Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-08-09
FREMONT.


great question, which involves the rights o.
half the Union. Here they stand:
FILLMORE. FREMONT.
Good t;Iith, as well heartily concur IL
as the peace Of the cOun all movements which
try, seemed TO require have for their object
that a cOmpromisf ito repair the mischief
which had stood forarisng from the viola.
more than thirty years ton of good faith in the
should not be toGnt0HLyrepeal of the Missouri
distur6ed Com ,romise.
Do you not see that their sentiments are
identical AS far as this vital question !.
concerned, there is no choice between FILL
MORE and FREMONT. The legitimate inference
from their languageis that either would sanc'
ton the restoration of ''the Missouri Resrric,
ton, the first great outrage on the South"
Union and American7
"Do you not see that their sentiments
are identical 2" No sir : nor does any man
with sufficient intelligence to understand
his vernacular, and honesty enough to use
it. So far from the Inference" being "le,
gitimate that either would sanction the
restoration of the Missouri Restriction, the
first great outrage on the South" it is ille-
gitimate, absurd, and ridiculous. While
the language of Mr.. Fillmore is but an ex>
preston of opinion that the observance of
good faith," and the preservation Of the
''Pcacs ofMe country" seemed to forbid the
a0antOn disturbance Of a great measure Of
pacifcation which had existed for more
than thirty years, and which had become
in James Buchanan's eyes "0S sacred as a
constitutional prOUisiOn," the language of
Fremont conveys totally different mean
ing. He speaks Of repairing the mischiefS"
which he thinks have been the result of the
repeal of the Missouri Compromise, by
which he evidently means the restoration
of the Missouri Compromise. There is not
a syllable in Mr. Fillmores Rochester
speech from which this extract is quoted,
or any other speech which he has made,
that affords scintilla of evidence to sup
port the charge that he would favor a
restoration as a means of repairing the
mischiefs" Mr.. Fillmore, as many other
Northern, as we'll as Southern men, regard
the agitation of the slavery question, as in
the highest degree deplorable and bane-
full 4; and he disapprOveS the unproyoked
and wanton disturbance of the question,
and in this light he regarded the repeal of
the Compromise, and like all honest man
spoke his sentiments, but we deny that
there is, in that speech any intimation Of
desire TO see it restored. If it is there,
show US the language. Imposing capitals
are arrayed showing that he said: i had
no suspicion that that was to be disturbed"
shat was decidedly opposed to the dis.
turbance CT that Compromise that
it should not be wantonly disturbed" but
where is the hint that he desired, or would
vote for, or sustain party which demanded
its restoration? II does not ernst.
But it may be asked is there any evil
dence that he would oppose its restoration?
There is, and it may be found in this same
Rochester speech, where after speaking of
the repeal he says: 1t affords no just
grounds for controversy with our Southern
brethren-oertainly none By lohtch they should
be deprired of their political rights" Would
not its restoration open "a controversy"
with his Southern brethren Would not
the restoration deprive them 'of their poll
tical rights? 2" But there is further and
still stronger evidence that be does not de-
sire. aud does not sympathze with move
ments looking to its restoration. 1t is in
the fact that he has denounced as MORAL
TREASON" the attempt now being made
to restore it. In his Albany speech, while
speaking to an assembly, large portion
of whom were Black Republicans, be holds
this language:
Itell you, my friends, that ] speak warmly
on this subject, for | feel that we are in dam
ger. am determined TO make q clean breast
oft. | will wash my hands Of the oonsequens
ces. whatever they may be; and tell yon that
we are treading upon the brink of volcano,
that is liable at any moment 90 burst forth
and overwhelm the naIiun. Uaighf 0y seTt
cords. hold out deLusiUe hOpss, and thereby 1IR
pOtes But can ReUer consent 10 be one thing
10 the North, and another 20 tbe South. 4
should despise myseJ n 1 could be gully Of
such epdssoa (Tremendous spplAuse) For
say eonscieAce scOUid still AK, wttA The dran'dt-
30 poet
ais there not some secret curse--
Some hidden thunder rel with immortal wrath
To blast the wretch who owes his greatness
To his countrys ruinF" Cheers
In the language Of the Lsmsstsd, immortal
CIay-"IAdd rather Be right tlaA Prssident"
Enthusiastic and prolonged chsers,
10 seems 10 ne impossible thai fA0ss engaged
IN this can haUe contemplated th assful eoRse-
0usaces otsuoceSs. II q breaks suRder the
bonds ofOur Uai0a. and spreads Anarchy and
ipn ssGr through the land, WHAT u IT LEss
THAN MORAL TkKAsoAl Law and common sense
hold a man responsible for the natural conses
ouencc. of his aois, and must not those whose
ncEs tend to the destruction OF the goVsrnnsnt,
be equally held responsiblel (Applsuse) And
let me also add, that when this Union is disc
s,lsed. It will DOT be divided into Two kePuo-
lio. or two MonArchiea, bot oxen into frag~
ments. and al war WIZ each other.
In the italicized language OF the last
paragraph is an unequivOcAl, decided and
indignant disapproEal, and denuneiation Of
the party which seeks to restore the Com
promise. lie tells them TO their teeth they