The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1851-07-30

Daniel Webster and Winfield Scott.

ton in 1859. So far as We have observed.
Cen Scott has been, ms yet, put forward NJ
= candidate by the free sellers and the in,
considerable portion Of The wings only who
are Hinged With the peculiar doctrines of the
higher law. Ii is somewhat difficult to
conjecture why these classes OF partisans
have selected Gen. Scot, as the representa-
i've of their peculiar views. This difficulty
Is not diminished by their publication of the
letter Of Cen. Scott, dated Washington,
Feb. ., lS4S, containing his views upon A.
merican slavery. From their remarks which
accompany the publication Of the letter, it
seems they imagine thcro is substantial
difference Of opinion respecting the subject
between the General and Mr.. Webster. II
they have any such belief it is, among their
many, ono Of their least considerable errors
We have read that letter attcnti,cly, and
We ara unable 10 discover any difference Of
opinion on the subject of it between the
opinions il contains and those which Mr.
Webster has always held and expressed pri-
yately aud publicly, in Congress and out of
Congress- and which lac now holds and ex-
presses on all fit ing occasions. There is no
sentiment or opinion in the letter of Gen.
Scott which is inconsistent with or which
initiates in any degree againit any sentiment
or opinion proclaimed by Mr.. Webster in
the great speech made by him on the 9Th OF
March, or in any subsequent speech made
By him. More than this Gen. Scott, so far
as we know, has not done single act, or
said single word, certainly there is nothing
of the sort in his published letter, to show
that he dissents in any particular from those
held and so often expressed by Mr.. Webster
respecting the much misrcpresen,ed fugitive
slave act.
But 10 the letter. Gen. Scott says: "In
boyhood, at William and Mary College, and
in common with most, if not all, my COM
panions, became deeply impressed with
the views given by MIR. jefferson, and by
Judge Tucker, in favor of gradual eman.
cipation Of slaves; and my early impressions
are fresh andanclaneed.
Such, So far as we know, arc the senti>
uisnts which Mr.. Webster holds, and has al.
ways held and EXPIRE sscd on the same sub.
jet. We know of no difference on this
point in the opinions of Gen. Scott and Mr.
Webster
Again Gen. Scott writes: 81 suppose |
scarcely need say that, in my opinion, Con.
gress has no color of authority under the
Constitution for touching the relation oil
master and slave within state"
Every constitutional law, or has expressed
the same opinion again and again. The fol-
lowing remark in The recent speech of Mr.
Webster AT Buffalo was misquoted in the
Geographic report:
Gentlemen, | regret exceedingly that
slavery exists in the Southern States; but
Congress has no power TO act upon it. Ii
may be, however, thai in the dispensation oil
Providence some remedy for this evil may
occur, or may be hoped for hereafter
And Mr. Webster, in his letter containing
tho correction of the report, addressed tc
Hon. J. NJ. Bolts, says:
at must be obvious 20 every intelliren,
person. that if Congress possessed power o.
yer slavery as it exists in the Southern
States, any attempt to exercise such power
would break up tho Union just as surely as
an attempt to introduce slavery into Massa-
chuse'ts These are subjects of mere State
right onl State authority, intended original.
~ 10 he iat entirely with the States, and
they must so be left sliH, if We wish to pre-
serve the Union"
IL will be seen from the above that Messrs.
Webster md Scott hold and express the
Same opinions in relation 10 the emancipation
OF slaves, and OF the powers OF Con-
gross over slavery in the States where it OK.
lists.
Again Gen Scott says {" hold the on.
posite opinion respecting the District Of
Columbia" That is, that Congress has no
power touching The relation of master and
slave in the District. So does Mr.. Webster,
and SO he has always said both in public and
private. Neither Mr. Webster nor Gen.
Scott would abolish slavery in the District
until change of public sentiment should ar
ford reasonable presumption that doing it
would produce more benefit than injury to
the two races.
Again Con. Scott writes: {" have from
the first bcen'of the opinion that Congress
was bound by the Constitution to receive, 10
rufer and to report upon petitions relating TO
domestic slavery as in the case of all other
pctirions-but have not fniled to sec and
10 regret the unavoidable irritation which
the former have produced in the Southern
States, with the consequent peril to the two
colors, whereby the adoption of any plan Of
emancipation has everywhere among us been
greatly retarded"
Such we're the opinions Of Gen. Scott on
this point, and such always have been the
opinions Of Mr.. Webster.
Again Gen. Scott writes " | own, myself,
no slave-but never have attached blame TO
masters for not liberalng their slaves
knowing that liberation, without the means
of sending them in comfort to some position
favorable to 'the pursuit OF happiness
would, in most cases, be highly injurious to
sll around, as well as 10 the manumitted
families themselves-unless the operation
we're general and under the auspices OF pru,
dent legislation. But ! am persuaded that
II 10 high moral obligation Of masters and