Newspaper Page Text
Office on Suintcr Street, )
Over the Post Office. j
VOL. f
THE SOUTH WEST GEORGIAN,
Is published every Friday Morning by
CHARLES B. YOITOBLOOD.
in advance, for one year, $2 00
It not paid in advance, 3 00
IBP” Payment any time within Th>pp Months frcim
sihe time of subscribing will be considered in^dvanee.
No notice to discontinue tftc paper will
the regarded until all arrerages are paid.
Six months Subscriptions will be received on the
name terms in proprtion tjte yearly
Rates of Advertising:
One Dollar per Square (of (Twelve lines, or
for the first insertion and Fifty Cents for each -week
thereafter. ‘V? >
IBf No personal Commtimcation will. be ndmit'-
•tedekeept as an advertisemehtj paid for in advafice
at double the rates of advertising.
All Advertisements not-lunitoi wkibi handed in,
will be published till ordered ont and .cliarged no-*
•cerdinglv. “ -
Provisional Cards.
Professional and Jlusinnss ‘Cards wflh weMßaer-Swl
at the following rates:
Twelve lines or less, three months, ■ |Q
“ sdfmoptM%tA -* \-r% Bft
“ ‘.twelve mouths, 10 o<f
No advertismenti t'hiß./ihQaeter will be ad
mitted unless paid for in ndvanee,, *■ ’ -
N. B. The bill for all advertising is due when the
publication ceases. A Reduction of 10 pet cent, will
be made wlieh paid for iivhdvanee. , .
law for Advertising.
SaiSes of Land .AND NVoboes, W Executors, Ad
ministrators and Cttardians, are required by law
to be advertised in a public gazette, forty days pre
vious to the day of side. ‘ and e, ’
These sales must be held on the first, Tuesday ip
the month, between the hours of ten iath,e forenoon,
and three in the afternoon, at the t'ourtbbuac in the
county in,which the property is sitnatedj * • ‘ -V
Sales of. Personal Property nfost be advertised
in like manner forty days. , :• . ■
Notice to Debtors and Creators of an Estate
must be published forty - days.
Notice that application will be made to (be Or
dinary for leave to sell Land and lyegroes,. must, b<r
priMfthed weekly’for Two months. •
Citations- for Letters of Administrn|iop, thirty
days ; for Dismission from Adminisi,ration,jnoitthlv
six months;-for Dismission from’bfihnrifainship, *
weekly forty days. 1 . ... .
Rules fob'ForeglosiSg of-Mortcagf.; monthly four
months; for establishing lost papers, for the full
space of three months ; for compelling titles from
executors or administrators where a bond lias been
given by the deceased, the full space of three
months.
The haw of Newspapers.
1. All subscribers who do not,,give express No
tice to the obntrary, are considered ns wishing to
continue their subscriptions. 1
2. If subscribers orderth'e discontinuance of theft
papers, the publishers may’continue to send .them
until arrearages are paid.
3. If subscribers negleet or refuse tailing their
papers fooir. the offices to which they'are Sent, they
are held responsible till theft Tulls are settled, aha
their papbrs ordered to he .discontinued. v ‘
4. The Courts have decided that refusing to take!
a newspaper or periodical from the office, or rrmo v
isgaad leaving it. uncalled for, is-pro/yi/y evi
dence of rNTBSTIONAT FRAUD.
- . — •*” f ■ ‘‘jaV -J
* General Pierce and Slavery.
General Pierce pronounces lb - report e r ti u ,
Independent Democrat r3i.“: yf
Dtr n er ■ an t :•'ire inis:-’ yfr**
Aierely untnudlul’’ but “grQfcdy
dlyfalse.” ’ T!i£ issue uptm-tliis jpw>ifVr* •% on<y.j
of veracity, js between General Pierce, the
speaker,,nn<l.Mr. Foss, the reporter, fh* latter
supported by, Mr. Qoqjiale; editor of ’ the
Manchester Democrat, and by statements of
other local journals. Whether Mr. Pierce
has forgotten words uffied in’flie course ..of de
bate, or whether the rdporte'r wilfully misrep
resent him and swears ljilsely ’to support tire,
misrepresentation, is a question in which we
have no direct concern. Ifejnnst be settldd
in New toampshiVe. .
