<^- P 685 583 KANSAS CONTESTED ELECTION. SPEECH I-ION. A. IL STEPHENS, OF GEORGIA DELIVERED IN TFIE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MARCH 11, 1856, On the Resolution from the Committee of Elections asldng for power to send for persons and papers in the Kansas Election case. -S' Mr. STEPHENS said: Mr. Speaker: It is not my desire to prolong this debate, nor do 1 expect to present any new points on the merits of the question before the House. I wisli, and intend only in what I have to say, to en- large upon and enforce some of the points made in the minority report on your table. I wish, too, in what I have to say, to liave the ear of the House rather than the ear of the counti*y ; not that I do not want the country to hear what I say, but my main object is to address myself this morning particu- larly, especially , and emphatically, to the attention of the House and upon the questions before us. These, sir, are grave questions. Tliey are ques- tions involving principles of the first magnitude. They are questions of a judicial as well as political oliaracterof the highest order, far above the small consideration of which of two men shall have a seat asa Delegate here. In deciding them, wc sit not as legislators, but as judges. Our decision upon this resolution, whatever it may be, will be an important precedent in the future history of tills country. Wc should , therefore, not act with- out due deliberation, careful reflection, and a full understanding of the principles involved; and we sh'ould also be stripped, as far as possible, of all party bias and all political prejudice. TJie proposition before us is one oi'an unusual character. It is for this House to exercise one of its extraordinary powers; that is, the power to send for persons and papers in a case before us, sitting as a court judging of the qualifications, election, and return of one who occupies a scat as a territorial Delegate upon this floor. Now, sir, I do not question the power of the House to exer- cise the authority invoked. The gentleman on my right from Pcimsylvania, [Mr. Kunkel,] in his remarks yesterday, spoke as if he thouglit those of us who oppose the resolution now pend- ing denied the power to send for persons and pa- pers in cases of contested elections; and he cited cases in which it has been done. On this point I wish to be distinctly understood; I do not deny the power in a proper case. Though no instance of its exercise has occurred since the act of Con- gress of 1851, regulating the mode of taking tes- timony in cases of contests for seats here; and no case need ever occur, as far e.s I can see, so long as that law remains on the statute-book. Its proi visions are full and ample. But should the case occur where it may be necessary, in order to get proper and competent testimony to establish any fact that the House can legitimately and properly inquire into in such investigations, to send for per- sons and papers, I do not question their pov.-er to do it. What I maintain is, that the power can be rightfully exercised only when it is done to pro- cure testimony which is in itself relevant, perti- nent, competent, and admissible, to prove such facts as the House can properly consider and look into. Nor do I wish to be understood as being inclined in the slightest degree to oppose investi- gation in this case to the fullest extent that can be properly gone into by us. Within these limits, I am in favor of the House taking the widest^ range and greatest latitude of investigation. But is the question before us such a one as would allow a hearing of the testimony sought to be obtained, even if it wei-e at hand.' I think it is not. It is to this point I now speak. What, sir, is the character of the testimony which is asked to be sent for? And what is the object of it i f obtained ? Sift the whole matter — get rid of the rubbish — go through both reports; and docs not the real gisi of this application amount to this: The memorialist wishes witnesses sent for to prove the invalidily of the law of a Terri- tory of the United States, under which a sitting Delegate was elected, on the ground that the members of the Legislative Assembly of that Ter- ritory which pas&H;d it were not properly and legally elected. Is not this a fair statement of the proposition as it now stands before us ■' It was to get this clear view of its merits before the House that I moved, when it was here before, to refer the proposition back to the committee, to have their reasons and grounds for making it re- ported to the House. We now have their reasons; we now know what is their object; and have I not stated it fully and fairly.' 'Then, sir, is the testimony competent if it were here? Mark you; we sit as a court. "SVould it be admissible in tlie trial of any cause in any court — in a criminal case, for instance — to permit a party to offer evidence to impeach the validity of the law under which the accused was arraigned, by showing that the Le- gislature that passed the law was not properly elected and legally constituted ? The vaHdity of a law may be inquired into and judged of by a court, on some grounds which migJit be stated. The constitutionality of a law maybe decided upon — tliatl do not question — but neverupon this ground. The rules governing all courts in passing upon laws and construing statutes, I need not here state. But no court, in judging of the validity of a statute on any of the grounds they take cognizance of, will ever allow an inquiry into the legality of the election of the members of the Legislature that passed it. No case can be found of this character in the whole history of civil jurisprudence. The reason courts of law will not allow such inquiries to be made before them is, that the de-' cision of all such questions properly belongs to another tribunal — to the Houses respectively of tlie law-making power itself; and their decision, when made, is considered as the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, which no othei* court will inquire into. And this House, sitting as a court as it now docs, cannot inquire into any fact invalidating or impeaching the validity of any law either-.of the United States, a State, or Territory, which any other court could not in- quire into. I assert this as a principle that can- not be successfully assailed. 