Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

CHROJNJCLB AND SENTINEL. A U G U S T A. TUESDAY MORNING, JULY 7. FOR PRESIDENT, WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON, ® Os Ohio; The invincible Kero of Tippccanoe--the incor ruptible Statesman—the inflexible Republican— the patriotic Farmer of Ohio. • v FOB. VICE-PRESIDENT, JOHN TILER, Os Virginia; A State Rights Republican of the school of ’9S— one of Virginia’s noblest sons, and emphatically one of America’s most sagacious, virtuous and patriot statesmen. FOR ELECTORS OF PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT, GEORGE R. GILMER, of Oglethorpe. DUNCAN L. CLINCH, of Camden. JOHN**W. CAMPBELL, of Muscogee. JOEL CRAWFORD, of Hancock. 9 CHARLES DOUGHERTY, of Clark. SEATON GRANTLAND, of Baldwin. ANDREW MILLER, of Cass. WILLIAM EZZARD, of DeKalb. €. B. STRONG, of'Bibb. JOHN WHITEHEAD, of Burke. E. WIMBERLY, of Twiggs. FOR CONGRESS, ILLIAM C. DAWSON, of Greene. R. W. HABERSHAM, of Habersham. JULIUS C. ALFORD, of Troup. EUGENIUS A. NISBET, of Bibb. LOTT WARREN, of Sumter. THOMAS BUTLER KING, of Glynn. ROGER L. GAMBLE, of Jefferson. JAMES A. MERIWETHER, of Putnam. THOMAS F. FOSTER, of Muscogee. G en. Harrison and Missouri Restriction. In our paper of the 2d inst., we charge*? the % Globe and the Standard of Union, witii “ one of # the glaring and disgraceful attempts to im pose upon the ; ople of the South,” by copying extracts from the Journals of the Senate of Ohio, endeavoring to prove that General Harrison was a Missouri Restrictionist. We now make the same charge against the Constitutionalist. We charge the editor of that print with having suppressed material parts of the Journal from which he quoted we charge him turther, with having suppressed those parts for the purpose of making a false im pression upon the minds of his readers —and it re suits as a consequence, that he not only suppressed truth, but suggested falsehood. We have often heard that Herod had b&eu out Heroded, but in this instance Haynes has been oat Haynes’d, and that too, by the editor of the Constitutionalist, who is always ready with his hypocritical professions of fairness, and of his being governed by a high sense of justice in the conduct of his paper. If he is sincere in his professions of doing justice, why did he keep back a portion of the Journal P And why did he keep back that particular portion of the Journal, which showed what were the sentiments of General Hairison p Why did he not publish all , the proceedings on these resolutions, rather than garbled extracts from them p Such a course as this wouhLnot have suited his purpose, it would have manifested too much ol that fairness and love of truth in political controversy,of which he boasts so much and practices so Hi tic. In £ii r notice of the extracts from the Journal of the Ohio Senate on tie 2d inst., we had no copv of Journal, and all our extracts were made Horn the Standard of Union. Since then we have seen the Journal in the possession of the editor of the Constitutionalist, and wc have made copious extracts therefrom, by which we shall bo alj.ie to bring home to that print all the charges we make against it, and leave the editor to make his defence to the country for having attempted to practice this fraud upon their judgements and confidence. But to the Journal: From the Journal of the Senate of Ohio, ISJ9-20* “ Saturday, January 1, IS2O. “ Senate met pursuant to adjournment,—Mr. Thompson moved the adoption of a resolution, for the appointment of a joint committee, to diaft a memorial to Congress, on the subject of admitting new States in the Union, the Constitutions of which authorize involuntary slavery. And on motion, said resolution was committed to a committee of the whole Senate, and made the order of this day.” e “ Monday, January 3, IS2O. “ The subject being out of the Committee of the Whole,and now before the Senate, I\ir. Thompson ©moved the adoption of tire following preamble and resolution : “ Whereas the existence of slavery in our coun try, has Qjf or been deemed a great moral and politi cal evil, and in its tendency, directly calculated to impair our national character, and materially af fect our national happiness: and inasmuch as the extension of a slave population in the U. States, is fraught with the most fearful consequences to the permanency and durability of our republican in stitutions : and whereas the subject of the admis sion of slavery in the new State of Missouri, is at this time before the Congress of the United States : Therefore, Resolvedly the Gen:,-a! Assembly of the State of O io. That our Senators and Representatives in Congress, be requested to use their zealous en deavors to prevent the adoption of so odious and d m a measure. Gu motion of Mr. Harrison, out all after the word “ Resolved ” in said resolution, and in sert in lieu thereof the following: “ That our senators and Representatives be re quested to use their utmost exertions, and take every means to prevent the extension of slave ry within the Territory of the United States, west of the Mississippi, and the new States to be formed within that Territory, which the constitution AND THE TREATIES MADE UNDER IT WILL ALLOW.” On motion to strike out, were, “Brown, Furnass, HARRISON’ Hookea Newcom, Pollock, Robb, Ruggles, Shelby, Swearingen