Newspaper Page Text
From tkc American EagJc. |
TO COTTON PLANTERS.
./effect of a National Bank upon the J
Value. an a Price of Cotton.
i h : extreme low prices ofCotton during
elm J>al five years, males it a matter of
mi woo* interest and enquiry among the;
Planters, t'< ascertain if possible, what has j
produced these low prices, and what lias
contributed to produce them. We have long
maintained the ground that the miserable
condition of the Currency, its contracted and
dried up volume, and the almost total des
traction of the Credit system, have been the
main cause of the extreme low prices of cot
ton during the past live years. That sup
ply and demand uro the positive causes re
gulating the prices of an article, is true —
but the Currency and the Credit system re
gulate in a great degree the demand. Des
troy them, and you destroy the main spring
to the demand.
It is well known to our Merchants, and j
to the Merchants in New Orleans—and
this is a highly interesting and important
fact which we wish impressed on the minds
of the Cotton Planters throughout the coun- .
try that the destruction of the Banking sys
tem for the past year or two has thrown the
control of our immense Cotton crop into the
bands of the Foreign Merchants—who have
regulated in a great degree both its price
and demand. Heretofore, w hen onr Banks
were in good standing and credit, they were
enabled to afford the New Orleans Mer
chants facilities and money to advance to
the Planter for his Cotton, who would there
by be enabled to hold it back from glutting
the foreign market, and thus force the for
eign purchaser to pay its value for it. But
this, (luring the past season oftwo, the Mer
chants have not had the power to do, in
consequence of the destruction of the Banks I
and tlie destruction of those facilities soes- ;
-sential to do it. And the consequence has j
been, that the British manufacturers and j
speculators have come over to New Orleans ■
with their gold and silver, and set up their j
offices, and bought the Planter’s cotton pret
ty much at their own price, in consequence
of the great scarcity of money amengst us,
and the destruction of those Bank facilities
which have heretofore enabled our Merch
ants to resist and successfully compete with
the foreign capitalists. It is tiie Banking
and credit system alone that has enabled
our Merchants ever to compete with the
heavy and overgrown solid gold and stiver
capital of foreigners. England, we doubt
not, has one hundred times the amount of
Gold and Silver that we have, besides the
powerful credit and facilities of her great
Bank of England, and other banking insti
tutions. It can then be seen attlie slight
est glance, that with the little gold and sil
ver we can keepamongst us to compose our
entire Currency with which to control, re
present, direct and protect our immense
trade, against the overgrown and overwhel
ming capital and credit of England, our
trade is bound to languish, our Cotton and
Tobacco, and other products, are bound to
decline in price. These are truths. And
until a sound Banking credit system be res
tored to us—until we have at least three
times the amount of money we now have
to constitute our Currency, we must expect
things to remain as they arc. We throw
out these remarks for the benefit of those
who are desirous of obviating these difficul-.
ties through the polls at the approaching
election, by voting for these candidates who
are in favor of RESTORING A SOUND
CREDIT SYSTEM—of giving to the
country an AMPLE AND ENLARGED
CURRENCY, capable of representing, pro
tecting and controlling our products and
agricultural labor. This the Whigs are
struggling to do, —and which the Democrats
are striving to defeat.
The History of the two Banks of the United
States, as connected with the price of Cot
ton.
We refer our Cotton Plapters to the fol
lowing tables of the prices of Cotton for
every year, from 1789 to 1835. We com
pile it from a report made by order of Con
gress in 1836, to that body, by Hon. Levi
Woodbury,Secretary of the Treasury—
good Democratic authority. It will plain
ly be seen that the influence of the United
States Bank upon the price of Cotton was
powerful—and also, that during the inte
rims when there was no Bank, the price of
Cotton fell and languished—and immedi
ately rose again when tlie Bank was re
chartered. Let every one read for him
self:
Years. Prices, i Years. Prices.
