Class P' g^r Book^3jL__ f SFEECII / / / HON. WILSON REILLY, OF PENNSYLTANIA., . or rATOB or mm ADMISSION OF KANSAS THE LECOMPTON CONSTITUTION. IK THB HOUSE OF EEPRESENTATIYSB, M ABOH W, HIM WASHINGTON: PRIHTED BT LEMUEI, TOTTB&S. 1868. SPEECH HON. W. REILLY. OF PENNSYLVANIA, CI VATOE Off THE ADMISSION OF KANSAS. THE LECOMPTON CONSTITUTION. SBLITHKaD Ur TUB HOUSE OF BEPBBSENTATIYBa. IDlECH tQ^ US8. The HoaM being; in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union — Mr, EEILLY said: Mr. CuAiRMAT* : T hare, up to this hour, refrained from a public expres- Bion cf my views on tho Kansas question, in tho hope that some fair and honorable compromise would be effected which would settle it in a way satisfactory to all parties. I begin to fear that my hope will prove a false one ; and as I will shortly be called upon to record my vote for or against tho admission of Kansas, under tho Lecomptou constitution, it is but proper that I should make known to my constituents and my country the reasons which induce me to vote as I shall when the time arrives for me to givd that vote. I confess, sir, that this question has given me more anxiety thSn all others to whicli I have had my attention called, or on which it has been my duty to vote since 1 took my seat as a member of this House. Indeed 1 consider it a question of more moment, and fraught wilh more of good or evil to tlie country, than any other ever presented for the consideration of Congress since the formation of ou; Gov. rnracnt. It cei-fainly detnanda an exercise of the best judgm.nt, and must appeal to the patiiotism of overy true Ajnerican citizen. Wc n::iy, perhaps, in a fow days decide the fate of this Republic. Uow careful, t.i;i'n. ought W3 to be of our" words how sure that wy do no act which will causo us regiet in the future ! Tiiis subject has not occujiied the mines and engaged the attention of those in authority alone; it has been an 1 is yet being discussed at almost every fireside in our land. It has been, a.nl is now, a fruitful theme for all classes of our citizens. T'jc statesman aid the politician ; the minis- ter, thu merchant and the riechanic; the farraor, the laborer, and th« lawyer, have all fdt, and still feci, a deep solicitude for its rightful solu- tion and peaceful seltloiheut. They fear, and perhaps not without just cause, that, if not settlnd now, it may for years to co'me, continue and inureasd the jealousy and bittexuas* which uow exist between our brethrea of thci North and South, acrl are, therefore, anxiously directing their atten- tion and hope* to Congress ibr a speedj and amicable terrainatiou of the agitation and excitement which this vexed and dangerous question has produced throughout our country, po that peace and harmony may once more prevail among our people, and the Union stand, as it has in time past, a monument to perpetuate the fame of those whoso wisdom planned it, as also the pride and boast of the nation. How shall we meet the expectations of our fo!lr>w-citizens? How shall we drive from our political horizon the clouds -wi. i lower o'er our house^ and cause the sunshine of peace and happiness to enter and keep pos- session of every dwelling in our once thrice happy land ! We cannot do it by engendering and encouraging strife and contention between one portion and another of our people. We cannot do it by calling each other harsh names and using opprobrious epithets ; by stigmatizing as base, mean, and vile, all those who may hokl a certain class of human beings in servitude. We cai not do it by condemning in harsh, unmeasured terras of abuse those who may honestly think that the institution of slavery is wrong. No, sir, this will not heal the wound inflicted upon our country by the indiscretion of some and the madness of others. This will only tend to widen the breach, already too wide, between our fellow-citizens of the North and the South. The circumstances in which we are placed demand calm, sensible action, and unyielding devotion to the interests and wel- fare of the great people whose representatives and servants wo are. Mr. Chairman, in performing the duty which I undertook to discharge,^ I shall not detain the House by an elaborate or lengthy argument to provo that Kansas ought to be admitted into the Union under the Lecorapton con- stitution. Nor is it my purpose t) go into a history of the settlement of Kansas, to show that a portion of the people now there wont therewith th« intention of laaking it a slave State, and another portion io make it a free State. In my judgment, the citizens of this free country have a perfect right to settle on any of the unappropriated territory of the United States;, and, if the dicision of the highest judicial tribunal of the nation is to be taken as the law, they have a right to take their slaves with them, and, if they can, even establish slavery as one of their domestic institutions. Nor •will I pretend to show that the citizens of the North or of the South hare not the right to appropriate money for the purpose of sending persons into a Territory to make it either a free or a slave State, provided such persons, after they have arrived in the Territory, set about the accomplish- ment of their work in a peaceful and orderly manner, and in obedience to the Constitution of the United States. This part of the present con- troversy I shall hand over to others to discuss, if