Newspaper Page Text
5 ,
THE MACON GEORGIA TELEGRAPH.
Speech t?r fli\ Stiles*, ofOeor^ia-
Xn Vor House *f Rep'^taentalivet, January 29, and 30.
If 14—On the m *:i,m .>t Mr. Black, of Georgia. to a*
meal l!ie motion of Mr. Droin,'oolr, of Virginia, to
re com ail thi report of the Select Committee on the
, RuiiM.by iiutractin’ them to report to the House the
following rule, (the MthJ viz:
" No petition, memorial, resolution, or other paper pray-
ioj the ab Jlition of slarery in the District of Columbia, or
any State or Tcrritorv, or the slaae trade between the
.t»uT.
; those limits, and in its nature ** imposing no “ burdens upon the judge 1 The eoutt has no jurisdiction of the case. Has
the people,” yet it MAT *• answer” an "eud" and a -pur such an answer qrer been considered a*disrespectful! Go
pose” for a set of petitioners to stale” the institution "as still higher; enter the court9 of chancery. A complainant
a grievance to the House." Again, in t.li^ next sentence, has filed a bill which, taking every word of it to be true,
“ the House of Commons,before they coin.- to a resolution presents no case for reiie'; a demurrer is ottered by -.lie de-
which inipo-es a tax,cannot but know that it may sensibly iendant, which, admitting all that the bill alleges, denies his
effect the commerce or manufacture on which the duty is right to come into court; and the chancellor sustaining the
laid; but they cannot permit the inconvenience that may demurrer, dismisses the complainant without proof or tnqui-
possibly be brought upon a particular branch of trade to sy. Has such a courae ever been deemed as wantingin res-
weigh with them when put in the balance with those advan- pert? and is the legislative power of the country to be slrip-
tagts which are intended to result to the whole, and which ped of a like authority? This rule is in the nature of a shu
ttle public necessities of the State demand from them.” pie plea to the jurisdiction or denturreriu chancery; and can
How, in this regard, do the advocatesof reception reason ' no more be coupled with disrespect than eilherof those
here 7 That Congress cannot butknow that slavery, which inodes ofjudicia) proceeding.
does not “ affect commerce or manufactures," nor impair But "we prejudge the case.’’ "We condemn them un-
any “particular branch of trade,” yet WILL permit the : heard.” What do gentlemen meant Am I to understand
r fanaticism which alone opposrs it“tow-cigh with them i that the petitions have never been read? They have been
t»eut, of all the dangers which threaten our Union, not one w beu put in the balance with those advantages ichich are, i read over and over again, whilst before the question of re-
esn be found, in ire speedy in its operation, sure in its cor.- ; intended to result to the whole, and ichich the public re- j ceptlao is put, the petition can always be read upon the call
arqucn-.-ei, or fatal in its results, than foreign interference eesrities of the State demand of them." |-of any member of the House It is meant, by not being
with the dome.tic insiitutions of the ioutn. Other divi-, In other words,the opponents of this rule reason that, in , heard, that these petitions have never been discussed!
■•■■■* A* -t-t—— -r «,! r-rinMi. ■ »— *- - - J 1 — ; - L They hare been discussed in this hall to the fullest extent
for weeks, ladftvea months, whilst the question of reception
Btates or Territories of the UniteJ'dtates, in wnich it now
ciista, shall be teceired by the House, or entertained in
anjr way whatever.
JakcaRY 29.
Mr. Stiles having obtained the floor, sp ike aa follows : |
Mr. Sr* sun itOf all the evils which beset our givefn-
alons between tile citizens of thi* wide spread republic. England.altli.iugh the petitioner! are baldened with tax*
which constitute the groundwork of opposing parties, and | tioneven to poverty and want tkeirpetiiions must be re-
whoee violence at time* teems almost to hazard the exis- Ijccted; while in America, where petitioner* are burdened
tence of the country are bat honest difference, of construe- I with nothing but their own sickly sensibilities, their peti
tion aa to the power* of the government. This variety ot lions must be rejected, notwithstanding their pray for the
opinion is but consistent with the variety of interest, educa- distinction of a constitution from which they derive
tion. and habit, by whiub we are distinguiahed. It is
wholesome, because it is a differance based in reason, hav-
ingfor its common object the support of the constitution; for
its end. the preservation of the liberties of the country.
But far different are auch divisions, from that which aepar-
ates the true lorer of his country from that band of delu
ded fanatics, wh se only reason is that “ the end will jusli-
fv the means,” and which end is the desalauun of the fair
est regions eftlte earth, the destruction of the most perfect
system of social and political happiness which has ever ex
isted.
The danger is nnt only great, but it is increasing. The
spirit of abolition has advanced, and is advancing. It in
creases by opposition; it triumphs by defeat. Scarcely ten
years ago, ana the few obscure enthusiasts of the North,
who advocated the abolition of slavery at the South, exci
ted but the deri-ioia and contempt of the whole country.
Abolition was deemed by the enlightened and reflecting
citizen but an insignificant and sickly flame; that, if sprung
from our own soil, it was but the ~ ignis fatuus” which
would expire when the css which gave it origin had been
-consumed; or, if dropped by some foreign hand, either by
accident or design, that there was no combustible matter
within its reach, and that it must be extinguished by the
first breath which swept over it. But time ha* proven the
fallacy of these calculations. The spark which dropped
fell amidst inflamable materials; and the breath which it
was supposed would extinguish, only kindled the flame.
It has shot with terrific rapidity through the land. Stop
ping neither by patriotism, principle, or party, it is now
•causing the very elements of our constitution to “melt with
fervent heat; and will, if not arrested by us in this ball
prove to our coentry its "las; great conflagration.’’
The question now before the House, which involves this
important snbjeet. is. in substance.ibe retention c rejection
of the 25th rule, providing for the exclusion of abotiion
petitions. Being in favor of retaining the rule, I shall con
sider. with the limited opportunity that the hour rule al
lows. the objections to such a course. These objections
consisL as the oppoaents of the rule contend, in its being a
violation of the constitution, and an abridgment of the right
of petition. What part of the constitution does it violate,
and upon what part do the opponents of<he rule rest? I
am answered, the firs;amendment. And what does the
first amendment prescribe: That “Congress shall make
rr> law abridging the right of the people peaceably to as-
srrable. and t>i petition the government for a redress of
grievances.’’ To analyze the clause: first. Congress shall
make no law. Congress has made no law; this is but one
branch of the government, and itcan make no law. Con-
i;ress does not pnipw% w m.k* «Lw flat itliMbaan said
that the rule accomplishes the same object—it abridges the
right of petition: it violates the spirit and intent of the con
stitution. The letter of the constitution, it cannot be de
nied, is not violated by the role; and befote it can be viola
ted, same law. some legislative enactment to that effect
must be passed by Congress. But the spirit and intent of
the constitution: let ns took to thaL To discover this, we
must refer to its history. What is the history of the first
amendment, and from whence was it derived 1 This point
having been felly discussed, and the acts relttive to the
subject read by the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr.