The “pretended report” passed without con
tradiction at the time, apparently because it
escaped General Pierce’s observation. That
it attracted notice at the time, and on flit’ sj u,
is evident from the letter of Mr. lb F. Aver,
who states in his letter to Mr. Hibbard that
he saw “the reports copied by the Republic.
when they first appeared,” and conversed “in
regard to them with several persons” who
heard the speech. The anomaly remains
unexplained, that reports which are alleged
to be late in the town in which the speaker
lives without any attempt to oorrcct their mis
representations. , * *. ‘
Passing from these particular reports, Geft-- ,
eral Pierce proceeds to strengthen his deni
al by a reference to his general pqWlfir wn*
duct “My opinions and of them,
Ike says,'“have been everywhere the- same.”
“My action aMmy Hump*; i
sshire touching this matter have - been -at alt (
-'times and under all circumstances in entire*’
-‘accordance with pay action and language at
a Washington,” Mr. Pierce is willing to stand
fcy the record ; an<j Itt ite£>jaitulate certain
facts connected -with his “actidp and lan
guage” in New Hampshire, that we may test ,
.the value of his present declaration. It ft oft
record that Mr. I’jerce was a member of the
St*te Convention in June, 1846, and that in
4hat capacity be Was one of a committee who
reported a resolution reaffirming the senti
ments and opinions of the Northern Democ
racy in relation to slavery, and setting forth
that they deplored its existence, and regarded
it “as a great moral and social evil.” It is on
record, again, that’ on tho 20th November,
1850, General Pierce attended n meeting at
Manchester, New Hampshire, avd delivered
* speech in which he asked, * Who did not de
plore slavery V’ and in which, replying to
his own interrogatory, he said, “TAc men who
would dissolve‘the Union did not hate or de
plore slavery more than he did.” And'yet \
again it is,on record that the State Conven
tion which sat late in 1860 had Gofierhl Pierce
as onhof its members, ami that the convention
unanimously adopted a resolution declaring
“that the holding ‘of human beings in bondage
is a curse to any.country ; that we arc ■opposed
torslarery, op white, in all its form*, ‘and .
under whatever circumstances.” Now here
are threo instances selected not from journals
persbnallyjiostile to General Pierce, butfrgm
quarters known to be personally friendly to
him. And each instance affords strong col
lateral testimbny in favor of tlie accuracy of
Mr. Foss’s report of the New Bostoirspeech, ]
and against General Pierce’s averment that
his “opinions and the avowai.of them” have
uniformly agreed with his opinions as express
od at-Waghinttmi.’ The presumption is thatr
the- General Pierce who “deplored” slavery
in 184&, an(J “haled” 1850, may also
have ‘doatbed” it-ms-lSaa.
The probabilities, Varo against General
Pierce on ahother ground. The Manchester
Union Democrat, a, friendly'priut, in its .■ out
line (ft his Nelv Boston spSec h, reports that he
.spodfh. of slavery, as .having been introduced
iifio this couriiry..“ggaitist the morai sense- of
l/ie'teorld ;’ 1 and'Jlic Nashua GaiSlic, wdnchjis
’ also friendly, reports his-vindicaf ion of the l’u
'gjtivdiaw as resting upon the fact that it “cw
-1 braces no single principles more obnoxious to
-.‘the North than the Fugitive Stave law of *
‘ nod. ” . y
To give full w eight to his present letter, it
is necessary, then, tliat General Pierce should
show that the records of the State Conveutions
have been falsifcd to iiis prejudice—that his
awft organ, the Pair jot, pub-
Cdncord, h£ts Wilfully misrepresented
him—and that tyvo friendly journals entered
into a conspi'.vtcy • with two abolition journals
for the pfacing hiiri m,a fateeposi
tiou before the country.
