The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1858-02-10
SPEECH
Hon. ]. S. Green, of Missouri,
CONSTITUTION OF KANSAS;
DeliUered IN the Senate Of the United
States, December l6, 1857.

The Senate having, on motion of Mr..
Brown, resumed the consideration of tie
motion to print the Pre- ident's message
aud accompany ng documents
Mr.. GREEN said Mr. President,
when, on "Wednesday last, the honorable
Senator from Illinois Mr.. Douglas] ad-
dressed the Senate, was tuken compara-
lively by surprise. l was surprised not
only that he should have made his remarks
at that time, but was still more surprised
at the manner and matter of his speech
He himself stated, if recolleet correctly,
that the President had made no recon-
mendation on the subject of Kansas. 1t
is a fact known by us all that no applica-
tion on the part of Kansas was before
Congress in any shape. If, therefore,
there was neither an executive recommen-
dation nor an application upon the part of
Kansas, wherefore should the subject have
been thrust on the attention of the coun-
try ? When practical action is required
on the part of Senators, the views of Sen
ators are expected to be elected; but
when neither an executive recommenda-
tion required any practical action, nor any
application on the part of Kansas had
been made, it seemed to me most extraor
dinary that we sho1ld be compelled to en-
gage IN an abstract discussion with no ref
ereBce to practical results. 1t is not my
purpose to inquire into the motive of the
honorable Senator. l am willing 10 con
cede, as do, that it was patriotic; bat
must think it very improper. 1t was well
calculated to prejudice the question now
pending before The people of Kausas An
election is to be held on tie 2lst of this
month, AID the public mud was prepared
to see the people go forward and express
their preferences for and against, as the
question may be presented to them; but
his speech, going as a counter manifesto
TO tie just and fair message of the Execu-
tive of this Government, is well calcula
lated, though no doubt not designed, to
prejudice the question before the people
Of KAT sas, as well as beft re the people of
the country.
But. sir, whether this question has been
rightfo'ly or wrongfnlIy brought up for con
sidcration, it is now before Us aud justice
to tie Exocnlive, justice to the question
ifsStf Justice 10 the people of Katsas. and
i;-ezt-rs own State,- which cannot
Tsit 20 feel u deep interest In the proper
question, require thai | should meet, al d
as far as l may be able, counteract the
positions assumed by the h0Eorable Sena
tor from Illinois.
lie honorable Sena tor fom Illinos sets
out with impu,ing to the President ''fun
Cldnent0L error" Before we can discuss,
we must have the issue presented. Before
tur arguments can have "a practical bear
ing on the question before the Senate, II
is necessary that we should understand
what that question is. In what, according
to the positions assumed by the Senator
from Illinois, does this Fundamental er-
ror" consist? l understand him to say
that the "fundameptal error" into which
he charged the President with having fall
eu, is that the President gays there was
no Law eitLer in the Kansas Nebraska act,
in the Constit ton of the country, or in
the common usages of the Government,
that made it obligatory on the convention
of Kansas to submit their Constitution to
a subsequent vote of the people Tis is
the imputed 'fttndamental error." To
that point l shall direct tie attention of
the Senate.
1t is not for me to say whether the pro-
priety of the submission of the slave
branch Of that Constitution to separate
vote, ought to have been considered by
the Executive or not. | choose not to
trace him in the course of his reasoning
on the subject. l choose rather to notice
the conclusion at which he has arrived-a
conclusion that promises a full adjustment
of this whole question; that promises
peace to the country; that promises salts
faction to the North and to the South /;
and that promises to remove bone of
contention over which the public mind has
been too much harassed for the last sevc-
raj years.
The real practical question, then, which
we have to consider is this: ought Kan
sas, when her Constitution shall be pre-
sented, be admitted into the Union? or
ought the consideration of what the hon.
orable Senator from Illinois calls 'fun-
damental error of the President, to be
| deemed a sufficient reason to keep Kansas
out of the Union, and to keep this most
unfortunate subject still agitating the
public attention THIS is the real issue.
1t is not whether we approve of parts oi
the Constitution of Kansas: it is not
whether we think the qualification required
by the convention in framing the Conssi-
tuition of Kansas, of twenty years citizen
ship of the United States in order to be
Governor, is right. That is subject up
on which the people of Kansas alone have
the right to decide.
1t is true the honorable Senator does
not say that we have right to supervise
the action of the convention OF Kansas II
that regard. But he seems to bring uT
ghst he regards as Objectionable parts o.
tbeir constitution, and traces them in such
. manner that the public might be preJu
diced against the result of the labors o.
the convention. In his great anxiety te
SO present that feature in regard to the
qualification which the Governor of Kan
.sas is required to possess, he even mis-
statatss and misconstrues the constitu tior
of Kansas as presented before-us. HI
says"twenty years citizenship is required:
That is true; but is that cause of OBJ
lection The Senator's own State of LII
inois, when she was admitted into the
Union, required as qualification of th'