1789 ! 1813 12
1799 141 i 1814 15
1791 26 j 1815 21
1792 29 1816 294
1793 32 1817 ‘ 26|
1794 38 1818 34
1795 36£ j 1819 24
1796 36| j 1820 17
1797 34* j 1821 10
1798 39 1822 16£
1799 44 1823 10&12
1800 29 1824 15
1801 44 1825 21
1802 19 1826 11
1803 19 1827 Oh
1804 20 1828 lot
1805 23 1829 10
1806 22 1830 10
1807 21 \ 1831 9$
1808 It) 1832 10
1609 16 1833 11
1810 16 1834 13
1811 15£ 1835 164
1812 )0J *
Ve. find from this authority, that the av
■s'i ,e price of Cotton for the 5 years, from
1812 to 1817, the period between the first
and secoud Bank of the United States, when
there was no Bank, was 18 cents ; and that
the average price during the next five years
the first 5 of the new or late Bank, was 231
cents—quite a difference, truly, in favor of
the Bank.
The first Bank of the United States was
Chartered in 1791. The price of cotton,
as the table shows, for the two years pro
ceeding the charter of the Bank, was 14J
cer.'.s. The next year the Bank was char.
| tertd and went into operation, and cotton
rose to 26 cents a pound—the next year to
I 29 cents—and kept rising for a series of
years. The average yearly price of cotton
during the twenty years’ existence of this
Bank, is shown to have been within a frac
tion of 2.8 cents per pound—and in no year
j lower
i immediately prior lo the chartering of the
Bank [we haxc have no data to run farther
buck] it averaged as low as 14J cents ; nor
did it fall as low until 1842 when we had
no National Bank again, when down goes
cotton to 10 1-2 cents, lower than it haclev
er been.
We now speak of the period from 1811
to 1817—during which we had no Nation
al Bank. The averagr price of of cotton as
the table shows, for the five years when we
| had no Bank, from 1811 to 1817, was 18
cents. Hero the new, or late Bank was
chartered—in 1816—and the average price
of cotton runs up during the five first years
ito 23 1-2 cents per pound. And the aver
age yearly price, for the whole twenty
years existence of the late Bank, was a
fraction over 15 cents per pound.
* Now we come to another no bank period
again, and a gloomy one, truly. The late
Bank expired in 1837. During the five
years proceeding 1837 ; during the exist
ence of the Bank, the average yearly price
ofcotton was 14 1-2 cents. During the 5
years following, which we have no Bank a
gain, the average price is down to 81-2
cents, and becoming still lower, with a still
gloomier and more lowering aspect. Is
there any argument in these facts and fig:
ores ’? Is experience and history to be re
lied on ? If so, we here have, in the history
ofthe United States Banks, in connexion
with tlie prices of cotton for Fifty years past
a barometer which tells as correctly as any 1
! tiling can he told, what effects have occur
| red in the cotton market in conjunction with
j operations and existence ofa National bank,
[and also what effects have occurred during
j the interims discontinuance. There
j tlie facts exist, plainly before you, there is
no dodging them, no denying them. The
sun is not plainer than tlie results they de
clare.
MONEY.
’['he superabundance of money in the
city of New York, is shown in an authen
tic and striking form by tlie quarterly re
turns, recently made by the Banks in that
city. We learn from the American, that
these returns are from twenty-three banks,
with an aggregate capital.of $23,000,000.
Oil the 7th inst. they held in specie twelve
and a half millions, or more than ono half of
the whole capital, while their aggregate
circulation was about. five and a half mil
lions—so that there was on hand about two
dollars and a quarter in coin for every pa- j
per dollar issued. Tlie aggregate dis
counts of commercial paper were thirty one
millions, aud about nine millions are lent
out on United States and State stocks. The
deposites arc near twenty four millions of
1 dollars—more than equal to the united cap
itals of the 23 banks, and as those deposites
draw no interest, their large amount shows
the absence of any demands for money, and
! the difficulty of finding satisfactory invest
! meats for it.