Even this is not all that is neeesnsry. The
records qf
‘ a||fe^ofiy > earsihe that State-,
tookiadwudage of every opportunity to reaf
firm their hostility to slavery, and their un
abated determination to enforce tlie Wilmot
proviso. They did this at their public meet
ings, in their State Conventions, in their Leg
islature, and through their delegations in Con
gress., l|o-far&B;we know-, iris md,alleged
that at any .portion of ths period General
Pierce wais aCtanimce with his party in tlie
State. , On ‘the contrary, itdslyuiwn that lie
’ acted with ffiem ; and -though that,
for of indis idtral members’ tis ‘Jlte' 1
partybe ft in
yet fepnsteaiaed To .feel thjit he shares the res*,
qi-’tSe actioii of the party in its
.■ S .■;*>•’ -.. -:h ‘. . .in it .
tin f.-- n jtoa.<isi9Wß|r- •-
‘lt; is,- (im: it f igojg, i
j’ “/ (ft SenlinpaifS 4 opifiniciM Ju .the‘New.
f, pe(fc^-ni-2t cqpSist.ent yi^jh ’ (Jqfieral
- desire to carry “out the law'.,
■ feport ditikes General Pierce to
say that the Fugitive law must he adhered to
because it is tlie fulfilment of the compact
made by jpiir fathers ; .apd so far jt mnkoß
• him the antagonist of the ultra Ahlitirtili-t.
. ‘Pbe irnportantead(fiH9h.is‘'.Tliat in ceßtiejibu,’
withal' is I lee hum bin |
incuts. We” r:i llll <rt ia l - ii-pected of having
(feWe lnm injustice in reference’ to these per
'libiis of his public life. In our notice of his
public character, written on the day after his
nomination at Baltimo;e, we expressed an
opinion that he was sound upon tho slavery
question. We formed Vhe'opiuion upon. Co
ngressional documents, and at oneagave hipi
thq full benefit ofitv - It has sjiice ”trauspirl
that,* in our hurried search, we emitted his vote
against the’act “authorizing Edmund Brooke
■to remove to the District of Columbia Cwo
•slaves, owffied by him prfor to-hjs remorel 1
‘from Virginia,'’": *” \’ ‘
“Vqtes in the Senate and House ofßepre-
arb good ite far as they go, hut
they ate hot sujlrriont to rebut evidence of
('.ontrary votes and specifies in another sec
tlon of the country. .The question just now
’i% got what General Pierce said and how he
voted at-Washington, but what he said and
whatiubdidln New Hampshire ; and on tliat
question we still contend that the balance of
testimony is against him. It is against him
alike on the specific issue raised by tlie New
Boston, speech, and bn tho general issue
touching his “action and language” in tlie i
Notth.
In saying this we have no intention to im
pugn the honor and sincerity of General
Pierce. The apparent frankness of his letter
is something in his favor, and we are willing
to believe that his personal character ns a
man—apart from the politician—is not loss
so. But private excellence is not a reason 1
for stifling inquiry into , public conduct, ncjr
is fetter that is apparently frank sufficient to ;
overthrow a chain of reasoning based upon i
OGLETHORPE, GEORGIA, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1852.
admitted’facts and strengthened by thievery-’
day probabilities of life, It is more easy,
more rational, ;uid not necessarily unjust to
assume that the incidents on which we dwell
as parts of the case have the recollec
tion of one who daisy suffers from the “her
culean tasks” of a Presidential
The memory may fail, hut the records live ; .