and Suilivan.” —11. The nays were, sc Baldwin, Campbell, Fithian, Foos, Irwin, Jones, Lucas,Madeara, McLaugh in, McLean, Russel, Simpson, Spencer, Shone, Thomp son, and (Speaker) Trimble.” —16. « Whereupon, Mr. Harrison moved to recommit the said resolution and preamble, to a Select Com mittee of three members, to report ffiereon —which motion was decided in toe negative.” o The yeas were : C£ Brown, Foos, Fnrnass, HAR RISON, Hooker, Newcom, Pollock, Ruggles, Rus sel, Shelb}', Swearingen, Sullivan and Trimble, (Speaker”) —13. The nays were: “ Baldwin, Campbell, Fithian, Irwin, Jennings, Jones, Lucas, Madeara, McLaugh lin, McLean, Robb, Simpson, Spencer, Stone and Thompson”—ls. “And on motion to agree to said resolution, with the following,” “Resolved further, That his Excellency the Governor be instructed to send a copy O' he fore going preamble and resolution, to each of our Sen ators and Representatives in Congress of the United Stitos.” On this motion the yeas and nays were ordered, and were. Yeas,“Baldwin,Campbell, Fithian,Foos, Fumass, Irwin, Jennings, Jones, Lucas, Madeara, McLaugh lin, McLean, Robb, Russel, Simpson, Spencer, Sul livan, Stone, Thompson and Trimble, (Speaker”) —2O. Nays, “ Brown, HARRISON, Hooker, Newcom, Pollock, Ruggles, Shelby, and Swear' gun” —8. “Ordered, That the Preamble and Resolution be sent to the House for concurrence.” Here then, we see Gen. Harrison offers an amendment which proposes to admit Missouri into the Union with slavery, because in the treaty which was entered into between France and the United States at the time the territory of Missou ri was purchased, the United States expressly agreed, by the third article, to protect the citi zens in holding their slave property. (See 3d arti cle of the treaty in our paper of the 2nd instant.) Consequently, if General Harrison’s amendment had been adopted, it would have been in favour of slavery in Missouri.—Again, when foiled in his amendment, he proposed to recommit (he matter to a special committee of three—in this again, he was *oted down, he then voted against the send ing copies of them to the Senators and Represen tatives in Cojw and finally against the pre amble and resolutions. But we desire particularly to point our readers to the yeas and nays, a.M see if Gen. Harrison is not always found voting in opposition to those Missouu restficlionists, Lucas and Thompson. Now, we ask the Editor of the Constitutional ist, to account, why, In his very special and par ticular regard to fairness and plain straight-forward honesty in political discussion, of which he boasts so much, why, sir, did you not insert these proceedings in your paper of Thursday ? Why did you keep them back, if you wished your rea ders to arrive at truth 1 Come out, sir, and an swer these questions, and defend yourself, before you again lay claim to the smallest particle of fairness in the conduct of your Journal, and until you have defended yourself, do not aspire to any thing higher than the contemptible tricks of the Globe and Standard of Union. Hid you dare to publish these things] no, you did not; it would have shown how utterly futile all your parade about Gen. Harrison’s being a Missouri restric tiouist was, and hence it would not answer your purposes, to aid you to traduce an honest upright citizen before his countrymen. Thursday, January G, 1820. “The Senate took up the amendments made by theHouseot Representatives, to the resolution, requesting our members in Congress to oppose the extension of slavery, in the Territories of the United States, and the first amendment being read as follows : strike out all said resolution af ter the word “ Resolved ’’ as follows ;by the Gen eral Assembly of the State of Ohio, that our Sen ators and Representatives in Congress, be reques ted to use their most zealous endeavors, to pre vent the adoption of so odious and dangerous a measure, and insert in lieu thereof, the following; That our Senators and Represcnatives in Con gress, be requested to use their utmost exertions, by EVERY constitutional method, to prevent the admission of slavery in any Stale or Territo ry of the Union, where slavery does not exist, to prevent the further extension where it lias been introduced, and that they be further reques ted to oppose the admission of any State into the Union, unless the further extension of slavery within such state, be expressly prohibited.” “ Mr. Lucas thereupon mivcd to disagree to the said amendment, which mo'ion was decided in the affirmative. Yeas 18; nays 10. And the yeas and nays being required, those who voted in the affirmative were, Messrs. Baldwin, Campbell, Fithian, Foos, Irwin, Jennings, Jones,Lucas, Madeara, McLau ghlin, McLean, Robb, Russell, Simpson,Spencer, Stone, Thomspson, and Trimble (Speaker.) Those who voted in the negative, were, Messrs. Brown, Fnrnas, HARRISON, Hooker, Newcom, Pollock, Ruggles, Shelby, Swearingen and Sullivan.” The second amendment being read as follows: strike out the preamble, after slavery, in the first line, which part to be stricken out is as follows: In our country has ever been deemed a great mor al and political evil, and in its tendency, directly calculated to impair our national character, and materially affect our national happiness; and in asmuch as the extension of a