The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1856-05-10
rbe Lame ana nougIas Corre.pondence.

~ .>>-
intended hostile meeting between these gen.
temen. As portions of this correspondence
have been published by the fusion press for
the purpose of conveying false impression
in reference to its character, and to injure
Judge Douglas, we regret exceedingly that
our limits to-day will not enable Us to copy it
entire: No person can read it without being
forced to the conviction that the whole affair
was concocted and urged on with the brutal
and dastardy intent to force Judge d. into a
position where his political enemies could
gloat their ruf[ianly instincts by an attempt
upon his life.
We shall give briefly the whole history of
the affair, as disclosed by this correspond
ence.
On the 18th ult Gen. Cass presented to
the senate the celebrated memorial of the
''self styled legisture of Kansas" and NOV
ed, as a matter of courtesy, that it be print
ed. The motion passed unanimously but
next day was reconsidered, when a debate
sprung up, i'm the course of which it was
disclosed that the memorial had been got up
in Washington, that it had not been signed
by the persons from whom it pretended to
come-and, in short, it was denounced by a
number of senators as an impudent forgery,
and the motion to print was rejected by a
vote Of = TO 3, solely on this ground. The
memorial was then withdrawn by Gen. Cass
and returned to Col Lane, its author. A
few days afterwards the memorial was again
presented, accompanied by letter from
Col. Lane, explaining that, although the
memorial was copied in Washington by him
self, and erasures and corrections made in it,
the alterations were such as he had full power
to make, and that it was IN substance the
same document that had been signed at To-
peka Another debate took place on the
printing of the memorial as thus explained
when Judge Douglas for the first time took
part i'll the debate. lie compared the copy
thus presented with the rejected copy and
the original. lie showed that the first three
pages of the original were now entirely sup
pressed that there were material omissions
and suppressons, many interpretations and
alterations running all through the paper and
changing its hole character, not only in
form, but in substance and principle ; and
that these SuppIeSsions had been made 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 it had been inserted ali humble pc
titon TO Congress recognizing its authority,
which in the original paper was denied, and
praying for its inlerpositon. He, therefore,
As many other senators had done, also de-
. nouncea the document as an ''impudent for
gerry" and the motion to print was again
, rejected.
And now, as next in the order OF events,
comes the note from COL Lane, sent by IA
friend" to Judge D., asking for explana-
tons. Col. L., in that note, claims that,
before Gen. Cas- had presented the memoir
al to the senate, he had met Judge ID. at his
own house, as personal friend, and had
stated to him frankly all the circumstances
and the authority under which he had made
alterations in the Kansas Memorial and that
Judge ID. had expressed himself satisfied
He therefore demands an explanation why,
after such interview, Judge ID. denounces
the paper as forgery. The reply of Judge
ID. is full and conclusive. When the memo
rial was first presented to the senate, he was
willing to take Cot. Lanes explanation as to
the verbal alterations. and had voted for the
printing. When. however, on its second
prosecution, he found its whole body, tone.
and character changed, and that change
made to shape it to events that had occurred
months after it had been originally conceived
at Topeka, it was impossible then not to re-
! gard it as forgery. Judge ID. therefore as
appropriately as CURLY replies to Lanes de-
mand for 'such n explanation as viii re-
move all imputa,ion upon the integrity of his
action" in the matter, that ''there are no
facts within my Judge D.'s) knowledge
which can remove all imputation upon the
integrity of mis- action or motives in the
matte, and consequently. has no explana-
| tons to give.
| Now why was it that, of the eight or ten
members of the senate who had denounced
this Kansas memorial as forg ry, and what
is worse, proved it such, Judge Douglas
alone was selected as the person Of whom to
demand explanations Why were not Sc
nator Pugh, Senator Toombs, OF any or all
of the 30 senators, who either by speech
openly, or by their votes pronounced the
memorial an ''inpudent forgery" called upon
t. n
had in private conversed with Judge d. on
the subject for that private conversation had
occurred before the material and important
alterations pointed out by Judge ID. had
been made. 1t was plainly for the purpose,
as We stated in the beginning, to draw
Judge ID. into position where some valiant
Kansas ruffian would have an opportunity to
shoot at him.
1t appears, however, that notwithstandi,
Lrne and his friends tad telegraphed ali over
the country that Lane was to challenge
Judge D., before the latter was allowed to
reply to Lanes note, it was concluded safest
to change the field of warfare, and instead
prosecuting the correspondence with Judge
d., Lane concluded to turn the fight into
newspaper war, by publishing long attack
upon Judge ID. in the National Inteliigen-
Ger. Doubtless, by this time, Lane bad
found that Judge ID. was not SO easily
frightened as he imagined, and concluded
paper bullets were safer than bullets of lead.
At all events, in the newspaper war, he could
have the field to himself, for it has resulted,
as he probably calculated, that Judge d.
would only treat his newspaper articles with
silent contempt.