Newspaper Page Text
friends in peace and allies in war. They ac
ted towards them in the most liberal and en
listened policy. It was left to the commer
cfai avarice of modern times to pursue a dif
ferent course. England, Portugal,and Spain,
had the finest colonies ever known. But they
looked upon their growing wealth and enter
prise with jealousy; they made them perma
nent sources of revenue for the mother coun
try ; they raised from then annual contribu
lion with which to enrich themselves. The
consequence was, that they lost the finest
possessions that ever belonged to any people.
And it is only by modifying their policy, that
they have been enab.ed to retain any portion.
And now, with the lights of experience be
fore us, you propose by this bill to adopt a
system somewhat similar in its principles o
that formerly adopted by bpa.n and England
in relation to their colonies. And the final
consequences will be the same. You may
find some of the new States acquiescing lor
a time under their embarrassments and the
pressure of commercial derangement; but
Ihcv will soon recover from that. You can
not keep down the energies of this people.—
Their embarrassments are but temporary. —
They will rise above them in a very few
years. Are we to legislate for a mere tem
porary state of things? Is it wise to pass a
bill of this kind, which was to operate upon
millions of human beings as enlightened and
as free as ourselves, underpressure and em
barrassments from which they were sure, in
the progress ol things, to be relieved in a ve
ry
principles of the bill were so well calculated
to produce alienation and unkind feelings?—
They will soon assert the dotrine that under
theJDeclaration of Independence they came
into the Union as equals, and that to own
the freehold within their limits is an essential
attribute of sovereignty. Yon will force up
on them this doctrine.
Mr. Chairman, what is the state of the
world? In the vast improvements ol the age,
we find every nation around us increasing
their military power. Have we no difficul
ties? Have we no points of difference with
a haughty and powerful nation? True, we
were at peace. But we had recently shown,
through the accredited agents of our Govern
ment, a spirit and tone but ill calculated to
sustain the honor and independence of the
country. I will forbear to speak my senti
ments on that point at present. It is delicate
matter, and I will suppress the feelings of
scorn that I entertain for the manner in which
our foreign intercouse has recently been con
ducted. But is this a time to divert an im
portant branch of your revenue from the
public defences of the couutry ? Were we
prepared to take a course that would dry up
our resources at a time when they might be
needed for the highest purpose of Govern
ment? If there be any surplus, spend it on
your navy, to protect your flag from one
open dishonor —guard your commerce—de
fend your soil from violation, your citizens
from'murder-prepare to sustain your rights at
home and abroad. Spend your money for
these purposes; but I entreat you to do noth
ing that will alienate the affections of any
portion of our people from their Govern
ment at this juncture of our public affairs.—
Let not this great Union be perverted from
its high national objects into a contemptible
machine to collect revenue to be distributed
among those who will hang around yonr
Treasury as fawning sycophants and profli
gate bankrupts.
Mr. Chairman, I know that] I address a
fixed and inexorable majority. But let me
appeal to them to consider what they are a
liout to do. Coming, as they do, fresh from
the conffct of bitter party contests, and
flushed with the triumph of victory, have
thev reflected fully on this great subject with
a sole view to promote the lasting good of
their country ? Those only live in tlie admi
ration of posterity who can on great occa
sions rise superior to party trammels, and look
alone to their country, her honor, her inter
ests, and her true glory. If Napoleon, in his
pride of power, had consulted the partner of
his early fortunes, and looked with a single de
votion to the star of France, he might this day
have been wielding in peace the same sword
that he flashed in the blaze of victory at Ma
rengo and Austerlitz. There is no policy so
fatal as to push power to an extreme. Sir, we
are at an important point in legislation. I ap
peal to gentlemen to survey the ground well. 1
invoke the spirit of the entombed Constitution
to save mv country from the ruin that a
waits her if these reckless schemes be adop
ted.
THE BANKRUPT LAW.
The following from the Charleston Mercu
ry shadows forth some of the many questions
to which the Bankrupt Bill just passed by
Congress, is to give rise. As the Bill is one
of general interest, we shall publish it entire
next week.
The Bankrupt Law.—A paragraph crept
into our paper yesterday without any legal
right, which entirely misrepresents this law—
stilting that under it the first attachment has
the preference over all other claims. The
prime purpose of the law is to abolish all pre
ferences, and to distribute the debtor’s estate
summarily among his creditors. It is not yet
clear how far it will be explained to carry out
this doctrine. On first reading the law it
struck us that it did not recognize the lien of
judgments—that it did not admit as incum
brances on the bankrupt’s estate any liens that
were not secured upon portions of the proper
ty particularized and set apart in the security,
such as mortgages. We “take advice” on this
point and were assured that we were wrong.
We have since heard that we were very pos
sibly not wrong—that it will be a vexed ques
tion’ before the courts whether general liens
are any security under the bankrupt law. A
mortgage is not considered a creditor , under
this law—on the contrary all creditors are
treated as equals.
To this there are three exceptions named.
The United States have a preference—the
policv of which is more apparent than the jus
tice. Persons who are allowed a preference
by the laws of the United States in conse
quence of having paid money as sureties also
have a preference. We are not learned e
nough to know how large this exception is,
but if it is really intended to protect “accom
modation endorsers,” it is abominable. An
endorser loans his name and pledges payment
of a sum, on failure of his friend. What bet
ter claim has he, than that other friend who
loaned the money in the first instance. It has
been suggested however, that the exception
is limited to those who have paid money as se
curities on Custom House Bonds and the
bonds of the public otficers, and that it is there
fore, a scrt of appendix to the first, standing
like that on policy and not justice.
