Southern standard. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 1851-1856, 1852-10-09

Hon. A. H. Stephens Of Georgia.
This gentleman for many years leader in Georgia,
and WhiOof acknowledged ability, has been address,
inc the people of that State upon the Presidential is
sues tits known to readers, that Messrs Toombs
and Stephens leaders last year in the great Com
promise Union question in that State and that they
were also signers of the celebrated Union pledge In
other words, they announced their determination to
support for the Presidency who was not OPEN
" in favor of those measures, as a "Finaty" Both
ofthese gentlemen were in Washington city, and are
known to be sagaciOus politicians as we'll as being in
all respects thoroughly post up in all the party
nents and intrigues about the capitol. Their test
mony is, therefore, valuable and as we have hereto
fore presented Mr.. Toombs' opinion of Gen. Scott
we can now, for the purpose of making the evidence
conclusive, present the views Of Mr. Stephens adding
that they both most heartily oppose the election Of Gen.
Scott The following extract is from speech delv-
cred by Mr.. Stephens, at Macon, recently. Let the
Compromise Union wings read it.
His objection to Gen. Scott, the wing nominee,
WAS founded upon the reason of his nomination,
unon the fact of his nomination under the circum-
stances under which it was effected With regard
TO Gen. SCOTS personal opinion upon the compro-
MISE he believed that he had very little if any
His opinions if he had any, were shaped and
controlled by stronger feelings, and principally by
his desire to be elected President. A compromise
platform was adopt by the convention that nomi-
mated him. Sixty men in the convention voted
against that platform But, Mr.. Stephens regard
ed the records of Congress better evidence of the
views of the party which nominated Gen Scott
than the action of an irresponsible nominating
convention. In Congress there was not single
Scott man from the North in favor of the execu-
ton of the fugitive slave law, or willing to re-
gard the compromise as final settlement of the
questions it embraced. Every Webster and Fill
more man, on the contrary either voted for it, or
willing to acquesce in it part Of the great
Plan of Adjustment. These facts show the tone
and temper of the party which nominated Gen.
Scott. He received the nomination because he
was not committed against the party. Gen. SCOTS
opinions upon the compromise never were known
in Washington City, before or after the passage
of the compromise. When in the early part Of
1851, the Union representatives of Georgia. with
others from he North and the South, signed what
has been called the Union Safety Pledge, and de-
clared that they would support no man for high
Office who did not regard the compromise as fl
nality, or who was in favor of the repeal of the
fugitive slave law, or any amendment of it which
would impair its efficiency, no expression of opin-
ion could be obtained from Gen. Scott. Mr. Fill
more and MIR Webster were known to be in ia
vor of it. All that time it was known which would
be the stronger the compromise or the -anti-com-
promise parry, and Gen. Scott was not silent upon
the whole subject. About this time he received
the nomination Of the Pennsylvania convention
for the Presidency, which repudated the fugitive
slave law in express terms. Gov Johnston was
nominated by the same convention for election,
who put in his pocket the bill Of the Legislature
repeating the law of Pennsylvania by which the
ials OF the Stt,e were disallowed the South for
the confinement of fugitive slaves. Gen. Scott
d.! not disapprove the Pennsylvania platform;
ami Gov Johnston canvassed the State urging
the repeal of the fugitive slave law, and with
Gen. Scott as his candidate for the Presidency
Vnon, in Ohio, canvaSSed his State upon the
same plaform-the repeal of the fugitive slave
law, with Gen. Scott as his candidate for the
Presidency. Thus did Gen. Scott by his silence
uron the compromise, lend himself to a party in
Congress, in Pennsylvania, in Ohio, and through
out The North organised in opposition to the com
promise. And this party Went to Baltimore de-
manIng victim, determined to sacrifice Webster
aud Fillmore, and to do it with General Scott
Since his nomination, Gen. Scott, it is said, une
quivocally endorsed the compromise; and letter
from him TO Mr. Clay and his speech to the Mis-.
sssippi delegations are quoted evidence Of the
fact. With regard to these documents, Mr. Ste
phens said he could not deny their aothehtcitv,
but he doubted it. The letter come from an anony
nous correspondent of newspaper in Tennessee
and the speech from gentleman in Mississippi
Mr. Stephens could only say, that in Washington
City, nothing was known the letter or the speech
and that if Gen. Scott was in favor of the com
promise, he might present his opinions himself tt
the Southern people, and not leave them to fine
their way to the light, from unknown or irrespon
sible sources.