The Arkansas advocate., 1836-05-20

friends, the Humbuggers. They are great ly indignant at the charge-but, unluckily. the facts are over tough for them. They are ill the same predicament with Pistol, when Fluellen would have him eat the leek :-
 zza. peseech you heartily, my desires, and i6s requests, and my petitions, to eat look yUu this leck pecause look you, you do not love it, your tohs and your appetiies and your digestions not agree with it. would desire you 10 cat it.
 Pst. Must bite
 Ffa. Yes, certainly; and ont of doubt, and out of questions too and antiquities.
 Pst. eat, and eke swear
 To the record again!
 On the 29th of January, 1sa0. in the New York Senate, the following Preamble and Re- solution passed unanimously:
 Whereas, the inhbiting further extension slave " in these United States Is subject deep the people of this State and whereas consider slave " an evil much to be depored and every Con. xuonl barrier should be inerp posed prevent fur ther extension and that the Constitution of United Stes clearly gives Congress right require new States comprised within the original boundaries of The U. States, the prohibition of slavery. condition of their admission into the Unioni therefore,
 Resolved, if the honorable Ssnate herein,) that Senators be nsructed and Representatives fin Congress be requested, oppose the admission as State, into the Union, of any Territory comprised aforesaid, without making the prohibition of slavery therein an indispensable condition of admission.
 VAN BuREN was present, and voted for the Resolution. Here. then, is palpabie mat ter. Here Is distinct, direct, decided vote. But, say his friends, she ,oas instructed so to do, and is therefore excusable' Not so fast If you please to recollect, Van Buren was never an upholder of the right of in- struction. When the people of New York instructed their Senate to give back into their hands the privilege of choosing Elect ors, .uaafin Ian Burea ridiculed the idea of instruction. He acted according to his we'll known remark in 15l2-ssthe farther power is removed from the people, the better'' His conscience must have grown wonderfully ten- der and troublesome by 1890. But look still closer at the matter. What says the pream- ble! That C the Constitution of the United States clearly gives Congress the right to require of new States the prohibition of slayery''--in other words, that Congress can abolish slavery in the Territories. Now. here is clear and decided opinion given on a Constitutional point. Did Van Buren be- lieve this position? If SO, he was an aboli- tonist. Did he say so because he was in= structed? We apprehend that this is sones what further than the right of instruction would extend. The people may ordet their servant what to debut they would hardly say to a Senator, ts We instruct you to 5esiege 50 and so-to betiere that t,is thing is consti- tutional, and tAat is not" It strikes LIS that this would be assuming one of the preropa- tives of Omnipotence. Or do his advocates mean to allow that he varies his opinions on Constitutional points, according to whatever happens to be the popular feeling and the strong side :! If so, we give them credit for their frankness. But he was not instructed: His vote clearly declares his opinion, that 1t Is Constitutional for Congress to abolish slave ry in the Territories--and acting under that Constitutional belief, he instructed the Sena- tors from New York in Congress to vote against the admission of Missouri, except as free State-and at Hat oery moment .Ne,o York aods slave State. This assertion that he was instructed stands without proof We challenge the proof of it-and if instructed at all, he could not be instructed as to his opinions on Constitutional points
 The next link, in the chain of evidence which proves him an aboltionist; is his SUD- port of Rufus King. For the historical facts which follow, we are indebted to the Phila- delphia Daily Advertiser. Rufus Kings term of service as U. $. Senator, was to ex- pire in the winter of lSIe-l9. Van Buren had acted in concert with him against Madi- lson and the war. King was candidate for reelection, before the State Legislature and was supported by the Federal party. If Van Buren went for him, he was re-identified With that party. He played his game there lore, to prevent an election. John c. Spen- cer, the friend and connexion of Clinton, was nominated by the Democratic Caucus. Van Buren bolted, and refused to be governed by that nomination. In January, 1919. Gener- al German was elected Speaker. He was distinguished Democrat, but friend of Clfrl- ton, and was elected by the aid of Federal votes. The Van Buren papers immediately opehed a war upon Clinton and his friends They denounced them as having united with the federalists, for the reelection of Rufus E;nm