Newspaper Page Text
LETTER FROM THE HON. HARRISON GRAY OTIS TO
JOHN WHIPPLE, Esq.
Dear Sir: I received with much satisfacton your letter with a report
so the Legislature of Rhode Island on the Atherton Resolutions, mid your
•perch explanatory •>! your dissent from that report. It is certainly
flattering to me to know that I live in your recollection, and that the
opinion of one so long withdrawn from the notice of the world, and all
participation m public affairs, could create either confidence or distrust
in your own—formed with the advantage of intellect in Tull vigor, anti
defended by arguni tut to which nothing of substance can he added
Yonr request under those ciicumstanccs would have imposed upon toe
. an obligation of courtesy to form the best opinion I might upon SHtHivel
anbject. But as your report (though upon a new question you
have disposed of by an eloquent aud conclusive argument) grows yput of
old subject—the condition of slavery among our Southern b js’llen.
•nd the relationship between their righ's and our duties— "jjW l has
been familiar to my thoughts for half a century. I was quite prJKk'd to
••amine its merits, and have no other trouble in replying to
hot that which is common to age—a loss where to begin and nfeje to
leave off.
Had I been n member ot Congress, called to decide upon the \ther
tsn resolutions, I should not have voted for them. \t the same time, I
’ have no doubt oftho constitutional pow erot the House to adopt them.—
But I considered the original refusal of Coiign ss to hear, commit, and
•binin a report upon the resolutions regardim; slavery in the District of
Columbia us unfortuiiaio and impolitic. It was sure to be coulotmded
la popular belief with a denial of the right id petition itself, and thus
touch the community in its most irritable nerve. It ivnsalsotm unusual
•nd apparently au unkind and cavalier mod. of cutting shoit a new in
qairy—or nn old one requested under new circumstances—entitled to
attention on account of the number of petitioners. I had also predicted,
three years ago, in a public speech, that the al- 't ivu m“ v C’uKut wo’.’.' '
be mingled w ith political intrigue aud parly p-’itics These objections i
I thought would be in a great measure ohr ia i.d by the report of the com
mittee. which, being under the control oftli - majority, would have end
ed in Ihesatnc result ns laying the petitions on the table, without afford- j
ieg plausible occasion I'oroftence or complaint.
But I am equally free to declare that, hail I been a member of tho I
Rhodt-lsland Legislature, 1 should have been found on voursideiu op
posing the report of your committee, inasmuch as the question there as- I
•anted an entirely different aspect. It is one thing for Congress to re.—s
fu»e to act tipi n a petition, aud another tl-.qig for a State Legislature to j
ds»y the t ight ofthe former to regulate its own proceedings. There is :
nothing m ihc.Aihet ton resolutions w hich negatives the right otpetiti- u, :
•nd nothing w hich in fact, impairs its value. A petition, jti'ilie coast!- '
Rational view, i* a request offered to a government supposed to h ive’ju- '
risdicion ofthe suWJect for a redress of some grievance. The right to ’
frame, and of consequence to offer such petition, belongs to every peace- i
■ble assembly of the people. This right also involves the right to make '
the Gor erument acquainted with the subject-matter of the petition— not j
•• have it read in er tense, as a matter of course, to which there may bo j
valid objections. Thousands of petitions may relate t » tho same single I
•bject or to objects palpably out of tho province and competency ofthe j
Government to decide, or on which the minds of a majority may be !
known to be made up. They may be flagrantly indecorous, ami numer- I
and voluminous enough to occupy in leading unreasonable time.— (
But if not read, the Legislature addressed is bound, at least, to hearken i
to • statement ofthe subject-jnattcr—to be informed of the character of
the grievances sought lobe redressed. Otherwise tho right of petition j
would be nugatory —at least nominal, and unworthy of a place among |
the fundamentals of a Constitution—the voice” of men ‘‘crying tn the '
wilderness.”
This right, thus explained. ha«. I think, an intrinsic value. Ttbelongs
to the whole mid every portion of the People—extends to all subjects—
is indispensable to an exposition of their sentiments and wants, ami in
papular and paternal G overnments will, when exercised, command at- ;
tention and obtain relief, unless the first sbal', after information and re
flection, be'thought superfluous, ami the last inexpedient or impractica- '
hie.. The exercise of this right in a particular case may, :is you have in- !
geniously shown, be of no value. Still the right remains, and has a value '
in itself—like a perennial fountain, in repairing to w hich one man’s
pitcher may be broken and his water spilt, while the source remains inox- ,
naustihle.
