Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1848-08-24
How the Fox doubled on the Sla-
very Question in 1920.


the Senate of New York, adopted in 1920, a
ganst the admission of any territory, not COM
prised within the original boundary of the Uni
ted States, without making the prohibition of
Slavery therein an Indispensable condition of od-
misunderstanding that it was zealously supper
ted by MARTA Van Buren,, who was then mem
Der the Senate. We improve the opportunity
of illustrais$F the doubling of the willy fox of
Undertook on this occasion-on The Missouri
question. Il is said, as above recorded, that he
opposed the admission of Missouri in the New
York Senate. Be that as 1t may, he did sign a
call for public meeting in Albany, called to
oppose the admission of Missouri, and was ap-
pointed one of the committee to draft memo
rial to be sent to Congress; but when the day
for the meeting came, he was absent from the
city. A memorial, however, was adopted, from
which the following is an extract:
With all due submission to the superior wisdom ind in
tcgenco OF Congress- mcmotaists respectfully
constitution tslO the Legislature ougrcss) has possessed
the power OF prohibiting the Introduction of slavery into
any State thereafter to bc admitted into the Unun whether
TIA, state formed from territory comprised within the
original limits OF the United states or from Territory acquir-
cd by treaty beyond those limits and consequently tai il
possesses ndpuabe render tho prohibition
of further extension of slavery in such new Stao condi
admission into the Union That there was nothing
contained in the Treaty by which the Missouri territory was
with the rest Of cedcd to the United states 40
the exercise OF such in regard to the State
proposed to be erected therein; and it highly
Just oxpeden Congress should on the esen uccn
sion, well as in all other future in tho udmss
states into the Union, nterpnse prevent most
e1cclua the further increase o slavery this
| ton"
This memorial, adopted at meeting of mis-
own calling, Mr. Van Buren, was requested to
sign BUT lie REFUSED TO SIGN IT, for the fol-
lowing reasons:
lie sincerely deprecated tho existence of slavery in the
United States, and willing in any measure
prevent it, extension 10 the west of the Msssspp
tent ,o The Constitution, and calculated disturb thu
mont, endange The rights aud securities of slave
owners. But he willing to unite the o
proceedings from Which such results might reasonably be
nppreherdcd nor 10 join in any Pronunciation, political
otherwise against the people OF the South Notwihstand
ng his great personal respect the other members of the
committee we'll Us those whose appeared
proceedings Of the meeting, he eond approve the slr
by which the resolutions adopted by it characicrzod
Being further pressed he got little vexed
and as much as told his friends that they had nc
business to know any thing more of his reason:
in the following note:
'SIR:--Y'u had permission my name ms n Com
miee TO call meeting of our express their opn
doing So ha. opt been Gnes,"ned by me- 70" surely can
not suppose that the ofmy for that purpose i'm
posed m~nn oblgatn sign whatever memorial nigh
he agreed u<n by the meeting Being out when
was Waving no hand in forming adopting the
mortal, iGo ned SHINING 1t. My for doing So
Their than yoS concerned in calling the meeting,
sumo 1t is hblyour intention of inqung into.
Yours, respectfully,
JAN. %, 1920. NJ VAN BUREN.
"IENW T.JoNEs, ESQ.,"
E Here then, is the first appearance of Mr.. Val
Buren's constitutional scrupieS, which Ben. F
y Butler was so careful to provide for in the Buf
falo platform; and here, too, is revelation o
c the fact that Mr. Van Buren was on both side
e oflhe Missouri question in the month Of Januar
d 1890 Two months ago, he insisted upon his oil
L pledge to sustain Slavery in the District; per
= haps now he will take the opposite side If h
r does, will any Van Buren, man tell US what h
e will do a month hence?