8 both sides. And wha^else could have been expected? What other result could have been looked for by those instigating the movements I have alluded to ? The first man killed in the Territory was Davis. He fell by the hands of those calling themselves free-State.men. Then Dow, a free-State man, was killed by Coleman; but the. quarrel between them arase about a land claim. ‘It was a private and personal‘matter. Coleman immediately gave himself up to the legal authorities, claiming to have acted in self-defense. Whether he did or not, I do not know, and will not pretend to say; but a friend of Ddw, of the name of Branson, having made threats of avenging his death, was arrested under a peace warrant, and, while in the hands of an officer, was rescued by a party of free-State men. Warrants were taken out for these, and they took shelter in Lawrence, W’here they put themselves in defiance of the civil authorities. The posse was called out to aid in the arrest, and this led first to the seige of Lawrence, and then to the capitulation of December last. In this war, no lives were lost. Two or three other homicides had been committed in the Territory;-but in all, from the organization of the Territory, up to the attempted assassination of Sheriff Jones, I think not exceeding half a dozen 1 In what part of the United States, sir, in the same length of time, with the same population they have in Kansas, have there been fewer murders or deaths by violence? How many were killed in the riots last year in Cincinnati? How many in Louisville, Kentucky? I venture -to say to-day, that with all this clamor about civil war in Kansas, more lives have not been lost there, sincedhe organization of the Territory, than have been in several of the large city elections of the United States within the last twelve months. It is not my wish to make light of these things, but to take a calm and dispassionate view of them. A strong and general tendency to disregard law and order is one of the most lamentable evils of the day. It is not confined to Kansas, but it is seen and felt everywhere. our object, and that of all good men, should be to check it rather than excite it. Then, sir, as to the election in Kansas and the ' laws passed by their Legislature. One word upon this point. The first election was held there for a Delegate to Congressin November,<1854. That there were illegal votes on both sides I have no doubt; but I believe it is admitted by every one that, notwithstanding the efforts of the emigrant aid companies to prevent it, General Whitfield had much the larger number of the legal votes of the Territory, aad was duly elected. In March afterwards grater efforts were made to carry the Legislature. The result was the commission or certificate of election by Governor Reeder Himself to a large majority of both branches of that body; They were therefore legally constituted as a legislative body. There may have been illegal voting on both sides, as there is doubtless in all our elections. But upon the well-settled and'fixed principles on which all our representative institutions rest, and without a maintenance of'which there can be neither “jaw nor order,” that is now a closed question. The laws, therefore, of that Legislature must be observed and obeyed until repealed or modified by legislative power, or set’ aside by the courts as void. And upon the character of these laws I wish to make but a passing remark. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Colfax] pointed out quite a number of them the other day, which he said were very bad ones. Well, Sir, I am not going to discuss their respective merits. Perhaps some them are bad; it would be an extraordinary code if it were otherwise. ‘I know the advocates of the present government in the Territory—the law-and-order party there—do not themselves approve of all of them! I will read what they say on tile subject: “The law for the protection of slave property has also been much misunderstood. , The right to pass such a law is expressly stated-by Governor Reeder in his inaugural message, in which he says: ‘ A Terri torial Legislature may undoubtedly act upon the question to a limited and partial extent, and may temporarily prohibit, tolerate, or regulate slavery in the Territory, and in an absolute or modified form, with all the force and effect of tiny other legislative act, binding until repealed by the same power that enacted it.’ There is nothing in the act itself, as has been charged, to,prevent a free discussion of the subject of slavery. Its bearing on society, its morality or expediency, or whether it would be politic or impolitic to make this a slave State, can be discussed here as freely as in any State in this Union, without infringing any of the provisions of tips law. To deiiy the right of a person to hold slaves under the law in this Territory is made penal; but, beyond this, there is no restriction to the discussion of the slavery question in. any aspect in which it is capable of being considered. We do not wish to be understood as approving of all the laws .passed by the Legislature; on the contrary, we would state that there are some that we do not approve of, and which are condemned by public opinion here, and which will no doubt be repealed or modified at the meeting of the next Legislature. But this is nothing more than what frequently occurs,’both in the legislation of Congress and of the various State Legislatures. The remedy for such evils is to be found in public opinion, to which, sooner or later, in a Government like ours, all laws must conform.” Mr. COLFAX. What is the date of that ? Mr. STEPHENS. Last November. Now, sir, I have examined this whole code of laws, and as a whole, some few exceptions out, I say that no State in the Union has got better ones. There are some in it I do not approve—there are some in all the codes I have ever seen that I do not approve. I will not go to the gentleman’s State, or to any other gentleman’s State, to find laws that I do not approve. We have plenty of them in my own State. And the gentleman ought to feel highly blessed if he has none in Indiana that he disapproves. We have a great many in Georgia I do not approve. There is one in particular which I fought in the Legislature and opposed ’before the courts with all the power that I had. It was a law making it penal to bear concealed deadly weapons. I am individually opposed to bearing such weapons. I never bear weapons of any sort; but I believed that it was the constitutional right of every American citizen to bear arms if he chooses, and ju^t such arms, and in just such way, as he chooses. I thought that it was the birthright of every Georgian to do it. I was defeated in our Legislature. I was defeated before our courts. The question went up to the highest judical tribunal in our State, the Supreme Court, which sustained the law. In that decision all had to acquiesce. Sir, the people in all the States
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=