Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-01-29

Of new States was given by the Cossti-
tuition 10 the sovereign people Of the
sovereign States, to whom belonged the
material out Of which the new fabric OF
government was 10 be built. Had Da-
kota presented here case complying
with the conditions thus implied?
Dir. Butler accepted the invitation
extended by Mr.. Harrison. and would
stand on plane higher than
party politics. lie would appeal
to the law, and IL the law did
not support him he would give up the
contest. He would first admit that
Dakota had the essentials for her adj
mission as State, AID when she should
present herself in an orderly and con-
stitutional manner before Congress, he
(Mr. Butler) would be prepared TO well
come into the Union her enterprising
population. Mr.. Butler then quoted
from the ordinance oflTST to prove that
the Territories were to be admitted under
the supervision Of Congress, and quoted
from the treaty Of 1903 to show that
such admission must be in accordance
with the Constitution Of the United
States. Mr.. Butler then proceeded to
argue that Territories had no right to
divide themselves up at their ewn plea
sure and do as Dakota had done. He
differed with Mr.. Harrison as TO the
effect of many Of the precedents cited
by that Senator in support Of his posi-
ton. While so differing, however. he
did not even admit that the precedents
we're binding on Congress except in so
far as they appealed to the Judgment
and reason of Congress, for there could
hardly be found case Of the overturning
Of social order that could not find the
same precedent in its support. AS to
the admission Of Tennessee, Kentucky,
and Maine, these had been carved out
of territory belonging to North Caro-
lima, Virginia, and Massachusetts,, three
Of the original thirteen States, and I'M
der the Constitution the consent Of the
Legislatures Of those States was all that
was necessary, and was taken as tanta-
mount to an enabling Of the cases. In
the cases Of Arkansas and Michigan
two political Titans-slavery and
aDti-slayery-were approaching each
other by conyerging lines. Michigan
represented one and Arkansas the
other. Both were taken into the
Union, in, as Mr.. Butler insisted, an
unconstitutional manner.
Those cases were cases Of compro.
mise-attempts to temporize with an
impending irrepressible conflict. 1t
would have been better for the country
if the issue had been at that time met
and settled than to have postponed it to
a time thirty years later, when the
power and capacity Of the sections to
struggle with each other had so largely
increased. Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin,
and Nevada, Mr.. Butler said, had
come into the Union under enabling
acts. Slavery was now dead. The
people Of the Union were becoming
more and more homogeneous. Time
was smoothing down the asperites that
came Of the conflict. We were hap
PLY at peace. Our Territories were
being occupied by intelligent and hardy
pioneers. Why, then, do we part from
safe, time-honored constitutional rules
for the admission Of new members into
the family Of States2 Of twenty-five
States admitted into the Union but six
had come in in this irregular manner, and
those under peculiar circumstances. Was
there pressing political exigency Turk
ing behind this movement which i'm
PEELED it forward with almost unseemly
zeal9 Was there a purpose to hasten
proceedings, lest a change might come
which might change the political CON-
plexion Of the representatives sent to
the national legislature Mr.. Butler
could not disabuse his mind Of such
suspicion, and that a snap,judgment
would be rendered if we refused to
ratify the present movement. He in-
sisted that the action Of South Dakota
had been ultra rires and void; besides,
he had received limitations of fraud in
the proceedings taken there Of crimina.
ton, recrimination; and ringism. Much
division of opinion prevailed in the
Territory as to division on the line Of
the 46th parallel. Why not have
fair hearing on all the questions in
volved, so that when Congress should
meet again it should have material for
intelligent action? Mr.. Butler particu-
larly disclaiined any hostility to the peo-
pie of Dakota. There was nothing
in the range Of his constitutional duty
that he would not be willing to do for
their happiness and prosperity. If the
Territory were as largely Democratic |
as it was now Republican he would feel |
constrained under the conditions now |
presented to oppose its admission till !
the constitutional method was adopted. |
The worst enemies the Territory had,
Mr.. Butler said, were self-seek- |
ing politicians, who employed vul-
gar abuse through the channels
of disreputable newspapers. He
knew Mr.. Edgerton personally, having
served with him in the Senate, and he
bore testimony to his high character, |
but be regretted that he could not vote
for his admission from Dakota on the case
now presented. There was no one out
side of Mr.. Buffers party friends that
he would more willingly have voted for.
The other gentleman he did not
know, but had heard high enco.
miums Of him. Mr. Butler could
hardly conceive that any personal dis
courtesy had been meant by railroading
through the Committee on Territories
IF an adverse report on the resolutions
offered by Mr.. Vest and himself rela-
ting to Dakota. They had been adj
yersely passed upon at the very first
meeting Of the committee after their
reference by the Senate, without notice
Or opportunity, Mr.. Butler said, to him
10 be present at their consideration.
lie inquired whether this haste was be-
,ause of q fear that il full considera-
ion had been given to those reso-
utions the weakness Of the case
low made for Dakota would be