Newspaper Page Text
•industry. Its protection or encourage
ment may be accomplished in various
,vays.” And then proceeds to point out
the different modes ol protection; and fi
nely, Mr. Clay uses this emphatic lan
guage:
“Now, Mr. President, before the asser
tion is made that the bill surrenders the
protective policy, gentlemen should un
derstand perfectly what ^does not, as
well as what it does propose. This is
the testimony ol Mr. Clav to two points,
important in themselves, folly establishing
the fact, that the act of lS'-3-3 was support
ed hv the friends of the American s\ stem;
but upon the broad ground that the bill
recognized and fully asserted the princi
ple of absolute adequate protection for
nine years; and secondly, carried with it
the long chapter of accidents, beyond that pe
riod.
i?ir, these opinions were made in argu
ment; were they ever denied? Did the
senator from South Carolina (Mr. Cal
houn,) rise in his place, and deny that the
1 bill contained the principles against which
he had rallied the south? ^es, sir, not
rallied, merely, but h;ul urged them on
until their feelings were lashed into such
excitement, by the repeated denunciation
of the oppression and unconstitutionally
of the tariff, that law, order, and govern
ment were oil the verge of ruin. Anil yot, Mr.
Calhoun himself believing, as ho lias professed
to believe, that the tariff of 1832, with the
same principles in 1833, was against the consti
tution, not only voi^s for the act of 1833, but
says: “when the senator from Kentucky first
introduced the bill, be, (Mr. C.,) then said that
lie approved of the princ'pje, and that lie
thought no satisfactory adjustment could take
p’ace but on time—time to afford the manufac
turers to accommodate their business to the
change which must foliow the adjustment of the
duties. lie still remained of the same opinion.
Sir, it should be well understood and distinctly
known, the part that these “great minds” play
ed, not only at the compromise, but before.—
The one, the author of a system; the other,
first its advocate, then its enemy; and finally,
when lie had a j#ersonal difficulty with the Prc
silent of the United States, and saw and felt
that he no longer deserved or could safely cal
culate on the support of the entire party at
taclicd to the administration, he avails himself
of the discontent prevailing on the subject of the
tariff in the south, asserts its unconstitutionality,
prepares the minds of his constituents to resist
the enforcement of the law within the limits of
his State, peaceably if they could, but forcibly
if necessary; and then, in the face of the world,
meets Mr. Clay in the senate, Mr. Clay main
taining boldly the bill was for adequate protec
tion for nine years, with a long chapter ol ac
cidents, and Nr. Calhoun responding. When
the senator from Kentucky first introduced the
bill, he (Mr. C.) then said "‘that he approved of
the principled 1 I leave those facts to speak for
themselves. If any man on earth requires
more proof to establish upon these “two great
minds” political juggling, political intrigue, for
purposes of the most unholy ambition, he need
not expect to find it in the review of the life of
political men, men who stand pre-eminent for
ability’-, and who weigh the eifect of every
movement before it is taken. Look, sir, at the
great prize for which “these great minds and
commanding figures” have been running.—
Wiiy, 1 need not here repeat, what every intel
ligent citizen of the Union knows, that it is
nothing more nor less than the executive seat
that has operated upon and directed every poli
tical movement of iheir lives; and so powerful
li^s been the charm, that one of the gentlemen
has made two indifferent runs before the people;
the other was announced as being ready to
make a trial, but was discovered not to have suf
ficient strength to start. And, sir, can it bo a
matter of surprise that, true to their purpose,
each in his own way taking his course, every
consideration of the public interest, safety, and
happiness, is to yield to their purposes; or, in
conformity with their settled plan of operation,
they will crush and destroy whatever obstacle,
be it man or be it principle, that may interpose
the slightest obstacle to their attainment of this
object?
I shall not, Mr. Chairman, add much
more to what I have said in relation to
the political course of the gentlemen who
were presented to the committee as the
authors of the only practicable plan of dis
posing of the public revenue. I have
shown enough to deter any prudent man
from following their lead, on this subject.
