Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1856-05-02

ION Tat is the point Now, sir, what '
loes this report say The persons concern
I'd IN the Topeka meeting, OF September I,
Igth, declared their purpose, believe tour
lines, but certainly three, TO be that, ana tha'
onlv. namely. to form a constitution. win
view TO present 1t TO Congress tor ndmlsslnn'
What does the report which the gentlemen
has read say Of the proceedings OF that meet
ing'
ola pur.unuoo Of The accommodated of the IN" II.
meeting hold al Lawrence 90 the 4th 81 August, eaa
indofs,d DIV me convention held stthe hg 'tf T. "a
the sh and 9th 81 scptstnbef, convention VA hri4 a.
r,ncka on iha 18Th and 21ih Of septeHibot, ,1,irb
vas determined 10 hold ano hof convention a. thefrwe
place on the fourth Tuesday Of uctohet, ~ nc pu,ose
ct tnmng consultation and state 60 sfnment and to
thi. end such proceedings wete h. ~ were deemed
necessary for gvng hs notices, O. nduoins the election
II delg ties, MAILING tho retu'n and a'senbng the
convention"
This is all the notice which the report
takes Of that meeting and then il goes on to
say, IN regard to the purposes
vith regard 70 the revetrrity Of these proreoiiny,
rouf com necessity f,f ffrket criticism than
s bo found IN the fact tkst the movement Of
political party Instead Of tho whole body OF the people
" Kansas conducted wfhos, The sanction uf law, and
in defiance ni The constituted authorities o the ed
purpose OF eyetthrc~ing tbe territorial government g.
tabiished by Nonrrcssn
THIS Is what Is stated 10 have been the
when we examine them A mere call for a
convention to form constitution for admis-
sion into the United States Government. 10
be presented 10 Congress What the Sena-
tor says about the order IN which these were
to come is true; but the difficulty Is, that
they have no, come in; that is the trouble.
To be sure, il was distinctly understood be
tween the Senator and myself, that the order
OF The proceedings in point OF date was, first
the Lawrence meeting, then the first Topeka
meeting, and next the Topeka constitutional
convention. That was the order OF thDir
dates.
Mr. DOUGLAS wish to be understood
as 10 the matter OF fact. ! stated that the
order agreed upon was first the Lawrence
meeting; next, the Big Springs convention,
which ind0rscd the Lawrence meeting.
stated 10 the report the fact, which the Sena-
tor pointed out to me that resolution of
the Big Springs congentou Endorsed the
Lawrence meeting. He pointed DOT 10 me
that the Big Springs meeting was the sec
ond step.
Mr.. CoLLAMtR. Second in point of time.
Mr.. DOuGLAs. That was the second sep
in the movement for State government
The third was the meeting at Topeka ot
lng-the one at Big Springs that they
ayowod their purpose to put To defiance the
authorities Of the United States, and to resls,
10 bloody issue. That is the fact, | think.
Mr.. CoLL,MER. | Understand wat | am
about am not misstating. viii give the
lrulh in relation to that transaction. | no.
llccd that IN the message of the President OF
the United States, II was said that the whole
mn Nttr..u lttr
proceedings, aud did not view 1t IN that light
| supposed that those who present II IN that
Light had taken 1T mp as beginning with the
Big Springs convention. Now, that was
party meeting. Having looked through the
papers, aud seeing the matter in a diA irent
hight, called the attention Of the gentleman
10 the order of the dates The first meeting
was hat at Lawrence, which was not a party
meeting. That Lawrence meeting did not
call the Big Springs meeting, which was
party one. That Lawrence meeting called
The Topeka convention of the lJth of Sep
tember, without respect to party, aud stated
their purposes to be to form "A state govern
men, for the Admission of Kansas into the
Union. Now, when | called the geutlcinan's
attention to the order OF the dates OF these
events did 1t for the purpose of having them
ton into the true character of the TRANSACTION.
! did not consider it party movement and
! think | shall be borne out in this by the
papers. ! do not complain OF the gentleman
for bring ing in the Big Springs meeting. II
Is true did not put 1t IN my minority report,
and will state why did not It was not
IN the lima of proceeding at all. It was
collateral side meeting OF party. It Is true
hpu cd Of 4 a al 40 t,r tAt,
iug at Topeka; but nobody asked them for
that; and It made no difference did not
think II right to undertake to give character
TO the proceedings the Topeka convention
by that side meeting, and therefore did not
think 1t proper to put II IN,
What is the course Of the majority report
After mentioning the Lawrence meeting, II
goes on to the Big Springs party meeting,
and extracts their violent proceedings, If you
please SO to call them, with resolution APP
proving of The call and what next they
then call up the Kansas League secret
military association. Oh, It is terrible
Awful oaths The book containing them is
exhibited as having been got out of a mans
mouth .NoHsirum horrendum, inlorme, in.
gems, cW iumen ddemiuml We are to be
frightened with il. What connection had
that with this business | know the report
of the committee had intlmaied that the Big
Springs side meeting had some connection
with that league; but II appears by the pa
per that 1t existed long before. It does not
appear that any man in the Big Springs con-
venion Endorsed it. 1t IS true they pissed
resolutions inviting people to form volunteer
companies; but there was no intim'ton
about the Kansas League. The connection
between them Is undertaken to De extracted
out Of the fact that the Big Springs meeting
recommended the formation of volunteer
companies Tint had no connection with
the Biz Springs meeting and even If IL had.
it had nothing to do with this line of pro
ceedings. The difficulty Is that the pro-
ceedings of the meeting at Topeka. which
called The constitutional convention ana sci
forth their purposes fully. are not presented
IN the report. Their meetings are represent.
ed as having been party meetings.. and their
purpose violence, although they had declared