M ith this explanation of my views of the right and value of the privilege 1
• f pet.tion secured by the Constitution, lam ptepared to go tho whole I
length ofyour argument nod couutei report in the distinctions so elaborate- ’
ly drawn between the t ight of petition in the People and the right of Con- ■
gress to regulate their own proceedings, and consequently to dispose of!
petitions at their will and pleasure. This you have so amply illustrated,
that the argument is exhausted, ami little more is left me than to say, :
“ditto to Mr. Burke.” I will venture, however, to make one suggestion >
confirmatory of your views; and that, not to render them more lumin- ‘
bus, (whichcannot be done,) but merely because it had occurred tome ■
•s derisive of the question from my own unaided reflection.
W bile the abolitionists insist upon the duty of Congress to do some
thing more than merely hear their petitions or a statement of their con
toots, they furnish no standard for measuring or defining its extent Thev 1
do not inform us nt what stage of proceedings it may he allowable for
Congress to exercise its discretion in rejecting or postponing a petition.
It would seem reasonable that the claims of petitioners to tho attention
•f Congress should not be regarded as of a higher character than those
appertaining to their Representatives on the floor—that the privilege of i
the constituent should not exceed that of a member in his place. But it
is notorious that the ordinary proceedings of Congress are upon resolu
tions offered by a member orj-eported by a committee. Every member ,
is entitled to offer a res diition upon any subject; and it is equally
certain that the House p issesses and e.xet vises, at pleasure, the right of
refusing to consider resolutions, aud of postponing or rejecting them
without debate. The lips of the member are thenceforth sealed upon'
the subject thus disposed of- Suppose, however, that the same subject
is afterwards presented in the form of a petition from persons out ofdoors
—perhaps by jhe same member - and that the House is constitutionally
bound to entertain and act upon it because it is a petition: the action I
must he upon resolutions, and these must of necessity conflict with tho!
previous decision, ami supersede the rules that have been applied to i es
olutions on the same subject. Here, then, the right of the House to reg- !
ulate its ow n proceedings is annulled by the right of petition.
Let thin doctrine lie established, and there is no vagary or extrava- '
gance which an assemblage of petitioners may not concoct into the form I
of a petition on'which Congress must act, or violate the Constitution.— 1
In the North we may petition for the abolition of slavery in the United
State*. The South may ask to open the slave trade. One set of per- ,
sons may propose to amend the Constitution by abolishing the Execu- j
live, or the Seriate, or the Judiciary ; another by making the President (
-eligible for life There are, possibly, some persons in the United States
who would prefer a limited monarchy to the existing Government. In- ! 1
deed, an endless variety of projects over which a great majority of the .
House may be satisfied that Congress has no jurisdiction, cr on which ' I
their opinion* are fixed, or which they deem it impolitic, dangerous, or i 1
premature to agitate, and which they would instantly suppress if pro- 1 i
pounded by one of their own members, would lie forced upon their de.- ‘ I
liberations, because, forsooth, the right of petition is sacred. Thus the . j
control ofits proceedings would be taken from Congress and transferred i
to any ami to every assemblage of people convened to petition for redress!
of grievances lu fact, the right of initialing Jaws a’t.i of compeliin"
Congress to act upon them would thus be involved in tho right of p ts
ticn, and the business of legislation, ns coinin’ted bye very organized
body of delegates ft om lime immemorial, would become impracticable.
But. apart from the merits of this particular question, I freely confess
that I regard with deep concern the intervention of our State Legisla- ;
ture. in any shape, regarding the abolition of slavery in the South. It is
uoue of our affair. We can do nothing towards changing or abolisliin” ■
that condition, but way do, as we have done, very much towards ag- I
gravating its evils If slavery is a stain, it is on*? with whiiji the Union
was born, and which cannot b : removed by our effort unless by cutting :
off the limb which wears it. I’o judge coircctly on this subject, we '
must not only resort to the Fed ral Constitution, but go behind it. The
members of the first Congress came from the South with a conscious
ness of a peculiar hit rc»t arising from their slaveholding tenure. From I
the North, they went under the impression that al! men were “born I
free," and would become so <F/aclo whenever the cdmiics should b ; !
declared indr peudciit, Within my remembrance, in the years ’75 and '
'76, the volunteer minute men paraded the stree’s with metallic letter•, i
“no slavery," on tlicir caps—which, though not intended peculiarly to I
bear upon th : condition of tho African race in the South, puinl.d toward*
it It was not easy for the men of the North to reconcile these doctrines '
m universal lilvwty with the same doctrine piofessed by the South, but
qualified practically, by their holding slaves in bondage. There was, !