1 call upon gentle- men who occupy a contrary position to show a case, if they can, in this or any other country, where the validity of alawin any court of justice was ever allowed to be impeached by inquiring into the legality of the election of the members of the Legislature that passed it. That is what we are now called upon to do; and that is what I assert we have no right to do. Why, sir, it is a fundamentpl maxim of the English law, laid down by Sir Edward Coke, illustrated by Sir William Blackstone, and enforced by every writer ' «n the subject, both English and American, that it is an inherent right of the High Court of Par- liament — from which, as a model, all our legisla- tive parliamentary bodies have sprung — to settle for itself all questions touching its own organiza- tion; and when such questions are thus settled, they cannot be inquired into elsewhere. What is the question now before us? Under that clause of the Constitution which secures to this House the right and power to judge of the qualifications, elections, and returns of those who may be entitled to hold seats on this floor, we have brought to our consideration the right of the silting Delegate of the Territory of Kansas. Into his qualifications, election, and return, we have full power to go, and to determine all ques- tions pertaining either to his qualifications, his election, or return. But in doing this, we are asked- to take a step further, and to judge not only of his election, -return, and qualifications, but to go into an investigation and judge of the qualifications, elections, and returns of the mem- bers of the Legislative Assembly of Kansas, which passed the law under which it is admitted ! he was elected. I say, sir, according to the prin- [ •iple v/hich I have laid down, no case in the par- liamentary history of England, from whicli all ! our institutions have sprung, or in this country, j can be adduced to justify or warrant it. I beg j leave to call attention to some authority on this ' point. I read'from Sir Edward Coke, (4 Inst., \ p. 15;) in speaking of the High Court of Parlia- 1 ment, he says: I "And as every court of justice hath laws and customs ft>r I its direction, some by the coiniiion law, some by the civil I and common law, some by peculiar laws and customs, &o., I so the High Court of Parliament, suh jn-opriis Icgihus et con- I suctudinihus suhsialit. It is lex nt consuciiflo farliamenti. I "And tliis is t!ie reason that tlie judges ought not to give j any opinion oi" a matter of Parliament, because is not to be I decided by the eommon laws, but secundum legem et con- ! suetudinem parliamciiti ; and so the judges in divers par- j liaments have confessed." I On any matter relating to the constitution, or- i ganization, rights or privileges of the members of ' the House of Lords, the Commons cannot inter- j fere. In like matters, relating to the organization ; of the House of Commons, the Lords cannot intep- I fere. No other court in the kingdom can interfere. The highest court of the realm — the King with the prerogatives of the Crown — cannot interfere. On all these matters each House is a court with full, ample, absolute jurisdiction over the whole subject. And when they are determined by that court, with full and coinpetent jurisdiction over tlie subject-matter, its judgment cannot be inquired into by any other tribunal. Sir Edward Coke says further, on page 50, same volume: " Thus much Iiave we thought good to set down concern- ing knights, citizens, and burgesses ; because much time ^ spent in Parliament concerning llie right of eli!Ctions, &c.j which might be more profitably employed jrro bono jmhlico." This latter remark is not very inapplicable to our condition. But the author goes on: • " Now, to treat more in particular (as it hath been de- sired) of the laws, customs, liberties, and privileges of this cowr/of Parliament, which are the very heart-strings ofttio Commonwealth," * * * " would take tip a whole vohiino of itself. Certain it is, as hath been said, that curia purlia- jxienti suis ■propriis Icgibus subnslit." And he goes on to say that it does not belong to the Justices of England, or the Barons of the exchequer, to judge of any of these matters coming within the jurisdiction ofthis court of Parliament. Now, sir, 1 invite attention to what Sir William Blackstone says on this subject in his Comment- aries, with which all of us ought to be familial. After referring to these remarks of Coke, and affirming them, he says, in vol. I. p. 163: " It will be sufficient to observe that the whole of (he law and custom of Parliament has its original from this ono maxim, 'that whatever matter arises concerning eitlipr House of ParUanient ought to be examined, discussed, awl ' adjudged, in that House to wliich it relat-es, and not clse- • n-hcre.