Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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-