Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1855-05-29

Kansas. This fact was charged upon him while
he was here, and the proof was IN Westport.
He has never, SO far as ! am advised, dared to
deny it. Comment upon such conduct Is unne-
cessary. II speaks for itself.
His last official outrage, believe, was to APP
point his toacn Of Pawnee us the place TOR the
meeting Of the Legislature. This town exists IN
far away beyond the settlements
in the Pawnee country, and destitute OF food or
any place for the members TO meet or lodge IN.
Several suitable places could have been selected
near the Missouri river.
will now proceed to answer Governor Reeders
charges. was at the election and have since
read, attentively, the papers, and conversed WIN
persons from various points IN the Territory, and
assert, without fear of successful contradiction,
that peaceable, orderly, quiet election, never
took place in any State since the days OF the
Revolution In the whole Territory there was
but a single disturbance--that took place at the
town of Lawrence, and was provoked by an abo-
lition editor in charging some voter with perjury;
for which foul charge an effort was made to pun
ish him, but he ran; and as he ran, pisol was
fired off after him, but did him no injury. That
there were arms in abundance, and well charged
too, is undeniable. But what was the occasion
Of this? Simply this: the Abolitionists generally
came well armed; some Of them made show of
their arms as they came up the Missouri river,
and made thair .threats what they would do with
the ''slave casehers.' Indeed, some seemed to
take pride in showing their brayado. They
also threatened to prevent the pro-slavery party
from voting, by force, and it was notorious that
they generally carried their arms. party had
already shot down one man, who died on the
spot. Under these circumstances, it was nothing
more than prudent for the other party to be pre-
pared to resist any Infringement of their rights
Had they been SO disposed, the returns OF the
election show that the pro-slavery party were in
nj
''scalped" the last Abolitonist in the Territory.
That no violence was committed, shows that
their arms were for the purpose of protection and
not aggression. The only attempt made to over
awe voters was made by the Abolitionists them
selves: who, think, at some point on the Kan
sas river, attempted to take possession Of the
polls, but were promptly subdued
Nor were illegal votes given. The judges of
the election were of the Governors own APP
pointment, where they could be got to serve.
They took an oath, as prescribed by him, of
most stringent kind to reject all illegal votes;
and at nearly all of the precincts there was one or
more Abolition Judges before whom, and in whose
presence, the votes were cast peaceably and with
out challenge, except in few instances and
generally when challenged, the vote was reject
ed. The returns were made to the Governor
under oath, and he, after taking ample time for
reflection, with full knowledge of what tran
spred at the election, communicated to him by
issued certificates Of election to majority of the
members elected. Yet in the face of all these
solemn official acts and deliberate proceedings,
he has the audacious efirontery to assert in the
eastern States that Kansas was invaded by band
of armed men. most unblushing statement.
Why did he not refuse
certificates of election TO the members thus fraud
ulently elected' He will doubtless say their
election was not contested. But why, if such
gross fraud was perpctrated, their election not
contested? Was there q single district that had
not many cunning lynx-eyed Abolitionists present
to watch for and detect the slightest illegaty in
the election 1t is well known that there were
many such. In addition to this, the Governor,
by his regulations, gave the greatest latitude in
contesting elections. They authorized a contest
not only by the defeated candidate, bat any Potter
might do so. And yet, notwithstanding these
great precautions and this extraordinary vigi-
lance, but few districts have been contested
And why is ths' Certainly not from any inds-
position to listen to the complaints of contestants;
tor this pattern of an executive officer, on re-
ceiving the specifications of illegality, without
giving any opportunity to the person elected to
show the falsty of the grounds alleged, or with
out giving him any hearing whatever, set aside
the election, and has ordered new elections in all
Of the districts which were contested. Rather~a
novel proceeding ON the part Of an ereeutire
officer in these United States! Where his excel
lency got his authority for such unprecedented
acts, am unable to learn; certainly not from
the act of Congress- for that act only conferred on
him the power to declare who was elected--I
do not pretend to quote the exact words)-a
power precisely similar to that granted to the
clerks of the county courts in Missouri, and per-
haps in other States; yet these officers never inn
agned, under such provisions, they had the
power of trying contested elections II would
be insult TO the intelligence Of the Congress-
that passed the Kansas bill to suppose that they
deliberately designed to subvert and annul a rule
that has been considered as sacred ever since our
revolution, to wit: that every legislative assem-
bly, shall be the exclusive Judge Of the returns and
qualifications Of its members. The rule adopted
by the Governor would make the legislature
plastic body, to be moulded and shaped by the
executive, and destroy it effectually as co-ordi-
nate and Independent department of government
An incident occurred at one of the precincts,
showing the kind Of men whom the Governor
appointed for judges, and the disposition mani
tested by them, which ought to be known. The
election there was conducted with the most per-
feet order, and during the whole day there was
but a single vote challenged, and that vote was
rejected. There were two pro-slavery and one
abolition Judge. The vote was challenged by the
last II was ascertained that this Judge had, in
the morning, endeavored to get this rejected voter
to vote for the abolition candidates, and had
given him ticket printed on paper'of different
color from the other ticket. When the man
went up TO vote, he offered ticket on the other
side, and then this Judge, for the first time,
found out that he was not legal voter, and had
his vote rejected. After the polls were closed,
this same judge refused 10 sign the returns, on
the ground that there bad been illegal voting,
though he had taken solemn oath TO reject all
such, and had sat there and received those votes
without objection, only objecting to the one be-
fore named. He was asked by the other Judges
why, as he was sworn, he did not object to the
votes. He said he was afraid. He was then
asked if the election had not been quiet and or
derby. He said IL had been. He was asked 10
point out any threats made, and he would not do
so. He finally slipped out and ran away without
signing the returns, which were signed by the
others, and an affidavit made Of the facts This
district not contested for the reason that the
candidates were elected, leaving out the votes Of
that precinct entirely for tho ones so elected and
giving the votes poled there for the other candi-
dates 10 them.
That many persons, who had recently been
citizens of Missouri went over to Kansas Just be-
fore the election, and voted there, is not to be
denied. But / do deny that any one SO went
there and voted, who had not the right TO do so
under the act of Congress (; and can show this
conclusively. II is well known that people com
menced settling in Kansas in the early part Of
the summer of 1854 too late to make farms