Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

~ - .i MR, THOKJNTTON’S tUTTER. (Concluded.) My second proposition is that the are the proper judges of their own nghtswr ' well as of their infraction as the mode and m<-a/ sure of redress. The grand oivot upon which the question of right, which is contended for upon the parr the Sra’es must turn, is die fact, whether do government of the United States has derived its authority from the States in then individual sovereign capacity, leagued together for pur poses of mutual benefit, and common welfare or from the whole people of all the Slates as one consolidated nation. It would be absurd to deny that the government is properly amen able to the power from whence it derives all its authority to act. If there!’ re it has deriv ed its authority immediately from the people of all the Slates, as a consolidated whole, then . 1 yield the argument, and acknowledge the! Supremacy of the Federal Government, upon j the broad ground that the will of the people I should be expressed through a majority of the whole. I think however, I have already | shown that the powers of the Federal Govern tuept are derivable alone from the States. I Will pursue the argument still further. The grand breastwork behind which the consohda- I tionists foitify themselves, is the caption to the Constitution,which commences with, “we the people of the United States.” In the solving of any problem, or the interpretation of any 1 rule of law, either natural, moral, or political, 1 we must take into consideration the nature of i the causes produced the effects about to be enquired into, as well as the effects them- . selves which have emtnated from the causes— otherwise all conclusions would be arbitrary, and unsusceptible of proof, and the philosophy of nature, as well as of science would be. swal lowed up in the crude, Nations of men, ori ginating in prejudice or some other passton, prompting the conclusions in all respects to be subservient to the will of the individual. Would it not therefore be mote reasonable io suppose that the Convention intended to have been un derstood as meaning the “States United” by the term United Simes, rather than such an absurd forced construction which makes it mean the people collectively of all the States ? Get us appiy the above test and see the result The constitution is the result, or effect, of cer tain important causes, involving the life, liber ty arid happiness of the parlies to it, whether viewed in the character of States, or as a con solidation of the people of all the States. What were the causes und the nature of them which led to the production of the Constitu tion I A number of separate and distinct com munities, having assumed to themselves the attributes of sovereignty, and each formsd lor itself a government according to 'he natural rights and sovereign will of its own citizens, being neighbors enjoying a similarity of rights and priviledgea, and being mutually interested in the preservation of the great natural and fundamental principles upon which their liber ties, right of self government and original sove reignty depended, tnought proper to unite themselves together for the attainment of these just ends; and formed a confederation, not of the “ United Stales.” nut in their own individ ual rai»a«u!y as the ‘State if New Hampshire, Massachusetts Ray Rhode Island, Providence Plantations &c. &c.” under “the style ofthe United States ot America,” for the ivowed purpose of “providing for the common defence prom . mg the gener I welfare, and securing the blessings o f liberty to themselves and their posterity.” V\ m>n the Colon es made their declaration of Indepetid nice, it was made in those ,ery explicit 'voids, “The unanimous de laration of the thirteen United States of Ami-cjcn.” What ran be understood trotn this but the declared will to the world of the thir teen Slates situated as before described, who thought proper to unite themselves for the pur poses set forth in the declarations of Inde pendence ? Y»>t in the face of all those facts, the avowed objects of the partm- m inter est — seeking every laudable means to obtain their object,—nnd sealing their efforts with their blood and trensuie, esteeming the attain ment of the great ends they have io vte«, more valuable than Ide or property, we are mid that the Stales in becoming parties to the Constitu tion, have yielded al] claims to the very objects they were endeavouring to accomplish when they formed that instrument!! (film object of the Stales that ratified the Constitution lad renlly been to form a consolidate government, why was the tenth amendment to t! e Consti tution introdm ed bv them, for it must he borne in m<nd that th* amendment was the result of • *<-r <p Jous jnalnuav on the purl of (he Slates of the precise powers they were about to part with, hy n ratification nf the Con-iitutmn, and by nu moans necessary tn give efficiency 'o the General Government in any of its operations, either legitimate or an mi med Again. how rould the States have ratified tea' umrndnien l , if they had intended the federal government to hare had paramount control over them? Il they were indeed *nuatrd towards the Fed«- ml Government "as counties are to the States" •• his been so va-nlv contended for bv some, than the irresiatanle answer* to those que» lions might he evaded; hut the fact nt the a mend merit alluding tn powers "ranted, nnd to /rote «rs rese red." sh-»ws that u was intended to become an explanatory part of the cnnsti- > tlOii, plainly defining the intentions of the par ties to it. And the fact that 'he powers no' granted to the F-deral Government “ar-re served to the folates or to the people.’’ leav> ■* the de ir inference that it nuts' have derived the powers granted, from the Siate«. and from the peple through the States; as the reserve must have been intended for 'he power «hi< h was competent to make the grant. Therefore •s tho governments f the States are intended for *ho immedtate pro;o<-ttofl nf their <*w n cm. Sens in alt '••wets. it follows that the power. < g- ’'!e r bv them to the fedrrr.l govern nent wa< | 4 O'* With • View to further that object, and t must have constituted a part of those original-! y derived by the States from the people, and ; ;.e powers reserved to lhe people, comprehend ; hose which have never been vested in any government at all, but such as forms that class ; n K'hich it is ;he veiy object and design of lhe , i .rmation of a government to protect the citi-i zen . Who can be a more proper judge of; a right, than the party who alone lias the power to exercise the right? “Shall lhe thing formed, say to him th it formed it why hast thou ■ made me thus?” Upon this plain principle, tne Federal Government can alone j tdge of its own poivers, and like the “thingformed” it has even to exercise that judgement al its pe- ; ril, being accountable to “him who formed it,” I for all that it does wrong. flow absurd there fore must be the notion that, because the S ales have gianted certain powers to the fed- , eral government, of which it has a right to ■ judge, that it should assume to itself the sole | preogative of judging also of “the powers re- ■ served to thv Slates and to the people,” which , i must be the fact, if the Supreme Court (the ! creature and a part of that government) is al lowed to determine all matters of controversy I arising under the exercise of those essential) rights. Upon those principles and views there- ; fore, which form the solid conviotions of my : mind, the Federal Government can only be the judge of its own powers, by its courts or ; otherwise, under the liability of being correct ed in its errors by the power that formed it, ) i which is the States, acting as individual save rcignties in their confederated capacity; while , the States and the people through the States, who possess an exclusive control over their reserved poivers, possessing also an appellate j control in ihe last resort, over the powers they have granted to the federal government, in the i event that that government should have pal pably abused the author.ty delegated to it by them, have the unquestionable right to judge of their infraction, whether done by the fede ral government, under ’he color of some pre tended authority, or by any other power upon • earth, deriving us authority from that govern ment. This is the true veto principle of a free , government, the restraining power tn the I hands of the people, against usurpations, and i attempted tyranicji! acts upon the part of the I government, and without which, no free go vernment can exist, which you may call by whatever name you please; and if the odious ) epithet of Nullification be the one which must i be held up as a scare crow, to drive the people from tne investigation of this great conserva tive principle, which can alone secure to them the untramelled exercise of their dearest rights, : I for one w ill glory in the shame of the name I before I can be induced to relinquish in one jot or tittle, the vital and all important principle II am here contending for. The right to judge ’( of the infraction oj its own rights, also of the rnede and measure us redress, whenever it is satisfied that its rights have been violated, is the last important matter I promise to notice In weighing the arguments I may produce to sustain his position, it must bo recollec ed that I have already established the sovereignty of the stales—their t.vdtvvbra/character the re lation they sustain to the Federal Government, in the character of creator, and its relative con dition of creating, which if taken in connec tion with the fact, tha ihe fun I itnent d princi ple oftnnafe power, or first cause, muat reside in the creator and not in the creature, will give . you the hypothesis upon which I shall base the I right of the people, to conuol under all circum stances, the rules by which their actions shall be governed, which involves their “lives, liber- -1 ■ ty ati'i the pm suit of happiness.” If the states ■ are sovereign, and have a right to pass laws for , ) the protec ion <>f their citizens, how would they ,! go about such a work, if you deny to them [• compeiency of determining ihe correctness of ( the