The third exception is that of creditors of
bankrupts, who are also their debtors—or
where there are mutual debt and credits—in
which case the balance is. to be struck and
that is to be considered the true debt. There
is as little justice in this as in the two first—
though the necessity of it is more apparent.
The law goes upon the violent principle that
all debts due to the bankrupt are to be paid in
full, all debts due by him are to be paid ac
cording to the proportion of each to the whole
of his estate. The law exists only by draw
ing a marked distinction between debts due
by and due to the baukrupt. However, the
very first principle ot the law is revolutionary,
and its no use to point out the injustice of the
details of an act that starts by abolishing the
jegal obligation ot contracts.
At a late commencement at Yale College,
the decree of L.L. D. was conferred upon Au
gustus’ B. Longstreet, President of Emory
College, who graduated in the class of 1913.
THE TIMES.
The union of the states and the sovereignty of l he states
COLUMEtUsTsEPTEMBER 9, 1841.
DEM OCRATIC TICKET .
FOR GOVERNOR,
Charles j. McDonald.
For Senate,
Col. A. McDOUGALD, ‘
Representatives,
Maj. JOHN H. HOWARD,
Hon. W. T. COLQUITT,
Hon. MARK A. COOPER,
Col. JOHN 11. WATSON.
Randolph County.
- Senate,
Col. ALLEN MOYE.
Representatives.
Col. A. M. HUGHES,
Col. S. A. SMITH.
Report of Deaths in the City of Columbus,
for the week ending September 7th :
Dysentary—l male.
Teething—l child.
Unknown—l child.
W. S. CHtPLEY,
President Board of Health.
THE REVENUE BILL.
It is admitted that this bill is objectionable,,
that it was urged too precipitately through the
House ol Representatives, and that the Whigs
themselves are not altogether satisfied with
it. The Richmond Whig said a week or two
since, that the Whigs were desirous to ex
clude tea and coffee from the operation of the
law, but were prevented by the Democrats,
who form a large minority in the lower House
of Congress —and a similar objection to the
bill has been urged by various leading Whig
journals in different parts of the country. It
is conceded, therefore, that the act as framed
is an improper and oppressive one, and that
the Whigs themselves were very solicitous
to alter some of its features. Why was it rvot
done ? Because, say the majority who passed
the bill, according to parliamentary practice,
at the particular moment the motion was
made to exempt tea and coffee, that motion
could not have been put, t oilhout including
with it an amendment suggested by a Demo-,
crat, to exempt likewise sugar, molasses and
salt. These latter articles were required to
be taxed to afford a sufficient revenue, and
therefore it was necessary to retain tea and
coffee among the taxed articles, as the motion
and amendment could not be put separately.
Admit this statement to be correct (which
we shall presently show is not the case) what
injury to the public interests would have re
sulted by exempting not only tea and coffee,
but sugarj molasses and salt 1 Are they not
all articles of the first necessity-—indispensa
ble to comfortable subsistence—and in uni
versal use 1 And if, in any possible manner,
the wants of the Government could have been
otherwise supplied, did not a proper regard
for the interests of the great mass of the peo
ple, indicate that all these articles should be
admitted duty free, and thus the consumer be
saved some expense, however small, in this
season of embarrassment and difficulty 1 It
is said, however, that sugar, molasses and salt
were subject to duty heretofore, and that the
present Revenue Bill leaves that duty pre
cisely where it was. Here is the very ground
of complaint. While adjusting anew law rel
ative to imports, taxing articles heretofore
free, and elevating the duties on such articles
as paid less than 20 per cent, to 20 per cent
ad valorem, why not, at the same time, re
lieve such articles as were paying a higher
duly than 20 per cent, by admitting them free,
or, at any rate, bringing them down to 20 per
percent—especially articles in such general
use as sugar, molasses and salt 1 Whore
would have been the impropriety in a course
of this kind on the part of the majority If
the parliamentary rule were even as stringent
as is represented, the Whigs, being the ma
jority, had the power certainly to exempt all
these articles, especially as the Democrats
were aiming to accomplish that object. There
surely would have been no difficulty under
such auspicious circumstances.
But the Government wanted the money to
be raised by duties on these articles, sugar,
molasses and salt. It seems, however, that
the Government also wanted the money to be
raised by taxes on tea and coffee—that is, if
the bill introduced by the Committee of Ways
and Means were correct, proceeding on the
ground that the articles enumerated in it
must be taxed 10 raise a sufficient revenue for
the Government, and yet a Whig member of
Congress moved to exempt from duty tea and
coffee. Now how could the country get a
long without the money to he raised by duties
on these articles ] The Bill introduced by
the Committee of Ways and Means, professed
to call only for such an amount as the exigen
cies of the Government demanded, and yet
the Whigs were willing to strike out two im
portant articles enumerated in the list. Does
not this show that a portion of the money in
tended to be collected by duties on imports
might be dispensed with without detriment to
the public interest! Else why manifest such
a willingness to exempt them ! This move
ment to admit duty free, Jas heretofore, tea
and coffee, evincing a conviction that the
money to be raised from their taxation could
be very well dispensed with, authorizes the
belief that other articles (sugar, molasses and
salt for instance, or same one of them,) might
also have been excluded from the Bill, or the
duties on them lessened, and yet the operations
of the Government have been in no-wise
checked or embarrassed in consequence.
It is said that the Government is over
whelmed with debt; and that no means had
accrued, or were accruing to liquidate this
debt. Where is the evidence of this enor
mous indebtedness? Has it been satisfaclo
ri'y shown? On the contrary, does not Mr.
