Newspaper Page Text
ComrtiUteP, upon which this debate took place,
was in the following words :
“ Revived, Thar, the House of Representatives of the
United States disapproves the proceedings ,n the trial and
execution of Alexander Arbuthnot and Robert C. Am-
brister.”
To this resolution the Committee of the
Whole disagreed ; and this disagreement be
ing reported to the House, and the question
stated on concurring in this disagreement—
General Harrison called for a division of the
question. “ The trial, sentence, and execution
of Arbuthnot,” he said, were in his opinion,
perfectly correct; and, although he would not
aoree to censure any one concerned when their
inotires were as pure as he was certain they
were on this occasion, especially when he had
no doubt but both men deserved death, yet,
beingcalled upon to say whether the execution
of Ambrister was right or wrong, as he differed
in opinion from Gen. Jackson as to his powers
over the court, he was obliged to say that it
was wrong. It was an honest difference cf
opinion, lie said, and was not intended to con
vey any censure upon that officer.”
The question was divided accordingly, and
being first taken on disagreeing to the disap
proval of the trial and execution of Arbuthnot
was decided in the affirmative, 108 to 62’
Gen. Harrison voting in the affirmative. The’
same decision was had, 107 votes to 63, on the
case of Ambrister, Gen. H. voting in the nega
tive.
515!Mr. Cobb, of Georgia, [then moved a reso
lution declaring “ that the seizure of the Spa
nish ports of Tensacola and St. Carlos de
Barancas, in WestFlotida, by the army of the
United States, was contrary to the Constitu
tion of the United Stales.”
On the question of agreeing to this motion,
(which was negatived by 100 votes to 70,) the
vote of Gen. Hariison is recorded in the af
firmative.. Soldier as he was, (or had been
during a good part of his life,) his conscien
tious regard for the Constitution showed itself,
in this vote, to be stronger than his respect for
mere military authority.
Not to fatigue the reader with details too
numerous of the votes and speeches of Gen.
Harrison when in'Congress, we shall passover
many such ■which do not appear to involve
any important principle, and, by doing so,
shall be able to bring within a reasonable space
all that we have to say upon the General’s
service in the House of Representatives, and
come to the consideration of his subsequent
service in the Senate of the -United States.
Upon the various questions which arose,
during his service in Congress, out of the
claims for indemnify for property destroyed
during the war, which had then just ended,
Gen. H. advocated a liberal policy. In dis
cussion of a hill upon the suViject, in Januaiv,
1817, he took the ground that compensation
ought to be extended to the owner of every
house which was destroyed by the order of
any officer in the service of the United States
to facilitate the operations of the army or any
detachment thereof, or to impede the opera
tions of the enemy ; to the owner of every
house destroyed which should have been oc
cupied by the authority of the United States
as a place of military deposite, or as barracks
for soldiers, or as a hospital, which was de
stroyed by the enemy in consequence of such
occupation; and to all houses destroyed by
the enemy in'consequence of a military resis
tance from or-in the neighborhood of the same.
Provisions to this effect he threw into the
form of an amendment to a pending bill;
which amendment, however, though embrac
ing principles undoubtedly just and equitable,
was deemed too liberal for the means then at
the disposal of the Government, and was nega
tived, though special provisions have been
since deemed expedient in all such well-es
tablished cases.
In debate, in February of the same year,
upon the hill for the relief of the sufferers by
destruction of property by the enemy on the
Niagara frontier, Gen. Harrison, who strongly
advocated the proposed relief to the sufferers,
came in conflict with Mr. Timothy Pickering,
of Massachusetts, who opposed the bill. In
reply to a remark of that gentleman, that the
conflagration of the Niagara frontier was an
act of retaliation for our burning the town of
Newark, (on the Canada side,) which he rep
resented as unauthorized iu civilized warfare,
and unnecessary, Gen. H. defended the de
struction by the American troops, and said
“he had no’doubt that if Mr. Pickering would
examine >the situation of that town, and its re
lation to Fort Niagara, he would himself ap
prove the burning of it.; and he (Mr. H.) was
willing to stake hiz reputation-on the propriety
of that measure as a military one which every
intelligent military man would sanction.”
In relation to the South American Colonies
(then in a state of revolution against Spain)
Gen. Harrison, in an incidental debate, ex
pressed coincidence in the view taken by the
Speaker, [Mr. Clay,] that every act of this
Government in relation to the contest between
Spain and the Colonies had borne hard on the
latter. In the same Session, iu further ex
pression of his opinion of the duty of this Gov
ernment to stretch forth the hand -of friendship
to those Colonies, he Yoted for a motion to
insert in the General Appropriation bill an
appropriation for the outfit and salary of a
Minister to the Provinces of La Plata.
( To be continued.')
The Standing Army dodged !—It is well
known that Mr. Van Buren, in his last Annual
Message, told Congress that “he could, not too
strongly recommend the plan of the Secretary of
War, [Mr. Poinsett,] for a reorganization of
the Militia of the United States.” That plan
was accordingly laid before Congress by the
Secretary, and immediately published to the
Country. It was received with almost unani
mous and indignant condemnation, as a scheme
of Despotism and Oppression. Virginia was
especially earnest in its deprecation. What
was to be done! Bach out or dodge, as usual!
Two or three white washing Reports were
made in Congress, and immense numbers of
them were printed for circulation at the ex
pense of the People. These Reports take the
ground that the President had nothing to do
with the matter, notwithstanding his explicit
endorsement of the plan above quoted, and
shirk the whole responsibility upon the Secre
tary, who meekly consents to shoulder the
load !—But let us hear Senator Preston tell
the story ;
The Richmond Whig says that Mr. Preston
in his speech in Petersburg, in contrasting
Gen. Jackson and Van Buren, referred to
Van’s skulking on the Army Bill. It was a
most admirable scheme at first, and he could
not too strongly recommend it to Congress ;
but when Old Virginia began to protest against
and to denounce it, he began to tremble and
skulk from the responsibility. “Here, Points,
-here !”■—(snapping his fingers and whistling
Points up as he would a spaniel.) “ 1 did not
do this, did 11 Please tell the gentleman and
ladies who did.” Points, with great humility
and innocency of aspect, responded as desired,
“ I did it /”
One may imagine, but no language can de
scribe, the ludricous effects of this representa
tion. •
From the National Inleliigeneor.