then, no resource but to leave that subject at rest, and to secure tho con
fidence of the South by leaving shivery to State jurisdiction. It was in !
concession to the jealousies, fears, prejudices, ami habits, of the South, 1
principally emanating from this otic cause, that Peyton Randolph was!
unanimously chosen President of the first Congress, mid George Wash
ington commander of the army. Am! it is notorious that this was the
sourccof tlie ■■c nbarra.ssinents" and “delay” in forming the Confedera- '
tiou of 1778. ami in combining into one general system the various sen- I
tiinMM* ami interest* of a continent divided “into so many sovereignties ;
•nd independent communities,” which are so forcibly set forth in the :
address to ibe People of the States by the Congress of the preceding 1
yew?. Looking into the Confederation itself, we find that the parties to
Il •».• the “//w inhabitants of etwh of these States”—terms involving the !
rcc’igmtjoa es si iverv. and ;■ virtual assent to exclude slaves from the |
iiglit» of freedum. Passing du >n to the era of the Federal Constitution i
ii r> in.tnifcstth.it the institution of lavetyis by that instrument assented '
tn. and agreed to be protected. The agreement to surrender fugitive
•laves, ami to tolerate the importation fur a term of year.-., would have
>eon a perfidious rueckcry, if the right were mentally reserved of ren-|
derma ih-se clauses ii««perate by promoting tho liberation of slaves rc
stored or imported. Equally delusive would be th • power granted tn
the General Government of ‘ easing insurrections,” if, in those most I
likely to happen, the troop* ordered for service should be led by the I
mnxiins of their legislative comoitnsders to favm the iamrgeut*. i
Thus, it is beyond controversy, tfeat w hatever questions may arise rc- I
spectmg the cm.fiict of junsdictioH between the Fedcial ami the State
Government* from various constructs of tho constitutional instrument, !
the condition m the several States is manifestly not a ease of
- the People of the
lined Hates under full tidvnoment of all circumstances, have absolute- I
lyatjured nml covenanted not to agitate by their representatives in Con- ’
press. 1 his is, indeed *„ incontrovertible that Ido not find it denied ;
any quarter. But the admission of this ( ,!< ato Federal jurisdiction i
over slave property ..reststibly draw* afterit the same conclusion against I
thought oftale jurisdiction—and, consequently, the right of one State I
to attempt, through tho memurn of its Legislature, by iu resolutions or '
enactrnmits to operate upon the condition of slavery rather than upon I
nny otherdomestie institution of another State. Sm h ri"ht, it is self-I
evident, could have no foundation but iiia-Fedcral comptu t. Not being
found therein,it become* a non entity. When, therefore, Uhode-M iud
and Massachusetts »dojm measures intended to have a bctiriii" on the
domestic institutions of Sotith Carolimt ami Virginia, they shoot from
their spheres, and assume Hie attitude of independent States making
laws at other independent States, which can have mi legal force; thus
exhibiting a spectacle which, but for its sinister tendency, would merely
deserve ridicuje as a species of burlesque legislation. lam aware that
th*! fanatical suphisters, in justification of these vagaries, disavow the
expectation ami intent of promoting slave emancipation otherwise than
by aw tkeniiq’the consciences and enlightening the understanding*; of
the owner*. With individuals or associations wdio sincerely expect to
attain th.'j de i * ri consummation by these mean*, my view of this ques
tion Ins no eoncer.u. Jam not speaking of tho freedom of the prers.iior
••I .<p,”-e!i, ••or «,f pen ; but of legislative propriety and dignity—of tho
wisdom ami d u ornm of legislation by ono sovereign State, in order to
‘oslighmn the bewildered minds of’thr; People of another- —to enact moral
• • >*'our *■ • homilies on übstnict rights, and a' lishe commcntuiie* on
) laws and customs other than their own—to fulminate anathemas against
j the religious institutions of Canada, or tho social institutions of Louisia
i na, which, in this relation, stand on the same parallel. Neither does
t ’ this reasoning apply to those who, laying their bauds on their heart*, can
r say that their object in inciting tho action of the State Legislature is con
fined to the District of Columbia. Their number, I imagine, is exceed
- iitgly small, and while they believe it to be expedient and obligatory on
I their consciences to pursuit this course, nobody is entitled to bo judge
t over them.