Calhoun demonstrate from the Report itself
of the new Secretary of the Treasury, that
such embarrassment on the part of the Gov
ernment does not exist? We refer our read
ers to the extract from that speech in another
partot this paper. It shows clearly—beyond
a shadow of doubt—that the Loan Bill and
the Revenue Bill were not required by any
actual, or expected indebtedness of the Gov
ernment. Did not Mr. Barnard, a Whig
member of Congress who, during the session
which terminated on the 4th of March last,
endeavored to prove the U. States to be forty
millions in debt, during the progress of the
Revenue Bill in the House, remark that, on
examination and farther scrutiny, he thought
that five millions would be sufficient to raise
in that form—whereas the Bill as passed will
bring in from that source eight or ten mil
lions ?
But the motion to exclude-tea and coffee
f om taxation could not be put,witl o it also ex
cluding with them the amendment to exempt
sugar, molasses and salt. It appears, howev
er, from the repotted proceedings of the
House of Representatives, during the pro
gress of the Revenue Bill, that a motion was
made to exempt the single article of salt.
Mr. Cushing, (a Whig,) being in the Chair,
decided that the vote could be taken sepa
rately on that article. It was taken, and the
majority refused to exclude salt from taxation.
It is, therefore, perfectly apparent that it was
within the power of the majority at any time,
in the progress of the bill, to separate the ar
ticles taxed, and include or exclude any of
them.
THE MEANS AND THE WANTS OF THE
|GOVERNMENT.
We have placed in our columns to-day all
that portion of the speech of Mr. Calhoun, of
South Carolina, delivered in the U. S. Sen
ate, in June last, which has reference to the
estimates of the Secretary of the ‘I reasury,
and the available means and necessary ex
penditures of the Government. We hope
our readers will not be deterred from giving
this extract a careful examination—as, if it
approximate at all towards accuracy, the
folly and error of passing the new Revenue
Bili will at once he most apparent. Certainly
a man holding the eminent rank Mr. Calhoun
does,"would not venture statements to the
world, involving matters of fact susceptible of
speedy and easy elucidation, without a belief
in their correctness —and no one will question
the ability of this distinguished Senator to
fully examine, and accurately determine the
financial affairs of the country. Read the
extract.
RETRENCHMENT AND REFORM!!!
Few, very few in this section can have
forgotten that one of the principal arguments
employed last year to eftect a change ot Ad
ministration, was that the expenditures of the
Government were enormous, and ought to be
reduced. The following are the remarks ol
the National Intelligencer, the Administration
press in Washington City.
“WE HAVE NO IDEA OF ANY
REDUCTION IN THE AGGREGATE
AMOUNT OF THE EXPENDITURES
OF THE GOVERNMENT. ANjAUG
MENTATION OF THE REVENUE
TO SOME EXTENT IS, THEREFORE,
INEVITABLE.”
THE CENTRAL BANE.
We have been requested to publish the ac
tion had in the last legislature respecting the
Central Bank.
W’e find among the laws enacted by the last
legislature, one “to repeal an act entitled an
act to establish a bank at Milledgeviile, to be
called and known by the name and style of
the Central Bank of Georgia &c.”
The material portion of that law, and the
part which inhibits the Dank from extending its
discounts , or making farther issues , is embraced
in the second section, and reads thus—
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted by the
authority aforesaid, That the Governor of this
State be, and he is hereby authorized to exe
cute the Bonds of this State, not exceeding
one million of dollars, in sums not less than
five dollars each, redeemable at the end of five
years, or sooner, at the option of the State,
bearing an interest of eight, per cent per an
num, payable annually in the cities of Savan
nah, Augusta, and Milledgeviile, which bonds
shall be used exclusively for the redemption
of the bil.s of the Central Bank now in circu
lation, and those which this General Assem
bly may direct the issue of, to defray the ex
penses of, and the appropriations made by, this
General Assembly, and for no other purpose
whatsoever , and only for that purpose to the
extent necessary, after the just application of
the funds of the Central Bank available for
that purpose :—Provided nevertheless, That if
it be practicable to obtain specie for the pur
pose aforesaid, by making any of the aforesaid
bonds payable elsewhere than in this State,
the same may be made payable at any place
in the United States.
The action of the House of Representatives
upon the act, of which the above section is
the material portion, may be found on page
334 of House Journal, and reads thus—
Upon the passage of the bill the yeas and
nays were ordered to be recorded, and are
yeas lU4, nays 68.
Those who voted in the affirmative, are Mes
srs.
Alexander, Anderson of Chatham, Ander
son of Warren, Ashley, Barclay, Bell, Bent
ley, Bigham, Boynton, Brown ol Bibb, Brown
of Houston, Bryan ot Houston, Burt, Chap
man, Chappell, Chester, Covenah, Cooke,
Crat', Crawford of Oglethorpe, Crawford ol
Richmond, Credille, Outright, Daniel of Green,
Daniel of Thomas, Darden of Troup, Darden,
of Warren, Davenport, Davis, Delauney, Dix
on of YV alker, Dodson, Emanuel, Farnall Ford
of Lee, Flournoy of Muscogee, Flournoy of
Washington, Foster, Gathright, Greene ot
Macon, Hagerman, Hampton, Mardman, Har
dy, Harrison of Putnam, Hines, Hitchcock,
Aotchkiss, Hubbard, Hudson, Johnson of
Heard, Johnson of Troup, Jones of Harris,
Jones ot Monroe, Jordan, King, Lefils, Long,
Loyal!, Lynch, Mann of Morgan, Mann ot
Tattnall, Martin of Morgan, Martin of Gwin
nett, Maxwell, May of YY'arren, McCall, Mc-
Crimmon, McMath, McMillian of Thomas,
Milieu, Moore,Morris of Cobb, Mulkey, Nash,
Osborne, Parks, Pryor, Rea, Read, Reeves,
Reynolds, Rhodes, Richardson, Robinson of
Laurens, Sheffield, Smith, Stewart of Mcln
tosh, Stuart Es Ware, Stiles, Stone, Stroud of
Clarke, Taylor, Thomas, loombs, Trayler,
Wales, YY'arren, YY r elborne, YY r est, White ot
Jasper, Whitfield, Whitworth, and Williams
of Harris. . .
