in which the Convention has attempted to tramme! or restrain it; in other words, to provide for a direct vote, under your own authority, upon the adoption of the con- stitution which is to be parvalls submitted on the 21st inst., under the authority of the Constitutional Convention Thave already expressed the grave doubta I entertain as to the power of the Legislatare in any manner to inter- fore with tho proceedings of the Convention; but there can be no question as to your sastority to provide, by a suitable haw, for a fair expression of the will of the peo- 1 the vital question of approving the constitution. highest act ot sovereignty, the actof delegating ap- suze powers in the best form of words and with the 7 ong, 10 & State organization, #o deeply in- ests of the people, that ystems of self government especitily where any doubt or MH unequivocal ratification of the od. majority of the people may accept the instru- ment now before them, in one or the other ot *he forms in by the Com ion. Ju that case. for consplaint; for 1 doubt not peor oorfully acquiesce in the will of the majority, fairly ascertained. On the other hand, if the people should decide against the constitution in both forms, it would not be possibletor Congress, without a vio lation of all popular rights, to admit Kansas into the Union under it. The way would be then fairly open for the pas- tage of any other appropriate ineasiire, by virtue of which the people, relieved from all former embarrass ments, could elect their delegates to a convention, and es- tablish thetr own institutions in their own way, in accord- ance with the provisions of the organic act and the funda- mental principles of self government. It is difficult to see what objection could be raised to such a law, passed at the present time, and to be executed cotemporaneously with the yote upon the constitution, as provided by the Convention, That body itself had its ex. istence from the authority of the Legislative Assembly. This constitutes its whole ttle to regularity and legitimacy ; for no valid claim can be based upon any supposed’ recognition by the people, inasmuch as the great majority of them refrained from all im the election. If that Convention, ing its authority solely from the Le actment which called ‘it into existence, can send up to Congress a constitution for the State of Kansas with- out actually submitting it to the people, the same Legisla ture may, with equal regularity and legality, provide for an independent vote of the people upon te actual ratifi- cation of the instrument which is sought to be imposed upon them. It is not to be supposed that Congress will disregard the voice of the people, legally expressed in the manner proposed, whether its decision shall be for or against the constitution. In pursuance of these views, T recommend the passage of a law directing an election to be held, either under ex- isting regulations, or ig pursuance of other suitable pro- visions to be expressed tn the acte, in whieh the people shall be authorized to vote for the constitution in either of the forma presented by the Convention, and also against that constitution in both forms. As any law attempting to control the officers of the Convention and those acting under them would be of more than doubtful validity, and might be wholiy disregarded by them, st would be ‘pru dent to provide for a separate proceeding under different officers, but it might be of great convemence to the 7 ple, and some efficiency for the objects in view, to bold Ubis election at the same time, and at the same places rovided for in the proclamation of the President of tho Ette Convention, in brder that the result may be commu. nicated to Congress, at the earliest practicable mo- ment, as the sovereigh will of the people of Kansas. Tt would seem to me that this single act will be sufficient to incet this whole emergoncy and to dispel the excite- ment which now threatens the of the Territory. If it be adopted, substantially in the form proposed, with- out any cmbarvansing; adjuncts calculated to arouse pre. judice and to produce discord, the earnest directness and ‘unity of the act, looking aloue to the one great and right ful end of ascertaining the true will of the people and se- curing its ascendancy, cannot fail to commend it to the approbation of all patriotic bearts in the Territory and throughout the Union. ‘The laws now prevailing in this Territory provide for the proper punishment of illegal and fraudulent voting; but there js no provision which will reach the case of frau- dulent returns. The case of the late Oxford precin Jolnson county, Was an enormity so great that it has bo where been defended or justiled. the evil conse quences of it are seen in the fact that even the late Con. vention has been so far imposed upon that in its appor- tiopment for the State Legislature under the constitution, it has assigned to Johnson county four representatives, which mupe necessarily be based on tho notoriously false returns from that county. In order to moet the ap- ae naturally growing out of these