and the records in this iqatter are at variance
with the lettyr. \
k Forgotten Chapter In Gck
Pierce’s History, \
> Tim Nashville (Tenn.) “Republican Ban
ner,” has been examining Gen. Pierce’s nii
| nor votes in the House of Representatives, and
the following statement is the result of the in
vestigation. It forms a noticeable addition
to thqjiistory of the conduct of the Demo--
cratiweaddidatQ upon larger questions; as al
ready pfesentoil in detail through tho “Re
public.” Gen. Pierce,-it will be Seen, sus
tained his reputation’ by voting ngtiiust the
old revolutionary soldiers-and their .widows,
,agd also against tivelplddndian fighters,’ His
fi tends ..havy probably these votes in view
when they land him ns an econoirfist:
The facts which, wo are now about to bring
to light, and wjijch are fully verified by the
public records of the comrtry, will no doubt
very much astonish some of tho friends, of the
lately “unknown” Democratic ‘candidate for.
the Presidency. We will takejlioui iu chro
nological order, as \ve.find them recorded. —
First, then, as he appeared in 1833
AGAINST THE INBIAN FIOItTERS.
I the House of Representatives, December
27, 1833, (see House journal, page-130,) Mr.
Chilton movpd the following resolution for
the.benefit of tlie old Indian fighters:
Resolved, That a select committee be ap
pointed whose diity it shall be to inquire into
the'expediency of so extending thy provisions
tSf tlic act of Congrcss passcd 7th Juno, 1832,
granting pensions to certain chjsses of troops
therein named, as to eiftbrace in its provisions
those who were engaged in tho.wars against
the Indians subsequent to the close of the revo
lutionUry war, and down to the treaty of
Greenville, with leave to report by bill or oth
erwise.
Mr. Blair moved that the said resolution
do lie on the table; which motion was reject
ed; ayesso,-nays I&7— Franklin Pierce vo
ting in Ihe affirmative. ’
Mr. Bomllin moved to strike out all of the
resolutidn-after the word “Inquire,” and in
sert “into the inoral and political effects of the
pension laws-of the United States, mtd bow
far the same ought to he modified or repealed.”
Gji motion of Mr. Everett, the cousidera
tionoutlie tesoltitlon and amendment Was post
poned. > ,
They were subsequently taken up, and do
batod on the following days—lsth, USth, 17th,
,g2d, 23d, 29th, 30th and 31st January, 1834,
i lks.T< ‘• nary 6, 7 and B—without any defi-.
rtiftkacimn hein “had upon them. Having been
taken yq; again on the 11th February, (see
page 317,) Mr. Chilton Al]en demanded the
previous question to cut off debate and Mr.
Bouhliin’s amcudiu,cnt. The call for the pre
vious questions was sustained, and the main
quest ion was pu t and the .resolutions adogtedi
ycqs nys 86 —Franklin Phtface w.VqSr
Amongst those voting ill the afljfinatiy&lil
opposition of Mr. Pierce, we find the follow
ing distinguished-mimes: J. Q. Adams, (l.jj
ton Allen, John Dell, John llluir, Rufus
Choate, Thomas Corwin, David Crochet, j&.’
IP". Dickinson, bulwark Everett, Millard I ‘if 1 -
more, X ‘lt. Foristcr, A-.'G. Hawes, Richard
M % Jidinspu, Gove Johassn, Luke Lea, James
K. l’olk, James Siandifr, Samuel. Bunch and
W. igi Inge. Those in italics helong to tly,’
Tennessee and ( legation. ‘ * . J
The committee ajipointcd umler the resohi-
Reported, on the 25th-February, a bill to
effect “1 ts object. (|see jingo 358.)
AC'iiyif 1832, which was prpjiosed to
he extenduil, gives to surveying officers, non.
commissiqAed officers, mttsiftans', soldiers and
Indign spies of the old continental line,or State
troops, volunteers, or muffin, who hare served
<U otic more terms two years during the war of
the Revolution, and have not been provided for
by the act of 1828, the amount of his full pay
in said line, according to liis rank, hut not in
any case to exceed a captain’s pay, during his
natural life, those who have served a less than
six months proportionate pay dining life—
from tlie 4th of March, 1831.