illicit.) aad subsequently by the member from Alabama,
{Mr. Bitlser ] I may here be permitted to be brief, and to
content myself with stating simply the conclusions to which
history irresistibly leads. Hot to go farther back in point
of time . it is sufficient to state that in the thirteenth year of
the reign of Charles II, an act of Parliament was passed
abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble and
petition for a redress of grievances. This act created great
and universal dissatisfaction among the people, in prohibi-
tin j them from assembling, preventing their petitioning, and
panishinc with incarceration all who attempted its infringe
ment. The oppressive operation ofthe riot acts being sen
sibly felt in this country about the time of the formation of
the constitution, and the obnoxious statute of Charles II be
ing still of force here, led to the adoption ofthe first amend
ment of the constitution.
unpsr
olleled liberty and happiness. And what is still more
strange, the rejection ofthe former (according to the posi
tion of the gentleman firm Massachusetts^ is no iufringe'
ment ofthe right of petition, while a rejection oi the latter
is a total annihilation o r this great " inuereut ?ud inaliena
bio right."
The mo,t objectfonable feature of this "odious rule,’ 1
(as he is pleased to term it.) the gentleman from Massachu
setts thinks, is that which undertakes “ to prescribe the
subjects upon which the people may or may uot petition.”
This feature he denounces a» being " at war with the con
stitutiou, and iu opposition to all parliamentary rule.”
The rule contended for only prescribes that petitions
aimed against the -constitution shall not be received. That
such a feature is uot at war with the constitution. I will
soou attempt to show ; but at present, while upon parliamen
tary practice, I would inquire whether such a feature, even
to the extent for which the gentleman contends, is “ in op
position to ell parlismentary rule.” Hot to proceed far
ther, the very parliamentary rule to which I nave had oc
casion to refer provides that petition against duties shall
not bs received. Now, I ask the gentleman from Massa
chusetts, whether that is not an undertaking, on the pan of
Parliament, "to prescribe the snbjeet upon which the peo
ple may or may not petition.”
{Here the Speaker announced that the morning hour had
expired.]
JANUARY 30
The Repon ofthe Select Committee on the Riles again
comiagup—
Mr. Stiles resumed and concluded bis remarks as follows:
When I last addressed the House, befote concluding,!
had shown, by reference to Hatsell's parliamentary Prece
dents that petitions sgainsttaxes were rejected by l’arlia
mem. Now, sir, as we are referred to England for the rule
of our conduct, upon what principle was it that petitions a
gainst taxes were always rejected in England? It was that
taxes were necessary for the support of government. But I
ask, sir, if nothing besides taxes are necessary for the sup
port of government? Are not national taitli and national ho
nor necessary for (be support of government. Can any go
vernment in the world last a moment without them. Can
dollars and cents be placed in the scale against faith and
honor. Are not the faith and honor of the nation pledged
upon the subject of slavery. Would the slaveholding States
ever have entered the Union—would our southern fathers
ever have signed the constitution, unless their rights bad
been secured by that inatiumenL Will not the Union be
dissolved, whenever the government shall, iastead of pro
tecting, plunder them of their property. Ye*, air. slavery
and tit* cnmatiiuuuii b«r« floarwliM f f>tfether; their existence
is the same, and inseparable; and if folly and madness slimtl
destroy the one, the other will follow it to the tomb. But
to return to the argument from which I have deviated, to re
ply to the gentleman from Massachusetts. Parliament 1
Rive shown were in the constant practice of rejecting peti
tions. The intelligent framers of the constitution were fa
miliar with this fact; and in guarding our country against
the evils of such legislation as the riot acts, in protecting
the great right of petition, their omitsion to provide that
pedtions should be received,!* evidence irresistible and
conclusive, that the reception of petitions was never inten
ded to be embraced in the amendment, or comprehended
under the right of petition. According to the letter of the
constitution, this rule is not a violation of that instrument,
because no law is passed or contemplated. According to
its spirit, it is not violated, because the object of the amend
ment was simply to prevent the passage of such acts as those
of George 1st. and Charles the 2d; and because the prac
tice of rejecting petitions was common in England, familiar
to the authors of the amendment, and not provided against
not only admits discussion, but admits it in the most ample
manner.,.
(Concluded next iceet.)
LETTER OF HR. VAX BUREX.
Harkisuuro, Jan. 20.1941.
Hon. Martin Van Borin:
Dear sir.— With this letter you will receive a copy of
die proceedings oi’a Stale Democratic Mass Meeting, held
at the scat of UuverninentofPennsylvaniz, on the 17th lnsl.
which we have the honor to forward in compliance with a
resolution adopted at t!>e meeting.
Thie Democracy of Pennsylvania, in common with their
brethreu uflhe otiter States, are anxious to wipe away the
stain which rests upon our country in consequence ot the
result of the election in 1840. It will be a glorious -eversal
of that decision to re instate you in the position which you
filled with such distinguished honor to yourself and advan
tage to the country; and a return to those republican prin
ciples which characterized your administration, and that of
your predecessor, will give assurance to the friends of li
berty that our republican institutions are .destined to be per
petuated.
We ought never to despair ofthe republic when the pop
ular voice is left to the guidance of reason and virtue; now,
these are in the asceudaut; then, reason was dethroned, and
a whirlwind r>f passion, folly, and madness, swept through
the land. The deceived votary, like the wanderet in the
desen, led by the mirage, pressed on to grasp the dolusive
representation. The sober second tliongtit will redeem us
from suck errors, and place the American character an 1
popular suffrage in the high position to which they are just
ly entitled.
* Your firm and inflexible adherence to republican princi-
ples.demand* our admiration, and fully entitles you to the,
war m support of every Democrat and ftiend of bis country
anrl in in Hninar bn nampnn.>w that b« ia ium__
Liability- to occasional error is an infirmity from which
no individual is exempt. What right have we then to ex
pect that i-un, inunities should be infallible. But there is a
wide difference between an occasional aberration and a con
firmed defect of character. Con we expect the people of
this country to maintain the elevated standing in the eye of
the world wInch they have hitherto enjoyed, if. after the
lapse of years, and the fullest opportunity for reflection, they
suffer themselves to be a second time operated upon by ap
pliances. from the use of which every friend to free govern
ment must turn witli mortification arid disgust 1.