LOCOFOCOISM UNVEILED!
The April number of the Democratic Re
view, a journal well known as a leading official
apologist of the present Administration, con
tains an article headed “ Mr. Van Buren's title
to re-election,” which recent circumstances
strongly admonish the American People to
consider carefully and deliberately. Some
what of dramatic interest is sought to he given
to this article by an introductory account of a
political conversation said to have been held
in the vicinity of Rock Creek Church yard,
three years ago, between “two equestrians,”
of whom one was President Van Buren, and
the other, as we are led to infer, ex-Attorney
General Butler. In this preface, which, like
Mrs. RadclifPs introduction to her celenrated
romance of “ The Italian,” will probably be
thought by many readers to be better than any
thing that follows, we are told by the Presi
dent that he should write the Message, subse
quently transmitted to the extra session of
Congress in 1837, “for posterity.” This
was a judicious determination, if a mere post
ponement of the public judgment was desira
ble, fur the Message has undoubtedly found
but little favor with the present generation,
which is more immediately concerned in its
doctrines and consequences.
The article in question recommends the ap
propriation of the President’s house to the
use of the “Smithsonian Institute;” the se
lection of a smaller mansion for the residence
of the President, not, however, the writer
warns us, “ democratized” “ quite down to a
log caein the “simultaneous reduction of
the Presidential salary to a level of something
nearer to those of the Governors of States and
the other high officers of the Federal Govern
ment ;” and “ the free application of the hand
of democratic reform to the Executive depart
ment of our Federal Government, by the sub
stitution of annual terms, with unrestricted re
eligibility, for the present tenure of four years;
and by applying the true principle of popular
election to the great bulk of the offices now
held under Executive appointment.” These
are the leading principles of the Reform of
which its projectors say that the time of its
adoption “ will indeed be an auspicious day
for the Republic.” But, it seems that its
benefits and blessings are not, so far as the
tenure of the Presidential office is concerned,
! to he dispensed for some time. The “ auspi-
| cious day” is to he postponed, and the “ diffu
sion of knowledge among men” is to be held
back, till after Mr. Van Buren shall have en
joyed the power, emoluments, and patronage
of office fur another term of four years. He
is represented as a “ wise” and a “ great” man;
his claim to the name of “Magician” is vindi
cated ; the whole vocabulary of flattery is put
in requisition to glorify him; the ghost of judi-
| cial astrology is invoked in his behalf, and the
country-is told that “it affords a striking in
stance ot the necessity of a leader in all such
crises of human affairs, and of the mighty in
fluence for good -which it may become the high
and happy lot of an individual to exert upon
the destiny of a nation, when the exact con
junction takes place of the hour and the man.”
With all these unparalleled advantages for
taking the lead in the proposed Reform, Mr.
Van Buren is, moreover, painted as the De
mocratic principle incarnate; an impersona
tion, one would think, which gives him an in
herent title beyond all other men to carry it
out to the “ auspicious” results which are
meditated. The Democratic Review, how
ever, strange as it may seem, sets up a very
! different title for him—a “ title to re-flcction”
j for four years longer to an office which he will
have already filled four years ; and four years,
according to the doctrine of the Review, is the
longest time during which the office ought to
be filled by any body!
Examples of the incongruity between pro
fession and practice which characterizes the
| party in power, and of its tenacity of the per-
! sonal advantages of establishments which it
! denounces as abuses, are so frequent and fa-
; miliar, that the present instance deserves no
tice only on account of its ludicrous preten-
j sion. We took up our pen, on the present
: occasion, not for the purpose of commenting
on it, but in order to call the reader’s attention
to the account given in this authoritative ° by-
authoiity” article of a party whose principles,
it avows, “ were those always cherished, by Mr.
Van Buren.” After having applauded him
| for his “self-possessed, resolute, and unwaver-
i ing” perseverance in a financial policy repu-
I diated over and over again by his constituents,
j the Democratic Review thus proceeds :
I “In appreciating- the difficulties of Mr. Van Buren’s
position at. the period we are It ere leferring to, it must be
home in mind that no indication then appealed of that,
great movement of the South to his support, under the glo
rious guidance of its noble lender, which has since devel
oped itself with such decisive effect ; while a general dis
solution of his own parly, with the abandonment of his
administration by a very great, proportion of all the old
influential leaders among its supporters, was plainly ine
vitable, if he should dare to assume any attitude antago^
nistical to the power of the banks, and to the popular in
fatuation in favor of the paper money Credit System.—
The only existing party on which he couid rely for sup
port in such a position consisted of a small section of the
Democratic party in the city of New-York, which had as
sumed a distinct organization on the ground of hostility
to the monopoly of the banking system, and the fraudulent
fallacy of paper money—insignificant in number, though
powerful iu talent, enthusiasm, and stern, true, radical
democracy—an object cf persecution to all the other par
ties, and known throughout the country at large only as
the object of a vngue terror and random execration, under
the uncouth and contemptuous designation of the ‘ Loco
Focus '
“ But, in truth, the principles of this little knot of sin
cere democratic reformer* were those always cherished
by Mr. Van Buren, and to which he had never been un
faithful, throughout the whole course of his political life—
being nothing more nor less than those of a pure and
earnest democracy, illuminated by the light of the sound
est principles of political economy.”
The readers of the National Intelligencer
may recollect exemplifications, within the last
two or three years, of the principles of this
“ pure and earnest democracy, illuminatnd by
the light of the soundest principles of political
economy,” which, in refutation of many former
denials, it is now confessed that Mr. Van Buren
“ always cherished.”