circumstances, recommend the adoption of a provision raaking it felony, , for aby judge or clork of elec tion knowingly to place on the poll books the names of persons not actually present and voting, or o°herwise cor: ruptly to make false returns, either of the election held by order of the Convention, or of any other election to be held in this Territory. Tcannot clove this communication without expressing my deep regret that the absence of the Governor, in this grave emergency, will deprive youot the benetit of his wise and patriotic counsel. His great experience in pub lic affairs, his profound knowledge of the causes and ef. fects of political action, would have been of infinite ser- viee to the Territory in this dangerous crisis, Upoa all occasions where ho bas addressed the people, officially or otherwise, upon the affairs of the Territory, be has unt formly proclaimed his determination to exert all his official power and al) bis personal influence to secure to the peo ple of Kansas the right to decide, fully and independently, upon the adoption of their ewn wstitutivons. Although my authority as Acting Goversor, is. wholly independent of his, and cannot commit him in any way,fer my acts, I conceive Uvat in taking the responsible step of calling you together and making tho recommendations now sabmit ted, Lam but following to its logical conclusion his whole potiey, im all of which Ihave heretofore cordially con- curred, That your labors may be directed to the attainment of only good ents, that a benign Providence may preside over your deliberations and give you wisdom and mode. ration, and forbearance, such as shall be appropriate aud efficient te allay the excitement and dispel the dangers which surround this distracted community, is the earnest hope and prayer with which I commit to you the grave interests upon which you are called to act. FRED. I, STANTON. PROGRESS OF THE DEMOCRATIC ANTI- SLAVERY CONSPIRACY IN THE NORTH. WEST AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION. [From the Columbus (Ohio) Statesman—Douglas organ. } THE UNTERRIFIED DEMOCRATIC PRESS OF OHIO, The Western democratic papers which resiet the usur- ea with suitable panishm tion of his ty, King Cathoun, and bis squalid par. jament over people, have been stigmatized by the papers on the jon list at Washington city, aa aiding pens! the black republicans. It may be seen how many demo- cratic papers of Ohio stand up for popular sovercignty and refuse to leave the platform adopted at Cincinnati, by the list below. We publich it for two or three reasons. One is, that they deserve honorable mention, who can neither be threatened nor cajoled into surrcndering tle principles and the true interests of the democratic party. Another is, that the representatives of Obio in Congress may learn, beyond all peradventure, the senfments of the demo. cracy of the State. We do it also to give the Washington papers plenty of material to blaze away at; for“ Ob, My ‘Stars!’ ? we do enjoy their Indicrous rage and senseless pother. We print the list aiso, in order that when this contest is over, and the ancieut principles of our y and popular sovereignty have been vindicated and sus- tained, as they will be, it may appear upon tho record, who stood undaunted in the crisis, and contended un. ceasingly for the great democratic dogma, “ Let the people rule.” It may be that we have overlooked many of our democratic exchanges of Ohio, for we had not at first wht of publishing the list; in'that cage we shall gladly make the additions at a future period: — The Hocking Sentine). The Holmes County Farmer. The McOunnelsville Enquirer. The Hancock Courier. The Adams County Democrat, The Jackson County Express. ‘The t~) “ mares ‘The Bellair Era. ‘The Mansfield Shield and Banner. ‘The Noble County Democrat, ue Mount Vernon Banner. e Monroe Democracy. Tho Newark Advocate. ‘The Nopoleon North West, The Fremont Messenger. The Preble Democrat, ‘The Clermont Sun. The Ashland Union. The Wayne County Democrat, The Mount Gilead Messenger. ‘The Delaware Standard. The Seneca Advertiver. The Columbus Westbote, (German.) The Cincinnati Volksfreand, (German. ) The Sandusky Democrat. The Perrysburg Democrat. The Warren County Demoorat, ‘The Butler County Democrat. The Canfield Sentinel. The McArthur Democrat. The New Philadelphia Democrat. The Hillsborough Gazette. ‘The Summit Sant Democrat, ‘The Marietta Republican. The Iron Valley Express. The Sandusky Mirror. The Allen County Democrat. The Urbana Democrat, ‘The Piqua Enquirer. ‘The Rrown County Democrat. The National Democrat, Madison county. The Springfield Expositor. ‘The Toledo Commmere ‘The Ohio Statesman. ‘This list does not include those which are ‘waiting for the facts.” The fret that the great principle of the Ne- bragka act and the Cincinnati platform—populer sovereign. ty—was contravened by the Lecomy Convention was enough for ns, and it was enough for nine hundred and amegce outof every thousand democratic voters in our State, SENATOR DOUGLAS’ GREAT SPRECH. m the Detroit (Mich.) Pree Presa a We undertake to declare that