The intelligent editor adds to these facts,
the following comment:
“The Strength of the banks, as exhibited
! by these returns, is evidence of any thing
1 but active and beneficial commerce.
1 “Nevertheless, the ordinary trade of the
country is active and healthy ; but without
1 any prospective or speculative demand.—
Purchasers lay in no stock in advance, eon
-1 tent to live from hand to mouth, and paying
| very generally, cash for what they buy.”
We may here take the occasion to re
mark that the banks of tlie city, of Bahi-
more exhibit the same relative degree of
strength in the items of full vaults of specie,
reduced circulation, limited discount lines,
and redundant deposites. Trade here is al
j. so narrowed down to the actual wants of
the people, and speculative enterprises are
unknown. The aggregate business of the
1 summer has been greater than usual, lining
made up of numerous items of moderate
transactions. The condition of the business
j community, on the whole, is sound and
healthful in an extraordinary degree; and
the results which have been already real
, ized from the completion and more perfect
organization of the various lines of internal
improvements which connect our city with
the noble valley of the Susquehanna, with
the interior empires watered by the Ohio
and Mississippi, and with an extensive re
gion stretching to the South West—afford
assurances of the most pleasing and posi
tive character, that henceforth the march
of Baltimore is steadily onward.—Balti
more American.
SLAVERY.
“I have been on plantations among slaves
and seen their condition ; and truth com
pels me to affirm, from my knowledge and
personal observation, that the slaves are
“better off',” as the phrase is, their condi
tion is more prolific of real enjoyment, and
possesses the elements of contentment, ease,
and quietness, to a greater extent, than does
that of free blacks, according to numbers.
And I have no doubt that there are at least
20,000 inhabitants of the City of New York,
whose condition is worse than the condition
of the slaves in our Southern States. And
that under the paternal government of cowi
miserating England, there are in England
and Ireland, at least three millions of peo
ple, whose condition is more deplorable
than that of our Slaves !”
The above is impartial testimony from
an able discriminating writer, a gentleman
and cliristian.of high character, and a na
tive of Massachusetts. Northerners, after
residing in the South, become almost inva
riably advocates of Southern institutions !
Are the “madmen,” who are by themselves,
and by fanatics like themselves, styled
“philanthropists,” in favor of free inquiry
and candid investigation on the topic of
their monomania? If so, let them study
Hon. J K. Paulding’s writings on the sub
ject, as well as the publication, of Presi
dent Dew, and Elder Stringfellov.
From the Augusta Chronicle fy Sentinel. I
Messrs. Editors :—1 have been prevented
by other engagements from giving earlier
attention to the remarks of the Constitution
alist of 29th ult. That press complains
with some bitterness of the language with
which I choose to clothe my thoughts.—
That is a matter of taste, about w Inch there
is no disputing. It is not likely that we
should agree upon that point. I might con
sider it more consistent with the character
ofa “ true gentleman,” to speak plainly
and truthfully even in “ Billingsgate” than
to weave tho tangled web of deceit in the
chaste, sparkling and brilliant language of
tlie Constitutionalist. Duplicity and chi
canery arc not apt to be pleased with any
language with which they are detected and
exposed—hence 1 shall continue to write
truth in such language as choice or neces
sity may dictate. Who lamis a matter of
small consequence to tlie public, though I
adopt this mode pf communicating my
thoughts on public affairs rather in accord
ance with custom than with any desire for
concealment.