I <ws they pass fui that purpose? If on the other hand, you grant to them this power, upon ( what principle can you depiive them ofthe right also, to determine when their laws are vi olated? And it must he remembered, that ihe Constitution ofthe United States, is tl.e law ot every state. In answering these questions, this fact must be kept in view, that the tenn Stale, sigiufi s all that pertains to, or constitutes a state, both as relates to the people and the government, and that “ the enunir-raiiori ofcer tain rights in the Constitution (of lhe United' Siates, which is the law of every state) shall not j be construed to deny, or disparage otheis re-i tamed tiy the people.” Now for example, it ' a state, for its own interest, should give any Other power a right to do a certain specific act ot ihing, which is plainly sei forth in its own l<w, upou what principle could it retain its sovereignty, and suffer Hie pow»*r to which the print was made, >o he the sole judge, not only ol rights brought in question by the grant, but dso, us all others us every character whatever. iha may pertain to the state, in its sovereign ! capacity I Softer me to offer a lew reflet" ions ! upon those important positions by w<y of illus 'ratior. 1 laid down sovereignly vou recollect, as an innate paramount power, and wherever it i resides it necessard err ues an imhoitty supe- ' rior to ill others whatever. By nature, man b- ini’ free, is subject only to the sovereign con trol of his Creator, anil is consequently as .a free agent, held responsible fu- Hi» exercise ol his ottmtriZZ in all things—for no mm can be held accountable fcr the actions ..t another, un less bv a voluntary assent on his part. In the foimation us a government, therefore, or any other association of two o: more persons ihf objects of such associ <um», wv be re isonably Considered as designed to be beneficial to Hie pat ies concerned, and the sacrifices mail by Hie pat ties, for the attainment of Hie ohje« I they have in view, (be Hwy whir they m-tv) •itts be of a voluntary chai tc.er, or you de stroy every principle of m >ns accomitabilitv to his cie.Hor principle I piesunie, no inudlt- gen ni-tn will question in this enlightened age. Pursuing the idea, and filactng Hie contracting parties upon an rq.nl fooling as it regards ihcir personal accountability, for the possible abuse •tfihe sovereign power, with which each pc son is endowed by na’tire, I would enq>>;ir» for the rule or principle, tho would subject ei ther to the control of tha other, beyond their Voluntary agreement, at the same time holding I he pans compelled \o submit, responsible for ihe act <o Ins ere; tor. Uniter this view of ihe. subject, 1 hold, as brim' obscived, that lhe’ rights reserved to tlx pople, rent thin cha racter, that for the pnii.l i> use <>< abuse of which . each individual is accountable to Ins maker, and no’ to Ins government; because lie has not vol , unlary yielded the exercise* ot this righi, or any control over it to tlx government; and any at tempt to do so on ihe p.n< of 'lie government,' would be tyranny and oppression. Ot this class of rights, is ;he pit- ilege of sei vmg God accord ing to the ronsciein eof evet v man. If the government we.e o attempt to interpose its au thoiity, in this mailer, think you the individual would not 11 ve the right o judge of he infrac tion, thus arbitrarily commuted upon one of his j most important and essential rights ! And if it , is lieie plainly imd conclusively shewn 'hat. he is of necessity, and according to the immutable purposes of G id, made the proper Judge < f the infraction of his rights tn one instance, where is the philosophy, oi indeed any thing but the ) grossest sophistry, that could deba* him of the same privilege in every ins ance. Iti all cases of compact or contract, between parties, who ■ have previously Voluntarily created through ! their governments,or assented thereto, tribunals or common umpires, competent to judge of mat ters of controversy between them, they are Looiind by the decisions of those tribunals or • > mimes, ! ecause it is impliedly a part of their I contract, they having previously as citiz> ns of . ihe country, voluntarily eixered into an *ai range l mem, by which tin y are bound to do so,for *he i general peace of tin- community,and which con- ■ stitutes a portion of die delegated authority from the people to the government; Inn in every in stance of this kind, there is a positive grant by the citizen, to the government in the constitu tion of the coutiuy, <n no court, however high, can lawfully assume jurisdiction, or control over the rights or c imisof any man. Arid when ever it is attempted, it is tyranny and uppres sion, in eve y sense of those hid *<ms terms, and no honest citizen is rightmlly, or morally bound to subm t » sin h usurpations of authority ov«* them, d iie possesses physical power to thmw them oft. L»‘ us apply those lational positiors to the contest for power between the federal govei tun -nt and the btat“s. The States in their political and sovereign capacity, bear the same relationship to the federal government, that