^ Hence, for instance, the Lords will not suffer tins Commons to interfere in settling the election of a Peer of Scotland ; the Commons vfill not allow the Lords to judge of tlio election of a burgess; nor will either House permit the subordinate courts of law to examine the merits of either case." All such matters are to be decided by the [ Houses of Parliament, respectively, not arbitra- ! rily, but according to the usages, customs, ard I precedents in like cases, which constitute the hx iParliammli, or law of Parliament; but when de- 1 cided, whether right or wrong, there is no power j to reverse the decision. Just so, sir, with us; I when this House passes judgments upon tha : qualifications or clcctidii of a member here, it is j final and conclusive. Here the matter is to ba I examined, discussed, and adjudged; and, when i 3 adjudged, it cannot bo inquired into elsewhere. So wilh every legislative body. On this point, I now call the attention of the House to what Mr. Justice Story says upon the same subject in speaking of this clause, in his treatise upon the Constitution of the United States. After quoting j the clause of the Constitution which provides j that each House shall judge of the qualifications, i elections, and returns of its own members, he says, in vol. II, p. 295. " Tlie only possible question on such a subject is as to Vie hadii hi wliieli such a power shall be lodj^ed. If lodged in any other than the le<^islativc body itself , iti^ independence, its purity, and even its existence' and action, may be de- stroyed or put into iuimiftentdanger. No other body but it- self can have the same motives to perpetuate and preserve these attributes ; no oilier body can be so perpetually watch- flil to gnai-d its own rights and privileges from infringement, to pufify and viiulioate its own character, and to presei-ve tlie riglitg and siistain the free choice of its conslitucuts. Jiccoydin^hi, the power has always been lodged in the legisla- tiite hodytij the uniform practice of England and America." If more authority is desired on this point, I refer to Kent's Commentaries, Tucker's, and to all writers on the subject. It is the uniform practice. | of this country, adopted lYom England, to leave [ the adjudication of all questions touching the elec- ! tions and returns of members of legislative bodies ; to those bodies themselves. The principle runs ! through all our State Legislatures. It liesat the | foundation of all our representative institutions. ] It is recognized even in all pur voluntary associa- , tions and conventions, whether civil or ecclesias- j tical. There can be no efficient pohtical legisla- j tive organization without it; and when the legis- 1 lative body, to which the question belongs, has j made its decision, there is no appeal to any other ! power. It is a final judgment rendered. It is so j with the decision of tliis i louse on such questions. It is so with tlie decisions of the Senate on.likc questions. It is so with the State Legislatures, and it should be so in Kansas. If the election of any meijiibers of the Legislature there, eitherof the House or the Council , was illegal , the proper place foran inquiry into it wastherc. Andif any person wishing to contest those elections failed to present tlieir case there before the proper tribunal, they cannot come here to do it. If we inquire now into the legality of those elections for the purpose of disregarding or invalidating the law j^asscd by the Legislature, under which the sitting. Delegate was elected, why may we not inquire into the validity of the law of Congress organizing that terri- torial government, upon the grounds that some of the members of this House v.ho voted for it in the last Congress were not pro]ierly elected.' Or on the ground that some of the Senators who voted for it were cliosen by members of State Legislatures not properly elected.' And, this, too pn the still farther ground that some of the sher- iffs or returning officers in the State elections for members of the Legislature perhaps were not legally elected or qualified.' If you open the door to such an investigation as that now sought, where are we to stop .' Who can see the end of this begmning? Whose vision can take in the wide e-xtunt of that vast region of uncertainty, inse- curity, abounding in hidden unseen dangers and perils, your course may lead to .' I hold, sir, th&t if a law should be passed by the votes of members now upon this floor who may hereafter be turned out because of the illegality of their election, the validity of such law so passed can never be in- quired into either by any court of the land, or even by ourselves, on the ground of its having been so passed. And though a la^v may be passed in a State or Territorial Legislature by the votes of members who may afterwards be turned out, because of the illegality of their elec- tion, yet the validity of such a law can never be questioned in consequence of that fact. But if the principle, now atlvocated for the first time in our history, shall be established, and the prece- dent be followed up, you unhinge all legislation; you bring everything like law amongst us into uncertainty, doubt, »nd confusion; you cut the "heart-strings," as Coke says, of our whole system of Government; you take the first step, and, if it be pursued, that which will prove to be a fatal step towards political and social anarchy. I enter my protest here this day against it. I repeat, sir, these are grave questions. I give you, Mr. Speaker, and the members of the House, as my fellow-judges in this matter, my views of the rules which should govern us in the judgment we are to render in this case. Weigh them an they deserve, and give them such consideration as they merit. , But, the gentleman at my right, [Mr. Kunkel,] who addressed us yesterday, asked, if the allega- tions be true as here made, that a set of usurpers assumed to be the Legislature of the Territory, are we to be bound by that assumption .' I say to him, no. The countenance of any usurpatioa I and the exercise of prerogatives, not duly bclong- { ing to any body of men, even ourselves, is what ( I am agamst. There must be something more I than a bare assumption of legislative authority to* i entitle the acts of any body of men to be recog- nized as emanating from a body clothed with j power to make laws. The law-making power of j this country must rest upon some better showing than bare assumption. It must come into being j in the proper and legally constituted way. This I is well understood