HonorWilliamHowardpg01_DP0012824 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 1 of 8 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
KANSAS-LECOMPTON CONSTITUTION. SPEECH OF HON. WILLIAM A. HOWARD, OF MICHIGAN, IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MARCH 23, 1858. The'House being in the Committee of the Whole on the Ktiite of the Union- Mr. HOWARD said: Mr. Chairman: I have long been of the opinion that speech-making was one of the evils in this body. I believe that more attention to the details of business, and less to speech-making, would greatly subserve the public interests. Acting on this principle, I served through the three sessions of the Thirty-Fourth Congress without occupying any portion of the time of the House except for explanation, and then never for personal explanation. If I consulted my own feelings I should still pursue that policy; but, Mr. Chairman, I need scarcely say that a question is pending before this House which demands the most careful consideration and the most prudent action at our hands. The fact that certain documents purporting to be a constitution for Kansas, and asking admission for her into this Union, have been recently presented to Congress, has disclosed a division of the Democratic party on this floor, and elsewhere, which was not anticipated; and I cannot but conclude that there must be some imperative reason controlling this division, and throwing the supporters of the present Administration into a minority in this House. Under ordinary circumstances, it might have been expected that Kansas, applying here for admission as a State under a constitution with or without slavery, would have received an affirmative response by a fair majority vote of this body; and although I need not say what would have been my course on such a supposition, yet it is but fair to acknowledge, what I believe to be the truth, that every northern Democrat in this Hall would have stood honestly pledged to support such a measure, and his constituents would have expected him to vote for it; and I have no doubt that each of them would have redeemed his pledge in good faith. Politically, they are my enemies: and I am theirs. I have never asked nor received po litical favors at their hands; nor do I 71010 ask or expect such from them. I make this statement in justice to them, and especially as due to the Democracy of my State, who are without a Representative on this floor. Open dealing demands that they should not be misapprehended or misstated with my consent. It has been aptly said that one portion of the Democratic party in this contest stands upon the "Cincinnati platform," but a much larger portion stand upon the " Cincinnati Directory." Candor requires me to say much the largest portion of the Democracy of my State stands upon the platform. Now, sir, without further preliminary, I pro pose to examine the only two questions in the premises which ought to be settled in order to determine our proper course in relation to this subject. These two questions are: 1. Is Kansas properly here asking for admission into the Union under the Lccornpton constitution ? 2. Does this Lecompton constitution embody the fairly expressed, unbiased will of a majority of the legal voters of Kansas? If these two questions can bs satisfactorily answered in the affirmative, then there should be an end of all strife. But if the propositions implied in these questions be not true, then there is an end of all power and of all right on the part of Congress in the premises. Nothing can be clearer than that the admission of a State into the Union is in the nature of a contract, the parties to which are the United States and the inchoate State. There can be no contract without competent contracting parties; and if Kansas be not legally here to ask for or consent to the proposed admission, then such admission on our part would be not only intervention, but oppression. Sir, I deny that Kansas is properly here at al! asking admission. The Lecompton contrivance, which is the only ground or pretense on which such admission is now urged, is the offspring of the frauds and trickery of a small number of
Object Description
Description
Title | HonorWilliamHowardpg01_DP0012824 |
Rights | All rights to images are held by the respective holding institution. This image is posted publicly for non-profit educational uses, excluding printed publication. For permission to reproduce images and/or for copyright information contact Special Collections and University Archives, University of Central Florida Libraries, (407)823-2576. http//library.ucf.edu/SpecialCollections/ |
Tag | DP0012824 |
Digital Reproduction Specifications | Jpeg2000 images were derived from 400 dpi tiffs scanned on a Copibook scanner. |
Transcript | KANSAS-LECOMPTON CONSTITUTION. SPEECH OF HON. WILLIAM A. HOWARD, OF MICHIGAN, IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MARCH 23, 1858. The'House being in the Committee of the Whole on the Ktiite of the Union- Mr. HOWARD said: Mr. Chairman: I have long been of the opinion that speech-making was one of the evils in this body. I believe that more attention to the details of business, and less to speech-making, would greatly subserve the public interests. Acting on this principle, I served through the three sessions of the Thirty-Fourth Congress without occupying any portion of the time of the House except for explanation, and then never for personal explanation. If I consulted my own feelings I should still pursue that policy; but, Mr. Chairman, I need scarcely say that a question is pending before this House which demands the most careful consideration and the most prudent action at our hands. The fact that certain documents purporting to be a constitution for Kansas, and asking admission for her into this Union, have been recently presented to Congress, has disclosed a division of the Democratic party on this floor, and elsewhere, which was not anticipated; and I cannot but conclude that there must be some imperative reason controlling this division, and throwing the supporters of the present Administration into a minority in this House. Under ordinary circumstances, it might have been expected that Kansas, applying here for admission as a State under a constitution with or without slavery, would have received an affirmative response by a fair majority vote of this body; and although I need not say what would have been my course on such a supposition, yet it is but fair to acknowledge, what I believe to be the truth, that every northern Democrat in this Hall would have stood honestly pledged to support such a measure, and his constituents would have expected him to vote for it; and I have no doubt that each of them would have redeemed his pledge in good faith. Politically, they are my enemies: and I am theirs. I have never asked nor received po litical favors at their hands; nor do I 71010 ask or expect such from them. I make this statement in justice to them, and especially as due to the Democracy of my State, who are without a Representative on this floor. Open dealing demands that they should not be misapprehended or misstated with my consent. It has been aptly said that one portion of the Democratic party in this contest stands upon the "Cincinnati platform," but a much larger portion stand upon the " Cincinnati Directory." Candor requires me to say much the largest portion of the Democracy of my State stands upon the platform. Now, sir, without further preliminary, I pro pose to examine the only two questions in the premises which ought to be settled in order to determine our proper course in relation to this subject. These two questions are: 1. Is Kansas properly here asking for admission into the Union under the Lccornpton constitution ? 2. Does this Lecompton constitution embody the fairly expressed, unbiased will of a majority of the legal voters of Kansas? If these two questions can bs satisfactorily answered in the affirmative, then there should be an end of all strife. But if the propositions implied in these questions be not true, then there is an end of all power and of all right on the part of Congress in the premises. Nothing can be clearer than that the admission of a State into the Union is in the nature of a contract, the parties to which are the United States and the inchoate State. There can be no contract without competent contracting parties; and if Kansas be not legally here to ask for or consent to the proposed admission, then such admission on our part would be not only intervention, but oppression. Sir, I deny that Kansas is properly here at al! asking admission. The Lecompton contrivance, which is the only ground or pretense on which such admission is now urged, is the offspring of the frauds and trickery of a small number of |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for HonorWilliamHowardpg01_DP0012824