THE

34011

CONQUEST OF KANSAS.

BY

MISSOURI AND HER ALLIES.

A HISTORY OF THE TROUBLES IN KANSAS, FROM THE PASSAGE OF THE ORGANIC ACT UNTIL THE CLOSE OF JULY, 1856.

BY WILLIAM PHILLIPS,

SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT OF THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE, FOR KANSAS.

"Come on, then, gentlemen of the slave States; since there is no escaping your challenge, I accept it in behalf of Freedom. We will engage in competition for the virgin soil of Kansas, and God give the victory to the side that is stronger in numbers as it is in right!” - Speech of WM. H. SEWARD, in the U. S. Senate, 1854.

BOSTON.

PHILLIPS, SAMPSON AND COMPANY.

1856.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1856, by

PHILLIPS, SAMPSON & CO.,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.

THE writer deems no apology necessary in submitting the early and unhappy history of Kansas to the public. A conviction of its importance impelled him to the task, and he assumed the duty of historian under the belief that his opportunities for observation, and participation in much of what has occurred, gave him advantages over other writers less conversant with the subject.

It is not the intention of this preface to make an elaborate assertion of impartiality. What is written is offered to the public as the simple TRUTH, and a fair record of the events it chronicles. The writer does not claim to be impartial on the cause of quarrel, nor would he regard such a profession as very creditable in any other person; yet he believes that his convictions could neither induce him to wrong an enemy, nor do a friend more than justice. The future will fully vindicate the truth of all that is written; and, if there is one generous mind which, with the lights now before it, would incline to charge the author with perversion, let such a doubter know that the author, while he values the good opinion of all good men, would rather thus be suspected, than purchase a doubtful reputation for impartiality at the sacrifice of a truthful record. The common

trick of authors who lack independence, is, to compound between "God and mammon," and, in steering exactly between two opinions, to claim all the virtues, and exemption from all the vices, of both. Such a course the author does not desire to imitate.

In this narrative there is a faithful record of all the important documents, and the opinions of both sides have. been given on many important points, although the design was to have a connected narrative, rather than a collection of statements. In the biographical sketches contained in the work the writer has treated the leaders on both sides with that close scrutiny which is the public right as regards public men. A perusal will probably exonerate from the charge of "puffing;" and if some friends regard their handling as rather "candid," let them know that it was, at least, without malice.

In descriptions of the battles, skirmishes, and other striking incidents, great pains has been taken to have the outlines and the facts correct, and to make the picture as true to nature as possible. As it was the design to give a history of the struggle, rather than a condensation or collection of outrages, very many important and outrageous occurrences have been necessarily omitted.

Finally, reader, after having perused it, criticize, and censure it as much as you think you conscientiously can. In the history thus submitted, the privilege of judging men and things has been too freely exercised to be grudged to any careful reader by

THE AUTHOR.