The Kansas herald of freedom., 1858-05-29

stilution, Win slavery, was presented TO
the people of Kansas, it would be rejected ;
and there was, therefore, no hazard in
voting to give them an opportunity of that
kind.
But, sir, We were induced to vote for the
House amendment for another eonsidera-
tioD, and that is that it provided fair board
BY which elections were to be conducted.
We said the previous elections in Kansas
had been controlled by violence and cor
ruption and fraud, but there was chance
to have them safely and honestly con-
Quoted and so much security was felt in
the board provided by the House amend
ment, that we were even willing to say
that when that board had supervised the
election. appointed the officers, received
the returns, and adjudicated upon those
returns, the whole subject might be settled
by the proclamation of the President, and
we were led to the latter merely from
confidence in the former provision.
| But another consideration, and perhaps
the most important of them all, was that
the House amendment proposed course
of proceeding which would put an end to
this controversy in either event and at all
events. If the people of Kansas received
and accepted the Leeompton constitution
by the vote of majority, they were to be
received; and if they did not, they were
to call new convention and form such a
constitution as they pleased, and when
that constitution was ratified they were to
be admitted. There was to be the end of
controversy. It was because the House
amendment did end the controversy that
it commended itself to the acceptance of
those who voted for it on this side of the
Chamber.
| Now, Mr.. President, come to the next
step: the proposition which is offered as
substitute for both those bills--the pro-
position of the committee of conference. /
do not propose to go into its details; but
let us see whether it gives to those of us
who voted against enforcing the Leeomp-
ton constitution upon the people without
their consent and who voted for the pro-
position of the House of Representatives,
those leading features of security, and
those objects which we desired to attain,
which were given to US in the latter pro-
position. I will state its leading provisions
The first is, that the Leeompton constitu=
ton shall be presented to the people of
Kansas for their acceptance or rejection.
"Oh, no." says the honorable Senator from
Virginia, Mr. HUNTER, ait does not SUBJ
NIT the constitution to the people," The
majority of the Senate, by the bill they
have passed, decided that it was consti-
tuition perfect, so far as Kansas was con-
cerned, not to be passed upon any further
by the people; and he says this bill so
treats it. If I understand it, it does not
so treat it. It submits certain question
to the people; that is, whether they will
accept certain land grants; and it provides
that, if they accept those land grants, then,
and in that case, Lecompton shall stand
as the constitution but it further provides,
that if they reject that proposition in
regard to the land grants, they reject the
| Lecompton stitution. Now, ask, is
it true, as the Senator from Virginia says,
that it is consistent with the former action
OF the Senate? Does it not submit a
question to the people by which they may
reject the Lecompton constitution Ger
tainly it does. Did not the Senate say, in
the former bill, to those people, it is all
perfect on your side, and you shall have
no opportunity to reject Lecompton ?''-
Yes, they did, unconditionally and say
they now propose question to the people
by which the people may reject Lecomp-
ton; and yet you say that you do not
subject the Lecompton constitution to their
vote! The two are utterly inconsistent /;
and there is no ingenuity or sophistry,
though the gentleman may have much of
the former, if not of the latter, which can
by possibility disguise or blink this out of
sight.
But, sir, as I said, this proposition pro-
yides for submitting to the people of
Kansas question in relation to laad
grants-whether they will accept certain
proposition in relation to lands. 1t further
provides that, if they will not accept that,
then, and in that case, Lecompton goes
aside, and the people of Kansas are to
remain in their territorial condition for q
length of time entirely indefinite. Itsays
they may have convention when they
have sufficient number of people to enti-
tie them to Representative in Congress.
That nun Der is now ninety four thousasd; /;
but, after the next census, in 1860, it may
be one hundred and fifty thousand; we
know not. Then, the amount of it is, that
| it is an indefinite delay; it shall be inde-
fnitely deferred.
Besides, it is as much as saying to them,
1--WE make you this offer of land, but if
YOU will not take this offer of land, liberal
as it is, now, see the danger you run of
never getting IT." Again, this same bill
| provides that different board shall be
| created to direct and supervise the cleo
ton. 1t proposes to add member, the
district attorney, appointed by the Presi-
dent, to the Governor and Secretary. so
that they shall have three-a controlling
majority OF that board over the presiding
officers of the two Houses Of the Legisla-
ture. We regard this as entirely unfair.
| The first objection that occurs to my
mind is the form in which this question is
attempted TO be presented to the people OF
Kansas. This has been very well defined
| by the honorable Senator from Kentucky,
(Mr. CRITTESDEx.l 1t is to put to them
| one question, by the answer to which they
are 20 decide another question that has no
relationship to it You might as well put
the question to that people will you
| vote that yon will be freemen ?'' and now
we say to you, .if you vote that you viii
be freenen, you shall have the Topeka
constitution but if ycu vote that you will
not be freemen. then you shall remain in
| a territorial condition. There is no more
/ relationship between the acceptance OF
this giant Of land and the character Of
/ this constitution. than there would be
between the question proposed and the
result that was to follow IN the case
j have Just put There is no necessary
i legal sequence or connection between the
two questions. The proposition is there
i fore artifcial-deceptive in its consequent
i ces. You put to man the question
asir. viii you take snch grants Of land IS
citizen of Kansas are you willing to
i receive such grants ?'' aYes.n saws he.