Mr. Buchanan received the electoral votes of all the Slave States, except Maryland, and of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Illinois, and California; in all, 174 votes. Mr. Fillmore, candidate of the American party, received the votes of the electors of Maryland, 8. Col. John C. Fremont received the votes of all the Free States, except the five before mentioned, 114.

The last session of Congress under Mr. Pierce, met the 1st of December, 1856. The President in noticing the election just past, says, "the people have asserted the constitutional equality of all the States," and "have condemned the idea of organizing more geographical parties." He censured those who "seek to prevent the spread of Slavery into the present or future States of the Union;" says, "they endeavor to prepare the people of the United States for civil war;" that "violent attack from the North" begets "a spirit of angry defiance at the South." He mentions as among He mentions as among "the long series of acts of indirect aggression" upon the South, the "objecting to the admission of Missouri" as a Slave State, and the prohibiting of Slavery in Territories; and he attributes the disturbances in Kansas to the "unjust interference on the part of persons not inhabitants of the Territory." Of course he does not mean by these officious "persons" the Missourians who went thither with the avowed purpose of "interfering" with the elections ! Again there is no utterance of condemnation against the violence and the frauds committed by the Missouri intruders or the Pro-Slavery residents, who coöperated with them in their atrocities.

Who can contemplate such servility to the Slave Power as is manifested in the Messages and acts of this President, without disgust and indignation? But he has already received a large installment of deserved retribution. Mr. Pierce and his successor can hardly fail to see, that, by their making common cause with the South against the advocates of freedom in the North, not merely conniving at, but positively aiding in carrying out their flagitious purpose of subjecting Free Territory to the dominion of Slavery, they have encouraged the slaveholders in their insolent demands upon the North for further concessions, the denial of which was made the occasion of the Rebellion, for which they-these Northern Democratic leaders-are to be held in a great measure responsible.

Again Congress failed to pass a law for the benefit of Kansas. Mr. Grow, of Pa., reported to the House a bill, declaring the acts of the Territorial Legislature to be a violation of the organic act, and therefore of no effect, and requir ing the Governor to order an election for choosing members of a new Legislature, and providing against unlawful and fraudulent voting. This bill passed the House, 98 to 79. The Yeas, 92 Republicans and 6 Fillmore men, were all from Free States. Of the Nays, 65 were from Slave States, and 14 from Free States; 20 Fillmore Americans, and 59 Democrats. In the Senate, the bill was laid on the table, 30 to 20. Yeas, from Slave States, 22; from Free States, 8. from Free States, 18; from Slave States, 2.

Nays,

Notwithstanding these failures to provide relief for Kansas, its condition had been improved under the administration of Gov. John W. Geary, who had been appointed in July, 1856. It being understood that he intended to side with neither party, the Pro-Slavery leaders published an address, in which they complained that they had not found in him such a successor as they had asked; and they feared that "he would prove no more efficient than his predecessors," (Reeder and Shannon.) They therefore hastened to gather an army from Missouri and other Slave States before the arrival of the Governor. Acting-Governor Woodson, by proclamation, declared the Territory in a state of rebellion and insurrection, and called upon the militia and other citizens to aid in putting down and punishing the insurrectionists.

Gov. Geary arrived. He ordered a restoration of property; declared publicly his intentions to do justice to all classes; and advised forbearance on the part of the Free State men, as they could ask the next Legislature to revise the laws. He endeavored also to increase the energy of the judges, whose inefficiency had become notorious.

In January, 1857, the Free State Legislature met at Topeka; but a large portion of its members were arrested by a deputy marshal, and the session was broken up. The Terri torial Legislature met the next week at Lecompton; and as the Free State men had taken no part in the election, both bodies were entirely Pro-Slavery. Gov. Geary recommended the repeal of some objectionable acts; but his recommendation was disregarded. An act was passed to provide for

electing a Convention to frame a Constitution; the election to be held in June, and the Delegates to meet at Lecompton in September. None were to be allowed to vote who were not in the Territory on or before the 15th of March. This was designed to shut out the votes of the Free State men, who had fled from their homes during the disturbances of the past year, and would be unable to return before that day. Another objection was the Constitution was not to be submitted to the people for their sanction or rejection. The Governor had informed certain members, before its passage, that if this objection should be removed, he would waive other objections, and approve the bill. They replied, that this would defeat the object of the act, which was to secure Kansas to the South as a Slave State The bill was passed, vetoed, and again passed, and became a law.

Another act was passed for the election of a new Legislature, in October, all persons not in the Territory by the 15th of March, being again excluded.

Gov. Geary, thinking that he was not duly sustained by the Government, resigned his office at the close of Mr. Pierce's administration.

CHAPTER IX.

Administration of James Buchanan.

JAMES BUCHANAN commenced his Presidential term on the 4th of March, 1857.

We come now to a new Chapter in the history of ProSlavery Democracy. A new plank is inserted in the Democratic Platform. The time-honored doctrine held and practiced by the political Fathers, that Congress had power over Slavery in the Territories, and that, being against natural right, it could exist only by special, positive enactment, was superseded, in 1848, by a new article in the Democratic creed, introduced by Gen. Cass, known by the now familiar name of "popular," or "squatter sovereignty;" which places the power exclusively in the hands of the people of the Territories. This principle was sought to be carried into effect by Mr. Douglas in his Kansas-Nebraska bill, which proposed leave the people free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way."

66 to

President Buchanan, in his Inaugural Address, announced, as about to appear, still another improvement in the ProSlavery Platform. Slavery in the Territories had been found to be a judicial question, belonging to the Supreme Court of the United States, before whom it was now pending, and would be speedily and finally settled. He did not, however, inform the public what the decision was to be, although he probably knew. He gave it as his opinion that, under the Kansas-Nebraska act, the proper time for the people of a Territory to determine the question would be when the number of residents in the Territory should justify the formation of a Constitution with a view to admission as a State. The nonintervention doctrine of Cass and Douglas had been understood to concede to the people, represented in their Legislature, full power over Slavery. But this doctrine was by the Inaugural scattered to the winds. Nobody ever doubted the

right of the people to exclude Slavery on adopting a Constitution. But if this is THE way to do it, it must be out of the power of the Territorial Legislature.

Mr. Buchanan, however, was wrong in saying that this question was now pending in the Supreme Court; that is, judicially. The question "legitimately" before the Court was one which involved the right of Dred Scott and his family to freedom. The Court, (according to previous understanding, as some believe,) two days after the Inauguration pronounced judgment, reversing the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, and directed the dismissal of the suit for want of jurisdiction. Scott's master had taken him into Illinois and Minnesota, and remained with him in free territory for several years. It had been held, until now, that a Slave taken by his master into a free State, became free. Some readers may desire to know upon what ground Chief Justice Taney based his new decision. It was, that free negroes, whose ancestors were slaves, could never become citizens. The Constitution did not recognize them as citizens. He said: "They had for more than a century been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in moral or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to Slavery for his benefit" The reader may ask : What relation had this decision to the question of power over Slavery in the Territories? None at all. The "decision" to which the President probably alluded, was a volunteer opinion of the Judges, wholly extra-judicial. The doctrine of "popular sovereignty," it was found, was not likely to secure the establishment of Slavery in Kansas; and it might hereafter prove equally ineffectual in other territory. The people could not be trusted to settle and regulate "their own institutions." Slaveholders wanted some improvement in the Democratic creed which would authorize them to carry their slaves into all territory "without let or hindrance." Their wish was gratified. The Supreme Court Judges gave it as their opinion, that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional; that Congress had no power over Slavery in the Territories; and that slaveholders have the right to take their slaves