You do not, therefore,gentlemen, in my judgment, over
estimate the importance which the proceedings of 1840 are
destined to give to those of 1844. Considerations will be
brought into v e w by that connection of greater magnitude
than any which have ever been involved in our political con
flicts, and compared with all personal and party mterests
dwindle into insignificance.
I am gentlemen, very respectfully,
Your friend and obedient servant,
MARTIN VAN BUREN.
Hon. James Ross Snowden,—President.
and in so doing be feels the assurance that he is advancing
and sustaining those principles which directed a Jefferson,
a Madison and a Jackson.
Be pleased to accept the assurance of our high regard.
Very truly,
your friend and fellow-citizens.
JAMES B. SNOWDEN, President.
Asa Dimock, Henry Buckler, Irad Wilson, Joo. B. Steri-
gere, Geo. Nagle, Joseph Uaily. M. M’Casliu, Isaac G. M’-
Kiuley, Henry Logan. Jno. J. M'Calien, Henry W. Sm.th,
Daniel M. Lane, John Heiuer, David Barnett—Vice Pre
sidents.
F. IV. Hughes, Elisha 8. Goodrich, Wm. H. Coleman,
Levi L. Tate, John a. Carter, Jas. G. Sample—Secretaries
by them. It is not a violation of the constitution, then. It
Linden wal. Jan. 29. 1844.
Gentlemen:—I hare bad the honor to receive your obli-
ging letter communicating the proceedings of a State Dem
ocratic Mass Meeting, held at Harnsbuig on tue 17tlt iust.
■t which my name was. with entire unanimity, pfesented to
the Democratic party of Pennsylvania, as their candidate
for the Presidency.
I cannot refrain from saying that I have received your
communication with feelings of uo ordinary cliaract< r. An
eapression of opinion so imposing as that which you litre
been deputed to convey to tne, coming from any portion of
my political associate*,could not fail, at any time, to excite
my prolounj gratitude. There are circumstances, howe
ver, atteoding this, which seem to deserve a more partten.
lar notice at my hands.
My relations with the Democracy of your great State
have been tn some respects peculiar. They sustained me
by their confidence and support, at a most interesting crisis
in my political career. I have been honored and cheered
by their good will, when tt was not in their power to render
it effective, and their support was at one lime withheld from
tne, and conferred upon another, when 1 received that of
their political brethren of tbe Union. Why should I not
embrace an occasion so opportune, and posa.bly the last that
" It wa s t be right of the people to assemble and peti
tion" which they held most sacred, and tt» the innovation
of which they teemed most ttrougl'/opposed. It was this
subject, and not the reception of petitions, that elicited the
thrilling eloquence of Fox to which the gentleman from
North Carolina alluded. _ It was his opposition to "the
bee vase the liberty to assemble „ 11*'consKTereSr’lli e T mare
important right, that Fox contended for iu instead of for the
reception of petitions: and not for the reason stated, that
the •' proposition to receive petitions was never at that lime
disputed.” Let me tell that honorable gentleman, and al
so the member from New York, {Mr. Beardsley.] who
state-1 that Parliament never rejected petitions, that tbe
proposition was at that time never disputed” that Parlia
ment was possessed of, and exercised fully the right of re
ceiving or rejecting petitions at pleasure.
Bat the gentleman from Massachusetts. [Mr. Wintbrop.]
uot content with mere assertion, has endeavored to sustain
the position by reference to authority.
But although assertion, in matters of law or precedent, is
the feeblest and most unsatisfactory aid which can be invo
ked. yet from the result of his effort, it is but too percepti
ble that those who precede him, and who relied upon asser
tion al-me, pursued at least die more politic and prudent
course.
_After a laborious search (I have no doubt) through Hat-
•ell's work upon parliamentary precedents, he his succeed
ed in discovering a tingle sentence which seemed to sus
tain his point; and it is not surprising that he should have
grasped at it with the avidity which he manifested, and to
hive desired for it the enviable distinction of a golden in
scription upon the pillars of this ball. This sentence, the
mere dictum of the eatbor, is in opposition to the practice
of ParliamenL as manifested in almost every page of the
work, aad contradicted even by the sentences which im
mediately precede and immediately follow iu Mr 8. here
read the passage relied on by the gentleman from Massa
chusetts, and (he ones immediately before and after iLI
.By ili- preceding sentence, then, tbe ” practice of refu
ting petitions" is clearly acknowledged; whilst, by the
•uoMqneMone, the "declining to receive a petition" is
~ mi o-.-iJereJ as a hardship.
From a hasty examination of the work introduced by the
gentleman from Massachusetts himself, (as to the merits of
which I will not distent from the high eologiura he has pro
nounced upon it.) 1 find ■ continued practice of rejecting
petitions not confined to the period referred to by thatgon-
tlctnsn—ICC- ; but extending from that time down to 1798,
commencing H auell, p. 166. as follows:
“ 9th April, 1C94, petition against duties on tonnage reject
ed
is a violation of the right of petition. B-it instead of search
ing tbeconslitution. in order to ascertain what are tbe right*
of petition, strange to tell, we must, as the gentleman from
New York, says, throw the constitution aside, and go back
to England, to tbe British Parliament, to tbe bill of rights,
which grew out of the revolution of 1688, A citizen of A-
merica. the freest coantry ir. the world, (as the gentleman
from North Carolina observed) run away from hi* own court-
try. and flee to England for bis freedom! 1 leave the gen
tleman from New York to reconcile himself with the gen
tleman from North Carolina, his associate in feeling on this
fi^Vhui:lff,7to h c i, n4gs l e « , i!»^l , K o ,n S'l , te r ci , n 0 ^.^.j»
aside the constitution of his country, can seek a cover for
his rights, a shelter for his liberties, behind the acts of a
British Parliament.
But why should we go back for injt'uc'ion to England?
as the gentleman from New York said Is there any anal
ogy between either the government or the people of England
and our own? Io England all power is in the government.
Here it is in the people. There the Parliament, humbly
speaking,is omnipotent. Here, our Congress is limited in
its powers to a few specified subjects, marked out and de
fined by a written constitution. In Great Briuin, the so
vereign holds his office independent of the people; ami so do
the member* of the House of Lords. If arbitrary and un
just laws are
ever unanimous
humble petition for their abolition. Here the members of
the government are directly responsible tn the people, hold
their offices subject to the popular will, and, if unfaithful to
their trusts, they are turned out. and more faithful servants
chosen in theirplaces. It results, therefore, that whilst in
monarchical governments, the right to petition the rulers is
the highest, or ultimate right of the subject in securing him
from molestation at the hands of bis government, here the
right dwindles into comparative insignificance; being only
a right tn petition our own servants to do that which we
may command them to do, or discharge them for not doing.
In abort, in England the people are listened to only when
they speak in the bumble toue of petition. In America they
will be heard, throughtheauthontive voice of instruction.
