The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1840-05-14

holding states had any right TO interfere with
slavery, but he moreover declares that dis.
cgssioas on the subject 10 those states are an
abuse Of the freedom Of the press and Of the
freedom Of speech, and ia violation Of the
spirit and design o the constitution. These
sentiments we're boldly proclaimed in the
midst Of assemblies Of people, whose preju
dlces were against the positions be assumed,
and where no favor was TO be expected for
them except what truth and reason should
win from reluctant hearers. Again, ask
do these things look like abolition II so,
then must the whole South stand convicted
OF tendency to abolitionism, for he main.
tains every position on the subject which the
South maintains. He insists, that neither
Congress nor the free states bave right TO
act on the subject of slavery-that discus
SONS about il, either verbal or written IN
those states, are violations Of the constiiu
ton, and that the whole authority 90 the
entire subject of slavery, belongs to the
states having the slaves. What southern
man expects or asks for more How in
deed is il possible that We can have more OF
any thing whether property or jurisdiction)
than the whole of it! And the whole Of it,
Harrison comedies 10 us-inslsts is ours
Away then, with this vile and baseless i'm.
putallon, which was well known 10 be false
and groundless by those that, for party pur.
poses, got il up.
But how stands Mr.. Van Buren, affected
towards this subject of slavery What
was his conduct al the memorable epoch of
the Missouri question Then his good
opinion, embodied in acts, would have help.
ed US; then was the occasion of need, 10
which sincerity shows itself in acts Of ser.
vice. He was then a member Of the New
York Legislature, and Resolutions we're IN
roduced, preceded BY long Preamble
the resolutions lnstructlng the Senators from
New York 10 vote 10 favour OF the restric.
ton upon Missouri, and the preamble setting
out the reasons Of the instruction, IN an abu
sise TRADE against the people and lnsritu
tons Of the South. What did Mr.. Van
Buren, do this Northern man with
Southern principles = He voted for the
whole preamble and resolutions too J.! Yes,
this man who is now recommended to our
confidence and support, recorded his vote 10
favour Of this fragrant act Of wrong 10 South
ern righls-aye, he showed himself thor.
ough going opponen, Of the Soulh--a re.
enlless Missouri restriclionist.
Has be ever recahted or qualified this
expression ofhis opinionl No. His friends
say he was instructed by his constituents
to vote for the resolutions. OF thus, there
is not the slightest evidence-an! it NAV
be confidently denied. Bot suppose he
was. Did be not do willingly what was
qused Of him , Or did he declare in his
place, that be thought with the South on
the question, bu, vas required by his ID
structions to act with the North Did be
say that his Judgnent and his conscience
we're NTH US, but his Instructions compelled
nm TO take part against Us No, be did
not. It's not pretended that he did. Has
he ever SAID so since Has be ever, to this
day, declared that If LETT to himself, be
would have voted against the resolutions to
instruct Tie New York Senators Has be
even minated that he thinks now, that the
lnsiructng resolutions oug htnotto have been
passed No, be has hot, nor never will
make any such declaration.
But If be acted under his instructions in
voting for the resolutions, Why did he vote
for the abusive aud insulting preamble =
/ Mad as bis constituents might have been
90 the subject Of Slavery, it is no, pretend.
ed they instructed hun to abuse the South
10 rillfy our people or our Institutions. :
Why then did he not oppose the preamble
+ vote against it--moye 10 strike it GU,
I But one reason can be given, his heart was
with .he preamble and the resolutions, the
l9!mer expressed the sentiments he enter.
/ tanned, the latter directed the conduct he
slshed to be pursued against Southern 10
-ll,utIon-. Yet this is the man to whom
ae are asked TO commit the guardianship
Of our rights. ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO
ri
The Importance, Mr.. Chairman, of the
Missouri question cannot be oyerslated p
Had The principle Of restriction prevailed
and Mr.. Van Buren, did his best to make
Il preyail) the Slates'of Missouri, Alabama
and Arkansas-al these great planting
States, would have been sbu, against our
slaves. What would have been the effect
upon the value Of that kind Of property, II
is easy to presume. But besides, how
should We have stood 10 point OF power 10
I lHe Iniou Now, even with the aid Of the
States have mentioned, the slave holding
States OF the union are the feebler party
are scarcely able to maintain themselves
4 Suppose these States cast into the opposite
scale-siyIng their Influence as free States,
against us-is II not evident that If with
their aid, we can scarce assert our rights
against the prevailing madness Of the day
without them, or rather with their nppo
sition, the balance Of power IN the Union
would be destroyed, and we would be total.
( y unable 10 MAINTAIN our rights. He,
therefore, who opposed Us lheu--in the day