The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-09-05

sincerely swear that If il may be done legally you win
when elected appointed to official station comforting on
you power TO do so, az foreigners aus, or Roman
Cath0es from Office place and that you will N case
appoint such 10 any Office or place in your GIN Such
the oalhs obligations which Miard Fillmore has
actually taken.
Contrast them with that one which tie constitution re-
qures TO be administered 10 President of the United
Staes-"I do solemnlY swear affirm that viii faith
fully execute the office u President of the United States
and will TO the aest Of my ability preserve protect and
defend constitution Of the United States" How sub
me Ia It's simplicity, how striking in It's contrast with
the oaths aud mummery of this party, TO which Mil
lard Fillmore has united himself This is the obliga
ton under which Washington first entered upon the du
tes of bis great office This is the oath which was admin
stered TO Jefferson and Madison and Jackson and Polk
and all the Presidents down 10 the present time But now
If Willard Fillmore is elected, he 10 swOrn arsadnot by
a constitutional but by party oath-not administered
in the Capitol in the presence of nation Of freemen but
in the secret council room of lodge 7 in the State OF New
York gu.
Spn already not faithfully 10 the duties of the
Office of Presdent be learned from all the various pro-
visions Of the tuition but 10 comply with the
will OF majority in all matters political
SUorn already never to appoint foreigner 10 office OF
any grade, but instantly TO remove him ii in his power
although the constitution has conferred Congress the
power pass naturalization laws, and Congress has
tusly passed them and made him full and untrammeled
citizen of the United States.
Spon already not appoint but 10 every Cath
Ollie from any Office high low although the constitu-
ton expressly declares that religious tea shall ever be
required.
| My countrymen if there were no other possible OBJ
lection Mr.. Fillmore than that he had joined this
midnight and oatb-bound party, and had enoanbered
himself by those strange oaths unknown and unpre-
scribed by the constitution, would not vote for him.
i AS democrat even II he himself, would not
vote for him AS whg, whose party he had de-
serted 1T he had taken these oatbs would not for
him. But there other powerful why neither
wings nor democrats North South, ought to vote
for him. The wings ought not because his partyite
journals, and its oratorshave denounced them ~
ru paryso corrupt that 1t lad become public necessity
to pa, them down ana opid n heir party on The ruins Of
the wing parry Seethefn wings and democrats should
not vote for hin, because the knownothng platform
which We stands eschewed and ignored the questions
which twelve hundred millions of their property depended
They ought not because his party repealed the twelfth
section which the safety of that property greatly de-
pended and, finally, neither whig democrat, North
South ought to vote for him. because he has proclaimed
Rochester that he totally dapprove of the repeal of that
Missouri restriction which he himself by his sigma
ture to the Utah and New Mexico bills, had substantially
repealed. He went in 1850 with MIR. Clay, Mr. Cass, Mr.
Douglas and all the other patriots who passed the
mise bills of 1885, in establishing the doctrine of nonn-
PREVENTION, and then turned round his from Eu-
rope in order adapt himself to his party and back
ed out from his signature and approval OF the Utah
and New Mexico bills.
Twice did he soemnly ax his signature bills organ
ling Territories on the principles sanctioned by Henry
Clay, Lewis Cass Stephen A. Douglas and ell the great
men who carried through the compromise OF
1850, and now bames the President blames Congress
bames the democrats and the southern wings for doing
the same thing in the of Kansas and Nebraska
we to have no uniformity in the organization of Territories
but sort OF sliding scale to be up down. accord
Ing to the strength or cupidiy of parties
But Mr.. Fillmore need to have told Albany or
Rochester anywhere else that he OPPOSED the
repeal OF the Missouri Compromises His knownothing
national council had commanded him. had be
opposed to it The platform which he stood peremp-
toriy demanded of him denounce the democratic party
and the southern wings for their reckless and unwse
policy in passing the bill Besides this Mr.. Fillmores
antecedens all told that he would the
admission of any slave Territories slave States
into the Union In this Erie letter the aboloniss he
expressly declared that he opposed to the
OF Texas so long slaves should be held there This
make starting point ia his public Under this dec
araon he elected to Congress in 1888 During his
whole congressional career lasting eight or mint
ears how far did he stand the given
that letter to his abolition rends2 1t is great question
Ii relates to the recorded and speeches of our
eminent public men, to whom ought not and to whom
will not knowingly, do the slightest injustice During his
whole Congress life how did he stand the
OF that letter. Examine the journals extracts from which
are now freely and think correctly published all the
country. From these you may challenge the world pro-
duee one single vote favorable to the South In the
slightest degree inconsistent with the the Erie
letter His name will be found recorded with those of
Ssde Giddings and John Quincy Adams nearly every
important occasion.
But no doubt that during his career in Con
gres Mr. Fillmore entertained opinions ruinous the
South and fatal 10 that equality which the States ought
ever to maintain in the Union, who will look his
on the following resolution in the series offered by Mr.
Atheron "Resored That Congress- In the exercise of
acknowledged powers, has right discriminate be-
tween the institutions Of portion Of the States with the
view of abolishng the one or promoting the other Here
Is plain and direct vote e precise point issue be-
tween Inc Nor and the South 1t does not relate to the
right OF petition, anything else but the great and
tai question Can Congress discriminate against slavery
with the view Of ebolishng 1T Willard Fillmore voted
that Congress could discriminate with the view OF abol
ishhg slavery Ii the very and marion of alb
clifton and freesosm. No sophisry explain IL away
no argument Justify defend it, This vote given
in less than two months after be the Erie letter and
but Of the which gave on the sub
ject of slavery during his service in Congress.
Let US now look HE opinions after he went out OF
Congress In s47 nearly TED years after his Erie letter
be candidate for the comptroer,hp Of New York
The cpnvsnton that nominated him built his platform and
placed him on it. The great feature of il was that
Will have territory unless be rcs The address
said And now, for the first time in the history Of our
government eyes behold and greeted with
the glad dngs that the free spirits OF the North
tefmiued for once and forever TO limits to the bounds
OF slavery within our glorious Union and cay TO it,
thou hast gone this far and shall go farther" Was
there explicit freeso fg than ths7 II shows
that In ls47 ho precisely the ground in 1893
dency approaching it's termination In that year Mr.
Webster in speech at Buffalo, bore The most unfortunate
testimony against him. Mr. Webster had gone there as his
friend and champion. He proclaimed that be had con-
versed freely and compared notes fully with Mr. Fillmore
and they agreed precisely He proceeded declare in that
speech that he would that there should
be foot Of slave territory added United States
beyond what the old thirteen States had the formation
Of the Union In Nblos Garden said he declared
my unwingness TO extend the slavery Of the African
upon this continent add other savehoding States to
the Union" In August ls4s Mr.. Webster had declared
my opposition to the increase Of slavery the country
or TO the increase Of slavery aon general and
universal shall oppose all such admissions all times
in nj npcf ALT rJp