What does this right of petition embrace? What would
they have? Tbe right peaceably to assemble. Do we pro
pose to disturb that right? No. The right to prepare a
petition. Do we propose to prevent them! No. The right
to present that petition •« this body. Do we oppose that
right? No, air, the question has not been fairly meL Gen
tlemen argue as'though we denied tne right of petition.
We make no such dental. We are as warm advocates of
the right ef petition as any persons on this floor. We know
tnay occur, to assure them, that neither then, nor at aoy
other time during the whole course of my political life, have
I ever, for a moment, doubted their disposition to do me
ample justice. Although they dissented from iny nomina
tion. 1 felt assured that they were actuated oy motives which
were enlil.ed to my entire respect.
1 have, therefore, never ceased to cherish, in common
with the friends of our cause throughout the Uuion, towards
the uuconquerabte. and as the fullast experience has proved,
the unpurchable Democracy of Pennsylvania, sentiments of*
sincere respect for their adherence to Democratic princi
ples under circuins-ancea the most adverse, and admiration
ofthe unfalteriogtpirit with which they have fro— tn
on-u-tu *mawini>.iii«.i.ii-Au. r„ s mu,t there
fore, geutleinen. too highly appreciate an expression of con
fidence and favor proceeding from so respectable a portion
of them, on this, the last occasimi on which my name can
ever be presented to the coantry far any public station.
Yet these are n-»t the only considerations which give in
terest to tbe proceedings which you have transmitted to me
It is known to ail, and be no one cneerfutly admitted than
by myself, that a large majority of our pofitical friends in
Pennsylvania prefened that ute honor which jfiose whom
you represent nave now to cordially awarded to ine.abould
be besto-ved upon a justly distinguished citizen of their own
State—one admirably qualified for the successful discharge
of any public duty, and possessing likewise, in an eminent
re instituted by the government, the people, how- j degree, the confidence and good will of the Democracy of
moos against them, have no remedy but in an the Union. It certainly becomes others better than myself
rr -i . - to comment on the propriety of his withdrawal from the can
vass, when it had been ascertained that the wishes of hi*
more immediate friends where not, for reasons however not
detracting from the merits of their favorite, in accordance
with those of tbe great b-dy of their political brethren in
other States.
I should not, however, do justice to the occasion, nor to
my own feelings, were I to psas over in silence the lact. that
but for this surrender of his pretentious to promote the gen-
eial harmony, the proceedings for which I am offering un
grateful acknowledgements, coaid uot now have taken place
Nor will iL 1 hope, be thought amiss in any quarter, if 1
avail myself of the occasion to shew that this commendable
desire to promote unanimity among common friends bad
previously, though to a less important extent, been acted
upon by myself. It is well known that amid the prevailing
preference of tbe Democracy of Pennsylvania for her, dis
tinguished son, there was a portion of them, of whose con
fidence any public man might well be proud who avowed a
preference, which they had early imbibed and zealously
cherished, for myself. It is not, however,so well Jtnown,
that without attempting tu interfere with their free exercise
of opinion. I caused them to be informed, that as far as tny
From, the Mobile Trilunc, Feb. 14.
Xhe Blacksmith Buckeye.
The Whig meeting night before Inst which greeted the
immortal “ Buckeye,” was certainly an imposing affair,
and "Buckeye’s” performance rich, rare and entertaining.
We noticed in the assemblage all the recherche of the par
ty—the well shaven, wi Il-whiskered, exquisite, perfumed
“ eh ek t dem me !" portion were all present, ami seemed
infinitely edified, electrified and exalted, nt the burst of elo
quence, and showers of saliva, with which -‘Buckeye” al
ternately bespattered the audience, and the stage. We re-
coguized but one blacksmith at tbe meeting, who sat upon
the stage rather behind the acenes, and occasionally pee
ped knowingly f rth, ever and anon eyeing the speaker, as
ifrather suspicious of his being the genuine article—a veri
table blncksinilh. Considering the decided taste of our
whig friends for the •• home market” and its productions,
we thought our native Vulcan rather cavalierly treated in
not being called out after "Buckeye” bad concluded.
We cannot say mtlch for "Buckeye as a specimen of
blacksmiths. Good manners, we think, are iu this country
not die exclusive property of any class ; and alter a train
ing of three or four years, «e should have supposed that
even a bear might be taught that spitting almost in the faces
of the spectator s who assembled to witness his antics, is a
superfluous and disgusting performance.
As a statesman and political economist, "Buckeye 1
showed himself, of course, profound and original. He
proved conclusively that a tax of fifty per cent, on imported
roods made them fifty percent, cheaper; that competition
s the life of trade; tlmt the Tariff produces competition—
oecnnse every body knows that there is' no competition in
the foreign market—the American manufacturers being the
only people that by any possibility can be induced to com
pete with each other, and, therefore,.if we bad no other
customers but the British and other foreigners, they would
combine, knock down tbe price of cr.tton, and knock up the
price of manufactures. We could not iiealp thinking ofthe
foreign pauper laborers, of whose low wages and cheap
labor we have beard so much, as the deadly foes of Ameri
can industrv--andawa ; t in some expectation for "Buckeye"
to reconcile* the .necessity for protection on these accounts,
with the wonderfully cheapening effects of it which he de
monstrated so conclusively. But "Buckeye” wisely shun
ned this part of the subject.
Having demonstrated the great blessing of a Tariff. Buck-
eye” next proceeded to show that although it was a_ glori
ous thiug. yet. like every thingelse, we could nlget tt'with-
out money; and hence the next grreat Whig measure wasa
National Bank, to give the people plenty of good currency.
And hero he was very racy, facetioija on! original;—attribu
ted a'llho disorders ofthe curreucy I- 0 d le Loepfocos—said
they were like the man who borrowed a copper kettle, and
after he had broken it refuted to pay for tiVc breakage, was
sued; whereupon be instructed his lawyer to take tlitee
zrourds, which he accordingly did: lat.lhollhe kettle wa *
broken when he borrowed it; 2d, that he never did borrow
it; and 3d, that it was whole when he returned it. So be
said it was with the Locofocos. who took- hold of agood cur
rency. spoiled it, declared it was had wbeu they got it; then
they never did meddle with it; & last, that they left it per
fectly sound!—And so "Buckeye" went on, ouifuingupcart!
D E M O C R A C Y. I f n ' ! ! h0 cau " ° f ,e P" blicaD government in all con,.
V — I ,n § ume ’ Thls >9 the question and the only q „*.
IWACOIV:
TCESDAT JIOKXIXO, FEB’T. 27, IS44.
Bciisocritlic Cnuilitlales for President.
