Newspaper Page Text
I
' Aw&VjStfjb.. ounotiiaun. . 1
"’■'A ■ ■''" ■ "IT*' ?* t '■' ■ 1 '."9* ' ii'—" w . - u . —«| ■ ' ’MS' ", - ■■"■ '■ K ‘ 1 « '■ > ■ ■■ ■ -*.'.
A much respected and very talented Mend, who
has been a moat ardent, disinterested, noble, anil
vclf-sacrificing advocate of the great Southern
cause, while in our office some time ago, on hU
way home from the South-west, struck off the fol
lowing lines, suggested by a conversation in re
lation to the country they allude to.—&’<f> Chrtn.
TEXAS.
‘There’s no taxes in Texas,
To plague and to vox us—-
No Army and Navy
‘To sop up onr gravy.
The thievish majority.
Have here no authority ;
Amiss for the Yankee,
“.Wc don’t ax him thank ye.*
We’re clear of the Tariff,
We laugh at the Sheriff
For the fruit of our labors,
Won’t go to our “Neighbors."
roa the acorsTA CSIIOKICLE,
THE BFRIaL.
1 saw her placed on the lonely bier;
Few friends were there, no kindred near
To weep tin mother ever kind,
Dr lender wife; none could the.,- fmd
To wear the weeds of sorrow, save
One who seem’d anxious, in her grave,
To see the lone one lowly laid.
Yet one was there, who nothing said,
Hut heav’d such sighs as seem’d to rend
Her heart; she’d lost her kindest friend,
No deep, sincere, appear'd her grief,
It might have prompted the belief
That she u mother wept; alas!
No mother had the hapless lass.
An orphan on the cold world cast —
Poor, 'reft of friends, she'd lost the Inal!
No wonder then her grief was deep i
Long, long, sad Orphan, shall thou weep
Thy more than Mend—-her Christian soul
Has wing’d its (light to realms above,
Whore cares ond trouble cease to roll,
And all is peace and heavenly love;
And there shall see her Saviour's fare
IlFrigbtflousnoss, and there lio Mess'd,*
Scaled in that all-glorious place,
. And resting on linanucl's breast;
For there shall she he satisfied,
When in Ins likeness she aw akes,
With his dear saints all glori/iod,
And off her cumbrous clay she shakos.
CLKOBULINA.
•Psalms, xvit. chap. 15th verse.
ran the aducsca cuuonklk,
IMI'RO.MPTt,' t
Written in the " Niagara Falls Album."
N ntWs great masterpiece! How feeble man,
I n vain essays of thee ami thine to tell—
A 11-wondrous as thou art—a mighty plan—
-0 reat, glorious, grand, and indescribable I
And fain would measure thee with pigmy span I
’lt drain, each object cries—‘ lay down thy rod,’
And look thro’ Nature, up to Nature’s Coed !’
Niaoaba Falls, August 18, 1831.
■speech of mu. ( Layton,
of Giitm ;ia,
On the State Bank Deposite Bill.
[Concluded from our last.]
I have now done with this branch of
mv-subject, and thank the House for the
veir indnJwent and attentive hearing
which they nave n(Forded me on this truly
unpleasant topic, and shall proceed to the I
other part ol the question, viz,: the rea
sons for my vote.
In presenting my reasons for voting
against the bill on your (able, and sus
taining the substitute offered by the gen
tleman from Virginia, (Mr. Gordon,) 1
shall briefly urge what I have a!wavs
done against the Hank of the United
states, viz,; that any concern on the
nart ot the General Government, with
Hanks of any description, is not only
unconstitutional, but inexpedient.
I do not intend to argue the constitu
tional question at large, anil what 1 do
•ay on that subject is wholly intended
mi-those who have always* thought with
me that the Hank of the' United States
was unconstitutional, and who have aided
m nutting it down on that, ground. The
lull reported by the Committee of Ways
and Means designs to substitute State
Hanks for the United Slates Bank, and 1
shall attempt to show, that, whatever ren-1
ders die latter unconstitutional, will an ■ I
ply with equal force to the former.
The friends of the United States Bank
have always maintained, and so it was
decided by the Federal Court, that it was
an instrument “ necessary and proper”
to carry into effect certain powers of the
•institution. The whole argument is
iturned up in this remarkable statement,
lottnd at the head of Mr. McDuffie’*
able report. “ I'he earliest and principal
injection urged against the constitution
ibly ol the bank was, that Congress had
oot the power to create corporations.
1 bat Congress has a distinct and sub
stantive power to create corporations
without reference to the olyects eutrus
ed to its jurisdiction, is n proposition
which never has been mail mined, but
hat any one of the powers expressly
onferred upon Congress, is subject to 1
■he limitation, that it shall not be carried j
•to effect by the agency of a corporation, |
s a proposition which‘cannot be main j
lined.’ Here then it is admitted that j
(ingress lias no right to create corpora-1
unis unless they are intended to carry |
nto effect certain expressed powers of the
v onsiitution ?
') e, who have opposed (he bank, con
eatl they have no right to create corpo- i
rations for purpose, and if a corpora
ion is nothing more than an instrument I
o execute certain powers of the Cmisti-1
• ation which Congress cannot create, i’J
. annot use such au inslrtuncnl created bv
y.\y one else. Let us illustrate this idea,
’'ll'. McDuffie laid down the powers
hick he said the bank was intended to
• xccute. 1. To aid as a fiscal agent, in
al lectins and disbursing the public iv
.■nue. 2. To borrow raunev. 3. To re
■ date commerce. 4. To coin mauev
-nd regulate the value thereof, or, in i
her words, to regulate the currency.)
aeee arc all die powers a bank can exe- j
it».
