The republic., 1852-06-26

CcTtalnly gwen 10 tue county
When, where, and by whom has such re-
port been circulated2 Will the Union name a
paper represented at the convention, or dele
gate present there, who has said, or can say,
that the authorship of the Compromise resolu-
ton was at any time attributed to Ex-Governor
beyond lis own guesses or insinuations-for the
statement, or for any thing like it We want
to know whether this phrase, currently re-
ported" is not dodge, designed to shift the
responsibility Of an assertion that never had
any foundation in fact.
1t is not true that ex- Governor JOHNSTON, or
any other northern man, drafted "ihe resolu-
ton on the sectional issues" Ii is not true
that that resolution was ever adopted in COM
mlttee or in convention in an "equivocal
and worthless shape" The. resolution read
by Mr.. AsHMUN was in every necessary par
ticular identical with that prepared by com
mittee of southern delegates; it was, in truth,
transferred from the draft prepared by the
South; it was adopted as read, and SO stands
now; and we have the Union's admission that
it embodies every idea required to meet any
conceivable view Of the case.
To exhibit yet more clearly the reckless
misrepresentation to which the Union resorts,
in its anxiety to damage the Wing nominee,
We Gull another sentence, alluding to the con-
duct of General SCorT. .'In hot haste" il
says
"He General Scottl telegraphs to his friend,
Governor Johnston, that he accepts both nomina.
tion and platforms; and then Governor johnston
always it is he, and none bat him, hguring in the
business-rises up to make, in 30 far as possible.
this TO be an c6ieu acceptance Of the platform, Ly
reading the whole despatch to the convention,
doubtless to be recorded on its journal"
There is no evidence in the proceedings of
the convention Of any communication between
General SCoTT and Governor JOHNSTON. Gen
eral SOorT's intimation of his acceptance of the
platform was addressed to Governor JONES, of
Tennessee, and he read the despatch Governor
JOHNSTON had nothing to do wi h it and all
the ingenious reasoning of the Union, predica-
ted upon his figure in the business" therefore
falls to the ground.
Another editorial effort at Misrepresentation
appears in the following shape in yesterday s
Union:
''The National Era--the Abolition journal in this
city-in its comments on the resolutions adopted
by the Wing Convention which nominated Gene
raj Scott, says Of the Fugitive Slave law and slave
ry agitation THE question is clearly left open, and
the Whg resolutions contemplate ftoo tcays ,chich
IL might be Ifg!imateIy rsneoed IN one for the p,I
pose of amending the lao to pvecent evasion
the other, Of 20 amending ii 10 correct abuse. The
opponents and supporters Of the la,o equally at
liberty TO agitate this subject.
"Such is the view of tue metropolitan organ of
abolitionism; and it should be borne in mind that
the expression which furnishes foundation for
this view was not in the original resolutions pre-
sented by the southern delegates. And il should
be remembered, also, that IL is in both versions OF
the platform. The Era was prompt in assailing
General Pierce; but yet il has not uttered a
word against General Scott's nomination. md
| inasmuch as il believes that the Whig platform
| gives more scope for anti slavery agitation than
the ID, mocratic platform does, we presume II will
urge the election of eneral Scott If the Pittsburgh
movement should prove a failure"
The Union is responsible for the itaIicizing,
which Is designed TO impress strongly on the
reader the belief that the National Era-the
metropolitan organ Of the Freesoilers-regards
the Wing platform as leaving open the agita-
tion Of the Fugitive Slave law, and as on that
ground more favorable TO the objects Of the
freesoil faction. Turning to the National
Era, we discover that to the sins Of misrepre-
sentation m cOnnexion with the convention the
Union now adds the sin OF misquotation. IL is
possible that in misrepreseniing the relative
positions Of General ScoTr and Governor
JOHNSTON, the Union acted under a mistake
resulting from lorgetfulncss. That plea is, at
all events, open To our contemporary but for
the misquola,ion there can be no excuse. Ii is
fragrant and indeiensible. Here are the re-
marks Of the Era on the two platforms:
1.-The resolutions agree in regard TO The Fugi.
tive Law. Both contain pledge To its faithful
execution what IL the come thing, it's strict
enforcement Neither excludes amendment; both
sdmit Of the possibility Of smendm.nts, provided
they do not impair the efficiency Of the Law.
Neither asserts the principle of fnaliiy, ss 81 re-
spects The lA~; consequently, IL 10 not regarded a.
final settlement Of tic question Of the rendition
Of fugitive slaves. The question ,is clearly leh
open, and the whig resolution. contemplate two
way, in which IL might be logtimately renewed
in one, for the purpose Of amending the law, 90 81,
10 prevent evasion; In the other, Of smeefing IL
as 10 correct abuse. The opponents md supporter,
Of the la~ are lett equally at liberty se,ate this
subject.
"As IL respects tie Compromise measures, (not
including the Fugitive lav,) tho resolutions sob
s.sntislly agree. Neither expresses any opinion
concerning their merits; both pledge ncquicsoence
in them. One resolve pledges III. Democratic
party TO abide by, and adhere 10 faithful esccu.
ton o. that series of scts. the other declares that
they are received and ,equesccd in by IN. wbig
party Of the United States a, settlement in prin.
cple snd substance. Of the d.ns.rou, and exciting
questions which they embrace All th.t this dec
lsration mean, finds ito entire equivalent in IN.
brief phrase Of the Democratic resolve, 20 abide
by"
The reader will perceive that the Union,
Italicized passage, purportIng TO convey the
sentiments Of the Era, bears meaning, when
taken with the context, widely different from
that imputed 10 it. The Era does not believe.
as the Union says, chat the Wing platform