Show constitutional NOT REBELLION THE T movement la in dakota looking towards the of a state government with or without the consent of congress con Cou grew is commented upon varl variously outly by the press of the country wo we notice that bome come papers take the ground that the course proposed will amount to rebellion and they announce that the possibility of establishing independent state governments was settled in the negative by the civil war the attempt to draw a parallel between the organization of a state government in dakota and the secession of certain southern states from the a singular stretch of the powers of comparison the two situations are entirely different the intentions of the parties are ex acely opposite the issue with the general government if one should arise in the case of dakota would be the tho exact reverse of that which was decided in the four years war dakota appears to have all the requisites for local seif belf government according to the doctrines enunciated in the declaration of independence she bhe has the right to a form of government deriving its powers from tho the consent of the governed govern and when the existing form iosub la subversive of that principle to change or establish it and this is declared to be not only a right but u duty ot of the people whose rights have been denied or abridged dakota has a territorial form of government under which her people nave nelve endured many usurpations and have been deprived of a truly republican form of government hav ing reached a status which justifies her in making a demand for political rights which it la Is the duty of the people to demand and of the general government to secure to her sho bho endeavored hab has by the ordinary din ary method f to obtain t them h e M failing palling in this she proposes to avail herself of those powers reserved by the nation al constitution to the people saud yand and aud organize a state government embodying the political principles which animate other states and then to aak oak ad admission mission into the union on an equal footing with them if congress refuses her admission she will just juat move along under her state government ready at any time to render allegiance to the national government as one of the confederation when permitted so to do this la Is not secession recession it t is the very opposite of secession it is not rebellion it is the exact reverse of rebellion it la Is no attempt to break up the federal union but is an ellort to increase and make stronger the federal union it Is a move ment in the line of the constitution and of the declaration of independence its forerunner states have been organized in a similar manner since the establishment of the general government running for fon fora forn awhile without national recognition but afterwards ter wards admitted admit ted led into the federal compact we believe that if dakotas people have grit enough and unity enough to stand to their colors they will win to settle the difficulty congress will milli be willing to give them their undoubted rights it it la only a struggle of parties patties which pre pro yenta her admission she IS ia not denied on any really valid objection jec tion each of the two great parties is fearful of any augmentation of power to the other from the admission of new states the claim of congressional sovereignty over the Terri torlea is based upon buchan sueh buch an untenable foundation that it cannot stand a rigid and determined ter mined test the easiest way out of the contention is to admit all the territories into the union and set tle tie the vexed question forever all that congress Is bound to do in the promises Is to see eee that each of tho the new now states ham has a republican form of government no other considerations are nrc paramount the wishes or fears ot elther either political party have no business to interfere with the welfare of the people and the peace of the nation they should be made to stand bland aside when the rights of organized communities ars ere demanded and should not be counted in view of the vastly more important considerations erat ions if it is maintained that congress may refuse dakota admission adm leaion and require submission to the form of government which it has provided the question of the right of congress to compel submission to an anti re publican form of government will come up for decision there cannot be anything plainer than the imitation limitation of the supreme exclusive power of con gress grebs to a region ten miles square in which is the beat ceat of government and the national dockyards dock yards arsenals etc and to make needful regu nations concerning the territory ie land and other property of the united states the people of dakota are not the 61 property of the united states the organized commonwealth mon wealth incipient or other othen otherwise wises of dakota Is not the property of the united states the people have rights righta that Con oon congress grebs grees cannot la lav vr fully contravene and by a firm and prudent course dakota may be able to maintain her stand even though denied the privileges of statehood without coming into armed and physical conflict with the national authority in time by legal arbitration and with unflagging perseverance r she Is bound to winro win because e right is on her side and ali nil ail nil that can be arrayed against her be sides arbitrary might Js is a sophistical farfetched and self refuted rendering of a solitary clause in that constitution which was framed to protect the people the en croach ments menta ol of governmental authority tho rity |