Next, as lie appeared in 1836
AOAINST THE OLD RE VOLUTION ERF.
At page 360 of the House Journals of Con
gress for 1836, it will he found that the hill
No. 353 was introduced “to extend the provis.
ions of an act entitled an act for the relief of
certain surviving officers and soldiers of the
Revolution.”
At page 1,045, same Journal, it will be
found that tlie question being put as to wheth
er this bill should be put upon its final passage,
the vote stood: yeas 89, nays 56— Franklin
Pierce voting in the negative.
At page 1,040, will be found that, a motion
being made to lay this hill upon the table, the
vote upon the motion to lay on the table stood:
yeas 68, nays 111— Franklin Pierce voting
in the affirmative.
Oltt tOIKTRt'S GOOD IS OlttS.
At pages 1047-48, it will be found that the
plain question being upon the same hill, “Shall
tho BUI jiassl the votes: yeas 109,.nays 75
Fraimin Pierce voting in the negative.
AGAINST THE WIDOWS.
Thc aclof 1838 gives to widows of officers,
&c., entitled to pensions under the net of June
,7, 1832, married prior to tlie % expiration of the
last period of said officers, j&c., service, and
“before the Ist January, 1794, for five years
after the 4th of March, 1836, the annuity or
pension which might have been allowed to
their husbands iu virtue of said act if living
at the lime it was passed.
In 1841 a hill passed tlie House of Repre
sentatives to extend the act of 1838 above
ntentiqned, and when it reached the'Senate it
was resisted.by Mr. Pierce. The Senate de
bates for 1841,'as published in the “Congres
sional Globe,’-’ page 1J7,-show’ that General
Pierbe made a spcech.ou tfie 25th July, 1841,
in which he thus states his position on tfid
passage, of that. act. In reply to Mr. Bcrrten/
he said: ‘
“That Senator, ( < Mr. Berrien,) it seemedto
him, could not have been apprised of the-firo
gress of revolutionary pensions, lip- rose
now to state what that progress had been,
and to show from history, from legislative ac
tion, from documentary evidence the danger
which must inevitably arise from a list of pen,
sions for civil service. He could Hot adduce
, more conclusive evidence that lie took his
stand upon principle in this case, than-by ad
'verting to his course at the lust session of
Congress, when a bill, from tlie House of Itepz
resentfttive, extending the law of 1838, was
under consideration. With a single exception
ho stood alone among the members from New
England in resisting the passage of that law.’
The act of 1836 gives five years, half pay.
to widows or orphans of officers, non-com
missioned officers, soldiers, &c., who have
died in the service of the United States since
the llOlh April, 1818. It also extends the
benefits of the act of June 7,1832, to widows
or children of officers, Sgc., who have died
since the 4th of March, 1831.
And now we are irresistibly inclined to ask
the reader what conclusion be is di iven to as
to the liberality, the magnanimity, and the
lofty patriotism of .General Franklin Fierce?
What does ho think of his appealing to tax
payers against .the few remaining old pa
triots who bought our liberties w ith their blood,
and the w idows and children of-those who
had lost ‘their lives, and could not longer pro
tect or provide for those deafer to them than
life, who at home suffered :is much as theHol
diers in the field so gloriously.defending thoir
Country? “We di lose the chapter, and pause
for a reply. ,
lion. C, J; Faulkner.
This gentleman is a Whig member of Con
gress ‘from Virginia,’ and is one of the Whig
“Secretaries,” who refused to support Scots,
and xvas tor FjllmCre. He delivered a power
ful speech in Congress on the 2nd tuf.,'tt'hlch
we have before uS in pamphlet form, and
from which we take the following closing
paragraphs;
There Was, it seems, one fatal objection to
his (Mr. Fillmore’§) noininatiorf, nud-tliat ob
- jeetion is alike.fatal to the nationality -of the
whig party, lie had approved the Fugitive
sjtave Jaw-, and he had, it/ the dfsehitege el liis
oifieial'ffuty, reqiiii ed'it. to he faithfully 1 xi eu
ted. Fffr tfeV he waJ sacrificed. Yes, fell it
i"ftjpTath; it in. the'street, of Askelpr
’ *fliatjftlln)qfe'was decrnedNinilvoiiable by the
whig, party bOeansj he lu-td tipjirovod, and
caused to-be executed; the fugitive slave law.