Now, if we deny (hat Congress can !
• eate a Bank fur these purposes, i
-no cau r Can a S ate do it? No ore I
vill contend forthia. But it is-rivtlv '
k maintained that if a State has ertated a j
P * OJ ' o'-ber purposji. Congress!
may take that Bank tn do what she can- !
not create a Bunk to do herself! If
Congress cannot create a Bank to exe
cute its powers, it is because we sav
there is no such expressed right to be
lound in the Constitution. Nor is it
such an implied power as is “ necessary
or proper” to carry into effect other
powers. The power must be expressed
or implied which Congress can do. How
is \t possible to evade the force of this ar
gument against State Banks. Where is
the authority expressed or implied to use
a Btate Bank for executing those very
constitutional powers which a federal
bank cannot do? Take, fur instance,
(he power “to collect and disburse the
revenue.” Congress cannot incorporate
a Bank to do this ; but then it is conten
ded it, may take a Bank already incorpo
rated by a State for that purpose, and
given as a reason, that a corporation is a
person in law which you can employ as
you would any other person. And pray
arc they any thing more than a person in
law after you have created them ? If
there is no other consequence ih crea
ting a corporation, but milking it a per
sasi in law, where is the harm of cor
porations? Is there any difference be
tween your creation us a person in law
for your own purposes, and a person in
law created by a State ? But to test this
matter still further, if you ran execute
one power with a State Bank, you can
another. Will it be contended that you
can regulate commerce or the currency
with State Banks ? remember these arc
also two of the powers which it was said
the United States Bank was intended to
execute. If you make a distinction be
tween these and the first power mention
ed, you give up the question. You must
take all or none. If you say that State
Banks cannot execute these powers, it
must be because the Constitution confers
no such rights, and then you virtually ad
mit that “ to collect and disburse the
public revenue,” is such a power as the
Constitution does confer, and if confer
red upon a Stale Bank it is equally so
upon any other Bank, exactly what lias
been contended for, by the United States
Bank. 1 always maintained that if there
was one single power it could be instru
mental in executing, it was a constitution
al institution.
But mark the consequences of the rea
soning which gives to the Federal Gov
ernment the right to use State Corpora
tions for objects which they cannot ac
complish by Corporations of I heir own
creation. What was gained by with
holding the power from the General Go
vernment to grant charters, if they can
take those granted by Stales as instru
ments for the execution of any purpose
they may wish ? The argument leads
to tins result: you cannot make Govern
ments, Legislatures, and Judges for the
Siatts, but you can take them after the
Stales have made them, for your use. So
lar Irom this being true, it has been de
termined that you cannot use Stale
Courts to carry any us your Judicial pow
ers intu effect, Jint what appears to me
conclusive upon this subject, if the
mere creation ot a Corporation is all that
stands in your way to use them for any
purpose you may ‘think proper, and that
you can take a Bank Corporation created
|to your hand by a Slate, then you may
! take any other State Corporation for en
larging your powers. You cannot ere
f ide turnpike, rail road, canal, or manu
facturing companies, for ‘lie objects of
their incorporations, but after the States
have made them, you can take them and
jgo to work. You cannot incorporate col
leges and academics for the purpose of
education, but when the Slates have done
it, then you can come in for the use of
(hem to any extent your love of implied
powers may prompt. It will not do to say
you have a constitutional right “to collect
& disburse your revenue,” and therefore
toitse the means necessary and proper to
that end. This was the grand argument
of the Bank of the United States. If
you can use means already provided, you
can provide tncans yourself. But if it
be granted that you can use means al
ready provided, to execute one power of
the Constitution, you can for any other;
| and recollect you claim the power to ef
fect internal improvements, and to en
courage domestic manufactures. Now
where are you to be stopped in the use
of all the companies I have just named
•or these hint mentioned great objects, if
you can take banking companies to ex
ecute any other power of the Constitu
tion ? It is impossible to draw a dis
| Auction between the two cases, and more
| fearful and important consequences may
How from ibis measure than can well be
i conceived bv the most far reaching fore
cast. ‘ °
I come now (c the last thing proposed;
an inquiry into the expediency of the
law; and I lay down (his proposition,
:.ml boldly affirm (hut it cannot be contra
dicted, that whenever reasoning’ is used
against (he expediency of the U. S. Bank,
it will apply with equal force to State
Banks. 1 challenge the must discrimina
ting intellect, to frame an argument a
gainst a federal Bank on the ground of
expediency, that will not immediately
exert alike authority over State institu
tions,
I presume it is well recollected, for the
! fart is dignified with a place in the nnnu
■ al Message, besides its repetition in nu-
I merous other State papers, that the
j principal charges against the United
j. States Bank are, 1. Too much power.
|i. Interfering with elections. 3. Buys
I up the Press; and -1. Corrupts the pub
i lie morals. Does any one remember any
! other objections besides these, or such
1 as would naturally classify themselves
j with ilicsc r II not, let us now examine
| how it is possible for State Banks to es
cape from the operation of these objec
tions? What is meant by too much
! power? or what is this power? Is it n t
MONEY ? Is not this the great iiatru
went by which banks operate? by which
they exercise their immense control over
the wants and wishes of society? by
which they rcgu'ate the value of every
h ug; and', opera"ing upon the varied in- :
(crests of men with an influence fixed '
a» destiny, ami as certain as death, they
| i u \* “ mast tremendous POWER. Btit j 1
I *? ltu ‘ imwer confided alone to the United I [
| Stales nankr Is money less powerful i
in a Btate Bank than in a Federal Bank ? t
1 Nit managed differently? by People of *
| a different character ? for different ob- '
ijcctsr Are five hundred State Banks v
united in a pal;trad league, less able cr r
I less inclined to the exercise us power, i (
I than one Bank and itc twenty-fW j „
jpwr; mj. i iga
branches? No: just as true as was the
fact which the dying father exhibited to
his children, when Tie wished to impress
them with the virtue of liarrnuny, that
one rod was more easily broken than a
bundle closely united, so is the truth of
the proposition, that there is more power
in 500 than in 25 Banks.
