Newspaper Page Text
make the rising generation more learned
than their fathers.
My friends! I see you before me—l
feel in your presence—l see your “up
turned laces” as often as of old I have
met yon mid you have heard me. Your
faces rise so palpably before me that I atn
inclined to call you by name, tip to this
good and glorious enterprise for your
selves. Accomack ! Charles City ! Eliz
abeth City ! Gloucester ! James City!
Lancaster! Mathews!'New Kent! North
ampton ! Northuheriand ! Warwick !
York!—all, tlie whole twelve of you as
a last appeal, as I love, I call on you no
more for my sake, but your own sakes to
meet in convention at the old Raleigh, in
Williamsburg, on the 4tli day of July
next, to consider of the ways and means
o f feeding and filling the minds of every
one of our children with the bread of
knowledge ! Come, send delegates ev
ery' one of you, as many as you choose,
and arrange propositions after you meet.
1 call upon the learned Professors of Wil
liam and Mary, and of the academies and
schools, 1 call upon the reverend clergy 7,
of every denomination—l call upon iny
brethren of the bar—l call on the hu
mane faculty bf medicine—l call upon
our most excellent farmers and mechanics
—I call upon parents and guardians—l
call upon women who would be the moth
ers of scholars, philosophers, sages and
great men—l call upon all ages and sexes
—I call upon the rich man and the poor
nun, and upon men of all conditions—
to stir, to “ live, move and have their
being” in this vital subject. Knowledge
is power ; it is the greatest of all power.
It is the power which overcomes all social
obstacles ; it is the power which pros
trates all political inequalities; it is the
jnnver which overcomes all physical ob
structions in the way of man ; castes and
nnksaud grades bow before it; wealth
ii impotent against it; it subdues the
earth ; and it humbles tyrants !! And
if knowledge is power, ignorance is weak
ness, utter, impotent weakness. We say
we were all born free and equal—that
may be so. But if we were born so, the
shite of freedom and equality does not
last long in life, if one man is to be cul
tivated in his mind, whilst the oilier is
permitted to grow up in ignopanee..—
How is the man who cannot read and
write the equal in power of any sort, ex
cept muscular power, of the man of let
ters ? No; ignorance among the People;
destroys the liberty and equality of the
People; it makes inequalities in the so
cial state ; it gives one man a pre-emi
nence and preference among men over
another in the political state; it makes
the weeds of the earth too strong for
man’s physical might to earn his bread ;
it makes the rich richer, and the poor
j»oorcr,thc strong stronger, aud the weak
weaker; it is the sycophant and slave of
tyrants, and the foundation of despotism ;
it not only enslaves the citizen, hut ener
vates the State.
I am about to leave you for a
Aud oh ! that when I return to you aria
again travel my wonted rounds, I can
only find amidst the changes of tune one
at least which will be anything but sad,
Schools! Schools! Schools! Free
Schools ! iu every village and at every
turn of tha roadside. Common free
schools! with their delightful uproar—
their bounding hoys—their Sweet little
modestly courtesying fly 7 -flapgirls—their
play grounds—their pranks—their ches
uut and their cherry-trees— their springs
of sweet waters, with their gourd or the
wilk’s shell—rtheir swings—their sweet
briars—their sports—their loves—their
(lights—their ferules and birch -with
ilieir music of the murmuring “a-b-abs!”
Oh ! my friends, go back to the days of
childhood; remember the old school
houses—and, whilst the tear of a swelling
good heart stands iu your eyes, go about
this work at once ! The ‘village school!’
What affections and hopes nestle and
fondle in its bosom.. What, half sad, half
sweet memories, rush bark lo its by-gone
happy days ! If, when I return, I can
but stop at one common fteescliool—hear
one “ well washed and well-combed”
urchin, ask, “Who is that 2” and hear
another reply', “lie isourold Representa
tive, who told our parents that the State
was bound to teach us all as its own
children, and persuaded them to bear
taxes for our education,” I will then.feel
the joy of having done you a service, in
deed, aud give you a greatful greeting, as
worm and heartfelt as the affection with
which 1 now sadly say to all—farewell !
1 am still your servant,
HENRY A. WISE.
Washing ion, Feb. 22d, 1811.
From tu” N. Y, Journal of Commerce.
The p eavnt T.l»' fT an< the Loco Foco Sub
stitute.
