The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1850-08-13

That the Bill [Clayton's Territorial Bill
was designei 10 openhe door far lie aduiss on Of
Stnr'ry INTO a certain portion efke 7trri'ories, and
was 50 treated by d. the Committee, we have
very dircc, pi'of."
e That a portion Of the new territories
would necessarily be Stare sod, and that the
Bill was framed so as to leave the inlroduc-
ton or prohibition of slavery in those terri
tories TO be determined by the laws of = pop
%ulation, climate" &c.-and, of course, TO
leave the door open to the introduction of
Slavery, wherever it could get a foothold,
and drive off free labor These, it seems,
from the testimony OF Mr.. Clayton, were the
views of the whole Committee, including
Judge Phelps. Are these the views of the
3D." almost entire North now? If we arc to
believe the biographer Of Judge Phelps, they
arc"
"LPadina Whigs-forcmost OF whom is
Daniel Webster declare they will not vote
for California a free State. because she has
not the requisite and right kind of popula.
ton, and is not prepared to be admitted into
the Union !'-Brandon Post, July %.
There are in the above extracts three di.
rect and unqualified statements which are to-
tally and palpably false. The author of these
extracts is E. d. Barber, Esq. The only
shadow of proof he offers for establishing the
assertions in the first Two passages we have
quoted, is the speech of MIR. CLAYTON on
presenting his report;-and in those remarks,
as Mr.. Clayton himself distinctly declared, he
expressed only lis owa rieps, and did not
speak for other members of the Committee
at all! This important fact, however, Mr..
Barber ~ncglects to state. And this be calls
very direct proof.
On the first opportunity that presented,
Mr.. CALHOUN, Mr.. KING, of Alabama, and
Judge PHELPS, stated explicitly TO the Sen
ate that they did not assent to the views OK.
pressed by Mr.. CLAYTON. That no reader
OF this article can possibly mistake judge
PnELPs's position, We will quote from hi,
own words on the subject-in his speech ir
the Senate, July 81, 1913. Speaking of thai
bill, as it related to California and New Mex
ico, he said
81 suppose We THE Committed all aareet
that it Slavery is not there now, and tina
it could not be- brought there without legisIa
ton and in the simplicity Of my heart an,
the simplicity Of my intellect, | supposed tina
# Il local regulation were already made whicl
forbade the institution, and that regulation
were left in force. The institution would be IF
JectuaIy excluded. M iIea of The matter il
simply this that the institution being alreA
dy excluded, il you forbade any change o
the law, 1T REALLY WAS EXCLUDED FOR
EYER"
iAP. to Cong. Globe, sO@ Cong. LIST Sess
p. 1901
This was said directly after the presenia
ton of the bill in the Senate, aud in the frs
full exposition Of his views that he attempt
ed. Precisely the same view was taken in hi
address to his constituents on the subject
and at all times aud in all places, wheneye
and wherever he has spoken of it. Al bi
remarks on it--frst and last-are based o
GLis understanding of the effect of the BIZ
This every person who is sufficiently we
Informed to speak i~ntelligently on the subjeC
KNows.-The attempt to misrepresent III
writer in the Wing Review, as sanctionin
any other view of the bill ,han this, does nc
Jequire any notice,
The third extract contains an assertion f
winch 40 p.o1fis alfred, and which go "a
rs Daniel Webster is concorned) every pc
son t~olerably acquainted with public affair
knOws to be not only wholly untrue, but d
rectly tue reverse Of the truth. Unilorml
and very decidedly, Mr.. WEBSTER has froI
The FIRST been q strenuous ddcooaie Of the in
ma1fnfa a1tuias.un of D,1ic,rni. ,ritL a.