Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1850-04-06
A LETTER FROM Hos. T. l. oLrNsMAN.

IiOW I1o PeHtp'stel evPy JuIIuSHcu W NT tang
man.
HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES. MAaeH % 1850
TO the Editors oftts Republic.
GENTLEMEN Your Republic Of Wednesday contains a
speech puIpong to have been delivered by my colleague
r SrAsLr in the House of Representatives March 9th
1850
On looking it find that il includes some twenty or
thirty extracts from speeches Of mine delivered al different
times within the last half dozen years On the day Of its
delivery, think heard all that said by nv colleague
He commenced by SAYING that the day was rainy one
be would advise gentlemen to 60 some more comfortable
place, be did intend to speak for the House bp for
his constituents In the of his remarks he stated that
be bad extracts from my speeches which he should print
but which he did not intend read lest his hour should ex
pre before be had concluded Just before the close Of his
hour however, having supposed gone over the ground
of bis speech he began to read extract from one Of INV
speeches. but after going through few sentences ecar-
ed that as his hour nearly over he would print and
some others Until the speech appeared your paper it was
impossible either for for the members generally to know
what particular Portions what speeches. he intended
read om In fact many of his quotations refer to points
which be made auson whatever in the course of bis
speech II will not, presume, be expected by any body
that should attempt reply the floor Of the House
could DO SO with no appearance Of parliamentary proprey
Not only has SO long time elapsed that the matters really
uttered by him have passed of the minds of members
but would be compelled ask the House to give me its ear
when replying to things not spoken there, wholly the
members generally and having reference whatever the
practical business of legislation.
If this matter he has had printed meel reply it would
doubtless be held sufficient for me, with your permission
publish an answer IN the paper he has selected the
medium OF his communication 10 the country On looking
over the speech, however, candor compes admit that
does not in my Judgment any thing of sufficient
moment to justify in asking the Of your columns for
reply to it, In selecting parts Of paragraphs and some
times parts Of sentences my colleague has exhibited some in
genuy and to have exercised much caution to avoid
doing me JUSTICE and to misead his readers in relation nv
opinions as formerly expressed As far have observed
the custom that has prevailed with members of the House
since the adoption Of the hourue though they sometimes
enlarge the argumenatve parts of their speeches in the
port they sudousy avoid printing any thing that refers
the opinions or declarations Of MEMBERS unless has been
fact uttered on the floor By that opportunity is
afforded gentlemen explain defend themselves when il
seems necessary My colleague has thought proper to take
different course AS far as concerned have no OBJ
lection whatever to his bringing into review my public acts
and declarations In the manner chosen by him. II would in
my Judgment however, have been appropriate for him
to have assumed osenby he appears have done really
the character OF pampkeeer. He anxious make
appear that there is inconsistency in my
opinions on political points, expressed at different times
Though entertain doubt but that by making more
pous extracts from my speeches than he has DONE should
be able to show that opinions expressed have
teriay varied yet canno, suppose that the public generally
sstency would not in affect the progress Of leg
tive business My constituents have generally my
speeches at length, and will not therefore, apprehend
qure any explanation from But what advantage he
1eve from misleading his constituents imagine
Should any thing in the progress of events the future rem
der proper that should offer explanations shall on it
with entire confidence in my ability make successful
defence.
Having disposed Of the speech Of my colleague will now
sentlemen have found it necessary resort to your
columns take this occasion to advert certain other points
of discussion You have heretofore while condemning ultra
politicians, thought proper in several of your editorials
rlude me by name in that class
but who are to be regarded ultra politicians with refer
snce TO the great issue pending The ultra on the
Southern side OF the question that know Of claim that slavery
shall 60 all the Territories Of the United States which
common property, until it shall be excluded by State
An ultra Northern is he who claims that slavery shall
'e excluded from all the territory of these views be
more ultra than the other must be the Northern one be-
cause, even if the Southern view adopted in practice
Northern men might occupy any part of the territory without
being deprived Of any legal advantage which they
heir States, and would have the further privilege if
hey chose to exercise it. Of holding slaves IT, however
slavery should be excluded the Souherner would find him
e deprived OF certain advantages which he would enjoy
home.
Those who, standing between these two opposite ex
willing that there should be an equitable division
Of the territory, may well claim be the moderate In
this class will fall far know, alhe Southern members
Of Congress- as well as the entire of the Southern peo
Government the territory, they willing in fact that
there shall be fair division
The real question issue, therefore, is whether the
South shall have all the territory, than the
Worth, but whether it shall be permitted possess any part
of it, For example, if the Missouri line of SO 3O' ex
tended to the Pacific, then Of all the common property viz
the territory included within any Of the States only one
sixth part lies south Of that lines yet when, behalf Of the
South, insist that this comparatively small part shall be
left open u.s. claim is denounced monstrous pre-
tension, as nsufferable Southern arrogance.
With just much fairness might the South be excluded
from any share Of the public money and other public
ty OF the annually paid Of the public Treasury
small part comparatively expended in the savehoding
States This portion of the disbursement the North might
insist on stopping with good grace they support
their present claim To prove that if that also
pended in the free States would be productive of greater
good they might just the arguments that they now
resort to. While the principle would be the same, too
each case, is clear that the ultimate mischief to the South
in the future will be much greater from the exclusion from all
the territory than could result from depvng any share
IN the public money.
If these principles which to have been adopted
by most Of the Northern politicians, prevails if this Co
vernment is to acquire territory by conquest by purchase
and the Southern States to be reqsred furnish their
full proportion OF men and money and then the fruits of
tory to be appropriated exclusively by the North, idle
suppose that the South will go into any such partnership
The Southern people have been free too long to consent
thus to become the vassa Of the North As their object is
10 Obtain recognition OF their right to participate fairly in
the benefits OF the national territory their opposition Is
limited to particular mode Of exclusion, The Wlmo pro-
vso extends to all such action the part of the Fede
raj Government places always agans, them and their
institutions If for example when territory is acquired in
which slavery legally exists, the with the Lou
siana Territory then the Government directly To