A meeting' of this “ pure and earnest democ
racy” was held at Tammany Hall, in New-
York, in the fall of 1838, at which John W.
Hardenbrook presided, assisted by thirty-two
vice-presidents and eight secretaries; and its
official proceedings were thus characterized
by the Evening Post, the New-York “ Rich
mond Enquirer” of the Administration:
“ We publish the excellent address and resolutions
adopted on that occasion.”
In the address thus applauded are the fol
lowing passages:
“ Anarchy is but a state of transition. It cannot ex
ista« a permanent condition of things. The very nature
of man renders social order inevitable. Even temporary
confusion can occur only as a consequence to a previous
infringmc.nl of the true principles of society. All the
laws of nature harmonize, and it u „„iy w hen some of
them are violated that convulsion ensues. If human reg
ulations did not. produce artificial and unjust distributions
of property, a slate of things could never exist in which
properly would be endnnged. W nere the averacious few
have so controlled legislation as to concentrate and perpet
uate property in themselves, it is natural that they should
seek to exclude from political power all who have no
stake in society, and that they should regard the plunder-
ed masses as hostile to such “ rights of property,” and
such a “ social order.” It is natural that they should dis
trust all whose sense of justice is not subdued by a par
ticipation in the spoils, and that they should tremble for
their iniquitous possessions and the system which upholds
them, but where society is constructed on just principles
such apprehensions are visionary and absurd. Convul
sion is the struggle of nature with disease in the body
politic, and can never occur when the system is in health.”
The meeting requested, by resolution,
the publication of the proceedings in the
Washington Globe,—the principal official
journal, from its local position, of the Adminis
tration.
The effect of such doctrines were soon
seen in the triumph of physical force over
law and order by which some of the ward
elections iu New-York were signalized in
the seizure of the ballot box, in the prostration
of an election in Bergen county, New-Jersey,
by a hand of marauders, with flags inscribed
“ Poverty Triumphant,” &c., and by similar
scenes of violence, to which it is painful even
to refer. In one of them, under the influence
of “ the soundest principles of political econ
omy,” an immense quantity of flour was
made to undergo a “ transition” from the pos
session of its owners to that of the “pute and
earnest democracy.”
But by far the most startling—and it is as
elaborate as it is startling—developement of
the principle of Loco Focoism, is that made
in the last number of the Boston Quarterly
Review. There is nothing in it, to be sure,
for which the public mind might not have
been fully prepared by former revelations of
the Loco Foco creed ; and it contains no pro
position which is not directly deducible from
premises which have all along been the ad
mitted elements of that creed. But its doc
trines are enunciated with a terrible and
alarming distinctness ; and their apostle is a
person holding an office of trust and profit
under the Federal Government. Orestes A.
Brownson, editor of the Boston Quarterly Re
view, is, we learn from the Boston Mercantile
Journal, Stewart of the United States Marine
Hospital, at Chelsea, with a salaty of 81,500
a year. Of this office the labors are said to
be light, and the perquisites, exclusive of the
salary, to be considerable. Mr. Brownson is
an author of some repute, and a lecturing ora
tor high in the esteem of the Administration
party. His periodical is an accredited and
fostered organ of the same party. The rea
der will have more definite views than he has
perhaps hitherto had of the principles of this
party, when he shall have read the extracts
which we are about to make from Mr. Brown-
son’s article. After a short notice of Mr.
Thomas Carlyle’s late work on Chartism and
some remarks on the condition of the labor
ing classes in Great Britain, in which be states
that “ Their only real enemy is their employ
er,” he says:
“ In all countries it is the same. The only ENEMY of
the laborer is your employer, whether appearing in the
shape of the master mechanic, or in the owner ot a fac
tory.”
Having thus informed the laboring classes
that their employers are their enemies, he next
depreciates, though he promises not to do so,
the advantages of education, and instigates
the laboring classes, who for that purpose
should be as ignorant as possible, to make
war on their enemies—“ the war of the poor
against the rich.” Of the horrors of this war,
he is nevertheless fully sensible. But hear
him :
“ Universal education we shall not be thought likely to
depreciate ; hut we must confess that we are unable to see
in it. that sovereign remedy for the evils of the social state
as it is, which some of our friends do, or say they do.—
* * * Indeed, it seems to us. most bitter mockery
for the well dressed and the well-fed to send the school
master and the priest to the wretched hovels of squalid po
verty—a mockery at which devils may .laugh, but over
which angels must weep.”
“ What tlien is the remedy?” Mr. Brownson proceeds
to inquire. “ As it concerns England, we shall leave the
English Statesman to answer. Be it what it may, it will
not be obtained without war and bloodshed. It will be
found only at the end of one of the longest and severest
struggles the human tace has ever been engaged in ; only
bv tlmt most dreadful of all wars, the war of the poor
against the rich—a war which however long it may he de
layed will come, and ennie with till its*horrors. 1 he day
of vengeance is sure ; for the world, after all, is under the
dominion of ji just I’rovidence.”
Mr. Broivnson tells us, as many thinking
persons have long suspected, that the political
discussions, exciting as they are, which now
agitate the public mind, are hut preliminary
to a deeper controversy.
“ In this coming contest, (he says) “ there is a deeper
question at issue than is generally imagined * a question
which is but remotelv touched by your controversies u-
houtU. S. Ranks-nnd-sub-treasuries, chartered hanking
and fife hanking, free trade and corporations, although
these controversies may he paving the way for it to come
up.”