in America. We are not by i any means legitimists, in the European sense of j the word; but we recognize that government as ]eo;idmate which springs into existence by the j will of the people, as expressed under the forms : of law.passed by the regularly-constituted author- j Uy of the land. A government so presenting j itself v/e regard not only as the government of the people dc facto, but de jure. j And now, sir, how is it with regard to this I Legislatiu-e of Kansas .' We have a law of Con- I grcss authorizing it. It is familiar to all. That j law organized the Territory of Kansas; that law j permitted the people thei-e, under the direction j of the Governor, to hold elections for membera of the Territorial Legislature, with power to pass j laws regulating the election of a Delegate to Con- Igress. "This organic law of the Territory cma- j nated from ourselves. This law we are bound 1 to recognize. A Governor was appointed in pur- Isuance of it. The Governor, the judiciary, the '■ whole machirjery of the government there was 'legally constituted by ourselves, by; Congress; j and the forms prescribed, through which this ter- j ritorial body exercising legislative functions came j into existence, emanated from the highest author- ; ity known to us under the Constitution. These j facts are admitted. No person questions the pub- j he law creating the Territorial Legislature. No- 1 body questions the legal appointment of Governor Reeder. Nobody questions the proclamation he issued to hold an election on the SOtB of March, 1855, for a Territorial Legislature in pursuance of our law. These are all admitted facts. If any- thing irregular, then, attended the election of its members, it presented a question to be inquired into and adjudged by the proper authority just as similar matters are inquired into and settled in other elections of legislative bodies— jusc as we inquire into such matters pertaining to our owii organization. When, therefore, it is admitted that an election for members of the Territorial Legislature Avas held in KfCnsas on tlie 30th of March, as stated in pursuance of law, under the direction of the legally-constituted authorities of the country, we are bound to recognize the body so coming into lift as legitimate in its origin. It certainly did not spring from usurpation; nor does it rest its claims of legitimacy upon bare assump- tion. It had its birtii in a legal way. Buthere comes the argu.mentfrom the other side that it was spurious, because the members who constituted it were not -properly elected in' con- formity to the laws under which it was created. Well, sir, that was a judicial question to be set- tled and determined by the lex pmiiamenti, ac- cording to the authorities I have cited, and the' miiversal practice of this country in like cases. It does not come within the purview of the pow- ers of this House to settle that question. It was an inherent right in the Houses of tljc Kansas Legislature to judge and decide upon, the quali- fications, elections, and returns of their own members respectively. This power, says Story, *by universal practice in Englaiid and in this country, is lodged in every legislative body to determine for itself. It is, indeed, one' of the vital functions of the organism. The question was a judicial one, which somebody was to de- termine; and what body v/as it.' The courts of the country (say all the authorities) cannot take cognizance of it. Governor Reeder, as it appears from the papers before us, insisted that it was his right, under the law empowering him to prescribe the rules governing the election, to decide it; and the two Houses of the Legisla- ture insisted that it was their parliamcntarj' and legal right to decide it. My opinion is, that the Houses were correct in their position. But, be that as it may, the merits of the question before us are not affected by it either way; for, if Reeder, as Governor, had the right, it- is an ad- mitted fact that, out of twenty-six members com- {)osing the House of Representatives of Kansas, le, as Governor, claiming the right to judge of this matter, did judicially, and not ministerially , award certificates to seventeen of these members, as having been duly and properly elected on the 30th March , in pursuance of his proclamation duly and legally made. And like certificates he gave to ten out of the thirteen members composing the Council. Thus a large majority of both branches of the Legislature were adjudged by him to be duly chosen and returned members thereof — members whose election, he now says, was carried by an invasion, and that they held the places which he assigned them by nothing but usurpation ! I am not now upon the question of his estoppel; I am consideringthe question of his right to judge, and, in that view, the effect of his judicial judgment rendered in the case. Keep in mind that, upon every question before any tribunal whidi has the sole and absolute right to judge in the matter, when the final judgment is rendered, it is forever conclusive upon the points embraced in it. Elec- tions were held in May, by order of the Governor, to fill the places of "the nine members and six councilmcn rejected by him at the March election. To those elected in May to fill those places he gave like certificates. Every man who took his scat in the Legislature at its organization was adjudged arid certified by the Governor to be en- titled to it. The Legislature, therefore, if the Governor had the right to judge, was legitimately and legally constituted; and their claims to be recognized as the proper law-making power of the Territory rests not upon bare assumption or usurpation. And, on the other hand, if the Houses had the right to settle these questions touching their organization , the result is the same; for they, too, settled the question the same way as to the original seventeen members of the House and ten