Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1856-09-06

PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULD NEVER Throw
SToNEs.-The Fillmore men of the South con-
stantly harping upon Mr. Buchanan's unsoundness
upon the slavery question. They aege he is not in
favor of slavery per se-that he is in favor of squat
ter sovereigny-of the right of Congress to exclude
slavery from the territories actually presented
petition for abolition in the District of Columbia.
From these charges we have already successfully
defended Mr.. Buchanan. But suppose, for argu-
ment's sake they could not be substantiated.
What is the value of your argument? If it has
any, it must be to persuade southern men to aban
don Buchanan and support Fillmore 1t would not
be reasonable to do so, however, unles he obnox-
ious opinions of Mr.. Buchanan repudiated by Mr.
Fillmore; for surely it can be no argument to urge
man to refuse his vote to one candidate because of
certain opinions, and to support another who holds
the same.
We challenge the production of any public vote,
act or sentiment in the career Of Willard Fillmore,
which shows he is not ingrained in his hatred Of
slavery.
We demand the proof of the reputation by Mil
lard Fillmore of the doctrine of squater sovereignty
We challenge denial of the assertion that Mil
lard Fillmore believes in the power of Congress to
exclude slavery from the territories-and moreover,
is in favor of its exercise
We aver, without fear of any contradiction, that
he voted to receive REFER and report upon, and con-
s:der all petitions to abolish slavery in the District
the territories, and the slave trade between the
States
We aver, that he is opposed to the admission of
new slave States into the Union, and declared in
spect to Texas that he would always oppose il: until
she abolish it.
We charge, that he was in favor of the immediate
abolition of slavery in the District eighteen years
ago, and we call for his retrarit.
We call for the production of word or vote in his
whole congressional career when he did not evince
settled hostility to the rights of the South.
We call for the vote upon any question, involving
slavery in Congress, when Willard Filmore's name
was not recorded upon the same side, with Adams,
Slade, and Giddings, or with one or more of them.
When these and many other charges shall be met
before the southern people by Fillmore men, we may
think it necessary to repeat defence of Mr. Bu-
chanan from their charges.
At present we only add, that while in common
with most northern men, and with many southern
men, among whom was the leader of the present
southern defamers of Mr.. Buchanan, our standard
bearer not advocate of slavery for Pennsylvania
yet that upon the other questions he is beyond
proach before southern people.
He is not in favor of squatter sovereignty.
He is opposed to the exclusion of slavery from the
territories by any but the supreme power of the
people when they come to form a constitution.
He is opposed to the abolition of slavery in the
District of Columbia; and though he presented the
petition mentioned, in the same breath he moced
that ats prayer be rejected. Do southern defamers
KNOW or knowing, make it convenient to forget that
part of the narrative?
We challenge the production Of vote of Mr. Bu-
chanan which would throw his influence on the side
of opposition to the rights of the South, or one
which did not vigorously sustain them.
He is in favor of admitting slave States and voted
to admit Texas, when Fillmore and others opposed
it. though they thus leagued themselves with the
British scheme for Texan abolition, as blow at the
South!
He never voted with the Abolitionsts against the
South, but with national men from both sections,
for the rights of the South under the Constitution.
That the fanatical portion of the North should
hesitate, and Aboitonists should shrink, from the
touch OF SO national record, is not wonderful; but
that the South should hesitate between Buchanan
and Fillmore is strange, and passing strange!