When we get back, we get to the point of the right of the people to make a constitution.  Kansas was settled, for example, in 1854.  It was a Territory yet, without having formed a constitution, in a very regular way, for three years.  All this time negro slavery could be taken in by any few individuals, and by that decision of the Supreme Court, which the Judge approves, all the rest of the people cannot keep it out; but when they come to make a constitution they may say they will not have slavery.  But it is there; they are obliged to tolerate it in some way, and all experience shows it will be so,—­for they will not take the negro slaves and absolutely deprive the owners of them.  All experience shows this to be so.  All that space of time that runs from the beginning of the settlement of the Territory until there is a sufficiency of people to make a State constitution,—­all that portion of time popular sovereignty is given up.  The seal is absolutely put down upon it by the court decision, and Judge Douglas puts his own upon the top of that; yet he is appealing to the people to give him vast credit for his devotion to popular sovereignty.

Again, when we get to the question of the right of the people to form a State constitution as they please, to form it with slavery or without slavery,—­if that is anything new I confess I don’t know it.  Has there ever been a time when anybody said that any other than the people of a Territory itself should form a constitution?  What is now in it that Judge Douglas should have fought several years of his life, and pledge himself to fight all the remaining years of his life for?  Can Judge Douglas find anybody on earth that said that anybody else should form a constitution for a people?...  It is enough for my purpose to ask, whenever a Republican said anything against it?  They never said anything against it, but they have constantly spoken for it; and whosoever will undertake to examine the platform and the speeches of responsible men of the party, and of irresponsible men, too, if you please, will be unable to find one word from anybody in the Republican ranks opposed to that popular sovereignty which Judge Douglas thinks he has invented.  I suppose that Judge Douglas will claim in a little while that he is the inventor of the idea that the people should govern themselves; that nobody ever thought of such a thing until he brought it forward.  We do not remember that in that old Declaration of Independence it is said that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”  There is the origin of popular sovereignty.  Who, then, shall come in at this day and claim that he invented it?  The Lecompton constitution connects itself