But there is yet more to he said, calculat
ed to shed additional suspicion upon the
whole plan, and prove that the opinion
of one of the gentlemen (Mr. Calhoun,)
has underwent a rapid and extraordinary
change since the time ol the compromise;
about that time Mr. Calhoun I lius express
ed himself: “There is another aspect in
which this subject may be viewed. We
all remember how early the question of
the surplus revenue began to agitate the
country. At a very early period, ,-i Senator
from New Jersey, (Mr. Dickerson,) pre
sented his scheme for disposing of it by dis
tributing it among the States. The first
message of the President recommended a
similar project, which was followed up by
a movement on the part of the Legislature
of New York, and 1 believe some of the
other States. The public attention was
aroused; the scheme scrutinized; its gross
vnconstitutionahty and injustice, and its dan-
gcrous tendency, its tendency to absorb the
power and existence of the States, were clear
ly perceived and denounced; the denunciation
was too deep Vo be resisted, and the scheme
was abandoned.” This is the language,
this the deliberately formed and expressed
opinion of Mr. Culh tun, on the subject of
the distribution of the surplus revenue,
within th - * short period of three years.—
And could any gentleman believe, that
now, at this moment, in the free of this
recorded opinion, he has introduced, is
-advocating and urging, an amendment of
the constitution for the avowed purpose of
establishing the very scheme which he
said “had been scrutinized, its dangerous
tendency, its tendency to absorb the power
and existence of the States, clearly perceived
and denounced,” and so strong that de
nunciation, that the scheme had been a-
bandoned? One of two conclusions is ir
resistibly forced upon the mind; either
that there is^some splendid project to lx
accomplished, favorable to the views of the operation of the tariff, that hangs sus-
>
himself and Mr. Clay, or else, if it has
been an honest change of opinion, he Is an
uncertain, unsafe, vaceilating pilot, not to
be trusted in a tempest—under any as
pect of the case, he stands contradicted.—
And whether the opinions then expressed,
or now entertained, are to regulate his ac
tion on the subject, is beyond the reach of
human wisdom. Then, sir, let not the
honorable gentleman from South Carolina
array this “commanding figure” and
“great mind,” as one worthy to lead in the
accomplishment of this project, which I
firmly believe “would absorb*tho jmeer a\u]
existence of the Statesand believing that
to be the inevitable effect, I shall for that
reason and others, resist as far as I can,
any measure from any and every quarter,
the effect of which would be so disastrous
to the existence of the Suites. Allow me,
Mr. Ch airman, to notice one other consi
deration arising out of the remarks of the
honorable member from South Carolina.
It has been a contested point with some
portion of the people of the south, as to
who was entitled tothe credit of settling the
tariff" question, on the principles of the
compromise. I have heard it said by
some, that the honor of that settlement be
longed to the party of the Senator front
South Carolina, and upon that Senator’s
course. Sir, I am not ambitious of
claiming the honor for my friends.—
There is no principle in the famous cora-
promise that is better than the act of 1832.
It is true, that it is a modification, c-ome
reduction; yet it contains some features of
a most hateful contrivance, and so artful
ly ad justed, for the interest of the manu
facturer, that with many practical men it is
believed to be as favorable as the act c f
1S32. Bat, sir, be the credit great or
small, rt is neither due to Mr. Clay or Mr.
Calhoun, and to that point I will again re
fer to the testimony of Mr. Clay, as given
to the nation, in his speech of 25th Feb-
unr\, 1S33. Mr. Clay addressed the
Senate as follows: “Mr. President, I want
to be perfectly understood as to the mo
tives 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 die country. I believe
the American svstem to he in the great
est danger, and I believe it can be placed
on abetter and safer foundation at this ses
sion than at at the next. I heard, with
surprise, inv friend from Massachusetts
say that nothing occurred within die last
six months to increase its hazard. I en
treat him to review that opinion. Is it
correct? is the issue of the numerous c-
lections, including that of the highest
officer of the Government, nothing?—
Is his declarations, in his proclamation,
that the burdens of the South ought to be
relieved, nothing? Is the introduction of
the bill in the House of Representatives
during this session, sanctioned by the
head of the Treasury and the adminis
tration, prostrating the greater part of
the manufactures of the country, no
thing?”
“It is well known that the majority of
the dominant party is adverse to the ta
riff". There are many honorable excep
tions, the Senator from New Jersey (Mr.
Dickerson) among them. But for the ex
ertions of of die other party, the tariff"
would have been long since sacrificed.—
Now let us look at the composition of die
two branches of Congress die next ses
sion. In this body we lose three friends
of the protective policy, without being
sure of gaining one. Here, judging from
the present appearance, we shall at die
next session be in the minority. In the
House, it is notorious that there is a con
siderable accession to the number of the
dominant party. How, then, I ask, is the
system to be sustained against numbers,
against the whole weight of the adminis
tration?”
Mr. Chairman, if the declarations of Mr.
Clay are authority on any question, and I
am sure none will pretend to deny it, he
has placed the whole question of the re
duction of the tariff" on a footing the most
flattering to the administration. Yes, sir,
it was the unremitting efforts of the Pre
sident to arouse the people in every quarter
of the Union to a proper view ot the rights
of all, that had a moral influence upon pub
lie opinion, irresistible, and tending direct
ly to bring into congress those representa
tives who would give efficient aid to hi
administration in carrying out his opinions
in relation to the tariff! Unfortunately for
die country, when the strength of the ad
ministration was nearly, if not quite suffi
cient, to carry the measure reported from'
the treasury Department, lie prefers to u-
nitc with Mr. Clay in his project, thereby
deserting the interest of the South for the
noble and patriotic motive of depriving
the administration of the credit of settling
this great and fearful question. But, for
tunately for the ng' and the country, Mr.