MARTIN VAN BIIBEN,ofBf V
liEWIS CASS, or Ohio,
RICIl’D. M. JOHNSON, of Kv
JOHN TYIsER, or Virginia,
To be decided by a National Convention in may,
1844.
The market for some days has been qnite un
settled, which tltearrivnl of tlte Hibernia, has, as
yet nnt been able to fix. The receipts, as usual at
this season, are light, and transactions limited.
We quote, generally, sales at 7 a 9 cents—princi
pal soles 8£ cents. Choice lots might command a
shade higher.
Arrival of the Ilibcrnin,
The steamship Hibernia, with Liverpool papers to the 4th
and London to the 3rd inst. arrived at Boston on the 19tb.
Nothing of much political importance is brought by this
arrival. Parliament had met, and the Queen's speech is
published. The State Trials had gone through 17 days,
without settling any one principle.
In a commercial point of view, the news is of some impor
tance : Cotton had advanced jd with heavy sales. Uplands
were quoted at 4] a 6j; New Orleans, 5 a 8. Total sales,
for week ending Feb. 2, 109,570 bales.
Clny Clubs.
Inmost of the counties, during the “Court Week,” the
w(iigs are getting op political Meetings, and fonning Clay
Clubs, thereby showing, that confident »s they pretend to
be of victory in the coming contest, they are determined not
to lose it by defaulL Their zeal is commendable—in any
other cause, it would elicit our highest applause. As it is,
it should stir up the Democracy to shake off their lethar
gy, and borrow some of their opponents’ zeal. Why are
not the Democrats osiOg their usual vigilenee? Why are
they not preparingto counteract the plans of their adversa
ries by forming anti Clay Clubs, end Democratic Associa’
lions? Let ns bear from them.
Speaking of these Clay Meetings, we have received a ve
ry graphic description of the one held at Thomasion two
, . weeks ago, and of one of the speeches made on that occasion
houses, and very valiantly besieging«knocking them down .. . , . , ,,
again—telling anecdotes and embellishing the whole with I —^-which for the present we forbear publishing. Hereafter
“29th April. 1693, petition against duties on pit eial
rejected.
“29th and 30t’u June. 160S. petition against duties on
Scotch linens and whale fins rejected.
“ 6ih January, 1703, petition against duties on malt liquor
rejected.
“2lst December, 1706, Resolved, That the house will
receive no petition for any sum relating to tho public ser
vice but what it recommended by the crown.
" 11th June, 1713, this is declared to be a standing order
of the house.
"23d April, 1713, Resolved, That the house will receive
no petitio . fiir compounding debt-*, ft-:.
"25th March. 1715. this is declared the standing order of
the house.
" Sth March, 1732. a petition being offered against a bill
depending for securing the trade of the sugar colonies, it
was refused to be brought up. A motion was then made
that a committee be appointed to search precedents in rela
tion to the receiving, or not receiving, petitions against the
imposing of duties; and the question being put, it passed in
tbe negative.
" 28tit January. 1760, a petition against duties on malt li
quor being offered, on motion * that it be brought up,’ it
justed in the negative, arm. con.
" I5lh February. 1765, a peftion from Virginia, Connecti
cut, and Carolina, agiinst the bill impaling a sump duty in
Amerli-.i being offered, opon question of its • being brought
up.’ it pisse-l in the negative.
On the 1st July. 1799, a petition of newsmen against a
bill fir granting additional stamp duties on newspapers, be
ing of.-red. it was passed ir. the negative.
" On the 4th of Mirch, 1789, a petition of certain impor
ters and dealers in foreign wines. praying against an aug-
mertmion of duties, on motion ‘that the petition be brought
up.’ it passed in the negative, nem. con.
[ am authorised,then, in stating, that Parliament was nnt
only in the practice of rejecting petitions, hut, by resoluti m
of rt -biding whole clauses ofuiem; an.I tint, too, upon the
rrur.-r of taxation—of all others the most important to the
subi-vt, and one upon which the right of petition should be
held most azered.
Tbe course proposed to be porsned by the opponent* of
the r tie. viz: that of re-'oiviqg all petitions, is not sustained
nr parl.xmentarv practice; beta* we are referred by the
gentleman from New York, [ Mr. B.] “ for instruction to
England”—(instruction in humanity and liberty, I suppose.)
—let u* look beyond the acts to the motives of ParliamenL
Let us see how the reasoning of the opponents of this rule
corresponds with that of Parliament in the rejection ol peti
tions. * , ,. .
Hatsell, p. 206. after laying down the rule by which peti
tions were rejected, states: “The principles upon which
this role was adopted appears to be this: that a tax exten
ding in ill effect, over every part of the kingdom, and more
or lea* nffteting every individual, and in its nature neces-
,-ir'dy ond intentionally imposing a burden upon the people,
it cr.n answer no end or purpose whatever, for any set of
petitioners t > state these circumstances ns a crievnnee to the
House.’’ Now, how do the opponents of this rule reason J
Ai i-m.t'iiisn (slavery) “extending in it* effect” not ba
the itnpottance of that right, and would not touch iL We individual feelings were concerned, it would be entirely sa-
are willing that gentlemen shall exercise the right t < asfull tiafactory to have them unite with the rest of our political
an extent, at least, as it is enjoyed in England, (for that I friends in the State.in giving jt* vote in Convention to him
seems to be the summit of their ambition;) but we come to who waa |Le choice of the majority.
" ’ * ’ **** That this suggestion had not been adopted, was, I feel
issue with them as to limits and extent of that right. What
are the limits and extent of that riglfl? There must be some
point at wltte.h the right of petition ends, and that of legisla
ting by this body commences. Where does the rigl 5t of
petition end? Just where that of legislation commences-
Legislation cannot go back and intei fere with petition; nor
can petition extend forward and interfere with legislation.
The right of legislation commences the moment the House is
informed ofthe petition. If they hare a right to go one step
farther, and say we shall receive, thev have just cs much
right to say we shall refer, and we shall granL The actioo
o. the House—the right of legislation—commences with tbe
presentation of the petition; and the refnsal to accept is no
interference with tint assembling; we do not dictate the
mannerin which they shall prepare a petition; or how they
(hall present it to this body. Bat, when they have assent
bled; when they have prepared the petition; when they have
presented it to this House, when, in short, their right has
teen fully exercised and completely exhausted,—then it is
that our right commences; and as, we have not interfered
with them, we should not permit them to interfere with us
to usurp the legislative powers of the country, and dictate to
us the mode-ana mannerin which our duties shall be per
formed.
But. (says the gentleman from North Carolina.) the peti
tion should be received, "in order to know what it is the
petitionees want.” We undertake, (says the member from
Maine.) by the refusal ofthe petition, "to prejudge the case,”
ami “condemn them unheard.”
