Newspaper Page Text
j^VlTir-Y ~iiir1l r fIfrT^V
i."
~n- - ''*»*■ * '•
‘K
From tho American Spectator.
ELOQUENT, IMPRESSIVE,
AND JUST.
The Society for commemorating
the landing of William Penn, cele
brated the 148th Anniversary of that
memorable event on the 25th ult. in
great splendor, in Philadelphia. A-
mong the many excellent speeches
delivered on the occasion, was the
one which wo extract on the condi
tion of the Aborigines of this country.
Mr. Berrien, United States’ Attor
ney, having been invited to attend the
Anniversary, sent with an apology for
bis absence, the following as a toast
for the occasion:
“The Freeman of Pennsylvania—
wcoessors of William Penn, and legi
timate Lords Proprietary of his wood
land domain. Before the advance of
civilization, the red man of the forest
has retired from the graves of his
ancestors. Is it the dictate of htt-
ur ni.y to deplore the result?”
Mr. Knokrsoll having read the a-'
bove, eloquently observed —
“If this inquiry be directed to the
eon 1 lion of Pennsylvania alone, it is
a .uwnible of a ready answer. But
i seek, in the conduct and exam-
pie of Wili am Penn, a sanction for
proceedings which are contemplated
e’smvhere, we who are here present
are obliged to demur to the analogy.
Taking np the question hypothetically
In the latter sense, and apologizing to
the dist inguished gentleman who has
proposed it, if I have mistaken his
moaning, I propose to give it a mo
ment. s consideration. Jt is now for the
ii st time distinctly put to Pennsylva
nia, by a representative of those who
are pursuing a course of policy, of
-which the justice and humanity are
open to scrutiny before the tribunal
efthe civilized world. It. is natural,
tha*, in collecting opinions upon a de-
Ih: Ue question, they should turn, not
without solicitude, to the descend
ants of William Penn. He felt, like
his great prototype Columbus, and,
unlike Columbus, he transmitted to
his posterity a deep and devoted in
terest in the concerns of the original
inhabitants of the country, of which
the one was the intrepid discoverer,
and theothar a humane and wise law
giver. The “woodland domain” has
been fairly and lawfully acquired by
them. But they are called on, in
effect, now to sav, whether it is not
humane io compel the scattered rem-
tanis of tne children of the forest to
quit the graves of their ancestors, and
follow the couase of the setting sun—
tit- v know not whither—hut far be-
y • id vhere he seems, from their pro
s' at abodes, to sink into the bosom of
the distant vvatern!
“If, by humanity, tie meant a poli-
ey h avowed by justice, it must be
x with hesitation, however
j. :i»! ; c may be its exercise, or pro-
£ an!,- ib results. While humanity
continues ‘o act under the guidance of
s'early and uniform principles, it will
be, a at 1 probability, faultless in its
imp . sos But the humanity which
turns aside from justice, must he un
certain in its origin, and capricious in
its movements, and must vary in its
direction, ; ,s well as force, exactly as
interest leads, or passion drives. If
llv measure proposed be sanctioned
by oo usage, founded in no right, op-
p by treaties, and at war with
well unders'ood and long-established
principles, it must he not merely a
questionable, but a perverted humani
ty. that can thus suggest a violation of
laws, human and divine.
“The idea is, in effect, to take
their lauds from the Indians, without
paying for them. Not in direct and
amo ved terms, but to withdraw’ the
projection of the General Govern
ment, pledged by solemn treaties, and
Lave them to the mercy of the States,
»vbo may choose to become the pos
sessors of them, by fair means or foul.
This is rank injustice, and it would be
admitted every where to he so, did it
s'and flUno! The necessity of a pur
chase has now been too long and too
invariably recognized and acted on,
to admit a doubt. It was perhaps
first introduced ns a part of the wise
and honest policy of William Penn.
It has been always adopted since, by
royal proclamation, by legislative de
crees, by executive orders and in
structions, and by the unwearying
conduct of every State that has had
occasion to succeed to the occupancy
of the Indians. It is as firmly rooted
as the foundation of their native
bills.
