Speech of Stephen Adams in the United States Senate, July 2, 1856

I have but a few words to say in reference to this question. Great complaint is made that the objectionable portion of the acts of Kansas amount to a violation of the organic law, which organic law confers on the people the power of establishing their own domestic institutions in their own way, leaving them perfectly free to do so. That law exhausted itself, and was complete when they established those institutions. Every objection which has been made to these laws has no foundation in fact. The people there have established the character of their institutions; and having done so, the right or privilege secured by the organic act has exhausted itself. Then it follows, as a matter of course, that when we have freely conferred on them the power of legislation, they have a right to pass such laws as they may deem necessary, in order to sustain their institutions. They have passed just such laws—not perhaps exactly in the language, but substantially the same—as the States maintaining the institution of slavery have found it necessary to pass to sustain their rights. In the State in which I have the honor to live, we prohibit the circulation of incendiary pamphlets, as they are called, which mean nothing more nor less than the language objected to and provided against in this act. Men are punished for it: so in nearly so in nearly all the States where the institution of slavery exists. The mistake which is made here is in reference to the question which I have already called to the attention of the Senate. These people have acted in conformity with the provisions of the acts of Congress.

But, sir, I have a further objection to this proposition. It is child’s play, it seems to me, to confer on the people the right of legislation, and then, after broadly and unconditionally conferring on them the right of legislating for themselves, to say that Congress shall supervise their work. Why, sir, Congress expressly refused to retain the power of revising the legislative acts of the Territory, but now you are proposing to declare null and void such parts as do not suit you. I believed in the doctrine contended for by the Senator from Michigan, that the people have a right to control themselves, and that is a usurpation of power, unauthorized by the Constitution, for Congress to legislate for the people of a Territory. So believing, I cannot vote to repeal a law which has been passed by them, whether I approve it or not. I concur with my colleague [Mr. Brown] on that point. I cannot approve these provisions; but I cannot and will not vote to repeal a law passed by the Legislature, after having once conferred on them the power to pass it. I do not believe congress ought to have the right to do this; I think it is not a safe principle.

SOURCE: Appendix to the Congressional Globe: Containing Speeches and Important State Papers, Etc., of the First Session of the Thirty-fourth Congress, p. 800