Here is another step where gentlemen reason unfairly
They assume, as a starting point upon which to found an ar
gument, that we have never seen, read, or heard the petition.
Now, sir, if this be reasoning, gentlemen have lorg lien tin
ery first rale in logic. They have failed to prove tltei
promises. It is true, in poiui of fart, that we are unacquain
ted with the objects of the petition ? I* fiyere a member
here who can rise in his place and say that he does “not
know whatthe petitioners want?” Have they not been pre
sented beyond number for years past? Has uot Congress
heard, considered, discussed, and determined, that they nan-
not entertain jurisdiction of the subject? And yet it impairs
the great right of petition, it treats the applicant disrespect
fully, for Congress, by this rule, to assert that they have
heard and determined that they have no jurisdiction over
tl.e subject. Will gentlemen inform me upon what princi
ples such an answer—the judgment of the House as to its
jurisdiction (lor that is the whole sum and substance of the
rule)—can he construed into disrespect towards the petition
ers?
Let gentlemen consider such eondncL if it had occurred
in private instead of public life. An individual presents you
with a petition today, and you inform him that you have no
power to grant his prayer; to-morrow he renews his appli
cation, and receive* the same answer, but not satisfied with
refusal after refusal, he continues to harrnss you with his
applications, until at length, worn out by hit importunities,
you adnptarule that you will not, io furure, receive htsap-
plicmions; will any one, the most fastidious say that the a-
d option of such a'rule is treating the pethfonerwidt disres
pect'
assured, not because those to whom it was addressed were
less friendly to the favorite uflhe 8tate,orless sensible of
his claims upon the respect and confidence of his country,
men. but altogether owing to considerations growing out of
tbe contest ot 1840, which they deemed imperative. I can
not lam confident, add anything to tile masterly and eloquent
disrription which you have given of that national struggle.
Neither am I mindful of the bias, which tbe relation in
which I stood towards it, is calculated to exercise upon my
opinion of its character. Yet I cannot, 1 think, deceive my.
sell in believing that the justice of the censure which you
have pronounced upon those extraordinary scenes, will now
at least, be recognized by a vast majority of the American
people.
However d.fficult it may then have been, to define
with requisite certainty the political objects for which our
opponents waged the contest of 1840, thete can now assu-
redly be oo room for misapprehension upon that subject.
The extra session following immediately upon its keels, un
masked those objects too clearly to admit of their being a-
gain obscured or misrepresented. An opportunity, and it ia
earnestly to be hoped that both parties will concur in endea-
voring to make it a fair one. will, thetefore. now be p>esen.
ted for the people of the United States to make a choice be
tween two systems for the administration of theit govern
ment, the influence of one of which, will, in all probability
affect the intererts ofthe country for good or evil, for a se-
run of years to come.
Nor is this the only, nor even the most important aspect,
in which the renewal of the contest, or which you have spo
ken with so much emphasis, and in so patriotic a spirit may
welt be regarded.
Singular as tt may seem to those who are not in a situation
to judge correctly of the circumstances, ii is nevertheless
true, luat a condemnation by the people of the United States
of many ofthe means to which our opponents had recourse
in that canvass, is not less imnnrlani to the permanent wel
fare of our coantry ami its political institutions, than the
overthrow of the principles they labored to establish. While
the effects of the success of the latter were, in a measure,
limited and temporary, the employment of the former struck
nt the very foundation upon which our political edifice was
based.
It has hitherto been oar pride to live under poli'ical in
sulations which are founded upon reason am) virtue, in tbe
establishment of which neither force nor fraud was employ
ed, and we have cheri-lied the belief, that is only by nn in
flexible observance rf the exalted principles which prevail
ed at'he period nfits formation, tliatour government’cait
be upheld. Without more particularly noticing the humil-
iating details to which you ullude in your communication,
can it be pretended that there could he any expectation of
salvarv iquiruiiont. right and left, but more frequently to
wards bit gaping and admiring audience.
Then came the soft soap pat l of the oration—in which Mr,
Calhoun waa highly complimented and pronounced his “se
cond choice,” an announcement that dieted a very profound
silence, and a long breath—ss the introduction of inch a
name ia well calculated tn in in the midst of an execrable
mixture of buffoouery deinagoguism and sophistry. The
idea of Free trade. State riuhts. Southern dignity aud inde
pendence, which arise like visous of promise whenever that
mighty nntne is called, was in sad contrast with the shallow
(Hilaries amt the low jokes of such an occasion. And so we
were not surprised that poor "Buckeye” rather choked and
boggled iu tbi* part of his march. ~
On the whole, "Buckeye” is quite a blossom in his way
Born for the vocation ol vagabond politician, he acts out
his destiny with the keen relish ofone luxuriating io the glo
ries of hi* art. In auy kindred pursuit be would have sue
ceeded equally well;—as a clown in a circus, repeating, with
enthusiastic grin, the same old jokes every night—as a ven
der of pinchbeck watches, horn combs and wooden nutmegs
—lie grander of a barrel organ, accompanied by a monkey;
or, in short, any thing in which small conscience, large im
agination and infinite impudence were required, he would
evidently make ».»*£?”“•'!: »«»tnat ne uas put off the
reamer apron, quit bis anvil, and threw dt.wn his sledge
hammer in disgust, is not at all surprising. He would never
have made a great blacksmith—that is clear. Genus homo,
is written clearly enough upon his front, hut species, com
munis loafer, still more so. He is of that illustrious race of
mortals who are born with an instinctive contempt for bard
work, and a conscientious aversion to living on his own ear
nings. Such fellows are valued beyond price bv our Whig
friends, who fondly imagine that they see the dear people
among them in any thing that savors of filth, vulgarity and
vagabondism.
From the Charleston Mercury.
ST. HELENA. Feb. 8, 1844.
jDear Sir—Believing it to be a duty highly incum
bent on me to give publicity to the treatment I found
must speedy and effectual in the cure uf that most
awful complaint the Scarlet Fever, I have taken the
liberty to beg you to give it a place in your valuable
paper. The manner, or the way it was brought in my
family, I am at a loss to accouut for.
