This lesson deals with the issue of popular sovereignty and the Lecompton Constitution. It also stated that the state constitution would decide the issue of slavery in the state of Kansas. Slavery would be allowed or prohibited depending upon the constitution territorial voters approved.
Both sides in the struggle, free-state and pro-slavery, were determined to have the state constitution reflect their point of view. The Lecompton Constitution is a confusing issue set in an even more confusing time period, that of Kansas Territory.
The Lecompton Constitution is easiest to understand when examined through the series of steps needed to create a state constitution. That is how this lesson explores the constitution. It is also important to remember that in regard to the Lecompton Constitution the issue is popular sovereignty even though the controversy is slavery.
The popular sovereignty process is what will bring about the solution to the controversy. Additionally, the constitution guaranteed slaveholders their property rights for the approximately slaves and their descendants currently residing in the territory.
The constitution left the question if new slaves could be brought into the territory to the voters. The convention wanted the voters to have the option of the constitution with slavery or the constitution without slavery. There was not the option to reject the constitution entirely, which would have represented the true anti-slavery choice because even if the constitution was approved with the prohibition of new slaves brought in, it still would allow the perpetuated enslavement of those currently held in bondage and their descendants.
Members of the convention argued that Kansans risked sacrificing their statehood if they voted on the Lecompton Constitution in whole. However, the vote on this document does not represent true popular sovereignty as voters were not given the option to reject the constitution entirely—the true anti-slavery option. Fresh off his resignation, Walker warned Buchannan that the Lecompton Constitution did not fulfill the promise of popular sovereignty and that blood may be shed over it.
Additionally, Senator Stephen Douglass Democrat-Illinois , the author of the Kansas-Nebraska Act , vehemently opposed the Lecompton Constitution because it lacked true popular sovereignty and he threatened to oppose President Buchannan publicly if he continued his support for it. However, despite this clear majority opposing the Lecompton Constitution, Buchanan demanded Congress approve it and admit Kansas as a slave state.
His unrelenting support for the constitution alienated many Democrats, including Stephen Douglas , who felt this constitution violated popular sovereignty. This is designed to be used as a one or two period lesson which will guide students through these complicated events by using excerpts from both of those documents with questions to stimulate thinking about the consequences of their implementation. The purpose of this activity is to better acquaint the student with the problems faced by Kansas settlers.
Decisions made by our countries leaders have to be well thought out or they may come back to haunt us. Free-staters chose not to vote at this election because they felt their. Next, the completed Lecompton Constitution went before territorial voters for approval.
The proslavery constitutional convention claimed the right to call for a vote on part of the constitution and to turn over the power of the territorial governor and legislature to the president of the constitutional convention. The territorial governor and the new free-state legislature disagreed with the convention. Their inability to reach an agreement resulted in. The first election resulted in approval of the proslavery Constitution, but the second election resulted in the free-state voters overturning the Constitution which led to even more anger and violence in Kansas.
The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction, and the right of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same and as inviolable as the r ight of the owner of any property whatever. The Legislature shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of the owners, or without paying the owners previous to their emancipation a full equivalent in money for the slaves so emancipated.
They shall have no power to prevent immigrants to the State from bringing with them such persons as are deemed slaves by the laws of any one of the United States or Territories, so long as any person of the same age or description shall be continued in slavery by the laws of this State: Provided, That such person or slave be the bona fide property of such immigrants: And provided, also, That laws may be passed to prohibit the introduction into this State of slaves who have committed high crimes in other States or Territories.
They shall have power to pass laws to permit the owners of slaves to emancipate them, saving the rights of creditors, and preventing them from becoming a public charge. They shall have power to pass laws to permit the owners of slaves to treat them with humanity, to provide for them necessary food and clothing, to abstain from all injuries to them extending to life or limb; and, in case of their neglect or refusal to comply with the direction of such laws, to have such slave sold for the benefit of the owner or owners.
In the prosecution of slaves for crimes of higher grade than petit larceny, the Legislature shall have no power to deprive them of an impartial trial by petit jury. Any person who shall maliciously dismember, or deprive a slave of life, shall suffer such punishment as would be inflicted in case the like offense had been committed on a free white person, and on the like proof, except in case of insurrection of such slave.
Before this constitution shall be sent to Congress, asking for admission into the Union as a State, it shall be submitted to all the white male inhabitants of this territory, for approval or disapproval, as follows…The voting shall be by ballot. The judges of said election shall cause to be kept two poll-books by two clerks, by them appointed.
Does the Lecompton Constitution reflect a belief that the people of Kansas believed in slavery or popular sovereignty as a solution to the conflict in their territory?
What options did the final draft give the voters of Kansas regarding the issue of slavery? What were some of the ways in which the proslavery Missourians influenced the slavery issue in this Constitution to insure that their slaves would be protected in Kansas? Failing to appreciate the growing power of free soil ideology in the north, President Buchanan continued his long-standing policy of appeasing the slave states by appointing many southerners to his cabinet.
He also showed his southern leaning in the matter of "Bleeding Kansas. The result was that large numbers of pro-slavery and antislavery settlers rushed into the Kansas territory. When voters met at Lecompton to write a state constitution, free-soil Kansans boycotted the registration and delegate election process, resulting in the election of a pro-slavery convention. When only a pro-slavery constitution was presented to voters, the antislavery faction again refused to participate in the election and the pro-slavery constitution was sent to Buchanan for congressional approval.
Meanwhile, the territorial legislature in Kansas called for a referendum on the entire constitution and, with antislavery partisans participating this time, the result was a large majority against the Lecompton Constitution.
Amidst the ensuing national firestorm, Buchanan characteristically decided his course by applying a narrow legalistic logic to the case. Kansas Territory was flooded with ideologically inspired Northern and Southern migrants, who hoped to shape the future of the West.
Despite the fraudulent voting practices that enabled the Lecompton legislature, President Franklin Pierce supported Lecompton and denounced the Topeka Constitution, and the possibility of it receiving federal approval died in the Senate.
Still not content, President Pierce declared the Topeka government to be in rebellion. Another blow to the Free-Staters soon followed when in , Charles L. Robinson , who had been elected Territorial Governor at the Topeka convention, was arrested for treason for his role in undermining the Lecompton legislature. Seizing the moment, a group of predominately slaveholding legislators quickly called for another convention to meet in Lecompton in order to draw up a new constitution that would protect the rights of slave owners and refute the Topeka Constitution.
In addition to the political wrangling, violence and coercion entered the voting booths. The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction, and the right of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same and as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever.
0コメント