Washington sentinel., 1856-08-07


the question of slavery, SO far as it was in,
yolyed in the action of that body. From this
review the Aduertiser establishes the conclu.
sion that "no one of these votes was given for
the South during the Congressional career of
Mr.. Fillmore" II is fact, material to be re-
membered, that the votes referred to cover a
period of service terminating in the year
l848, and that the fact is as the AdeertiSer
has stated. Acting with the worst enemies of
the South, Mr.. Fillmore never gave one vote
that was even impartial to the South upon the
question Of slavery.
| The Adcertiser has referred to the Erie let
ter as a fair expression of the opinions of Mr..
Fillmore 1t may not be improper to add, in
extreme caution, that in the year lS4S Mr..
Fillmore departed from the rule laid down by
himself and General Taylor, and answered
Governor Gayle, of Alabama, in letter ex-
tensively published as document in that
campaign Lest we should be charged with
suppressing this document, and as conclusive
proof that Mr.. Fillmore has never retracted
one opinion in the Erie letter, we republish
that to Governor Gayle
ALBANY, June 81, l848.
| Dear Sir: have your letter of the 18th in
slant, but my official duties have been so press
ing that have been compelled to neglect my
| private correspondence. l had also deter
mined to write no letters for publication, bear
ing upon the contest in the approaching
canvass. But as you desire some information
| for your own satisfaction, in regard to the
charges brought against me from the South
on the slave question, have concluded to state
briefly my position.
While was in Congress there was much
agitation on the right of petition; my votes
will doubtless be found recorded uniformly in
favor of it. The rule upon which l acted was,
that every citizen presenting a respectful peti-
ton to the body, that by the Constitution had
the power to grant or refuse the prayer of it,
was entitled to be heard; and, therefore, the
| petition ought to be received and considered If
right and reasonable, the prayer of it should be
granted; but if wrong or unreasonable, it
| should be denied. Think all my rotes, acheth-
er on the reception Of petitions or the consider
alton Of resolutions, aoiU be found consistent
acith this rule. Italics our own.
| have none OF my Congressional documents
here, they being at my former residence in
Buffalo, nor have | access to any papers or
memoranda to refresh my recollection but |
think at sometime while in Congress took oc-
casiou to state, in substance, my views on the
subject of slavery in the States. Whether the
remarks were reported or not, / am unable to
! say but the substance was, that | regarded
slavery as an evil, but one with which the Ma
tional Government had nothing to do-that by
the Constitution of the United States, the
whole power over that question was vested in
4 fha oil he
tolerated. If they regarded it as blessing
| they had constitutional right to enjoy it; and
| if they regarded it as an evil, they had the
power and knew best how to apply the remedy.
| did not conceive that Congress had any
power over it. or was in any way responsible
| for its continuance in the several States where
1t existed have entertained no other senti-
ments on this subject since | examined it suf-
hciently to form an opinion; and / doubt not
that all my acts, public and private, will be
found in accordance with this view. | have
the honor to be your obedient servant,
WILLARD FILLMORE.
Hon. JOHN GAYLE.
1t will be seen from this letter that Mr.. Fill
more affirms the common doctrine amongst
the Abolitionists, that Congress has no power
to abolish slavery in the States. he also says
that he does not think his votes contradcted
the principle that every citizen had right to
be heard in a respectful petition or resolution.
The record cited by the Advertiser will show
that no abolition petition was ever presented
that Mr. Fillmore did not vote for its reception,
and that no resolution was ever presented re-
buking the action or condemning the princi-
Piles Of abolition, that Mr.. Fillmore did not
vote against its reception.
With these antecedents there could be no
safety to the South under the administration
of Mr.. Fillmore, unless he shall pledge him.
self to the positive maintenance of the Kansas
bill.
1t is very well known that in the canvass of
lS4S, both General Taylor and Mr.. Fillmore
laid down the doctrine that the President
ought not to interpose the veto unless in cases
clearly unconstitutional, or informal Now, ac-
cording to Mr. Fillmores avowed opinions, the
Missouri Compromise is constitutional, and
the Kansas act is violation of the compro-
mise Of 1850. 1t cannot be said that mea-
sure discussed since 1854 can be the subject
VI VI lutItlOTty
if the Black Republicans SHALL during Mr.. Fill
more's administration, present q bill repeal
ing the Kansas act and restoring the Missouri
restriction, he will be bound to carry out their
will by signing the bills. 1t is inevitable
Nothing except his distinct pledge not to do
so would prevent it. And why should he not ?
Suppose the friends Of Mr. Fillmore, composed
of equal parts Of Northern and Southern men.
He will not say what he proposes to do upon
the proposed legislation. Can it be contended,
after his election, that upon bill passed by
the votes Of Northern men, he stands obliged
10 contradict their wishes to crafty the
South Will that be carrying out the will Of
the people? Will that be a fair representa-
ton of the Northern men who have as much
right to dread his administration as the South
ern men? If then, Mr. Fillmore we're in