Clay has placed it fairly before the world,
and the honor will be, as it should be, a-
warded to die faithful and deserving.
There is, Mr. Chairman, one other con
nexion in which T desire to notice these
“commanding figures.” I cannot but look
back to the commencement of this Con
gress, when expectation deep and intense
pervaded every part of our country on
the subject of our relations with I'ranee;
nor can I suppress the feeling of sur
prise I have always felt that Mr. Cal
houn and Mr. Clay, who so triumphantly
maintained, in the councils of their coun
try, the honor of the nation in 1312,
should, at this day, be willing, through die
person of the Chief Magistrate, to inflict a
stain upon our national escutcheon by
withholding from the Executive that aid
he had a right to expect from every patri
ot, when the honor of the country was in
volved. The man in this nation that
would for one moment hesitate, when the
absurd pretension is put up by a foreign
power, that for language used in a com
munication to Congress, they have a right
to demand explanations as a condition to
die performance of a treaty stipulation,
must have lost all diat elevated, ardent
and patriotic devotion for the honor and
character of the nation that would charac
terize die man who, in the hour of peril,
would be on the side of his coun
try.
Mr Chairman, having shown the pre
sent condition of your Treasury, its proba
ble condition for the next two or throe
years, (to say nothing of the rapid de
crease that must suddenly ensue under
honorable member from Tennessee, (Mr.
Bell,) with a view to prove that it must
have been his opinion, so far from there be
ing a surplus revenue, that if the system of
public defence, as recommended by the
President and die heads of the Depart
ments, should become the policy of the
nation, your resources would be exhaust
ed, and the financial operations of die Go
vernment changed.
The honorable member from Tennes
see, in his printed speech, says, “The
first inevitable result of this policy, (allu
ding to the system of defence now under
consideration) il" it shall be sanctioned by
Congress, will be the int reduction, in a short
period, of an increased and oppressive
system of taxation.” The honorable
member further says, “That the public
lands are now in such a rapid state of ex
haustion, that very soon we shall find our
revenue from this quarter reduced to a mil
lion or less.”
.Sir, I trust, with at least a portion of this
House and the people of this Union, die
warning voice of that distinguished gen
tleman will not be disregarded. He has
told us what would be the consequence
of that system of defence which this ad
ministration has not recommended, which no
gentleman, so far as I know, has proposed,
and which no friend of the measures of the
President would support. Whether it
was his policy, in imitation ot the example
set by the member from South Carolina, to
make a statement of the amount of public
expenditures for extraordinary purposes,
so large that he might become alarmed
himself, and, in the office of true charity
frighten his friends and followers,
neither, do say, nor pretend to allege
But it may be said, anil I undertake
to maintain, that there is no system
public defence recommended by-the prc
dent, or any portion of the friends of thi
administration, whereby an expenditure
of ten millions per annum is proposed to
be voted as imagined by the gentleman
from Tennessee.
Sir, the utmost limit, upon the large]
scheme, as promised by any and all the
departments, would not far exceed one-
half of the amount laid down by the gen
tleman. If, then, I am not mistaken in
this view of the case, I may claim the
authority of the gentleman’s name again
the wild and dangerous project of ilistr:
but.ion, as well as the system of defence
which he supposes to be acceptable to the
administration, and still save the system
which has been actually proposed by the
party supporting the administration, from
all the censure and odium, so unsparingly
heaped upon it by that gentleman and
others.
Sir, that honorable member should
have well deliberated, he should have well
considered the ground lie has himself s-
long occupieil before the American
people in reference tothe measures of thi
administration, before lie ventured forth
in a crusade, which could only be intend
ed to tear down the very principles he had
contributed so much to build vp. The
gentleman should have remembered that
there are blows to receive, as well as
give, and that, however pacific and for
bearing are those whose pleasure it once
was, as it still would be, to act with him
on all important measures connected with
the administration of the federal govern
ment, still they have feelings, rights, and
principles, which they cannot suffer to he
lashed, either by an open enemy or by
pretended friends.
Sir, in the honorable gentleman’s ow
language, I desire not to be misunderstood
be tore the committee or elsewhere. My
purpose is to do precisely what the gentle
matt himself desired should he done: to
answer the points he has raised, to meet
the charges he has preferred, without eva
sion. In the little 1 shall sav, 1 shall avoid
so much of the argument of the honorable
member from Tennessee as was answer
ed, and most triumphantly, in my opinion
by 1113' esteemed friend the honorable
gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Garland.