“ In.regard to labor, two systems obtain ; one, that of
slave labor, the other tiiar of free labor. iOt the two, the
first is, except so far as the feelings are concerned, deci
dedly the least oppressive. If the slave has never been a
freeman, as a general rule hiB suffering are less than those
of the free laborer at wages. As to actual freedom, one
has about as much as the other. 1 he laborer at wages
has all the disadvantages of freedom and none of its bles
sings, while the slave, if denied the blessings, is freed from
t he disadvantages. We are no advocates of slavery, we
are as heartily opposed to it a3 any modern abolitionist
can he : hut we say frankly, that if there must always he
a laboring population, distinct from proprietors and em
ployers, we regard the slave system as decidedly prefera
ble to the system of wages ! Wages is a cunning device
of the devil for the benefit of tender consciences, who
would retain all the advantages of the slave system without
the expense, trouble, and odium of being slaveholders.—
We really believe our Northern system of labor is more
oppressive and even more mischievous to morals than the
Southern.”
Mr Brownson gives us his views of reli
gion, and some further hints on education, as
follows :—
“For our part we yield to none in one reverence for
science and religion, but we confess that we look not for
the regeneration of the race from Priests and Pedagogues.
They have had a fair trial. They cannot construct the
temple of God. They cannot conceive its plan, and they
know not how to build. They daub with untempered mor
tar—and the walls that they eiect tumble down if so much
as a fox attempt to go up thereon. In a word, they always
league with tile-people’s masters, and seek to reform with
out disturbing the social arrangements which render re
form necessary. They would change the consequents with
out changing the antecedents, secure to men the rewaids
ot holiness, while they continue their allegiance to the
devil. We have no faith in Priests and Pedagogues. They
merely cry peace, peace, and that too when there is no
peace, and can be none.”
“ For our part we are disposed to seek the cause of the
inequality of conditions of which we speak, in religion,
and charge it to the priesthood.
“ The germ of these sacerdotal corporations is found in
the savage state, and exists there in that formidable per
sonage called a jongleur, juggler or conjurer. But as tho
tribe or people advances, the juggler becomes a priest and
the member of a corporation. These sacerdotal corporations
are variously organized, but every where organized for the
purpose, as that arch rebel Thomas Paine says, ‘ of mono
polizing power and profit.’ The effort is unceasing to ele
vate them a3 far above the People as possible, to enable
them to exert the greatest possible control over the People,
and to derive the greatest possible profit from the People.
“ But having traced the inequality we complain of, to
its origin, we proceed to ask again, what is the remedy !
The remedy is first to he sought in the destruction• of the
Priest. The priest is universally a tyrant—universally the
enslaver of his brethren—and, therefore, it is Christianity
which condemns hint !
•“ Ii may he supposed that we Protestant* have no priests;
but, for ourselves, we know no fundamental difference be
tween a Catholic clergyman and a Protestant, a3 we know
no difference of any magnitude in relation to the principles
on which they are based, between a Protestant church and
the Catholic church. * * Both ought, therefore, to go by
the board.
We insist upon it. that the complete and final destruc
tion of the priestly order, in every practical sense of the
word priest, is the first step to he taken towards elevuting
the laboring classes.
“ There must be no class of men set apart and authorized,
either bv law or fashion, to speak to us in the name of God ,
or to be interpreters of the Word of God. The Word cf
God never drops from the Priest's lips!
“ But one might as well undertake to dip the ocean dry
with a clam-shell as to undertake to (jure the evils of the
social state by converting men to the Christianity of the
Church.
“ We object not to religious instruction ; we object not
to the guttiering together of the people one day in seven to
sing and pray, and to listen to a discourse from a religious
teacher; but we object to every thing like an outward, vis
ible Church; to every thing that in the remotest degree
partakes of the priest!!
“ We say again, we have no objection to teachers of re
ligion as such ; but let us hove no class of men whose pro
fession it is to minister at ttie altar. Let us leave tiiis
matter to Providence. When God raises up a prophet,
let that prophet prophesy as God gives him utterance.
Let every man speak out of his own full heart, as he is
moved by the Holy Ghost, hut let us have none to prophesy
for hire, to make preaching a profession, a means ot gain
ing a livelihood. Whoever has a word pressing upon his
heart for utterance, let him utter it, in the stable, the mar
ket [dace, the street, iu the grove, under the open canopy
of heaven, in the lowly cottage, or the lordly hall.
** But none of your hireling priests, your * dumb dogs’
that will not bark. What are the priests of Christendom
as they now are 7 Miserable panders to prejudices of the
age, loud in condenmingsins nobody is guilty of, but silent
as the grave when it concerns the crying sin of the times ;
bold as buld ctm be when there is no danger, hut miserable
cowards when it is necessary to speak out for God and
outraged Immunity. As a body they never preach a truth
till there is none whom it will indict.”
Mr. Brownson gives the following view of
“ True Christianity” as understood in his
school:—
“ The next step in this work of elevating the working
classes will he to resuscitate the Christianity of Christ.
The Christianity of the Church has done its work. We
have had enough of that Christianity. * * * Under
the influence of the Church (he continues) our efforts
are not directed to the re-organization of society, to
the introduction of equality between man and man, to the
removal of the corruptions of the rich and the wretched
ness of the poor. We think only of saving our own
souls. * * Or, if perchance, our benevolence is awa
kened. and we think it desirable to labor for the salvation
States, at tbe last session, and has doubtless
had some effect in rallying “ the only existing
party on which he cun rely.”
The project of changing the tenure of the
Judicial office so as to approximate it to the
views of the Locofoco party, was advocated iu
debate by Mr. Hubbard; and a bill for that
purpose was actually introduced by Mr. Tap-
pan : both those Senators being main pillars
of the present administration. Thus we have
■a glimpse ot that “auspicious day” prayed for
by the Democratic Review, which is to wit
ness the application of “the true principle pf
popular election tothe great bulk of the offices
now held under Executive appointment,” and
to the overthrow of palladium of American
liberty—an Independent Judiciary. What the
other “deeper questions” are, Mr. Brownson
tells us. Some of them are the destruction of
the system of free labor and wages ; the subver
sion of the Christian Religion, in every form in
which it note exists in this country ; the abroga
tion of every law securing the descent of propel-
ty ; and the abolition of matrimony.
