Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1856-04-28

| tees on Territories and Printing were rescind-
| Su, ana me paper was then withdrawn by
"eheral Cass and returned to Colonel Lane.
nave been thus minute in tracing the out
| nes OF tne debate which occurred on the
| INST presentation Of this fraudulent rnsmoyiaI
In order to show that took no nart IN ~.
discussion which questioned the autbeuticitv
| vi tne paper or the conduct Of Col Lane In
connection with it Yet il will be observed
.nSt, In the letter which you bore from Colo
mel Lane to me, it is stated, as the trst e.nse
vI grievance, tnat " on Thursday Of that week,
that memorial was the subject Of severe criti,
criticism, and in connection with II cbs,sss
oil most grave character are prefe,ss5
| against me, F" Colonel Lane
| We have seen what those charge. vs,a
| They were no less than that II rRIun AMI
FORGERY! These charges we're made and re,
Peated by several Senators in the course of
| tnat debate, and received the sanction of the
senate by vote Of 80 to in the adoption of
Mr.. Mason's resolution Your friend, Col
Lane, rested under these charges until the
next week, when he attempted TO exculpste
himself, not by calling on the Senators who
made the charges for explanation, but by pre-
senting petition signed by himself, With the
ing that the pretended copy, which had been
rejected on the previous Thursday, might also
be received, and inviting q comparison be-
tween the two, with q view Of enabling the
/ Senate TO determine whether the one which
the Senate had rejected was q copy or a for.
gerry. As the chairman of the committee
| having charge Of territorial affairs il becsm
my appropriate duty to institute the compari-
son which had been invited by Col Lane in
| ms petition, and TO give the Senate the result
OF my investigation. / found that while the
| rejected copy purported 10 be authenticated
oy the signatures (all in one hand writing) OF
the members of both houses of that spurious
u z.
pretended to have been copied, had no sigma
lures at all attached 10 it, and no suthent;ca-
ton whatever, except On evasive affidavit
iken that day before Judge Mclean. also
found that the first three pages of the original
were entirely suppressed in the pretended copy,
also found many other material omissions
ana suppressions, many interpretations and al
terstions running all through the paper, and
changing its whole character, not only in
form, but IN substance and principle ex-
posed these things to the Senate in plain and
unmeasured terms, as 1t was my right and duty
10 do. did not 60 out Of my way TO crimi-
nate or ezculpate any one L dealt with the
fraudulent paper as it came before me in the
line OF my duty, and left the authors of tho
iniquity tree TO pursue their own course 1
showed that the original memorial which IL is
alleged was adopted by the spurious LegisIa-
ture OF Kansas was based on the fundamental
idea or prlReiPle that Congress had no pewsr
that the Kansas Nebraska act was uncons sti.
tutionsl and void for that reason; that the
people ef the Territories owed no allegiance
to the governments which had been or should
he established by Congress in the Territories;
and hence they had an inherent right TO take
the steps which they had taken to overthrow
the territorial government without the con-
sent and in defiance Of the authority OF Con.
Sress. L also showed that in the pretended
copy all this had been suppressed since the
Issue was made up between the two par
ties by the reports of the majority and mi
nority Of the Committee on Territories, and
In lieu Of ii had been inserted an humble
petition to Congress recognising its autho. 4.
rity and praying for its interpostion. In
short, L showed and proved by a compari-
SON OK the two papers that the pretended
copy was NOT copy in any sense Of the word
that it was base and impudent forgery. No
Senator did, no man in or out Of the Senate
can, vindicate the paper from this Just con-
demnation. The severest judgment which L
pronounced on this transaction is contained
In the following extracts from my speech,
whicn L now repeat as the only explanation
have to make Of the matter 70 which they re.
fer:
q submit whether this does not make il a
totally different document, affirming entirely
inherent principles, in order 10 place their
action In totally different light. The Kan
sas legislature, in the origioal document said
they justified their acts because Congress had
no power over them. The memorial came in
the other day recognising the power Of Con-
gress. L ask, then, if il lie not a forgery thus
to change the document in the most vitality
important point upon which the whole pro-
ceeding rests / do not say by whom the
forgery was committed-I care not The
faint runs through this whole proceeding, and
the affidavit does not cure or remedy ito'
Again:
Il can take up this memorial and show
that, as have exposed one heresy after ano-
ther Of their pretensions, they took the pen
and ran through this memorial to get rid of
the objection.
at has been changed from time to time in
material points, striking out and inserting,
until 1t has hardly a vestige Of its original
form. The very comparison which is here
challenged between the pretended COPY, pre-
sented the other day, and the original now,
proves conclusively that such is the case. L
then submit whether here was not evidence oS
the most glaring fraud ever attempted to be
perpetrated upon a legislative body. After
thatfraud has been snce detected and exposed
the question is, whether a second one is TO be
perpetrated upon US by taking the same spu-
rious document and attaching it to a memo
rial, and thus dragging it into the Senate 2"
1t should be borne In mind, that the first
time this fraudulent paper was presented TO
the question Of its authenticity, or the means
by which it found its way TO the Secretary's
table. Other Senators did denounce il as Ga
fraud and impudent forgery" l remained
silent on these points, not from any sympathy
with the perpetrators Of the fraud, bat from
my profound respect for the feelings of the IL
lustrious Senator from Michigan, whose cent?
dence had been abused 90 far as TO induce
him to present it under the impression that it
was an authentic memorial. When be dis
covered his mistake, joined him in hat vote
of condemnation which the Senate pronounced
by 80 to in the adoption Of Mr.. Masou's
resolution.
The next week Col Lane comes to the Sem
ate, through Mr.. Harlan, Of Iowa, and pre-
sents memorial, in which he asks and chal-
ienges comparison OF the two papers, with
the view of inducing the Senate 10 reverse the
Judgment which had been so emphaticslly
pronounced upon the conduct Of the authors
Of that fraud, at the same time avowing him
sell TO be the person who perpetrsted the act
i did make the com N rison in pursuance of