The interfering with elections, the buy
ing up the Press, and the, corrupting of
the public morals, nrc merely the effects
of the great money power we have just
been considering; and I put it to the
candour of gentlemen to say, whether
they are not as likely to follow from the
influence of money in one condition as
another, especially if it is used in precise
ly similar situations, employed by similar
intelligence, and for exactly similar ob
jects f By the bill on your table the Gov
eminent can, and, such is its love of pat
ronage & power, it neVer rejects an oppor
tunity to increase its dominion, will
draw into its service five hundred State
Ranks. Now let the imagination range
for a moment over (he wide spread field of
this active, restless, grasping power; see
it managed, politically, by one ambitious
* mind ( xiexv its diversified operations,
first upon the People, then threugh them
upon State Legislatures, then through
these upon Congress, and through this
* last Upon the legislation of the country ;
: see its effects upon the officers of the
1 Government; upon speculations in (he
1 public lands; upon stock jobbing; upon
I trade; in fine, runningits fibres into eve
■ ry soil it can possibly penetrate, and (hen
! say is there no dread of connecting this
* vast, power with (lie Executive branch of
Government? I confess it presents
■ fearful forebodings to my imagination.
You say the United States Bank inter
: fern! with elections; grant it; but what
could it do in comparison with five hun
dred State Banks connected with the
Government ? Has arty one made a cal
: eolation of the immediate political power
it brings to the support duhe hand that
wields it ? Bear with iot while I pre
sent it to your view. Five hundred banks
will average, including directors,officers,
and agents, twelve persons to a Bank ;
two hundred stockholders, and one thou
sand debtors in (he course of a year, be
sides other thousands who are constantly
seeking to become debtors, which cannot
well be intu the calculation, but
over which, every one must perceive, the
Banks must exercise the most subduing
control. The result of this estimate gives
upwards of 600,000 persona, and making
;i deduction of <i sixth for over estimate
and other drawbacks, will leave half a
million, with all their friends, and when
added to those who are daily seeking
Bank favors, it forms altogether one of
the most stupendous political fabrics ever
reared by the art of man. Joined to the
other vast powers of the Federal Exccfl
■ live, in distributing twenty millions of
dollars, and conferring one hundred thou
sand offices, if some future Chief Magis
trate, less virtuous than those who have
preceded him, and more ambitious of
higher honors, do not succeed in the ac
quisition of sole and exclusive rule, it will
be owing to the singular interposition of
Heaven’s guardian protection—a protec
tiiin almost undeserved, by reason of the
blind atjd servile infatuation which urges
us iu crowds to bend our necks to the
yoke.
The substitution of Slate Ranks toper
, form (he business of the Federal Bank,
is a clear admission that we cannot do
without Banks J* and if hereafter the ex
periment should fail, it will drive us back
to the old institution, and then there will
be a complete triumph over the Constitu
tion. The friends of that instrument will
have Install they have gained bythepre
sent overthrow' of the Bank, It will be
perpetuated upon us forever, and the Con
stitution will remain a living, crippled,
memento of the instability of ail human
institutions. The inexpediency of this
measure will be apparent, if we only sup
pose, which is by no means unreasonable,
tor like causes produce like effects, that
the State Banks should act precisely as
the United States Bank is said to have
done, in subsidizing the press, violating
the elective franchise, and corrupting the
public morals, what advantage nave we
gained ? And will it not prove that it is
only the master, and not the principles,
we have exchanged. This view is pre
sented, under the idea that the Banks con
tinued their opposition against the Gov
ernment, as did the United States Bank;
but if their influence should happen to be
turned in its favor, who does not perceive
the thing would be ten thousand times
worse ?
I am in favor of the amendment to the
bill, because it is intended to separate the
Government from all connexion with the
banking system. It pi oxides that all the
receipts ami expenditures of the Govern
ment shall be in hard money; and if the
cry which we heard last summer about
gold and silver, and all that sort of thing,
was not the veriest trickery to cajole the
people for political effect, the friends of
hard money ought not to lose a moment in
supporting it, also. Let us hear no more
about hard money, if this measure is re
jected, and let the community know that
the meanest juggling has been used—first
to betray, and then to destroy them.
Mr. Speaker, 1 am free to confess that
I once believed that State Banks could
answer the purposes of Government as
a fiscal agent, and so expressed myself
in an elaborate essay against the Bank
ot the United States. But my opinion
was formed entirely on theory, and
without the opportunity of testing the
argument from any thing like expe
rience, or proper information. Since
then, I have seen and heard mt’.ch upon
that subject. The facts which have been
presented to (his House, and the able dis
cussions they have undergone, leave shed
a lhiod of light upon the subject, and I am
constrained to own, that everv conclu
sion, drawn from the testimony, and its j
commentary, not only decides against a i
further continuance of the Bank of the U.
States, but renders the same verdict a
g iinst all banks, of whatever character or
* When Mr. Jefferson came into office, he and I
his friends hod said mi much against the Navy, as !
a usual drain upon the Treasury, that ho was ‘
obliged to cut it down, hut subslit utral in its place
the gun-boat system, which plainly implied we
could not do without a Navy. \V oil, the gun-boat
system failed, and the Navy was restored. What !
was the consequence t There is nothing in the
whole history of that statesman that so signally de- j
ndss, and therefore constantly reproaches, hit od- I
ministration, as this unfortunate gun-boat system, j
Other statesmen ought to bexvaro how they experi- <
meat it too far.
description. To confess, repent, and be
forgiven, is the creed by which I hope to
live and die.
