Four Conventions framed Constitutions for this State. The first assembled at Topeka, on the 23d of October, 1855, and adjourned on the 11th of November, after a session of twenty days. It was composed of forty-seven members, of whom thirty-one signed the Constitution. On the 15th of December this instrument was submitted to the people for ratification or rejection. Only 1,777 ballots were cast, all but 46 being favorable. One of its sections, a provision excluding negroes and mulattoes from the State, was submitted as an independent proposition, and adopted by an affirmative vote of 1,287, to 453 against it.
The second convention was that held at Lecompton, which met on the 7th of June, 1857, and after a session of four days, adjourned until the 19th of October, a final adjournment being reached on the 3d of November. It was composed of sixty-four members, forty-five of whom signed the organic law it framed, and its session continued twenty days. No direct vote on this Constitution was provided for. The Schedule ordered two forms of ballots, one, the “Constitution with Slavery,” the other, “Constitution with no Slavery.” It was the old turkey-and-buzzard choice. The Free-State men refused to vote at the election, held on the 21st of December, and only 6,712 ballots were cast, 6,147 being for Slavery and 569 against Slavery. The Free-State men had, however, elected a majority of the Territorial Legislature in October, and at a special session of that body, held in December, a law was passed providing for a direct vote on the Constitution. This election was held on the 4th of January, 1858, resulting: Against the Constitution, 10,266; for, 164—the Pro-Slavery men not voting. A third vote on the Lecompton instrument was taken August 2d, 1858, Congress having ordered its re-submission under the terms of the English bill. Again it was rejected, the ballots in its favor being only 1,788, and those against it, 11,300.
The Leavenworth Convention met at Minneola, March 23d, 1858, and at once adjourned to Leavenworth, where it reassembled March 25th. It was composed of ninety-five members, was in session only eleven days, and the Constitution it framed was signed by eighty-three persons. This instrument was adopted at an election held May 11th, by a very small vote, the Pro-Slavery men taking no part in the contest. It was never a popular organic law, and many Free-State men who supported it did so under protest. An earnest effort was made, by the Republicans, to secure the admission of Kansas under the Topeka Constitution, and by the Democrats, with a few exceptions, to bring the Territory in under the Lecompton Constitution. But no serious or determined contest was waged, in Congress, for admission under the Leavenworth Constitution, and in less than eight months the movement in its behalf was formally abandoned.
THE WYANDOTTE CONVENTION.
Early in February, 1859, the Territorial Legislature passed an act submitting to the people the question of calling a Constitutional Convention. This vote was taken March 28th, and resulted: For, 5,306; against, 1,425. On the 10th of May, 1859, the Republican party of Kansas was organized, at Osawatomie, and at the election held on the 7th of June, for delegates to the Wyandotte Convention, the Republican and Democratic parties confronted each other in Kansas for the first time. The Democrats carried the counties of Leavenworth, Doniphan, Jefferson and Jackson, and elected one of the two delegates from Johnson. The Republicans were successful in all the other counties voting. The total vote polled was 14,000. The Republican membership was thirty-five; the Democratic, seventeen.
The Convention then chosen assembled on the 5th day of July, 1859. In its composition it was an unusual, not to say remarkable, Kansas assemblage. Apparently the chiefs of the contending parties had grown weary of Constitution-making, or regarded this fourth endeavor in that line as a predestined failure, for they were conspicuous by their absence. In the Topeka Convention nearly every prominent man of the Free-State party had a seat. Gen. James H. Lane was its President, and Charles Robinson, Martin F. Conway, Marcus J. Parrott, Wm. Y. Roberts, Geo. W. Smith, Philip C. Schuyler, Cyrus K. Holliday, Mark W. Delahay, and many other recognized Free-State leaders were members. In the Leavenworth Convention there was a similar gathering of widely-known Free-State men. Conway was its President, and Lane, Roberts, Thos. Ewing, Jr., Henry J. Adams, H. P. Johnson, Sam’l N. Wood, T. Dwight Thacher, Preston B. Plumb, Joel K. Goodin, A. Larzelere, W. F. M. Arny, Chas. H. Branscomb, John Ritchie, and many other influential Free-State chiefs or partisans, were among its members.
THE MEMBERSHIP.
In the Wyandotte Convention all the noted Free-State leaders were conspicuously absent. Its roll-call was made up of names generally new in Kansas affairs, and largely unknown in either the Free-State or Pro-Slavery councils. Its President, James M. Winchell, his colleague, Wm. McCullough, and John Ritchie, of Shawnee, had been members of the Leavenworth Convention; Col. Caleb May, of Atchison, and William R. Griffith, of Bourbon, had been members of both the Topeka and the Leavenworth Conventions; and Jas. M. Arthur, of Linn, had been a member of the Topeka Convention. But their prominence was largely local. On the Democratic side, too, appeared men before unnoted in the annals of the stirring and tremendous conflict that had for years made the young Territory the cynosure of a Continent’s interest. None of the prominent Pro-Slavery men who sat in the Lecompton Convention or the Pro-Slavery Legislature—Calhoun, Stringfellow, Henderson, Elmore, Wilson, Carr, and others—appeared in this body.
Perhaps the absence of these party leaders was a fortunate thing for the Convention and the incipient State. For in discriminating intelligence, in considerate zeal for the welfare of the people, in catholic grasp of principles, and in capacity for defining theories clearly and compactly, the members of this body were not wanting. On the other hand, there were fewer jealousies and far less wrangling than would have been possible had the envious and aspiring party leaders been present. I think it is certain that the work was better done, done with more sobriety, sincerity, prudence and real ability, than would have resulted had the recognized chiefs of the rival parties been on the floor of the Convention. The pioneers—the John Baptists—of the Free-State cause were all at Topeka, and the Constitution they framed is disfigured by some blotches and much useless verbiage. The leaders were all at Leavenworth, where they schemed for precedence, and spread traps to catch one another, and quarreled over non-essentials, and did everything but make a popular Constitution. Lecompton was the last expression of a beaten, desperate and wrong-headed, but intellectually vigorous faction, and was really, barring the mean method of its submission, and its attempt to perpetuate Slavery, an admirable organic law.
The younger men of the Territory constituted the Convention at Wyandotte. They came upon the field fresh, enthusiastic, and with a place in the world of thought and action to conquer. They recognized the fact that they must do extremely well to secure popular favor, and they set about their task with industry, intelligence and prudence. They were not martyrs or reformers, as many of those at Topeka were; nor jealous politicians or factionists, as most of those at Leavenworth were. They had no old battles to fight over again, no personal feuds to distract them, no recollection of former defeats or victories to reverse or maintain. They were their own prophets. They had had no experience in Constitution-making, and hence did not look backward. They were not specialists. A few had hobbies, but the vast majority had no bees buzzing in their bonnets. A few were dogmatic, but the many were anxious to discuss, and willing to be convinced. A few were loquacious, but the majority were thinkers and workers. Some were accomplished scholars, but the majority were men of ordinary education, whose faculties had been sharpened and trained by the hard experience of an active and earnest life. Many were vigorous, direct, intelligent speakers; several were really eloquent; and a few may justly be ranked with the most versatile and brilliant men Kansas has ever numbered among her citizens.