Southern standard. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 1851-1856, 1852-08-14

James CflSIy, NelSOn N nliDTlck,
VIM Parker, Stephen Fippen,
E Parker Mark Colburn,
Cyrus Wilder, Thomas j Stone,
Levi Chamberlin, John Shirley,
Moses Woods, John Shirley, jr.,
VIM Parker, jr., Willard Colburn,
Daniel Dodge, Daniel Gregg, of
Dustin Marshall New Boston.
july "a, 1852.
''In regard to the character of the signers of
this document and the n ture Of their testimony,
we suboin the following observations from the
Boston Post in which journal the document is
printed. We remark simply that We have before
us a letter from one of the most respectable gen
temtn in New Hampshire, addressed to one OF
the members of congress from that State, giving
exactly the same information as to the character
and position of the sgners whose names are given
above. Says the Boston Post:
THAT evidence is both negative and positive.
1t pronounees the abEtion reports OF Gen. Pierce
speech as a tissue of tulSehoodS, while it dis
tincty afirms what he did say to this law
The Republic may like to know as to the charac-
ter of some of these signers. Now, Benjamin
Fletcher was chairman of the New Boston meet
ing George G. Fox is the town clerk of New
Boston John Grgg is the present representative
Of this town Daniel Campbell, r. b. Cochrane,
and several others, have heretofore represented
New Boston in the Legislature Jesse Carr, OF
Goffstown and William Parker, OF Francestown,
are the judges of the court of common pleas Fer
! ley Dodge of Amherst, is clerk OF the superior
court Elijah Monroe, If Amherst, is hgh sheriff
/ of the county in which he resides; Walter French
and Isaac c.. Flanders, of Manchester, are TWO oi
the wealthies and most respectable citizens OF that
city and B. B. Whittemore of Nashau, Is one OF
the State Senators. Such are some OF the slgners
to this document. A more specific and concIu-
sive piece of testimony it would be hard to find
1t nails the abolition reports the counter the
bascst sort of coin.
But the Republic likes contemporary testimony
as to the views of Gen. Pierce. Now. it happens
that he made three weeks after his speech at New
Boston, another speech at Bradford. In this
speech he spoke of the fugitive slave law enacted
Gin accordance with the requirements of the con
stitution. An account OF this speech was pub
lished in the Union Democrat of January %, 1852
The following is the portion relating to this law
''Ths law had been pronounced constitutional
by the highest judicial authorities, and contained
not single principle that did not exist either il
the statute of 1898 or in the common law. Tn
} der these circumstances, 1t was our duty to sus
tain and obey it. If other views should prevail
it would be considered as an expression of deter
mination on the part of the North disregard th'
: plain provisions of the constitution and ever,
one might see the result. The Union could no
} long exist, and the two sections of the countr'
would soon be involved in civil war, to which
for ierceness and atrocty, the history of the worC
f has furnished no parallel"
Now, the statements contained in this abstract
in all these letters, and the above certificate, agre
t with Gen. Pierce's letters and speeches on th
compromise measures and the fugitive slave law
and in harmony with his whole political course
{ We challenge one and all to produce cleane
d record as to any northern man. We AFFIRM wit
+ that herr ut he
: first to last, openly and boldly, with power c
e argument and persuasive eloquence that few ca
e command he has stood up boldly as the defende
of the constitution and the rights which it guaran
ties, as the opponent of abolitionsm and It's mon
: strous higher-law doctrines. He unraveed il
0 ntrigueS, and tore the mask from its selfish dema
: gogues. In 1850, when the question was wheth
i er the compromise measures should be sustained
S he appeared at the great Union meeting, Novem
i Der go, 1885, at Manchester-those meeting
n which abolitionsm in all its phases here rldicue
d or denounced-and there made most powerfl
3 speech. He stood on broad constitutional grounC
II elf (his words were while the abolltionlsts wei
i kissing around him the constitution provided ft
the return of fugitive slaves, it should be DONE
le That was what he wanted to do: and that W.
what the friends of the Union established
Of them wanted to do.' Misses. "These (sa
.e Gen. Ps) are the arguments of the .higher-law
ic suppose"
lie The same year in private letter he writes
re s'What the North and the South but comp
t nent parts of our common country-parts viii,
al should be regarded as absolutely inseparabe n
united merely by reciprocal rights and obligatio
lie arising under the constitution, but bound ogeth
re by ties of Affection common interest, and recipr
cal respect On the 10Th of March 1852, in
public letter he regards the triumph just achiev
in his own State, where aboIticnism was defeate
as .'the triumph of right over wrong-of the
n mocracy single-handed over all factions and CO..
binations-of fidelity to The constitution and !
Union over uirtual treason to both
AS an appendix to this statement, and to fix t