The daily national Whig. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1847-1849, 1849-06-09

'e' VAC 'ihhouiatCJ uPpoNcu anu siSHcu,
and became the law Of the land. The law
bears date Oh that day-March 9th, 1920
Mr.. Calhoun gave his written opinion with
the rest, in favor of the constitutionality Of
the act, and no whisper was ever heard from
HIM to the contrary, or in denial Of the right
OF Congress TO prohibit or abolish slavery
IN territories until the introduction OF his
fire-brand resolutions, twenty-seven years
after his cabinet opionion had been given
These resolutions were brought in near
the close Of the short session Of 1S46-'7,
and were intended for general debate at
the session Of 1S47-'S--the long session
which preceded the Presidential election
and to make chance for himself at that
election by gettingup test which no north
ern man could stand But that general de-
bate never came on. Before the time had
ripened for it, the cabinet opinions Of 1920
had been found out, and were produced in
the Senate to the confusion Of Mr.. Calhoun,
and utter prostration of his resolutions They
were first produced by Mr.. Westcott, Of
Florida, and afterward by Mr.. Dix, of N.
York. The proofs were in writing, and to
the point, and from two different Witnesses
and the two, above all men in the world, the
most competent and credible to testify in the
case--Mr Monroe and Mr.. Adams--both
dead, but both speaking from the tomb, and
in the highest form known to the law Of evil
dence--that Of recorded evidence, written
down at the time as the true history Of a
fact, and without the slightest expectation
that it was ever to be used against any hui
man being. Mr.. Monroe's testimony was
in his own hand writing, obtained frenr his
son-in-law, and consisted Of two pieces
being the interrogalories propounded to his
cabinet, and the other the autograph copy,
OF draft Of letter to a friend, the interoga-
cries were endorsed thus: "IntprrOgaiories
Missouri, March 4, 1920" "To the heads
| Of Departments and Attorney General
The interrogatories themselves were inthese
words:
Has Congress right under the pow
ers vestedin it by the constitutional make a
regulation prohibiting slavery in a territoryan
I" Is the 9Th section Of the act which pass
ed both houses on the 3rd instant for the
admission Of Missouri into the Union, con-
sistent with the constitution y
| With these questions was an original
draft ola letter if Mr. Monroe's hand writ
ing, not dated, signed, or addressed to any
one, but supposed to be written to General
Jackson, which letter shows that these two
questions were put to Mr.. Monroe's cabinet,
were answered by them in writing, and that
they were unanimous in answering the ques-
tons in the affirmative This is the letter
DEAR SIR: The question which late
| ly agltated Congress and the public has been
settled, as you have seen, by the passage
Of an act for the admission Of Missouri as a
State, unrestrained, and Arkansas likewise
when it reaches maturity, and the establish
ment Of the 36a, BON. North latitude as a
line, North Of which slavery is prohibited
and permitted to the South took the opin-
ion in writing Of the administration as to the
constitutionality Of restraining territories,
land the vote Of every member was unan-
nous and which was explicit in favor
Of 1t, and as il was that the sth Sec
ton Of the act was applicable to terri
torres only, and not to States when they
should be admitted into the Union On this
latter point | had at first some doubt; but
the opinion Of others, whose opinions were
entitled to weight with me, supported by the
sense in which it was viewed by all who vot-
ed on the subject in Congress, as will ap.
pear by the journals, satisfied me respecting
it,"
The words in brackets were crossed out
by running the pen through them, and the
word explicit substituted substitution evil
IDENTIFY made TO avoid violating the cabinet
rule, not to tell the opinions Of members,
which the word unanimous would do. But
the word explicit is sufficient Taken in
connexlon with the rest Of the paper--wth
the resultant with the (almost) thirty
years silence of Mr.. Calhoun, and that word
is equivalent to the word unanimous. For
it is not TO be presumed that Mr.. Calhoun
was omitted in the address of the questions
or that he failed to answer, and to an
swer as the President required, in writ
ing--or, that failing to answer, it would not
| have been noted--or, answering negatively,
Il would not have heen equally noted.--or,
above all, that differing from Crawford and
| otntl .'OutHclIl lltH tIlIS utIlCdte point,
he would not have let the secret out at the
time, or produced since as an evidence of his
guardianship over Southern interests, and as
a proof Of his precious consistency. The
presumption against him, and the absence
| OIL all these concomltants Of dissent, are
proof positive that he concurred with the
rest OF the cabinet at the time, and never
thought Of denying it until caught fast and
hard in the fixed fact Of killing contradic-
| ton.
But the other piece Of writing is still more
close and stern than the letter of Mr.. Mon
roe. It is the diary Of Mr.. Adams, written
down at the time, and clear and pointed to
every partlcular--the questions, the answers,
the Immunity, the writing OF the answers,
and their deposit the Department of State.
The extract from this diary, furnished and
certified by the son, Mr. Charles Francis
Adams, IS IN these words:
Extracts from the Diary Of J. q. Adams.
"March 3, 1890 Wher came this day