New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-10-23
TEX LRCompTON CONSTITUTION.


The BreckiDridge Association OF Leayenworth,
Kansns, have brought charge against Mr..
Douglas that he was in fact the real author Of the
provision in the LecOmptOn Constitution restrict
ing to the Slavery clauses alone the submission TO
the people, on which ground he aftefward opposed
it, and that it was upon bis suggestion and advice
that Calhoun acted in that matter.
To support this charge they publish the letters Of
surdIy members Of the Lecompton Convention,
and Others, in reply to circular asking infOrma-
ton on the subject. 1t will be recolle;ted that
Calhoun, who brought forward and carried the
partial submission icheme had been elected to the
Convention on the strength Of express pledges ID
support the submission of The Constitution to
popular vote and that he was known as political
friend of Mr.. Douglas.
Ten persons replied TO this circular, Of whom the
most spec fc in his statements is Green Il. Red
mon. He AYERS that, duting the tendency OF the
question before the Convention, Calhoun showed
him Letter addressed to Calhoun by Douglas, sug-
eeetipp aud urging the scheme of partial submis'
sion, which Calhoun proposed, and the Convention
adopted, sid pledgDg himself to carry the COnstitu.
ton 10 that shape through Congress, and that upon
the strength of this letter he Redmou, though
originally opposed to any submission at all, was
inouced to vote for the partial submission clause,
which was carried by one majority. Redmon, who
represents himself ss p'iSate citizen Of ILLINOIS,
claims to be personally acquainted with Mf.
Douglas ard familiar With bis handwriting, having
received great mary documents from him under
ola frank ard he asserts positively that the letter
to Calhoun was 10 the handwriting of Douglas.
VIM. G. Matthias, without pretending to identity
the hand. wIting states that Calhoun showed him
letter of the character above designated, pur-
porting to be from Mr. Douglas. c. K. Morley
states that Calhoun read such letter to him, as
also does Lucien j. Eastin. Others merely certify
to III delstandiog or being told by Calhoun or
Others that there was ,uch letter, and that Doug
lss favored tie partial submission plan. OF the
ten persons who answer, only ono is at present
Douglas man. He states that Calhoun told him
be had Letter from Douglas, but did not Ultimate
that thin letter favored the partial submission plan.
On the o:her hand, Calhoun stated that Douglas
Was of OPP Mon that the Coas Tuition must be
submitted to the people.
As to the present whereabouts of this alleged let
ter Of Douglas, David Scully AYERS that since Cal
b. uns dea'b, he has had Sera conversations With
Calbouns brother.in-law, Mr. Diefepdorf, on the
subjtc OF it, and that the latter always spoke of it
ss being amorg the papers Of the deceased In pos
session Of hs family remaIking that Republication
Of it hsd been prevented by C,lhOun's nice sense
of honor VIM. G.. Matthias alleges haviog seen a
letter from Mrs. Calhoun, in which SHE stated that
she had been offered $4,000 for the letter. bu! hes
itated to part with it for cersin set forth
IN her letter, WI ch Matthias does not think proper
10 repeat. Ofthe twenty -four members Of the Con-
yeItiOu TO whom the circular was addressed, only
seven returned any answers.
In a speech made by Douglas at Milwaukee, he
denies altogether having ever written any such
litter to Calhoun, or ever having the submit
sion clsDse annexed 10 the l. compton Consultation
till it was published ia the newspapers. He ad-
mlts that he nav, perhaps, have written to Cal
boun, though he has no recollection OF it, bat posi-
lively denies that the letter could have contained
any thing Of the kind alleged.
1t certainly is very strange, if any such letter
is pretended ever existed, that nothing has ever
been heard Of It before AS tie Administration at
Washington has been commonly charged with hav-
ing deyised ard transmitted to Calhoun the partial
submission scheme End as if such letter as that
asclbed to Douglas existed and had been freely
read ard shown TO the members of the Convention,
they would not have failed TO have heard Of it,
surely the whole story, if it had any fOuodation in
fact, must have come out long ago. Recollectng
how interruptions these Kansas Democratic poll
tcans were in the matter of election returns it is
easy to imagine that they may have been playing
Of little forgery against Mr.. Douglas.