Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1849-06-27

: net at the time, and never thought Of den,
> ing until caught fast and hard in the fixe
: fact ofa killing contradiction.
: But the other piece Of writing is still NOR
close and stern than the letter of Mr. Nor
roe 1t is the diary of Mr.. Adams write
down at the time, and clear and pointed t
: every particnlar--the questions, the an
swers the unanimily The writing of the an
swers, and their deposte in the Department
of State. The extract from this diary, fur
nished and certified BY the son, Mr.. Charlie
: Francis Adams, is in these words:
Extracts from the Diary of J. 9. adams
"MARcH 8, -ls2O.--When | came thi
day to my office, found there note re
questihg me 10 call at one o'clock, at tht
Presidents House. It was then one, anc
l Immediately went over. He expected
that two bills, for the admission of Maine
and to enable M issouri to make Constitu
ton, would have been brought to him fol
his signature; and he had summoned all the
members of the Administration, to ask
their opinions in writing, to be deposited
in the Department of State, upon two ques.
tions: 1. Whether Congress had con.
stitutional right to prohibit slavery in q
Territory? and g. Whether the eighth sec.
ton of the Missouri bill (Which inrerdiets
slavery forever in the territory north oil
364 deg. latitude) was applicable only to
the Territorial state, or would extend to it
after it should become State? AS to the
first question, it was unanimously agreed
that Congress have the power to prohibit
slavery in the Territories.
"MARcH 5-The President sent me
yesterday the two questions in writing, up.
on which he desired to have answers in
writing, to be deposited in the Department
of State. He wrote me that it would be
in time, if he should have the answers to-
morrow The first question is in general
terms us it was stated at the meeting on
Friday. The second was modified to an
inquiry whether the eighth section of the
Missouri bill is consistent with the Consti-
tuition. To this can, without, hesitation,
answer by simple affirmative; and SO af.
ter some reflection, | concluded to answer
both. u y y
"MARcH 6.-* ** I took 10
the Presidents my answers to his two con-
stitutional questions, and he desired me to
have them deposited in the Department., to-.
gether with those of the other members of
the Administration. They differed only
as they assigned their reason for thinking
the eighth section Of the Missouri bill con-
sistent with the Constitution, because they
considered it Us only applying to the Ter
ritorial term, and barely gave my opin-
ion without assigning for it any explanato-
ry reason. The President signed the
Missouri bill this morning"
This testimony leaves no room for doubt
or quibbe. 1t is clear and positive at all
points. 1t was overwhelmingly conclusive.
Mr.. Calhoun should have surrendered
His evil genius, and the fix he was in as
the leader Of party founded on new ideas
the reverse of his old ones, and the disease
of consistency, made him hesitate, and de-
ny, not directly, but argumentively, and in
the way ofnon-recollection. He could not
remember-and he could not believe that
he could have given written opinion in
such an important matter without remem-
bering ii! Unhappy man! he did not per-
perceive that this species of argumentative
denial was far stronger than the other way
that it would have been far more difficult
to have forgotten his opinion, if he had
stood alone in the Cabinet, dissenting from
all the rest, and disobeying the Presidents
command to answer! This would have
been the difficult thing to have been forgot
ten, and still more difficult to have been con.
cealed! Sensible Of the damage he had
done himself by this non.recollection, Mr..
Calhoun undertook to rehabilitate himself
by assuming to know all about the Com
promise, and by giving statement of which
was intended to convince the Senate thai
his memory was good ana entitled to credit
in opposition to all the testimony against
him: He began by assuming to know ev.
cry thing, and ended by showing that he
knew nothing He said:
81 know we'll about the Compromise the
cause which led to it, and the reason why
that the Northern men who voted ogains'
it were universally sacrificed for SO do
ing. 1t is quite a mistake, as some suppose
that they were sacrificed for voting fol
the Compromise. The very reverse is the
case. The cause will proceed to state:-
During the session Of fthe Compromise, Mr.
Lowndes and myself resided together. He
was a member OF the House of Represen
tatives, aud was secretary of War. We
both felt the magnitude of the subject
Missouri, at the preceding session, had pre-
sented herself for admission as a member
of the Union. She had formed Conslitu
ton and Government, in accordance will
an act of Congress. Her admission wa'
refused, on the ground that her Constitution
admitted Of slavery; and she was remandet
back, to have the Objectionable provision
expunged. She refused to comply with
the requistion, and at the next session a
gain knocked at the door Of Congress fol
admission, with her Constitution as it orig
inaly stood. This gave rise to one of th'
most agitating discussions that ever occure'
in Congress. The subject was one of re
peated conversation between Lowndes ant
myself The question was, what was tt
be done, and what would be the CONSCIENCE
if she was not admitted? After full refec
ton, we both agreed that Missouri was
, State-made SO by a regular process
, law, and never could be remanded back t
= the Territorial condition. Such being tn
case, we also agreed that the onIy question