*.R<U the humanity which is sup
posed to cover the proceeding, con
sists in the offer of a supposed equiva
lent, in extensive hunting grounds be
yond the Western Mountains. This
unjust humanity, however, this hu
mane injustice, declines to make
parties to the exchange those who are
mainly interested in it. It contem
plates a novel kind of contract, which
is voluntary upon the one side, and
involuntary upon the other. “The
whole tide of national feeling,” we
are assured, “sets, in one strong and
unbroken current, against a removal.”
They are opposed to it from the bot
tom of their hearts. They cling to
their habitations with a firmness pro
portioned to the strength of their con
victions of the clearness of their ex
isting rights, and‘the enormity of their
threatened wrongs.
“If neither justice nor consent sus
tains the plea of humanity, perhaps
there may be kindness in the manner
of effecting the removal, which soft
ens the severity of the thing itself.
Turn to the statute-book, and you will
see the tender mercies for which they
aro indebted. Arguments of persua
sion are there inscribed with an iron
and relentless hand. Their laws, and
ordinances are declared null and void.
They are not permitted to testily a-
gainst the whites, and- are therefore
condemned to be the victims of the
most atrocious crimes. Even those
who venture to counsel or advise
them for their good, are branded with
infamy, and loaded with chains. A
whole nation is outlawed. Cut off
thus from mutual protection, and fel
lowship with others, die door opened
wide to admit every species of assail
ants, tluough their prejudices or their
crimes, the linger of scorn pointed at
their dwellings, the consolations of
friendship denied access to their bo
soms, their worst passions fomented —
and the last best relief of suffering
man, the bright beams of hope, ex
tinguished—the injustice of the mea
sure is exceeded by the cruelty which
accompanies its infliction.
“Compare this course of treatment
with that adopted by William Penn,
when Indian wrongs were measured
by no other standard, and Indian rights
redressed by no other appeal, than,
that provided for the white rnan—
when no invitations were given to
“win upon them in the line of their
own prejudices,” to iheir own de
struction—when none were permitted
to minister to their evil propensities,
which they share with the rest of
mankind:—but penalties were inflict
ed for leading them into temptation,
and they received especial and pater
nal protection from t he wiles or their
more sagacious neighbors.
“•We are still at fault in our search
es to detect the lurking humanity of
the contemplated proceedings.
“But, perhaps the end—though in
violation of justice, treaties, and es
tablished lavT9--in opposition to the
wishes of one of the parties—in man
ner cruel as in principle without ex
cuse—perhaps the end will vindicate
the motive, and sanctify the means.
Is a separation from the whito man a
measure of humanity towards the In
dians? Who created the contact,
and who rendered it disastrous?—
Did the Indian leave his forests, to
seek the white man, or did the
white man cross the waters and
penetrate the wilds, to force him
self upon the happy retreats of the
Indians? Has the contamination of
the savage infected, with barbarous
habits, the sons of Europe? Or, has
the evil communication of European
manners corrupted the simplicity,
without enlightening the ignorance of
the savage? If authentic history he
not all a fable, they were, for the
most part, a guileless, generous, con
fiding people: given, fatally given, as
it seems, to hospitaliity—amiable and
grateful in the extreme—firm in their
friendships, and not inexorable in their
hate. They seern to Ir/vc been pro
videntially blessed with many of the
gospel virtues, without having been
visited by the glad tidings of its name.
If these virtues have indeed been ex
changed for opposite qualities, it is
because of an association which the
natives neither desired nor sought.
Feeble, then, is the pretext for their
removal, founded in the suppose cor
ruption occasioned by those who in
sist upon a separation.