Though promising to expose the “ mis
statements” of the legislative Whig ad
dress, the Constitutionalist in neithor of its
two laborious articles has joined issue upon
a single statement’ made in it. In its arti
cle of the 22d ult. it attempted to cover the
disgraces of its friends there portrayed, by
preferring charges against the Whigs
Those charges were met and answered by
me. His reply abandons the points made
in this first artfcle except as to which party
had the majority in the Legislature of 1838,
and rambles off into anew set of pretended
delinquencies against tlie Whigs, equally
unfounded with those which have already
been exposed. These tactics may be very
good for the purpose for which they arc in
tended, for as its readers generally see but
one side of the question, what is lost to truth
by this mode of discussion may he gained
by “the party.” I gave the Whigs one
more majority in the Senate of 1838, bv
mistake, than they actually had ; instead
of a majority of six or seven, as the Consti
tutionalist asserts, their actual majority was
only two. Judge Dougherty received for
ty-seven votes for President of the Senate,
all Whigs except the Democratic Senator
from Madison county. Gen. Echols receiv
ed forty-two votes, all Democrats. The
Democratic Senator from Bulloch, it was
well understood at the time, voted for Col.
Lamar, and as is usual on such occasions,
neither of the candidates voted. I believe
this to be the exact state of the case ; but it
is needless to dispute this point—the politics
of every member of the Senate of that year
was well known to me, and I presume also
to the editor of the Constitutionalist, in
which latter opinion 1 am greatly confirm-
I cd by the accuracy with which he designa
ted their politics, w lien it suited his purpo
ses on the question to lay Colonel King’s
bill upon the table. He did not mistake a
single man on the negative of that question.
The history of the bill to continue the
charter of the Central Bank until 1843, for
the sole purpose of winding up its affairs,is
correctly given by the Constitutionalist.—
I well knew the history of that bill and took
a deep interest in its success. It did pans
a democratic House of Representatives (a
few Democrats have uniformly opposed that
institution,) after the failure of their scheme
‘ to amend the charter, so as to authorize the-
Bank to borrow five millions of dollars to
be squandered in loans. That amendment
1 was defeated by the union of a portion of
the Democrats with the Whigs. After its
• defeat the Democratic party abandoned the
bill, and Mr. Toombs of Wilkes, did offer
I the bill to which the Constitutionalist refers
as a substitute therefor, which was accept
ed and passed the House. This bill came
up on its final passage in the Senate on the
[’ 29th December, the last day of the session.
, Absences of members had reduced the Sen
, ate to under eighty, a large majority of
those present were democrats and they en
s grafted those provisions upon the bill of the
• House-v.hich theCons'.itutionaiist now char
es on the Whigs. They used their acci
r dental majority, as they attempted to do
subsequently upon a memorable occasion,
; to defeat the popular will and to carry out
1 their own destructive measures. By rea-
I son of the afcsen ;e of members the demo
. era’s had acquired a majority in the Sen
. ate as early as the 27th December, and on
i that day, as the journals will show, carried
i their sub-treasury resolutions by a vote of
forty-five to twenty.nine, only three mem
i bers of the Whig party (the Senators front
Burke, Striven, and Paulding,) voting* with
I them. Every other Whig present voting
against them. Then tlie only charge which
the Constitutionalist can sustain against the
Whig Senate of that year in respect of that
bill is, that they were not present to prevent
the Democratic party from passing so bad a
measure. For this the absentees justly de
serve the public censure, unless their ab
sence was for providential cause, nothing
else should ever excuse a Whig for trust
ing the Democrats with power for a single
day, when they can prevent it, for the coun
try has never yet failed to suffer by their
exercise of it. And the present attempts of
the Constitutionalist to saddle them with
democratic measures should be an addi
tional warning to the Whigs never to aban
don their posts even for a day without the
most controlling necessity.