I As to the rest, would to God the folly of our legislative proceed- I
• ings w ere the worst of their effects. But lam profoundly convinced
1 that if this mania lor tampering with the slave tenure of the planta
i tion States shall generally pervade the Legislatures ofthe North, or,
• j h'd< ed, be permitted to go much further, the days of this Union will
I shortly be numbered. The people of those States already think
they discern in it the commencement and slow approach of a mine
j destined to blow their social fabric into air, and they will anticipate
j the explosion by cutting off the communication. These suggestions,
lam aware, arc, with many themes of derision and contempt. In a
; strain of braggart self-complacency, that tinder-values all prowess
but their own, they insist that the South date not secede; that the
measure w ould place this favorite interest in greater jeopardy, and
■be destruction to other interests. As a Northern man, I have no dis
position to break a lance with those who bold to these opinions. I
am unwilling to believe that, in the event of a partition of the fa-
i mily estates, they could not manage their share of the inheritance
I without us. But it is lamentably true that they think otherwise, and
that gieat names and splendid intellects among them are enlisted in
■ propagating the opinijn that they could not only do as well, but bet
! ter —certainly much better, unless we forbear our persecution—in a
a.-parde cslitbl-slimer.t: that would be the sunshine, and ours
the. shade and the mist. ’I Hey nmj he cnlirelv mistaken ; but in I
! w hat Government is it found that the passions of a people, or of their
! rulers, excited to a certain pitch, do not prevail over their interest?—
It was tint for the interest of your ancestors or mine to bravo the dan
! gers ol a it volution, that their wives might “sip bohea” without pay-
■ mgaduty. And there arc many persons among our Southern breth
-1 ten probably a great marjorily—who regard the perpetual assaults
■■ made upon their light to their slaves, as menacing dangers to their
property, liberty, lives, and social contorts, not less flagrant than
: those which united them with us in a common cause.
Ai,er all, the blindness ot those who deny that the South can be
j lot ecd to a secession from the Union is less astonishing and dangerous
I than tht> infatuation of others, who console themselves with calcula
lions that the loss would not be sensibly felt by the rest of the Con
' feder.u-y. There would, say they, remain enough of population and
I material, for all the objects of a grand, prosperous, and powerful
j nation, and sufficient to check, and if necessary, give law to neigh
boring States. The East and West, as of course, would become,
| ipso facto, a new and homogenious confederacy, without the trouble
I of a new arrangement among themselves: a cluster plucked from
so exuberant a vine may easily be spared ; and the corps d'armec
! would be more efficient without a wing composed of troops who are
j always disposed to discontent and mutiny, and embarrass the opera
. tions of every campaign.
Whoever, in reply to these reckless enthusiasts, should assume the
j duty of showing the consequence that would be found to await th«
j disruption of the Union, would find himself not engaged in a school
i boy’s calculation, to be made in a day with slate and pencil, at Colum
i bia College, in South Carolina, but in compiling a volume of no small
i size, referring to the posture of the country piior to the Constitution,
! and annalizing the wonderful changes which have occurred with time
in its commercial, agricultural, political, and geographical relations.
The results of such an investigation would, I fear, prove less flatter
ing to the capability of the non slaveholding States, (and especially
i of New England,) erected into a rival government, of persevering
i in the rapid advance to prosperity' hitherto experienced, than some
I of us fondly imagine; admitting, even, that the scene of separation
| would be confined to one act, and that the rest of the Star# would
.continue “losing together.” But how can any, with the exam
! pie, and not the fear, of the fate of the republics on the Southern
i continent of this new world before their eyes, indulge in the dream i
that we should divide only into two confederacies? Looking upon
the’iirip of the American continent, we perceive the garden of the i
[ world, extending from Mexico and Cape Horn, converted into a bear i
! garden. Independent States springing up one day like mushrooms,
! and withering the next—yet living long enough to inflict some new i
calamity on their people—commit some new ravage, and some new ’
disappointment to the friends of liberty—one day federal, and the I
next day anti-federal; changing governments, boundaries and names,
so that nothing is constant but the spirit of revolution and the canse
of agitation, which, with different phases, but always enhancing in
tensity, broods over contiguous, jealous, and rival democracies so-
menting their feuds, and annihilating their prosperity. With this
prospect in full view, with the news of contests, dissensions, carnage &.
desolation, and of perpetual civil war made the order of the day, in
thoSe new-fangled States, we cherish the deceitful imagination that
we, an enlightened chosen people, are beyond the Teach of such ca
lamities. There is we think, some charm in our character that will
prove, in all events, an antidote to the contagion of bad principles,
and the dangers of anarchy. That our people form a varietv in the
; great family of the human species, and have a natural aptitude for
making constitutions and federal compacts. But the onlv claim of
our people to gooJ sense pre-eminent over that of other nations must
i be found, if at all, in their having framed, and for so long a time ad
ministered, a government sufficient for all the objects of general lib
erty and security, under which we are advancing to the highest sum
mit of national prosperity. But t.he good sense which, having ac-
quired these advantages, is not -able to retain them, and suffers the j
golden fruit to become an apple of discord and fall ftom her hands, j
must cease to be a subject of boast or reliance.