slave population in the United States, is fraught with the most fear ful consequences to the permanency and durabil ity of our republican institutions; and whereas the subject of the admission of salvtry into the new State of Missouri, is at this time be r orc the Congress of the United States: Therefore, and insert in lieu thereof, the following: “In the United Slates, must be regarded as a mo ral and political evil, and the extension thereof in its tendency, directly calculated to impair the national character, and materially alfcct the hap piness of the people; and inasmuch as the ex tension of a slave ponidation in the new States and Territories here . to be erected and admit ted into the Union, must in err ? an evil so much to be deprecaled, which if not promptly guarded against, will probably, at some not very distant period, shake the foundation of our polit ical fabric. We would, therefore, fondly hope, that the consistency of our national character, will never be tarnished by acknowledging an evil, while we tolerate its extension ; and whilst the civilized nations of the world, not through necessity, but acting on the broad principles of philanthropy, are laudably uniting, to prevent the extension of tralic in human beings, that the United States, who are so immediately interested in this important subject who understand so well their own rights, and who have so much to dread from the extension of slavery into the interior of this vast republic : and who have in their power to prevent the evil, will not let pass, the present opportunity, but will, by an act of the National Councils guard against the extension of Slavery into any of the States, hereafter to be admitted, or into any of the Territories thereof.” “Thereupon, Mr. Lucas moved to disagree to said second and last amendment of the House, which was decided in the affimalive. Yeas 1G —Nays 12.” “ Those who voted in the affirmative, were, Messrs. Baldwin, Campbell, Fithian, Foos, Ir win, Jennings, Jones, Lucas Madeara, McLaugh lin, McLean, Robb, Simpson, Spencer, Stone, an ! Thompson. , Those who voted in the negative, were, Messrs Brown, Furnass, Harrison, Hooker, Newcom, Pollock, Ruggles, Russel, Shelby, Swearingen, Sullivan, and Tumble, (Speaker.”) Reader, let us examine the vote of General Har rison on the motion to disagree. Docs not every man of common sense see, that if he had vote I in the affirmative tg disagree, that he would have been in effect voting for the original preamble and resolution of the Restriction is t Thompson, which , he had so determinedly opposed on the 3d of Janu | ary, as you have already seen. What course had he then to pursue—he was compelled to vote in , the negative or not vote at all. What then was the object of his vote in the negative ; it was most ’ clearly to array the two houses against each other, and have the Senate adhering to one set of 1 resolutions, and the House to another, by which means he would accomplish his object, of prevent ing any instrustlons to the members of Congress ? against Missouri. But suppose for the sake of argument alone, that ) he did vote “ for the adoption” of the amendments ol the House ; and does not every man see that ’ the insertion of the words “by every Constitution -3 al method” secured to the people West of the Mississippi, tire possession of slaves ? How so, i simply because the treat) which was made with i France in pursuance of the Constitution, secured j the light to hold slave property. 3 Look leader, at the votes, do you see those restrictionists, Lucas, McLaughlin, and Thompson voting on any occasion with General Harrison ? No, not on a single quosfon. What says “the wise and worthy editor ” of the Constitutionalist ? Will he, in his high regard for fairness, puolish ) these facts of the Journal which he lias suppressed, 1 or will he play “ mum,” as he has done on the f Army Bill of Mr. Van Buren and his Secretary. 3 Saturday, January 8, 1820. r Message from the House. “ They insist on their amendments to the reso- J lution, requesting our Senators and Representatives - in Congress to oppose the extension of slavery, &c. r l hey request a conference, on the subject of difference between the two Houses, relative to - said amendments, and have appointcdfcconferccs on their part.” 7 “ On motion, the Senate (hen agreed to the con i ference requested by the House of Representatives on the resolution aforesaid, and appointed confer ees on their part, of Messrs. Lucas, Thompson and 3 McLaughlin.” Ordered the House to be informed thereof. Here, gentle reader, examine who composed - this committee of conference, do you not see that i they are all restrictionists, and on every question 3 which lias been taken, they have invariably voted . against General Harrison. r Thursday, January 13. “Mr. Lucas from the Joint Committee made a report, recommending the adoption of the follow ■ mg preamble and resolution, in lieu of the original. . and amendments.” “ Whereas, the existence of slavery in our coun ‘ try must be considered a national calamity, as well [ as a great political evil: And whereas, the admis sion of slavery within the nc v States, or Territo ries of the United States, i might with the most ; pernicious consequences, and calculated to endan ger the peace and prosperity of our country. Thcre * fore,” 1 “Resolved, by the General Assembly of Ohio, that our Senators and Representatives in Congress be requested to use their utmost exertions to pre ■ vent the admission or introduction of slavery into . any of the Territories of the United States, or any new State that may hereafter be admitted into ll e ; Union.” The report was agreed to, without the yeas and na)-s being ordered. But as a thing is never done till it is well done, we propose to give tiie sentiments of General Har rison two years after, on tills same question, when lie was a candidate for Congress, and he was charged with being in favor of the admission of Missouri with Slavery. What docs he say, when his votes in Congress and in the Senate of (;hio arc brought in judjnenl against him ? Docs lie shrink, or express any regrets about those votes ? Does he say, 1 repent and ask forgiveness,—l was in error ? No, none of these thing-;; but lie comes out and replies like an independent ;on of Virginia, like a freeman. Hear him: “ Congress had no more legal or constitutional right to emancipate the negroes in those sections of Louisiana, (Missouri or Arkansas,) without the consent of their owners, Ilian they have to free those of Kentucky—those people were secure I in their property by a solemn covenant w ith Franco, when the country was purchased from that power.” This is the language of General Harrison in 1822. What say you to it, most “ wise and wor thy editor ” of the Constitutionalist, does this sound like he had “ qualms of conscience.” If ho had no qua 1 as of conscience, how must you feel, most “ wise an I worthy editor ,” who have, after a lapse of tweni y years, raked up these voles and attempted to draw inferences from them which you knew were untrue, and to give your reasoning the semblance ol truth, suppressed half the iccord p Have you no qualms of conscience ? Speak out— do not play “mum” as you have cn the Army Bill. But you say, most “wiseand worthy Editor,'’' that the resolution of the Ohio House of Repre sentatives “is an absolute, direct,unconstitulicm aV ’ instruction. Will you tell us, and your rea ders what you think ol the following preamb! and resolution, which was passed by the Legisla • ture of New York, for which your high priest o Locofoco democracy, MARTIN VAN BURG A voted. —Is that an “absolute, direct , unconstiiu fional instruction.” Speak out, Mr. Editor, ai give your readers your opinions of this resolutior and the resolution itself, and probably you \vi! give them some information, which )'ou have ne ver essayed to do, notwithstanding your hypercri tical love of truth and fairness. Whereas, the inhibiting the further extension of slavery in those United States, is a subject of dec, concern to the people of this State : an d whereas, w ! consider slavery as an evil much to be deplored, an t every constitutional barrier should be inter pi se to prevent its further extension ; and that the Cor st it id ion efthe United States clearly gives Congrer the 7 rght to require new Stales not comprised withl the original boundaries of these United Slates ti. prohibition of slavery, us a condition of their ac mission into the Union — 'The / efure. Resolved, (If the honorable Senate conci; therein,) That our Senators be instructed, and ou Representatives in Congress be requested to oppos the admission as a Slate, into the Union, of an territory not comprised, as aforesaid , without mu king the prohibition of slavery therein an indispen sidle condition of admission. On the 20th of January, IS2O, the Senate (oc up the resolution and passed the same uuanimou ly, the following Senators being present: —Messi Adams , Ausfin,Bamum, Bar stow. Bourne, Child. , Dudley, Dayton, Dit miss, Evans, trothinghan , Hammond, Hart, Livingston, Lounsberry, Me Mai tin, Moores, Mall y, Moore, Noyes, Paine, Ros , Kosencrantz, Skinner, Swart, 23“ MARTIN VAN 11UREN, JjQ Wilson, Young —2B. In conclusion, most “ wise and worthy editor ” of the Constitutionalist, we charge you with urg ing upon the South the claims of Marlin Van Bi ren to the Presidency, who opposed the admissk of Missouri and Arkansas into (he Union, unle: ■ slavery was excluded, in opposition to the plight* . faith of the Government as expressed in the tieal with France —who voted to exclude Florida, ui • less slavery was prohibited, and who also vote in the New York Convention to admit free negroi ■ l o vote in all elections of the people. We char< upon you and your party these things, and w e challenge you to deny the truth of these charges. Verity you are an admirable specimen of Loco Foco democracy to urge, (even if it were true,) that General Harrison was in favor of Missouri restriction, and offer it as an argument against his election, when you are supporting Martin Van Bu ren, who is a known and acknowledged restric tionist. The Designs of the Democratic Party De veloped.—The Abolition of Slavery.