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

euepiinE the people OF Kansas 10 frame announcer, II
the opinion he gave % to; the will of the majority
IN that Territory was correct, slavery would be
abolished, and she would become free State.
shall not stop here to make an argument upon this
point. Everybody knows that the seventh article
of her constitution established slavery. by every
guarantee that could be thrown around that insttu
ton. 1t was opposed by the Black Republican party
upon that ground The President announced the
fact in his special message, that Kansas as much
slave State as Georgia or South Carolina, and my
colleague labored throughout his whole speech to
prove that the people of Kansas would vote down
the Lecompton constitution if we submitted it to
them and would certainly, frame free State
sttuton in its stead.
But sir, my colleague says he unwilling to
bring Kansas into the Union by unfair means he
would not countenance the "shufling" by which
an "unnatmraL emigration +" was forced into Kansas;
sttuton which they were opposed to. Yes sir, my
colleague had such an adherence for the "shuM ng
which had been witnessed in Kansas" he was SO
much opposed to that sort of shutting by which an
unnatural emigration had been forced into that Ter
ritory ;" he honest so fair, and SO just, he
felt constrained to vote against constitution which
made Kansas slave State, and which had come to
US sanctioned BY all the forms and requirements of
law and, at the same time. to every effort in
his power to enable those "shvtaess" and Free
Sellers. who had been brought into Kansas by an
unnatural emigration" to frame a new constitu.
struggle in Kansas. would have been lost.
And why did he do that? Because the gentleman
was too fair too just and too honest to force upon
reluctant people a constitution which was not their
will and their choice. Because that constitution had
not been submitted to the people of Kansas for their
of objection which justified my colleague lin his
estmation) in putting himself in opposition to the
whole body of southern Democrats in the Senate
and in the House supported by majority of north
ern Democratic members and Senators, and by
half the members of his own party from the South
because the people of Kansas had not had oppor.
tunty of voting at the polls for the ratification
rejection of that constitution. When, let me ask my
c'lleague. did this new light dawn upon him? When
did he find out that justice and honesty and fair deal
ing to the people of Kansas required that the Le-
compton constitution should he submitted to them
for ratification or rejection? Sir, I say that he had
not made that notable discovery when he received
the votes of the people of North Carolina which
cured to him the seat which he occupies upon this
floor.
During his canvass he proclaimed everywhere to
the people of the fifth congressional district of North
Carolina, that President Buchanan was unworthy
the confidence of the southern people. because Gas he
sad) he had instructed Governor Walker t. see that
the constitution of Kansas submitted to a vote
o: the people Of that Territory. He declared that,
If the Lecompton constitution submitted to the
people of Kansas for ratification rejection, the
last hope of the southern people for the admission
OF slave State north Of 30 deg. 80 min. would he
go"e forever. I say. when did my colleague make
this extraordinary discovery?
As late as the day when Judge Douglass made
his speech in December last, my colleague had not
received this light! So far from it. he did not
hesitate to say that he in favor Of the admission
of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution. with
out its being submitted to the people 1t was not
until still later period that he made the discovery,
and his conversion appears to me almost as strange
and extraordinary as that of st. Paul.
When did that light heem mon him' have
said was not in December last but sir, when the
struggle came on when the two parties were array
ed against each other here-the South for Lecomp-
ton with slavery, the one hand and my colleague
with his five southern coadjutors, with the whole
Black Republican party. on the other-then it was
that this new light dawned upon him. Then it
that nv colleague turned from us, in our hour of
need. and went to the enemy, and cast his vote
against us. But sir, after that vote had been cast
and the enemies Of the South were rejoicing
the victory thew had achieved, effort made to
raise conference committee, to see if some plan
could be agreed upon by which Kansas might be
brought into this Union under the Lecompton con-
stituton and peace thereby restored to the country
My colleague had admitted the urgent necessity of
settling the question and relieving the country of
the fearful excitement and the dangerous agitation
which had so long prevailed How did he vote then
upon the motion to raise that committee? Did he
come forward in spirit Of Cancellation and COM
promise. and say to those with whom lie had differ
ed, 81 have not been able to agree with you as to
the Senate bill but the necessity of getting
rid of this vexed question: and will vote for
ference committee, with the hope that some plan
may be agreed upon to which may be able to give
my support?" No. sir; no such thing! When
the two parties in this House were ar-ayed against
each other. nearly the entire southern delegation on
the one side, and the whole body of Black Repub-
lcans upon the other, while the question was in
imminent doubt, my colleague came forward and
said, by his vote, I" I will permit no further effort to
be made to settle this question; here the matter
shall stop" And sir, had it not been for the cast
ing vote of the Speaker of this House. my colleague
would have been successful; the Kansas question
would still be open ;; still source of trouble and
danger But, sir we prevailed over my colleague
and his coadjutors; the conference committee was
raised and bill reported to this House which re-
ceived the support of my colleague; and therefore
stands record evidence against him on account of
his vote against the conference committee which
framed it!
But my colleague says that applied the phrase
"unparalleled outrage" to the position which he
occupied upon the Kansas question. What said
that the gentemans position was injurious to the
rights of his own section; and proved it by quo
ting against him authority which he could not ques
tion-the Raleigh R2gister-which had denounced
the opposition to the admission of Kansas under
the Lecompton constitution as an unparalleled out
rage" Does my colleague deny that the phrase
applied by that journal? I will here quote
the article so that others may see whether I was
warranted in the assertion:
The President establishes by undoubted proof that the
constitution of Iecompton made according the
suon and the laws and this being the what earthly
pretext will Congress have for hestatng about
cepting and admitting Kansas Slater What right
has that body to look behind full compliance with La
and I" the people of Kansas ought to have done
and known to be by the unscrupulous who urge it.
What if majority of the Of Kansas did not take
part in the formation of the constitution? Whose fault
that but their ownP They had unlimited opportun
ties to VOTE and if for cous and rebeous purposes they
chose to exercise their right of suffrage they be
allowed to take advantage of ch Of their