‘Better take what tve offer yon,’ is the
msufting admonition of the Free Tra
des to die Home Industry of teV- Coun
try ; sis yon-don’t you will fare worse.’
Such is in efl*ct the threat of uw Fcc
ningr P6st, Journal of Commerce, ifcc.
Who are you, Sirs, that so threaten us—
who in substance bmncFns ‘monopolists’
nine-tenths of tlie Producing Classes in
the country? The Tailor, Shoe maker,
Hatter, as well as Farmer and jtrtizan,
arc all protected by the present Tariff.—
'Prihune.
This is the editorial slung to which the
Tribune, and such like papers, are redu
ced, in their opposition to the excellent
bill rc|»orted by the Committee of Ways
and Means. It must prove to all candid
minds, that the real motive of the men
is something besides the bill itself. A
hill imposing twenty-five and thirty per
cent, duties on all the great articles of
importation, imposes duty enough either
for revenue or protection. We think the
good sense of the maniifacTittrm them
selves has determined that such a Tariff
icitfl jierjnancncy , is incomparably bet
ter f>r them than the agitation in which
jiolitieians full of hyprocritic.il profes
sions of love for American industry have
kept them for these twenty years. The
. chicanery of clustering all the various
i occupations together as protected, is the
same game which tyrants and selfish
men always seek to play. Bishop
Hughes, when he wants to get the con
trol of tlie Churches and break down the
independence of trustees, seeks to put
himself nd the people in one group,
and the trustees in another. When the
Tariff men will raise the price of beef,
pork, wheat and corn, they may talk a
bout the farmers being protected. But
with beef at #4 and $6; pork at $7 and
£9, and flour at $4,88 a $5, while at tlie
same lime woollen and cotton sroods,
iron, salt and sugar, are sold by whole
sale, for twice their cost in tlie countries
of production, you talk with poor grace
about the protection of the farmers. By
your language you insult the intelli
gence of the farmers, in addition to the
wrong you do to their industry.
But Mr. Tribune, have you rend Mr. C's.
lettcrtotheciuzensof Tuscaloosa in which
be says, “I look back, gentlemen, with
conscious satisfaction to my agency in
rhe passage of the Compromise law”—
that radical, free trade, horizontal, twen
ty per cent, law, in which there was nei
ther protection nor discrimination.
Mind now, if you are caught barking
up the wrong tree, your master will flog
you within an inch of your life.
From the Washington Sjieftator.
Federalists and Republicans.
But the great leading distinction be
tween the two great parties of the coun
try, is not in their measures only. It is
in the principles on which these meas
ures turn. The Federal party, in the
convention which framed the Constitu
tion, advocated a strong central govern
ment—a consolidation of power in the
federal head. Their propositions all
tended to this object. The Republican
party, or those who afterwards were
known by this name, on the contrary,
were for retaining power in the States
and the People. The Constitution is
the result of the struggles of tlie oppo
sing parties, compromising their differ
ences. Alexander Hamilton, who was
one of the leaders of the Federal party in
the convention, as Secretary of the Trea
sury under General Washington, soon
commenced the work of obtaining, by
construction, for the Federal Govern
ment, those powers which had been ex
pressly denied to it in the convention.—
Mr. Jefferson, then Secretary of State,
op]K>sed these constructive powers, and
insisted on administering the Govern
ment within its clearly granted powers.
Tlie difference in principles then arose,
which has characterized the parties ever
since—the one claiming powers by con
struction, the other denying them ; the
one seeking toconcenlratc power thereby
in the federal head, the other withhold
ing it to the States and the people ; the
one extending the powers of the General
Government over sectional and local in
terests, the other striving to confine them
to those tliat are general to the whole
Union. This difference in principles
led to their difference in policy: a Na
tional Bank—the Alien and Sedition
taws—lnternal Improvement—and a Pro
tective Tariff—in former times ; and, at
the present day, Distribution and Aboli
tion are the corrupt funguses of construc
tive powers. Tlie Constitution no where
upholds them by any of its express
grants; but the disposition to make Con
gress omnipotent in the Union, and the
Federal error in supposing that it is so
over these various questions, has carried
the Government beyond the general and
specified purposes for which it was crea
ted ; and in the collisions of sections and
the strife of opposing interests, has threa
tened its utter downfall. Upon such
principles and policy the twogreat parties
of the country have differed, lie fore the
Constitution was formed, and ever since
it has been in existence. In arraying
themselves in opposition, just after the
Constitution went into operation, they
were termed Federalists and Republicans
They are now called Whigs and Demo
crats ; or, more gracefully perhaps, coons
and Locofocos: but it mailers not what
are the names they may assume, in prin
ciples and policy they differ now as ever,
and are the same, and will continue tlie
same, as long as the Constitution en
dures..