I will not attempt to occupy ground taken
by him. To do so would weaken, rather
than strengthen, the view presented by
that gentleman. Nor do I regret that my
friend from Virginia has preceded me, for
his effort has left but little for me to do.—
My purpose, however, will he with the
utmost spirit and kindness, and with the
full conviction of my own weakness, to
throw myself upon the ground taken by
the gentleman from Tennessee, (Mr. Bell,
and with whatever knightly grace I may
possess, as one of “the party, 11 to receive
the lance hurled from his able arm; con
soling myself, that if I should not be able
to return the blow, f shall at least com
mand his respect for taking a position so
full of danger to myself. Mr. Chairman
should the opinion entertained by the
honorable member from Tennessee be
correct as to the result of the system of
defence proposed by the administration
upon the revenue of the country, then,
sir, his friend from South Carolina is
wrong in supposing that system a “misera
ble quackery, 11 so far as regards the absorp
tion of the revenue. By way of illustration,
the former gentleman was showing that
the system of public defence must be
arrested. And, what, sir, was the rea
son? Why, “that although the system
might be proper in itself,” yet that you
had not the money to carry it on; while
the latter gentleman tells you that you
“must distribute, 11 because, by an expendi
ture for the purposes of defence of ten or
twelve millions per annum, you will not
be able to expend the surplus, but it will
continue to accumulate.”
Now, sir, I cannot undertake to settle
1 must not omit to notice m connection
with it, another purpose he made it serve
him. Having, as he supposed, establish
ed the fact that the Treasury was to be
exhausted, and tlie system of high taxa
tion established, he turns from the scene
with apparent indignation, and asks the
question, “who does not see from all this
that we are to have an increased tariff in
due season, and that the managers of the
party are preparing to claim the support
of the manufacturing interests:’” The
honorable gentleman here charges upon
the managers an intent to establish the
tariff", and thereby secure the support ol
the tariff" party. An important inquiry
then arises, to settle with certainty who
are the managers of the party? For in
this allegation the member from Tennes
see has drawn a distinction between the
“rank and file,” as I suppose him to mean,
and the “few 11 that manage. 11 There is,
however, one bright side in this charge:
it stands in bold relief against others
made by the honorable member; which I
shall notice before I take m3' seat. It has
been the fashion of man3' gentlemen op
posed to the President, to charge him
with “absolute dictation”—that the party
could not, dared not oppose his views,
without incurring the.settled displeasure
of the President, and the loss of confi
dence “of those who bend their supple
knee” at his bidding. The gentleman
has, in this particular instance, given us to
understand that there were more “mana
gers” than one. Now, sir, I should be
pended for years, yielding but a tenth per
annum until the appointed period, when
it suddenly falls six tenths of the excess li
ver twenty per cent within six months,)
having shown the causes that will most
certainly produce a decrease for the years
of 1830 and ’7, and perhaps, for after
years; having sliown the revenue from im
ports as well as from the sale of public
lands; and haying also shown the part
now playing by those “commanding
figures” and “great minds” in relation to
the revenue, I shall now call the attention
of the committee to the argument of the
between these two growing, if not “great
minds,” which of them is correct. It may
be that neither is right. I think I have
proven it; but there is one thing we all
know, that the gentleman from South
Carolina has told us that he will go for a
distribution of the surplus, and he has
further informed us, that there would be
thirt3'-five millions to begin with. I do
not pretend to sa3’ that the gentleman from
Tennessee will support the measure for
distribution of the surplus revenue. If
he does, however, one fact is clearly es
tablished—that the opinions he has ex>-
pressed of the effect of the system of de
fence recommended b3’ the administration,
had better be expunged, great as may be
the abhorrence of some gentlemen for
black lines.
But, Mr. Chairman, before I proceed to
another part of the gentleman’s argument,
pleased to know if he includes the Presi
dent among the number of “managers”
who are seeking this connexion with the
tariff" part3'? If there is such a thing as
an administration party, lie who presides
over that administration as the chief ex
ecutive officer, must be considered one of
the “managers of the party.” And that
brings us directly tothe consideration of
this most unwarrantable charge against
the President. I ask the gentleman, I
ask any and every -andid man, whether
an old or new enemy, to point to a single
act of his administration sustaining that
allegation. Let not gentlemen answer
me by sa3'ing that the President was not
embraced in this charge. I have the
proof at hand, recorded in the same
speech, that puts this question beyond
doubt. Hear the honorable member from
Tennessee speak for himself. “There is
strong reason,” sa3's he, “to believe that
the obligations of pany are held so sacred,
that none who belong to the majority dare
do any tiling which tlie President shall for
bid, or fail in the support of whatever he
shall recommend.”
