Pomeroy weekly telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy, Meigs County, Ohio) 1860-1866, 1860-10-26

the recess was to allow time to ascertain
| the views of Democrats holding infuen.
| tial places in the councils of the country
When the reassemblage took place
and the subject of the disposition of the
Constitution, intermediary. between the
Convention and Congress came up, il
was found that the body was divided
into three parties: one in favor of send
! ing the instrument direct to Congress-
the second in favor of submission of the
whole instrument to the people; and the
third in favor of submitting the slavery
clause only. .e-.-
It was understood that Governor Wal
ker and Secretary Stanton were in favor
of an entire submission. It was very
naturally supposed that they represen-
ted the views or wishes of the Admins
tration. The partial submission party
was led by General Calhoun, the Presi-
dent of the Convention, reported to be a
favorite of Mr.. Douglas, possessed Of
his confidence and in correspondence
with him, and the scheme was generally
known as the douglas plan
After protracted and acrimonious
debate, the question was put on the 5th
or 9th of November, and the non-sub-
missionists triumphed by one or two
votes. By extraordinary exertions a re
consideration was had On the 7th, the
day of final adjournment, and the plan
of submission, through which the Con
stitution went before Congress, was car
ried by bare majority.
On the evening Of the day on which
the non-submissionists were victorious,
Gen. Calhoun requested me to endeavor
to secure for his side member, since
dead, Mr.. Swift of Jefferson county, who
had previously voted against submission,
and over whom it was supposed I could
exercise some influence. In the course
of our conversation, Gen. Calhoun in
formed me that he had in his possession
a letter from Mr. Douglas, either sug-
gesting the project of partial submission n,
or giving assurance of his support to it,
[ do not recollect which,
Since the death of Gen. Calhoun,
have had several conversations with Mr.
Oliver Diefendorf, his brother-in- law
who maintained with him and his family
all the intimacy such a relationship be-
speaks-on the subject of that letter,
and upon every occasion Mr.. Diefendort
referred to the letter as being among the
papers Of the deceased, in the possession
of his family. l have more than once
expressed my surprise that man of
spirit, as | supposed Gen. Calhoun to
have been, should have silently sub
mitted to the gross indignity put upon
him in the Senate by DIR. Douglas, and
Mr. -Diefeqdorf has ehallanaeda :;
spect for the deceased by answering that
very few knew the nice sense of honor
he had; that he. considered the CORES
pondence private, and would have sub
mitted to anything rather than violate
that privacy. sl E7so- t
If formal investigation of this affair
should be determined upon, permit me
to suggest that you address every mem
Der of the Convention, and particularly
those who voted with Gen. Calhoun On
the submission issue. 4n t-s.9oI
Iwould also indicate, for. your con-
sideration, the propriety of communica.
ting with Col. Andrew J. .Isacks of this
city. Though not member of the
Convention, he was present during the
whole struggle ON submissions; he zeal
ously labored with Gen. Calhounfor the
form adopted, and, like him, was an ar
dent friend of Mr.. Douglas, putatiyely
representing his views.
Having thus laid before you all the
knowledge I have in this connection, ]
remain, 1ah ,a1 hatHi ss# J-s- ;i
-gHgsI #5i Your obedient servant, yzg
g1e aergzeszs< e.15 DANIEL. SCULLY.ai
Lewis Burnes; Esq; President of the
Democratic Associat1on.of IeavenwortA.
;-.r-613.t s&t 3-4--s sasal3s5s=G aseeI3 :
.~a5tld REPLY OF WIN. g. MATTHIAS. sfaE
| H' zH'' LEAvESwoRTH Cry, X. T., -
'2Ha7=sa 't.'s'i'A@. 9iA' Sept. %, 1860 .
Col: LEWIS BURNEs- Dear Sir: In
reply to your letter Of the 25th inst, ]
can state that I was well acquainted with
General J ohm Calhoun, President of the
Lecompton Constitutional Convention,
in his lifetime, and we were warm per
sonal and political friends We stood
together in the Lecompton- struggle.
have been citizen Of Kansas for nearly
six years and having been a member OF
three several Legislatures in Kansas,
am somewhat converse Mt with the his
tory of politics therein. '' 80 @
Some time before the. Lecompton
Constitutional Convention assembled at
its adjourned session, Mr.. Calhoun
showed me letter, which he told me
had been written by Hon. Stephen A
Douglas, and sent to him for the pur-
pose of influencing members of the Con-
vention to adopt particular form Of
submitting the Constitution. In that
letter, Mr.. Douglas advised plan Of
submission, which plan was finally
adopted by the Convention. And il
was further stated by Mr.. Douglas, ir
the letter before spoken of, that if the
plan which he (Douglas) had advised
should be approved by the Convention
that he (Douglas) would pledge it:
passage through Congress. And, il
! order that what little [ could do towart
bringing this plan about might be done
iIr. Calhoun invited my cooperation
but I did not go to Lecompton during
the sitting of the Convention.
After the Lecompton Constitution
had been framed, the Democratic party
assembled in Convention at Lecomptol
for the purpose Of nominating a Stat
ticket. During the sitting of that Con
vention, General Calhoun, desiring me
against my wishes, to accept the nomina
tion for Lieutenant Governor, and, seem
ing to suppose that my indisposition tt
accept arose from doubts as to ultimate
success, frequently and emphatically as
sured me that Mr. Douglas would stant
by the Constitution in Congress, ane
would in no event abandon Gus ~