| Stephen B. Oates - History - 2009 - 522 pages
...the voters chose the last question, a provision was to be added stating that "slavery would no longer exist in the state of Kansas except that the right of property in slaves now in this territory shall in no measure be interfered with." What kind of fucking hocus-pocus was this?... | |
| Nicholas J Santoro - History - 2006 - 286 pages
...failed because of the exclusion of free blacks. pate. (The proposed constitution stated, "the rights of property in Slaves now in the Territory, shall in no manner be interfered with.") On December 21 the "constitution with slavery" won 6,226 to 569. More debate and controversy followed... | |
| Kansas State Historical Society - History - 1883 - 110 pages
...constitution they provide that, even though the vote should be for the constitution without slavery, still "the right of property in slaves now in the Territory shall in no manner be interfered with;" and in the section relating to amendments to the constitution it is expressly and carefully provided "that... | |
| A Centennial Edition Of The History Of The United States - 1875 - 842 pages
...Lecompton early in September, 1857, formed a constitution, in which was a clause providing that "the rights of property in slaves now in the Territory shall in no manner be interfered with," and forbade any amendments of the instrument until 1864. It was submitted to a vote of the people on the... | |
| William MacDonald - Charters - 1916 - 684 pages
...be stricken from this constitution by the president of this convention, and slavery shall no longer exist in the State of Kansas, except that the right of property in slaves now in this Territory shall in no manner be interferred with, and shall have transmitted the constitution,... | |
| Zachariah Chandler - Cuban question - 1859 - 24 pages
...be stricken from this constitution by the president of this convention, and slavery shall no longer exist in the State of Kansas, except that the right of property in slaves shall in no manner be interfered with." So, if they voted out the slavery clause, still the right of... | |
| |