“But possibly they will be happier
elsewhere. Their fancied heaven
is perhaps beyond the hills, or on the
borders of tliedislant waters. There
their boundless desires may expand
without restraint. There thty may
roam at pleasure oVer interminable
plains, unmolested by the vicinity of
the white man. Will it really con
duce to present or future happiness to
be withdrawn trom the light of civili
zation and a knowledge of the living
God? to be restored to primeval hab
its, with an exposure toali the imput
ed horrors of savage life? If, as Chris
lians, we could belisfe it; if, as citi
zens of a happy country, living under
the benign infiaence of mild and equal
laws, we could admit the moral pro
priety of the course proposed, still
there are natural difficulties which are
absolutely insuperable. You must
teach them to forget the lessons of
civilization which, you have taught
them. You must give back their
comparative purity, with their abso
lute ignorance. You must re-invigor
ate the sinews which you have de
prived of strength, and replace the
courage and activity that would pur
sue and delight in the gigantic pas
times of the wilderness.
“Suppose them, however, removed,
and happy: engaged like their ances
tors in the occupations, and breathing
like them the atmosphere of a state
of nature: stripped of the garb with
which civilization had clothed them,
and yet happily blind to the conscious
ness of their own nakedness, what se
curity is there against the farther en
croachments of the while man?—
Wherever temptation leads, cupidity
will follow: and as casuists have
discovered a new species ofliumantiy
in the removal beyond the mountains,
future casuits will find a newer still iri
a removal beyond the waters.
“Besides, thus* are no longer sava
ges. The propensities for the life de
signed for them, have vanished with
their capacity to enjoy it. They
have, if official reports he credited,
every thing which can distinguish
them a9 civilized men. They have
schools, and churches, and printing
presses: government and laws. They
are herdsmen, agriculturists, mechan
ics. &c. They have attained the last
glorious test which marks the broad
line between civilized and savage
life—respect for the female charac
ter, tenderness fot the female person,
and a proper separation of their pur
suits. They arif not, as Lord Cha
tham once expressed it, “the canni
bal savage thirsting lor blood, tortur
ing, murdering, devouring, drinking
the blood of his mangled victims.”
It will be remembered that *.lie burst
of eloquence to which f have alluded,
was uttered in reply to a similar plea
in the name of humanity. Every suc
ceeding President has proclaimed
their improvement ill the arts of civi
lized life. Ancient customs have
been abolished, YY’e arc distinctly
informed “that it may he doubted
whether any considerable portions of
the civilized world present specimens
of equal improvement in the same
space oftime.”f The question is wheth
er these men, “our brethren by every
tie that can sanctify human nature,”
shall be deprived of what tlioy have,
and driven by force or fraud—as
some of their ancestors were by the
blood hounds of the Spaniards—among
unknown regions, not to seek their or
iginal habits, for we have deprived
them of their practical hardihood and
dexterity, but to suffer, and languish,
and die, and have their raee and
name exterminated and forgotten.
Their elegy has been well expressed
in a recent production of a Northern
poet:—
“The doom’d Indian leaves behind no
trace
To save his own or serve another
race:
Nor lofty pile, nor glowing page,
Shall link him to a future age.
His heraldry is but a broken bow,
His history—-but a tale of wrongs and
wo.”
“I w ill ask leave to conclude, with
requesting you to receive as a toast,
“The learned, eloquent and accom
plished Attorney General of thq Unit
ed States.”
fhev. Mr. Kingsbury’s letter to Col.
Al’Kenney, 8lh February* 1930; as to the
Choctaws.
MR. WEBSTER.
Boston, Nov. 1, 1830.