councilmen, and their judgment must be conclu- sive upon the fact that a majority of both Houses were properly constituted. In either view, there- fore, we may take as to the hands in which this power of judging was lodged, the question is a closed one; it is res adjiulicatce, and we have no right now to open it. I i-epeat, I am not now upon the point of Reeder 's individual or personal estoppel in law. AVhat I aflirm is, that this ques- tion, from admitted facts, is closed; judgment has I been rendered, and there is no appellate jurisdic- tion in this House, nor in any other tribunal. Wc can no more open this question than we can that of the proper organization of any State Legisla- ture. The gentleman on my right to whom I have alluded^ [Mr. IfuNKEL,] said, in the course of his I remarks yesterday, that we, this House, have got j a right to go, and have often gone, into an inquiry I into the validity of the laws of the States in judg- j ing of elections to this House. Sir, I do not'denjr this. I admit that we may pass upon and judge I of the validity of any law coming before us in 1 such cases, just as any court may do, and upon just such grounds and such grounds only as courts ; may properly do. The grounds upon which this i inquiry is sought courts will never inquire into, i and we have no right to do it. There are some I matiters touching legislation and the rules govern- ing the law-making power which must be consid- [ ered as closed; and when judgment is rendered in them it must stand until the great day of judg- ment. Mr. SIMMONS. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question ? Mr. STEPHENS. With pleasure. Mr. SIMMONS. I ask whether a judgment is valid for any purpose whatever, until i t be shown that the party in whose name it is is the true party .' Mr. STEPHENS. To ascertain the true ai)d proper party is part of the proceedings before judgment. That is one of the matters to be settled "by the judgment, and when once settled by judg-' ment finally rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction over the subject-matter, it iS settled forever. Whether the party in whose favor it be rendered be the true party or not, cannot be in- quired into afterv/ards or elsewhere. And so in this instance persons presented themselves as the elected representatives of the people of Kansas, in their Legislature. They pi-esented their cre- dentials: the Governor claiming the right to pass judgment judicially in their favor, certified that they were the proper and true party. They then took up their own credentials in the usual way of Legislatures, and came to a similar judgment, as to a large majority in both Houses. That judgment, viewed either way you please, is final on that question. That is my answer to the gen- tleman. But the gentleman from Pennsylvania, in speak- ing of the inconsistency of Governor P^eeder's course — for even he seemed ready to admit his great inconsistencies Mr. KUNKEL. No, sir; I said it was not necessary to my argument to prove that Gov- ernor Rccder was consistent. Mr. STEPHENS. And the gentleman added that he could not speak for his consistency. Now, what I was about to submit to the House is, whether anybody can defend his course? I intend to speak of the facts as they are detailed before us in these reports, and as we know them to be. He was duly appointed Governor of Kan- sas. He accepted the trust and was in office, when, according to his own showing, the election which took place in that Territorj^ on the 30th of March was held in pursuance ot his own proc- lamation. Twenty-six members of the House of Representatives, and thirteen members of the Legislative Council, were elected. These were the numbei-s of which the Houses were respectively composed. He assumed the right to judge of the election returns of these members. The rules gov- erning the elections were prescribed by himself, and very rigid ones they were. The judges of elections were required not to allow any non-res- ident to vote, and to take an oath that they would not. These returns were submitted to hun, and he examined them. He ratified the returns, and gave certificates to seventeen members of the House, and rejected but nine. He gave certifi- cates to ten members of the Council, and rejected three. He ordered a new election to be held, to fill the places of those vacated by himself, but the two Houses, as I have stated, assuming the right to judge of the qualifications of their own , members after they met, decided in favor of those who had thehighestnumber of voteson the first election. But, sir, it was three months and upwards from the' holding of this March election until the Legis- lature met. He then said nothing of what we now hear of the manner of this election. But he, as Governor, upon being notified that they were organized in obedience to his own call, addressed them as the legally-assembled and constituted Legislature of the Territory. As late as the 21st of July, after the Houses had acted upon the subject of the contested seats in the cases of the nine members and three councilmen rejected by him, he again ad- dressed, them in a message, and in it he says nothing of an invasion. He says nothing of subjugation— nothing of "martial music" and "artillery" — nothing of "border ruffianism" — nothing of their action in the cases of contest referred to. But he addressed them then as the legally-con- stituted Legislature of the Territory. If, there- fore, Governor Reeder had the right to judge of the election returns, as lie claimed, was not liis acquiescence in the decision of the Houses on mat- ters pertaining to their organization an affirmance on his part of their judgment in those cases .' And at his instance shall we now go behind, not only the judgment of the Houses of the Legislature on these questions, but his affirmance of that judg- ment by an official act of Governor Reeder