The Arkansas advocate., 1836-07-08

. ,,,a. .s,,re but he cannot De instructed 10 say shat ha believes this or that measure to De r;ght. when he believes 1t to be wrong.
 Nor do we find that his opinions, thus de- Iberately expressed in 1920. when N. York Senator, have altered up to the present time. During the past spring, we hnd hlm deciar- ing ssthat he would not feel sale Ill saying that Congress has aoi the powerto to aooiish slavery in the District of Columbia" If they have this mower, they can also abolish it in the Territories--for the Congress of the Uni ted States rules as directly, and with as un- limited power over the one as the other.
 We find him also. in 1920. using course of extreme .duplicity with regard to Ruius Kipg. That gentleman was a ee-iaboref iii the cause of ultra-federalism with harrlsoh Gray Otis, Caleb Strong and others oi the leaders in the Hartford convention. While Mr.Van Buren professed to oppose hls elee- tion, and in public took an active partagalnst him, he was secretly matchmaking to secure his election, and actually wrote an anony- nous pamphlet in his favor-and yet he at the same time knew that Mir. King, if elect ed Senator, would warmly oppose the admls. sion of Missouri, as he in fact did. When the election came on, Martin Van Buren de- serted his party, and carried over with hlm strength sufficient to elect the Federal oen- ator.
 In 1929, we find Mr. Van Buren voting m the Senate of the United States in favor ot re- strcting the admission of slaves into Florida
 In 1921, he was member the New York Convention, called for the purpose ofamend- inp the Constitution of that State. A certain article in tue Constitution submitted to the Convention specified that all free actite males over the age of twenty-one should be allowed to vote. A motion was made to strike out the word achite--so as to give free negroes the right to vote--and Martin Van Buren roted for He motion. A motion was after wards made to reinstate the word aohite-and Martin Van Buren voted against 1t. He stands therefore before the people of Arkan- sas as the advocate of free negro suffrage.
 In 1894, he voted for the Tariff--in 1897, he voted for the Woollens bld--whlch was also admitted to be q Tariff bili--and Tn ls2S he voted for the bill of abominatlons--the Tariff bill of that year--1n company With Daniel Webster. This latter bill was the very one so odious to the whole South, and to be released from the oppression of which South Carolina plunged into the great error of nullifcation. ltwas bill adverse to the dearest interests of all the cotton growing States--and directly and expressly calcula- ted to impoverish them for the benefit ef the
  voted against repeating the duty on salt, which was another Tariff measure, caleula- ted to keep up the price of that indispensable nrticle--and which Mir. Van Buren was Tn favor of for the purpose of encouraging the salt manufacturers Tn the western part of New York. at the expense of the people ot the western country.
 In 1928, Martin Van Buren voted four fimes iT one session against the biil for redu- cinr and graduating the price of the public Iands-for making donations of land to actual settlers-and for granting the refuse lands to the States in which they lie--a bill dear to every poor citizen in the West.
 In the same year he voted against a bill which granted donations of land to the per- sons who lost their improvements by the ces- sion of Lovely county.
 We find him, in the State of New York, to have opposed giving the election of Presiden- tial Electors into the hands of the people, and in favor of retaining it in the hands of fhe Leuislature--and also to have opposed giving the people the election oi their ooV- ernor.
 We find that he opposed the bill for inn proving the navigation of the Ohio and Mis- sissppi, and the bill for the final settlement ofland claims in the Territory of Arkansas.
 We are therefore to regard Martin Van Buren as opposed to the war--to improving western watcrs--to reducing the price of the nublic lands--to repaylng to our own clt- zens what they lost by a treaty of the United States--to the admission of Mlssouri--to gi- vino the people the election of their Govern ar and Electors--against the free admission of slaves into Florida--in favor of giving free negroes the right to vote--and of the Tariff and Abolition. What claims has he uDon our votes to overbalance these objec- tions! Will a proper regard for our own rights--a due care of our own interests, all low us to vote for any man who has untortu- nately been ever found against us when we were most interested!
 To all these objections we hear but one an- swer--and it comes to us in the voices of a hundred thousand office helders--''He will carry out the principles of General Jackson's administration"
 To this we say, in the first place, that we can have no certain assurance that he will be consistent in the support ot any set ot prln- ciples or men. His course through his whole public life seems to have been one of poilti- cal expediency. He is proven to have been cunning, intriguing, double-taced and dou- ble-tongued politician. First opposed to the war, and then in favor of it--irst supporting Clinton and then doserting him, when, de- spite of ieering, contempt and opposition, he commenced the unpopular work of the Erie canal--and again supporting him after the canal had succeeded--hrst against Rufus Kinr. and then for him-eyer working se- cretly and in the dark, we have no guarantee of his future political course.