the citizens hear to the government of the stales; bee use, I ke (tie people cf a stale, ’hey are lhe indtvir/udZa yvho ire the parties to the compact, that creates or forms the government. They also, (lhe slates) like the people m their indi vidual capacity, possess unalienable rights, with which they neither h ve or ever intended to part, and for ihe prudent use or abuse of which, ’hey are accountable to he power that created them—-the sovereign people. Ano how could the government of a stale be accountable to the people, if v<m deny to it, the power to judge of its own ligh'S? It smelv cannm be} In like maimet, as m Hit- rule laid down for the deter mination of cGit’racts beiween indiyidii ds, are the slates bound turaHi o her in all cases where there is a specific gram of power, to any tribu nal or umpire, extrresslv created or authorised to be crea'ed bv the constitution, for the deter mination of sinh Cages, because it is a pail of the original contract between the states; but where there is rm express gram of power o.'aii ihority to c eate any tiib mal <>r umpire, com petent to deter rn'tit* a particular m i “er of con 'rovPisy between the oar'u s, each rmst be ne cessarily left to uh the jiid . r of the pioptiely <>f its own actions, upon >hr s one principle that each ciozex has tiie light to Je'crimim for him self, the m inner of sc ving his God, and an at tempt to coerce or res ron • s xe in the one case, would he as high !» rn.led oid palp hie op pression, is to practice -arc'. <>borniriahle fraud on the rights fthe ex a m ’ :, e ther. If < ' stale however, has • right ’>■ judge < f its own ; powers, those (r-setved as well ■-s ■> controlling veto, or negativ* upper ti<m ’pon those gr ra ted by it to the federal goverumen l , and it should, under the exercise of this rii.h:fi>l pow er determine anv fu ureoperati -ns ot he h-de ial government to be on tmhonsed, ( nd viola tive of'he grants of power given by it to thai government; I would xnquxr, what benefit could i estjlt to tire sialo, from the possession of this tight, ifit should be debared limn exercis ing the light to apply the proper remedy for the ’evil t In v tin would i> be for well regabued I communities, to pass laws or adopt plans eu- I cottraging scientific researches, and an "cquiie nient of useful know bulge on the part of ns cit izens, if a fundament I principle of Hie govr.n meni restrained the qualified person from redu cing his acquired kt "wltdge into piacHce, for the general ooorl. Unde' surh a s' ite of Hungs, niedic.il knowledge lor ms' mce, might bound in the cuuuir\, and the ch z--ns de by sc >res, ! fur Hie want <>f utiduui v ■<> apply i.. In Me ! chanics and .Arts also. . most pet tec knowledge of the laws that gov.ru them, might piev d ihtiiugh the ivhob comrrmuit v., and vm, for 'he Want of then application, pobhit en erptise would languish, -mu Hie best ore pss ol the count! v would dwmdle m'o ms . ir-firanc arid supiljeness. What for ins h mid the in valuable rnven. imi ol i hi t>" ■ Fulton, have availed Hie country, t || ( . , it* •> $ ♦•am boats, which are the pi idt td’iln rit *., -nd the ad miration of the world, wi • • a.- ‘ to eternal inactivi y, tinewgh 'hi- pieji. or mistaken policy of the gove-niiu'iu .' 1' iese jicsiHons are applicable r„ ,*>v*| govirrmien .particularly, one based upon the riaim.d inherent rights td people, asisil.r < «-,• with ours— in-re are im mutable law— by which as a sv-» e;n, ii mils' be iemulated, and a depanme front spy of hem, destroys the beau ifol cmaiiir ol -he whole, ami leaves it a mmr f<> n- wnimu' ;• body— a sha dow without i siib«t mre. .And such in all its miserable res.,l.- „ j,| i„ State Kights Without STATE REMEDIES. Tile right .o ap ply lie ru-i c-» unrr-Ct, wherever a natural or ves rd authority in uh power whatever has b- en ♦ ml-.md, , s as conclusive, as that an effect succeed very c us--, i» a pl tin |diilos<>phic- I t"i h; and wi can be more compefem i 1 ■ rue mme he i.a nr.- <d <lie remedy, ih in * ’ th ts I ‘>u'i e • under the v * >l ted ri>. h. J ■Ti»n go t<i hi- • dibor « ii whom he had a cuotruversy, about a violated right, aud ' ask him how far ho might be permitted to ap ply a remodij for what he considered an ev.i, or io vvhai exien- it would be bis pleasme fi. him to submit ? Such a piaciice in common lite would be i. diciiled, for the very fact th n ins oponent had been wantonly guil y of a viola tion of bis rights, proves conclusively, that he could not be telied on as possessing any oftlmse high moral quallnies that Would cause him <<> make a voluntary surrender oftlie unlawful as sumption, const qn< ntly being interested in the matter, die same principle that caused him to do the improper act, would uec< ssarily induce him to persevere in it. Just so in a controver sy between the states, in a similar case, for it must be lecollec ed, that they stand related to each other under lhe federal govei ninem, pie ; cisely as individuals du, under the government ) as ihe state, each entitled to an equal participa tion in the rights ceded, and an exclusive con trol over those reserved. I hold