Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1857-12-31
Congressional.
WASHINGTON, Monday, Dec. Il.
GEN ATE

MIR. Blgler made long speech III Vlnuica-
on of the Presidents policy in the Kansas
ortion Of his message. In his opinion, the
reat speech of the Senator from Illinois was.
ftar all, large structure resting on very
nsound foundation. He could not understand n
INV the Senator should have shown SO much
,iilingness to weaken public confidence in the
olicy Of his own party, whom he assisted to
lace in power. He could discover no pnr-
rose of public policy, the attainment OF which
eauired the Senator to do those things, DOR !
o deal in an ungenerous manner with the
President.
The allegation that the venerable states
nan had fallen into fundamental error as to
he meaning of the Kansas and Nebraska /.
dill. because he was out of the time Of it's
passage, was not worthy Of the. Senator
What did the Senator mean by assembling
that the Kansas policy of the message was
not an administration measure? Did he
mean that the Cabinet did not agree with the
President? He lMr. Bigler) understood
Or did he mean that the ad-
ministration, having laid down its Kansas
policy, will not hold that those who assail
and denounee that policy do not oppose he
administration Th4re was certainly no
reason for misunderstanding on that point I
If he meant that he does not see clearly what
that policy is, Mr.. Biger could tell him, ssad
on this occasidi he need not doubt the akeu- 4
racy Of the explanation. The administration,
having from the beginning maintained the
territorial laws of Kansas, having sanctioned
the authority of the territorial legislature
call convention of delegates to be elected
by the people to make constitution, and
having exercised all its powers to secure to
the people fair opportunity to make their
domestic institutions In their own way, it
would be imp roper to PREJUDICE and discard
the dongs of that Convention, before it had
been fully developed and, further, that when
Kansas shall have presented herself for ad-
mission into the Union, her Constitution be-
ing Republican, and the people having had a
fair opportunity of making Free or Slave
State, as indicated in the organic act, and as
required by the general understanding of the
whole country, it will not considered a suf6.
cient reason to object to the admission of the
State, that the ordinary forms of the Consti-
tuition, (about which there was no dispute
and which may be changed at any time the
people may dcsire) were not submitted to a
popular vote. The people of Kansas had a
right to do this in their own way. The way
it has been done is their own; but if in this,
or in any other particular, the delegates have
acted in bad faith, or have abused the pow
ers delegated to them, they are responsible
to the people, not to Congress, nor to the
Administration.
Mr.. Bigler said he had before him the bill
reported on the 9TH of March, 1856, provd-
ing for the admission of Kansas into the
Union as State, the third section of which
reads as follows:
" That the foregoing propositions be, and
the same are, hereby offered to the said con.
vention of the people of Kansas, when formed
Tor their acceptance or rejection; which, if
r adopted by the convention and ratified by the
people at the election for the adoption of the
Constitution, shall be obligatory upon the
United States and the said State of Kansas"
The bill was read in his place by the Sem
ator from Georgia, (Mr. Tombs,) on the 18th
. July, and referred to the Committee ON Ter &
' ritories and contained the same section word
for word. Both of these bills were under
! consideration at the conference which had
been referred to, but when the Senator from
Illinois reported the Toombs bill to the Sem
, ate the next morning, it did not contain so
much of the Sd section as indicates to the
s Convention that the Constitution should be
. approved by the people
J The words sand ratified by the people at
. the election for the adoption of the Constitu-
= ton" had been stricken out. Who struck out
these words J? or for what purpose? were
/, questions it was not for him to answer. The
i Senator assumed, the other day, that when
= ever the law is silent on the subject, the in
. ference is in favor of submission but full
y. explanation of the precedents bearing or that
point had shown him that the converse Of the
e proposition had the weight of authority, and
}, that which he had laid down as the rule of
It precedent, has never happened in single in
o stance.
;, Mr.. Bigler proceeded to reply to other
IL points in Mr.. Douglas speech He sustained
the legality of the Lecompton movement and
J. III euO oouioC vi HIS TGuldThS Sdlu uG CUulu
l. not toretell what his action would be on the
" question of admitting Kansas under the Con-
+. stitution. The case was not fully made up.
! A very large and dangerous power was in
the hands of those who are to conduct the
If election on the slavery article. They may
If abuse it. If so, the result could not be re-
d cognlzed; but if the election shall be fairly
F. conducted, he should vote for the admission
>, OF Kansas as State, either with free or
y slave Constitution, because he thought that
n would settle the controversies, and give peace
J. to Kansas and the country. If the institu-
ID tons should not suit the people, they could he
j. altered more easily and satisfactory with
Or Kansas as State than as Territory.
D. Mr.. Douglas replied-saying he had n6
!. fault to find with the Senator from Pennsyl-
r. vania for the making series of attacks on
r his consistency, while emitting to answer his
arguments. Some persons had presented him
g with the records Of the votes of Senators on
ID the Wilmot Proviso, and some former speech-
Is es relative to Kansas matters. He knew not
:, II whether these were true or false; but what
a had they to do with the question now pre-.
sented? He did not understand the motives
tor ransacking all the public records and
5 newspapers and picking up every little scrap
&c to see what his course had been twelve wears
past on the subject of slavery. Suppose it
;, was true that, in 1913, he was in favor of ex.
! tending the Missouri Compromise line to the
n Pacific Ocean, as recommended by Mr. Blu.
r ehanan in his letter preceding; aud suppose
II it true that, in 1854, he introduced a bill for
d the repeal of that compromise, of which the
President says he now approves? All these
y ~ things are not material to the Argument