I have now done with the subject, and,
Sir, I am fully aware of having obtruded
upon the House, many remarks, in rela
tion to myself, that bear the aspect of
seeming arrogance. 1 assure the House
that no such spirit animates my bosom.
I am about to close a long life of public
service, in which there has,perhaps, been
much to censure, and but little to praise.
But I can, in great sincerity, say, what
ever may have been its errors, they have
been—to use a very common but expres
sive phrase—of the head, and not of (he
heart. In parting with you, although it
may seem to be voluntary, I will not con
ceal from you the fact, that I have every
reason to believe I have lost the confi
, deuce of my constitutents. Whether it
. is deserved for any thing I have done
1 here, I bravo you to judge. It is true I
. have not been removed from my trust,
. but it is only because I did not seek its
|- renewal. Men, with whom it has been
, Iny pleasure to serve, and whose exalted
, worth and talents have secllred for them
an equal reputation with the mostdistin
| guished upon this floor, have been put
, aside after the most faithful services, and
j such as had acquired for their State the
. very highest character. I could not have
. expected to have shared a different f-.te,
. because with them I have felt and acted ;
\ and our principles of action, to every
useful purpose, have been the same. I
, was, therefore, extremely anxious, under
. circumstances like these, in retiring, per
(■ haps forever, into private life, to leave,
, as a memorial to my children, (lie pleas
ing reflection, that, if I had done no good
for their country, I had done no harm to m
t reputation, which, in after times, it may
. be their pride to honor and to imitate.
s -..i5*....
From the Southern Sjnj.
f Presentment* ot the Grand Jury ol
i Wilke* County.
February Term, 1835.
; We the Grand Jurors of the County of
4 Wilkes, having been duly qualified, feel
( sensibly the obligations xve owe to our
’ country and (he duties imposed upon us,
by the obligations of our qualification;
. and although as a general rule, we do not
t approve of Grand Jurors, wandering from
i the path of their duty in search of subjects
for presentment, yet xve are bound to no
' ticc such as xve believe arc intimately as
> sociated with the general interests of the
* community, in which we live. Under
’ these impressions, after divestinsc our
*l*i • i • “
selves ol those predilections, prepasses
-1 sions and prejudices, so well calculated
1 to tit ad deti our passions, warp our fcel
j. ings, and becloud our judgment, we will
proceed to notice some subjects which we
) believe affect the foundations of our so
-3 cial anil political rights and liberties.
' First, xve feel ourselves constrained by
the highest obligations which a citizen
owes to his country, to notice the alarm
ing encroachments which have recently
‘ been made by the Executive and Legisla
tive departments of onr government up
‘ on (he Judiciary. We approach the sub
. jeet not in the spirit of party, but xvitli a
deep and solemn conviction, that the fun
damental principles of our government
3 have been vitally assailed, and that it is
' (he bounden duty of all good citizens, to
J repel the assault with promptness, and
with firmness, if they would perpetuate to
themselves and their posterity, the bless
> ings of constitutional liberty.*
1 The very first clause of the Const! tu
(ion declares that “(he Executive, Legis
lative and Judicial departments of’the
government, shall be distinct, and each
department shall be confided to a sepa
rate body of magistracy, and no person
or collection of persons, being of one of
those departments, shall exercise any
power, properly attached to either of the
others, except in the instance therein e.r
ptessly permitted.”
The Constitution (hen proceeds to al
lot to the three departments, their several
powers, carefully withholding from the
two first, all judicial power, except in ca
ses of impeachment. Itgivesto the Su
perior Courts, “ exclusive andfinal juris
diction iu all criminal cases” (with a few
trivial exceptions) “and in all cases re
specting titles to land; and concurrent
jurisdiction, in all civil cases ,” It pro
vides that the “trial nx' jury, as heretofore
practised, shall remain inviolate.” It de
claresthat “thejudges or any one oflhem,
shall have power to issue writs of manda
mus, prohibition, scire facias, and all oth
er writs which may be necessary for car
rying their powers fully into ettect,” and
it provides that “no person shall be de
barred from advocating or defending his
cause before any court or tribunal, either
by himself, or lus counsel, or both.” And
yet, in defiance of all these plain and in
mtelligiblc principles, xve have seen the
Governor of Georgia, setting up his judg
ment, in opposition to the decision of a
Judge of the Superior Court, impugning
the wisdom and integrity of the whole
Bench, and boldly recommending a cur
tailment of the powers of the Judiciary,
by a co-ordinate department of the Gov
ernment ; and xve have seen the Legisla
ture, with a dangerous and unmanly sub
serviency to his views, sustaining his
alarming pretensions by positive enact
ment. \Ve have seen them obliterating
the line of distinction which the Consti
tution draws between (he three depart
ments, —clothing—not the Governor to
be sure ; but the Governor’s dependent,
with power to try titles to land, and arm
ing he Governor with the sword to carry
his aaent’s decisions into effect. Thus at
one blow, destroying the right “of trial by
jury an heretofore practised,” wresting
Irani the courts their exclusive preroga
tive, and making the Governor the irres
ponsible arbiter of private property and
personal security.
We have seen them arraigning a judge
of the highest court in the State, in an
informal and extra judicial manner, and
■ divesting him, and him alone, of some of
| the most important and indispensable
attributes of a judge,—curtailing his pow
ers, and inhibiting him from “ issuing the
writs necessary for carrying” (he rem
nant of his “ powers fully into effect.”
