Phelps, Samuel Shethar, 1793-1855 to J. H. Barrett
Order a pdf of this item here.
Gilder Lehrman Collection #: GLC03678.01 Author/Creator: Phelps, Samuel Shethar, 1793-1855 Place Written: Washington, District of Columbia Type: Autograph letter signed Date: 1 August 1850 Pagination: 8 p. : docket ; 25.2 x 20.2 cm. Order a Copy
Phelps, a Whig Senator from Vermont, writes to J. H. Barrett, possibly Joseph Hartwell Barrett. Relates that an article by E. D. Barber in the "Brandon Post" (a newspaper from Brandon, Vermont) provided misinformation regarding the Clayton Bill of 1848. Phelps argues that this bill prohibited the extension of slavery, and was an equivalent to the Wilmot Proviso. He vehemently defends his position on the bill against Barber's false reports, emphasizing his opposition to the spread of slavery. Also argues that Barber misrepresented Horace Greeley's opinion of the bill, and thinks the bill's unpopularity was due to the fact that it was misunderstood. Defends Daniel Webster (Barber asserted Webster would not vote for California as a free state). Discusses other facts of the Senate, mentioning Dawson, Bradbury, Walker, and Pearce (presumably Senators William Dawson, James W. Bradbury, Isaac P. Walker, and James A. Pearce) in relation to the omnibus bill (regarding the extension of slavery).
Citation Guidelines for Online Resources
The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.