But now, on this very subject of the extension of the slave power, I would by no means do the least injustice to Mr. Van Buren.  If he has come up to some of the opinions expressed in the platform of the Buffalo Convention, I am very glad of it.  I do not mean to say that there may not be very good reasons for those of his own party who cannot conscientiously vote for General Cass to vote for him, because I think him much the least dangerous of the two.  But, in truth, looking at Mr. Van Buren’s conduct as President of the United States, I am amazed to find that he should be placed at the head of a party professing to be, beyond all other parties, friends of liberty and enemies of African slavery in the Southern States.  Why, the very first thing that Mr. Van Buren did after he was President was to declare, that, if Congress interfered with slavery in the District of Columbia, he would apply the veto to their bills.  Mr. Van Buren, in his inaugural address, quotes the following expression from his letter accepting his nomination:  “I must go into the Presidential chair the inflexible and uncompromising opponent of every attempt on the part of Congress to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia against the wishes of the slave-holding States; and also with a determination equally decided to resist the slightest interference with it in the States where it exists.”  He then proceeds:  “I submitted also to my fellow-citizens, with fulness and frankness, the reasons which led me to this determination.  The result authorizes me to believe that they have been approved and are confided in by a majority of the people of the United States, including those whom they most immediately affect.  It now only remains to add, that no bill conflicting with these views can even receive my constitutional sanction.”

In the next place, we know that Mr. Van Buren’s casting vote was given for a law of very doubtful propriety,—­a law to allow postmasters to open the mails and see if there was any incendiary matter in them, and, if so, to destroy it.  I do not say that there was no constitutional power to pass such a law.  Perhaps the people of the South thought it was necessary to protect themselves from incitements to insurrection.  So far as any thing endangers the lives and property of the South, so far I agree that there may be such legislation in Congress as shall prevent such results.

But, Gentlemen, no man has exercised a more controlling influence on the conduct of his friends in this country than Mr. Van Buren.  I take it that the most important event in our time tending to the extension of slavery and its everlasting establishment on this continent, was the annexation of Texas, in 1844.  Where was Mr. Van Buren then?  Let me ask, Three or four years ago, where was he THEN?  Every friend of Mr. Van Buren, so far as I know, supported the measure.  The two Senators from New York supported it, and the members of the House of Representatives from New York supported it, and nobody resisted it but Whigs.  And I say in the face of the world, I say in the face of those connected with, or likely to be benefited by, the Buffalo Convention,—­I say to all of them, that there has been no party of men in this country which has firmly and sternly resisted the progress of the slave power but the Whigs.