; Thus, at one and the same moment peos
j (rating the safeguards which the Consti
tution has thrown around the judge, vio
lating the plain letter of the Constitution
itself, and destroying the whole symme
! try of the judiciary.
To look upon such a state of things
with calmness and indifference, would
argue a xvant of reverence for the framers
I of the Constitution, an utter disregard for
the instrument itself, and a total aban-
donment of burselves to anarchy and mis- «
rule. The right of the Legislature, to 8
arraign any judge fur violation of his ot- p
tidal duties, xve readily concede, provi
ded thev adhere to Constitutional forms; _
but while xve hold the man responsible to p
Ibe Legislature, we hold his office sacred, 11
and its poolers inviolable; In so doing, ’
we think that we are vindicating the dig- n
nitv and independence of the present in- *
curnbent of that otlice, no less than the £
liberty and safety of the people. "
We therefore take this opportunity* -
while we are co-operating with a Judge, I
whose prerogative we defend, to enter our
most solemn protest against the encroach- v
ments made by the Governor and last a
Legislature upon the Judiciary of Geor- «
gia. We believe them in some instances t
to be flatly violative of the letter, and in J
all, of the'spirit of the Constitution ; and
xve think they should be instantaneously
r
repelled, that they may not acquire the ]
force of example. *
22 signatures—6 dissentients. 1
° 1
From the U. S. Telegraph,
MR. LIVINGSTON’S LETTER. ,
Mr. Leigh on Saturday, in the Senate, i
expressed his apprehensions that the
publication by the President of Mr. Liv- 1
mgston’s letter of the 23d of November,
! would embroil us still more with France,
i when the letter reached France. We
; confess we are surprised at the fatuity
that prompted its publication. It would
seem that it was published with similar
motives to those to which xve owe the
publication of the boasting letter of Mr.
■ Rives. In neither case does it seem to
■ have been considered what effect the pub
! lication might have abroad. The sole ob-
ject seems to have been a party one at
home. Mr. Rives’ letter was published
for the party press to electioneer on, and
show an excellent treaty Mr. Rives had
made. Mr. Livingston’s letter was pub
r lished as a sort of justification for the
menacing tenor of the message, 'i’he
P publication of the latter is far more inex-
I disable than that of the tormer. Let the
contents of the letter be true or false, let
Mr. Livingston be deceived or not, in
) what he says relative to the wishes of the
’ Kins; and his Ministers, nothing but evil
0,,' O , .
can result Irom its promulgation itl
France. The King and Ministers tv : !l
5 be forced necessarily, to disclaim '..c
implied collusion between them and Mr.
Livingston. The French Chambers and
( Nation will pour forth a torrent of indig
nation on the King and his Ministers,
when they find he has been intriguing
I with a foreign government to operate on
the Chambers. The King and Ins Min-
I isters will not be unwilling to divert this
indignation from themselves to this
country. The following is the letter of
Mr. Livingston:
. Mr. Livingston to the Secretary of State•
i (extracts.)
Paris, 23d November, 1834.
I do not hope for any decision on our
affairs before the middle of January.—
One motive for delay is an expectation
i that the message of the President may ar
rive before the discussion, and that it may
; contain something to show a strong na
> tional feeling on the subject. This is not
i mere conjecture, I know the fact, and I
I repeat now, from a full knowledge of the
» case, what I have more than once stated
• in my former despatches, as my firm
persuasion, that the moderate tone taken
by our Government, when the rejection
xvas first known, was attributed by some
to indifference, or to a conxdction on the i
part of the President, that he would not 1
be supported in any strong measures by 1
the people, and by others to a conscious- 1
ness that the convention had given us '
more than xve xvere entitled to ask. ,
»*•*»*
I saxv last night an influential member
of the Chamber, xvho told me that * *
* * * * and that the King had spo
ken of our affairs; and appeared extreme
ly anxious to secure the passage of the
laxv. I mention this as one of the many
circumstances which, independent of of
ficial assurance, convince me that the
King is sincere ; and noxv I have no doubt
of the sincerity of his cabinet. From all
this you may imagine the anxiety I shall
feel for the arrival of the President’s
Message. On its tone will depend very
much, not only the payment of our claims,
but our national reputation for energy.
I have no doubt it will be sucli as to at
tain both of these important objects.
LATEST PROM PRANCE.
Nexv-Yobk, Feb. 27.
The packet ship Independence, Capt Nye, ar- i
rived yesterday, sailed from Liverpool, on the i
271 h ult. and we have received papers of that
dale, with London papers to the 26th inclusive. i
The first subject of inquiry is, what is the news
from France I We answer, that things remain- i
ed as they Were, and there is no intelligence to
alter the opinion we have before expressed ; that i
peace will be preserved. 1
We annex the following extract of a letter -
from (the highly respectable American house of i
Messrs. Welles, at Paris, dated January 22nd, i
addressed to Messrs. W. & J. Brown, of Liver- i
pool, the copy of which was furnished by a pas
senger in the Independence. This- letter, doubt- )
less, gives intelligence that may be relied upon, as i
to the true state of the case. |
“ The American question is what we follow i
here with great attention, and we shall ho happy
to give you any information in our power upon
that subject The documents in this affair were
laid upon the (able of the Chamber of Deputies,
and thence have been sent to the Committee. It
is uncertain how soon their report will be made,
hut from present appearances it may bo in three •
or four weeks. We consider the great result is ’
now before this Chamber—if they execute the
treaty in voting the subsidies, it will end there; 1
if they refuse them, the consaqucncc, at least, will 1
be an interruption of the intercourse between
France and the United States, and probably end
in war. The ministry here is making every cf- I
fort to carry this question, and our opinion is,
that they will succeed in doing it” '
The Paris correspondent of the London Cou- 1
ricr slates, in a letter of the 20th, that it is per
fectly understood, ministers will have a majority •
on the American question, and yet Ihe same pa- f
per contains information that on the preceding day 1
war risks were taken at Lloyd’s on ships and car- ■
goes on French account, which were previously ■
insured against sea risk only, at an additional 1
prcmitmi of three percent. 1 for three months. The
language, however, of some of the ministerial pa- 1
pers differs from the Journal, and the editors en
tertain fears that the bill will again he rejected. 8
M. Hyde do Neuville, by a letter published in the *
Echo Francaise. in opposition to the treaty, has '
aggravated the hostility to it, and it is supposed *
it may afford Mmc trouble to the ministers to dis- c
prove his statements, which the Journal des De- 1
bats promises shall he done. I
Several papers have been siczed, one of them f
the QXiotidienne, for au article in oppoeition •
to Ihe treaty.
