Speech of Hon. William A. Howard of Michigan

              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