New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-05-04

The above is essentially false. Its pretended
our columns. "We have adopted the LecomptOn
Constitution is no language of ours. What We
did say in substance was that we ,could acqulesce
in the LecomptOn Constitution, eternal Slavery and
all prorided it's advocates would consent to fair
and free submission of that Constitution to the
People of Kansas, and agree to abide their decision
thereon. We offered to do this, because We knew
that the People of Kansas would vote down Lee
compton overwhelmingly as they did on the 4th OF
January last. And we have urged repeatedly
submission of the Lecompton and Leavenworth
Constitutions side by side, inviting each voter to
cast bis ballot For" whichever he preferred, or
against both if he liked neither, aud let the ma
jority instantly prevail. If majority was
for Lecompton, so be it; if for Leavenworth
better yet; but if neither received clear
majority of all the votes cast, let there be
new Convention and new Constitution, which,
being ratified by majority of the voters, should be
accepted on all hands as the Constitution of Kansas.
We presume no one believes that . new Convention
would be required. The first election might have
the result known at Washington by the 9th, and
Kansas thus fully in the Union and all trouble with
regard to her at an end before the cose of this SEES
sion. This was our plan-the only one that con-
templated the earliest possible settlement of the
whole controversy by the votes of the People of
Kansas. The Crittenden Montgomery plan was
next to this; for it proposed first to have fair vote
10 T
that being voted down, have new Convention and
q new Constitution. This would have required
some three months to finish up the whole business,
while our plan would have settled it within
month. That which Congress has been dragooned
into adopting will not settle it at all, bat return it
at the next session "to plague the inventors"
Hear the forcible Characterization of this nefarious
project by Democratic Senator (Mr. STUART of
Mich. on Friday last:
81 oppose it the English schemeI upon the same
ground that would opposea accumulation OF prop.
erty in a dsbonorable way; | oppose it as would
oppose the reception of stolen property, knowing it
to be stolen oppose it because il is unbecoming the
msgnanimty and generosity of great people, and a
Congress representing great people, because while
in effect the people may destroy this Constitution,
hose who report it here to-day in their places have
it. Sir, upon higher principles than any possible per-
sopal consequences oppose it because seeks to lay
down in the admission OF States into TINS Union one
set of propositions for one character OF States anu
another set of propositions for different character OF
States oppose 1t because instead OF giving peace
to the country, which most ferventy desire IT VIII
inevitably increase and promote excitement and dis
cord throughout the Coniederecy and because Is IN
plain violation of the letter aud spirit OF the organic
aw of Kansas and the true principles OF sefgovern-
ment.
al have said Sir and beg leave to repeat it again
from the very bottom of my heart wish to-day In the
settlement of this principle, that this Lecompton Con-
sttution was Free.Stste Constitution tnat 1t might
North would despse and condemn and derlde and
trample under foot such proposition as this. Sir,
will never agree to any such unjust, despicable DIS
elimination as is contained in this DILL.
"Sir, we are called upon TO say to the people of
Kansas if you will take this obnoxious Constitution
Won may come in now at once, by the proclamation
Of the President-s Constitution which we know is
obnoxious TO every impulse OF your nature; but
If you insist upon framing, a Constitution
that is agreeable to your Judgment and your
wishes, you shall not come IN until you
have doubled your population; and yet am
asked TO vote for il. Why, Sir if it were submitted
TO me as the only slternatve-fI were so b,rne down
Inv COMPRESSION under duress that was compelled TO
fssfy all my opinions Of Constitutional authority,
and take the naked Senate bill take this thing inf
nitely would prefer the original Senate bill, because
that does stand and can stand upon technical legal
authority if you choose to that IN opposition to
the known Will of the people. This stand
nothing either human or div inc. II you were TO set It
nm and apply the commandment 10 il, you could not
make Il out heresy TO worship it. for it is not like any
thing in the heavens above or IN the earth beneath or
the waters under the EARTH Ii Is an anomaly, mis
cradle ingebously-concocted pretense to smuggle
through Congress and fasten upon the necks Of the
neople of Kansas an obnoxious organic law