they feel inclined to do 80, and shall proceed to state a few facts, as I understand them, and tho eonclusipns T have arrived at upon those facts. In the year 1854 an act of Congress was passed organizing the Terri- tory of Kansas. A Governor and other officers for the Territory wero appointed by the President then in power. In 1857 a Legislature was elected, and convened at Lecompton. Divers laws were pafised by thi» Legislature, among them one calling a convention to frame a constitution preparatory to the admission of Kansas into the Union as a State. This convention met at Lecompton, framed a constitution, and submitted it to a Toto of the people. There are four questions arising out of this et/ite of f«et« to which I vrill direct the attention of the •ommitt«« for a short Uta«. First. Was the Legislature vrhieli passed the act calling a convention to frame a constitution a legally electe*! body! Second. Was the convention which framed the Lecompton constitution a legally elected body ? Third. Was that convention bound by law, precedent, or otherwise, to enbrnit the constitution framed by it to a vote of the people for ratification or rejection ? Fourth. If Kansas shall be admitted into the Union, will the people of that State have a right to alter, amend, or abolish the Lecomption consti- tution in any other manner or at any other time than that prescribed in that constitution ? In answering the first of these questions, it seems to me that I need do Tery little mo'-e than read one or two extracts from the inaugural address of Governor WalkfT to the })eople of Kansas. I presume these will bo considered good authority by those who rely with so much confidence Hipon Lis statements. The extracts from the inaugural are as follows : " Under our practice, the preliminary net of framing a State constitution ia uni- formly performed through tlie instrumentality of a convention of delegates chosea by the people themselves. That convention is now about to be elected by you under the call of the Teriito-ial Legislature, created and still recot^ni^cd by the authority of Conifrcs8, and clothed by it, in the comprehensive language of the organic law, with full power to make such an enactment, The Territorial Legislature, then, in aesembliiig this convention, were fully sustained by the act of Congress, and the authority of the convention is distinctly recognised in my instructions from the President of the United States. Those who oppose this course cannot aver the alleged irregularitv of the Territorial Legislature, whose laws in town and city elec- tions, in corporate franchises, and on all other subjects but slavery, they acknowledge by thei:- votes and acquiescence. If that Legislature was invalid, then are we without law or order in Kansas — without town, city or county organizations; all legal and Jndieiiil traosactions are void, all titles null, and anarchy reigaa throughout our bordei-s." Again : " But it is said that the convention is not legally called, and that the election will Bot be freely and fairly conducted. The Territo- >! Legislature is the power or- dained for this purpose by tlic Congress of the L led States; and, in opposing it, you rcMst tlie authority of the FcdcW Governme.t. That Legislature was called .into being by the Congress of }8')i, and is recogni.-od in the very latest congressional legislation. It is recognised b/ the present Chief Magistrate of tlie Union, just «ho3en by the American people, and matiy of iti acts are now in operation here by ani versa! assent. As the Governor of the Territory of Kansa.«, I must su|>port the laws and the Constitution; and I have no other alternative under my oath but to see that all constitutional lav/sarc fully and fairly e.vecuted." The positiou here talcen by Governor Walker cannot, iti my opinion, be overthrown. But, sir, both parties in Kansas, have, by their acts, ad- mitted tliat L'.'gisl.'dure to have been a legally con-^tituted bo>ly, and tho act i)assed by it, calling a conveution, to be a biuding statute. Tlie pro- slavery party have admitted it by voting /or the constitution framed at Lecompton by the convention called into being by virtue of that act; and the free-State party admitted it by voting against that constitution on the 4th of January last. For, if the Legislature which called the convention Lad no legal e.^istence, it had no legal authority to pass any Ihw ; and it would foUow, of course, that the act passed calling a convention was without force and void, and the convention which convened in pursuance of its provisions had no legal existence, and all its acta were simply and absolutely void. Will any gentleman on the other iside say that tho free- 6 State party, with Governor Stanton nt lluir bead, would act fio unwisely a* to have an extra session of the Legislature called for the purpose alone of passing an act submitting the Lecompton constitution to a vote of the people for ratification or rejection, if that constitution was a void instru- ment, as it certainly would be if the Legislature which passed the acfc calling the convention had no legal authority to pass such an act! It will not, I presume, be denied that the extra session of the Legiblature wan callec". at the instance of those who opposed the Lecompton constitution; and what was it called for, if the act which called the convention was an act passed by a body witliout legal