Not the least ominous incident connected
with the Locofoco revelation on which we have
been commenting, is the manner in which it is
hailed by the New-York Evening Post, one of
the most aide and influential journals in the in
terest of Mr. Van Buren. From an editorial
are determined to mil the wheels of ruthless
^rrmina
lion over all State banks, mid thus to prostrate with
the rights of the Stales. Gentlemen may think to Cm
the People; but let me tell them the "People nr <P !V’
awake, notwithstanding all the poppies that have been fl °
over their eyes. 1 am ready now to meet thequestii,, Un f
stand on the old conservative ground ; I go f 0l . p re>(1 ' r • *
the institutions of the country, and tne rights of the ■
vidunls connected with them. I am against flrstr/"'
the relations of creditor and debtor, to bringlall thc-V""'
ertv of the debtor under the hammer. That ill ^( >ro P'
operation ul tbe bill. That is the question on one or
other side of which we are now to range ourselves u-ij
you, by voting this bill, appreciate money one hundred o
cent., and depreciate nil property fifty per rent. ? t ^
you throw the property of this District into the hands' •
moneyed men, and thus make the rich richer. a :.d [i e *
poorer! You know well that I am not one of th,,^. (("'
love to dwell on the invidious distinction between ■■■•'
and poor; hut though 1 make no hypocritical pretension*
am n,t
of ethers, it is merely to save them from imaginary sins, j art j c ] e } n that u f t h e 8th instant, in which
and the tortures of an imaginary Hell, lhe redemp- . • r V . ... , lT . . r
lion of the world is understood to mean simply the re,to- I the WUleV COm P la,,,S of the W h ig prints for
ration of mankind to the favor of God in the world to
come. Their redemptior. from the evils of inequality, of
factitious distinctions and iniquitous social institutions,
counts for nothing in the evts of the Church. And this is
its condemnation.”
Mr. Brownson’s creed in relation to Banks,;
connecting the Administration with Mr.
Brownson’s “ deeper questions,” we make the
following extract:
As to the truth of Mr. Brownson’s sentiments, with
many of which, as political journalists, we have nothing
to do. we shall not now hazaid an opinion. He seems to
the controversy about which is “paving Mel have studied them profoundly, and to speak from the sin-
way” for his “deeper question,” coincides with]
that which the locofoco party in Congress
acted out at the last session towards the Banks
of the District of Columbia, in contemptuous
defiance of the will of the people of the Dis
trict :—
“ But what shall Government do? Its first doing must
be an undoing.
“ But again, what legislation do we want so far ns this
country is concerned 7 We want first the legislation which
shall free the Government, whether State or Federal, from
the control of hanks.
“ Uncompromising hostility to the w lvole banking system
should therefore he the motto of every winking man, and of
every friend of humanity. The system must be abolished.
On this point there must be no misgiving, no subterfuge,
no palliation. * * * Every friend of the system must he
marked as an enemy to his race, to his country, and espe-
oerity of of his convictions. His essay is written with
strength and spirit, as wc-Jl as eloquence, and saving noth
ing ot ihe objectionable parts, tells some home truths.”
While on this subject we must further protest against I he
acrimony and ill feeling with which it ist.oocomrr.on to visit
those who originate new or startling doctrines. Society
is too sensitive by half in respect to what trenches upon
its ancient habits and established modes of faith. It is
far too much concerned about the preservation of its own
safety. Let a novel opinion he started; and it is immedi
ately thrown into a fever of excitement, its prejudices
bristle in most threating aspects, it places itself in an alti
tude of defence, becomes suddenly and outrageously vir
tuous, grows desperately fearful, begins to mourn over the
decay ot its former strength, and expects the next moment
to tall into the agonies of dissolution.”
After condoling with these originators of
“ startling doctriues,” and denouncing the
public reprobation of them as “preposterously
dally to the laborer. No matter who he is, in what party ! silly,” and “ downright and eno'rmously wick-
he is loiind, or what name he heurs, he is, in our judgment, „ ] >> j- J
no .rue democrat, as he can be no true Christian.” I ed ’ t “ e PoSt thuS ^SCllbeS their advantages
The next movement in the great Locofoco to society :
' 4 * They are to society what the spur is to the sluggish
steed. They break in upon its heavy slumbers, infuse life
Revolution is to take away a man’s property,
at his death, fiom his family, and give It to . into its limbs, give it elasticity and vigor, quicken its circula
tion, and impel it more rapidly in the career of improve
ment. They disperse the spells woven around it by the
associations of the past, break the charms of prescription,
loosen the fetters ot usage, enliven its spirit, enlarge the
sphere of its activity, expand its ideas, and habituate it
to that freedom of thought and effort, which is tbe main
condition of progress. The curse of human nature is,
that it moves too slow, is reluctant to break its accustomed
routine, and thus groans on for ages under abuses which
a year might correct. These men tear it from its fast
nesses, and push it along with a more bcneiical and desira
ble velocity. *
“ When intrepid men arise, therefore, to make an onset
upon our old-lashion ways of thinking, so far from being
offended, we look upon them with more than ordinary re
gard. We esteem them f ,r the many noble qualities ot
mind and heart which they often evince. We honor them,
for the originality which pries into and detects the errors
of existing arrangements, for their faithfulness to ir.ward
impulses, for their devotion to what seergs to them truth,
for the enthusiasm which sustains them in the midst ot
persecution, for the heroic fortitude with which they meet
scoffs, jeers and contempt, for the energy that baffles enmi
ty. and for the faith which*-nables them to stem frowns of
indignation arid menaces of death- We honor them, be
cause they dare to be true to their individual character, be
cause they free themselves from the slavish worship of
fashionable idols, because thev rise superior to prevailing
prejudices, because they rehtrke the too common dread of
public opinion, and because, beneath their wildness and
extravagance, there often lurk the germs of some great
and all-comprehending truths.”