him- self.' But, sir, I wish to notice some other matters that have dropped in this debate. Another gentleman from Pennsylvania, on my right, [Mr. Camp- bell,] gave as a reason why this investigation should be gone into — why we should set aside Governor Reeder's own judgment in this case — that he was a gentlentan of high character — a man of worth, standing hi^iinthe estimation of the people of his State, and that this investigation was due him as such. Well, Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman that, if what Governor Reeder now says be really true, he certainly has for- feited and lost all just claims he may have had to the high and exalted opinions of his countrymen; he certainly shows himself guilty of the most flagrant and gross dereliction of duty that any public officer in the whole history of the coun- try was ever guilty of. The gentleman from Pennsylvania must admit that if the Territory committed to his chargewas invaded by an armed force, by which the legally-qualified voters of the Territory were driven from the polls in every dis- trict save one, and the polls seized by non-resi- dents, who by violence carried the election — if that be true which Governor Reeder now affirms to be true — if that took place which he now says did take place, and he silently sat by and saw all, and afterwards recognized these invading hordes as the duly-elected Legislature of the people, as he certainly did, then he was guilty of abase dis- regard of his official duty, without a parallel in our history, and one that no depth of infamy and degradation would be too low to assign him to, for. Mr. CAMPBELL, of Pennsylvania. Tf the gentleman from Georgia will allow me, I desire to ask him, if these things tan be substantiated, why deny to Governor Reeder this investigation ? Governor Reeder is ready to prove that his course was consistent, honorable, and proper. I ask that the gentleman will hear him, and then decide. Mr. STEPHENS. Governor Reeder can never show that his course was proper and becoming an officer in his position, if what he states be true. I am not for this investigation, because I do not think it is right to make it. I do not regard it as a part of my duty to make improper investigation to sustain a man who, by his own statement, shows himself to have been guilty of a gross dis- regard of his official duty. So far as he is con- cerned, his showing makes no favor with me. Wiicn a man comes here, and on his own state- ment, out of his own mouth, makes it appear, if his statement is to be credited, that he was guilty of the grossest neglect of duty, it does not com- mend him to my favor. Such statements or calls for investigation have not much force in inducing me to follow his example in the commission ofia wrong, or in disregarding my official duly. But whatl was about to say was, that if his state- ment be true, he is not now entitled to that high encomium which tlie gentleman pronounced upon him. If he, as Governor of a Territory, per- jnittod such unlvear(J-of outrages to be committed Ij ing how the gentleman 'a declamation can be an- tliere without a word of complaint, but giving his: j i swered . Every community, sic, must judge for Sflnction to the \v-hol« of tlitim— which, uppn his Jj itself in all such cases, both ne to the grade of own showing, you must adijiit he did — then ha is ji the crime and the punishment to be inflicted, not entitled to that high position which the ^en- !' But to the gentleman, in this case, I would say tleman says ho occupied, in the estimation of the : as Scotland's poet said to the " unco guid." of his day- " Oil, ye who are so good yourself, t^o pioua and so liply ; , Ye-wenouglUtatJ'P buM"'*f^ •''"'' ^'^'l '"• 'Voiir'neigiibor's faults and folly. «« Yd see y^ur sta^e vyirti theirs compared, And shudder af. the Tiifler ; But. kisia motii^Tit-s fair reiard. What makes tlic mighty differ !" It is only on the point as to tlie extent of tlie- punishment that the Ohio laws, in this instance, differ from those of Kansas. Now what I main- pi^ople of Pennsylvania, before ho left tliat State. It ma}'- be true that Governor Reedcr, while in Pennsylyanic\j,>v;«i3 a gentleman of good char- actor and high standing. That docs not show; tliat ho is entitled to be held in the saxiie estima-! tion now.. His course, by which he may have justly t\jrfoited that character, we have before us. Neither is lus present position, contrasted with | his former, an isolated or. singular one. A gen- tleman once oGcupted" a position in this cauntry second to no one then living. For thirty-six ballots he held the votes of this House, in even balance, for the .Chief Magistracy, of the country. ^ . . , .,, ^ , ■ , ^-.i rr- •, He stood shouldec to shoujder with a head quite ii [^"^ i^' tl>^^] ^' '^^'Y ^f Hiese laws pf the Territory 8^ high as that of Jefferson himself. Who stoodjl ^f ""f S^^'i ^"'T^ ''^''''^? laws suited to the peo- higher then than he ? Who shone brighter then I P''^ ^''=''^' ^""l ^IT^. ^"^ changed by the people m than these two men? Twin-broihereinaoH.tics,as il the regular legislative way. We, belong, sir, to two morning stars they appeared risitig together i ! ^ government of law ; and it is the duty of every in tlie day-dawn of our nation !s glory-, but dis- 1' ^"".^ ^'^'^F" ^^ sust,ain the lawas it exists, unul it appointed hope, and blasted ambition, caused I- i^''l\^"S'?'*''^"^\"'^'''^^^'^'^7'?'^^P'^°JJ?r'''^^^'?''"^y'<^' Aaron Burr- Hke Lucifer-like the ai-changel, |i ?"''' '^ V>''-^"'^7cf°'' '■^'"°'i"r ": What character- standing high in heaven, next to the Throne it- il ^^fs the United States ai«l distinguishes us above self, to fall, and from his fall to rise no more, jl ^'^ ''^}''^'' "^^^'^."