therefore, that a state would be wanting m self-respect, a<id guilty of a violation of the essential purposes ■of the formation of its government by the peo- ■ pie, was it in any degree whatever, to submil to an on authorised assump ion of power by tiie j federal government, violative of wh it it mos* ■ solemnly believes to be its own reserved <>r in ' herent rights. Nor can the charge of interest be urged against the state, as a disqualifying consideration, because the interest it holds in lhe matter, is of paramount character, ovei which there can he no higher tribunal, than the power which inherits it, without a violation ol 'he original sovereign tenure bv which it is held: whmoas the interest held by the general gov ernment in controversies bet ween it and a sine, is of a delegated character, and Can be right fnllv subjected to the ultimate control of the power from which it erninated, without the vi olation of anv principle at all. This brings me to my last, and I think cleatly distinct position as 1 tid down bv Mr Jefferson, ‘‘ that ihe sevc ral states who formed that instrument, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestion able >ight t>> judge of infractions, and that a nullification bi/ those sovereignties, of all unau lh<>rised acts done under colour of that instru ment (meaning the Federal Constitution) is the rightful remedy ” Mr. Madison also in the most forcible man ner expresses the same ’dca, tn the Virginia Res ilniions of’9B protesting against the alien and sedition laws; “that it ('he views the powers of the Federal Government, as resulting from the compact, to which the States are parties, as limiter! btj lhe plain sense and intention of the instrument eonstituting that compact, as no further valid than they arc au thorised by the grants enumerated in th it com pact’, nd that in case of a deliberate palpable and dan'-erous ex rcise of other powers not granted hy the said compact, the stales who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for the arresting the pro gress of the evil, and for mai- tnining in their respective limits, the authorities, rights, and li berties appertaining to them.” How can t'icv “arrest the progress of the evil” unless it is done by declaring lhe net they believe to be unauthorised Null, and Void. I not only be liever this to be a natural and in'ierent right a conceded to the States by those who deny its constitutionality, but I consider its right/ulness to consist mainly m its being one ofthe ac knowledged powers reserved to the States by the constitution. It < attnnt b<* denied that t<> nullify art act of any government is a power fraught with import nt consequix’es tit lhe peo ple. If it be a potccr therefore, it must reside somewhere, nnd if it cannot be found hy a positive grant in the Constitution to be located in the Federal Government, it must of neces sity he among those reserved to the “Slates or \ to the people:” as lhe tenth amendment to >he I Con-titution declares “thepojoers not granted to the federal government, hy the Constitution nor prohibited by it to th* States, are. reserved, to the Stales respectively (net jointly) or to the people- Does mu this embrace all powers, hatever? It would be unnatural for it to be supposed, that it was intended for the Consti tution lo give this power to the Federal Go vernment, because it never would question 'he correctness of its own acts, consequently the check would he an unnecessary one or if at tempted to be exercised by any tribunal crea ted bv that government,the fact that the Crea tor, would be subservient to the views of the creature would weaken in a very great degree, if not totallv destroy the beneficial advantages expected t« be derived from that very import ant < he< k; it must follow conclusively there tore, that it must be among the powers reserv 'd to \he slates or to the people ; and conse q'lendy may be rightfully exercised by the legislature of any state, as wag done by Ken tuckv and and Virginia, in’9B and’99, or by • he people in original convention, as was more recently done n, Smit i Carolina, Ym rs Respect full v, REUBEN THORNTON. From the Charleston Courier June 10. Excitement in Columbia. —lt will be seen bv the letter of our Columbia correspondent, and the proceedings of the meeting at Colum bia. that an attempt has been made to create an excitement at that place, against the Judt ciarv. According Io our corresnonilerif, Dr. Thomae Conner, an exile fr<>m his native land, who has sought protection and received favor and honor- under the benign institutions of our free country, an aged man too, “standing, as it were, on the horizon of time, ready to step info eternity,” is at the he id of ibis wick ed project Strang- i deed th it he should thus requite the bounty of tins adopted countrv, tuat he should thus employ the last sands of Itlo ; that one who has himself -o much need •f unbounded toleration, should t-ngrge in a war of oppression against others for opinion’s sake. V\ c trust that the good men of the other party, who value liberty and desire peace. ♦ ill make •bemselves he-rd on t(pa occasion j nd