The Paris National, of the 22d. containing an '
article adverse to the treaty, and reiterating the f
insinuation that the Ring was interested in j
seized at the office. \ v
The Journal des Debats (Ministerial) has I
poragraph deprecatory of war with Ametiwu |,
“ tVur between France and the United States "
—Wc do not hesitate to say, that of all the wars ,
practicable or possible for Prance, the ntost fool • (
ish, the most gauche, the most impolitic, that I
which would cause the loudest laughter at St. IV !
tershurg, Beilin, and the Hague, and which would 1
most afflict all the friends ofliberty in Europe, t
would be d war between France and the United .
Stales. Only conceive the cries of joy which the i
men, who labor to resuscitate the parly of the Holy
Alliance, would utter when they saw France em
ploying the forces and the power which she has
acquired since the Revolution of July, in a strug
gle against the Republic of of IheUnitcd States—
when they saw these tWo people, who, in tire Old
and Now World, represent the cause ofliberty.
stupidly warring against each other. What in
trigues would iw set on foot against us at home,
w hilst we wc were occupied against brother free
men abroad.
A serious claim has been made on the govern
ment of France, by the Emperor of Russia, as
King of Poland, for a debt due him, acknowledg
ed to be at least 20,000,000 f. The Paris Consti
tutionncl of the 23d, asserts that though the Mi
nisters will leave no means untried to dairy the
American Bill for the 25,000,000 f. they do not
pretend to make its adoption a Cabinet question,
and that, should the Chamber of Deputies resolve
to reject that measure; they will still retain their
places. The same journal intimates that the
supporters of ministers need not be deterred from
voting against the bill by the fear of endangering
the existence of the present administration.
• The London Times of the 261 h, publishes a
loiter from its Paris correspond?*!! of the 21th, of
which the following is an cxtradl I
M. Dupin, the Picsidont of the Chamber of .De
puties, has been heard within these few days to
express himself very strongly against a ratifica
tion of the Washington treaty by the Chamber.
Returns have been received of the election of
628 members of Parliament, who arc classed as
follows)
Reformers, - - - - 337
Tories, - - - - - - 256
Doubtful, ...... 15
Majority of Reformers, - 101
The total gain for the Tories is 52.
If we are, indeed, to believe the Paris Consti
tutionnel, Russia and the United States are not the
only parties that have advanced at this lime, pe
cuniary claims against France. Austria, too, is a
claimant, to a large amount; and, it is stated, that
there are several other claimants.
“ A repolt is current, of an attempt to assassin
ate Madame Malibran %in Italy, but whether by a
professional rival, or from despairing amant, is not
stated. It is said, that in returning from the per
formance of Othello, site was wounded by a stilet
to in the throat, in a manner to prevent her ever
again exercising her talents, if even her life is
saved.”— Gatignani'e .Messenger.
“To the Editor of the Echo Francois;
Lktano, near Saxceuha, Jan. 15.
“Sir—Gen. Jackson wishes, it appears, to treat
the Government of Louis Phillippe as he has
treated the poor Indians. Ho does not see that
France is prepared and prompt to resent an insult
ofiered the country. General Jackson ought to
have remembered that there exists a debt —sacred,
avowed, and recognized by his predecessors, and
relating to a great service rendered more than half
a century ago to the United Stales, which has
never yet been settled. He ought to have known
that a treaty has no, force or value, especially
where money is concerned, unless it has been du
ly accepted and sanctioned by the dififcrent powers
whom the treaty affects. Has the President of
the Union found out also, that au arbitrary act is
a wise resource of government! Either a great
change must have taken place in the U. States in
the sentiments of the nation, or this strange doc
trine is not likely to succeed there. I know not
what the American papers may say, but I am cer
tain, heforc-hand, that they will not acknowledge
the dictatorial logic of the First Magistrate of the
Republic.
The throat of Gen. Jackson is, therefore,impo
litic, ill-timed, and awkwardly made. I know not,
morover, how the affairs of Franco are at present
conducted at the TlluiUoriea. I will speak only
of that which I know: now I do know positively,
that never, under the Empire, or under the Resto
ration, has there been any question of such a trea
ty ! I know that under the Restoration, it nev
er entered the head of the President of the Union,
to address such a message; I know that at that
time the King of France was respected, his friend
ship conferred honor, and his good offices, his wise
and powerful mediation were sought after; I state
nothing that I cannot prove. This affair of the U.