1 he first measure, under the most favorable aspect of separation,
that must be inevitable, would be a convention of the People of the
free .States to remodel the Constitution, and adjust it to the new or
der of things. A partition treaty of some sort for the apportionment
of the public domain, and the disposal of its property remaining in the
South and for regulating commerce, would be indispensable, and no
power can be foup.'a in the Constitution authorizing any treaty or
contract founded on the contingency of a division of the Union. Be
sides, the disturbance of the balance of power among the Slates, the
location of the Seat of Government, and innumerable causes spring
ing from the prodigious alteration that has occurred and is in progress
in the relationship of the various parts of the Union to each other,
would probably occasion a convention to be demanded with acclama
tion. Supposing this to take place, are we of Rhode Island and
Massachusetts* quite secure that the first one of the first subjects of I
discussion would not be a proposal fora new basis of State represen
tation in the Senate 1 This it is notorious was the great stumbling
block to the framers of the Federal Constitution, which, for a long
time threatened to be insurmountable. And now that “ Empire
States” have grown up within and beyond the old limits, would they
bo likely to acquiesce in our aliquot part of political power in one
branch of the Legislature! If not, should we be ready to resign it?
And if not, again, do we not here discover the germe of an outbreak
which would prove “ the beginninjof the end ?” Again, without at
tempting to enumerate what no man can number, are we of New-
England satisfied that the alternative of uniting and-forming a new
confederacy with all the other States would be left at our option?—
May not the myriads of the “ great valley” imagine, perhaps truly,
that their interests will be more closely affiliated with a Southern
titan with a Northern confederacy, and that free access to the ocean
by their rivers and a free trade with Southern ports will outweigh all
o<her considerations? In which case they will set us off “to live in
Sinope.” Furthermore, is our prospect of dwelling together in unity,
twen io New England, of harmonizing in our views of public meas
ures and polio j, altogether cheering? And are our resources so pro
digious that wo are ready and willing to go alone?
In a word it is manifest that a new convention would be a very
different assembly from that of its predecessors. No parallel can be
formed between the circumstances of the country which generated
the “ constitutional assembly,” and its present condition. The pop
ular sentiment every where was fixed and united in one conviction—
the necessity of a federal government adapted to all the State*.—
Hence a sympathy in tho great community resulting from experience
of common sufferings, and a good humor, from the consciousness of
honesty and sincerity in their aim at a common object. Grave and
! w< i"lity differences of opinion undoubtedly existed, and were brought
] into that convention and debated with “hearts of controversy;*’ but
! they were the hearts of great statesmen, patriots, and jurist*, warmed
Uiv the zeal which prevails in a Congress of ambassadors, but un
; tainted by the infection of the spirit of personal parties, which was
as yet unknown.
I In such hands we know it was a Herculean labor to create a gov
i ernrnent for the Union, but they were skilful and experienced work
! men, and had only to apply old and established principles in framing
; a new model. To this end, men were elected in reference only to
i high character for talents and services in the cabinet and the field,
I with Washington at their head. How different then was the honest
; strife of opinion and debate among those men, turning principally up
: on theories and the great fundamentals of public view and real pecu
! liarilies of local institutions and interests, and aiming sincerely at
: fair and honorable compromise, which they providentially attained,
| from that to be expected from men sent from a community chafed
; and embittered by party passions and collisions, nominated by cabals,
’ by the procurement of intrigue, ignorant of the first principles of
i constitutional or national polity. I cannot doubt that members of
; this description would be found in a new convention, sufficient to
I embarrass and defeat any comprehensive scheme of policy adapted
Ito Hie exigencies of a great confederacy of Slates. Tho times, my
j dear sir, are sadly out of joint—the minds of men teem with fancies
lin rnxpcct to government, of which our fathers never dreamed. No
I nia*qn in the science of government seems to be settled except that
! every thing is to be doubted. There is not a danse in the Federal
Constitution which some party, when convenience suits, is not ready
to meet with a special plea or demurrer. The State Constitution* are
like the highways, requiring to be mended every year, and which any
man who can handle a spade or a pick-axe is competent to repair—
thus making straight the path for the “march of intellect.” The re
. formers are “ abroad,” especially in those places where the “ school
