Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1858-09-22
TaE KANSAS coYFERENcE BILL.

kind which arc over indicative of weak cause.
Knowing that all are tired of the matter, We should
perhaps abstain from continuing the vain discussion.
But it right that the other side, to which we belong,
should have at least single showing. That this
may be given in as brief space possible, We here
to append statement of the whole question as pre-
sented by the Hon. c. C. CLAY of Aubana, in let
ter addressed to his constituents. Hoping that each
and every reader will give the distinguished Senator's
reasoning close examination, we dismiss the topic
at once and altogether.
Read the argument:
The Conference bill involved no concession of our
rights or interests, md no abandonment Of sound
principles or good policy. II the Senate bill was
acceptable to tho South the Conference bill should
be, iu my opinion.
The Lecompton Convention, not content to get Kan
sas into the Union equal terms with other new
States with suicidal folly demanded better terms than
had been granted any Of them; claiming four sec
tiuns Of land in every township for schools all suit
spriugs gold, silver copper, lead or other valuable
mines five per cent Of tho nett proceeds Ot the pub
lie lands sold before after admission: sevcnty-two
sections for seminary Of learning; aud every utter
nate section for twelve miles each side OF two rail-
roads, one crossing the State from her Northern 10
her Southern and tho other from her Eastern to her
|
acres when her just and equal shmro, compared with
| Alabama, would have heen about 4,OO0,OO0 acrcs
| No one in Congress willing to grant this arrogant
and unrghteous demand. No State had been granted,
| or had asked, huff much on applying for admis-
sion and soInc had been refused admission with much
| less asked for by them. Ohio asked admission with
Objectionable boundaries and Congress refused it. hut
passed IN net, providing that if minority OF her
people, at the ballot box, assented to ccrtain modii
cutons Of boundaries thcrcnproposed, she should bc
admitted approximation Of the President. The same
thing huppcmed with Michigan except that Congress
referred her terms of admission to convention Ui
| the people, to be called for that purpose Arkansas
demanded more land than Congress would grant, und
now terms of admission wcro proposed and submitted
by Congress to hor Lcgisature-as the power 0f de-
Gliding hud been conferred on8he Legislature by the
Convention that framed the Constitution. So Con-
gress refused to admit Wisconsin and Iowa on the
| terms they asked, and proposed and submitted tu
| them respectively, other terms Of admission. The
| demands Of tluse States were moderate compared
| with those Of Kansas Should exception have
been made in her favor, by gruntng her about six
times US much land rs was her share, or hnd been
granted other new Statcs? In previous Of re-
fusal to admit State on the torlns she asked, Con-
gress had proposed new terms, and submitted them
to tho decision of the people, or of their delegates in
Convention, Of their representatives in the LegiS
lature, and made her assent to them condition pre-
cedent to her admission into tho Union Why depart
| from past practice in the cuse of Kansas?
Kansas had right or power to prescribe to Con-
gress, aud Congress had no right power to pro-
scribe to Kansas, the terms of her admission; but
each had the right and the power to dissent from the
terms proposed by the other. Congress cSUrcd this
| right and power by refusing to adnt Kansas with
the immense dowry shr aSkcu, but offered her adlnis
| sion with an equal portion with her elder sisters
This was done both in the Senate and in the Confer
ence bills. Euch Ll acknowledged the authority Of
| I'm pnfif
the ratification ly the people Of the fro-slarcry
clause submitted to their votcthe right of the peo.
pie Of territory, when establishing State Govern.
nent to adopt constitution without submitting it t.
popular vote. and to form ind regulate their domes
tic institutions IN their way, subject uuly to the
Constitution Of tie United StateS-and each accepted
the Lecompton Constitution republican in torm
agreed and promised to admit. Kansas under it int
tho Union, and actually did admit her equal
footing with othor States provided she chose to
in with equal md like grants Of land for schools
roads, &C., &c. The only difference seized and com.
menea ON by the Southern opponents Of tho Confer.
euce BILL is this: it did while tho Senate bill did not
expressly and formally submit to vote Of the people
| of Kansas the question Of admission upon the new
terms Of land grants proposed by Congress instead OF
those proposed by Kansas. But this difference Of
form, not Of substance. Had the Senate bill become
n law, Kansas would not thereby havo been brought
into the Union, because her terms of entering it had
been rejected and other and less favorable terms had
been substituted without her consent by Congress
She would have had the right and the power to stny
out of the Union and would have been ont till she
expressed her assent to the new terms Of admission
| proposed in that b by some declaration of word.
or of acts, such rGte Of acceptance the cleo.
ton of U. S. Senators, and putting in motion the
machinery Of State Government.
To deny this is to deny the free agency of Kansas
aud her right to choose the terms Of her admission
into the Union and to cluim for Congress power Ia
cocrco her into the Union against her consent The
doctrine Of state rights denies Congress power to
make or unnnke State, force State in or out OF
the Union. Under the Senate BILL Kansas could and
would have assentel isscnted to striking OF her
ordinance and substituting new and less favorable
terms Of admission md could and would have elected
to come in Or stay out Of the Union The Conference
bill simply acknowledged that right, and provided q
mode of exercising it, but did not and could not con-
fer the right. 1t was right of Kansas, which Con-
gress could not give to take from her, and did no,
give to her by tc Conference BILL or tukc from her
by the Senate BILL This, it seems to me- no udvocatc
of state rights strict conSruconist deny, and
if true, the difference between the two bills was in
| form, not in substance.
But some Southrons opposed the bill because, they
said, it submitted the constitution to vote of the
people, and some Nurthcrners opposed it because,
they said, it did not submit tho constitution to such
vote. There is nothing in the language or spirit OF
4
LecUmptun constitution to vote of the people, but
much contradict the assertions for acknowledged
the constitution to be the act of the people of Kan
sas to DO republican in form, and to be acceptable to
| Congress- but declared the terms of admission de-
manded by Kansas were unacceptable, proposed
other terms aud submitted them to vote of the rco-
pie. 1t is true that the people might vote against
the terms proposed, not because they wero unacccp-
table to them but because the LecomptOn constitu-
| ton was unacceptable to them. But what had Con-
gres, to do with the motives Of the people of Kansas
1t could not lcgsue for their acts into or
out Of their heads 1t should not have been deferred
from doing its duty mud respecting the rights Of Kun
by letting her choose whether she would como in
to the Uuion under the Lccompton constitution with
5,000000 acres of land granted to her. instead Of the
1000 900 demanded by her, from fear of her refusal
to enter the Union because Of opposition to that con-
suton, and not because Of dissatisfaction with the
quantity of land granted tu her She might have
refused for the same secret to como into tho
Union under tho Senate bill
Hence, repeat, there is no objection to the Con.
ference bill that does not obtain against the Scnate
bill There objections to the Senate bill that do
not obtain against the Conference bill. Tho Senate
bill, by the Green-Pugh amendment declared tho
right of the people Of Kansas cat all times to alter
refOrn or abolish their form Of government in such
manner as they may think proper, Congress hereby
dsclaimng any authority to interfere, &c.,"-vhich
truism seemed like apology to Black Republicans
In and out Of Kansas, for admitting her under tho
Lecompton constitution, and suggestion to them to
como in and Immediately thercrftcr to change thoir
oonstitution-a policy which some of them advocated
Again, the Senate bill made no provision about Kan
sas in case of her refusal to into tho Union un-
dor the Lecumpton constitution Tho Conference bill
is free from the Green Pug amendment and declares
if Kansas refuses the terms therein proposed, she
shall not be admitted into the Union till ait is as
rko,rz l,,l,t nlI..x