Can any one believe that that gentle
man entertaining this opinion of the abso
lute control, dictation,and arbitrary power
exercised In - the President over the ma
jority, docs not intend to convey the idea
that the President himself constitutes one
of the managers of that party? Yes, Mr,
Chairman, whatever may have been the
meaning of the gentleman, lie stands, and
must continue to stand, as making a charge
more disreputable to the private character
of that man, more dcrogatoiy to a large
majority of the freemen of this Union
more reproachful to the honor anil charac
ter of the President in his official station,
than I have ever before heard from any
quarter. Sir, the President of the United
States has been compared b3' his bitter
enemies, in the day-s of great excitement
to a Nero, to Caligula, an usurper worse
than Cromwell—a tyrant, trampling un
ilcr foot the rights of the widow and the
orphan; but it was reserved for the honor
able member from Tennessee to attempt
to prove what others had only the temori
ty to assert. That gentleman sa3's—
“There is strong reason to believe that, if
the majorit3' dare do 0113- thing, or fail in
tlie support of any measure whatever that
the President orders on the one hand or
forbids on the orther.” Sir, can there be
a character in this nation more absolutely
despicable than the one drawn b3’ the
gentleman in this brief sentence?
Sir, as one of the part3'hcre alluded to,
and so much calumniated 113- this charge
of passive servilit3 r to. the will of the
President, it would be but just to sa3',
that he who is prepared to avow such sen
timents as these, would be the first to fill
that station with becoming dignity. But,
Mr. Chairman, it is not only tin’s unpro
voked, unwarrantable charge against the
majority", which, if true, makes them
more sen ile, dishonored and disgraced
than slaves; but it is absolutely stripping
the President of the brightest traits in his
character—patriotism and love of the in
stitutions of" his country as a public man,
anil honor, nobleness, generosity-, and
sensibilit3 r as a private gentleman. Can
an3' man rise here and maintain that if
those allegations are true against the
President and the party, of absolute dic
tation on the one hand, and unqualified
submission on the other, they can have
aii3' regard, love or veneration for the in-
titutions of the country, all of which are
based upon principles directly the reverse
of those tiiat alone could conduce to such
acts of tyranny and servility? No, sir,
if I have correctly conceived the meaning
of the honorable gentleman by the re
marks I have quoted, no longer, in his
opinion, can the President or tlie party-
put up any pretensions to patriotism,
virtue, or independence. Sir, there must
have been a very sudden loss of those in
estimable qualities, for surely such was
not the character of the President or the
party, when the honorable member was
himself one of the most consipicuous and
iiithful of its members. A few short
days and some small incidents frequently
produce rapid changes in the opinions of
men.
Mr. Chairman, I have heard it said on
this floor, if" I mistake not, during the
present session, by- different gentlemen on
different occasions, that when a thrust
was made at the party, they would dodge
behind the President, to shield themselves
from tlie castigation they deserved; and
the moment at) arm was raised to inflict a
blow, they would cry- out, “Do not strike,
you will hurt the President.” The great
regard heretofore professed by certain
gentlemen for the President has preserved
his character sacred, but I think the hon
orable member from Tennessee cannot be
charged with staying the blow either for
the party or for the President. It would
seem that he has hardly stopped to inquire
who it was that he had struck, or was
iboul to strike; but has, in the spirit of a
reckless knight, charged upon the Presi
dent and tlie party’, without the slightest
discrimination as to persons or regard for
weapons.
The honorable gentleman, on the con
clusion of his first day’s speech, gave a
short explanation of his own course here
tofore, and the course he should pursue
hereafter. On resuming his arguments,
on the second day r , he remarked: “Some
of those with whom I formerly acted in
this house may think my declaration upon
the nature of my present relations to the
party’ in power, sufficiently explicit. I
can have no possible motive to assume an
equivocal position before the committee
or the country. On the contrary, I consi
der my honor at stake in taking a differ
ent course. I therefore repeat that I shall
support all the measures of this adminis
tration, which I shall find to be in accor
dance with its early avowed principles,
in the same manner and to the same ex
tent I have hitherto done; and I shall op
pose with my influence and ability, what
ever they may be worth, every measure,
every practice and movement of the par
ty, which can be traced to the policy of
electing tlie executive favorite to the suc
cession.” And, Mr. chairman, as if the
language used "by the honorable gentle
man was too strong, and might not answer
what it plainly means, viz: that lie will
oppose every measure of the administra
tion, he places the matter bey-ond doubt,
by proceeding to say 7 :
“If the declaration that I hold, myself
the supporter of the ailmiiiisiration, to any
extent, shall appear inconsistent with my
votes upon so many party questions which
arise in this house from day 7 to day, I can
only answer, that it is not my fault if the
party action of this house shall almost in
every instance have a direct reference not
to the support of general Jackson so much
as to the election of a particular candi
date to the presidency’.” Mr. Chairman,
I have seen some manifestoes, a few pro
clamations, and some declarations of po
litical creeds, but I must frankly admit
that J have never seen so labored an ef
fort to say’ two things at the same time.