The uniform inconsistency of errors is
happily illustrated by the Constitutionalist
in its speculations on the Central Bank.—
Its positions are “crossly indented and
whimsically dove tailed.” Its editorial of
the 23d ult. taunts those whom it pleases to
term “ Whig leaders,” with lending all
their energies to the sole object of the des.
truetion of tlie Bank. That institution it
.affects to consider of small account. It
(liitAsaid “ all the vaporings of the Whig
. 7eatiers were against the Central sank;
that institution was the bug-bear of all the
calamities with which the people of the
State had been afflicted, and nothing but the
destruction of the institution could'repair
our disasters, pay our State debt, complete
our.internal improvements, and relieve our
citizens from ail their distresses.” And in
its editorial of the 29th ult... one short week
| afterwards, when it became necessary to
traduce the Whig Senato of 1838, it de
clares that tho defeat of Mr. Toombs’ bill
and the passage of the act of 1838, “ ex
tending the charter,of the Bank to 1850,
(was) a measure fraught with baleful con
sequences and ?he root of all the evils we
have since suffered in Georgia;” and a
gain, in the same article, ho designates it as
“ a monstrous measure, the origin of’all our
subsequent embarrassments.” The first
article intended to disparage the sagacity of
the Whigs, charges them with a quixotic
crusade against an institution, the destruc
tion of which was not “ an efficient and
practicable measure for the support of the
credit of the State and the relief of the peo
ple,” and within seven days afterwards de
clares one of tho least inoffensive amend
ments to the charter to be “ tlie root of all
the evils we have suffered in Georgia, and
the origin of all our subsequent embarrass
ments.” The “ Democracy” must have
capacious throats and strong stomachs to
swallow and keep down such heterogenous
and conflicting ingredients. I hope the
next editorial will give us the third “sober
thought” of the editor, for those of the faith
ful who take the trouble to think at all must
be in great doubt until they receive a “ new
revelation.”
But the act of 1838 was not “ the root of
all of our evils.” It gave the Bank no
power for evil that it did not posses by its
original charter, .except that SC allowing it
to buy, with its bills, exchange to pay the
State debts. This, however, if properly
used at that time, would have been produc
tive of good rather than evil to the State.—
It produced no evils under the administra
tion of the Whig direction of the Bank in
1839. They used the power honestly sot
the purpose for whic it was inteded ; the
fraudulent use of the power to make accom
modation loans, by the Democratic direc
tors under McDonald, produced all the e
vils growing out of it.
But even when thus used, it was weak
and impotent for evil, when compared with
that great Democratic measure of 1839,
which authorized the directors to issue as
much paper us they pleased. This was
much more “the root of all otlr evils;”
charity would induce me to hope that the
Constitutionalist had confounded the two
measures, and in fact referred to the latter.
This Was the wild, delusive and destructive
measure which annihilated our credit, and
overwhelmed our State with pecuniary dis
grace.
1 flatter myself that I have satisfied the
Constitutionalist of tlie wisdom and patri
otism of the Whig policy in 1840, as it
leaves that untouched and rambles off up
on anew sin of the Senate of 1836- A pro
fessed friend of Internal Improvements,
which its party have have made unpopular
by extravagance aud imbecility, that jour
nal now seeks to make political capital out
of that very unpopularity
It is but another illustration of that uni
versal Democratic priciple, to sacrifice ev
ery social and physical improvement, State
honor and State credit, public interests and
public virtue, our dearest interest, our ho
liest affections to the sole object of parly
; power; and, of course, to mislead honest
but uninformed citizens, for the accomplish
ment of that end. May God deliver this
! country from the domination of sucli a coni
bination of reckless and desperate adventu
i rets.