Those who voted in the negative, are Mes
srs.
Anderson of Franklin, Atkinson, Beavers,
Bethea, Bryan of YY'ayne, Carlton, Cannon,
Carroll, Chandler, Collier. Crutchfield, Dark,
Dawson, Dufour, Ellis, Erwin, Espy, Ford of
Cherokee, Green of Forsyth, Green of Pike,
Hall, Hammond, llardage, Harrison of Ran
dolph, Harris, Hendry, Htbbert,Howard, Hud
gins, Hunter, Johnson of Appling, Jones of
Franklin, Keaton, Lawson, Lee, Liddle, Mays
of Cobb, McDuffie, McJVlillen of Jackson,
Mitchell, Moon, Morris of Murray, Moultrie,
Murphey of DeKalb, Neal, Nixon, Palmer,
Pettee- Pitman, Pitts, Price, Roberts, Robin
son of Jasper, Rodgers, Sanders, Sanford,
Shropshire, Stephens, Stroud of YY”alton, Sum
nior, Tanner, Tarver, Thompson, Turner,
Webb, White of Pike, Williams of Bulloch,
Wilson.
These proceedings took place in the House
on Saturday, the 12th day of December. On
Monday the 14th pf December, a motion was
made to reconsider so much of the Journal
of Saturday as related to the passage of the
bill concerning the Central Bank.
Whereupon, the yeas and nays were order
ed to be recorded, and are yeas 73, nays 110.
Those who voted f in the affirmative, are
Messrs.
Anderson of Franklin, Atkinson, Barclay,
Beavers, Brqwh of Fayette, Bryan of Wayne, <
Carlton, Cannun, Carroll, Chandler, Collier,
Crutchfield, Dark, Dixon of Walker, Ellis,
Erwin, Espy, Farnall, Green of Forsyth,
Green of Pike, Hall, Hammond, Haidage, 1
Harrison of Randolph, Harris, Hatcher, Hen
dry, Hibbert, Howard, Hudgins, Hunter,
Johnson of Appling, Jones of Franklin, Kea
ton, Lawson, Lee, Liddle, Mays of Cobb,
McDuffie, McMillen of Jackson, Mitchell,
Moon, Morris of Cobb, Morris of Murray,
Murphey of DeKalb, Murphey of Wilkinson,
Neal, Nixon, Palmer, Pettee, Pitman, Pitts,
Price, Roberts, Robertson of Columbia, Ro
binson of Jasper, Rodgers, Sanders. Sanford,
Shropshire, Smith, Stroud of Walton, Sum
mer, Tanner, r l'arver, Thompson, Turner,
Webb, Welborne, While of Pike, Willirins
of’ Bulloch, and Wilson.
Those who voted in the negative, are Mes
srs.
Anderson of Chatham, Anderson of War
ren, Ashley, Bell, Bentley, Black, Boothe,
Boynton, Brown of Houston, Bryan of Hous
ton, Burt, Coapman, Chappell, Chester, Chip
ley, CoVetlah, Cooke, Craft, Crawford of O
glethorpe,’ Craivford of Richmond, Credille,
Cutrigbt, Daniel of Greene, Daniel of Thom
as, Darden of ‘Troup, Darden of Warren,
Davenpert, Delauney, Dodson, Emanuel,
Evans, Flournoy of Muscogee, Flournoy of
Washington, Ford of Lee, Foster, Franks,
Gathrighf; Hagerman, Hampton, Hardman,
Hardy, Harrison of Putnam, Hines, Hotch
kiss, Hubbard, Hudson, Johnson of Heard,
Johnson, of Troup, Jones of Columbia, Jones
of Monroe, King, Lefils, Long, Lowe, Loyall.
Lynch, Mann of Morgan, Mann of Tatnall,
Martin of Morgan, Martin of Gwinnett, Max
well, May of Warren, McCall, McCrimmon,
McGahagan, McMath, McMillian of Thom
as, Meadows, Millet), Moore, Mulkey, Nash,
Osborne, Parks, Pieston, Pryor, Rea, Rend,
Reeves. Reynolds, Rhodes, Richardson, Ro
binson of Laurers, Sapp, Sermons, Sha, Shef
field. Stephens, Stewart of Mclntosh, Stuart
of Ware, Stiles, Stone, Stroud of Clark, Tay
lor, Toombs, Towles, Travler, Waldhour,
Walker. Warren, West, White of Jasper,
Whitfield, Whitworth, Williams of Harris,
Williams of Talbot, Wingfield, and Wooten.
So tWe rfouse refused'to reconsider.
In,the Senate, oh Tuesday the 22;1 of De
cember, (see Senate Journal page 369) the
question relative to the repeal of the act es
tablishing the Central Bank, came up, and on
the passage of the bill (the second section in
serted above) the yeas and nays were requir
ed to be recorded, and stand thus—
Those who voted in the affirmative, are
Messrs.