We do not deny that the Republican
party have sometimes departed from their
principles, and have acted on those of
their opponents. This, indeed, .-us in the
case of the United States Bank, establish
ed in tire tkne of Mr. Madison, has given
to the Federal party all the pretext they
offer for assuming to be of the Republi
can party. They say that the Republi
can party, at otie time, supported the
measures they advocate, and therefore
they are Republicans. The premises
here are unfortunately Uue r l>ut the con
clusion is false. The argument,, to be
lair, should be put thus :: the Republican
party, at one time, supported Federal
measures, and therefore, on, these occa
sions, they were Federalists, ns we now
are in supporting them. Federal mea
sures *.nd principles can only prove men
lobe Federalists; ns Republican mea
sures and principles can alone prove a
party to lie Republican. 1 his is the fair
statement of the matter.
Iftit a' fait statement of any matter, in
these days of political eoi. r uption and im
posture, is probably hardly Jo be expec
ted'. To assume false names.', under
which to smuggle lalser principles, is one
of the cTeViccs of unprincipled detnagOg
neism, by which it is proposed to delude
arid betray the people. Mypocricy, it is
said, is the homage which vice pa>’ s to
virtue. If so, the hypocrisy of assuming
their name by the Whigs, mast be an act
of the most humiliating deference to the
Democratic party. It shows their re
spect for the virtue and popularity the
name of the Democratic party implies,
and a mean effort to appropriate them.
IJut the effort itself is characteristic of
! that distrust and contempt of tlie people,
! which has always marked the whole
policy. They suppose, that ihe people
are led only by names, and are incapable
of judging ol the principles they indicate.
Hence, that if they can only manage by
repetition and effrontery, to appropriate
a Hang', confidence of the people will
follow, without regard to their Federal
heresies, old and new. And on the oth
er hand, they have only to stigmatize
their opjHMietits with opprobriousepithets,
and the people will echo back their con
tempt, without comprehending the great
issues of liberty and right involve#in the
ascendency of the different parties. The
same spirit is tfie key to their whole le
gislative policy. T&ey rely on Govern
ment more than the people: hence, to
enlarge the sphere of Government, and
this restraint and control over tlie people,
is the encroaching tendency of their ever
reckless policy—Banks—Protective Ta
riffs—Alien and laws—Distri
bution-Abolition—what are these, but
impertinent and dangerous efforts to
bring Government into “the bosoms and
business of men”— controlling all their
pursuit!*, interrupting their labor, plun
dering theil substance, and endangering
all government and life itself? These
are attributes of Federalism, acting on
its legitimate principles; and undei
whatever name assumed, must, if suc
cessful, bring the Government to conten
tion, anarchy, and ruin.
Commercial Legislation.
We have published as one of Mr. Ham
ilton’s reasons, for recommending the
adoption ot the Constitution, that tnxa
tion would beeqnal and uniform through
out the Union under the power delegated
to Congress. To reconcile the opinions
which he entertained subsequent to the
adoption of the Constitution, with the
one above expressed, involves no other
difficulty perhaps, than a just understan
ding of tlie system recommended by him,
connected with the political principles
which it is known he cherished. From
the Federalist, which is generally regar
ded as a text book of our Constitutional
Law, we learn, that the power delegated
to Congress, of raising revenue, was a
definite power, having for its object a
fund for the ordinary exigencies of the
government, and the control of such gen
eral measures as had been previously re
garded as essential to the welfare of the
States. The manner of levying it was
also distinctly defined ; being so regula
ted as to distribute its burthens, in accor
dance with tlie principle of republican
justice—that it should be uniform
throughout the United States. All this
is carefully commented upon by Mr.
