Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1856-07-25
1@ulhiral.
ADMISSION OF KANSAS.
SECOND SPEECH OF
HON. JACOB C0LLAMER.
IN Senate, Tuesday, Jidy %. 1856.

cIn-r 1nh insert in lieu thereof ihe u looub pass
ed By fhe -enli= nn iha 20 iltt.nf.
Mt Duualss adifossed The Senate % como lensih.
Mr. CoLLAMER Mr.. President, |
have had occasion to address the
Senate on this subject before, be-
cause thought it was demanded
by the position ia which the Sem
ate had placed me They appoint
ed me a member Of the Committee
on Territories, and when / have dif-
fered in opinion from the majority
Of the committee, | have felt 1t to
be my duty TO make that difference
Of opinion known. ! thought this
was a duty which | owed to the
Senate, and | have eudeavoied to
state, as fairly aud as distinctly as
could, the grounds for the opinions
which | MAINTAIN. | understood.
toe, that lt was the universal usage
of this body, alter the chairman of
a committee had spoken in support
of The report Of the committee, for
those who presented the views OF
the minority to sustain them. have
attempted heretofore to perform this
duty. 1t appears that e now occurs
to me again. The chairman has
made report this morning, 10 re-
gard to which ! differ from the ma
jonty OF the committee He has
briefly stated his views, and | sup
pose lhst duty requires OF me TO
state 10 this body the reasons which
govern me IN differing ma opinion
from him and the committee on This
subject. In obedience To this duty.
which ! understand to be drvolvrd
on me by au appointment that has
been conferred on me, shall pro-
ceed as briefly as may TO state the
grounds of my objection to this
proposition.
In the FIRST place, beg leave TO
remark that it is not true that, be-
cause a bhl upon i,s face is well eu-
ough, it ought therefore to be
sustained. Thus bill may have up.
on its face no serious obIecuouS,
and yet, after all, there may be 10
foundation for mau's voting for IT,
Every lawyer will understand me
when say that it is not true that
every bill ia chaucery and every
declaration in a SUIT at law can be
aud ought to be sustained because
you cannot demur to Il. Ii may be
well enough on MS face you can
no' do'""e TO il. but that is no rea-
iSQn for saying the suit suUuid ba
Sustained. That depends on the
other proofs and pieadings in the
case. The same remark Is true of
a bil here. It may be we'll euough
on ITS face bot the state OF the cur
cumstauces, the coudiuon of things,
may be such as TO render ii exceed
iugly iuexpedient aud improper -
That state of circumstances must
be brought forward M sut at law,
by pleas setting them up, aud not
by demurrer. 80 10 tins case : the
facts which exist should be present.
ed, that we may see, upon view
of the biil and the facts, whether
the bill ought to pass. must there
fore proceed IN some measure to de-
tail what the facts are, and why 1t
is that cannot sustain tins measure,
even though on lis face It may not
apparently be objectionable.
| do not mean To consume my
time by going over he previous ms
tory which has led TO the present
condition OF things Il seems to
me very extraordinary that gentle
meu-as some have done IA thus
bod, shuuld call upon us To pre-
sent our plans and provisions for the
purpose of meeting and relieving
the lreSent eNlgeucy Of aiialos, and
at The same time say that we must
not present those which require You
to 90 back aud undo anything here
tofore done. sir know Of no
way IN which diseases OF any kind,
moral, political, or physical, can ey-
er be reached but by iuquirlug into
the cause of the difficulty aud the
only true and sound mode OF redress
aud correction must be by remuv-
ing the cause of the difficulty. 1t
will not do to say to us that we
should give a Sy STEM 10 remove the
difficulty, but must at The same time
take care not to touch the causes
that produced ii, This TO me is ex-
ceedngly inconsistent, unreasona-
bic, and paradoXical.
Now, sir, however fair this bill
may be for trying the experiment,
as It Is called, what experiment is il
that it PROPOSES to try The Sem
ulor from Illinois has just told US
1t Is TO carry ont the experiment
winch was proposed in the adoption
Of The Kansas-Nebraska bill. The
purpose, he says, is TO carry out that
experiment fairly. That being the
purpose of the bill, is 1t proper that
gentlemen who Were opposed to The
project of the Nebraska Kansas bill
originally should be called upon to
aid in carrying out that experiment.
Is 1t reasonable to ask III We were
opposed TO the experiment altogelh-
or. We should not be expected to
aid in carrying ont an experiment
against which we have all along
protested. Certainly think it Is
unreasonable to expect it. ! do not
mean to be understood as lntlmat-
ing that we should be caplious ioI
the purpose Of defeating It. Though
| may be opposed 10 a bill allogeth-