The Vth Congressional District—Shall We Re-elect Mr. Maclay?

image 1image 2image 3image 4cropped image 1

THE VTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT—SHALL WE RE-ELECT MR. MACLAY?

As has long been anticipated, the Hon. Wm. B. Maclay has at length been nominated by a portion of the Democratic Party for re-election, as the representative of the Fifth Congressional District of this State, and this nomination will, if the opposition remain distracted, result in an election, without much difficulty.¹

It will be remembered that in 1847, to the great satisfaction of the Free-soil party,² this representative voted for the Wilmot Proviso,³ and that in 1858, to the great disgust not only of the Republican and American parties, but of all the Democrats who are either not in public office or are not seeking for place, he voted for the Lecompton Constitution.⁴

The real sentiment of the Democratic party is truly reflected by the course of Douglas,⁵ Clark⁶ and Haskin,⁷ although the languishing power of the administration may, for a brief season, suppress its open avowal. The suicidal wound to the powers at Washington was fatally inflicted in the effort to crush freedom and force slavery on Kansas. Thence, the downfall of Mr. Buchanan and his agents may be recorded, not withstanding the spasmodic efforts of officials to suspend, though they know they cannot avert, the evil hour.⁸ When Mr. Buchanan, lured by the hope of re-election, repudiated the administration of Governor Walker, though it had been conducted in conformity with his special instructions, he set the seal of his fortunes, and in his fall dragged with him every Northern member of Congress who aided him in the unhallowed purpose of attempting to forge the fetters of bondage as an institution on a free people.⁹ Had he been governed by the rule of non intervention in Kansas affairs, he would have retired from power, receiving that homage and respect which the American people rejoice to pay to the honest and the just; but in his devotion to slavery propagandism his course will be shrouded by the veil of pity, and himself left to the remorse of "vaulting ambition overleaping itself."¹⁰

Popular sovereignty is the Democratic and true political doctrine, but the very essence of it is, that the people should freely exercise the right of self-government—it is this proposition that underlies the whole Kansas controversy. The Democratic members of the 35th Congress were elected on the platform of principles enunciated by the Cincinnati Convention, and the President had no right to add a new plank to it, in making the admission of Kansas with the Lecompton Constitution, an Administration measure, and the support of it a paramount test of Democratic orthodoxy. This he has done, and will never cease to rue the fatal hour when he was tempted to that folly. The advocacy of the admission of Kansas with a Slave Constitution was an act of supererogation on the part of the Executive. The admission of a State is confided by the Constitution to Congress, where it is exclusively vested. It was Congress and not the President that had to decide the only two questions involved: First, Did the Lecompton Constitution guarantee a Republican form of government to Kansas as a State? Second, a question of fact, Did the Lecompton Constitution express the sentiment of the people of Kansas in all respects, but most especially on the subject of slavery?

The attempt to foist that constitution on the people of Kansas was defeated in the House of Representatives by a very inconsiderable majority—Mr. Maclay voting in the affirmative, whilst Clark and Haskin both spoke and voted in the negative. The next plan was the "English Bill," that bill of abominations, holding the money bag in the one hand and the sword in the other, appealing as well to the sordid passions, as to the fears of a free people;¹¹ offering the bribe of broad lands for the adoption of the Slave Constitution, and threatening exclusion as a sovereign State, until the population of the territory should amount to ninety-three thousand. That bill, which in effect declared that Kansas had population sufficient to be admitted as a State with a Slave Constitution, but had only half enough to be admitted as a free State; that bill, which involving the paradox that it required double the population to govern a Free State that it did to govern a Slave State, received the cordial and zealous support of the Honorable William B. Maclay, notwithstanding that, before his votes were given, a Committee of Congress appointed to visit Kansas and investigate the subject, had reported that the Lecompton Constitution was leprous and corrupt, reeking with fraud, had been carried by violence, in short was the offspring of the basest purposes, effected by the most nefarious means.

It is now for such representation of the Vth Congressional District, and for those votes, that Mr. Maclay is to be rewarded with a re-election.

Was the Lecompton Constitution all that the Committee of Congress represented it to be, or was it the pure and spontaneous offering of the free people of Kansas? The answer was given at their last August election, when it was scouted by almost a unanimous vote, notwithstanding the power of the Government was exerted to produce a different result. The vote stood 11,800 against it, with but 1788 in its favor.

It now remains to be seen, whether the people of this district are prepared to extend the period of Mr. Maclay's usefulness to Mr. Buchanan, or whether by a firm and united effort, they will dismiss him as faithless to his trust.

The means are ready at hand, and sufficient time is yet afforded to defeat his election, sustained though he be by the power of the Custom House and the essential patronage of the Navy Yard. At the election of 1856, Maclay's poll was 5,996, Andrews's 3,600, Northup's 3,800, while Hamilton, without a party, received 1,165 votes. Total 14,551. Hamilton's vote was drawn almost exclusively from Maclay, and from the present disaffection in the Democratic ranks, that vote would be certainly doubled or trebled should a concentrated effort be made by presenting a suitable candidate, on whom all in opposition to the Lecompton fraud, would have an opportunity to unite. The clear majority in the District was at the Election of 1856, 2,561, against the present representative, and at this time will far exceed that number.

All now required is that there should be concert of action. It is obvious that neither of the parties in opposition single handed, would have the ghost of a chance to defeat him, whilst combined they could not fail to do so.

---