Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-04-22

nr;vatc citizen. Any acquaintance whateve
with the history Of the Compromise of 1850
would have detected the error Of both tn
States" and the Republic" and enabled tn
| .'Whig" to have concealed the ignorance it nov
displays.
We hope this piece of experience Will LOT
ever caution the "Whig" from such display
Of ignorance TO the world, and the "brilllah
and corruscating gentleman from FArQrlEI.
We must advise the Wing to "looS oeior'
he leaps" to r~citcrate abolition charges OF
our neighbor will findhimself in the unenv,a
bic nredicament of the monkey climbing TN
mole" You understand, don't you?
Since writing the above the Wing oil TN
slst appears, in which the climbing mohAe!
.xb;hits 4 stocking aspect. We must inior'l
the "Whir." that the debate irem when 'h'
estates" extracts what the "Whig" has quoted
took place August ind, ls5i-si1 yf"rs G''e'
the passage Of The fugitive slave t"'-ahu "a'
upon "Dunn'S amendment for when ""'S
Black Republicans voted.
We annex an extract from the speech oil Mt
Letcher, of August ,, lS1G, which VIII explain
the whole matter. We shall publish the "hoie
of that speech, in the Enquirer, IN ! 'e"
DAYS. and to its careful perusal we earnestly
invite the "Whig," and challenge that paper 'o
bring to light any sentiment ever u''ereu' oy
VIM. l.. Gogyin, in or out of Congress, ina
maintains in equal strength the rights Oh 'h'
south.
We would ask the .whis," if u L. Cog
,,;u had been in Congress, would he have voted
for the Fugitive Slave Law" which MIR, LetcheI
said he would not have voted for had ne been
present: Will the Wing answer: Had MIR.
Gorrin been in Congress. how would he have
rcplicd to Mr.. Giddings' question: Will tho
"Whig" answer:
We are lett TO infer from the Wings con,
duct with regard TO these extracts that VIM.
l.. Goggin would have sustained the Dunn
amendment" Arc we correct: Will the
"Whir" answer: We challenge the Wing
to say how that paper would have desired Mr.
Gogcin to have voted on the dunn amend
mcnt." Speak ont.
We subjoin a full extract from the speech oil
Mr.. Letchcr, in the House Of Representatives
August ID, 1916:
But / was greatly amused at the g%entlcman's
adroitneSs exhibited near the close OF his speech,
Nv friend from Mississippi Mr. Wright wished
to'know of him whether he recognized the
RIGHT Of the Southern slave. holders to reclaim
their slaves, If they absconded and were found
in 4 free State. have not heard IRON HIM an
answer to that question yet. The gentleman
talked about II good many other things, but he
was particularly careful to dodge that question.
And il struck me that there was u reason Tor II.
II has not been quite a week since the gentle
man himself voted for Il fugitive slave law.
And, that | NAV not he charged with doing IN
~iustice to that gentleman, | beg leave to call
his attention to a bill for which he voted, and
TO- which every other gentleman Of his parti.
cular stripe voted. save the intelligent and
cautious gentleman from Ohio. now before me,
Mr.. Letter In the bill OF Mr.. Dunn for the
reorganization of the Territory of Kansas, and
in the 9th section of that bill it is. amongst
other things, declared:
That any person lawfully held TO service IN
either Of the SAID Territories, shall not be dis
charged from such service by reason OF such
rcpcal, if such person shall bc permanently re-
moved from such Territory or Territories, prior
TO the first day Of June, eighteen hundred and
tifty-eight; and any child or children born. in
either of said Territories, Of any emalc law.
fully held to service, if in like manner removed
without said territories before the expiration oil
that date, shall not be, by reason OF anything
in this act, emancipated from any service II
might have owed, had this act never have pass
Cd: And provided, further, that any person
lawfully owing service in any other State OF
Territory of the United States, and escaping
into either the Territory Of Kansas or Nebraska,
NAV be reclaimed and removed to the person or
place where such service is due, under any law
of the United States which shall be i'll force
upon the subject
Now. sir, the gentleman has been horror
stricken for years over the fugitive slave law
Of 1850; and yet, no longer ago thar last
Tuesday, the scales fell from his eyes, and he
and his friends marched up in solid column,
with one exception, and recorded their en-
dorscment OF the conStitutionality and policy
of the fugitive slave law Of 1880. Ever
since its passage, he and his allies have
denounced it as unconstitutional and void,
and have addressed the most inilainInatory
appeals to the people Of the Northern States to
resist its execution.
Mr.. Wade. That vas a bitter pill, and |
tasted it distinctly when took it; but being
driven into a corner by the sham Democracy
in their efforts to ingraft slavery upon Kansas,
| thought it better to let them have the iilgi-
tive slave law in Kansas, until | could get u
fairer lick at it and knock it in the head.
Mr.. Lctcher. 1t 'was n bitter pill" and he
was driven into a corner before he would
consent to swallow it, But when driven into
a corner nc did swallow it, and voted to re-
enact a law which, in the presence OF the
House of Representatives, before the face Of
his constituents, and in his conversation, he
has been in the constant habit of de-
nouncing in the most imlammatory language.
as a palpable violation of the laws Of God, and
of the Constitution of his country, which he
was Swsrn TO support.
Mr.. GidGings. wish to ask the gentleman
Il question. Did he not vote against the law :
Mr.. Letcher. | was not here. Laughter.
I happened to be on that day addressing my
constituents, and warning them of the rcvolu-
tionarv conduct being pursued by these mode
Tllc diu lSlilSiatN SSii'iNbiN' 20 -" ''N "
the House, and who constitute your party.
Mr.. Giddings. | would like to know wheth-
or the gentleman would not have voted for 1t
ifhc had been here?
Mr.. Letcher. would not; but not because
| considered the fugitive slave law either mex
pcdicnt or unconstitutional. tits sufficient for
me to know that it is now the law Of the land,
in full force and effect. But you, gentlemen,
not contcn, with its enactment in 1850, grave
~ re.cnact it, and specially apply it to Kansas;
and as YOU have all now given it your appro-
val, | trust we shall hear nothing more OF it's
unconstitutionality, or Of its barbarous fea-
lures. When You return to your constituents
| expect to learn that you have admitted your
error-that by the same process Of reasoning
which has satisfied your own minds, you will
satisfy them of its conStitutionality, and its ac-
cordancc with the laws Of God. and urge upon
them the propricty and duty of a rigid enforce
mcnt Of all its provisions. This is their duty