existence or authority ? It seems to me, therefore, Mr. Chairman, that the parties in Kansas are estopped by their own acts from denying that the Legislntuie, which passed the act referred to, was a legally elected body, and if it was so, the laws passed by that legislature, not conflicting with the Constitution of tho United States, were valid and binding. The second question, to an examination of which I will direct the at- tention of members, is, whether the Lccom];ton convention was a legally elected body, and if so, is the constitution framed by it a legal instrument? It is said that the convention was not a legally constituted body, and the constitution framed by it a void instrument for two reasons: First, because a number of the counties of the Territory were not represented in the convention, and could not be represented for the reason that the quali- fied citizens of those counties were not regist'^red, and consequently could not vote for delegates to the convention ; and, second Ij-, because the dele- gates who did assemble in that convention were not legally elected. Let us inquire whether or not these two positions are correct; and if they are correct, how the constitution framed at Lecompton would bo aflfectcd by them. By the nineteenth section of the territorial act organizing the counties therein, there were created thirty-seven counties. Three of these counties lie on the extreme western frontier, and are said to have no population to be either represented or disfranchised. These tliree counties aro Wash- ington, Clay, and Dickinson, It may be said that this assertion that these counties are without population is an assumption without proof to sustain it. I would inquire, where is the evidence that there is a single citizen residing in either of these counties qualified to vote ? At a time when, of all others, they would have voted, there was not a single vote given. On the 4th day of January last, when the constitution was submitted to a vote of the people, in the form in v.-hich the free-State party desired it to bo submitted, not a single vote was cast in either or all these three counties. Where were the qualified citizens at so impoitant an election as this; an election at which, if there were any voters tliere, they cculd have voted and shown their opposition to the Lecompton cotistitulion? The fair and legitimate inference — at least, until it is proved to be otherwise — is, that these counties v.'ere without population. This would leave thirty- four counties to be represented in the Lecompton convention, Tlicso wero arranged by law into election districts for the election of delegates to tho convention, as follows : Ist district, Doniphan county. 2d " Brown and Nemeha coontiea. 3d " Atchison county. 4th " Leavenworth county. 6th " Jefferson county. ien it exlonda to tho- people the right of suffrage, but it cannot compel the performance of that dutv. ^Throughout our whole Union, however, and wherever free government provaila, those who abstain from the exercise of the right of suffrage authorize those who do vote to act for them in that contingencj', and the absentees are as much bound under the law and constitution, where there is no fraud or violence, by the act of tho majority of those who do vote, as if all had participated in the election. Otherwise, OB voting must be voluntary, self-government would be impracticable, and monarchy or despotism would remain as the only alternative." I have not read this portion of the Governor's inaugural to show that the citizens of Kansas had a right to annul, by their votes oq the 4th of January last, the constitution which had been adopted by a vote of the citizens on the 21st of December preceding. I only quote from this authority to establish the rule which I have laid down, because whatever the Governor says now is taken by rny friends on the other side of the House as verity itself. If this rule be a correct one, does not a fair pro- flumption arise, from the conduct of the citizens of these seven counties in not voting against the constitution on the 4th day of January, that they either approved it, or that they would not have voted for delegates if they could have done so! To my mind it is clear that, if they approved the constitution, or if they obstinately refused to vote when they had the opportunity, they would have refused to vote for delegates if they had been. permitted so to do, and in either case they are in law without remedy, and the Lecompton constitution is to be taken as an expression of their will. Let us inquire next to what number of delegates the remaining six of the disfranchised counties would have been entitled in the convention if they could have elected delegates? The convention, by legislative enact- ment, was to consist of sixty delegates. The number of voters registered in the counties represented in the convention was 9,251. Add to this number the whole number of votes given in these six counties on the 4th of January last, which was 1,225, and you have as the total, 10,47G. This- number divided by GO, (the number of delegates of which the convention was to be composed,) and it will show how many voters it required to elect a delegate. ItAvill be seen that it required 174. If we divide 1,225 (the number of votes polled in the six counties referred to) by 174, it will show that the six ounties were entitled to just seven delegates. Now, sir, taking it as granted that all those counties would have elected free-State d'.