The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-03-01

M WILSON, Is an opponent Vi slavery, an
enemy to the Compromises of 1850, an agitator
of the Slavery Question. He has been accus-
toned to denounce Shareholders and pro-slavery
men in his speeches, and to stigmatize the pro-
slavery sentiment of the South as slower law ia
naticism." From the year l84S to the year 1854,
he stood in the front rank of those who held that
the hope of the slave, the triumph of the cause
of Human Rights, the preservation of the Union,
and the promotion of the best interests of the
country, lay in the organization and consistent
action of Party of Freedom, pledged to agi-
tate the Question of Slavery, pledged to resist
the aggressions of Slavery, pledged, openly,
unequivocally, without compromise, evasion,
or postponement, to root Slavery out from the
Federal Jurisdiction, and place the Federal
Government on the side of Human Liberty, so
as to promote, without interference with State
sovereignty, the extinction of Slavery within
the States
To those unfamiliar with the party necessi-
ties and tactics to which the fundamental an
politics of the slaveholding and non-slavehold-
ing sections of the Union has given birth, it
may seem strange that two politicians, separa-
ted from each other by this very antagonism
as widely as the poles, should yet be found ap-
pareTaS standing together on a common plat
| form
With what satisfaction the South shakes
hands with the North How complacently
Pro-Savery embraces Anti-Slsvery "If Sen
ator Wilson's emphaticresponse to our inqui-
ries," says Mr.. Ellis, "does not check the
progress of the enemies of the American Party,
in their mischievous attempts to identify our
Party with Abolitionism, we underrate the in
| telligence of the People of the South |"
The reader at once asks, how can Light and
Darkness dwell together? How can opposites
agitator and the Pro-Slavery quietest affiliate
| with each other2 How can Senator who be.
lieves Slavery the paramount question, and an
editor who holds that it is, and shall be, no
Question at all, occupy the same political plat
form, work beside each other in the same
political Party? How is it that conspicuous
Anti-Slavery agitator, "higher law" poll
tician, an active member of class at the
North, denounced by Vespasian Ellis as cab
clifton fanatics" has replied to certain inquiries
of said Ellis respecting Slavery, Abolition, and
the higher law, in such a manner as to secure
the endorsement of that gentleman? Has Mr.
Wilson ignored his peculiar opinions, modified
them, clothed them in ambiguous languages
failed to state the truth, the whole truth, moth
ing but the truth? Has Mr. Ellis changed his
or is he willing that the South. should be de-
ceived?
We must examine the correspondence ITSELF
and in the light of the circumstances that called
it forth.
Mr.. Wilson has long been understood to oc-
cupy prominent position among those desg-
mated .distinctively as Free-Soilers. He bolted
the nomination of General Taylor, because he
was non-committal on the Slavery Question !;
he voted for Martin Van Buren,, because he
accepted the Buffalo PLATFORM he presided
over the Convention at Pittsburgh that nomi-
mated John P. Hale; he was known subse-
quently as thorough, uncompromising advo
cate of distinct political action against Slavery
in the ranks of the Independent or Free Dem
ocratic Party. His election to the Senate of the
United States by Know Nothing Legislature,
naturally awakened deep concern in that large
portion of the Know Nothing Order, which ig-
nores the Slavery Question, aspires after what
is called by pro-savery men, Nationality"
and is now hoping to carry the elections in the
slave States Especially was the shock felt in
Virginia, the Administration press holding up
the fact, damning proof that Know Nothing
ism at the North is after all, Abolitionism in
disguise.
| The moment Mr.. Wilson arrived in Washing
ton he was besieged by Southern brethren of
the mystic Order. For the first time, he must
have felt the serious embarrassment of belong
ing to Party, seeking national success by
sinking the Slavery Question. We can imagine
how he was beset with entreaties by day and by
night, to say something, write something, that
might furnish materials for rebutting the accu-
sations of the Administration Press in Virginia
and other Southern States. AT last, the device
of a correspondence was hit upon; and now, we
beg the reader to observe how carefully the in
quiries of Mr.. Ellis are worded, so as not to draw
Mr.. Wilson into any disclosure of the real an
tagonism which exists and must exist between
him and his Southern brethren. There is not
a question which does not admit of an answer
satisfactory to both North and South. Let us
see whether Senator Wilson of Massachusetts,
and Senator Dawson of Georgia, do not agree
entirely on the four points
Senator Wilson. Il fully recognise the doc.
triHe of State Rights in its application to Sla.
Senator Ddwson. So do l.
Senator ". 81 do not entertain the opinion
that Congress has any power to interfere with
Slavery as it exists under State Laws"
Senator ID. / am with you there.
Senator w. every man who believes in a
God, must believe that there is a law paramount
to all human law, and that law is to be obeyed
by men in public and private life, rather than
any human law IN conflict ,cith it. But see
nothing in the Constitution of the United
States, as understand that Constitution, which
requires me, as a Senator from Massachusetts,,
to do anything in conflict with the law of God.
If thought otherwise, / would not take an
oath to support the Constitution of the United
States
Senator ID. Well-that will do l have
no objection to such an abstraction, so long as
you admit your obligation to obey the requi-
stions of the Constitution, or resign.
Senator ". "The American Organization
in Massachusetts, does not embrace the question