Beasley, Blackshear, Bryan of Stewart,
Calhoun, Carter, Chastain, Christain, Creach,
Dawson, Flovd, Fryer, Glover, Goode, Gor
don, Griggs, Harris of Warren, Janes, Jones,
Knight, McDonald, Miller, Minler, Moore,
Neil, Reid. Smead, Smith of Bryan, Spencer,
Strickland of Tattnall, Strickland of W#re,
Thomas, Tomlinson, Vincent, Williamson,
Waldhour, Warthen, W’iggins, Wright, and
Young.
Those who voted in the negative, are Mes
srs. ! ■
Beall, Bishop, Bos-w-ck. Camp, (’one, Cox,
Culbertson, Diamond, Dunagan, Echols ot
Coweta, Echols of Walton, Gi a ham, Guess,
H\tnmood, Hiffin, Henley, Holmes ol Baker,
Holmes of Houston, Jemeson, Kimsev, Lind
say, Loveless, Marsh, Mays, McAflee, Mor
ris, Rainey, Robertson, Smith of Twiggs,
Speight, Stapleton, Swain, Walker, Wallers,
and Williams.
So the bill passed under the title thereof.
BANK OR NO BANK.
An instructive article from the Madisonian
showing how lar the question of a bank was
the issue, or an issue in the last election, will
be found in this paper. We recommend to
the special attention of the late Honorable
Senator, from Talbot, and the Columbus En
quirer, who have stated that the issue was
Batik or no Bank, the whole of the article,
but particularly those portions of it distinguish,
ed by italics and small capitals.
What does the Columbus Enquirer think of
the concluding remark of the Savannah Re
publican, of the 15th of September, 1840—
“that the Harrison party here (in Savannah,)
has as large a number opposed to a Govern
ment ißank as their opponents'!”
The Enquirer has not yet answered our
queslio%—whether, if the Distribution Bill had
been let alone, the articles heretofore duty
free might not still have remained so?—or,
whether, in framing a Revenue Bill, a much
less duty than 20 per cent might not have
been imposed on free articles: and articles
of prime necessity (such as sugar, molasses
and salt,) paying more than 20 percent,
might not have been subjected to a much less
lax —ar.d still a sufficient sum have been raised
to meet public demands?
The Georgia Delegation, it is true, voted
against the Distribution Bill. Before, how
ever, the filial vote was taken, in the Senate,
on tlte Distribution Bill—the Revenue Bill
passed the House. The vole on the Revenue
Bill stood yeas 116, nays 101 — Mr. Alford
voting in tlte negative —-Col. Foster absent.
Suppose the seven members from Georgia
who voted lor the bill, and Col. Foster who
was absent, had voted in the negative with
Col. Alford —bow then would have stood the
vote? Would it not have been—yeas 109,
nays 10S? What would this result have
effected—the loss of the Distribution Bill in the
Senate? Most certainly. And by prevent
ing tl;e passage of the Distribution Bill, and
turning the three millions derivable annually
from the Public Lands, into the National
Treasury, would not the necessity for taxing
lea and coffee (if indeed such necessity can
be shown.) have been obviated—and Con
gress have been enabled, probably, to reduce
the duty on sugar, molasses and salt, without
detriment to the public interest? This ap
pears be a plain case, and what
we have-saggested above to have been sus
ceptible of easy accomplishment. Why was
it not done? YY'ilJ the Enquirer furnish a
sufficient reason ?
The truth cannot be disguised -Mr. Clay
is rapidly perfecting his odious system of pub
lic policy. The Distribution Bill and the
Loan Bill, with other subordinate measures
in the course of accomplishment, will create
the necessity for a high Tariff. It can end in
nothing else. lu addition, if a Bank be char
tered, the Government must raise its propor
tion of the capital. Here is a still further
augmentation ofihe public debt. YY"hat other
means are provided to extinguish these lia
bilities, and furnish funds to meet the current
expenditures of the Government, but those
derivable from duties on imports? And to
give some idea of the amount to be raised
hereafter from this source alone, look at the
remark of the Government organ in this pa
per, that it does not suppose the expenses 0|
the Government hereafter will “be less than
they have been heretofore—although one of
the principal reforms promised by a change
of Administration, was a reduction in the
“enormous” and “profligate” expendi
tures of the last Administration.
Here is food for digestion, and such as
ought lo arouse the attention of every reflect
ing man. We believe it is creating alarm
and apprehension among considerate Whigs
—the Republican portion of the Whig party.
We have heard of expressions of disappro
bation from prominent Whigs in this section,
at the tendency of things, and the present
aspect ot public affairs—shadowing forth the
speedy adoption of a'l those objectionable
measures which have been attain and again
repudiated by the South, as violative of its
rights, destructive of its best interests—and
as strengthening improperly and dangerously
the arm of the E’ederal Government.
BANKS OF COLUMBUS.
Since the close of the Western Bank of
Georgia, in this city, a few days s nee, notice
of which was given last week—reports unfa
vorable to the other banks of Columbus, and
particularly to the Planters and Mechanics
Bank, are in circulation in the country. We
hazard nothing in saying that any apprehen
sion concerning these institutions (the Bank of
Columbus and the Planters and Mechanics
Bank,) or of their ability and readiness to
redeem their notes in current funds, are ill
timed and unnecessary. We have made
enquiry in the proper quarter, and are satis
fied of the correctness of what we state. And
as the alarm at the present moment seems to
have reference particularly toj the Planters
and Mechanics Bank, we can stale in regard
to this institution that ii is redeeming its notes
in current funds, or in checks on New York
at the usual rates, deducting something when
its own bills are paid for exchange. It will
continue to pursue this course so long as it
has a dollar out. The Bank of Columbus is
pursuing A course equally satisfactory, we
learn.