-lpgates, there would have been just that number of free-Slato delegates in. the convention. But, sir, let us go further, and admit, for the sake of tlie argument, that the thirteen counties said to be disfranchised, (not taking in the account th<- three where nobody lived,) had been entitled to all the delegates, except those who took their seats as members of the- convention, they would have bet-n entitled to only sixteen delegates; for it will be observed that forty-four delegates from the other districts signed the constitution. What could have been done by these sixteen delegates?^ Could they have controlled the action of the convention? Would not tho constitution have come from the convention pix-cisely as it did? It is but iiiir to presume that it would. Tho position assumed by liome, that the delej^tea who did aaaeiuble in- convention at Leople, yet I have no power to dictat« tL« proaeediujii of that body." IS O^orernor Walker was riglit He had not, nor had any other human being outside of the convention, the power to dictate what its procaodings should be. Was there any law requiring the convention to submit the constitution to a vote of the people? If there w;vs, I have failed in my search for it. The territoriHl act, under the authority of which the convention assem- bled, is in the words following: "Tlie delegates thus elected [to the convention] shall assemble in convent! oa at the capital of waid Territory on the firet Monday of September next, and shall proceed to form its constitution and State governiient, which shall be republican in its from, for admission into the Union, on aa equal footing with the original States in all re- epeots wliateyer, by the name of the State of Kansas." It will be observed that there is not one word, either in the organic law organizing the Territory, or in the territorial act calling the convention, requiring a submission of the constitution to a vote of the people, before it should become binding on them as the fundamental law of the State. By what law, then, was its submission required? By no law v/hatcver. Indeed, it is but fair to argue that tlic people of Kansas were opposed to the submissifjn, for the reason tliat the act which was passed, calling the convention, was vetoed by the Governor because it did not require the con- vention to submit the constit'Uion to a vote of the people, and it was after- wards pas9eion cornea ia conflict with another provision in the same instrument, by which a certaia right is reserved to and declared to ba inalienable and indefeasible in the people, the former must give away to the latter. And now, Mr. Chairman, I have discharged the duty I undertook, in the best manner I could. I will record my vote for the admission of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution, because I believe the laws of my coun- try, which I am bound to support, demand it of me. The consequences to myself I have nothing to do with. I am in the hands of those who hon- ored me with a seat on this floor. They are honest, intelligent, and generous, and I know they will do me the justice to believe that my opinions are honestly entertained. If they think I have misrepresented them, and that there is another more worthy or capable to represent them, here, I believe in tl eir right to send that person in my place. I will not com[)lain. When I have done my duty in obedience to the dictates of my judgment, and, as I believe, in accordance with the lawsof my country, I shall be contented, whatever may be my fate in the future. I would now wil- lingly sacrifice my position, and all my political prospects in the future, whatever they may be, if, by so doing, I could secure peace and quiet among our people. I love my native land; I am proud of the past history and present greatness of my country ; and I confidently look forward to the day when all nations shall acknowledge our superiority, and when, through the benign influence of our free institutions, the kingdoms of the earth shall be regenerated, and the whole human race disenthralled. Let ua cherish these institutions. Let ua environ our Union with an impeno- trabla wall of strong arms and stout hearts. That Union ? Who does not love it? The grandest edifice the world has ever beheld — erect<;d by the ■wisdom of men of whom the world was not worthy — cemented by the, blood of the purest patriots who ever lived in the tide of time, and b^ queathed by them to us a priceless herit^ige — it haa resisted all the rud© ahooka and angry wavea which Imve heieiofore threatened its deatruction, and Bhall stand firm apon il« base in all time to come, if we, and those coming after ue.ehall fjuard it with but half the vigilan(5e exercised by thoee ■who Bpent their energies and lives to secure its perpetuity. I earnestly be- seech my brethren of the North and of the South to act, now, wlu-n our country is perhaps in its greatest peril, not as the Representatives of a di- vided and distracted people, but as the Representatives of the whole coun- try. Let us abandon all sectional feeling, and rally around the btandard of our common country. Let us keep our tim(»-honored flag waving gallantly over our heads, no star obliterated, no stripe erased, until, as State after State shall be admitted into our Union, arid star after star be a(ide