New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1858-07-05
KANSAS GlNEERENgE gaMMITTEE gILL.
spEMcH OF H0E. NJ. r, B0NIIA1E,
OF SOUTH CAROLINA.


the State Of The Unioa
MIR. Bonham said
Mi. ChairTaan--I did not for various reasons par
tcipate in the debate on the Kansas Senate blll nor
did expect to take part ia the discussion OF any
branch Of that question On the passage of the con
ference bill moved the previous question: but for
bore to occupy the time of the House TO give my
reasons for my vote. Perhaps should not have
troubled this House at all with these reasons But
few DAYS after the passage of the bill, my honorable
colleague Mr., Boycel delivered speech IN reply to
the honorable member from Mississippi Mr. Sultlanl
/ in whose views GOneurredt and who aud myself
alone Of nil the Southern Democrats stood wish the
| Opnosition on that question. do not complain OF
the course nv colleague thought proper to pursue
but that with other subsequent events makes it due
to my constituents rs wel as to myself, IN my own
Judgment that should ask the indulgence OF the
Honse whilst now briefly state those reasons.
The argument for and against the Senate bill had
been exhausted in discussion exhibiting degree of
ability seldom surpassed IN these deberatlVe bodies
And think an impartial posterity will bear me out
when say that the prepondeIance Of the argument
was largely in favor Of the advocates of the bill, To
my mind it was concnslvely proved that the Constr
tuition of Kansas had come up TO us with all the
sanctions requisite to q valid Constitution. The
entire Democratic party, with the President at its
head ethe Douglas Democrats excepted) Endorsed it.
1t was clearly shown, by precedents and sound argn-
men that the convention had the right to submit that
Constitution to the people for ratification or rejection
in part in the whole, or not at all and in either
us. That she hadnot the requisite federal population,
and was presenting herself without formal enabling
act might and ought, under all the circumstances to
he waived was conceded by ALL denied by none. 1t
was not questioned that she would agree to abstain
from the exercise of all right OF taXatlon and that
the extraordinary claim Of seventeen millions of
acres of land over and above what other States SINH
larly 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 shat was useful and neednl for her ad
mission The Gfeen7Pugh amendment was dstaste-
full 20 many OF us, but, to secure unity OF action
among the friends Of Kansas it was aequesced in,
after some notifications. This amendment was, how
ever, concession which brought no strength to the
BILL but, the contrary, weakened iii for it led the
opponents of the bill to hope for further concessions
on conference upon the disagreeing votes Of the
two Houses Il was, however, considered by many
that although we might. in the language OF the late
lamented Evans, be fighting for shadow, so far
as any ultimate good could come to the SOUTH,
nevertheless we were contending for principle Of
vital importance' namely, the admission OF q State
with pro.slayery Constitution; the Importance OF
which principle was enhanced by the fact that such
admission 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 It, so much the greater
the wrong to the South of refusing Kansas admission
with the Lecompton Constitution.
The passage Of the bill was opposed by the Repub
lcans on the ground of the slavery feature of the
Constitution. The Douglas Democrats opposed it,
mainly as they alleged, on the ground that the whole
Constitution was not submitted. But, think, they
deceive themselves say it with respect, as Ido not
mean to assa the motives Of gentlemen, the force and
power Of abolition feeling at home unconsciously and
impereeptibly operated upon their judgments. The
preCedents of the ratification of the Federal Const
tuition by the thirteen nal States by their respect
i've conventions alone, without submission by the
people, and the adoption of their State constitutions
by more than halt of the States OF this Union in the
same manner it would seem ought to have been suf
feient to have determined this question in the mind
of any unbiased person. The Democratic party, how
ever with a portion Of Southern Americans were
satisfied with the Constitution upon both the slavery
clause and the question Oi submission and should
therefore, have insisted upon the adoption OF the
Senate bi They would ultimately have succeeded.
But il they had failed then, on the defeated Senate
bill they would have gone to the country with bet
ter issue than on the victorious conference bill.