—Let the South take Warning. The following startling paragraph, be it remem bered, has been published in the Tuscaloosa Flag of the Union, the Locofoco organ in this State, and endorsed and warmly commended by that paper, as containing “the philosophy of Democracy and the Christian tendency of its principles.” People of the South ! Slaveholders ! pause ! for Heaven’s sake, pause, and ponder ! —Mobile Ado. “Would you free the slave ? What party puts forth general principles which in their gradual un folding must break every unjnst bond, and set every captive free ? The day of emancipation is not yet. It were useless to emancipate the slave to-day, because we should be merely changing e form for the substance of his Slavery. But T<i K DEMOCRATIC PARTY PUTS FORTH PRIN CIPLES WHICH MUST, IN TH E END, ABOL ISH SLAVERY, and do it too at the very day, the very hour, when it can bo done with advantage to the cause of freedom and justice. Slavery is doomed ; man will not always tyranize over man. There are causes at work which will free the slave, and free him too with the consent and to the joy of his master. Let these causes work on, and do not murmur because their full effects are not realized to day. God doubtless could have made the world in one, but wo are told that he chose six days in creating it. The seed is not sown, and the corn harvested the some day. Be sure that you have principles in operation that will effect their work, aiid you may retain your composure. The democratic paity embraces the idea of universal man, and it will realize this idea, just as fast as we can urge onward the general progress of hu manity, and no faster.” — Rev. 0. A. Browason. A Loco Foco Historian. —The Louisville Jour nal relates tiie following amusing anecdote: “A lew days ago a loco foco, on board of one of the steamboats coming down the river, made him self very conspicuous by iiis foul abuse of General Harrison. At length he exclaimed, “Gen, Harrison was nos in the battle of Fort Meigs at all ; lie was not within two miles of it.” “Vou are mistaken,” said a quiet old soldier, speaking for the first time, “1 was at Fort Meigs myself, and 1 know that what you assert is not true.” “Well, may be so,” stammered out the locofoco, somewhat abashed, “but I have history for it.” “What history?” calmly asked the old soldier. <: Ah, I’ve history for it,” said the loco a second time “But I wish you to tell me what history,” exclaimed the vet eran in a slightly elevated tone. “Why—why— why — Rollin's History,” faltered out the despair ing locofoco.” From the Georgia Journal. W1) o are Federalists I The Van Buren Press of this State, will an swer this question wry readily whenever it is pro pounded to them. Why say they, you are the Federalists!!! You have connected yourselves with the Whig Parly, in the ranks of which are to he found Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, and others, notorious Federalists—therefore act ing w' o "these men, associated with them to promo,c ine election of Harrison, you must he Federalists!! Well, this is excellent logic !!! ! These gentry we suppose must have the bene fit of their notable discovery ,- and all that we can do, to obviate the evils that would neces sarily result to our cause, hy an admission, on our part, of the soundness of their argument (/) is, to turn their own batteries upon them, or, to use a more homely phrase, “/ o fight the devil with his own fire.” This we now propose to do in as brief a manner as possible. The State Rights Party then, are Federalists, are they ? because they have nominated Harri son, and are found in his support, acting in con cert with Daniel Webster and others of the same political school. But with whom ive the Van Buren Party, in Georgia, acting to promote the re-election of their chief l Has this Parly no avowed Federalists in its ranks? Nay, more, has this party, no acknowledged Federalists, act ing as leaders in the cause of Van Buren Democ racy ? What was Mr. Van Buren in 1812? A federalist. What is he now? A pampered Aris tocrat, who has fattened upon the people’s mon ey. and who seeks to unite, with the purse of the Nation, the sword, in the shape of a standing army, to rob the nation of its birthright, and the people of their liberties. Who is James Buchanan ? A Under now of the sclfstyled “Democratic” Party; but he is the man who once said, that if he thought there was one drop of democratic blood in his veins he would let it out. This is the man too, who, when speaking of Madison’s Administration, uses such language as this. “ The democratic administration declared war against commerce. They were not satisfied with depriving it of the protection of a navy, but they acted as though they had determined upon its an nihilation. ***** “Time will not allow me to enumerate ALL THE OTHER WILD AND WICKED ACTS OF THE 11 F.MOC RATIO AOMIN] ST RAT ION. * * * * * “ After they bad, by refusing <he Bank of the 17. S. a continuance of ifs charter, embarrassed the financial concerns of t lie Government, they RASHLY FLUNG ■ O US INTO V AVAR. ***** “ Glorious it has been in the highest degree to the American character, but disgraceful in THE EXTENT TO Til E ADMINISTR ATION. Thanks then, (o Heaven, that we have obtain ed a peace, BAD AND DISGRACEFUL AS IT IS. ‘.