A bill having precisely the same objects
as the one referred to by the Constitutional
; ist, was passed by a Democratic House of
! Representatives in 1837. It was supported
■ bv both sides without regard to party, and
i went into the Senate, (also Democratic)
where it would have passed, but for an ob
■ noxious amendment sustained by the ene
• mies of the bill and local interests. That
Legislature was decidedly and unequivo
cally Democratic, yet no voice of condem
f nation is raised by this chaste “ gentleman
ly” organ against it. It would not help the
i party! But a false impression is attempt
ed to be raised, touching the ‘.oto of certain
Whig Senators upon an incidental motion
i on a similar bill in 1838. The vote refer
, red to, and attempted to be distorted, wasa
. j gainst laying the bill upon the table ; that
vote might have been given in strict accor
dance with parlimentary usage, without a
single individual giving it, being in fa
vor of the bill, not only as it then stood, but
in any other way. A bad bill may be the
foundation of a very good one on the same
subject, as the Constitutionalist has admit
ted, was the case in substituting the bill Re
winding up the Central Bank in 1838, for
that outrageous Democratic measure for
borrowing millions of money to squan
: der in loans to political adventurers. But
it is not made to appear by the Constitution
. alisl, what were the provisions of the bill;
, how far the rights of the State were protec
ted by it; or under what conditions the
thing was to be done ; for all that is disclo
sed, tiie bill might have been a harmless
if not a good one, whether it was or not, the
simple vote against laying it on the table
without further knowledge of the opinions
of those who gave it, is insufficient to base
a charge against any public man, except by
those whose known rule of political warfare
is the indiscriminate use of any and every
means, however unworthy, which promises
success. This may be a perfectly “gentle
manly” rule, but I should prefer to act here,
and be judged hereafter, by a different code.
Yours, &c.,
A WHIG MEMBER
OF THE LEGISLATURES OF ’3B AND ’4O.
The Difference. —It is stated in the N. Y.
Tribune, that SIOB,OOO in specie is now
travelling to the west to pay off'lndian an
nuities, under an escort of two special gov
ernment agents, and otherwise transported
at a heavy’ expense—probably not less than
three or four per cent, on the whole amount.
While a National Bank was in existence,
this transfer would have been made by a
draft through the mail, without costing the
treasury a farthing, and with the certaiftty
that it could not be lost by any casualty,
or be purloined by special agents or sub
treasurers—a security now altogether
wanting.
FREE TRADE REASONINGS.
The New York Evening Post quotes the
following passage from a letter recently
written by Mr. Clay.
“1 am so far a friend to free trade as to
think that, within the limits of the Union, it
should be entirely unfettered, and perfectly
equal between all interests and all parts of
our country. But to that free trade which
would throw wide opbn our ports to foreign
productions, without duties, theirs remain
ing closed to us, or our admission allowed
only upon the condition of high duties and
severe restrictions, which would compel a
resort to direct taxation, instead of a custom
house, to supply the wants of the •Treasury
and which would leave our domestic indus
try unprotected, and exposed in an unequal
contest with tho rival productions of foreign
powers, I am utterly and irreconcilably op
posed.”
The Post wishes to know what reasons
there are for a tariff between different na
tions which do not apply with eqiml force
to a tariff between our different Stages. Is
there any consideration adduced it asks,
“or that was ever adduced, in favor of higli
protective duties between this country and
Great Britain, which might not be made
applicable to the differents parts of this
country.”
Inasmuch as the States of this Union are
parts of one whole—members of one body
politic; it may be naturally infered that tlie
relations existing among them are different
from those between the United States and
a foreign country. In so far as that differ
ence consists, to such extent the analogy of
the New York paper fails.
Great Britain has institutions different
from ours :—Her condition is what it is by
reason of those institutions and ‘he results
oftheir operation. The state of !i r iabor
ing population—the rates of --ug. --the
relations between the employer ami the
working man ; in fact the entire social and
political condition of the kingdom could not
but affect very powerfully our condition,
both socially and politically, if unrestricted
trade were allowed between that country
and-our own. Ifitbeaduty of Govern
ment to make no distinctions between its
own and people ofother countries ; to show
no preference for its own domestic concerns;
to provide no safeguard for its own institu
tions when they are liable to danger ; then
indeed our view of the matter is wrong and
protective duties are wrong ; all discrimi-.
nations in favor of home industry are
wrong.
