The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1856-05-27

it shall excape from us. A bill, too, that
was coupled as it were with three other
bills, the whole forming Siamese connex-
ion and dubbed the Compromise bills
Measures, as whole, supported by Clay,
Webster, and nearly the entire Whig party
OF the country-Mr. Fillmore's own party,
at the time. And yet, notwithstanding the
imperative circumstances under which the
fugitive slave bill went up to him for sigma
MISUNDERSTANDING it was passed under
an express provision of the Constitution,
| Mr.. Fillmore hesitated about signing it
thought twas unconstitutional, &c!! Many
of his leading friends, however, were in fa-
| vor of it-another Presidentissi election was
approaching-th bill was an arm of three
| others forming body, all making conces
sions to free-soilism-the fugitive slave bill
being the only share of the South in the
| Compromise,-and Mr.. F., under these Cir
cumstances, did finally. though hesitatingly
and reluctantly, consent to. sign it And
this one single act is to give the lie to Mr..
Fillmore's whole political career, and prove
|
proof, truly, of soundness, on the slavery
question! And what reason does his Nor
thern friends assign for the act! The New
Albany Tribune says:
''Mr. Fillmore gave his official sanction
to the Fugitive Slave bill because 1--WE got
other laws on which our hearts were set,
that we should not have got, had not that
law been passed also," and because ''in do
ing so he was but carrying out one of the
great principles of the party which elected
! him-that the personal opinions of the Exc
| cutive, on mere questions of policy, ought
never to be brought into conflict with the
will of the peoples representatives,, by an
arbitrary exercise of the veto power"
The Tribune also informs its readers that
Mr.. Fillmore would just as readily sign bills
restoring the Missouri restriction, and re-
pealing or amending the Fugitive Slave
law. We have not the slightest doubt but
| that the Tribune is correctly informed upon
| the subject, and that should the Senate, dur
| ing his term, become as thoroughly aboli
| tionized as the House is now, Congress will
find in Mr.. F. willing agent for carrying
out their measures.
The signing of the Compromise bills, as
the Petersburg Democrat remarks, sis the
only trophy of Ex-President Fillmore, the
only act of his life which his friends can
extract from a lengthy record, on which to
claim for him the slightest countenance at
IL, &C Aho ho,
them that he was an advocate of the Wilmot
Proviso, and they say he signed the Com
promise Bill. Point to his speeches on
behalf of abolishing slavery in the District
of Columbia, and you are told that he sign
ed the Compromise Bill. Read them the
Buffalo letter, and again comes up that ev-
erlasting Compromise Bill. Now this Com
promise Bill, the solitary Southern feather
amid the waving freesoil plume that adorns
Mr.. Fillmore's head, was a measure which
it would have staggered the unblushing as
surance of Giddings to have vetoed under
the circumstances. 1t was proposed by
one great leader of the party which placed
Mr.. Fillmore in his seat, and sustained by
the other. 1t acos far greater concession
to Northern than to Southern ultrdiSts, and
was denounced by some of the ablest men
of this section of the Union. To have We
toei it would have been as great violence
to what we may call, following the latest
nomenclature, national whiggery," as to
democracy, and would have subjected him
to as much denunciation from the one as
the other.''
SO much for Millard Fillmore's course up
to the close of his Administration. There
was, in truth, nothing inconsistent with his
uniform abolitionism, before he became
President, or repudating in the smallest
degree his declared sentiments and his votes
in Congress, in favor of fanaticism. And
what has he said or done since, to show
that he is sound on the slavery question
| Nothing. His opinions on this vital sub
| ject are kept in the dark. Is he in favor of
bill for the admission of territories, as
States, freed from any restriction on the
subject of Slavery? Or is he in favor of
the repeal of the Kansas Nebraska bill 3
Who can answer these questions? Noper-
son! And yet we find the Know Nothing
party 'going it blind" for Mllard Fillmore
not knowing what his sentiments on these
vital questions are, at this momentous cri-
sis, farther than they have been revealed
by his uniform course of abolitionism! Read
his record-look at his ''sealed book on
the present questions agitating and threa-
tening the very salvation of the Union, and
who can believe that Southerners. familiar
with the facts, will be found supporting him!
The South, we are sure, will never trust q
man who keeps dark on the Kansas-Ne-
braska questions-a man who has always,
when he had an opportunity to do so, acted
in favor of abolitionism. With the bare
exception of the signing of the fugitive slave
/ BILL, Mr.. Fillmore, while President. acted
in accordance with his uniform sentiments
so far as he he'd opportunity. He pardoned