States is a most serious one; it is not a question
of party, but of country ; the 25 millions arc only
of secondary importance; a commercial interest of
au importance widely different governs the ques
tion. Let my correspondence be read, which was
printed at Washington and communicated to the
Senate, (which, I am ot opinion, must have been
laid before the Committee, who last year were
charged with the task to examine this treaty) and
it will be seen what a sacrifice the treaty imposes
on France, and what advantage it ensures 10 the
English. I repeat that the question now mooted
is entirely national. Government, like private
persons, are equally called on to pay their debts ;
by doing so, they not only honor but enrich them
selves; for to nations, as well as to individuals,
good faith is an inexhaustible source of credit, and
credit an inexhaustible source of riches.
But wc must first examine, and xvell examine,
if the debt is real, under all circumstances, not sa
crifice to the interest of passion, or of the moment,
the interest of the future, when this interest of the
future has cost so much, and when as wc have
resigned ourselves to such enormous sacrifices, in
order t» render it durable. Governments pass a
way. men die, hut badly devised treaties remain.
I will therefore give all the information necessary
to enlighten my fellow citizens. The Americans
do not desire it from me. With them, country
absorbs every other consideration. They know
me, and they esteem me ; I will not lose a jot of
their good opinion, and, isolated as I am by the
revolution of July, I will continue to give proofs
of a patriotism which nothing can weaken. lam
persuaded that I owe this loyal publicity to my
country, which 1 love above all things, and the U.
States, which I consider as a second country. I
will moreover, go so far as to say, that the rejec
tion of this treaty will, perhaps, be useful to both
countries. I shall bo undersotod On the other side
of the Atlantic. I address this letter to you, Mr.
Editor, and to you only, in order to show you that
I do nol in any manner, make this great question a
question of party ; the Journalists of all shades of
generous opinions, will concur with me. I am,
sir, &c. HYDE DE NEUVILLE, Ex-Deputy
And formerly Minister to the United States.’*
ONE DAY LATER FROM ENGLAND.
Ciiabikston, March 9.
The Br. barque Mary Catherine, Capt. Oliphant,
arrived at this port yesterday f from Liverpool,
whence she sailed on the 28th Jan’y.
We arc indebted to Capt. O. for a London paper
of 27th Jan., and the Liverpool Courier of 28th,
being one day later than before received.
We find very little news in tliese papers.
Wc have been unable to obtain any thing res
pecting the markets, later than before published.
The Liverpool Cornier, of the 28th, says:—“ The
sales of cotton yesterday, amounted to 1500 bales
at steady prices to the trade.”
Under the London head of the 20th January,
evening, it is stated that the Paris letters, as re
gards the dispute with America, arc of a pacific
tenor, and the general impression was, though it
is not to be made a ministerial question, that the
indemnity will be voted by the Chamber of De
puties.
A private correspondent of the London Times,
writes from Brussels, Jan. 24th, as follows :
“ It is a coincidence somewhat remarkable, that
at the same time in which the refusal of the French
Chambers to ratify the act of their Government is
made subject of such xvarm discussion, tho rejec
tion by the Belgian Government of the treaty of
commerce, signed by their Minister at Washing
ton xvith tho American Secretary of State is made
public. Belgium has acted in the question which 1
concerns her, without any reference whatever to 1
that regarding France. Nor is- there any likeli
hood of a quarrel between this country and the
United States, let this disagreement with France (
rum out as it msy. i
I ■ — ■ ” ” ;
“ The treaty between the Belgian Minister at
Washington, and Mr. Livingston, then Secretary
of State, and now .Minister at the Court of France,
hears dale tire 23d of January, 1833. Os the va
rious stipulations pf that treaty, based no doubt
(hose existing between the tinted Stales and
1 - commercial countries, I have reason to be
!® vc at those concerning tire principles ofblokc
tfde, as ve;l tne a y lom t h at free ships make
Irec s ooa ' wcrc t | ic caU sps of non-ratification on
the part of >.q an j of t | lo statement by the
Minister for p. Affilits> that Baron Dehr had
exceeded bis n
from \EW YORK.
The line ship C apt. For;, arrived at
Charleston on Sunday U fro , n \ cw York, bring/
ing papers’ fmm that city of t)lc Monday and
Tuesday previous.
No lateyntelligcnce from Ea, opc ], a j been re*'
ceived at New York.
On the Snd inst, 20 shares United Bank/
sold at 10VJ,‘ and 100 at 107 f, on time.
A letter from Washington was received at
New York expressing the opinion that the whole
subject of our French Relations would be pm o ff
to the next session of Congress.
Com. Barron has succeeded in raising the sloop
of war Offline, recently sunk at Philadelphia, by
mfcans of tlic powerful pump of which he is the
inventor,’ The vessel is now floating at her old
station I .’
The Washington .correspondence of the New
York papers, put us in possession pf the proceed- ,
ings of Congress ns’ Kite as the evening of Yatur- .
day, the 28th. Tbcf Senate tverc -occupjcd the .
whole day in electing a Printer to the next Con
gress, and after from 15 to 18 ballottingHj Gxtss
& Sbatos were finally chosen, they obtaining,27 ,
votes on the last ballot. Forty-seven Senators,
were present, anu 18 votes were the highest ntm>-
ber ofiiuine'l by the Editors of the Glebe. At 4>
o’clock P. M. trie Senate took a pecss until 6
o’clock, at which hour tltoj’ went bIW session on
hills from the House,
The House, in committee of the whole ora the
state of the Union, took up Mr. Cambrelcng s re
solutions, offered the day bffore, on our relation*
with France. Mr. C. said he was desh.eus ol una
nimity, and would consent to any reason.'^ o m 0"
dificution. Mr. Adams followed at some n "gth ;
condemned both sides, was for negotiation ano * or
peace if it could bo preserved ; but if France re
fused to carry the Treaty into effect, ho was pre
pared to hazard the consequences of war; said
that the recall of Mr. Livingston, and his whole
suite, under existing circumstances, would be a
measure of hostility towards France, and sh. would
be justified in so considering it, under the law of
nations, and added that it would not surprise him,
should the French Government seize and detain
the Frigate sent for Mr. Livingston; contended
that the faith of France was committed, and that
the non-performance of the Treaty Would be a
violation of that faith; and moved his resolutions
as a substitute. Mr. Archer condemned every
measure that would lead to war ; considered Mr.
