Republican vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1857, 1856-05-10

: removal, or disposal of persons held as
: slaves, from one slaveholdng State to an.
, other.
81 am not aware that The question has
ever been discussed IN Congress or was ev-
Supreme Court of the United States, be-
fore 1941. In that year, the celebrated
case from Mississippi was decided, and
Mr.. Justice Mclean gave an elaborate
opinion on the point, in which the Chief
Justice concurred. He came 70 the con-
clusion, that the constitutional power over
this matter was vested in the several States,
and not in Congress.
$50 far as my knowledge extends this
opinion carried conviction to every I'M
prejudiced mind, and the question was cor
sidefed as Setted. At any rate, this was
my own opinion then, and have seen no
cause to change it eince. Should | do so,
should not hesitate to declare il. You
will, therefore, perceive that you did me
no injustice in representing 10 your friend
that these were my sentiments.
Il write in haste, amid the pressure OF
official duties, but remain, truly yours.
'MILLARD FILLMORE"
This, then. il one of the letters, with its
notifications of sentiment. Il is confined
to Que solitary point-the power Of Con-
gress over slavery IN the States. No ref
erence Is made to his famous letter Of 1888,
IN which he did avow the possession
of that authority in Congress; and he is
evidently DESTROYS to leave the inference
that his own individual opinions have al
ways correspondent with the decision Of
the Supreme Court. This result is the
fair import OF his language, and it is most
dangerous, to say the very lea.t, OIL his
part. But this is not the only uncandid
and incredible revelation which be makes.
He states explicitly. that, che is not aware
that this question has ever been discussed
in Congress p In other words. he leaves
the impression that the consideration and
decision of the power of Congress over sla-
very in the States. was Tor the first time
presented to his mind in 1871 BY the SUI
preme Court Muabiie diciu! Never
been discussed in Congress p Has he
foupd it convenient TO forget one of the
celebrated resolutions against which he vo-
ted in December, 1888, and which were
discussed IN Congress by Atherton Of New
Hampshire. and others Has he forgotten
this resolution
That all attempts on the pal. of Con-
gress to abolish slavery in the District OF
Columbia, or the Territories, or to prohibit
the removal of slaves from State TO State
or TO discriminate between the institutions
of one portion of the Confed-racy and an.
other, with the views aforesaid, are in VIC
l.. Il, 1...fp 70,
the fundamental principle on which the
Union Of the States rests, and beyond the
jurisdiction OF Congress"
Mr.. Fillmore voted against that resolu-
tion, and the principle spoken of in his
letter to Brooks was then discussed in Con-
greess. But this is rot all. He voted a
gainst the following resolution. OF Mr.
Wise Of Virginia. the principle OF which
was again discussed in Congress:
That, Congress has no power TO abol-
ish slavery, or to prohibit the removal o.
slaves between the States and the Distinct
OF Columbia, or Territories Of the United
States"
Has he forgotten, that on the 18th day
OF December, 1888, he voted for this reso-
luton of Sade OF Vermont, which, with
the preamble not only discusses the ques-
ton, but asserts the authority. which hi
now PROCESSES to deny
i Whereas there exists and is carried on
between the ports IN the District OF Col
umbia and other parts OF the United States
and under the sanction OF the laws there
of, trade in human beings, whereby thou
sands of them are annually sold and trans
ported from said District 10 distant parts Of
the country, in vessels belonging 10 citi-
zens of the United States; and whereas
such trade involves an outrageous violation
OF human nights, is disgrace to the coun-
try BY whose laws it is sanctioned, and
calls for immediate interposltion OF legls-
tive authority, for its suppression.
"TheretoIe, to the end, that all obstacles
to the consideration Of IBIS subject be re-
moved, and remedy for the evil speedily
provided, Resolved, That so much OF the
fifth resolution on the subject OF slavery
(Atherton's passed by this House, as re-
lates to the removal of slaves from State Il
State. SC. be, and Is hereby recinded. "
Has he forgotten that his compeer, Shade
OF Vermont on the Goth oftbe same month
entered into an argument on the subject o
, slavery in the States, especially III Virgin
ia, and that the scene then took place, in
which Mr.. Wise remarked, that the gen
f tleman had been discussing slavery i'll The
South, slavery in the District, and slavery
in the State of Virginia, and he called up
Oh his colleagues TO retire with him from
the hall? Has he forgotten. that in til,
feeling which was aroused on The occasion
that Mr.. slade promised specifically not +,
discuss the question OF slavery in the States
We have drawn attention, purposely and
specifically TO these facts, which will be
found in detail in our last article. They
place Mr.. Fillmore in an uncandid and
unenviable attitude. AT the time his letter
to Brooks was written, he was politician
seeking for place. He was associated with
General Tay lor, and a candidate for Vice
President. In his disposition to shield
himself under the decision of the Supreme
Court, he carefully avoids all allusion to his
former opinions, and assumes that his own
"mind IS unprejudiced, and it has carried
him 10 the extent of settled convictions
upon phase of the slavery question which
has "never been discussed in Congress,
and which was thus presented to him for
the first time Does not his position
smack OF the demaoouue aud the schem-