The honorable member seems unwilling
to trust himself in saying what his course
will be, before lie rushes in a proviso,
backed by an example; and the plain En
glish of the whole is, that he believes
every movement of the party, every act
of legislation, every measure introduced
in the house, has some connexion, direct
ly or indirectly, with the “policy or mo
tive of electing the executive favorite to
the succession,” as he is pleased to call
Mr. Van Buren, and that, therefore, ac
cording to the rule he has prescribed for
his own course of action, his claim to can
dor would not have suffered from an open
avowal of his determined opposition to
the principles of the administration.
Sir, it will be remembered by the com
mittee that the honorable gentleman from
Tennessee made a labored effort to estab
lish the exact similarity in principles of
the dominant party of the present day’
and the federal party of 17 9S. To estab
lish the correctness of this charge against
the administration party, he insisted that,
as the party of ’93 was for a large stand
ing army anil navy, so was the adminis
tration party at this day’. The evidence
of the charge was to be found in the sys
tem of defence as recommended by the
president, and for which estimates had
been furnished by the heads of the de
partments. I must confess I had much
difficulty in comprehending either the
facts or the reasoning of the gentleman
that could have authorized him in making
the charge of federal principles on the
party. Neither the president nor the war
or navy departments, nor any friend of
the administration in either branch of con
gress, has submitted any proposition for a
large standing army or navy. The ut
most verge of all their plans would scarce
ly organize a respectable peace establish
ment; and how tlie member could feel
himself authorized to assert the analogy
between tlie principles of the party now
supporting tlie administration and the
federal party of ’93, is so far beyond my
ken, that I shall yield to the gentleman
the honor often claimed by men who have
gone before him, of discovering a strict
analogy in things wholly’ dissimilar in
every principle. This analogy is discov
ered to exist, not only as relates to the
standing army and navy; but the honora
ble gentleman goes further, and detects
another federal principle in the dominant
party by the adoption of a rule of this
house, making certain appropriation bills
the order of the day, from and after a
particular time, over all other business!—
This rule of the house was recommended
at an early period of the session by the
committee on foreign affairs. So far as
the committee were concerned, they pro
posed a rule for the order of business here,
which was, in their judgment, imperious
ly demanded, from our defenceless condi
tion and a full view of our foreign rela
tions. Now will any gentleman pretend
to say’ that, with a knowledge of the fail
ure of the eppropropriation bill of the
last year, with the wretched state of eve
ry branch of our public defences, with
the daily prospects of a collision with
France, it was not our first duty to take
up, consider and pass the appropriation
bills necessary for the public service?—
Was it the duty of this house to have act
ed on these various bills, or to let them
sleep until the end of the session? Whv,
sir, 1 venture to affirm that there never
was a rule more imperiously’ demanded
by the public interest than the one which
has received such uncalled for and unwar
rantable censure and condemnation from
the honorable gentleman. The gentle
man also contended that if the spirit of
tlie resolution regulating the order of bu
siness of 2Gth January’, was carried out,
“that it would result in tlie re-enactment
of tlie sedition laws of 1798.” He says
that the resolution of the house and the
sedition law contained the same principle:
tlie object of each was “to suppress dis
cussion and to prevent attacks upon the
party in power.”
Sir, I should really be inclined, from
this broail assertion, to suppose that the
honorable member could not be greatly
dissatisfied with the principles of the se
dition laws; for, if he should have suc^
ceeded in showing the principles of the
one to be identical with those of the oth
er, I think the journal of the house, and
the minutes of the committee of the whole,
will show that, so far from the rule sup- own country and our own age admonish
s?T- a.* :— 1— 1 1 1 all, that the man of this day is sunk '
oblivion tomorrow; and surely his greater
solace in such an extremity, is that, i n a jj
he has done, his conscience approves th
motive, and his judgment affirms hi °
sistency.
It is well remembered, Mr. Chairny
pressing discussion, it has been enlarged
and extended to the utmost verge. Why ,
sir, the gentleman’s own case is a happy’
and triumphant refutation of his assertion.
I ask the honorable member to'tell the
nation how long he discussed one propo
sition in relation to one of"the appropria
tion bills. Four successive days, sir, did
he enjoy the privilege of say’ing any and
every thing he chose to say, upon any and
every topic he thought proper to discuss,
and yet, sir, “the spirit of the rule, if car
ried out by the party in power,” he as
serts, would result in the re-enactment of
the sedition laws of 179S! But the hon
orable gentleman says one of the “objects
of the rule was to prevent attacks upon
the party in power.” The rule, sir, has
been equally unfortunate in that respect,
and if the honorable gentleman could
have allowed himself but one moment of
reflection, in this very assertion was to
be found a fact directly at variance with
the point lie was laboring to establish.—
What, sir, prevent attacks upon the party
in power! What else has the minority
done during this entire session? Have
they introduced any measure, proposed
any project, for legislative action or inqui
ry, but with the view of fulminating de
nunciations, unjust, unwarrantable, and
such as were never before witnessed in
any deliberative body, against the party?