‘THEY (ihc democrats) GLORIED IN SETTING THEMSELVES IN ARR AY A GAINST OUR PRESENT ADMIRABLE FORM OF GOVERNMENT.” This man, Buchanan, i; now, called a Repub lican. Associ; with the Federalists all his .he is yet a Van Buren Democrat—a leadp\ too, and one whose nod of approbation is mot-b eagerly sought after hy the chief of the party himself, whilst his frown carries terror along with it. Are you Federalists, gentlemen, because you are associated with this man to carry out the policy of your party; or to promote the election of your Kiudcrhook candidate ? Who is Samuel Cushman? A Van Buren representative lately in Congress. An acknowl edged leader of the “Democracy.” One w 1 o, during the late war, “hoped to God the ’ cvc ••/ American soldier, who marched lo C. nus. - would leave h’s bone, [here.” Who is Henry Hubbard ? One of the “D mocracy” now, being a Van Buren Senator from New Hampshire, but who was one of the prime movers in getting up the meeting at which dele gates were chosen io the Hartford Convention. Who is J. H. Prentiss? Now a Loco Foco, but who, during the war, used such language as this? - • r “It is with great isation of indescribable pleasure that I find myself enabled lo announce the complete triumph of the F cralists.” “If my humble labors in the caused my native coun try have produced the change in favor of Federal ism, in this country, then have I arrived at the acme of my hopes, the summit of my wishes.” “The frightful Hydra of Democracy begins to droop its head before the Heaven deiived spirit of Federalism”—“Democracy?” a monster wild that which roams the Lybian wastes and jo) s to drench his tusks in blood—a pestilence that spreads contagion o\er the whole extent of our country—a pernicious blast that withers every thing it touches.” Who is C, J. Ingersoll? The Van Curen candidate for Congress in Philadelphia—the man who said, and who still says, that had he been ca pable of reason and reflection during the revolu tionary war, he should have been a TORY” 1 Who is Garret D. Wall ? The Van Buren 3 Senator from New Jersey, who in the Senate in - 1838, said, “here, sir, in the presence of the American people, I avow that T was a Federalist, and acted with that parly, zealously and acticdy so long as their flag waved in Now Jersey. Who is Kuel Williams ? A Van Buren Sen e’ ator from M?'ns who helped to burn J i "vs Madison in effigy in 1812—then, as ever, a most ' notorious federalist. Who elected Levi Woodbury, Governor of N. 3 Hampshire, in 1823 1 The Federalists. , Who arc Roger B. Taney, J. C. B adhead, f Henry Vail, H. D. Gilpin, Richard Hush, Mr. 5 Bancroft, collector of the port of Boston, and others'? All, all Federalists, in days that a;e 3 past — notorious federalists —tea times worse ‘ than Daniel Webster—hut now, these gentry , are clad in the garb of Van Buren Democracy, , and a”e Republicans forsooth. Will the “ De ; mocracy ” in Georgia, deny now that they are 1 Federalists ! Have we not made out our case, - according to their own mode of discussing (he query of “ who are Federalists?” If we have ’ not, we are prepared to try them again. But before we close, we desire to notice one other conspicuous advocate of Van Buren De ; mocracy. We mean none other than W. C. ; Bryant, the Editor of the leading Van Buren 1 paper in New York, the New York Evening 1 Post. This paper is the organ of the parly in New York, and the views of its conductor arc \ followed by the party every where. Now, there j never was a more hitler, and venomous defamer i* of the pure principles of democracy, as taught > by Jefferson and Madison, than was this Van 1 Buren Deraoc r at. Thomas Jefferson he hated 3 bitterly, because of his advocacy of republican principles. A federalist “ dyed in the wool,” with a malignant heart, and a slanderous tongue, this William Cullen Bryant, this apostle and ■ chief priest now of Van Burenisrii, was not sat . isfied with his abuse of Jefferson in prose, but must needs resoit to verse to aid him in his un- I hallowed detraction of the great opponent of i federalism and federalists. Will our readers hear this “ prince of poets” / / > THOMAS JEFFERSON. , t BY WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT. And thou the scorn of every patriot name, > Thy country’s ruin and her council’s shame ! Poor servile thing ! derision of tiie brave I Who er f from Tarleton fled to Carter’s cave; Thou, wiio, when menaced by perfidious Gauf; Didst prostrate to her whiskerd minions fall, And when our cash her empty bags supplied, Didst meanly strive the foul disgrace to hide ; Go, wretch; resign the presidential chair, Disclose thy secret measures, foul or fair, Go, search with curious eye for horned frogs. Mid the wild wastes of Louisiana bogs; Or, where the Ohio rolls his turbed stream, Dig for huge bones, thy gloiy and thy theme; Co, scan, Philosophist* tiiy charms, And sink supinely in her sable aims, But quit to abler hands the helm of state. Nor image ruin on thy country’s fate.” What will (he ‘■Democracy” say in extenua : tion of this “ poetic effusion ” —an effusion re -1 fleeting disgrace upon its author, and calling for ; the unqualified condemnation of every honest man. The reptile which crawls upon the ground, and in whose fangs arc lodged the most deadly ! poison, should not he avoided with more care, than the political demagogue who has the au dacity to put forth such malignant stuff as is contained in the above lines. Neither can he, ' who seeks after political truth, be too careful to avoid associating with those whose leaders are such as we have described, and who have as their “ sentinels upon the watch tower,” such ’ men to conduct the press of their party. We call upon our State Rights friends, the friends of Harrison