The Woodville Republican. [volume] (Woodville, Miss.) 1847-1853, 1851-06-03
Letter from A. 6. Brown.

GALLATIN Miss, May 3, 1851.
To the Editor Of the Matches Courier
In your weekly issue of April 30th, you
charge me with voting fer that corrupt
anti.slavery man" VIM. J. Brown for spenk-
er in company with Allen Durkce Giddmgs
and other abotionists. And hy way as |
suppose of establishing the inference that
did SO knowing well the character of the
man, YOU publish correspondence between
Wilmot and Brown, disclosing a corrupt
plo, to sacrifice the South "by organizing
;he Committees in the House of Represen-!
tatives to suit the abolltlonsts. dt was
due to me that You should have added what
| think YOU must have known to be true,
that the very fact of the abolitionists voting
for Brown aroused suspicion and led TO the
investigation which resulted in disclosing
this corrupt correspondence, and that after
this disclosure not a single Southern man
cast his vote for this "corrupt ant-slavery
man" as you call him. VIM j. Brown
had uniformly in public and in private de-
nounced the Freesoilers and Abolitionlsts.
And on the very morning after this secret
correspondence with Wimot, and not two
hours before | cast my vote for him, he de-
nonhced them to me and declared with en-
phasis that he would have no afiIletlon with
such corrupt rascais.
| submit under these circumstances chat
am no more to blame for trusting Brown
than Washington was for trusting Arnold.
We all are liable to be deceived as to ttse
character of men. You once thought our
friend Gen. Foote very indifferent sert oil
person; you now think nim the most pro-
per man in The State for Governor. Anc
by the way, speaking of Messrs Foote ant
Blown reminds me that they were associa
ted on the same National Comnittee" II
1846 for the franking and distribution @
documents in the Presidential contest be
tween Taylor and Cass. My present recol
lection is thai you did not think very wei
of that association, You seem now to hav'
forgiven Gen. Foote, and | think you arr
right in doing so, and as the two gentlemen
are again associated in the support and de
fence of "the Adjustment it may not b
impossible / suppose for you to forgiv
Brown also. You might at least cease. t
advertise him as that corrupt man Tbi
may be none of my business however, an
do not press the point.
You object it appears to my vote agains
the Utah bill, and if understand you, o
very insufficient grounds. You publish
little extract from the bill and follow it wit
a few sentences from one of Mr. Schenck
speeches. and seem TO infer that becaus
MIR. Schenck spoke and voted against th
bill, that therefore ought to have voted fc
1t. 1t you had known me better, ther
would have beeu no necessity of my telin
You that j always vote on nv own iuds
tment aud not on the judgment of M
Schenck or any one else.
regarded the Utah bill it is true. as IL
least Objectionable of all the territorial bill
aud if California and New Mexico had bee
put on the same footing with Utah, al
Texas had been let alone, am not prepare
to say that should not have voted for a
the bills. But saw California with h,
unnatural and huge proportions made FRI
on one side, ard New Mexico amplified
an acquisition of 10000 square miles
Texan territory on the other. And | .sa
butlitile chance for slavery in Utah, sltu
ated as she was between the two. Calif'
MIA was already free" and New Mexi
had softened the hearts of the free-soi
by declaring III favor of freedom" u
lay between them, and because Mr.. Schen
inferred from loose expression in the ch
ter that slavery might exist there, you Sc
to think that / ought to have jumped at
with as much avidity as 4 fish at u bob.