Semi-weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1852-1853, 1852-09-08
Mr.. GRAHAM,S LETTER.

Mr.. Graham, in his letter to Mr. Lorine request
ing him to discontinue the use of his name for the
Vice Presidency in connexion with that of Mr..
Webster, appears to take it for granted that Gen.
SCOTS position in relation to the compromise" is
not of sufficient public notorety to satisfy the peo-
pie of the South. Hence he goes into details
speaks of what he saw and heard of and from Gen.
Scott during the tendency of these measures before
Congress yet he makes no allusion to the fugitive
slave law in so many words; but contents himself
with merely referring to the compromise" as
WHOLE or to its separate bills" This brings up
the question: What aUere these separate bills ~ {?
Are we to understand Mr.. Graham as meaning that
Gen. Scott the active and anrious advocate of
the fmgitive-slave laws If so, why could not Mr.
Graham say so? He knows as we all know, that
that is the only measure of the series which promised
substantial benefits to the South; and he knows
that the compromise" when spoken of in the free
States is not generally considered embracing this
law. Why this obscurity in matter of so much
Importance?
1t is hardly necessary that we should dwell at
length upon this letter of Mr. Graham; but in adj
dition to remarks of last week, we beg leave
to submit the following points:
LIST. If Gen. Scott the friend of this fugitive
slave law while it was pending before Congress,
why did he not answer to that effect when adj
dressed on the sub ect in March, 1851?
I'd. Gen. Scott promised, during the ballotings
in the Baltimore Wing Convention to give his views
on the compromise at length, provided he should
be nominated for the Presidency. Why has he
not redeemed this promise?
Sd. Gen. Pierce, Col. King, and Mr.. Graham, in
their letters of acceptance all cordially" approved
of the fugitive-sIave law as embraced in the Reso-
lutions of the two Conventions; but Gen. Scott
merely accepted the nomination with the Reso-
lutions annexed" How will Mr.. Graham account
for this difference?
4th. Mr.. Fillmore and Mr.. Webster have both
approved the fugitive-slave law in many words,
and they did SO long before the meeting of the
Baltimore Convention but Gen. Scott has never,
to this day, publicly and openly approved said law.
Messrs. Fillmore and Webster were set aside and |
Gen. Scott nominated, the former being statesmen
and the latter nothing but General How does
MIR. Graham account for that
AS Mr.. Graham is in the field as a letter-writer !
in behalf Of Gen. Scott, it would be as we'll for
him, think, to turn his attention to the forego-
ing points. His bare certificate that Gen. Scott
was privately in favor of the compromise " will
not do. We donot mean to question Mr. Grahams
veracty but what to say is he has not met
the questionable has not stated, in SO many words,
that Gen. Scott was in favor of the fugltive-slave
law; and we do not believe he will now come out
and so state, and express the opinion over his own
name, that Gen. Scott will. if elected, and such
bill should be passed, veto bill repeating that law
But Mr.. Graham might write letter every day
from this time until the election, with the view of
Gen. Scott to the support of the friends
OF the " compromise" and of the Union, and it
would be of no avail. The public mind is made
up-Gen. Scott is doubted upon this momentous
subject, and that is enough. His surroundings"
as Mr. Loring calls them, are against him-against
Mr. Graham-aggainst the Wing party from Maine
to California and they will sink that party so deep
that the hand of resurrection can never reach it."
q. T. R. James, Esq, the celebrated novelist,
has Jeen appointed British Consul at Norfolk, Viz
yinia es--~- 80.