The Feliciana Democrat. (Clinton, La.) 1855-186?, 1856-10-04
From the y. q. Delta.
LETTER FROM MIR. McNEA.

1t appears that the structures We recently
made upon 4 portion Of speech lately deliver
IA by Mr.. McVca, were based upon III entire
II erroneous report. 1t will DC seen hy his
letter that Mr. Pond, the opposing speaker in
The discussion, endorses fully Mr.. McNea's
statement Of what tic really did say 1t Is
unfortunate that reporters are sometimes 80
loose and incXact III rendering political speech
NJ They owe Il responsibility 10 the public
nnd TO thr press which they should be made to
frrl. we publish Mr.. McNca's letter below,
aul uncsitatinaIy make retraXit oi all r.
marks founded upon the erroneous report il
question::
CoyINGroN, sept 20, 1886
Ldiiors If me- Dritu: lii Your issue of the
10Th inst, AIN reported, by 4 correspondent
ofthc Crescent, a. having stated ia q speech
lately made by me ~ Ami'r, THAT Mr. urh-
nnuil was ia favor OF the doctrine of Selmttrr
Sovereignty, and that john &. 4 honn was
the author of the d"a and the phrase II II
difficult for me 10 imagine loW any ono could
50 grossly misapprchnd I'll" line Of argument
pursued hy Inc on that occasion The Kansas
BILL the question Of slavery IN connection with
il, and the objections urged ny our opponents
10 the bilI itself were the subjects Of discus
sion, and it was distinctly argued by me- that
the provisions Of the bill Itself, especially tie
10Th section Of II, directly urgntlyed the idea
Of Squaltor Sovereignty, and that the same
doctrine was clearly announced in the 81 arti-
Gle Of the Democratic Platform, adopted ut
Cincinnati
1t had been urged by onr opponents that
the Kansas bill contained the doctrine OF
SVuatler Sovereignty because it conceded 10
the people Of The Territory, while in an nuor-
gaulzed condition, the right to determine for
themselves whether or not s avery should exist
among them: but on the contrary, that il tie
cared the people OF the Territory had no such
right, and could exercise no such right, until
they met in Convention to form a State Con
sitution. 1t was also distinctly stated by me,
that Mr.. Calhoun had de ounced the doctrine
and that not the least objection made by him
to the admission Of California WAS, that the
manner in which her State Convention had
been formed was II departure from the usual
and constitutional mode Of Introducing Il Stat,
into the Union and gave counlenancc ana sui
port to the doctrine Of Squatter Sovereignty
These were the positions assumed by me IN Tho
discussion referred TO- and during the H6ole d
the canvass, when the beet has been touched
they have not been departed from.
The report oimy speech, therefore, at Amitc
which you have made Il text for IN article il
your issue Of the 10th inst, was evidently got
ten up under II gross lnisapprchcnson of til,
argument made by me at the time; and N.
opponent, Ool. Pond, has already done lii,
the justice to say, that so far us that portion
Of the report is concerned, it was made under
such misapprchension
DO me the justiSe, however tardy it may be
to give this II publication, and oblige,
Yours, with regard, JSo McVEA,
| understood Mr. McVea's argument n
!, Amitc exactly as he has stated in the forcgo