Such is the language of a leading Adminis
tration journal, on the appearance of the arti
cle to which we have called the reader’s atten
tion, and on which we entreat him to ponder
long and often. Considering the relations of
the New York Evening Post to the Executive
and to the country, its comments on Mr.
Brownson’s article may fairly be considered
as indicative of the attitude taken towards it
That attitude
proves 1 of2 tilings either—1st. That the Ad
ministration party, as a party, coincide in Mr.
Brownson’s views : or 2d, That if they do not,
they dare not, by a whisper of censure, ha
zard the displeasure of the Locofocos—of
“ the only existing party on which he [Mr.
Van Buren] can rely ;” a party, we are told,
“ insignificant in number, though powerful in
talent, enthusiasm, and stern, true, radical de
mocracyIn either case, the People of the
United States see what they have to expect
should they continue in prower “ a pure and
earnest Democracy, illuminated by the
LIGHT OF THE SOUNDEST PRINCIPLES OF POLIT
ICAL ECONOMY ! !”
the public: —
“ Following the destruction of hanks must come that of
all Monopolies, of all Privilege. There are man}' of these.
VVe cannot specify them all; we therefore select only one.
the greatest of them all—the privilege which-some have of
being horn rich, while others me born poor. It will be seen
nt once that we allude to the hereditary descent of pro
perty—an anomaly in our American system which must
be removed, or the system itself will be destroyed.
“ A man shall have all he honestly acquires, so long ns
he himself belongs to the world in which he acquires it.
But his power over his property must cease with his life,
and his property must then become the property of
the State, to he disposed of by some equitable law, for
the use of the generation which lakes his place Here is
the principle without any of its details, and this is the
grand Legislative measure to which ice look forward.
VVe see no means of elevating the laboring classes which
can he effectual without this. And is this a treasure to be
easily earned 7 Not nt all. It will cost infinitely more
than it cost to abolish either hereditary monarchy or hered
itary nobility. It is a great measure, and a startling one.
The rich, the business community will never voluntarily
consent to it, and we think we know too much of human
nature to believe that it will ever be effected peaceably. It
will be effected only by the strong arm of physical force.
It will come, if it come at all, only at the conclusion of
war, the like of which the world as yet has never witness
ed, and from which, however inevitable it may seem to the
eye of philosophy, the heart of humanity recoils with
horror.”
The drift of the following passage, if we
understand it correctly, is, that the rile of mar
riage should be abolished :
* * “ As yet civilization has done little but break and
subdue man’s natural love of freedom; hut tame his wild
and eagle spirit. In what a world does a man even now
find himself, when he first awakes and feels some of the
workings of his manlv nature? He is in a cold, damp,
dark dungeon, and loaded all over with chains, with the
iron entering into his very soul. He cannot make one sin
gle free movement. The priest holds his conscience, fash
ion controls his tastes, and society with her forces invades i . .i » j • • .
the very sanctuary of his heart, and takes command of j 5 f 13 133 P ar }
his love. * * * Even that he cannot enjoy iu peace
and quietness, nor scarcely at all.”
Such are the doctrines, as now unfolded, of
the “pure and earnest democracy,” etc. Mr-
Brownson, it is true, “ takes the responsi
bility” of them all upon himself, and denies
that any of it rests on his party. \Ve ar-e quite
willing that this disclaimer shall pass with the
public for what it is worth. And they will,
we doubt not, place a just estimate on it, when
they compare the principles, in which Mr.
Brownson asserts a “ monopoly,” with the
appeals of the party in power for years past
to the very classes of society to which he ad
dresses himself; and follow out to their con
sequences topics which have been in constant
use with leading partisans of the administra
tion, in and out of Cougress, and even in Pre
sidential messages, letters &c. We need go
back no further than the President's letter,
published in our paper of last Friday, in which
lie strives to prop up his tottering fortunes on
an appeal quite as agrarian in its temper as
anything that Mr. Brownson has said ; an ap
peal charging the founders of the Republic,
and the fathers of the Constitution, with being
“friends and advocates of privileged orders,”
and with contriving to vest “ all power in the
hands of the few, and enabling them to profit
at the expense of the many;” an appeal strung
with such phrases as the “ few were enabled to
enrich themselves by using the money which
belonged to the many “ an extensive inter
est had sprung up deriving wealth from the
use of the people’s money,” a rich privileged
order,” &c. &c.
We shall not of course be understood as im
puting to Mr. Van Buren a speculative predi
lection for the principles announced in the
Boston Review. On the contrary, his person
al interests, to say nothing of higher consider
ations to which we should be sorry to believe
him insensible, are as deeply staked as those
of most American citizens in maintaining the
social system as now established. But the ex
igencies of his political condition long since
led him to the lavish use of topics which he
supposed most erroneously we devoutly trust,
to be popular; and he is willing to ride again
into power on them, though at the risk, which
he probably underrates, of awakening a spirit
of destructiveness throughout the land. The
experiment is dangerous. Such a spirit once
roused, as we think it never can be, would re
quire a magic more potent than his own or any
other man’s, to quell it. The light in which
the country is called on to view this subject
is that whether or not the principles of the
“ Locofocos ” are, as the Democratic Review
says they are, “those always cherished by Mr.
Van Buren.” That party is, beyond contro
versy, now, as it was at the period designated
by the Review, “the only existing party on
which he can rely.” He must inevitably then,
should he politically survive his present death
struglge, come again into power, nominally
the head of that party, but virtually its slave,
and must be impelled by the force of circum
stances, whatever may be his inclinations,
upon measures “paving the way for” its “deep
er question” to come up. One ol them already
has been broached in the Senate of the United
BANKS OF THE DISTRICTS.
Wo present the following as an outline sketch of the re
marks of Mr. Dawson, of Georgia, on the verv extraordi
nary leginlation of Congress in relation tothe Dist. Banks.
VV'e hope Mr. Dawson will find leasure to write out his
able, ardent, and very impressive speech more at large.
[A alional Intelligencer.