I attended the caucus on Sunday
evening at Quincy Hall, and here 1
found a vast multitude who had again
assembled to hear the conclusion of
Mr. Webster’s speech. Mr. Web
ster resumed his argument about six
o’clock, and spoke for an hour or
more. Not having an opportunity to
take notes, as Quincy Hall does not
afford the conveniences of Faneuil
Hall, i had mere leisure to observe
Mr. Webster’s manner as wdlt ax
matter. And Hare I will interpolate
a sentence with the remark, that as
Mr. Webster’s speech will soon be
published in the Boston papers, (to-
morrow perhaps,) and probably be
revised by his own hand, 1 thought it :
not expedient to continue (he speeeh'
as quoted from my notes, for I cannot
pretend to perfect accuracy. Mr.-
Webster, so far as manner is concern
ed, is by no means a perfect oratot:
he has net the graces of eloquence,
and he seems to hold in profound con
tempt every thing which is termed or
atorical ornament. He has [he for titer
in re, that Cicore speaks of, hut little
of the suaviier in modo. He is all ve
hemence; his voice—-his tones and
modulations—his actions are all vio
lent. His gesticulation is like a
sledge hammer, up and down. His
arms are constantly in motion, beating
out ^for that is a fitter word than illus
trating) his ideas. Mr. W. is inde
pendent of manner; he knows he ia
master of his subject, aud he makes;
his audience interested because he i&>
interested himself. The hearer mutt
listen, for the speaker is wide awake
—and he does give attention, just as.
men attend to a conflagration, not that;
it is beautiful, hut because it is for
midable—sublime—terrific. Having
the power to grapple stoutly with hig
subject, and to talk like one pleading
for his life on almost every topic, Ins'
auditors aro thoroughly roused op.——
After all, his sincerity, or 1o say the
least, his power to make the multitude
believe that he is sincere, honest, and
patriotic, is the great charm of his
eloquence. His character as an hon
est man is a powerful support to his
eloquence: and if you ore disposed to
contradict, you aro yet sensible that
Mr. Webster feels aud believes what
lie says. His pathos is admirable.
There he is great without exertion,
lie says a bold thing in an ordinary
way, with no flourish of colors to fore
warn you he has a charge to let off.
You hear him talking ns he would talk
to his neighbor, and before you are a-
warc of it he has got hold of your feel
ings. He does not talk loud, like
most speakers, when he has a good
thing on hand, hut low. No modula
tions and quavering of voice betoken
a storm, and thus put you on your
guard, but he assumes a careless
manner, and thus prepares you to ex
pect nothing. The peroration of his
speech in Quincy Hall was more elo
quent than his speech in the great De-
bale--not so sparkling to he sure, nor
so gaudy with ornament, but more ef
fective, perhaps more touching—and
yet it was about the Sanaa as to the
amount ot matter—declaring his re
solve to stand by that Union which her
knew—lie felt—yea which he knew
there was a conspiracy to bread; up;
&1o cry “rescue, rescue,” to thelast,.
Many of the Jacksonians with us
are often attempting to prove our Mr.
Sprague is an imitator of Mr. Web
ster—the bob to his kite, to use their
own language; and they often accuse,
him of imitating Mr. W. not only in
his politics hut in his mannor of speak
ing. Now the truth is their manner
of addressing the public is as dissimi
lar as one can well imagino. Mr.
Sprague is a bettor speaker by half.
His modulation and gesticulation are
better formed. IDs address is pleas
ing; and his own personal appearance,
without the aid of any thing impoil-
ant to snperadd to it, would command
deep attention. Not so with Mr,
Webster. No matter whether you
have the speaker in your eye or not ?
you must listen tu him; he will be
heard; and when you have him in ycui;
view, you e#e nothing additional. His
arguments, if I maybe allowed the
use of an expressive word, are saucy.;
his words are bold, and be uses no
honied terms. Mr. Sprague is con
ciliating; Ins manner is pleasant,- not
impudent, a»d you would not like him
the less for believing all he said to he
paradox. There is no escaping Mr.
Webster's conclusions. You must-
take them; but Mr. Sprague loaves
you at liberty to agree with him of
not. He has spread before you the
banquet, and you may profit by jt or
not. 1 womjer that any discerning
man could over think of instituting a
comparison between the two speak
ers. Both are great in their woyj
hut both are unlike. Indeed it. would
he well for Mr. YVobster to take a
lesson in declamation from our Sena
tor. The desk lie speaks over, aud
tho air he is ever lashing, would suf
fer less. And this orator would ap
pear better two-t(iiids of the timfr.