About tho 15th of January, sevetal of my negroes
were taken with a violent sore throat, pain in the head
and fever, swelling of the glands of the neck, and
behind the cur. I then did not know what tbe disease
was; and from its rapid progtess to leimination, it
caused me to bo much alarmed; on the first day it was
a simple soro throat; in twelve hours ufter the sore
throat commenced, there was pain in the head, and
before tweoty hours, hot fever and swelling of the
glands and neck almost to suffuca'ion. I had but little
medicine on the plantation, with the exception of
Jalap, of this I gave very large doses; its effect was
astonishing, attacking the diseace at every pore, and
in two or three duys eff-eting a cure; the dose was
repeated every day until the cure was effected. Strong
red pepper tea was given in the interval: (at night
and sometimes throughout the day) from a tea cup
full to a pint, according to age; this was given tor the
sore throat. I did not know what the disease was
until it got in my family, when it then shewed itself
by the Scarlet eruptions milking their appearance,
which could not he seen on the negroes. With my
children, as soon as they complained of the sore throat,
1 gave them a full dose of Jalap ; and had no further
trouble with it, as (lie di-cusc was stopped (here, and
never went further; the next day gave a small dose
to prevent the return of which I was alraid. From
this simple t'catmcnl the di-case yielded so readily,
that I considered it a trifling tpmpMnt, and Marled for
Charleston, telling Mrs. Chuplin, if any of the other
children were attacked with iL to pursue the same
tieatment. In my absence, my two youngest children
were attacked with it; the symptoms being rather
more violent, she sent for the doctor, who came and
guve on emetic; their throats began to swell much;
after the operation of tho emetic, calomel was given,
which rapidly increased the disease, nearly to suffoca
tion, dreadful sore mouth, with great difficulty of
swallowing. When F returned home I found them in
this stale, with two Doctors attending them, I got all
the medical aid I could procure, it was too late, they
died, and were buried both in one coffin. After my
return, there were eight children (some boarding with
me) taken with the disease; un the first symptoms, I
gave Jalap, and repeated in small doses the next day,
with red pppper tea; at the end of three days they
were out playing about <he yard ; in a few esses I
gave salts the next day, whrie the symptoms were not
violent. Out of ihirty-four cases where I administer
ed the Jalap, not one remained in bed more than one
day.
Directions.— Immediately on the first symptoms,
which is sore throat, give a full dose of Jalap, to an
adult GO or 70 or even SO grains; ut night give strong
red pepper tea, front a tea cup full to a pint, accord
ing to uge and violence of the symptoms; the next
day give a small dose of Jalap, say half the quantity
given the day before, continue the pepper tea at night;
on the third day, if there is any soreness remaining in
the throat, give a doee of salts, which generally effect
if the" Orator alluded tots not more guarded io his remarks,
wa may publish 8 sketch of his Thomaston speech. -
The Bill fo pay the fine imposed opnn Gen.
Jackson by Judge Hall, in 1815. with interest, has
nt length passed both Mouses of Congress. In the
Senate, the vote \*vas, yens 30—nays 15.
Annexation of Texan.
A rumor prevailed ln*re some weeks ago, that a
Treaty had been made at Washington City, be
tween the Secretary of State And Textan Commis
sioners. for the Annexation of Texas Io the United
States—but heard nothing further ofthe matter,
until we found it announced in the Texas papers
that the Treaty had been confirmed by the United
States Senate! The information may be fine, but
—— - —,!•—« svjirrl b will turn uui tl> be 3 IttlSlitKe Z
From the Houston Telegraph.
Glorious News—Annexation.
We have received intelligence from sources of unques
tionable authority, that the Senate of the United States has
almost unanimously ratified a treaty for the annexation of
Texas to the United States. The despatches relating tn this
subject have been forwarded to our capital with all possi*
successf>r such efforts, unless founded upon the assuinp- : a cure; the doses must of course ho regulated uccurd-
tiun that the popular voice was not “under ilia guidance of
reason and virtue." or upon the supposition, that tlje moral
principles of the people to whom those degrading appeals
were made, might he corrupted by a resort to such practice
The belief that the use of such means contributed to the re-
I r tlsveholdinj Statct. ’’ sffe-t’.ng” no sr.s oat of risdiction of tbs court, Ap’.exii
lint step above the walks of private life, and enter suit of 1840. must nave lowered the character of our people
the places of power; and is the Drineuile of action ehnneedl in the estimation of mankind, and if si. lmw much would
Visityoureourts of lawjyou find a plaintiff has hroueht an their respect for us be diminished, should t}ie coming can.
action”for an amount,or of a nature, beyond or out lftlie ju- ! vass tie soeonducied, as to establish the impression that the
•• it :• tli* reply of ■ Americsn peon!# tr* liable to be alway < thus imposed upon.
ing to the ngc of the patient.
Thus my dour Sir, I have endeavored to give you
the history and treatment,—the treatment I found
(through the blessing of a merciful God) the most
spt-dy, safe ami effectual in the cure of this awful
malady; which has been, and id ways is, the scourge
of our cities and towns, and 1 may say country.
Yours very respectfully,
EDWIN CHAPLIN.
hie haste, ir. order that, if necessary, the senate may be con
vened to ratify the Treaty on the part of Texas. This •’ow
ever, will not be necessary, for our Congress in secret ses
sion, has fully authorised the President to ratify the treaty
for the abject immediately. This news may seem too good
to be true, but we have derived it from letters written by
intelligent gentlemen in the capital of the Uuited States, A
we place fall relianeein its authenticity. Gen. Murphy, who
is here on his^wa.v to Washington, does not deny it; but his
,|oyons smiles indicate too plainly that he believes the day
is close at hand. when the youngest daughter of Republican
America will be restored to tbe arms of the mother republic.
Ere another harvest is gathered in Texas, the broad ban
ner of Washington may be unfurled in glory on our Wes
tern border, and the burnished arms of American troops
will he reflected from the sparkling waters of the Nueces.
“Westward! the stars of empire takes its way!
tion that should give importance to the c »nva
and to it, the attention or every ftiend of his **'
try should be solely directed. There is
ever has been in our country since the f oim ^
tion of our Federal Constitution, a party opposed to
that instrument—a party who have been unwear
ied in their efforts to make it what it is not, and in
some respects what its framers expressly declared
it should not lie, While the constitution distinctly
limits the powers ofthe Federal Government, thi*
party totally disregards those limitations, breaks
down all the barriers erected to protect the rights of
the States, and whatever may be their object, the
legitimate tendency of all their rnensures.isto a total
subversion of the principles of our political organi-
zation, by converting our confederated, into one
grand consolidated Government,. In former times
that party in the face of the very letter ofthe Con
stitution passed the celebrated alien and sedition
laws. Subsequently under theif guidance, heed
less ofthat instrument, the Federal Government
has made large appropriations for internal improve
ment for purposes other than national, has cliarte-.