For the submission of Ids judgment, to the
of Ids country, and for his rebel
lion to tlie “hlgfior those mighty
iq tin of the .\ortii—S c naYd (J inron an and Vin
ton —array their disciplined battalions against
him. lii vain did the whig*: of the South strug
gle jn his behalf; in vain did they, four days
and nights exhibit an unbroken font, and
any to their northern, allies. We present a
man from your section*’ whose only offence
—if offence it be—is, that, lie has obeyed the
constitution, and accorded to ns our rights.
Their appeals were spurned. The decree had
gone forth: Let him die. Let his fate he an
example hereafter to all northern statesmen
who dare to pander to a slave catching poli
cy. Can there ho unity or nationality in a
party wherediscord reigns upon such vital in
terests? Is this a question upon which south,
era whig! can agre to disagree with their
northern allies ? Is is sufficient to
tell mo that the platform recognizes the bind
ing efficacy of that law? 1 have already
shown, from the mnnner of its adoption, how
little confidence can lie placed in it as a rule
of party action; and besides, mere paper roso
lotions, when they stand alone, are airy, un
stantiounl wotliingnem. ‘1 hey are salt without
its savour—bodies without souls. The nomi
ination is the living, breathing, nrinmting
principle that, imparts life to the object, and
nssures us there is a reality in what we see.
Tlie whig party might have been national
ized, it might have been made powerful.—
Had the compromise resolution been adopted
under circumstances to give satisfactory as
surance of its sincerity; and the distinguished
representative of the principles embodied in
thd resolution been triumphantly placed upon
its pedestal; and had the northern wliigs ral
lied to his supported the polls in a manner to
testify that they had the hearts to honor and
support, a man who had the firmness to main
tain the constitutional rights of the south;
then, indeed, a confidence might, have been
inspired in their patriotism and fraternal sym
pathies Unit M’ould in some measure have
atoned tor years of hostility and warfare upon
our institutions.’ But die opportunity is past;
the nationality of the whig party is gone;’ sec
tionalism rmlst forever predominate in its pre
sent organization. ‘Scott nmy succeed, lie
may become President. But success or de
feat will now he alike fatal to it. Its inevita
ble dertiny is to have ifs northern wing here
after dnsht bed in tliis great abolition free-soil
parts of that section.
IpMition pf Webster on the Territorial
f Question.
The Georgian of yesterday lias shown Jiow
easy it is to misrepresent the views of Mr.
VV muster in regafd jo tlie territorial question.
By extracting particuhy passages from his
speeches, unaccompanied by the qualifying
circumstances under which they were deliver
ed, and a statement of his whole position, it
is no difficult matter to make him, or, indeed,
any other man, appear in the light of a.hitter
opponent <qf the South. That he has uttered
opinions on the subject of slavery which we,
cannot, endorse, is frankly ‘admitted: Mr.
Pierce ha 6 avowed similar sentiments, ex
cept that he lias gOne much further in his ex
pressions of hostility to our institutions, as m o
shall take occasion'to show hereafter. So
far, however, as relates to the new slave States
tef be carved out of Texas, and to all the ter
ritory now owned by the United States, the
position of Mr. Webster is all that any Sou
thern man can desire. Th’is-ywe 6hall jiro
eeed to demonstrate.