Hamilton in recommending the adoption
of the Constitution, ns we have belore
seen. As Secretary of the Treasury un
der the new organization, in a report on
the subject of manufactures, he suggests
a system of legislation, which, though it
was believed at the time by many uncon
stitutional, had for its recommendation
an argument sustaining its equity, and
its advantages, the examination of which
may excite a little surprise among a few
of the friends, disinterested friends, of the
protective system at the present day.—
They will find that they differ not less
from Mr. Hamilton’s comparatively equi
table system, than did this system differ
from Mr. Hamilton’s opinions prior to
the adoption of the Constitution.
He recommends the protection of a
variety of manufactures. Examine the
different modes by which protection may
be afforded ; among them, which is
preferable, protective and discriminating
duties upon importq, or an increase of
tire revenue of the general government
beyond its wants aud to apply the sur
plus in the way of bounties to the manu
facturer. No difference was conceived
to exist in the operation upon the consu
mer unless it was that the discrimina
ting policy often fell with greater weight
upon him, than the system of bounties.
This, however, was considered eompara
tively unimportant. The surplus, iu the
one case, would be necessarily derived
from the consumer under ordinary modes
of taxation, and the bounty paid, invaria
bly by them, under the operation of dis
criminating duties, in the other. The
qfttesdoß was not which mode would fall
heaviest upon this '’lass—hut which
would give the most effectual aid to the
introduction of manufactures. Mr. 1 lani
ilton preferred that the bounties should
lie paid out of the Treasury from the
surplus revenue. Ought we not to la
ment that the government did not acqui
esce in his preference*? Who can doubt
for a moment the immense saving which
the adoption of this system would have
secured to the consumers of the country?
How long would the other classes of in
dustry have permitted the general gov
ernment to levy exorbitant taxes upon
them, for the purpose of raising a surplus
revenue, and that surplus transferred to
an individual class of industry hy way
of bounty? It would have obviated
countless evils, which have been intro
i duced under the deceptive policy of a
protective tariff—a system which has si
lently and imperceptibly taxed the com
forts and even the necessaries of the con
sumers, and squandered millions for the
benefit of a iiivotired and opulent class,
whose desires still outstretch their acqui
sitions.
But Mr. Hamilton examined, also, the
constitutional question of protection.—
Whether Congress had tlie power under
the Constitution to transfer the profits of
one branch of industry to the support of
another branch ? And the argument
mt’st be exceedingly unsatisfactory, even
to the partisan of the Federal school.—
He admits the qualification to the power
of levying taxes, which it would have
been vain to deny, that they should be
Trttiform throughout the United States.
AYul also the qualification that the mon
ey thus raised should be generally and
not locally appropriated. Now Jet us
see. in the effort to reconcile his system
of protection with the powers of the Con
stitution, what support the present advo
cates of the system can derive from the
opinions of Alexander Hamilton. At tlie
time when the report was made the ninn
facturers formed, numerically, an insig
nificant class in the American Union :
The plan of the Secretary did not con
template tlie fostering of these manufac
turers, as more important, than the intro
duction of others. The taxes therefore
levied upon the consumer for the pur
poses of protection, whether hy discrimi
nating duties or by bounties, must ope
rate upon almost the entire mass of the
community, and thus the qualification of
uniformity would not be materially dis
regarded. That the appropriation of the
money thus raised, would be general
and not local he predicates upon its ulti
mate results. Independence of foreign
nations for supplies, is an object contem
plated, and one of vital interest to the
consumers at large in every country.—
And that though they must submit for a
time, under the plan proposed, to a tax
in order to enable the home manufactu
rer to enter the market with the foreign
er, yet, that the protection thus tempora
rily afforded him, will ensure his perma
nent establishment, enable him to over
come fair competition, and finally to
drive, by the low price at which he will
produce his manufactures, the foreigner
out of the American markets. Thus the
consumer, though hurthened for a few
years with an onerous and apparently
unnecessary tax, will in a short time be
remunerated for all of which the govern
ment has deprived him. Thus the end
will finally justify the means; thus will
the Constitution he found unimpaired, as
“ Returning justice lilts aloft her scale.”