Mr. Dawson of Georgia, said that the measure now
under consideration was very important to a large portion
of the free but unrepresented People of the United States,
and it became gentlemen to act in this matter with the re
spect due to themselves and to a moss of the community
whose interests were confided to their care. Mr. D. went
on to observe that he considered the present question,
when viewed in all its aspects, as the most important one
which had occurred during the present session of Con
gress; it was nothing less than the grand “ hard money
scheme” of the Administration carried out in its first ap
plication. Gentlemen might cover it up as they pleased,
but it come to that; it was a question whether, in a Dis
trict over which Congress exercised undisputed su ay, they
should at once abolish all banks and credit, and rely on
a hard money circulation ! That was the question. A por
tion of this House (said he) have declared that, all Banks
in this District are to come to an end, and then all bank
currency must cease with them. Another portion of the
party say they are for banks with certain limitations ; but
they uie to he of a temporary character, and all looking
to a winding up of hank concerns, and this final winding
up must be accomplished w ithin two years. Let me refer
to the language of a gentleman from New York, (Mr. Van-
derpoel,) who is considered as one of the leaders of the
Administration party in this House. He told us that we
ought now so to develops the principles of the snb-Trea-
sury bill that the States might carry oat the system and
reduce the country to a hard money ctiireiicy. We are
to set an example, he says, in this District for the States
to follow.
[Mr. Vanderpoel here interposed, and was very anxious
to explain. Mr. Dawson for some time refused to yield
the floor, the explanation to he deferred until the gentle
man should make his reply; at length, however, he yielded,
when Mr. Vanderpoel explained that what he had said, or
meant to say, was this, that banks under a state of sus
pension exerted a demoralizing influence: that they ex
hibited a demoralizing aptitude to rush into a state of sus
pension whenever it did not suit their convenience to pay
their debts : and that Congress was bound to set an exam
ple in opposition to this spirit.]
Mr. Dawson resumed. It. vms then the moral tenden
cies of the conduct of the hanks that induced the verv
honorable conscientious gentleman to oppose them.—[A
laugh.] Well, sir, the gentleman votes to wind up the
affairs of all the District banks, because their suspension
had an immoral tendency. Has the Patriotic Bank sus
pended 7 Does it not now redeem its bills on presenta-
tation 7 And does not the bill bofore you put this bank on
the same footing with all the rest 7 U it the immorality
of paying its notes for which this bank is to be destroyed 7
No, sir, no.
That was not the gentleman’s ground. He was for hav
ing us set an example here by winding up all hunks, and
leuvistg the people of the District to a hard-money circu-
lation. It is due to the country—due to candor and mag
nanimity, to develope the issue, and not by unworthy sub
terfuges to attempt to conceal it. I have said this is an
j— — — - -o : ■ nn.1 “ now is the
of sympathy, when it thus comes to action, I
willing to destroy that kind indulgence extended bv r. 1 "
banks to the people in this District, and thereby force"tl • ■
property into market. For who. 1 ask. are to he the |,,.
fieiaries of this splendid act of reform? I answer tj
stockholders of these banks and public officers. The h UIl i
of this District have two millions and a half of dollars d
to them from the citizens whose notes thev have disc,. u ..
ed ; the amount of their paper circulation is about -®t> jo
000 ; the specie capital in their vaults is about yyy .
now taking these $420,000 from the $650,000. n; )( j ,,
leaves about $200,000. to pay, while they have tvv,, „,i|
ions and a half to receive. Under these circum.-tu,,,
What do you do? You friends of the People—vou who
j are no more democrats at heart than I am, vet tel/ ,j
dear People so much more about vour democracu u i .
1 ask do you do? *
At one blow you cut off thp five heads of these District
banks, and throw them bletding into this ten miles square
and you tell them, now die—close up your earthly con
cerns—for you may live no longer. Well, what "is ti
result? 1 hey must sue their debtors, bring their property
to the hammer; and who will buv it? The office-holders
first, and then the stockholders ; and where is the peor
debtor ? Borne down—crushed ; brought with his family
to ruin and desolation : and brought by whom ? By
House—by you, who call yourselves the People’s friends.
I or the sake of your political experiment of bringing a
“ hard money currency” into this devoted Di»trict, von
stand by with stony hearts and look upon the ruin of these
defenceless people as if it were a spectacle exhibited at a
theatre. You throw nil the property of the poor and mid
dling class of people into the hands' of rich landlords and
money holders. Houses, the fruit of hard earnings and
long savings ; houses that cost the owner $10,000. « i’,
before his eyes, under the hammer of the auctioneer i •
$ 1.500 or $1.000. All to carry out your beautiful scheme
ot retorm and a “ hard money currency !” You talk
about “ indulgence” to the hanks. Is it not amazing that
gentlemen will talrt about bank directors as proud aristo
crats; rag barons, rolling in splendor and luxury, when it
is a well known (act that the banks have never averaged a
profit over seven per cent. ? Why, the “great monster”
itself never realized to the stockholders over six per cert.
on their money. Yet with language like this in tl.eir
ruouihs, gentlemen will pass this hill, driving every bor
rower to the usurer or shaving shop, to save him from a
jatl. There is the sheriff levying on all he has in the world,
and there stands his poor wife w ringing her hands and'
clasping her weeping babes to her bosom, while her hus
band in an agony is offering twenty-five per cent, for money
to the usurer or shaver to postpone the hour of their finai
ruin. How are these money lenders to be benefited >
Not by granting, the banks a charter? no; if you want to
encourage and fatten usurers and shavers, and make bank
directors already rich, stiH richer, cut off all banks at a
b:ow, annul their charters, and compel them to enforce
their demands on thecommunitv. While millions are due
the banks, they have only to take off enough to redeem
their circulation, and they pocket the balance. This is
the way to make capitalists the lords of the land. Tiiis is
to set us an example : and I say, if you can onlv earn
out your plan—if you can but go through the States and
induce their Legislatures to do as you are doing, 1 say that,
barring “ stop laws” and “relieve laws," no property in
the country will be equal to bank stook, and no people be
made so rich as usurers and shavers. The effect of vour
reform is to depreciate all property to make the stockhol
der plaintiff and the borrower defendant.