1. Mr. Werstekls opposed to the acquisi
tion of foreign territory to form now Stutes,
whether the territory he free -or slave. In
proof of this, m’o submit the following extract
from a speech of his, delivered in the Senate
in March, 1848, in regard to die Mexican
wav. (See Oon. Globe, page 632,)
“This war was waged for the purpose of
creating new States, near the Southern por
tion of the United States, out of Mexican ter
ritory, and with such population as might he
-found resident therein. I have ofipos'ed that
against the acquisition of territory ,tq form
new States. And this, sir, is not a mutter of
sentimentality, which I am to parade before
mass meetings, or before my constituents at
home. It is with mo no matter of declama
tion', Yegrhf, or expressed repugnance. It is
matter of firm, miCliiingahle purpose, to yield
to no-tprec sis circumstances that have occur
red,’ok that I mhy consider likely occur; and,
therefore, I Say, sir, that if I am asked to-day ’
whether, for the sake of peace, I Mill take a
treaty.that brings tM r o new States into this
Union .on its Southern bonndnry, I say no—
distinctlyum! and I wish every man in the
United Stales to understand that to be my
judgment and my purpose. 1 have said on
the southern boundary, because there the pre
scht proposition takes its locality. 7 would
say the same of the, western, the northern, the
eastern, or any other boundary. I would re
sist to-dat/ and tothe enXj here, and everywhere,
any proposition to add an yfor vigil territory, on
ihe south or west, north or Cast, to the Stairs of
this Union, as. they are now constituted and
held together under lie CormitldJon. Ido not
want the colonies of Engl anil on the north. I
as little desire the Mexican pojivlution on the
Couth;’
To say, therefore, that Mr. Webster is op
posed to the acquisition of slave territory on
ly, is to misrepresent him. His hostility is
precisely the same to the acquisition of free
territory.
2. Upon the foreign jirlnciple Mr. Web
ster resisted the imiioxation of Texas (slave
territory) and our recent acquisitions from
Mexico (free.) Yet he is determined to act
up to tlie Resolutions by which Texas muis
brought into the Union. Those resolutions
contain the following provisions:
“New States, of convenient size, not ex
ceeding four in number, in addition to the
said State of Texas, and having sufficient pop
ulation, may hereafter, by the consent of said
State, he formed out of the territory flioreof,
which shall be entitled to admission nnder
the provisions of tlie Federal Constitution. —
And such States ns may he formed ont of
that pnrtipn of said Territory lying South of
36 deg. 30 min;, North latitude, commonly
known as the Missouri Compromise line,
shall he admitted into tlie Union, with or
without slavery, ns the people of each
State asking admission may desire; and in
such State or States as shall he formed out
of said Territory North of said Missouri Com
promise line, slavery or involuntary servitude
(except for crime,) shall ho prohibited.”
It his great speech delivered tlie 7th of
March, 1850, Mr. Webster quotes the fore
going provision, and jiroceeds to ask ,
“Now what is here stipulated, enacted, se
cured? It is that all Texas south of 36 30,
which is nearly tlie whole of it, shall he ad
mitted into the Union as a sluve State, it u-a# a
j Terms—s£ oo in advance,
} s:t OO at the end of the year.
slave State, and therefore came in as a slave
State—and that neM- States shall be made
out of it., and such Stales as arc formed out of
that portion of Texas lying South of 36 30
may come in as a slave States to the number of
four, in addition to the State in existence, and
admitted at that time by these resolutions.—
* * I kuoM’ no M ay, I candidly’ confess, in
whjch this Government, acting in good faith,
as J trust it always trill, can relieve itself from
that stipulation and pledge, by any honest
course of legislation whatever. And, there
fore, I say again that, so far as Texas is con
cerned, in the M’liole of Texas South of 30 deg.
‘3O min., which, I suppose, embraces all the
territory capable of slave cultivation, there is
no land, not an acre, the character of which
is not established by law, a law which cannot
be repealed without the violation of a contract,
and plain disregard of the public faith.”
Mr. Webster therefore stands upon the re
cord pledged to tho admission of four addi-
Jjonal slave States from Texas.