Now talk of free trade theory ! Hete
we have the first glimmering of the pro
tective Utopia in American affairs. We
candidly confess that it is not so objec
tionable in its shadowy form, as is the
detestable and unrighteous shape which
it has since assumed. We do not doubt
the patriotism, and we admire the saga
city with which it was conceived. No
heartless cupidity existed to impart to it
its hateful poison. It breathed no par
tial spirit which sought the benefit of the
few, at the expense of the many. A few
insignificant individuals, with little prof
it to themselves, were to become its
agents in administering to the welfare of
the whole Union. 'Pile money employ
ed in effectin'; the object, was to be paid
into the Treasury of the United States,*
and appropriated hy Congress, specifical
ly, to the manufactures in the way of
bounties ; so that the people might al
ways be fully apprised of tlie losses they
were sustaining, and tlie gains the man
ufacturers were receiving, under the fos
tering system. We think, nevertheless,
the theory, even in this ingenious form,
to be founded upon mistaken data, and
to lead in its results to unmitigated injus
tice. We believe, as ftas often been ex
pressed, that every man, in every class of
society, will be invariably propelled by
the force of interest to those pursuits most
advantageous to him; and if the point
he admitted, that the aggregate wealth of
individuals constitute the wealth of the
nation, the conclusion is inevitable, that
the less a government has to do ii» the
regulation of individual economy, the
more transcendent will be that nation’s
prosperity. The same results—indepen
dence of other natious for supplies—the
growth of domestic manufactures, and
the reduction of prices in manufactur' and
articles are inevitable, when manufactu
ring becomes as profitable as other sour
ces of industry, without the forced sys
tem of establishing such a class by exac
tions Upon other portions of the commu
nity.
To the south, especially, there is some
thing exceedingly fluttering in the result
of Mr. Hamilton’s arguments He under
stood and appreciated their characteristic
traits of chivalry. Do not be alarmed
for your interests. Temporarily the sys
tem will operate unequally upon you—
but the talent which you entrust to oth
ers, will be returned with a hundred fold.
Besides, individual independence is the
passion of your people—you all seek,
and all maintain it. Is there not some
thing peculiarly congenial to yo t, in the
idea of national independence ? You
have proved it in a thousand battles—
your pride revolts at every species of sub
jection.
It was all in vain- The south could
never be brought to sanction the system,
and to sacrifice its interests to this spe
cious idea of independence. Too well
they understood that trade is reciprocal
—that the dependence is mutual. That
one nation is as anxious to dispose of its
surplus products as another is to purchase
—and that that nation is the freest, the
happiest, the most independent, which
sells its produce, and purchases its arti
cles of consumption at the best market.
Destitute Condition—Portions of the Alps.
M. Blanqui lias lately visited the de
partments of Var and the High and Low
Alps, and has brought back with him a
practical proof of the poverty of the ag
ricultural classes, which is far stronger
than all theoretical demonstrations. The
proot is a piece of blade bread, which
serves as food for the inhabitants of those
regions. This bread, if we can give the
name to the substance which we touch
ed'the other day (says a French paper) is
baked once a year ! To detach frag
ments from the enormous block, which
is prepared in a mass, an axe is used, and
the pieces broken from this species of
alimentary rock are soaked for two days.
Rut this is not all : as the miserable in
habitants of these regions, exposed to
floods, are destitute of wood, it is with
dung dried in the sun that they hake
their bread and prepare this, their food.
Such tacts require no elucidation : they
are a gloomy commentary upon the neg
lected state in which a considerable por
tion of tlie territory is left.
O’Connell’s I amnns Speech.
We republish to-day, the famous
speech made by Dan. O’Connell on his
trial in Dublin—and we do so in order
to supply the craving appetite of his
countrymen and lovers for this bonne
bouche. Heretofore it has been only
published in the third edition of our last
Weekly and in the Sunday edition but
to reach all readers we give it again entire
to-day. Ify the way—we perceive that
some of the Philadelphia papers, like
some wiseacres here, consider the speech
a hoax Here is one :
“ A Hoax. —The most stupendous
hoax which has been palmed upon a gul
lible community, since Lock discovered
the inhabitants in the moon, is O’Con
nell’s speech, which was published at
length in several of the papers (large and
small) of this city. A penny contempo
rary with its usual foresight, kept all
hands hard at work on Sunday night, for
the purpose of issuing an extra on Mon
day morning They did so, and have
no doubt found out by this time, that they
have been most egregiously humbugged.
The speech was manufactured in N. Y.,
and although not the great Agitator’s, it
has created much sensation among types
andsteampresses— Philadelphia Chron
icle.