master” is at home. And, despite of the good sense and illumina-
• lion of my countrymen, I do not believe the soil of Mexico, or Co
i lumbi.i, or Bolivia, or Chili, or Peru, is more prolific in all the varie
j tie* of political tmmoil, than would spring up in the hotbed of a new
> convcmi'Hi of these dis-united Slates. AH this, perhaps, may strike
i you.as the orpen of an old man’s dream, mid may deserve no better
estimate, But haying in vivid recollection the great events of tho
Revolution, from the landing of General Gage in Boston to its close
—having known in my boyhood, and in riper age been honored by
an intimate acquaintance with many of the members of the old Con
gress, (of which iny father was one) —having witnessed the scenes
which preceded the adoption of the Federal Constitution, and been
familiar with the impediments to that happy issue, which filled all
minds with agonizing apprehensions fur the fate of the country—it
is perhaps natural that I should feel unutterable concern, as I certain-
I ly do, in perceiving that the time is coming for the discussion of top
ics, the mention of which in a serious way would have been regarded
as the superfluous raving of a diseased mind. My personal acquaint
ance,"too, with the men of the South, in public and private life, for
more than forty years, has been considerable, and with some of them
my intimacy has been strict and durable. 1 can perceive no justifi
cation for my fellow-citizens on this side of the line of Mason and
Dixon to throw firebrands, artows, and death on the other side of
that line. The evil of slavery is not a new discovery ; its turpitude
wa» • lubject quite as familiar to the People of the North when they
•ought the alliance of those of the South, as it is at this hour, or at
least it wa» so when they framed the Constitution. If other nations
have since that lime abolished slavery in their own domain, the con
sequence is that ihc amount of misery incident to that condition is
diminished, and we should be thus reconciled to wait for “ coming
events,” however apparently remote, rather than to do wrong that
right may come of it. Bet the strong and final argument in my mind
is that already hinted. Our States and Legislatures can do nothin"
but agitate, provoke, and drive to desperation our Southern brethren 5
defeating their own object by adding new rivets to the black man’s
chains, which I believe is the effect of every legislative movement.
I am yet to learn how emancipation forced unon tho nlanfer. admit
ingthe thing to be possible, can be reconciled with the professions of I
those who announce the whole science of government to consist in
promoting the greatest good of the greatest number. But I must re
member that while there is no end to this subject, there must be an
end to your patience, and am, with great respect and esteem, your
obedient servant, H. G. OTIS.
Boston, March 1, 1539.
WHIG RULE IN NEW YORK.
“Tho land of tbo free and the home of tho bravo.” 9
Asa striking proof that the American people are still true to the I
glotious principles, that overwhelmed, and completely defeated the i
concoctors of the Alien and Sedition laws, and the leaders of the !
Hartford Convention, we may refer to the late great victory of the i
democracy in the city of New York. An old, yet true adage, says, !
“ when rogues fall out, honest men will get their own,” and so it is
in this case. Ihe New \ork Courier and Enquirer, which lauded
Aaron Clark, as the very pink of statesmanship and the wisest of
civic functionaries, ftom the days of Dogberry himself, for activity
in preventing the landing of emigrants in New York, (or rather to
use his own words “ foreign paupers”) in 1837-8, now denounces
him as the cause of their common defeat; and, with true Whig con
sistency, throws the very course, he then pursued into his teeth, as the
primary reason of their discomfiture.
The Courier says: “Mr. Clark exacted without any notice what
ever, a commutation fee of ten dollars from all passengers arriving
from foreign countries in our harbor, whereas, previously the prac
tice had been to demand only one. The consequence was, that some
fifteen hundred or two thousand poor and destitute foreigners, who
had not the ability to meet this increased demand upon them—for all
they bad, had probably been expended in paying their passage money,
and the previous commutation fee, —were driven away and landed
near Amboy, where they had to sock shelter and support from the
compassionate, whilst for weeks, the avenues of the city were guard
ed by police officers, to prevent their entrance to it.
“ We will not stop to inquire into the necessity, which the Gazette
urge* existed, for the exaction of an increased commutation fee, but
admit it on general grounds , yet surely, “common sense and com
mon honesty” required that some previous notice of it should have
been given to these who would be called upon to pay it; that men
•hould not htive been allowed to leave the countries of their birth on
the faith of a long established practice, and on reaching the land of
their hone, find it doted to them by the introduction of an usage en
tirely new.”
