The independent press. (Abbeville C.H., S.C.) 1853-1860, 1858-07-09
5 sPE,E;C.M
HON. MILLEDGE L. BONHAM
OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
In the House Of Representatives of the
U. s., May 8, 1868.
on the
THE KANSAS CONFERENCE COMMITTEE BILL.
The House beingin Committee of the Whole
Mr.. BONUAM said.

TIE kANSaS C0NFEkEACE CUMMlTTEE BILL.
The House bengin Committee of the Whole
Mr.. BONHAM said:
Mr.. Chairman, did not, for various rca-
SONS, participate in the debate on the Kan
sas Senate bill nor. did 1 expect TO take
part in the discussion of any branch of
that question. On the passage of the Con.
ference Bill, I moved the previous question,
but forcbore to occupy tho time of the
House to give my reasons for my vote.
Perhaps should not have troubled this
House at all with theseSaasons. But few
days after the passage oftIie bill, myhonor.
able colleague (Mr. Boycc) delivered n
speech in reply to the honorable memberfrom
Mississippi, (Mr Qnitnan) in W6ose,Yiew
concurrcd, and who and myself alone Of all
the Southern Democrats stood with the op-
position Oh that question. | do not COM
plain Of the course my colleague thought
proper TO pursue. >, But that, with other sub
sequent events, makes it due to my consti-
tuents as well as to myself, in my own judg-
ment, that should ask the indulgence of
the House whilst now briefly State those
reasons.
TIE argument for and against the Senate
Dill hadsbeen exhausted in discussion ex-
hibiting degree Of ability seldom surpassed
in these dclibcrative bodies. And thiul
an impartial postcrity will bear Inc out when
| say that the preponderance Of the argu-
ment was larycl in favor Of the advocates
Of the bill. To my mind it was conclusive
ly proved that the constitution Of Kansas
had come up TO us with all the sanctions
requisite to a'vaiid constitution. The en-
tire Democratic party, with the Presiden,
At IFS head, ('hc Douglas Democrats except
cd) endorsed it. 1t was clearly shown, bv
prccedents and sound argument that the
convention had tho right to submit that
constitution to the people for ratification or
rejection, in part, in the whole, or not at all :;
and in either event.it would be binding on
Kansas and acceptablesto lis. That she had
not the requisite federal population, and
was presenting herself without formal en-
abling act might, and ought, under all the
circumstances, TO be waived, was concc,lcd
by all-denicd by none. 1t was not n,es.
toned that she would agree to abstain from
the exercise Of all right of taxation, and that
the extraordinary claim Of seventeen millions
of acres Of fland oyer and above what other
States similarly situated had received,
would be abandoned, and the four millions
gladly accepted The Senate bill was the
embodiment, as was supposed by its advo.
Gates, of all that was useful and ncedful for
her admission. The Green -Pugh amend
ment was distasteful to many of us .
but to secure unity of action among the
friends Of fkansas, it was acquicsced in, after
some notifications. This amendment was
howeycr,<a concession which brought no
strength to the bill, but on the contrary
weakened it; for it led the opponents of the
bill to hope for further concessions QUA
conference upon the disagreeing votes of
the two Houses:$a 1t was, however, consid-
cred by many that, although we might, in
the language Of the late lamented Evans,
be fighting for shadow, so far as any ulti.
mate good could come to the South >
nevertheless, We were contendipn for "a
principle of vital Importance viz? the ad-
mission OF State with pro slavery consti-
tuition; the Importance of which principle
was enhanced by the fact that such admis.
sion might prove-though do not myself
think such would have been necessarily the
Casa barren victory to the South and
that in proportion as she would gain but
little by 1t, SO much the greater the wrong
to the South of refusing Kansas admission
with the Lecompton constitution. The pas.
sage of the bill was opposed by the Repub
licans, OH the ground of the slavery feature
in the constitution. The Douglas Demo-
Gratis opposed it, mainly, as they allercd. on
the: aground that The whole constitution was
not submitted: But think they deceive
themselves. Isay it with respect, as I do
not mean TO assail the motives of gentle
men, the force and power Of abolition feel
ing at home unconsciously and impercept-
oily operated upon their judments. The
prccedents of the ratification Of the federal
constitution by the thirteen original States
by their respective conventions alone, with
out submission to the people, and the adop
ton OF their State constitutions, by more
than half Of the States of this Union. in the
same manner, it would seem, ought to have
been sufficient to have determined this cues
ton in the mind Of any unbiased person.
The Democratic party, however, with a
portion OF Southern Americans were salts
he'd with the constitution upon both the
slavery clause and the question of submis-
sion, and should, therefore, have insisted
upon the adoption of the Senate bill. They
would ultimately have succeeded. But II
they had failed, then, on the defeated Son:
ate bill, they would have gone totbe coun.
try-with better issue than on the yictor;.
Gus conference bill.
But, sir, the Senate bill was defeated and
conference committee, at the request Of
the Senate. was appointed. After many
meetings and much disagreement, thew re-
ported the bill, the merits of which now
propose to consider.
The first objection to the bill is, that it
snbniils the whole Lcconpton constitution
baekSt the people of Kansas for adoption
or,rsectioif in despite Of tire declaration of
the people, in convention assembled, that
theg desired admission, at once, under that
constitution. The first section OF the bill
provides that tho admission of Kansas shall
l. l. 4