And pray, sir, who is the party’, and who
is it that is eternally arrayed against that
party? Why, it is the indefinite party,
composed of advocates of the tariff! in
ternal improvements, the bank, the nulli
fying party, and above all, the “no-party’
party’.” Each with principles professed
ly opposite, irreconcfliable with each oth
er, are now seen united under a common
flag, waging an eternal, unrelenting “war
against the party. Why, in such a con
test, “the party, 11 from the fact that their
principles are defined, avowed, open and
undisguised, have much to fear. Why,
sir, if “the party" make a blow at that
branch of the indefinite party 7 professing
the principles of the American system,
you are answered by gentlemen profess
ing the doctrines of nullification, and du
ring the scuffle that ensues between them
the American system gentlemen skulk
out of the contesf, take their position on
some commanding eminence, and there
snugly remain until the battle is over,
when they return to their friends, the nul
lifies and offer them their smiles, and
look so piteously concerned, that the bold
nullifier can but feel his utter disgust,
Just so with the remaining parties: the
one regarille^ of consequence rushes to
the fight, but are no sooner engaged than
their allies take a distance, which is well
observed, until danger passes off, when
they 7 in tuna approach tlie battle ground
a Jierce and brace little band, whose max
im it is to share all the honors, without in
curring any of tlie dangers of war. Sir.
I have been compelled to this review of
the state of the opposition (whom I call the
indefinite party, in contradistinction to
“the party,”) from the language of tlie
honorable member from Tennessee. “I
believe (says he) there are many individ
uals who do not accord with the present
course of the party to which they belong
upon many 7 questions, who cannot long a-
•bide their party connexions; and, sir, if
possessed the power of exorcism upon thi
occasion, I would bid them instantly come
out from among their uncongenial tie
ments and associates, with which they
are at present united.” Now, sir, I ask
the honorable member which wing of thi
opposition would he have us join? Is it
his party? If so, I have never yet heard
an avowal of their creed. I do not know
the principles they profess. All that I
do know is, that they’ are opposed to the
administration. I must therefore take hi
recommendation on trust, or refuse the
politeness of his offer. Am I to join the
nullification party? They do not want it:
they do not wish to divide tlie glory 7 of
the enterprise; there will not be more ho
nor in the end than will meet the de
mands of the present members of that
party. But, again: they have others that
would receive a preference. Under no
circumstances, therefore, would the dis
satisfied of the dominant party receive
quarters in their camp. IShall we join
the American sy’stem party, and thereby
keep company with the balance of the
family of the opposition? Why, sir, that
is impossible; our early habits, our deli
berate judgment of the best interests of
the country; our own interests, founded
upon justice, constrain us to refuse
connection with this portion of the oppo
sition—selfish, cold, and calculating in
eveiy movement, we should expect to be
reduced to absolute want and beggary in
a veiy short time in their company.
Now, sir, having shown the objections
to joining any of the different portions of
the opposition, but one of two things
seems to me proper for such as may not
be entirely satisfied with every measure
of the administration; to lop off" and con
stitute a fourth division of the opposition
upon some particular political tenet,
which, according to my observation, is
no sooner settled than promptly deserted,
or stay where we are; instead of oppos
ing eveiy measure, right or wrong, to
give a cordial support to such measures
as vve believe are right, and a manly, in
dependent, and firm opposition to those
we believe to be wrong. For one, I shall
on all and every occasion give my support
or opposition to each particular measure
that may come before me, as I believe
conducive to the public good; and though
it is of no consequence, either to the hon
orable member from Tennessee, or any
one else, yet I do not hesitate in saying,
whenever this government shall be ad
ministered upon other than the cardinal
principles of the present administration,
as I understand them, and firefly believe
them to be, I shall ho found •among those
who will have firmness enough to take a
stand against that administration. But,
sir, in such a position, I will not hold
communion with a party or the fragment
of a party, whose principles are equally
or more objectionable than tlie principles
of the administration to which 1 may be
opposed. Sir, there is a glory iq politi
cal consistency, that far surpasses the
fleeting honors that are conferred and with
drawn, according to popular whim. Per
haps it is to that alone a political man
should look, to compensate him in the
hoqr of desertion. Th,e history of ovir
con-
that the honorable gentlemen (Mr. n?
let no argument escape him that j n h'
judgment, would excuse, authorize,or iu<!
tify tlie attack which he made on the"®!"