r" a n dow n the nefarious attempt to de grade arid punish Judges for fearlessly asser- ' ting that independence, which is at once the I brightest ornament of the Judicial chafafter, . d ! he great bulwark of popular rights. Cet riot be said that South Carolina boasts of an independent Judiciary, arid yet, as it wero •n very rno< kery of the thought, uplift- the irm of oppressi'm against that Judiciary, the first moment it asserts that independence by interposing in favor of the few against the ma* ny, by upholding the Constitution of the State against the assaults of the majority. We learn from another correspondent that the Judges, conscious of their pair ofistn, and purity of purpo-e. remain calm and miir.nved anxd the efforts 'o intimidate them; and we vet indulge a confidence that the people will sustain them in their high-minded course, and even honor them, for thus breasting the torrent of power. The following are the proceedings nf tho Meeting above alluded to: At a meeting the State Rights Party of Richland district, held at the Town Hall in Columbia on Thursdav evening, June 5. 1834, on motio > of Hr. N. Herbemom, Dr Edward Fisher, was called to the Chair, and Col E M. ax<-y appointed Secretary. The Chair min stated the object of the meeting; C’ol. P. 11. Ru ler, after some preliminary remarks, submitted the. following resolutions: 11 esolved, That whiku we are at all timet disp <ed to acquiesce in the impartial and un prejudiced decisions of the Jndiciary. we can not nv ud the conclusion that the late decision bv a majority of the Court of appeals on the military Oath, is the result of party and preju diced opinions, expressed and published by two member- of the Court tn the proceedings us the Union Convention, in December, 1332. Resolved, That lhe opinions of the majori ty of the Court in this case contain doctrines anti-republican, conformable to lhe infamous Proclamation, dangerous to Liberty, and subversive of lhe Rights of the State. Resolved, Tha' in :he opinion of this mee ting, (he late Convention of the State was not and could not be limited by the Legislature; and did not in any instance violate or abuse the trust confided bv the people. Resolved, That it is the opinion of this mee* ting, that the Court of Appeal’s should be re modelled or a -oiished; and one established competent to administer justice and maintain the rights and privileges of the people of this Commonwealth. Resolved That the deliberate opinion of this meeting is, that the Legislature ought to pass a law deliiug and p.tnishing treason against the State. Resolved, That in the present alarming cri sis of public affairs, new safe guards are re quired to secure the Liberties ofthe people of 'his commonwealth, and ’he Governor bn re quested to convene the Legislature to devise such measures as the public welfare requires. Colonels D. J M’C ird F. H. Elmore, nnd James Gregg, then addressed tho meeting irj favor of toe. res'»l tmtis. Each oftlie firegoing resolutions was then unanimously adopted. On motion of |{. J. Nott, Esq it was Hesotved, I hat the proceedings of the mee ting be published in the Southern Times, Tel* escope, and Christian Herald, and that a copy be transinilicd to Hia Excellency, the Gov ernor, EDW \RD FISHER, Chairman. E. H. M \XCY, Sec’y. from the Pennsylvanian. Great Failure.— ft is no longer doubted, even by us fnemL, that a certain great Ban king house m Chesnut street has failed—to accomplish its object ! Bv this calnmitous event, mnnv hands will lie thrown out of eteplnytnent, nnd many ) mouths will want bonbons. None will suffer more from the “stopping payment” than some o I our confraternity.-who have hitherto drawn their whole means of subsistence from that house, am] we fear are now incapable of get ting their living in an honest way. A ineiuing ofthe sufferers we learn is about to take place, for ;he purpose of memorializing Congress h r v .lotion, as the only (nenns of giving tlx i b d; the committee being in structed to <• I! 1 a passnnt >n the President in order to conciliate him and his friends by a busmg him in round terms, and then falsify ing his observations Ihe meeting is expected to be very large, as it will comprehend the following classes of respectable persons in the various branches of industry and the an » Alarm artificers, Bankruptcy brewers, Calamity creators, Distress deniers, Embarrassment exaggcrator®', Grown growers, Borrow Herald*, Insolvency Inquirers, Jt.mpardv jobbers, Knell knollers, Lamentation lecturers. M.sery mongers, Necessity narrators',. ’ >! orators, Panic producers, Q take quoters, Ruin raisers, Suffering 'Terror tattlers, Usury upholders, Woe weavers, Yell yelpers, A Good Joke.— The old Federal parlv havo adopted the name of iiigs, and have agreed to < all such names as J i kson. Washington, Jefferson and Tompkins, Tories They w-mt stav Whi »s long Bit n little while, ago they were the “Great National Republican party of the world.” Thev put us in mind of the servent girl who bawled out to her, “Mis tress m toe itches!” ’‘Well, scratch it then,” said she “J havo tna’um, but it won’t stay scratched!”