The North-Carolina standard., 1849-08-01

has undergone changes in the long period of thirty
years. since the adoption of the Missouri Compromise.
At that time, the power of Congress over the terrific
ries had received but little considerations while for
the last few years it has been subject of vital inter-
est to you and, snch has been thorou ghy inves-
tgated by myself and others, whose daty it has been
to defend your rights in the councils ofthe Union,
reference to it. EHaIf 10 I'D zisf > - -e4-
To substantate the charge of change of opinion,
he introduces copy of what phrports be draft of
letter found among the papers of Mr.. Monroe. 1t
rs said to be in his handwriting 1t is without date,
not sgned or addressed to any person by name, but
contained expressions which leave no doubt that it
was intended for General Jackson. This paper was
found filed away with another endorsed " Interroga-
-Missouri---March Sd, 1890" ssTo the heads
of Departments and Attorney -General.' 1contaned
two questions of which the one pertinent to the PRES
ent subject is in the following words: Sc Has Con-
gress right under the powers vested in the const
tuition to make regulation prohibiting slavery in
territory?" The only material sentence in the draft
of the letter. in reference to the point under consider
alton is in the following words: took the opinion
in writing of the administration, to the consttu-
tionaity of restraining territories, which explicit
in favor of it, These are the exact words of the
sentence as finally corrected by its author. 1t is
explicit the statement, that the administration,
as body, was in favor of the constitutionalty but
furnishes no proof whatever of Its members being
unanimous, and of, course evi dence that any
other particular member of the Cabinet, in its
favor. sl@. s,i
This deficiency Col. Benton undertakes to supply,
first from the interinng, and next from astatement
purportng to be from the diary of Mr. Adams. First,
to the interlnng instead of expression which
was ssexplict'' - as it stands. it read in the
original draft, and the vote of every member was
explicit" These words were all struck out except
explicit" and in their place the following words
Were interlined In the first instance, IS which
unanimous and,'' afterwards the words ssunanimous
and, were struck out which left the paper as it
stands. Now hold 1t to be clear that the nerlning
and striking out so far from Strengthening the infer
that the Cabinet were unanimous, Col Benton
contends it strengthens and sustains the very oppo
site So far then it is certain the draft of the letter.
standing by ITSELF instead of furnishing proof that
the Cabinet were unanimous, furnshesproof directly
10 the contrary. Even Col. Benton himself seems
to have been conscious that it furnished satisac
tory proof as to the unanlmity of the Cabinet, and
endeavors to supply this defect from statements pur
porting to be taken from the diary Of Mr.. Adams.
From these it would appear, that meeting of the
Cabinet was held on the Sd of March, for the first
time, to consider the compromise bill and that, ac-
cording the statement of Mr.. Adams, the Cabinet
were unanimous upon the question of constitutional
ty. also appears that the President sent him the
two questions, the 5th of March, informing him at
the same time that he desired in writing from
the members of the Cabinet, and that the answers
would be in time if received the next day. Such is
the substance of the statement puportng to be taken
from his diary. ,...--.
Connecting this with the draft as it originally STOOD
and the subsequent alterations including the date of
the memorandum filed with 1t, the natural interpreta
tion of the whole affair is that Mr. Monroe drew up
and the draft of his letter intended for
General jackson on the 4th Of March, the date of the
1t could not have been earlier accord
ing to the diary of Mr. Adams, probably later.
Heidi date the draft because the letter coud-n
be finished and transmitted to General Jackson, until
after he had signed the bill. The draft was drawn
Up as it stood, in all probability the basis of the |
opinion expressed the third of March, the first day
of the meeting of the Cabinet, and which, at the time
IS the diary states was tunanmous, and the doubts
nd aiutV of expressed
If the members the two subsequent days (the 5th
md 9th of March.) which cause the interining and
he first modification of the draft as it now stands 1t
S difficult to give any other explanation. ..--r
| now turn to- Col. -Benton's reasoning upon the
subject He alleges that the words and vote of every
member was explicit were struck out and "explicit
nsered evidently to avoid violating the rule of Cabi-
let secrets tell the opinion Of members, which
he word ssunanimous - would do. His statement
contains TWO errors, to fact. Explicit was in
he original draft, and never struck out. Unanimous
made part of the original draft, rs he suPPoses:
It was part of the interinng at first; but subse-i
luently struck out All this is apparent from GER
lied copy of the paper now before me. Thus his |
falls to the ground. He carries the rule
'f Cabinet secrets very far, much farther than he does
he rule applied to the secrets of the Cabinet
ho heard that 1t was violation of any rule of
Cabinet secrets, to say the administration was unan
nous or divided 1t is constantly said in reference
o their meetings, and yet he would have you believe,
hat it-woud have been breach of confidence in Mr..
Monroe in writing confidential letter to friend of
ligh standing, to say that his Cabinet were unani-
nous; and especially, as the question was one of
;onsttutionality, and not of policy. What member
# any Cabinet would be So base and, cowardly, to
esire conceal his opinion Constitutional CUES
ion? Who, accordingly, did not know at the time,
hat the opinion of the Cabinet of General Washing
on was divided, the question of charterng bank,
md what side every member took Co- -Benton's
exclamation is destitute of even plauSibility, and
caves the drato speak foE ITSELF it stands; and
hat clearly is against the Cabinet being unanimous.
The diary of Mr.Adams furnishes the only opposing
vidence. Now, hold it to be sound rule, that
ary is no evidence of fact against any one, but he
Who keeps it. The opposite rule would place the
haracter of every at the mercy of whoever keeps
diary. It-is not my object to call IN question the
eracity of Mr.. Adams, but,he was man of strong
hasty temper, and much disposed to view
hings as he desired. From his temperament, he
would be liable notice and mark what fell within
is own views, and to pass unnoticed what did not.
venture little in saying that if his diary should be
ublished during the lifetime of those who were on
he STAGE with him, it's statements would be contra
icted by many, and confirm al Ii have stated. But
ew statements from it have yet been brought to. the
otice of the public but even of these few two have
een contradicted; !; Gone, if my recollection serves
ne( related to General Jackson, and the other to
dr. Harris, of Philadelphia, during the admlnstra-
ion of Mr. Monroe. e... ~. -
Opposed to the statement of Mr.. Adams, stands
he fact that opinions is admitted by Col. Ben
on are to be found on the files of the Department of
tate, nor any evidence that any such opinions were
yer filed although the statement purporting to be
rom the diary of Mr.. Adams says, that Mr. Monroe
irected them TO be filed. One of two things would s
to be clear either he fell into error, in max
no. the entry or that he failed to place them on ffe
\ consequence of some subsequent direction from
he President. 1t is hardly possible if they had been
laced on fle but that they would still be there or {
in eYiS