Adams too warlike; denied that the faith of France
was pledged until the Chamber of Deputies had
sanctioned the Treaty ; and moved a modification
ol the substitute. Mr. Pinckney denied that the
national honor was involved—it was a question of
mere money. Mr. Cambrelcng sold he would of
fer as a substitute for (he whole, a resolution,which
was totidem verbis an extract from (he conclusion
.of (he Minority Report—“ Resolved, (hat in the opi
nion of the House, the Treaty of the 4th of May,
1831, should be maintained and insisted an at all
hazards.” This proposition was accepted by Mr.
Adams, and appeared to meet the general consent
of the House. A motion for the committee to rise
was carried.
Correspondence of the Charleston .Mercury.
Washington, Feh. 25.
A motion was made to suspcnd.the rules, for
the purpose of taking Up the Resolution, upon
which the y;eas and nays Were called, upon
which it appeared that the Blair party, instead
of having a vote or tsvo thirds to suspend the
rules, were actually Outvoted on the occasion, the’
yeas being 103 to nOys 110. The House then
took up a Bill from the Senate to alter the Judi
ciary System—making certain new Circuits—
which was assailed hy some of Mr. Taney’s
friends, upon the ground that the Senate had a
bolished Mr. Taney’s Circuit with a view to get
ting rid of his nomination as a Judge. Mr. Clay,
of Alabama, said he was softy for Mr. T., but
the Bill was beneficial to AlahaWa, and he could
not put the interests of an individual in competi
tion with the interests of his State. Mr. Thom
as, of Maryland, opposed the Bill, as injurious to
that State, and c omplained of the age and infir
mity of Judge Marshall, who* Would be assigned
to that circuit. Mr, Robertson and Mr. Mercer,
of Virginia, both vindicated the Judge from the
imputation of decay, and affirmed that his mental
and physical strength were’ unabated. Mr. M. in
deed, went so far as to assure the gentleman
from Maryland that if he would choose any other
able bodied man to act with him as bis partner,
he would engage that he (Mr. M.) and the Judge
would heat Mr. Thomas and his friend at a game
of quoits. Mr. Barringer of North Carolina,
spoke with severity of the introduction of Mr.
Taney into the question. He hoped the House
was legislating for the country, and not for Mr.
Taney. He did not agree with Mr. Thomas
that Mr. Taney was “ a most distinguished citi
zen.” He was a man of notoriety, to lie sure—he
had made himself notorious by his extraordinary
conduct as Secretary of the Treasury—but that
was orte thing—distinction was another.—The
Bill was finally committed to the Committee of
the Whole. Another effort was now made to get
up Mr. Gilmer'S Resolutions, which succeeded:
and the rest of the day was devoted to them.
Mr. Speight of North Carolina contended for six
years, as the Presidential term. Lost by a large
majority. Mr. Pierce, of Rhode Island, objected
to taking away the election of President altogeth
er from the House of Representatives; in which
I concur with him, as the vote by States in the
, House, is one of the main federative features off
the Constitution.
The House adjourned without taking the ques
tion—and in all probability there is the end of tho
Resolutions.
Fbiihcaiit 20.
It affords me pleasure to inform you that the
Committee of the Senate, who were appointed to
investigate the charge against Mr. Poindexter,
made a report upon that matter this morning, in
, which they not only acquit Mr. P. of having had
any connexion whatever with the attemptjof Law- '
rencc on the President, but declare,'in,the most cm--
, phalic manner, that “ there is no ground for even*
the shadow of a suspicion against him.” The
report with all the testimony, will bo published'
to-morrow. Gratifying as this report is, it is still
more so from the fact of its being the unanimous
verdict of the Committee, two of whom arc un- f
compromising Jacksonracn, and bitter political
opponents of tho accused. How will the Presi
dent now answer to the country for having pro
cured and circulated depositions against nn inno
and honorable man, and which have been pro
ved to have been utterly unfounded and calumni
ous, by tho strict investigation and unanimous
report of an enlightened and impartial Commute*
of the Senate 1 Every honest and independent
man must stamp this proceeding, so- unworthy in
itself, and so degrading to his high office, with un
qualified reprobation.
Immediately after flic adjournment, and within
a hundred yards of the Capitol, a desperate affray
took- place between'Mr. Ewing, of Indiana, and'
an Officer of the A'rrtiy, a son of My. Lane, one of
the colleagues of Mr. E. The affray
unquestionably from the altercation which occur
red not long since, on the floor of the House, be
tween those members of the Indiana delegation.
Who was the aggressor in this rencounter, I know
not; nor do I know what kind of instruments were
used; but when I arrived at the acene of battle,
and where a large concourse of member* were
assembled, I saw Mr. Ewing, with a brokensword
cane in his hand; his forehead terribly gashed, his
right eye extremely swollen and his face and neck
covered with blood. He was immediately taken
to his lodgings by his friends.—Whether his an
tagonist was wonnded or not I have not been aHe
to ascertain. Mr. Ewing’s wound, though very
severe, is not considered dangerous.
We regret to learn, that Mrs. Hbhans, an ex
cellent lady and admirable poet, is alarmingly ill
in Dublin.— Char, Courier.