Thisis rich. If our acute cotemporary
will take a trip to New York, and step
into our office we will show him the
copy of the Dublin Pilot, Extra, dated
the afternoon of the sth of February,
from which we copied thespeech. This
copy was brought by the steamer leaving
Dublin that night, and reaching Liver
pool next morning, in time for the after
noon papers of that city to republish a
column on the 6th of February. Our
agent in Liverpool secured a copy of the
“ Extra Pilot” and sent it to us by tiie
packet, leaving for New York that day.
ft was the only copy brought to this
country:
These are the simple facts—but if the
gallant Colonel of the Chronicle believes
as firmly as he does his Bible, that it was
manufactured in New York, it must
have been manufactured in our office—
it must have been spoken by ourself, and
reported by our corps of reporters, for no
other paper had the speech. If this is Iris
solemn belief—be it so—we shall take
the credit, therefore, of being a greater
man than even Dan O’Connell.— Week
ly Herald.
Hs=The New York Courier and En
quirer, in an article on the annexation of
Texas to the Union, gives the following
reasons for the measure:
First. The annexation of Texas
would of necessity, exclude the further
introduction of slaves from abroad into
that beautiful country, because the laws
of the Union would be extended over it.
and tnose laws make the slave trade Pi
racy.
Second. It would not increase the
number ol slaves in the country, btrt
merely increase the territory occupied by
them.
Third. It is a well known fact, that
wherever slave labor is most valuable, it
is flic in'erist of the master to treat the
slave most kindly. Where his labor pro
duces the largest return, the master can
afford, and find his interest in providing
for him better food, clothing and shelter;
and consequently, every person wlkv has
at heart the welfare of the slave, should
zealously advocate any and every meas
ure, which is calculated to compel the
slave-holders in the Northern slate
States , to send him further Soutln
Fourth. With the rich lands of Texas
inhabited by our own people and consti
tuting a portion of our Union, no slave
holder in Delaware, Maryland, Virgin
ia, Kentucky, or Missouri , could afford
tori tain their slaves, hut would find it
their interest to send them further South.
Fifth. The annexation of Texas
would greatly increase the wealth and
rapidly extend the commerce of tlie
country.
Sixth. Texas in twenty years will
grow all the cotton that Great Britain
will require. She will admit British
goods free of duty, and in return, Great
Britain will exclude the Cotton of the
United States from her ports, unless we
too, receive her goods free ; and if we
refuse, ns we doubtless will, they will lie
smuggled, into live country through
Texas f
Natura’ Fountain of llyilrojcn Gas at Fort
Gratiot.
Dr. Smith, of the Medical and Surgical
Journal, is indebted to Lieut. Marcy, of
the U. S. Army, for the following account
of a natural curiosity in the Western
country:
“ I have just returned from a visit to a
place a short distance from here, where a
discovery lias recently been made which
appears to me to be curious. A farmer,
about six miles from here, was boring for
water, and had penetrated the earth one
hundred and fifteen feet, when, upon
drawing out his anger, he heard a deep
gurgling noise at the bottom of the hole
he had made, and immediately a column
of gass hurst from it with the most terrific
violence, rising to the height of seventy
feet, carrying with it stones and pieces of
clay the size of a pigeon’s egg, and at
tended with a noise very similar to that
of letting off steam from a large steam
boat. This continued with unabated
violence for thirty-six hours, when it
moderated a little, and a pipe was inserted
in a hole with a stop-eock. The proprie
tor has attached to this smaller pipes,
which convey the gas into his house, and
light it in the most brilliant manner im
aginable. It appears to he hydrogen gas,
almost pure; it burns with a lambent
bine flame, without odor, extinguishes
flame when immersed in it, and possesses
the properties of hydrogen, according to
all the tests that it was in tnj power to
apply at the time.”
From the Augusta Constitutionalist.
Mr. Clay, on his progress through th?
southern states to the north, is delivering
speeches in which he alludes to the
he took in the politics of the country
dnring anti after the last war with En
gland. He frequently alludes also t<y
the famous compromise act of 1533
which was repealed by the tariff act of
1842. As he is to visit Augusta in *
few days, it would be well for him to be
more explicit in regard to the motives
which led him to introduce that com
promise act in the Senate. He states hi'
reply to a committe from Tuscaloosa
who had repaired to Mobile to in vite
him to visit that city, that “the motives
which governed me on that occasion
have been so often publicly avowed, that
it is not necessary now to repeat them. A
leading one, was the preservation of that
union, which is at once the basis an#
guarantee of all our rights, privileges and
liberties, as a nation of freemen.” We
must refresh the memory of our readers
with a few extracts from the speeches
delivered by Mr. Clay when he intro
duced the compromise act, and during
the debate upon it. We will be able then
to compare the coincidence which exists
between his declaration then and his de
clarations now. On the 12th of February
1833, Mr. Clay introduced in the Senate
the compromise bill. He then said :
“In presenting the modification of the
tariff laws, which I atn now about to
submit, I have two great objects in view.