“ Murder will out,” at last. Here, the Courier, in the bitterness of
it? anguish—in its “ weeping and wailing and gnashing of teetki,”
tells of the misery—the countless the unknown, number of unfortu
nate foreigners who flocked to our shores, as the “asylum of the
oppressed of all nations—the country which they were taught io re
verence, as
“ The laad of the free and the home of the brave;”
to kiss the virgin soil of Freedom—to chaunt the song of Liberty—
no!—to be turned away with scorn—and contempt by the whig Mayor
of New-York—to be tossed again upon the “mountain -vave”—to
take their chance upon the waters, through which they had already
passed. And, under what pietext were they kept from landing?—
Because they had not $lO a piece. It mattered not whether they
were the countrymen of a Montgomery—of a Pulaski—of a Ster
ling—of a Lafayette—it was enough that they had not not ten dol
lars! Oh magic power of gold what canst thou not do? A bank
robber—a forger—a swindler, a cheat, might roam at largo through
the city of Gotham, under the sway of Mayor Clark, but the honest,
hardy laborer—the “ unwashed artisan,” the despised material for
the manufacture of a locojoco, should not pollute its “milky way”
unjess he could produce a passport in the shape of ten dollars!!!
Slandered Autocrat of all theßussias! Maligned Emperor of Aus
tria !! Belied Commander of the Faithful !! ! Traduced, yet most
high, and mighty Great Mogul!!!! Which of you, sovereign, and
royal despots, as you ate, would keep a poor—but honest foreigner
from entering your dominions, under such a plea? Not one! It
remained for the Whig Mayor of New York, to desecrate the plains
of Freedom by such a charge.
Yet, what reward has he reaped ? How have his fellow-citizens
recompensed him for his activity in stemming the tide of immigra
tion ? Simply, to walk him out of office, and “leave him alone in
his glory.” Mr. Claik is an advocate for depriving naturalized citi
zens of their right of suffrage—he is for denying those who may arrive
at our shores, of the privilege of adopting the countiy as their own.
He is ultra in these opinions, and we rejoice to say, finds few, very
few, even among his own political-party, to sanction his views. But
his race is run. His day is over, and he may henceforth repose in
quiet. All he can do,’ will not deprive our great country of the
proud and brilliant appellation she has long since received from the
patriotic and the good. No! She will long remain, what she is—
“ The land of tho free and the home of the brave.”
[)SavanH«7i Georgian.
From the Charleston Courier.
Our Correspondent “Patriotism” has shot another spent arrow from
his quiver—he has revived another old charge against Mr. Van Bu
ren—one of which the American Senate made a most unwise use
when they seized it as the pretext for rejecting that gentleman’s no
mination as Minister to England. Does our Correspondent hope—
nay even dream—to use it with more effect than did the Senate?—
Did not Mr. Van Buren join issue with that august body as to the
propriety of his conduct in relation to the West India trade, and have
•not the people again and again triumphantly sustained him? Was
not this very proceeding on the part, of the Senate, one of the most
efficient causes in elevating Mt. Van Buren first to the Vice Presiden
cy and then to the Presidency ? The Senate made an attempt to
stigmatize and degrade Mr. Van Buren, but their act recoiled upon
themselves, and the rejected minister soon inflicted on them the sig
nal rebuke of his presence as their presiding officer, and in due course
became the chief of our republic. It was party opposition that
prompted this proceeding against Mr. Van Buren, and to that cause
may we asoribe the ferocity of the warfare watjed against him. To
say the least, it was an unwise and impolitic warfare, and we know
that it was against the judgment of one of its distinguished support
ers, to whom our Correspondent alludes. He predicted the result
with unerring sagacity—he foresaw that it would be an clement of
Mr. Van Buren’s success—and yet the exigencies of party arrayed
him in debate against his deliberate judgment. What then can our
Correspondent promise to himself by a recourse to this blunted wea
pon? It did not prevent, but rather promoted, Mr. Van Buren’s ele
vation successively to the Presidency and Vice Presidency ; and
how can it prevent bis ro-election? Mr. Van Buren has been alrea
dy tried on these and other stale charges, now revived by our Cor
respondent-Mho verdict of the people has accorded him a triumph
ant acquittul—and they will not suffer him to be twice tried for the
same offence. We by no means admit that Mr. Van Buren was
wrong either tls to the mode or the merits of his proceedure in rela
tion to the West India Trade—but were it even so, his defence was
Complete on the ground of intrusions from the President—for it is
well known that “ Old Responsibility” avowed the deed as his own.
We cannot think that our Correspondent’s argument is altogether in
keeping with his title—for we are unable to see the “patriotism” of
endeavoring to stigmatize the head of our republic for an act wh'mh
the country has approved. Let our correspondent rake as he may in
the a»hes of the past, he will find no live coal with which to scorch
a hair on Mr. Van Buren’s head.
