The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-07-18

| n
Representatives Noo, he turns deaf ear to similar
exkortatlons, and leads movement, the most favor
able issue OF which, far as his advancement i.
concerned, is to devolve the election upon that BODY
Ihen, he denounced the aboltoniss and their agitation
Nov, he courts their alliance and support Then. h,
repeated the warnings OF Washington and Jackson in
their farewell addresses to their countrymen and of JEFF
ferson and Madison occasions scarcely less solemn
against sectional parties founded upon geographical lines
and their patriotic denunciaon against all who should be
concerned IN encouraging the formation of them No,0
he heads movement looking to that result, and thus
brings upon himself the judgment of condemnation by
these fathers OF the republic And to make the matter
worse, II anything make it worse, to exempt himself
from this inconsistency, he msquotes his own acts and
to prove that he not aposate in s4s he takes ground
which, true, shows that he was an mposor ten wears
before
All this alleged; and to make good our allegations
we produced the strongest poofin most instances from
his own pen. But we happened, the same tme Incl
dentay to contrast the ordinances of 1884 and l7s7 the
circumstances under which they were passed and to
remark "that the first was passed when the Congress
was In its entire vigor and nearly full; the second
when it was in the last days of its existence and when
there were few men in it who enjoyed to any great ex
tent, the confidence of the country"
In saying this, it seems we committed, in the estimation
OF the "New York Evening Post" heinous offence
and in its Indignation it forgets Mr. Van Buren, and at
least as far structures upon him are concerned
would have the country to forget him also and INDUCES
In three mortal columns in its language 'to vndi-
cate the rutho history and repe the aspersions on
the memory of those who founded our free institutions
With all due respect to the New York Evening Post,
we would suggest that before undertakes to vindicate
the truth of history, it had well inform itself accurate
ly of it, on the points to be indicated as we will prove
has not in this instance; and that its time would be
more prohtably employed in chassing the conduct of
those who are doing much to destroy "ou free inst
tutions" than In repeng visionary aspersons which its
own imagination has conured up the memory of those
who founded them In the instance it will find in
its own idol living subject in the other it will be deal
ing with the phantoms of its brain. II it is deter
mined in these uitaran days TO become knight-errant
would advise it, with all due respect to defend those
who really assaied and not, like another Don Quix
otte, sally out to protect imaginary victims
But let us take up, one by one, the Posts grave
charges 1t says
The of the "Union" that the clause prohibit
ing slavery stricken of the ordinance of I7s4 III
orally true but nothing can be further the truth than
the whole scope of the "Unions' reasoning which n.
to invoke the authority of the who posed the Con-
of that period against this provision and represent
that the omission of it in accordance with their
sense.
Now, nothing can be more unfair than this statement
1t not TO be inferred, from anything we had sad that
the omission OF the ansavery clause in the ordinance
of 1854 was in accordance with the general sense of the
Congress of that year. On the contrary the very reverse
is the case Mr. Van Buren, had stated in his letter. with
the view of showing change in the sentiments of the
statesmen OF the SOUTH that the antslavery clause of the
ordinance was first brought forward" by Mr. Jefferson
and the representatives from all the slavehoding States
gave it unanimous support" In reply to this we said:
It's true Mr. Jefferson the chairman the commit
tee which reported the ordinance of I754not the ordi
nance of 1851 He was not in Congress in 1887 having
left in 1884 1t is also true, that that ordinance as re
ported contained clause which prohibited slavery in the
Northwestern Territory after the year 1900 of the Christian
era-thus looking to prospective prohibition after the
lapse OF sixteen years; which, admit, favorite
policy with Mr. Jefferson But this clause struck out
OF the ordinance of 1884, upon the motion of Mr. Speght OF
North Carolina, by the Of the soerm Staes-virgna
among them-and the ordinance adopted without it
SO far from saying it struck out " in accordance
with the general sense of the Congress- statement was
in terms that it was struck out "by the votes of the
southern States" We knew that the vote was strictly
sectional one-every northern State which was present
voting to sustain it and every southern State, with the
exception of North Carolina which was divided voting
to strike it out. We also knew that on the 10th of
March, 1885, when Mr.. King renewed the effort to en-
graft the antisavery clause upon the ordinance. the vote
was similar one-every southern State, except Mary
land, where MIR. McHenry was overruled by his COL
leagues voting against the proposition to commit
for consideration, and every northern State voting ia
vor of the commitment. The proposition always de-
feated by nearly sectional vote till it assumed the form
of compromise when it was adopted with but dis.
York Richard Henry Lee, whom the New York Even
ing Post highly eulogzes, voting for it in the latter
shape, and against it until it assumed it,
The Post having perverted our meaning to make out
we had argued that the anti-savey clause of the ord
nance of 1854 struck out by the general concurrence
OF Congress, upon that presumption thus proceeds
The Union having, it think, enlisted the
hoy OF the Congress of 1884 against that clause prohibiting
slavery for which than two-thirds of the members
present voedi proceeds draw between
that body and the Congress of 1887 for the purpose of
ating the authority of the former which it claims thus to
appropriate In doing so, it commits of fact
than say have before been compressed
within the space Ii has long been notorious that the
ideas of the venerable editor of that Journal political
and constitutional history, ended with the resolutions OF
9S; but is apparent that they also began the
period.
The Union says that the ordinance "a "was passed
when the Congress its earliest vgor" but that OF
81 was passed when it in the last days Of its exist
$50 WI