Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1858-04-29
The Kansas substitute Bill.


the Conference Committee on the Kansas
question was the special order of the day.
Mr.. CritteDden expressed his dissatisfac-
tion with the substitute proposed by the COM
mittee, though perhapsin some Of it's features
it was an improvement on the bill originally
passed by the Senate. ii certainly involved
an abandonment of the position assumed by
the patrons of that bill, in so far as it recog
missed contingency upon which the Lecomp-
ton Constitution vas to be considered Gull
and void. 1t remained, therefore, to examine
whether that contingency had been we'll Sc
lected by the committee in susPendlng the
fate of the Leccmpton Constitution Oh vote
10 be had On the modified ordinance. 1t
seemed to him that it would have been more
consistent with fair and just legislation t.
refer the question of the Constitution to a
direct vote Of the people, rather than TO de
termiue its eligibility by vote on PROPOSE
ton extrinsic to it. And the substitute, by
further providing, 10 case the proposition Of
Congress should be rejected by tie people Of
Kansas, that they should lie retained 10 a
Territorial condition for an indefinite term Of
years, seemed to proceed upon principle of
resentment, afhxing. as it does, disability
upon the people which is not contemplated
otherwise than as consequence OF vote
hostile to the establishment of the Lecomp-
ten Constitution. The provision, moreover
that the vote should lie conducted underline d.
rectiOn OF board not equally divided in poIiti-
cal sentiment, bot Of which majority would
be Federal appOin' ees, seemed to be no in-
provement on the Ii use bill-destroying, as
it does, the impartiaiity of that measure
He thought it important that Congress in
the present question should not ouly do JUS
tice, but avoid the suspicion of injustice. lie
closed by alluding, in elcquent terms, to the
geographical position Of Kentucky as part
of the great West, which was conservative
and national not only 10 it feelings, by also
because it's material interests were lniissoiu-
bly, bound up with the uulon of the States.
Mr.. Hunter defend ID the substitute OF the
committee That substitute, he argued, in.
volved no abandonment of pie on the
part Of those " no had SUI ported the Senate
bill. 1t assumed that the LecomptOn Con
stitution was the legitimate work Of the peo.
pie, and differed from the Senate bill only in
specifically providing for contingency
which the latter had lett to be settled by i'm
plication. The Senate bill admitted Kansas
under the LEGO mptou Constitution with
certain grant Of land, and assumed the pop
ulsr acluiesceDce in that grant. Ibe sub
stitute offers to admit the State into the Uul.
on with certain grant Of land and refers
that proposition TO a popular vote, with
view OF ascertainng whetfe: 1t Is accepta'
BILE to the people prior to tier admission.-
10 case it should be rejected, the bill further
provides that no STEP shall be taken Tor the
formation of Safe q vernment until the
population Of tie Territory shall enttle 1t to
representation III the popular branch OF Con-
gress. This last provision was not enJ1lned
by way of penalty, as had be n intimated,
since the general equity and propriety Of the
provision could not be contested. Mr.. IL.
closed by earnestly invoking the Senate t.
accept the substitute CT the committee
Its passage would at least bring q truce to
the pending sectional agitation; aud 1t was
to he hoped might result IN permanent
peace.
Mr.. Cplamer desired briefly to ass IN the
reasons why be had voted against the Senate
bill, had subsequently voted for the House
bill, aud would vote against the substitute of
the committee. The Senate bill was Office
tionab!e because it recognised the validity OF
the Lecompton Constitution, which be beleV-
ed to be the creature OF usurpatlon and
fraud. and which, not being made by the
people, did not embody their will. The
House bill was accepted by him because 1t
submitted the Lecompton Constitution to
vote of the people, who, be was assured,
would reject it. As an alternative proposition,
it was preferable to the bill If the Senate,
and offered the only chance by which aid
could be afforded to the people OF Kansas IN
their efforts to establish free State. The
House bill provided fair board TO COT
duet the election on the Constitution, and
was not OF en- to the suspicion OF frauds on
the elective franchise. And lastly, the
House bill afforded q means of certainly ter
miDating the Kansas controversy at an early
day. The substitute of the committee was or
jectiopable in that it submitted the COnstl-
tuition, not fairly, but to a vote on land
grants. If the people will take the land
grants, they must take the Lecompton Constr
tutiop; if they reject the land grants they re-
ct the Constitution; that is, the bill puts
question to the peopleon one point, and their
answe r is held to decide anOther. Such
mode of puttirg the question was certainly
aTUuCldl tuu Wcll W ="
case the land grants are rejected the people
are RENTED for an indefinite period to a
state If Territorial pupilage, inst much that
they are virtually left to choose between land
grants and slave State on the one hand, or
no land grants and slave Territjry on the
other; for by the bred Scott decision, slave
~ already exists in Kansas. In other words
il is held that there are people enough I'D
Kansas to make a slave State, but not people
enough to make free State. The substitute
moreover, was Objectionable because 1t pro-
vided no means Of certainly terminating the
Kansas question. In case the land grants
shou ID be rejected, who could say that the
chronic troubles 10 that Territory would not
break out anew?
Mr.. Hale made brief argument against
the substitute, on the ground that it conh,cted
with the Democratic doctrine of the equality
Of the States, inasmuch as it asst gns different
conditions OF the admission Of slave and free
States, Offering, as it does, premium OF i've
millions of dollars (the value OF the land
grants) for a slave State, while 1t extends
to fre.-State comm unities the prospects OF
waiting indefinitely for admission into the
Union.
MIR. Wade denounced the substitute as te-
ing insulting to the South and unjust to the
North.
Mr.. Green briefly defended the committees
bill from what be deemed the harsh criticism