Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1858-06-16

throughout The land Il approved Of the general
principles there set forth but / did not approve,
and take occasion to say here that do not now
approve, the doctrine that the people can alter or
amend their constitution without regard to the re.
strictions contained in the instrument itself
But suppose the Green amendment had contained
that doctrine how can my colleague object to it
Does it lie in his mouth to get up here or elsewhere
and condemn il And here let me say that my col
league has brought another charge of injustice
against me on account Of the reference which made
to his position in the Legislature of North Carolina,
in relation to similar question. Now, what was
the position of my colleague as q Senator OF the
State Legislature Of North Carolina? 1t is well
known by intelligent gentlemen here that the con-
sttution of that State declares that convention
of the people of North-Carona shall be called to
amend the constitution of that State, except by
twothrd vote of both branches of the State Legis-
lature; and yet my colleague, as member of the
North Carolina Senate, supported aud voted for the
proposition of Governor Graham, which was intend.
ed to provide that the question of convention to
amend the constitution should be submitted to the
people of the State by bare majority of both
branches of the Legislature; and if majority of the
people voted for convention, then the people
should proceed to elect delegates to amend the con.
stitution although that instrument itself says that
convention shall be called unless it is by vote
of two thirds of both branches of the Legislature.
Mr.. GnNER Will my colleague allow me to cor
rect him as to . matter of fact?
Mr.. SHAW, of North Carolina. l owe the gentle
man no courtesy, and will not allow him to inter-
rupt me, especially am sure the Chair will have
the liberaty to award him the floor at the close OF
my remarks, when he will have an opportunity to
say all that he may desire I say, then, that my
Governor Graham in the Legislature of North Caro-
lima, has himself sanctioned and approved the doc
trine which he now denounces, but which l say is
not set forth in the Green amendment.
But if the special message of the President does
contain this doctrine which has now become obi
Gus to my colleague and if he has changed his
opinion since he was in the Legislature, Why have
we not heard his thunder sooner? l have here an
editorial article from the leading organ of the party
to which the gentleman belongs-the Know Moth
ing party of North Carolina-in which, in speaking
of the Presidents message and of his very doctrine
which the gentleman so vehemently condemns, the
following language is used. quote from the Raj
eigh Register, of the 10th February, 1858:
according to promise lay before readers to-day
the Presidents recommending to the favor OF Con-
to paying compliments to Democrats aud rarely indeed do
they deserve any hands, We hope. however
do justice and is in spirit of fair dealing that say
that Mr. Buchanans message is most excellent one'
"Besdes all this as the President very we'll contends
Kansas is admitted a State she call another
convention make another constitution then be
asceraned whether the friends opponents of slavery
in the minority in the State. This to exceedingly
dents only be accounted by the fact that
tain politicians Congress desire proong this agitation
for their purposes and with view likewise of assert
ing if possible the principle that slavery shall not spread
beyond its present limits As citizen of the United States
then and lover of law and order, and citizen of the
South and mindful of her rights do most earnestly de-
sire to Kansas admitted with the constitution she
sents and let her future struggles if shall ensue be
carried upon her own soil as sovereign State and be
settled by her citizens. Then and not before will her
matters cease to be rebrands threatening the
destruction of the Union
IL I'll l. ~
ing organ, in North-Carolina, of the gentleman's
own party, and I have never yet heard any denun-
citation of that article by my colleague or any men,
Der of his party at home. But after the gentleman
had concluded to oppose the admission of Kansas
under the Lecompton Constitution, he finds that
this is an odious doctrine and which ought not
only to condemn the President, but the Democratic
party also and me too, who never adopted it!
Now, sir, as to my colleagues denial that the
gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Quitman] moved
to strike out the Green amendment. That has be-
come a matter of his it is upon your record. and
ask you, and l ask the gentleman from Mississippi
whether the effect of his motion was not to bring
before the House the Senate bill without the Green
amendment?
Mr. QUlrMAN. Certainly.
Mr. SHAW, of North-Carona. I must say was
surprised when read the speech of my colleague,
to see the charge brought against the gentleman
from Mississippi. of being guilty of dupcity in
bringing forward that amendment in the manner he
did. If there is any trait which stands out in
bold relief in the character of the gentleman from
Mississippi, it is his direcness, his straightforward
ness, and the moral courage and holiness with
which he marches up to every question which it is
his duty to meet he is not the man who would
lend himself to any such course as that charged BY
the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr.. QUITMAN. 1t was only yesterday that read
the remarks of the gentleman from North Carolina
[Mr. Gilmer.l and have been thinking very calmly
upon the question whether should notice them or
not. will not, at any rate, take the time to do
now. Perhaps may notice them, and may think
them unworthy of notice.
Mr.. SHAW, Of rth-Carolina. was saving that
the record will show that the gentleman from Mis-
sissippi moved to amend the bill then before the
House, by submitting the Senate bill without the
Green amendment, as an amendment to the Crtten.
den bill, offered by the gentleman from Pennsylva
MIA, [Mr. Montgomery The effect of that would
Senate bill with the Green amendment, and the Sen.
ate bill without the Green amendment. Now sir
voted for the proposition of the gentleman from
Mississippi, and my colleague voted against it; and
repeat that have done him no injustice in pla-
cling him in the position that did.
But my colleague says he voted against the mo-
ton of the gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Quit
man, not because he was in favor of the Green
amendment, but because the success of that motion
would have defeated the Crttenden bill, which he
was IN favor Of; and that was unjust towards him
in not stating that fact To show how much justice
there is in this charge, will be excused, l trust,
for quoting brief extract from my speech, which
will be sufficient answer to the gentlemans accu.
sation:
But the gentleman may say that he voted against the
Green amendment in order to if possible the House
find sufficient justification Of his vote but willing,
for the sake Of argument only to give him the benefit
that position; and now let whether he is usiable
taking the CrltteDdeN
Senate BILL"
My colleague in his speech, stated that read
from the Lecompton constitution, prove that that
instrument prescribed proper qualification for vo-
tiers; for the purpose he supposed, of having it
ted contained no such On fonnord If tho antlarnan