We say again be under no apprehension
these two Banks. Credit no ru
mors you hear respecting their failure, or ap
proaching failure. If the bills of either of
jhem are brought here, you can get in ex
change current funds. They are in the hands
of men of capital and credit, and who will
not suffer them to retrogade from where they
now stand. Their indebtedness bears no
proportion to the amount of their assets—and
although these assets are not immediately
available, yet they are of a character and
kind to enable the institutions which hold
them, to make all necessary arrangements to
meet their liabilities in current funds. We
say again if any are led by false rumors, or
apprehensions of loss, to sacrifice the bills of
ihe two Banks now doing business here, they
will assuredly regret it.
As we have heretofore remarked the Bank
ing system, in our opinion, requires thorough
reformation—yet this opinion does not, and
ought not to restrain us Irom communicating
facts, interesting and beneficial to the public,
based on sufficient evidence lo authorize their
perfect belief. Such are the character of the
(acts detailed above respecting the Bank of
Columbus, and the Planters and Mechanics
Bank.
MR.. ARNOLD, OF TENNESSEE.
This gentleman has attained some notoriety
recently by his coarse abuse of Air. Tyler.
We krfow nothing of him personally, except
that he is a member of Congress from Ten
nessee.
Tiie Columbia (S. C.) Chronicle, a Whig
Journal, seems to possess particular informa
tion respecting the Honorable Mr. Arnold, as
the subjoined article from the Chronicle of the
Ist inst. will show :
A Jackall playing thf. Lion. —Thomas
D. Arnold\ known as Thomas Dog Arnold,
or Benedict Arnold, in Tennessee, and who
was elected to Congress by chance from the
first Congressional Distifttof Tennessee, has
been seeking distinction at Washington City
by stigmatising. Mr. Tyler as “the base,
miserable u-releh at the other end of the aven
ue,” wi'h other vituperative epithets. That
this conduct is in perfect consistency with his
character may lie known when we state the
fact that we have now before us the Jonesbo
rough (Tenn.) Whig of June 30, in which he
is held up to the public as a grig shop bully, a
liar , a scoundrel, and a coward, by a respecta
ble lawyer named Thomas A. R. Nelson.
Public Expenditures. —As the Enquirer
went so wide of’the mark in its computation
of the State debt of Georgia, we thought we
hazarded nothing in manifesting a desire to
dissect its computation of the indebtedness of
the General Government. As, however, it
has directed our attention to estimates and
calculations of the official organ at Washing
ton City, we ask its perusal of the extract
from the speech of Mr. Calhoun, to be found
in this paper. We shall continue these ex
tracts from the speeches of other distinguished
Statesmen, made during the present session
of congress, who have had access to the same
“ Public Documents,” and are as capable of
analyzing them, as the National Intelligencer.
Daguerreotype. —We call the attention
of our readers to a notice of Mr. Fogle in an
other part of this paper, respecting this ex
traordinary invention. Mr. Fogle has provi
ded himself with an improved Apparatus—
and we have seen several specimens (likeness
es and views,) which show very strikingly die
remarkable power of this recent discovery to
delineate objects with perfect accuracy.
Mr. Fogle has a view of the upper pirt of
Broad street, aud of the Episcopal Church
in this city, an inspection of which will give
some idea of the power of the Daguerreotype
to catch and delineate different objects, and
the most minute features of them.
The cnergv and enterprise of Mr. Fogle
in supplying himself with an Apparatus so
expensive, and incurring the risk of reim
bursement by the public —especially as like
nesses and views are taken with such perfect
accuracy, and at so low a rate—entitle him
to the favorable consideration and the patron
age of the community.
MUSCOGEE COUNTY.
The Enquirer, ia announcing the W h'g
ticket for this # county, says that the welfare ol
the country, without regard to party inter
ests, is what it seeks. In another place, in its
paper of yesterday, it italicises our remark of
last week that we had announced a ticket
“selected to represent the interests of the De
mocratic party”—thereby making the distinc
tion that the Whig ticket was of more enlarg
ed and liberal views, looking beyond the mere
fortunes of a party to the great interests of
the country. If by this the Enquirer means
that its ticket is not exactly “an unit”—that
some on it are Tyler men, in opposition to Clay,
and others Clay|men, in opposition to Tyler, we
are instructed that the Enquirer is entirely
correct. But does the Enquirer mean to say
that in all that pertains to party organization
—to the preservation of strict party lines —
and the ascendancy of parly power, in all its
Jor ms and phases, the Whig ticket is less te
nacious and committed than the Democratic
ticket? Ceriainly it cannot mean this, and
yet fight with the weapons of truth. Does
the Enquirer mean to say that, in it? legisla
tive action, the whig ticket will not adhere to
what are understood to be the prominent mea
sures of the whig party —will not, in every
instance, vote for whigs for such offices as may
be filled by the coming Legis'atuie —and, in
all things, conform to .the views and measures
of the Whig party ? Certainly the Enquirer
cannot mean to assert otherwise, and yet fol
low “the code of honor” by which it profes
ses to be governed.