My first object looks to the tariff. lam
compelled to express the opinion, formed
after the most deliberate reflection, and
on full survey of the whole country, that
whether rightfully or wrongfully, the
tariff stands in imminent danger. If it
should he preserved during this session,
it must fall at the next session. Bv what
circumstances, and through what causes
has arisen the necessity for this change
in the policy of our country. I will not
pretend now to elucidate. Others there
are who may differ from the impressions
which my mind has received upon this
point. Owing, however, to a variety of
concurrent causes, the tariff, as it now
exists, is in imminent danger, and if the
system can be preserved beyond the next
session, it must be hy some means not
now within the reach of hit man sagacity.
The fall of that policy* sir, would be
productive of consequences calamitous
indeed.”
On the 25th of February, 1833*in sup
port of the bill, he said :
“Mr. President, I want to he perfectly
understood as to tlie motives which have
prompted me to offer this measure. I
repeat what I said on the introduction of
it, that they are, first, to preserve the
manufacturing interest,- and secondly, to
quiet the country. I believe the Ameri
can system to be iu the greatest danger,
and 1 believe it can be placed on a better
and safer foundation at this session Ilian
at the next. I heard with surprise, my
friend from Massachusetts say, that noth
ing had occurred within the last six
months to increase its hazard, 1 entreat
him to review that opinion. Is it cor
rect ? Is the issue of rmmerotis elections,
including that of the highest officer of
the government nothing? Ltheexplicit
recommendation of that officer, in his
message, at the opening of tlie session,
sustained, as lie is, by a recent triumph
ant election, nothing ? fs his declara
tion in his proclamation that the burdens
of the South ought to be relieved, noth
ing? Is the introduction of a bill into
the House of Representatives, dn ring this
session, sanctioned by the head of the
treasury and the administration, prostra
ting the greater part of the.manufactures
of the country, nothing ? Are tlie in
creasing discontents, nothing? Is the
tendency of recent events to unite the
whole South, nothing ? What have we
not witnessed in this chamber ? Friends
of the administration, bursting all the
ties which seemed indissolubly to unite
them to its chief, and, with few excep
tions south of the Potomac,opposing, and
vehemently opposing, a favorite measure
of that adm i list rat ion, which three short
months ago they contributed lo establish!
Let us not deceive ourselves. Now is
the time lo adjust the question in a man 1 '
rier satisfactory .to both parties. Put it
off until the next sesriom aud the alter
native may, and probably then would lie
a speedy and ruinous reduction of the
tariff, or u civil war with the entire
South.”
On another subject wo should like Mr.
Clay to lie more explicit in his explana
tions. lie frequently alludes to the con
spicuous part he took at the election for
President in 1825. lie has repelled with
indignation, and continues to repel, the
charges that were at the time alledged
against him, of a corrupt understanding
between him and Mr. John Quincy
Adams. We are charitable enough to
admit that he has vindicated iiimsell from
the aspersions of his political enemies;
but we should like to have from him the
true reasons for abandoning the claims of
Mr. Crawford, who was supported by a
large majority of the democratic party,
and who was defeated by a concurrence
of circumstances which were highly dis
creditable to the parties supporting the
other candidates. On several occasions
Mr. Clay declared that before he left Ky-,
he communicated to several gentlemen
of the highest respectability, his fixed de
termination not to vote for General Jack
son. He declared also that physical in
pediment, if there were no other obje<>
tione, ought to prevent the election ot
Mr. Crawlord. Now we should I ike to
know what those objections were, besides
physical impediment, and what were
those considerations of a public nature,
which, deserving examination, would
have prevented Mr. Clay from giving
him his vote. We will hereaiter have
something more to say on these subjects,
with documents before us.
The Lowell, Masa. Cotton Mill* have Jffl ircd *
itivitirnj off per reel., jiayable.tlw »’Oth ult-