It is common with nations to incur annu
ally very considerable.expenses to support
navies and military armaments to a greater
or less extent. The speculative philanthro
pist might say', as some do say, that all this
is improper ; that war is an unnatural state;
that all the world ought to be at peace, and
that these war-like preparations among the
various governments are but provocations
to hostility. Every arfstment which the
speculative free-trader adduces in support
of free trade, the speculative philanthropist
might adduce in favor of peace; al! reason
ings against a ta'iff, as calculated for the
distinctive advantage ofa nation, might be
urged against a navy and military arma
ment for the individual protection of a na
tion.
The time may come when there will be
perpetual peace in the world, and when
navies and armies will no more be needed;
and So the time may come when free trade
may prevail among the nations of the earth
precisely as though they were, as ou r States
are, all members of one political body.—
But until that time comes—until the diverse
nations arc lo one another as the States are
among themselves, the reason which makes
free trade p*oper within the limits of this
Union will not be applicable to sustain the
argument in favor of unrestricted free trade
with foreign countries.
It is as much a proper matter of policy
to regulate commercial intercourse with na
tions differing from our own in spirit, gi-n
----ius. institutions, and ot.ndition our
ir.teiests shall not suffer from such inter
course, as it is to take care that foreign
arms be not allowed to endanger our land.
If unrestricted trade with a country
where the laboring classes were serfs and
paupers or little better, should have the ef
fect to degrade our laboring men to a simi
lar condition, then we would say let all the
dogmas of all the free trade theories in tho
world perish forever ; —we will have none
of them. In view of such an alternative,
we would adopt the wish of Jefferson that
an ocean of fire might roll between us and
such a country.
The Post uses an argument to this effect:
“If it be an advantage to the farmers of ll
linois to exclude the manufactures of Old
England, in order to build up manufactures
within their own limits, would it not be an
equal advantage to them to exclude the
manufactures of New England, for the
same purpose ?”
IfNew England were a distinct nation
from Illinois as Old England is ; if it were
a country foreign in its institutions, feelings,
habits; if it were an over-populated region
crowded with millions of oppressed labor
ers at the mercy of employers, and if a war
might break out at some time and stop all
intercourse between them—then we say
that Illinois should not remain dependent
on such a New England for her supplies of
manufactures, and this the more especial
ly because a New England similar to the
Old England would allow no just rules of
trade but would keep out the agricultural
productions of Illinois by restrictive corn
laws.
So long as there is a possibility of war
between countries it is not good policy that
either should be dependent on the other for
indispensable supplies. The last war with
England found us without domestic manu
factories ; we had been dependent on Great
Britain, It is known that our country suf
fered much on this account. When the
war was over the policy of encouraging our
domestic manufacturing industry was
strongly advocated by Mr. Clay, Mr. Cal
houn and others, as a policy essential to the
National Independence. Upon that ground
it stands ykl. — Balt. Anxr.
BANK OR NO BANK?
Is a National Bank useful and necessa
ry to our prosperity as a people ?
This question mav be answered in few
words by facts. Then,
It is a fact that the government never
lost anything by a National Bank as fiscal
agent.
It is a fact that during the existence ofa
National Bank, we had a sound currency,
and a plenty of it—the working man got
liberal wages for his labor, and the poor
man could get money to buy bread and
meat too for his family.
It is a fact that when we have had no
National Bank, our currency lias bean de
ranged, depreciated, and so scarce as to
produce pressure and distress among the
people every where throughout the coun
try-
If a Bank be necessary, tllen will not the
people have one ? They are the sovereigns
and must decide. If they will the creation
of one, let them go so the polls and give
their votes for Whig candidates : if they
will otherwise, then they may stay at home,
or vote for the* self-styled democrats, just
as their humor may dictate.— Raleigh Reg
ister.
PRICES UNDER THE TARIFF.