and Reform, to note the crowd : with which some of their old political associates 1 are about to connect themselves; then let them ! take into consideration who compose the “ Dc * mocracy ” in Georg : a—what have been the poli ’ cy and politics of the falsely styled democratic party in our own Stale—who are the leaders, &c., and if they do not pronounce condemnation upon them, set us down as being no judges of their feelings. ( 0 Van Buren Bcononiy, The Log cabin Farmer, a paper published in ? Ohio, has the following account of some state , ments recently made by Elisha Whittlesey, “ the working” member of Congress from this Stale, whose word never failed to challenge full conli ’ dence. Mr. Whittlesey shews up (he pretended ; economy of Mr. Van Buren's administration in a 1 most effective manner. His texts, under the dis -1 feren! numerical heads, well deserve the com monla.ies of the people. Every hotly who has heard of Elisha Whiltle i scy, knows that no man in Ohio stands higher in ’ point of honor, integrity, vera-ity and patriotism ■ When in Congress Mr. W. wet known by the name of “ the wo'koy.” He was not willing to receive his own wages, nor was he willing that ; any hr 1 y else should receive bis wages, without doing a Ah’ day's work. Mr. W. lately made a spec-: h in Trumbull county, in which he took oc ea ion to animadvert upon the extravagance of the ' j present administration, and related some four or I j five outrageous instances, to which we call the at . Icntion of the public. No. 1 —Mr. W said he would road from the report of the Secretary of the Treasury one item, 1 which though small, is characteristic of the man ner in which the public money is expended at Washington. He then read the estimate of five • hundred and forty odd dollars for attendance at the western gate of the* Capital. He remarked that the tliice of gate-keeper originated but a few years since, that he had observed from day to day, ■ at the western gate of the Capitol, a man who ap -1 peared to have nothing to do, yet kept his position at the gate, in a few days lie had an umbrella . over bis head ; by this time Mr. W. came to the 5 conclusion that the man have a permanent post at the gate. Mr. W. made inquiry and learned that lie had been appointed gale keeper —ere long ■v the man had a convering erected in the style of i a sentry box, in lieu of his umbrella, and since i that he has been to all appearances one of the . officers of the General Government. Mr. W. [‘ said there was some shrubbery, <Scc., growing i about the gate, and a very beautiful flower that j Mr. Dickinson, tSecrelary of the Navy, (who is . j an old bachelor and a botanist) who fearful that , *some lady, might pluck the flower and suggested r tfie idea of this new officer, ostensibly to attend the gale, but realty io watch the. flower , lest some fair lady might pluck it; and so, for the protec tion of this /hir flower, Mr. Secretary Woodbu i ry recommends the expenditure of five hundred > and forty dollars lor the current year. No. 2—Mr. Whittlesey ;, omi ked, that he . had obscr v a man loanin'' yttint the Capitol , for two or three days ituu . c on, with a cane ; in his nd ; and occasionally moving round in the shade of a tree, to avoid the rays of the sun. . | He at first; opposed him to be a stranger in ; j Washington, but continuing at the same place f from day to day, Mr. W. inquired what \v the . c. ision of the man’s occupying that post. He . learned that he was overseeing two other individ ! | viduals, who were digging up some posts for hitch ’ | ing horses to and planting new ones—and that j this overseer ot two men received cither three or t four dollars per day. 1 No. 3.—Mr, W. said, that when he first went 3 into Congress, there were two little boys in the t | Hou : of Representatives, who acted as pages, r | to carry papers from members to the Speaker, j that when he left Congress, this number had in creased to eighteen. That members of the House (ami that he would bo believed wi io - 11 they were not Whig members) bron i 9 cousins and their cousins’ males, to ai . } S ‘ U fa and feed at the public ctib. L as pa;i do No. 4—Mr. W. said, that the special 01 ol Congress in 1837, continued fortv i *!•' and that nothing was done but to p J ven bills in relation to the currency 1 ors, ’®« whole ol the writing done by the CkVk House of Representatives he could d 0 i* one week. That at the close of the Crambreleng a Van Buren member from]? } I: I p ° city, introduced a resolution, to <y ve 1 extra pay, that he opposed the 6 I m for so doing was called hard-hearted a 1 sive, that at the next session of Centres' HI the curiosity to look into and see had eeen thus expended, and found" ow Clerks and pages of the House of Ron T lives, had received over T *° THOUSAND DOLLARS, f or FoKTvs4p l£ DAYS SERVICES. U J^ms No. s—Mr. W. said, that he did not m > ■ these because they were isolated ca« C ' , tl cause they were characteristic «f theVxir? B he manner m which the party i n pow e money of the nation. He said it iw all the new cilices at Washington— ih f* en Rl the old offices were plainly and simply p!‘jfl k‘ the new ones were more splendidly furnish! ornamented than any parlor on the V "B dl sei ve; with and settees he down or sit up, as their convenient® dictate, spending their time reading new ?’