^ •""'■''' distinctively than this— It may be so with Governor Reodor. A man hc.'i '^'^^ ^'T ^''t" ^^''^^^'^ government of laws ema- may have been of high character, fair fame, and ii n^iting/rom those whs are controlled and governed high ambition; but his ambition \ws " overleaped 11^^ f ""'^^ constitutions? If our laws are wrong itself," and fallen on th.o other side. History, I ^''^ ^'^>''^ '^""i '° S*^ ''^ ^^'^ polls-to the ballot-box dare say, will assign him his true position. Thei-e I -^° have them amended, corrected, and suited let him rest. We are to deal witli the facts as j they appear before us. I The gentlemnn from Ohio, [Mr. Bivgham,] i the other day, said the legislation of the Terri- 1 tory of Kansas was nidi and void upon its face, i He wished no better evidence of the invalidity of the laws than that which is to be found upon ! their inspection. He read one of their acts, ' which makes it penal for any individual to steal ., , , , , .- , ,■,.,, a slave, or to induce him to run away from his i| r^'' ^:",'"*'^ ''7*^ showing us tluU such illegal a^xd master, or to harbor f^ich ' " ' ~ pronounced more infamous and asked whether we were Douna to recoirnize , , .-,.,. , t -, , • ,- , as valid any such law, as this, and some others - hesitated in doing what I could to give him the to the pubhc' wants. To the ballot-box, and not the carlrid^e-hox, the people should go to settle questions fouching the character of their laws. "/»('«• anna silent leges." If, by the Kansas Itrw regulating the election of a Delegate on this flopr, any person is allowed to vote who were not cn- tiilcd to vote under their organic law, and atiy such perspn in the late election did so vote, and Governor Recder had gone into the contest, and to run away from his n . "^' ■ " '"'" ow^„.,.^ „^ w.c.. o„v.m ...>,gcw «^«* slave. Sachacodehei!"^^P™P^^'^"^^'^^'^^ ^^''■" P"''^'' f""'' ^1'? s'^tinff 13 than that of Draco, -! member, and that he had received a majority of ere bound to reco"-nize i^ J^e legal votes of the Territory, I should not have he mentioned. Why, sir, there is a law in the But he did no such thing. He and his up in opposition to the gentleman's own State, Ohio, that punishes any i' f"*'"'^^^ set themselv ^ . , . _ person who entices an apprentice to run away, ij '''^^^' denied its force and vahduy, and are now or who harbors him after he has run away, d ^'''''"P'"^^^*' ^^'*'''^^^''"^v the only government and Whoever harbors an apprentice escaping from j! ^^^'''"^ of laws m that Territory to which the the tyranny, perhaiis, of his master— an orphan ij P'^'^ple can look with confidence and .security for boy, it may be— whoever gives him bread in his/ t^cp'-otoction of their lives, liberty, and property, wanderings- as the gentleman was very pathetic j| Jy}^^ clamor, sir, about a luiijority of the peonle I must follow him— under the Ohio law is subject li °f Kansas being opposed to General Whitlield's to indictment and punishment. The man that ij '^'eclion nere will not do: it will not bear the teat would give one, thus in distress, shelter and a ;! ^^ notorious facts. If it were so, why had he no • cup of water !| competitoratthepolls? Where wasReedcrthathe Mr. BINGHAM. Did Ohio law make it a ij '*'^^""'^'}o^^ his relative strength with him before felony? i; the people? This is not the first time that General Mr. STEPHENS. No, sir; but it makes it a 'i Whitfield was a candidate before them. He wa»' crime. Tiic only difference between your law |! 'fleeted m November, 1854. At that time he had and that of Kansas is as to the grade of crime I competition. 1 have before rne the rt/5cial poll and the extent of punishment. . ij made out and j?ntered upon the executive minutes What law does, tlie gentle- Mr. BINGHAM, man refer to ? Mr. STEPHENS. I refer to the law in refer- ence to apprentices, and the enticing them away by Governor Redder himself. Here axe the en- tries: "December 4, 1854— The jtidgns of the Reveral elccUon districts nu-ulo retiimof the votes pnljedatthe eloctioii held .m not complaining,of the law, but only show- [ S^^^Sv^f r[Sr^;;i^^^^^^":£'t. First..., Second. Third.., Foiirlli. Fifth... Seventh Eighth Ninth Tenth Eleventh Tvvclfih...... Tliirteeiitli... Fourteenth... Fifteenth .... Sixteenth.... Seventeeutli., ■^, I Itt 2,258 248 305 16 2 2 1 St i Send the committee out tliere if a full invcstiga- ^ j 4.— On examining and collating the re- turns, J. W. VVIiitfield is declared by the Governor to he duly elected Delegate to the House of Representatives of Ux! Lfnitcd .States; and same day certificate of the (Jovcmor, under the seal of the Territory, issued to said J. VV. Whit- field of his election." voters. If you are going a-fishing for all the facts in real earnesT, why not make a completa ; drag of it at once.' Send out the arms of your i net far and wide, and make a thorough haul over the whole broad territory, and bring to land every ; thing, whether fish, eel, or serpent.' I But, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I am against this resolution for another reason. I am against it because it is but a part and parcel of a policy I now pursued by some men in Kansas and else- I where, which cannot be looked upon in any other I light than revolutionary in its character. Gentle- ! men cannotbe mistaken in this particular. There I are men in Kansas who seem to have resolved en j rebellion. They wereamong the original enemies of the Kansas bill. When their leaders wore I beaten in this House and in the Senate, and that great measure of sectional and national equality ] was carried against and over their votes, they betook themselves to new schemes to prevent its ! potent influence in allaying agitation, and to make : it the occasion of continued strife and discord. I The Territory was not left to settlement by the people of all the States equally and fairly, as the : laws of climate, soil, locality, production, and : population might determine; l)ut emigrants from V distant points were stimulated, if not hired, to »o Here the number of votes appear officially and ] there with