3.His position is not less satisfactory in re
gard to the Territories of New Mexico and
Utah. In the speech from M’liich n’e have
just quoted, he said: “And I will say fur
ther, that if a resolution, or a law, were now
before us to provide a territorial government
for New Mexico, I would not vote to put any
prohibition into it whaterer.” But this is not
all. The hills organizing terrritoal govern
ments for Utah and NeM’ Mexico (a portion
of the Compromise) contain the following
provision:
“And provided further, that when admitted
as a St ate the said Territory, or any portion
of the same, shall he received into the Union
with or-without slavery, ns their Consti
tution flirty prescribe at the time ot their ad
mission.”
“This provision, it will be observed, and
the act for the nddmission of Texas, upon the
same subject, are identical; and Mr. Web
stivß, ns a Law-abiding Man, as well as a
Compromise’ Man in the highest and best
senior, is ns fully committed to tlie one as to
the other.”
Such, then, is the position of Mr. Webster.
He is opposed to all foreign acquisitions,
whether of free or slave territory. He is pledg
ed to the admission of four slaveholding States
to be carved out of Texas. He is pledged
also to the admission oT Ncm- Mexico and
Utah as States, with or u ithout slavery, as
the people inhabiting them at the time may
desire. He is also a fiiend of the Compro
mise and-of the Fugitive Slave Lam\ So fur,
therefore, as relates to the present territory
of Ihe Uip ted States, his jiositioii is invulnera
ble. It is only in regard to future and foreign
acquisitions that he can he opposed—and
.those M'ho oppose him must first become the
advopatesof suelr acquisitions. j*
More Capers. —A. H. StepbrtfiCono of
the “cinitnifkerous politicians” of that “can
tankerous State Georgia has fulfilled the jire
diction M’e made some weeks ago, and come
out for Scott and Graham. So, at least, tho
telegraph s&srs. He is the same person Mho
got tip file pronunciamento against Scott short
ly after his nomination, Which was signed by
himself and Toombs, and in which was stat
ed the idea that lias since been used as a
strong'holt inthe democratic quiver, that Gen.
Scott took the nomination with tlie platform,
:is a man M ould accept an estate, M ith its in
cumbrances. We have no doubt Stephens
justifies his last change by arguments quite
as ingenious as those on which lie placed his
previous movement. The ambition ot Ste
phens and Toombs seems to. he that of little
hoys making sand hills —to create merely to
destroy. They arc constantly leading off
holiest folks into some separate and indepen
dent organization, which they are first to
abandon, leaving dupes to get out of the
scrape as well as they can. It is a marvel,
and shoM-s how deeply infatuated jicoplcmay
he made by politico—that such loaders should
ever have any followers. — N. O. Delta.
(ffT You have been misled, Mr. “Delta.”
Mr. Stephens is still dead against Gen. Scott
—dead against the Fm-soilers who support
him—dead ogainstGen. Pierce—dead against
the abolitionists who support him—blit per
fectly alive in Lis advocacy of die election of
Dni.iel Webster!
Parson Brow Blow on Pierce.
The eccentric editor of the Knoxville
(Tenn.) IFAig, Parson Brownlow, has been
one of the great guns of the Democratic press
since the nomination of General Scott. He
has boe'H cited from week to M eek as author
ity for the statement that 10’OCO Tennessee
Wliigs will follow his example and vote for
Fierce. The Whig of the 7th instant, how
ever, shows that the Parson is not to he re
lied upon in this particular, for, after reciting
certain of Pierce’s votes in Congress, he re
marks : “We cannot rote for, or support, such
‘an unfelling and cold-blooded Yankee as
‘this.”
“Cold-blooded Yankee” Thct, lie it re
membered, is Parson Bbownlow’s epithet ns
applied to General Pierce. The Union has
of late replenished its columns ireqtienlly with
phrases coined by our reverend eotempo
rary. Will it remember this !
NO. 20.