® or talking politics, morning noon and nM, I fa but a small portion of their time ® tlici, high salaries and all this f rom H #■ fessing to be purely democratic ’ j rf 1 Mr. Whjttlesej urged U|.on’ the Co„, ei J 'ft thcnecesatyufacimgas Americans, a sfl 2 „ . 'heir country, and not mrrol, pmi 3 1 1 he necessity of electing officers who will t the nation back to its city, and relieve the people from their rJ grievous burdens. 1 For the Chronicle 4. Sentinel. Jo! John C. Calhoun, my jo John, a 1 * I once did love thee dear: Tl.ou we it my guiding star, John, ln< When sfoims were gathciing near. Those days of peril past, John, I Lin would seek to know, ■■si Why to our ancient foes you’ve gone ? John C. Calhoun, my jo. BB^ Power, like a courtesan, Is ever dress’d in guile : |9‘ 'lhe syren has deceiv’d thee—Van | Is withering in her smile ! Os 'Treasury, talk not to me— c< You’ve jumped the b>'g Jim Crow! a No sub. could metamorphose thoc, xv John C. Calhoun, my jo. Jr li John C. Calhoun, my jo, John, Your locks are bleaching last; 1^ And we may meet no more, John, To question of the past. J. Then fare thee wcll'my jo, John, v Tiic “ / Teasel ” thou didst know, I fear will prove a Li-on, John C. Calhoun, my jo. i, 0 Beautiful Extract.— The scenery which we are born and brought up, if we reman E long "enough therein to have passed that earil n period ot existence on which memory seems fix have no hold, sinks, as it wore, into the spiritcß * man ; twines itself intimately with every thought! 0 and becomes a part of his being. He can 1 cast it off, any more than ho can cast olfthe hoc® in vvnich his spirit acts. Almost every chain his after thoughts is linked at some point to nii magical circle which bounds his youth’s ideci:l» and even when latent, and in no degree knowsl A it it still present, affecting every leehng and even Br fancy, and giving a bent of its own to all on I f words and our deeds. 1 I have heard a story of a giil who was a cap- K live to some L: stern prince, and wore upon htKit ancles a light golden ring. She learned to lon H her master devotedly, and was as happy as could be in iiis love.—Adored, adorned and isheo, slie sal beside him one day in all the poirfß! of eastern state, wh,en suddenly her eye fell upoi K flic golden ring round her ancle which ciisioaK had rendered so light that she had forgotten iK altogether, 'i'he tears instantly rose in her evefl' as she looked upon it, and her lover divining W once the cause, asked, with a look of “ Would you be free ?” cast herself upol his bosom and answered, “ Never ! ’ Thus often the links that hind us to early secnf 1 and places, in which we have passed happy unhappy hours, and 1 nobserved and forgotteJß til! some casual c cumstances turn our cvißk thitherward. Bui 1 any one should ask us wlieitJß er we would sever that chain, there is scarce!® one fine mind that would not also answer, Nevc|B Ihe passing ot our days may be checkered grief and care: unkindness and frowns may or the smiles of boyhood, and tears bedew llflj path ot youth ; yet nevertheless, when we and look back, in later life, letting Memory lioviß over the past, prepared to light where she wii B there is no period in all the space laid out befoi B heqovcr which her wings flutter so joyfully, or d I vylnch she would so much wish to pause, as lb H time of our youth. J’lie e\ils of other uayss’l forgotten; the scenes in which these days pa 3 fl are remembered, detached from the sot rows lb* B checkered them, and the bright misiy light -B life’s first sunrise still gilds the whole with a gio - |B ry not its own. It is not alone, however, awf I l° n .? years have passed away, and crushed out tb# 1 gall from sorrows endured, that fine and eilc^3U 'J ting feelings are awakened by the scenes in our eaily days have gone by, and that the thufl <>f associations is felt in all its joyfulncss, actinl I as an antidote to poisonous sorrows which ofw* B mingle with our cup.— James, The insane department of the Prnnsylvaci* H Hospital contains at present one hundred pall® 1 * I —halt of whom are females. A Nkw Title.—Prentiss, in liis late eloquen. I address at the St. Charles, called Martin La ■ Buren the commander in chief of the army, 9 and dogs of the United Sta’cs.— Picayune. Consumption of Flour,— lt is that 12.000.000 of barrels of 11 aur are annua*' 1 !H consumed in the United States. Massachusetts Militia.—Massachusetts ha-» disbanded her militia throughout, and repealß the whole old system. Volunteer companies un|| hereafter to be relied on, stimulated by a annual stipend to each man. The Population of the United States, at I* M present time, according to Major Noah's calciD M tion, is 17,114,893 —a pretty neat calculation- I The Picayune says, a fellow in that city, <l r ‘ ll '' fl so many cob.'ers the other evening that he '' i | up in the night and found himselt mending - I own shoes. Stephen A. Douglass, tiie defeated R ,co la ,l candidate for Congress in Illinois, has sion for speech-making and finds it is so ■ to obtain audiences, that he actually at,t ! liUt ji I <® hanging at Carlinville, a few days a go, tQf (ht » purpose of making apolitical harangue the crowd assembled at the gallows. think that a locofoco candidate h aT * vr-"I make a speech at any hanging but his 0" ■ Prentice.