ministration; and hence the extraordhia ~
position he assumed before the committee
“that president making” should become
a. regular part of the legislative proceed
ings of the house. To avoid doincr an *
injustice to the argument of the gentle
man, I will give his own words: “if an '
one shall object (says the gentleman) to
this discussion because it savors of pru
dent making; if any gentleman shall he
deluded by the opinion that topics dire ct
ly connected with the politics of the dav
should be excluded from this hall, I qI
him to reflect for a moment upon the fact
that no subject at this day, of importance’
does or can arise in congress which is n ',,
sustained or opposed, andfinally decided upon
principles and motives which enter dined,
and deeply into the presidential canvass, and
altimately decide the issue.” Now, sir, here
is a charge, coupled with a confession, j n
which the honorable member has certain
ly placed the opposition in a position be
fore the country which I could scarcely
liave supposed one so elevated, disinter
ested, and patriotic in his course as that
lionorable member, could have consented
to occup3*. What is that confession, sir,
and what is the position the members of
this house must occupy before their con
stituents, if" the gentleman is correct?—
He tells 3’ou that no subject of importance
docs, or can arise, in congress which is not
sustained or opposed, andfinally decided upon
principles and motives which enter dirccthi
and deeply into the presidential canvass, a ,id
ultimately decide the issue. iSir, if this be
true, the gentleman must establish that
“president making” is a part of our regu
lar legislative duties under the constitu
tion, sanctioned and approved by the con
stitution, which I undertake to say no man
can serious^ 7 , in a moment of cool de
liberation, believe; or, otherwise, he has
branded ever}, 7 member of this house with
a violation of his oath.
What, sir, has it come to this, that every
measure is opposed and advocated with
the direct view of advancing the preten
sions of some favorite to the chief mnris-
trac3'? Sir, the gentleman who can feel
this charge to be true, may well exclaim
that this is a corrupt and degenerate age;
he may well cry out that there is corrup
tion in tlie land; lie may well denounce
men and measures; he may see and feel
dangers that are unseen and unfelt by
those who are influenced by no such im
proper motives. I would beg the honora
ble gentleman, for the honor of all, for
the honor of the nation, not to inflict a
mortal wound, by 7 one thrust, upon the
landing of 3'our legislative department of
the government; not to prefer a charge
against all the members of this house, and
plead guilty to that charge in their names.
If tlie opinion is entertained by' tlie gen
tleman, either as to the character of our
legislation or the motives that influence
members, I think our constituents should
begin to inquire into our duties as defined
by the constitution; they should determine
whether this or the other, or both branch
es of congress combined, are required to
make laws for their benefit, or to make a
president to rule them.
lean but say, Mr. Chairman, that I be
lieve it is no part of our legitimate duty
to “sustain or oppose, anil finally 7 decide,
any question upon principles and motives
which enter directly anil deeply into tie
presidential canvass.” Anil here, sir,
whilst I deny 7 the principles and motives
charged by the gentleman from Tennes
see as regulating my conduct, it is hut fair
to hold him to a confession that lie has
thus voluntarily made. And the honora
ble gentleman having made a confession
of this portion of his faith, I shall lie pleas
ed to know if it was considered one of the
“original Jackson principles;” and if so,
whether this principle of legislating on
the subject of “president making” was
known to an honorable senator from Ten
nessee, (H. L. White,) when he opposed
general Jackson’s election to the senate
ol the United States, for fear that “it
would be believed that he was placed in
W r ashington to electioneer for the presi
dency?” But to proceed in the honora
ble gentleman’s own language: “It has of
late become more important than at any
former period in the history of the govern
ment, that this subject of president mak
ing . should be taken up seriously, and
made a part of the regular business of
congress.”
Sir, it strikes me that tlie propriety 01
the course now recommended by the hon*
orable gentleman, the principles he now
seeks to establish as a part of the creed
of the opposition, were not so well under
stood in the first days of this administra
tion, or during the time the chief magis
trate was first a candidate, otherwise a
distinguished gentleman from Tennessee
(honorable H. L. White,) was not so for
tunate as to be fully 7 initiated in the doc
trines of that party, or has furnished the
world very conclusive evidence that he
was not at that period a Jackson man.—
After adverting to one other remark of the
gentleman from Tennesse that struck m e
at the time with some surprise, I shall pro
ceed to notice some of tlie opinions of the
honorable H. L. White, which I shall do
in a manner perfectly respectful to him,
and which I would not do at all but fot
the respect I have for tlie examples of bis
friends upon this floor in examining the
opinions of one other individual (Mr. \ an
Buren.) who, like the honorable senate
from Tennessee (Mr. White) is now be
fore the people of the Union for the fifal
office" within their gift. And, sir, there is
another reason; during all the denuncia
tions I have heard here from each branch
of the opposition, I ha.ve heard none of
them censure either of the candidates for
] iresident, except Mr. Van Buren, although
~ should have supposed some of the other;
entertained principles far more objection
able than aqy of Mr. Van Buren’a could
possibly be.
The gentleman from Tennessee advert
ed to the President’s late special message
upon French affairs, and such was tfa