Now, in our remark, that certain individu
als had been “selected to repieser.t the inter
ests of the Democratic party ol Muscogee
county in the next legislature of Georgia,” we
meant to say, and presume we were so under
stood by our readers, that the Democratic
candidates, if elected, would seek to carry out
such measures as were believed by the parly
to which they were attached to he essentia! to
ihe welfare of the country. We apply this
remark to prominent questions of General
and State policy which may come before the
Legislature. So tar as local matters are con
cerned—personal rights or interests are in
volved—or county alterations or arrange
ments contemplated or desired—we presume
they will know’ no party —nor exhibit any
partiality whether friend or foe be benefiited
or injured by their course. That the Whig
ticket will be actuated by views less manly
we do not believe or assert, notwithstanding
the perversion by the Enquirer of our remark
that certain individuals had been “selected to
represent the interests of the Democratic par
ty of Muscogee county in the next Legisla
ture of Georgia”—to the exclusion of a pro
per regard for the personal and individual in
terests of a portion of the r constituents, op
posed to them on questions of general policy.
Tiie Oglethorpe House. —This extensive
establishment is now in the hands of Wil
liam B. Phillips, the former proprietor, Mr.
Bedell, having relinquished it. Although as
the superintendant of a Public House, Air.
Bedell was energetic, polite and attentive, yet
in all these qualities the present Proprietor is
equally distinguished, and we have no doubt
the Establishment will, under its new head,
sustain its former high reputation.
Washington—Congress. No measure
of importance lias passed either House of
Congress since the passage of the Lard Bill
in the Senate. The Fiscal Corporation Bill
yet remains in the hands of the Senate—and
little doubt seems entertained, if it pass lhat
body, of its disapproval by the Bresident.
Nothing definite is yet known as to ihe period
when Congress will adjourn.
Giovanni. —So far as we questioned Ihe
correctness and propriety of the opinions and
statements of “ Giovanni ” in his first article,
we shall endeavor next week to show wherein,
in our view, he stated the case too strongly.
Other matters of more immediate importance,
at this particular time, have delayed our in
tended notice of the positions of “ Giovanni,”
and the few remarks vve designed to make
respecting them.
We neither designed nor “ threatened ”
any “elaborate and demolishing review.”
The Enquirer avoids or mistakes the issue
respecting the lev Revenue Bill. While
re-adjusting the tariff law, why was not re
gard had to those articles of prime necessity
which paid a very high duty, above 29 per
cent, ad valorem, and why were not suita
ble efforts made to lessen the duty on them ?
This was practicable as a motion to that effect
was made, and its adoption rejected.
As we have said in another place to-day,
the Georgia Delegation (all of whom voted
for it with the exception of Alessrs. Alford and
Foster) ought, under any circumstances, to
have voted against the Revenue 8.1 l as it
passed the House—because, by so doing, the
Distribution Bill would not have passed the
Senate, and the deficit, whatever existed,
would have been supplied from the proceeds
of the sales of the Public Lands. Here is one
great error which ought to, and could have
been avoided by the Georgia Delegation, and
its failure to avail itself of this means to kill
the Distribution Bill, to which it professed by
its votes to be opposed, subjects it to the im
putation of allying itself to the fortunes of the
Whig party, without regard to its measures.
Air. Alford is found voting boldly in opposi
tion to the bill, and there is reason to believe
that Col. Foster (from his .firmness and inde
pendence on the Bank question) if present,
would have gone with Col. Alford. However
this may be, Mr. Alford voted against the
Revenue Bill, and we ask the Enquirer to ex
plain the reason of his vote, if it be indeed a
fact that it is a mere Revenue Bill and designed
to raise no more than the wants of the Gov
ernment absolutely require. Is not Mr. Al
ford as sensible of the honor of the Govern
ment, and the necessity of preserving its credit,
as any member of the Georgia Delegation ?-
How then happened he to be in opposition to
his colleagues ? The Enquirer can only ex
plain it by supposing Mr. Altord to be igno
rant of the financial condition of the Govern
ment, or willing to violate its plighted faith,
neither of which it will, we presume, impute
to him.
The reason for the vote of Mr. Alford is to
be found, we think, in various of his speeches
during the present extra session of Congress.
He has boldly repudiated several of the meas
ures of the Whig party, and pronounced their
tendency to be to consolidation and federalism
lie has been less party bound than D s col
leagues ; more disposed to give to passing and
contemplated movements their true name and
intent. It. is true Mr. Alford loses no oppor
tunity to assail the Democrats. Be it so. 110
is not indisposed to tell the truth on his ow n
party, and expose the impiopriety of its acts,
and as lie can have no apparent motive to a
bandon his party, we should suppose his state
ments were worthy of belief.
We understand the Enquirer to say that
“all that is wanted” is a bank ol issue; with
power to deal in exchanges; with blanches
to be voluntarily adopted by the States. Do
we understand the Enquirer aright.
Extract from the speech of Mr. Calhoun of
South Carolina, delivered in the Senate of
U. States, June 21, IS4T
Air. Calhoun said, that it was impossible for
any one to read the report ot the Secretary,
without being struck with the solicitude ap
parent throughout, to make out a deficit in the
revenue of the year. So great was Ii ssi lici
tude, that it betrayed him into errors, which
have been so fully exposed by the two Sena
tors who preceded me on the same side, that
I do nor Jeel called on to add a word to what
they have said in that respect. \\ hat I pro
pose, in connection with what may be called
the financial part of the report is to show, by
a brief and condensed statement, what would
be the deficit at the end of the year, according
to the data furnished by the Secretary him
self, collected from different portions ol itis re
port, but all from himself, without adding an
estimate or a figure of my own.