I have a letter from my own Stale from which I learn
that, when a certain plaintiff who had recovered a judg - -
meat ordered the sheriff to levy on the defendant’s pro
perty and compel him to pay in specie, tue indignation of
the neighborhood was aroused to such a degree that thev
went to the sheriff and asked him to stop sole, and then
to the plaintiff in a state of such excitement that thev
could scarcely be restrained from violence, remonstrating
against such oppression and revolting cruelty. Yet we are
| now called upon to do this very thing in the name of the
I General Government, that it may be held up as an exam-
i pie to the State Governments. Well, sir, iet the exan.-ile
j be carried out; let those w ho are for compelling the de-
j fenceless people of ibis District to use nothing hut hard
I money, go into their own States, and get their’ Mate Le-
i gislnlures to collect the taxes in hard coin, and to pay
j for all their works of internal improvement in the same
i hard currency. Try it there, and how long do you ti.mk
! your Government will exist ? Will you not have a revolu-
■ tion as surely as you make the trial ? Then I say that we
| have been here fighting these two days past in ambuscade;
j neither side has come up boldly to the issue. I call on
1 2 ou come out from the bushes and show vour faces. Do
I to the people of this District as you are willing to do to
| tne people of your own State. I call upon vou Virginians,
; anc * y ,,u Representatives from Maryland, to treat the peo-
I pie of the District of Columbia as you are prepared to
I treat the citizens of Virginia and "of Maryland. Then
i y° UI people will know what it is you mean, and what thev
have to expect. let while you are voting here todeslrov
these banks because they have suspended specie pavment,
(though one of them has not,) you will vole at home, to
re-charter your oe n suspended hanks and to legalize their
| suspension. Is this giving the people of the District
equal rights? Your conscience says, No! These people
; consider themselves, and justly so "consider themselves as
trampled on. Ought we not to do something to alleviate
, their^ distress? All they ask of you is to do them as
i the State Legislatures do to the people of the States. All
they demand is, that you will treat them as American citi
zens. Do this, and it is ail we ask.
The proposition of the honorable gentleman from Ma
ryland, (Mr. Thomas,) with the amendment of the hon
orable gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Underwood.) will
I do this. Indulge them at least for two vears. Who, I ask,
should best understand the affairs of this District and the
necessities and wishes ot its inhabitants ? Is it not the
gentlemen whose local situation brings them nearest to the
District? And who are these ? Are they not the gen
tlemen from Maryland ? And now what do we see ? Who
feels the most anxiety for their relief? The two gentle
men from Maryland,"(Messrs. Johnson and Jenifer.) These
gentlemen are not H illing that Congress shall set its heel
I upon this District, and grind its citizens to powder. Thev
' ai ' e - r, °t willing you should treat them as tats in a receiver,
| mere subjects of experiment. This District ceded to
I your Government, and confided to its parental care, is
j not a garden plant in which to try new-fangled experi-
j ments. Its inhabitants are Americans—American citizens;
and they are not to be practised on in this way. If yon
want to try your new schemes, take a wider, field. Lit
the zealous gentleman from New York (Mr. Vanderpoei)
go to the great empire State, and there let him proclaim
his hard money doctrines. If, indeed, I have mistaken
his real views—ifhe is not in favor of prostrating banks
and introducing a metallic currency, I shall rejoice from
the bottom of my heart. It will cause roe the most live
liest joy to hail him as conservative, and join him in aa
effort to save the country.
I now move to you tfiat this whole subjac be referred to
a select committee, with instructions to report a Li.i
this House to-morrow, at 11 o’clock.
Valuable statement.—The annexed valuable state
ment of the popular vote of Virginia, in 18J6 and 1340,
has been prepared by a gentleman thoroughly conversant
with the subject.—Petersburg Intelligencer.
Van Buren vote in the State, in 1836, 30.800
Whig vote “ “ •» £.5.353
Majority for Van Buren in 1836,
Whig vote in 1840,
Van Buren “
Whig majority in 1840,
Whiggain since Presidential election in 1236,
7,456
33.741
32,34 f
897*
*8,353
important, an all-important question; and
time and now is the hour” to dismiss and settle it; to form
the great issue before tbe country ; und to let the People
of this land know that there is a party in Congress w! o
Hurra for old Tip!—A good joke is said to have
occurred at or near Fort Meigs Hie other day. As the pro
cession was passing a house, the occupant came out
and began shouting for Van Buren. Not a response was
heard! While thus engaged i:i his solitapr hurrah, hus
wife came out, crept up behind- him, shut his mouth with
one hand and with the other waved a banner, and hurrah d
for Harrison ! Of course, three times three followed
from the multitude.
A voung gentleman ot our acquaintance was arrested
and brought before a magistrate, upon suspicion that he
was a female in disguise. Occular demonstration, how
ever, satisfied the “ limb of the law” that he was in error
y et he admoni-hed the young man from the pi attire ot
wearing his hair to such an iaunoderate length, that it re
quired (he use of side-combs to prevent it from concealing
his face.—Maryland Journal.
All men are “ Led.”—Swift once attempted in a
humorous mood, to prove that all things were governed bv
the word led. Said he. “Our noblemen and drunkard,
are pimp led—physicians and pulses are feelcd—their pa
tients and organs are pilled—a new married man and at:
ass arc bridled—and an old married man and a pack-horse
are saddled—cats and dice are rati led—swine and nobility
are sty led—a coquette and tinder-box are spaik/ed.
A Father Indeed.—We see it stated that the father
of Daniel and Ezekiel Webster mortgaged his humble
premises in Salisbury,, to get the boys through college
and never recovered possession till filial giatitude s 11 pp
the means.—Phil- Inq-
