The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-07-15

the courts created by the terrtora legslatur but the
United States courts with appeal 70 theSupreme Court
OF The United Satcs-to determine do not wish In any
way TO interfere with that judicial question Let these
gentlemen stand fall according 10 their guilt inno-
eence as il may be made TO appear before the proper rLu
nas at the proper time Let us not In the mean time,
PREJUDICE the either for against them. The
who Claims TO be governor under this Topeka consti
tuition is in custody awaiting his trial for the high
offence known to the laws and constitution Of the Unl
| ted States. Et &c. 7.'E..
am opposed to this BILL because we have no evidence
that majority anything like majority OF the people
of Kansas in favor Of ths pretended Topeka consu
ton. IL Is pdre proceeding from beginning TO end.
II was got up by party contriyed by Gov. Reeder
and though he and his associates place the whole
grounds of their justification upon the plea that the ter
rtoria legislature composed Of usurpcrsthat tho
election carried by Invasion OF non-fesden who
passed laws that they cannot submit toet II must be
collected by all hrminded men thatthis legislature how
elected organized under the auspices Of Governor
Reeder himself He the judge Of the election returns
Of its members in the first instance and he duly cCmns
stoned large majority Of both branches Of IT. and gave
his own official certificate that they were duly elected II
what s asserted by him and others be trne why did
he not at the proper time arrestit2 Whynow lay COM
pan at the door of the President for not preventing
invasion Of Kansas setting aside the legislative elec
ton, while he MS governor made no complaint 70 the
tower II Kansas The @ only cry ~ heard from him By the
President the country during this nowpretended nva
sion and for several long months afterwards was Ais
wel He recognised this legislature after it organ
zed andafter he knew full well how twas elected II
must therefore, receive with many grains Of allowance
what he now % asserts al tending towards @ nothing more
rity His position is not such as to warrant as fair
man. now back him in his present revolutionary
men see sufficient grievance even alleged to justify
Grant t6at so;c Of the laws passed by the legislature
that he certified to as having been duly elected bad
awsno single case OF oppression growing out OF any
one of these laws has arisen was this point when
interrupted by the gentleman from oo Mp oAApBEII
How does it appear but that the courts Mud pronounce
these laws UNCONSTITUTIONAL on this aor mann
tain that they are Why resort to revolution un nS
courts fail Nay more: IL majority of the people -
Kansas opposed to these laws as so boldly assorted
on this hoo why they not have them repealed by the
next legislature, be elected, if the courts
should sustain them? The nextegature is to be chosen
in October Why not settle 1 tsa; question At The ballot
questions Is it not the way we have to do in all our
States Are those who press this e Parte constitution
upon us afraid of the balloboxY Whatever else M be
said Of the acts Of the Kansas legislature they certainly
secured the purity of the fountain Of political power.
Here is part of their election law:
sre a. If any person, by threats and force,
attempt influence qualified voter In giving his vote or
70 deter him from giving the same or disturb or binder him
held under The laws Territory person offending
SHALL conviction thereof be adadged guilty Of nisde
dollars by Imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding
one year. rvnrx who shall, q, tho same election,
moro once either tho different place.
shsl on conviction be adadged guilty Of %lsasmeanGr,
imprisonment the county jail not exceeding three months
% s &. s% snd sf s Sa@s&T @
that e Ss SSs sce q s Tn . Sc s aS1a1E
ndemeanor punished BY fine not exceeding ity dollars
sEc 81 Any who designedly gives printed
aning the written or printed names Of persons for whom
said voter does design to vote for tho purpose Of canspg
conviction be adjudged guilty misdemcanor and pun
is6ed by fine not exceeding i've hundred d9Sr or 5y I'M
SEC 2s Any person who shall be printed and
tickets which upon their face appear be designed
fraud upon voters shall upon conviction be punished by
fine not exceeding i've hundred dollars or by imprisonment
in the county jail not exceeding three months or by both
such dno and iuprisonuhoEt u. -. --,-o,,-
This take effect and be in force from and after It's
passage"-Chsp. 81, p 2sl
Does any free man want better security for his soye-
reign right Of suage than is here given2 Does this look
like the work Of "border ruiians who were looking to
carry elections by fraud voence But IL Is said that
Ia the same law IL Is provided that shall be ent
tied to vote who has been guilty OF violation OF the fug
tive-slaye law passed BY Consress Well SIR s this an
open violation OF the laws Of or country 70 complain OF
being deprived OF the right OF hayicC voice In making
laws Are not certain offences In all Dur states grounds
Of denying suage2 But the great question i cannot
this provision Of the election law be repealed By the next
legislature II majority Of tho honest people there are
against t2 The then presented by the governor nd
his associates IN the Topeka movement not such TO
Justify In my Judgment, this revolution whs they have
set foot and ask Congress to sanction
Besides this Mr. Speaker the evidence Is very strong 10
my mind II conclusive that this Topeka constitution
does not meet the approval Of majority Of the people Of
kanSaa
abput seventeen hundred in the whole Territory approved
H. Now, sir 7 for such judgment either way--l
am for fair dealng In this matter on both sides
wish for nothing but fair expression Of the will Of
the bona fde residents Of Kansas upon this subject When
voted for the Kansas bin did not for the purpose OF
making IL slave State unless majority Of the white ee-
there desired IL and IL they did desire H. for
permitting them 10 exercise the power the sub
ec that the eemen Of the other States o the Union
else the subjects within their respective limits
regarded the Of that triumph
OF the South the North further than Il triumph
Of this great constitutional principle Of equality that
sectonalism OF party at the North which denied it
Whether Kansas Nebraska would be slave States reo
States did not know. left that TO time, climate SOIL and
the people settle And sir, though upon general
principles am opposed the admission Of any state into
the Union without population sufficient TO cattle them TO
member this floor according TO the ratio OF representa-
ton yet in the present case II gentlemen 50 anxious
press the admission OF Kansas am willing 70 forego
the usual inquiry into the exact amount Of population
there. will waive that point do not know the num-
Der Of people there Gentlemen the other side vary m
their estimates from sixty thousand 10 ninety thousand
think IL would be best first 10 ascertain the facts Still
WILL say, waive that point and IL gentlemen are
anxious for the admission Of the people of that Territory
whatever msy be their numbers, State meet them
and offer the substitute 10 this bill which have submit
ted Mine Is alternative proposition II Kansas Is 10
be admitted let IL be done In fair just and proper way
and at The instance Of Irregular Illegal and revolu
tionary convention Of only portion, and very small
submit Is the same that offered by my colleague
[Mr ToowBs In the Senate. suppose gentlemen have
read H. cannot read IL ts main features are to
provide for the admission Of Kansas under such constu
tion as her people may FORM al early day ia prac
tcable aI asa FFe af ~ ..H