According, then, to Ins own data, the avail
able means of the Treasury for the year, in
cluding the balance at tiie end ot the last year,
Treasury notes authorized to be issued during
the year, and the revenue lroiu all source.-,
would be $24,942,935. This is made up,
first, of the sum ol $4,212,540, the actual
receipts into the Treasury irom the beginning
of the year to tiie 4th of March, including
the issue of Treasury notes and the .balance
on hand at the commencement of the year,
and m the next of the sum of $20,750,395,
at which he estimates the receipts irom the
4th of March to the end of the year, including
Treasury notes authorized to lie issued. Both
items are taken from the report, without the
alteratiin ot figure. Cents are emitted, as
they are th oagi.oul my statement- These
together make the sum i $24,042,935.
winch, as l have s a’.e-J, is the aggregate of
the available means oi the year, according lo
the data ol the Secretary.
The actual demand on the Treasury for
the year will bo, on his data, $58,012,7/0. —
1 have obtained the result, first, from his
statement ot the annual appropriations (ho
. calls them definite appropriations) made du
ring t'-e last Session, which ho puts down at
$17,987,981 ; next, Irom the permanent ap
-1 pro| rat ions payable in the veer, $1,781,115,
■ followed by Tieasury notes, which he esti
. mates win fall due in the year, or come into
Ihe Treasury in payment of duties, making
$5,283,831. These items are all taken from
’ 12th page Treasury report, House docu
’ men". An the table containing them, the iiem
of Treasury notes is put down at $5,431,421 ;
but there is a note appended, which give the
- items that compose it, which, strange to, tell.-
- gives not that sum, but the one 1 have stated
and is so footed, making a difference of nearly
$150,099. I have taken the one 1 have, as
1 find the items that compose it, stated in
’ another part of the report, according with
: those that, give that sum. The next and last
i sum that composes the items, winch makes
up, according to the data o! the Secretary the
demands on the Treasury for the year, is.
one of $3,009,849. the estimated diiierence
between the outstanding appropn tionsal. the
end of this year, compared wiin those of the
last year. Tins sum i have obta.ned in the
following manner. ‘The Secretary estimates
ilie demands on tiro Treasury, In us the 4;h ot
March to the end of the year, at $33,429,ti1t*
and that which will he required ion ire ser
vice of the year, from the 4;h of Alarchtothe
end at $24,210,009. ‘The difference between
them ($9,290,910) would, of course, be the
amount of the outstanding appropriations, ac
cording to his estimate, at me end of iliis
year. Take that .-u ti irom the sum of $12,-
300,205, which he stall s to he the amount of
the outstanding appr pria'ions, at the end of
last year (see 12 h page ol report,) and the
difi-rence will give the amount 1 have sated,
as chargeable to the disbursements of the
year, and all the items added, the aggregate
amount of those disbursements according to
the Secratary’s own data. (Subtract the ag
gregate means of Ihe year ($<M,912,')30)
from the aggregate demands, ($28,021,770)*
and the deficit would be s3,ot 9,841.
But from this, two ilems must be clear I }’
deducted. First, the omission in stating, a
mong the means of the year, the item of
$215,151 of money in the mints belonging to
ilie ‘Treasury. Next, an overcharge in the
disbursements of $1,110,011 of ‘Treasury
notes, issued under the act 1840, between the
31st December, 1819, and 4th oi March,
18-1 h and which will not fall due till next
}C-ai. Both the Sen aims who preceded me,
have clear y shown th s to be an overcharge. —
1 will not attem(t to add to their proof.—
These two items added make $1,325,702, and
tba'sum subtracted from $3,009,841 gives,
for the deficit, according to the Secretary’s
own data, at the end of tiie year, the sum of
$1,713,970. He es imam- it at $10,088,215,
making an over estimate in his own data of
$14,039,03(5.
It is true that he makes out his deficit in
part, by adding items that have have not been,
and a kirge part of them probably will not be
appropriated by Congress; bin when we speak
of deficits, wp refer to the excess of the au
thorized demands on the Treasury over its
available means, not such demands as the
Secretary, or any one else, may think ought
to be authorized by law. In that sense there
would be no limitation in the deficit.
Among items of this kind the Secretary has
added one of four millions of dollars, lo
constitute a s'andmgdeposit in the Treasury,
that is, the projected Bank ; and this he pro
poses to borrow, say at six per cent, which
would make an annual charge of $240,000
ou the people, that the Bank may have the use
of it for nothing] I, for one, shall never
agree to such a measure. If the Treasury is
to be guarded against contingency of an acci
dental deficit, a vote of credit authorising the
temporary use of Treasury notes, or, as called
in England, exchequer bills, would be greatly
preferable. There is another large item of
nearly a million and a half, in addition to
what has already been voted this year for for
tifications, to which i shall not give rny as
sent. The great changes lhat steam has
made,and the still greaertthat it must make in
the operations of war on the ocean, Require
that the whole subject of the defence of our
maritime frontier should he reviwed by able
and skilful officers, before we proceed any
further in the present system of fortifications.
Much that has been done, anu what is pro
posed to be done, will prove, on such view,
to be wholly useless—money thrown away.
I say nothing of the other items of the kind ;
they are small. Nor will I undertake to
show what will be the actual deficit, if any.—■
It would be too hazardous. Tiie Secretary
can make it more or less, or nothing at all, at
his pleas:ure. But if he should chcose to leave
the outstanding appropriations as they stood
last year, there would be in the Treasury u
considerable surplus, instead of a deficit. On
the contrary, if he should undertake to spend
the whole, he may increase the deficit by ma
ny millions. We know what his desire is,
and it remains to be seen what he,will do.