American telegraph. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1851-1851, 1851-07-29
~ Communicated
Mr.. Stuart and AbOlitfOnism.


In a communication which appeared in the
American Telegraph, some weeks ago, notice was
made of Mr.. Secretary Stuart's declaration in
his famous Richmond speech, that he retained
no Abolitionists in Office among the eight hun
dred " dependants'' connected with the Interior
Department, and commentary upon his de-
claration was furnished by reference to the
fact that he had appointed to, and that he still
retained in, the Office of Indian Agent for Mi
chigan a noted Abolitionist and Free-soiler,
Mr.. Sprague, who was in the last Congress,
and voted with Joshua r. Giddings and his
Abolition followers against all and every one
of the compromise measures.
The writer of the communication stated that
the reason alleged for not removing Mr.. Adolf
ZIONIST Sprague, agreeably to the earnest wishes
and appeals of the leading Union Wings of
Michigan, was, that Gov. Cass and the Hon.
Mr.. Buel, Democratic members of the last Con-
gress from Michigan, had written letters asking
the retention in Office of Mr.. Sprague. And
the writer suggested that Messrs Cass and
Buel, shrewd politicians, knew what they were
about-that their aim in this business was to
distract and divide the Wing party in Michigan.
In reply to these statements and suggestions,
the Hon. Mr. ,Buel has sent letter from De-
troit to the editor of the Union in this city, in
which he says:
envy attention has just been called to com
munication in the American Telegraph, over the
signature of 'Aristides,' in which q statement
is made concerning myself that has not the
slightest shadow of truth or foundation. l find
it there stated, as reason why Mr.. Stuart
Secretary of the Interior, has refused to remove
Mr.. Sprague from the office of Indian agent of
this State, that have 'pritten letters in favor
Of the retention IN office of Mr.. Sprague'
"This is, the only paragraph in which my
name is used, and / have only to say that there
is not a word Of truth in it. l have never re-
commended in writing, or in any other way,
either the appointment or retention Of Mr..
Sprague as Indian Agent"
This disclaimer will do, so far as Mr.. Buel's
statement that he has not recommended Mr.
Sprague's appointment to or retention in office
is concerned. | am glad to learn that he has
done nothing Of the kind. But has he not been
little uncandid and disingenuous by repre-
senting the statement in the Telegraph as refer
ring to him alone, and then contradicting il |?
He had no right to declare there was no truth
in the statement The statement was, that
Gov. Cass and Mr.. Buel had written to have
Sprague retained in office. He misrepresented
the statement, changed and perverted it, and
then gave it positive denial Did he not
know at the time he wrote his denial, that Gov.
Glass; his neighbor and friend, political and
personal, had written rs charged, and therefore
that at least half Of the statement published in
the Telegraph was true? / need not inform
Mr.. Buel, good lawyer, that the suppressio
UeyI is rs criminal in the eyes Of the law and of
morality as the suggestio falsi
! While upon this subject, let me point to
another instance exhibiting the tenacity with
which Mr. Secretary Stuart holds on to an
| Abolitionist in office under him. In one of the
bureaus attached to the Interior Department,
there is New ork- Van Buren, Free-soil Abo-
litionist who, while in Office, has been open
mouthed in his hot opposition to the compro-
mise measures in general, and to the fugitive
slave act in particular Five or six Of the New
York Wing members Of Congress have urged
and urged Mr.. Stuart to turn out of Office the
Abolitionist referred to. But Mr. Stuart stead
lily resists their entreaties. Much has been con-
jectured as to Mr.. Stuart's motive of action in
this matter; but those who know him best and
are aware of his love for Old Virginia, and his
belief that Virginia is entitled to pretty much
all the Offices as well under Wing as under 0
Democratic administration, will have it that he
bases his ground of resistance in this case upon
the fact that he has learned that the Abolitionst
he holds on to has Virginia lady for his wife.
4 In conclusion, let me say to the reader that
my object is not to urge forward prescription, In
what may write for paper published here
under the very nose Of power, but TO try Mr..