The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-05-27
xDw. EVERETT ON THE SUMNER OUTRAGE.


found its way into the newspapers. 1t seems
to have been called fofh by the statement of
Mr.. Yeadon, of Charleston, and the comments
of Northern presses upon that statement. In
the letter, Mr. Everett Explains his signature to
8 proposed testimonial to Mr.. Sumner, and the
reason why he afterwards regretted that he
signed it. 1t seems that he did not read the
language Of the testimonial. he says:
The paper was sent up to me at very early
hour the next morningsin my bed room, where
from i'll health / had passed bad night, and
was still under the influence of ether, repeated
ly inhaled as an anodyne. 1t was engrossed
on very stiff sheet, rolled up, the lower end
outward. l unrolled it up to the names al
ready subscribed thoAe which struck my eye
were of judicious and rejecting persons !; and
without reading or seeing the caption, signed
my name. This of course was a great indis
erection, but of kind perhaps not unnatural
under the circumstances of my illness This
is the paper given a. length in Mr.. Sneed's
card.
"As soon as / saw it the next day, in the
public prints, l informed the young gentleman
who had procured my signaturey that could
not have signed the paper had been aware of
the spirit In which it was drafted and the terms
In which 1t was expressed. l made the same
statement to numerous friends and correspond
ents in different parts of the country. l fur
nished memorandum to the above effect to the
editor of theBoston Daily Advertiser, to be pub
lished when he should think it proper. l au-
thorized two friends in the Senate of the United
States to make the necessary explanation,
should the subject DE alluded to in that body,
as thought it possibly might be- and as soon
L. kk a. L.,
stored to make it proper to do 80, wrote to
him to the same effect"
| The reason why Mr.. Everett regretted ais
signature, was not it seems, because he did not
condemn the outrage upon Mr.. Sumner, but bt.
cause the testimonial bestowed unqualified
appreciation upon Mr.. Summers speech. We
quote Mr.. Everet's words
"With these views Of the subject, though, as
l trust, for reasons higher than any effect or
party politics, fully concurred in the mair
line of argument in Mr.. Summers speech. Alb
staining, however, habitually myself from all
personalities in de bate, and believing that they
always irritate, and aever persuade nor con.
vince, could not, Of course, bestow my uns
qualified appreciation son the manner in which
he treated the subject, nor Intentionally give
my sanction to the violent and offensive lun.
guage of the subscription paper alluded to, and
inadvertently signed by me-"
From this letter, it appears that Mr.. Yeador
did not do justice to Mr.. Everett. He did and
does condemn the attack on his fellow. either
most heartily. Of course, he does not sympa
thize with Mr.. Sumner in all his Anti-Slavcry
views.
| X he &c Al
Ne~ York Times q very conservative jourpa,
upon the Slavery question, writes as follows
respecting the troubles near Fort Scott:
"Gov. Denver has been repeatedly appealed
to to interfere and prevent bloodshed, but he
sees no practical way to avoid the conflict, ex
cept to have Clark, Bracket and other noted
| murderers, leave the Territory forever. he
says there can be no peace while they live 10
Kansas, but Clark is employed by Buchanan
in the land Office at Fort Scott; and while
this is 80, Denver can do no less than furnish
him troops when called upon to protect the
land office, alias Clsrk's head. He is the
worst man now in Kansas, and is the originator
Of all this imbrogio.
There is probably purpose in this South.
ern tempest 1t is well known that a project
is moving to open by treaty the land belonging
to the Usage and Cherokee Indians, and by
constituting them citizens thus open up Ter
ritory south of Kansas, for the benefit of the
peculiar institution. Atchison is now in that
Indian Territory, and many other Southerners
have recently visited ii, and prejudice already
exists among the Indians against any Kansas
man. This prejudice has been begotten by
Atchison AID others; and this turmoil in Bour-
bon and Linn counties, it is believed, is intend
ed mainly to intimidate emigration, that has
been naturally tending southwark the past
year, and divert the attention of our politicians,
| while Atchison and others accomplish their
purposes in the Cherokee country. This is
probably the correct solution of the whole mat
| ter. As heretofore, the blood of our country
men is not the forfeit of our own misdeeds, but
the price, or wager, for which Southern polti-
cal gamblers seek to procure the extension of
Slavery"
If these charges are true, it would seem that a
very heavy responsibility rests with the Presi-
dent. Can be Knowingly retain murderers in
Office in Kansass
H9- The New Granada Senate has adopted
the treaty with this country, but, with such
amendments as to render it unacceptable to the
United States, and it will doubtless be rejected
H8r The Rev. Abram Byrne, of Cincinnati
challenges Parson Brownlow to discussion
of Slavery. The Parson wants to know if his
antagonist is white man, and what church he
belongs to. Mr.. Byrne replies that he is white,
and q Congregationalist, and hopes that he has