The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-05-10

0o-PosThAsTERs are authorized 70 esens and
~ sending DAILY subseber, with $50 sheased or
sEM-wEEK.Y subscribers win eos enclosed wiz be en-
uled 60 copy Srats.
slightly inaccurate did not say intend say that
my colleague received the knownothng vote of the two
largest counties ia tue district intended say that he
received majority of the know-nobing votes In two of
the counties OF his district giving the largest know-noth-
! Mr WATKINS. That does not materially change the
ISSUE aud am willing 70 accept the modification made g
my colleague and meaning stated before dscour-
tesy dsrespect to him. state that his information is in-
correct p reference TO that also and that IL Is not true Ia
point OF fact 1t is not true n point of argument and it IL
true in point Of inference, that did receive the
jory of the know-nohing votes in those two counties
did receive know-nehing votes and received them upon
the ground OF the national issues they understood
in the county Of Jefferson received in Jefferson county
the knownothing votes Of those who my personal
friends Every know-notbing vote In that county
msrshalod and disciplined that could be- SO as to bear
upon me on the day Of election They were mnrshaed in
that witnessed In the county OF Jefferson
ceiyed every democratic vote every whg vote the
votes Of such Of my personal friends in Jefferson county
belonging to the know nothing party as preferred the
principles Of the KansasN Nebraska bill to know-nothng
But wherever they had the power they brought all their
machinery, directly and Indirectly to bear against me on
the day Of the election, and they did defeat In snc
places two to one and but for the little sagacity which
happened possess they would have beaten me in the
county Of Jefferson, and thus beaten me in the contest
Bat week before the election left tho contest in other
was to be the battle-ground That wis the county which
In ls40 received the cognonen of Ltte Masschusepin
consequence of giving the largest in the State
against Van Buren, Sewer county the banner coan
" in 1884, and had received the title Of aLits Kentucky
in consequence Of its giving the largest the inn
mortal Gay, 10 opposition TO distinguished son Of her
Butt knowing that Jefferson county was to be the bat
tie ground returned there and blessed with good con-
week before the election rode BY moonlight through
rain and mud. marshalled my friends and stationed up
magazine Of the party and spike the cannon which they
had planted with view Of producing my destruction
the day OF election in every part Of the county exceptthc
county seat reached that place the day Of election
and there defeated three one by their bringing
bear all their machinery of party oil their influence
through every possible combination and by the assistance
Of every society that existed In the county and threw
votes for what they conceived to be the regular candidate
Of the know-nothng party in that district
Those are the facts and II is with no pleasure pride
that recur to them for trust shall again witness
such another trust II should be in forty other
contests never shall witness similar excitement 10 that
which existed in that district the day of that election
But, while do not wish TO apply these remarks any
member Of the party outside Of my district they did in my
county resort to every scheme defeat for time
before the election They pracsed every sort of dup
ty every sort of deception every sort Of hypocrisy and
sratagcm to defeat my election and OF my enemies
in that county actually went TO the objectionable
Of peuring TO defeat me- have shown in the address
written the 26h of December and there confined IL to
s spss Ss Ss s rs
of peurythat perjury which is cognizabe only in the
high Of Heaven, beyond which there is appellate
jurisdiction and the sentence Of whose just condemnation
is depart ye cursed into outer darkness
Sir, had hoped should never be brought to the
reme Of making this declaration but sir is true
have shown In that pamphlet applied To the specific
have mentioned hsvc time to argue the rea-
why it so but argued the 2eth of Deoeu
Der last y s}Sas
we sir as to the vote Of the county of Sewer ] am
not prepared to say how many know-nothpg votes did
receive did receive the votes OF personal friends there
who belonged to that party; but sayand feel fully
authorized say from facts derived from personal
tact with my constituensthat nearly all those belong
ing then to that party and whose support received
not now members Of that party and take pride and
pleasure in saying that would have received the
vote under any other circumstances than those which
listed in the believe that is the in respect
to Sewer county also was supported upon the national
questions embraced in the Kansas Nebraska bill
will not now occupy more time in reference to this
point Ny colleague wishes address the House regard
TO II by unanimous consent; that courtesy will be-
matter Of course extended TO each Of us in future If the
discussion shall be pro,racted this point the
facts as understand them and will state one other ad-
ditona acttha lost the votes OF two democrats in the
district in consequence Of my having been AT time in
ated in the know-nohing party for the vote OF every
single know-nohing friend oherwise-thst
received at the polls the day OF election These
additional facts TO show that my election did not depend
upon that and that have not violated any principle
plighted faith in my In this House; but there
some questions Of policy entertained in my district in ref
to the bill IL has been known
my district and the country every where that
been warm advocate Of that since i was
first mooted in the Congress Of the United States But
10 the Kansas Nebraska BILL the principal of which Is
squatier sovereignty. ] not that know what
the enemies Of the KansaNebaska bill by the term
"squattcr sovcreignty"--
Mr.. FLAGLER 1 submit that Il Is not in order in n
personal explanation to proceed to the discussion Of the
principles OF the KansasNebraska bill.
The SPEAKER III the gentleman from Tennessee states
that be intends to debate the Kansas Nebraska b the
Chair thinks that II does within the privilege OF
the personal explanation.
Mr.. WATKINS. IL the Chair allow will say that
do not propose discuss that specifically, abstract
question: propose discuss IL In connexion with tho
question under which was elected TO Congress-under
this newspaper accusation.
The SPEAKER The gentleman from Tennessee stated
that that his intention.
Mr. WATKINS | viii con6ne myself trust 10 the
rules Of debate and TO the parliamentary law governing
the House One OF the intmson OF this publication in the
Knoxville Register involves the doctrines contained In the
Nebraska BILL called "squaer sovereignty Now
not understand where principle squat
sovereignty in this bill Ny opinion that there IL
squnter sovereignty in the bill What they call sqnater
sovereignty" call popular sovereignty you may call
IL by whatever name you please am in favor Of all the
sovereignty that there is In the Kansas Nebraska bill
There Is such thing squaer sovereignty, but IN my
opinion il does not exist 10 the KansasNebraska bill All
the sovereignty that there in the bill
is legal constitutional popular sovercigntythat
and every State after Il becomes State The recent de-
nunciaons the subject OF squaer sovereignty Il Is
termed do not meet my appreciation. hold that the Con-
gess OF the United States has transferred the Territory
Of Kansas all the sovereignty and all the powers which IL
possesses but DO not hold that that sovereignty Is In
allegiance in the Congress OF the United States for the eo
pie OF Kansas and Nebraska when they shall have organ