no position of the speech of Senator Douglas, which we spread before our readers in our last issue, can be succersfully assailed. It is not only a complete and thorough and incontrovertible expo- sition of the doctrine of popular sovereignty, as annuncia- ted by the Kangas organic act, but removes the founda- tion upon which the Lecompton Convention has been made: to rest, and brings that structure in ruins to the ground. The democratic party must continue to stand wy the doctrine of popular sovercignty, as interpreted b Donglas, or it, too, will fail in ruins to the |. Wha cost much to establish that doctrine. The democracy of the No bave made tremendous sacrifices to wipe ou the Congressional restriction which prohibited the peopl of Kansas from forming and regulating all their domesti institutions in their own way. They cannot and will uo now abandon it. They cannot and will not permit its sig niticance and scope to beabridged They will maintain it, or, if they do not, they will commit suicide. We believe we can speak for Michigan if we cannot for the Northwest, Here in Michigan we only need the pre- servation of the doctrine of popular sovereignty intact, and we will sweep black republicanism from the face of the land at the next contest. And there is really but on sentiment here regardizg the ture of affairs. The unanimity in this city id wonderful, and ous advices from the interior axsure us that the city is an index of the whole State. If wecan rely upon our democratic cotempora- ries, the democracy of the eutire Northwest are impelled by one impulse. ‘Then look at Kansas! Every pewspaper in the Terri- tory, save one, protests against the admiasion under the Tecompton fraud, and these papers that tine- tenths of the people protest against it. They protest against the violation of the doctrine of popular aover- elgnty in their cage, The doctrine must not be violated in their cage, and in no other case. {From the Detroit Free Press. DEMOCRATIC MASS MEETING AT THE CITY HALL LAST NIGHT—PASSAGE OF RESOLUTIONS RE-APFIRMING THE GREAT DEMOCRATIC DOCTRINE OF PO- PULAR SOVEREIGNTY, RESPONDING TO THE SPEECH OF SENATOR DOUGLAS, EXPRESSING CONFI DENCE IN PRESIDENT BUCHANAN, AND RECOMMUEND- ING A STATE CONVENTION. Purevant to a call, amecting of the demoe at the City Hall last evening, for the purpose of re- ing the great doctrine of popular sovereignty, and taking stops towards a State convention of the democracy, to be held atan early day, for the purpose of a thorough organi- zation of the party.’ The City Halt was filled at an early lour, and the meeting was organized by the appointment of Alderman fyson as Chairman, and F. J. Allison as Sec- retary. Mr. Cranuxs W. Cure moved that the Chair appoint a committee of dye to draft resolutions expressive of the sense of the meeting and report ceordingly. ‘The Chair appointed the following gentlemen such com- mittee:—Meesrs. Charles W. Chapel, J. Logan Chipman, George V. N. Lothrop, 8. Dow Hiwood and Thomas McEn- tee. The committee retired, and after a short absence return- ed and reported, by their chairman, Mr. Chapel, the fol- lowing resolutions, which were read by the clerk: — Resolved, That the democracy of the city of Detroit will in no wise depart from, but will resolutely and inm- movably adhere to, the doctrine of popular sovereignty enunciated by the Kansas Nebraska act. Resolved, That the true intent and meaning of that bill was to leave the people of Kansag and Nebraska perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the constitution of the United States, Resolved, That the domestic institutions of a political community about to enter the Union as a State emb: not only the question of slavery, but the executive, gislative and judicial departments of the government, tho finance, taxation and education of the people, and all other things relating to their local government Resolved, That the speech of Stepaen A. Douglas, deli- vered in the Senate of the United States on the 9th day of December inst., is aclear, conclusive and onassaiiable exposition of the doctrine of popular sovereignty aa enun- ciated by the Kansas-Nebraska act, aud Uhat the demoora- cy of the city of Detroit tender to Stephen A. Douglas their thanks for tho promptness with which he has pro- nounced this exposition. Resolved, That we have unabated confidence in the in- tegrity of James Buchanan, that we approve and admire every act of bis admimistration thas far save his interpre- tation, in hia late message, of the popular sovereignty clause of the Kausas-Nebraska act; and that we have no other expectation than that the future course of his ad- mipistration will be such as all good deuwocrats can ap- plaud and none condern. Resolved, That in the opinion of this meeti rable that & Slate convention of the democracy State be held at an early day, to take mensures for the more thorough organization of the democratic party; and that, to that end, the President of this meeting is request- edto int a committee of ten persons, who shail have = ity to call such convention at @ suitable time and