ed national hanks, and has imposed protective tar
iffs, robbing one portion of the people to fill the cof
fers of another and more favored class. The la$;
Congress was pre-eminently distinguished for its
devotion to the principles of (hat party, and for it*
encroachments upon the rights of the Slates,
not only passed the odious tariff act of 1842, aj
protective in principles as the act of 1828, and in
several respects as oppressive 3nd unjust, but also
at its last session passed the bill commanding (he
States to lay off congressional districts, evincing a
contempt for the teserved rights of the Stales, un
surpassed by any act of national legislation in the
darkest period ofFederal domination, and which,
in the purer days of republicanism in Georgia,
could not have found an apologist, much less an
advocate. It also, ■with tbe view to afford a pre
text for an onerous tariff*, passed an act distributing
to the States, the proceeds of the sales of the public
lands, and in its body, were those who were the
strenuous advocates of the duty and the right ou
the part of the Federal Government, of assuming
the payment of the debt* due by the respective
States. This party who, iu modern times, have
assumed the name of Whig, are now fully organi
zed and are acting in zealous and barntoniou*
concert. Tlrcii banner is unfurled, ond on its
folds are inscribed, a high Protective Tariff, a
National Bank, Distribution to the States of public
lands, and hostility lo llte veto power ofthe Presi
dent. Their great leader, Henry Clay, the itinera
ting aspirant for rite honors they are. anxious to
confer—the father of the American system, the
uncompromising enemy of Georgia in all her In
dian controversies, has left the sloshes of the West,
and is now in the field boldly canvassing for gold
en opinions, with whomsoever he can come in
contact. It may however, be urged by his friends
at the South, whatever opinions may be entertain
ed and expressed in other portions of (lie Union,
that Mr.- Clny tbe embodiment of the principles of
the whig party, is not now the advocate of a Pro
tective Tariff*. He has unequivocally expressed
his approbation ofthe Tariff* of 1842. If that it
not Protective tn its chnfacter, we have never had
a Protective Tariff - , and it is difficult ft say what
will constitute one. But besides, look at Mr
Clay’s emphatic remarks, delivered in the Senate
of the United States in March last. He then said,
’•lie had lived and would die an advocate ofthe
The Buckerc Blacksmith.
As this celebrated character was in Columbu
last week, enlightening the good people of that city
on the beauties of Whiggery—and will, in all prob
ability, make us a visit—many of our readers will
doubtless be gratified by the*graphic sketch ofthe
man anil his oratory, which we extract from the
Mobile Tribune.
P. S. Since the above was in type, the Buck
Eye has been here—and, as far as we can learn,
fully corroborates the account given of him in the
Tribune. Those who are anxious to know more
of his character, may be gratified by consulting the
filesof 1840,—particularly the Extra Globe, pages
70 and 109, where bis biogtnphy is briefly sum
med up, with responsible affidavits.
Democratic Republican meeting.
According to previous notice a large and respect
able portion of the Democratic Party of Bibb coun
ty, assembled at the Court-House, for the purpose
of organizing n Democratic Association; and, on
motion of Dr. James M. Green, Col. D. C. Camp
bell, was ca’led upon to preside, who explained
the object of the meeting in a few eloquent and
pertinent remarks, J. G. Coleman and T. E. Gor
man were requested to act as secretaries. On mo
tion rf Col. John Lamar, the chairman appointed a
committee of five, who were Messrs. John Lamar,
Dr. J. M. Green, L. Ross, J. Dean, anil A. E.
Ernest, to draft resolutions expressive of the sense
ofthe meeting. The committee retired and after a
few moments reported through their chairman, the
following resolutions, which wete unanimously
adopted :
As the approaching election for the chief magis
trate of our country involves principles of vital im
portance to the well-being and even the very exis
tence of republican institutions, it is the duty of
hose who are the friends of that Constitution by
which they arc secured, not only to remember
that “perpetual vigilance is the price of liberty,”
but by their conduct prove their appreciations of
the truth of this axiom. It is a matter of but little
moment in itself considered, what one of the aspir
ants of either parly shall fill the presidential chair;
Protective System, he had never changed his prin
ciples, they were now the same as they had ever
been—as far be could go he would.’’ Tbe ques
tion, then, now presented to the Democracy of the
Union, is not simply whether this or that ma n
shall be elevated to the presidential Chair, but
whether the constitution itself, the sacred charter
of our liberties, and of our rights, shall be preserved.
If the principles of our opponents triumph, its in
junctions will be disregarded, its restrictions con
temned, and this noble effort of the genius and
wisdom of our patriot fathers will have proved A
splendid failure. When such is the issue, what
course shall we pursue? Shall we idly fold our
arms, anti take no part in the contest ? If the prin
ciples for which tltose who have gone before us
have struggled, and under the control of which our
institutions have been sustained, and our country
has flourished, were worthy of their efforts, are
they not equally worthy of ours? Inaction at the
present crisis would be pusillanimous and crimi
nal, would prove us tbe degenerate sons ol noble
sires, recreant to the nrinciples we profess—forget
ful of the glorious recollections ofthe past, and in
sensible to the claims upon us of those who shall
come after us, and to all the brilliant hopes and
anticipations of the future. Let us then buckle on
our armor; let cvety Democrat be found nt his
post, nerved with the consciousness ofthe immense
results dependent upon his efforts, nnddetermined at
every hazard, zealously and firmly to defend his
position ; then it may be confidently expected, that
with “a long pull, a strong pull and a pull altogeth
er, the constitution will be preserved, and the re
public will be safe.’’
Be il therefore Resolved, That the principles for
which the Democratic party ate now contending,
are the same for which the Republican party con
tended in 1800—which were triumphant in the elec
tion of Mi. Jefferson—which we sustained at the
piesidentiai election in 1840, anti which ate embo
died in the Resolutions of the Baltimore Conven
tion of that year.
Resolved, That while we distinctly declare
that “ we are no man’s men” we are prepared,
and hereby solemnly ple-Jge ourselves in the ap
proaching election !or President, to use our efforts
in the support of that candidatie, whose principles
coincide with our own, whose prospect of success ts-
tnost certain, and whose elevation will most eel-
tainly secure the triumph of our political tenets.
Resolved, That in ortler to perpetuate and ex
tend the principles of the Democratic party o-
mongst us, and more efficiently aid in accomplish*
ing the great object of its organization, that it is ex
pedient to establish in Bibb county, a Democratic
association.
Resolved, That we recommend to our.Demo
cratic bret It ren in other con mien ofthe State,
organization of similar associations.
Resolved, That a committee of five be app 0in *
ted to select the officers of this association, ronsisiicfi.
of a President, ten Vice Presidents, two Recordiafi
for with regard to talent, it is freely admitted all
are amply qualified. It is however a matter of and one corresponding secretary
infinite moment what set of political principles by
his elevation shall prevail in the administration of
the government. Upon this question depends the
perpetuity of our union, the liberty of our people. Officers, and tbcirr*
On motion, a Committee ”Vns (hen appoia te ^ to
nominate the Officers of I* e Association-.
The Committee repc /r(ed |he following nara**»»
port was
unanimously adopted
tr.'
mo,
ids
C
iea
II
l»*
t*
W
.1
the