no purpose but mischief. Their main in full, in all the election districts in that Terri- !: object was not to become bonajidc settlers, but to tory, numbering from one to .seventeen. There }: control the first elections. In this they were is the poll, examine it — for J. W. Whitfield, i beaten, as fully appears in the present sitting 2,258; for J. A. Whitfield, which was by mistake I Delegate's first election which I have shown, for his name, 248; making his real, entire vote [; They were also beaten in the first election of 2,50G; and for Flenniken,"lii3 highest opponent, t members to the Legislature, as appears from the 0*1 ly 305. The whole number of votes polled {certificates before alluded to, given to the mcmbera were 2,833; so that Whitfield in that contest re- li of that body by Governor Ileeder himself. And eeivod more than eiglit times the number of votes j: now, disappointed, discontented, lind di-saflrected' polled for Flenniken, his highest opponent, who |; at these series of defeats in their design.s- and ob- was the candidate of Reeder and his party, and .1 jects, they are about to betake themselves to the ■ ' last resort of malcontents — a trial of physical i force. Arms are collected — fortifications are built I — munitions of war are provided — Sharpe's rifles ' are procured — volunteers ai-e invoked — aid and i assistance from a distance are looked for — ^hioney I is raised, and hostility against the existing legally- j constituted authorities is openly avowed. The ! telegraphic dispatches of this morning announce I that the government proclaimed by the Topeka i convention is to go into operation at all hazards. All these movements are lawless, insubordinate, and insurrcctionaiy. Governor Reeder may be considered as at the head of them, the commander- who now pretend to be a majority in the Terri- tory. At the last election Whitfield got 2,936 Totes, without opposition. Mr. CRxilGE. What has become of Fleoni- keii.' Mr. STEPHENS. Flenniken flunked ! The la.st 1 hoard of him he was on his way back east, where he came from. [Great laughter and a Iilause upon the floor and in the galleries.] la . . . ™ . m has never been in the Territory since, as 1 have been informed. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that the investi- gation now sought is right, for the reasons I have ^ given. I am opposed to itin toto. But ifit is to be | in-chief of the whole of them; and his movement gone into, would it not be much better to send out h here can but be viewed as a part of his general a commission, as is suggested by the minority ij plan of operations. Any countenance he may I of the Committee of Elections? Nay, I go fur- j; seem to receive, therefore, at our hands, can but ther. Would it not be much better to send a com- ji favor his ulterior designs. Tiiis must be all he ' mittee of the House — the Committee of Elections 1 1 looks for. He cannot expect to be voftd a seat tJiemselves, if you please .' If we are to go through I j on this floor. ! with this exceedingly complicated aflair, would it | Now, sir, let us pause and reflect. How far in not be better for the committee to go to the hun- j ' this business do you intend to proceed .' Are you reds and thousands of witnesses that may have |' going to back those deluded men in Kansas whom to be examined, than to bring such a " cloud " i Governor Reeder represents here, while they ! of them to the committee?— as the " mountain [\ stand with arms in their hands? "We see by the I cannot conveniently come to Mohammed, is it not ij President's proclamation that he intends that the bettor for Mohammed to go to the mountain ?"*il hT.ws of that Territory shall be executed, as it is 8 ■M his duty to do. Now, which side are you going to take, whenSharpe's rifles and Federal artil- lery are brought in array against each other in this threatened conflict? Ought we to do any- thing calculated to inspirit or encourage any mis- guided portion of the people of'-this country to put themseh'cs in open, hoslile, armed resistance to the laws? What is this but treason, as ex- pounded by our courts ? Our history, as a united people, dates back for more than seventy years; and no conviction for this highest crime known to society has ever, as yet, marred that history. No nation perhaps ever existed in the world so long, of which the same can be said. I feel the prouder of my country because it is so; and long may the day be hence before, if ever, such a case shall occur. I trust that my eyes, at least, will never see the light of that day when American soil shall be stained with a traitor's blood. Some persons in Kansas may have, under their delu- sion, gone very far; but I trust that the locus penitentia in every such heart will be found be- fore the last extreme step be taken. Let us be careful, at any rate, that we do nothing here in this matter which may tend to encourage them to take that step. Let it be our aim and our object rather to "pour oil on the troubled waters. "__ Ours is a government of laws. Let us, then, in our action in this case, set a good example, not only to the people of Kansas, but to the whole country, by adhering strictly ourselves to the principles and precepts of the laws e&tabhshed for the government of all our deliberations and proceedings here. This investigation proposes to lead us into an inquiry into subjects over v/hich I think I have clearly shown we have no proper or legitimate jurisdiction. Let us not, then, assume powers and prerogatives'which. do not belong to us, in our attempting to see if another body has not done it; and, particularly, let us not do it for bare party purposes, when the only effect of it may be to put in hazard the peace and quiet of tl/e country. These, sir, ai'e my views and opinions upon the proposition before us. Printed at the Office of the CoiigreSticnal Globe. LIBRARY OF CONGR^^^^^^^ ' 016 089 343 6 <