place. Speeches followed by Mesers G. V. N. Lothrop, Corne lius O'Flynn, Charles W. Chapel, Elijah Hawley, H. A. Morrow, A. Smith Bagg, and others. The meeting helt until ajate hour, which rendered it impossible fer ua t report the speeches in time for this morning's iasue. @ previous question being finally demanded, and tho demand being sustained by a division of the house, the chair put the motion on the adoption of the resolutions, ‘The resoluticns were adopted by a decisive vote. The meeting then adjourne STATE CONVENTION OF THE PRO-SLAVERY PARTY. A Convention of pro slavery mon assembled at Lacomp- ton cn the 6th of December, says a correspondent of the St. Louis Democrat. The object of the Convention ia to ao- minate a Governor, Lieutenant Goveruor and mem ers of the State Legislature. Preparations for putting a State government in motion are going rapidly forward. Calhoun, in the exercise of power delegated to him by theConstitutional Convention, bas already commenced the appointineut of county com. missioners, with whom rest the power of choosing judges of election. In the event of the establishment of a State: goverpment, two United States'Senaters and a member of. Congress are to be elected. In consideration of the zeal Le has manifested in the furtherance of pro-slayery in- terests, Calhoyn will probably receive a United Mateo senatorehip. It is aleo rumored that Secretary Stanton is likely to be a candidate for the same office. It is probable that Jadgo Elmore will aspire to the position of Governor or member of Congress TELEGRAPHIC. TRO-SLAVERY NOMINATIONS FOR STATE OFFICERS— THE BORDER RUPFIANS ORGANIZING FOR THE RLEC* TION—OPYOSITION TO THE LECOMPTON CONSTITU- TION. Sr. Lov, Dec. 17, 1857. The Reputican bas Kansas dates of the 10th inst. The Legislature had done nothing towards carrying out the recommendations in Secretary Stantow’s message. Tho election returns of Kickapoo had boen declared fraudule: by @ committee of investigation , and the republican mem- bers admitted to their seats in the House. The Democratic Conven¥on at Lecompton nominated Jobn Cathoun for Governor by acclamation,,but he de- clined to accept, and Frank Marshall was nominated in his stead, W. G. Matthews for Lieutenant Governor, and Mr. Cagr for Congress. istrict Attorney Weir declined a Domination for Congress. General Denver had not ar- rived in the Territory. Kansas letters to the Democrat say that an attempt is being made in the border counties of Missouri to form companies of voters to control the election om the 2ist inst. At @ mass convention held at Lecompton on the 7th inst. resolutions were passed endorsing the proceedings of the Delegate Convention held at Lawrence @n the 2d inst., and pledging themselves, individually and collectively, to oppose to the utmost the constitution adopted at Lecomp- ton, and resist every attempt made to put the government im operation under the sam Political Intell! PRACTICAL NON INTERFERENCE.—A convention of the de- mocracy of Uwen county, Indiana, was held at the Court mons of Sone Sena ultimo, when the fol- lowing reeolution was on or TREES nase ee oneen wesolved, we of the 4 of thie county or State interfering in any manner whatever with the management of affairs in , and are in favor of the people of that Territory settling their own vexed ques- pa ST, LT by non residents and outsiders—a strict adberence to the privileges of the Kansas and Nebraska bill. . Wikk AXD The Prespancy.-The Fredericks. burg (Va.) Gazette thinks that Governor Wee has ruined My ebances eg Presidency by bis pay: over iseue messages. Iteays: “if be writes four messages as Governor of one Bante in ‘O7,a8 President of thirty-four pong 60, he word pen ge pd ga an six messages. 0 pose such umpa- Falleled proliziy wii forever ircelade hin from the Preat- dency. How. Manny W. Bares. —This gentleman, says the Dela- ware State Keporter, of the Lith instant, is making Preparations to proceed to Washington an early day to take his seat in the United States Senate. He enter- tains no ides of resigning, nor has he been advised to that effocyns has been erronedaly reported. |The President's moeaage meets hit warm approval, that portion in relation to Kanaan aifairs in particular ‘Tre Sort axp Cor. Ore.—The New Orleans Crescent thus speaks of the new Speaker of the House of Repreaen- tives —Col. Orr, of South Carolina, is spoken of for . er, but that gentleman fs said to be su by \ tary Cobb's particular friends, and is regarded as a tender toed Southern man. We would sooner, ten to one, have an out and out freesoiler, like Banks, than @ . makeshift politician from our own portion of the racy. In the one case we know what we have to expect, In the other, we are at sea all the time without chart, com- pass or rudder. Mesicrpat Engction® is MAassacirserm —Elections for munveipal officers occur in seven cities in the Common- th to-day, vit:—Boston, Roxbury Charlestown, Lynn, Worcester, Newburyport, aad Lowell, In most of these cities the canvass has been marked by an unusual interest, and Were will probably be a large vote thrown, “