The North-Carolina standard., 1848-10-04
MI1I.ARD FILLMORE.


to Mr. Fillmores soundness, on the slavery qnes-
ton. We asked the Editor Of that paper if he re-
rarded MIard Fillmore as sound upon the slavery
question: and he replies that he believes he is as
sound as any man of either party, North OF Masons
land Dixon's Ine.u Every body sees that this Is an
evasion but there is an important confession in It,
The Editor admits that he is not sound but believes
he is as sous1d as any citizen of non-slaveholdlng
State Now, if we did feel every confidence, from
his published opinions and his recorded votes that
Lewis Cass was entirely safe and perfectly sound
on this vital question, we would not support him.
The Register parades batch of miserable ISLANDERS
against Gen. Cass, and then asks if we do not
believe him to be an Abolitionist! We answer NO!
and we will tell that paper that no Wing leader in
this State, elsewhere, who has any regard for his
own reputation for intelligence fairdealing, will
dare prefer such charge against that distinguish
ed man. His whole career, from first to last,
gives the lie any allegation of this sort and were
all other proof on this subject set aside, the fact
that he is supported for the Presidency by ninety
nine out of every hundred of the citizens of South
Carolina, would be deemed conclusive by all
able persons Does the Register believe that the
people of South Carolina would vote for man for
President, whose position on the slavery question
was even doubtful
IL
er letter on this subject. We give it in full as fol-
lows: ..
ALBANY, Sept. 13, 184s.
DEAR SIR: 1 returned this morning from the West,
and have yours of the lOth in which you say that it
has been charged in the Richmond Enquirer that
hold it be within the power of Congress to inter-
fere with, break off, the transportation removals or
disposal of persons held slaves from oneslavehold-
ing State to another.
am not aware that this question has ever been dis
cussed in Congress, or was ever presented for the
consideration of the Supreme Court of the United
States before ls4 In that year, the celebrated case
from Mississippi decided, and Mr.. Justice Nc
Lean gave elaborate opinion this point in which
the Chief Justice concurred. He came to the con-
cluson that the constitutional power over this matter
was vested in the several Staes and not in Congress-
So far my knowledge extends this opinion carried
conviction to every unprejudiced mind, and the ques-
ton considered settled. At any rate, this was
my own opinion then, and l have seen no cause to
change it since. Should do so, l should not hesi
tate to declare it.
You will therefore perceive, that you did no in
justice in representing to your friend that these Were
my sentiments
write in haste, amid the PRESSURE of official duties,
WILLARD FILLMORE.
JAMES BRooKs, ESQ.,
AS the Editor of the Washington Union very truly
says, {" Mr.. Fillmore comes forward to expunge one
item from the catalogue of his sins but there is
VI
his doing it, He does alude to his letter
of 1885, in which he expressed himself favoraby to
every CONSTITUTIONAL effort on the part of Congress
to abolish the internal slavetrade and it is only in
le4I, after The highest tribunal in the country has
solemnly declared that his opinions the subject
are in conflict with the Constitution, which as
member of Congress he had taken oath to support,
that he appears adopt opinion in the premises.
Mr. he 10 nof that
ton had ever been discussed in Congress- - Has
he forgotten that in December, 1885, he voted against
the following Resolution! Here it is:
"esolued, therefore, That all attempts the part of
Congress abolish slavery in the District of Colum
bia, the Territories, to prohibit the removal Of
sL1pes State to Stale, to discriminate between
the institutions of portion of the conederacy and
another, with the views aforesaid, VIOLATION
CONSTITUTION, destructive to the fundamental
principle tOhich the Onion Of these States rests, and
beyond the jurisdiction Of Congress.
'' 1t passed in the afirmative-yeas 149, nays 52''
Millard Fillmore voting in the negative with Gid
dngs and Slade; and yet he says he is " not aware
that this question had ever been discussed in Con-
gress''!
The truth is, neither Mr.. Fillmore nor any other
Northern deserves any credit for saying that he
will not interfere with slavery in the States. We
might well thank for declaring that he will
HOI OuI HOUSES cut our HIS u as
that be claimed for Fillmore by has most ultra South
friends and we have shown, and again,
that in this respect he stands side by side with Gid
dings, the platform of the Buffalo Convention. In
none of the letters which he has written this sub
iect since his nomination Philadelphia, has he al
luded to his letter of 1885, his antf-Southern
votes in the House of Representatives but knowing,
as the New York Globe Declares that the 's Wings
of the South easily sqsfed,' he explains nothing,
but merely plants himself upon the ground occupied
in common by the Abolitionists, of every shade of
character, in the non-saveholding States. His posi-
ton may be briefly summed up follows:
1. He was in favor of Legislation by Congress to
suppress abolish the internal slave-trade between
the States, until the Supreme Court declared that
such legislation would be in violation of the Const
tuition.
9. He is in favor of receiving abolition petitions,
of referring them and of having Reports upon them.
8. He is in favor of an act of Congress to abolish
slavery in the District of Columbia.
4. He was opposed to the annexation of Texas,
because Texas slaveholding State and he is
now in favor of the Wilmot Proviso, which would
exclude the people of North Carolina from all par
cpaton in the benefits and blessings of the Terrific
tories of New Mexico and California.
S. In common with Giddings, Hale, Palfrey, Cor
win, Arthur Tappan, and Others he "disavows' all
intention disturb slavery in the States where the
claim to property in man is recognised, or where
&c