The Tuscaloosa Monitor refers to the de
cline in the price ofcotton bagging, an im
portant article of consumption in the South,
to show the beneficial effects of high duties
upon prices, by bringing tlie domestic in
competition with the foreign fabric. In 18-
40, the price of cotton bagging was quoted
in the New Orleans papers, at 20 cents a
yard. It is now selling from 12 to 13 cents
—a decline of 100 per cent. The quanti
ty of this fabric used in Alabama alone, is
estimated at two million of yards, which
under the Locofpco Van Buron system in
1840, would have cost the Planters the
round sum of $520,000
While under the present Whig
Tariff, th ■ same quantity on
ly cost! 260,000
Saving under the whig tariff $260,000
And this the Locofocos complain of as,
oppressing the people ! Here again is a
fact against a theory.
ANEDDOTE OF JOHN RANDOLPH.
An Irishman in the New Mirror, relates
tin following anecdote, illustrating the
marvellous geographical knowledgeof John
Randolph :
“ My knowledge of Ireland,’ said he to
me, ‘seems to astonish you as much as it
did a servant of Mr. Canning’s at Washing
ton, the other day. He brought me a note
from his master—who, by the bye, is a ve
ry superior man, sir—and the moment he
spoke I at once detected the Munster man,
for lie had a fine rich brogue ; so thinks, I,
I’ll have some funr’
‘6o, John, you’re from Munster, are you
not?’ said I.
• I am, plaise yonr honor,’ replied he,
surprised at my question.
‘ From the county Clare, I presume?’—
(This was a guess on my part as to the
county.)
‘ Yes, sir,’ said lie, still more astounded,i
‘ What town did you live in ?’ continu
ed I.
‘ The town of of Ennis, sir.’
‘Oh,’ said I, laughing, ‘I know Ennis
very well. Pray does Sir Edward O’Brien
still live at Dromoland ?’
‘ He does, indeed, sir.’
‘ And Mr. Stackpoole at Edenvale?’
‘ Yes, surely, sir.’
‘ And the Knight ofGlin at Shannovale?’
‘ Yes, sir ;’ and then, after a pause and
a low bow, he added, ‘ might I make bould
to ax, sir, how long your honor lived in
Clare?’
‘ I never was there at all,’ replied I, ‘ but
hope to bo very soon.’
• Oil, sir ’ said he, don’t be afthcr fooling
me. for yon m tst be a bit ot an Irishmen ;
you i.uve tiie brogue, and you know as
much of the tounthry as I do myself, and
more too, I’m thinking!’
It was in vain that I assured him I bad
never been in Ireland ; he went away still
insisting that I had lived there; which fact
he told to Mr. Canning, who was very
much amused a-t the way in which I had
puzzled poor John, as he told me himself
next day.”
A NEW WAY OF DETECTING A
THIEF.
The St. Louis New Era of the 3d inst.,
chronicles the discovery of a thief who had
previously managed always to evade de
tection, by tiie following contrivance:
“ Thomas P. Bray, a man heretofore
holding a respectable position in society,
was yesterday arrested, and brought before
Justice Wetmore, under the following cir
cumstances. G. S. Chouteau, flour mer
chant in front of the market, has occasion,
ally lost inconsiderable sums of money, and
set a trap to catch the pilferer. lie placed
a pistol in the drawer containing the money
usually received, and so contrived it that
the opening of the drawer would discharge
the. pistol. Yesterday an explosion took
place, and Mr. Bray being left alone by
some other person in the employ of Mr.
Chouteau, was met by him, immediately af
ter the discharge, descending the steps, his
face perforated with powder, and his man
ner much confused. He was shortly after
wards arrested, taken before Justice Wet
more, and held to bail in the sum of
The accused w'as for MrT
Chouteau.” _
Food of the Chinese. —Monven’s Voyage
around tlie World, furnishes the
paragraph :
“ The Chinese eat almost everything that
comes to hand. Upon the streets of the
city, but particularly on the large square
before the factories, a number of birds are
daily exposed for. sale, which among us,
have not yet gained much repute for fla
vor ; among others, hawks, owls, eagles
and storks. To a European, nothing can