But, sir, the Senate bill was defeated, and Con-
ference GOmntiee at the request Of the Senate, was
appointed. After many meetings and much disagree.
nent, they reported the BILL the merits Of which
now propose to consider.
The FIST objection to the bill Isl that it submits the
whole ecomptan Constitution back to the people of
Kansas for adoption or rejection, in despite of the de-
elardtion of the people, in convention assembled,
that they desired admission, at once, under that CON
stitution The yst section Of the bill provides thGt
the admission Of Kansas shall be dependent "the
fundamental condition precedent that the people of
Kansas shall accept specific proposition contained
in six clanses Of the bill respecting lands taxes, etc.
proposition accepted at election to be held, "the
President Of the United States shall announce the
same by proclamation and thereafter, and without
any further proceedings on the part of Congress- the
admission Of Tie State of Kansas into the Union upon
an equal footing with the original States, in NIL re-
spects whatever, shall be complete and absolute Y
Whilst, on the other hand, ii "a majority of the votes
east be for proposition rejected it shall be deemed
and held that the people of Kansas do not desire Gd
mission into the Union 1Cih said Constitution, under
the condition set forth in said proposition And
them regarding the adoption by Kansas of this last
alternative rejection of the Constitution, the bill
goes on to authorize the people to form new Com
stitution Does this statement alone not make it pal
pabe to the plainest understanding that though not
ia many words, this is virtually submission of
the Constitution 1t does not matter whether the
voting be on the land grant the taxing power ETC.,
or on some totally Indifferent question: STILL if the
result be that Kansas with the Lecompton Constitu
ton, would, on the one hand, be admitted, and on
the other, rejected BIZ reason of that cote, uuques
tonaby the Constitution is virtually submitted back
to the people fer ratification or rejection.
Besides, if it were intended to submit the PROPOSE
tons growing cut Of the ordinance alone, why intro
duce into the bill the words Hadmssiou of the State
of Kansas into the Union,n etc, at all
Again, the Douglas Democrats, as before stated,
based their opposition to the enate bill mainly upon
the ground OF the non.submisson of the whole Con
situation to the people. What other feature then
bill rather than the Senate BILL to the support of the
English branch Of the Douglas Democrats2 Surely
not that feature which proposes to admit Kansas un-
der the Lecouipton Constitution, upon the people, at
the approaching August election, giving a majority
for g proposition accepted Y but H. on the contrary,
they should give majority for proposition re-
jeeted, proposes to keep them out indefinitely?
But, sir, as 70 the construction which the English
branch Of the Douglas Democrats place on this bill
eere not left conference alone, The naked and
unqualified admission Of Kansas under the Leeomp
ton Constitution said Mir. English in presenting
the conference report to the House, he could not
vote for Y that, before Kansas is admitted, her
people ought to ratfY, or at least have fair oppor.
funty to vote upon the Constitution under which it
is proposed to admit her = that " lie would make
reasonable concessions provided the substance be
secured which is the making Of the Constitution, at
early day, conform to the public will or at least
that the privilege of so making it ne secured to the
people beyond all question: 1t would puzzle human
| ingenuity to discover any other meaning in these
words than that Mr. English considered the confer.
ence bill as, in effect, submitting the whole Constitu
tion to the people for acceptance or rejection, Would
Mr.. English, any other advocate OF the BILL have
voted for an amendment declaring it was nota sub.
mssionS apprehend not Mr. GrOesbeek and Mr.,
Cox, Of the wing of the Douglas party and Mr.
| Gilmer, of the Southern Americans, said they re-
garded it, in effect, submission All the opposition
| say that ii is virtual submission. Other distn.
guished members Of the committee, it is true, say
that there is no submission OF the Constitution to
| vote Of the people, The members Of the committee
disagree. We are therefore free to place our own
construction upon the bill. To my mind it is O
virtual submission of the Constitution back to the
people for acceptance or rejection, which view
think have shown to be correct
The most plausible argument in favor of the con
ference bill, which have heard or seen, is that
Kansas, BY rejecting the proposition in the confer
enee bill, should be kept out Of the Union still i
she had been unwilling to accept our proposition il
the Senate BILL she would in that event. also, havI