Our Correspondent forgets history, when he alleges that Mr. Van
Buren was elected President only by the plurality of the Whig can-
• didates. It is well known that he would have distanced either single
• handed ; and that it was the forlorn hope of the Whigs to run differ
ent popular mon in different sections of the Union, and thus instal a
minority President in the Chair of State.
Correspondence of the Charleston Courier,
Messrs. Editors:—Having withdrawn myself entirely from public
life, and standing aloof from the party contests of the day, it is with
great reluctance that I find myself constiaincd to notice the allusions,
in your paper of yesterday, to my vote and remarks in the Senate of
the United Slates, on the nomination Mr. Van Buret', as Minister to
England.
Your correspondent quotes a part of my speech on that occasion,
in which I stated, “ that if I wore a Juror in the box, sworn to give a
true vetdict on the issue made up between Martin Van Buren and
his country, I should feel myself constrained to give that verdictagainst
him.”
“On this you remark that it was party opposition that prompted
this proceeding against Mr. Van Buren, and to that cause may wo
ascribe the ferocity of the warfare waged against him. To say the
least, it was an unwise aud impolitic, warfare, and wo know that it
was again:.t the judgment of one of the distinguished supporters, to
! whom our Correspondent alludes. He predicted the result with un
erring,sagacity—he foresaw that it would be an element of Mr. Van
Buren s success—and yet the exigencies of party arrayed him in de-
i bate against his deliberate judgement.”
i W it.tout further explanation, it might seem, that I had on this oc
casion expressed opinions, that 1 did not entertain, and putsued a
course, which was conttary to my own conviction of what was right.
Now the truth is, that the nomination of Mr. Van Buren as minister to
England was seized upon as a suitable occasion for making up an issue
between, the two parties as to his merits as a member of General
Jackson's administration. His whole conduct, and especially his
instructions to Mr. McLane, in relation to the West India Trade,
came up for discussion, and for condemnation or approval, and the
vote was regarded as a test question between Utp.parties. In my
“ deliberate judgment,” it was unwise and impolitic in the opposition
to make up such an issue, on the question then before the Senate. I
believe, as it has turned out, that the rejection of the nomination by
the Senate, would make Mr. Van Buren President. My political
friend thought otherwise ; the issue was made up between the parties,
and Mr. Van Buren was put upon his trial. Compelled to take«ground
on one side or the other of the issue thus presented, I acted in con
formity with my own conviction, “ in giving my verdict against him.”
Die grounds on which 1 then acted, are fully explained in the speech
delivered by me on that occasion. This explanation is due to my
self, and to the truth of the case. In the controversy now going on
between the’friends of Mr. Clay and of Mr. \ an Buren, 1 take no
part; I am otherwise, and 1 trust better employed.
1 am, very respectfully, your most obedient servant.
ROBERT Y. HAYNE.
i The Joilerali-ts undertake to break the effect of their tremendous u'S!
throw hi New-York city, by crying out “frauds,” “official influence,’
“office-holders,” &c. Now be it known that the city government was
exclusively in the hands of the federalists—that they appointed the in
spectors to superintend the polls iu every ward—that about seven thou
sand office-holders were in the employ of the city government —that they
have had the disbursing of more than a million and a half of dollars dur
ing the year—and that all these means were used in the most unscrupu
lous manner to keep themselves in nswer—they had turned out of em
ployment even the lamp-lighters anil the sweepers of the streets who re
fused to vote the federal ticket—they stationed large constabulatory for-
■ ces in all the democratic wards with a view to get up riots, to interrupt
| the voting, under pretence of keeping the peace—the polls were in fact
i completely in theirown hands, guarded by their several thousand federal
! office-holders, and yet they complain that they have been cheated or
| bullied out of their rights 1 This sounds like Dud Palmer’s accusation
; against the democrats here, that they are opposed to temperance, when
they had not expended a single dollar, byway of treating, whilst the
federalists had kept a gang of loafers drunk all winter to secure their
votes—the expense of which was paid for out of their electioneering
fund.
The New-York Journal of Commerce (fed.) denies that there were
any “riots,” or any unusual disorders during the election iu that city.—
Ac w- Ha mpshire Pa t riot.
New-Jersey.—ltwillbe recollected that by some hocus pocus or
other, five whigs received certificates of election as members of the next
Congress from New-Jersey, while five democrats, their opponents, re
ceived a majority of the votes of the people. So evident wa» the fraud
by which these men received the certificates, that, although their party
profess to believe there will be a whig majority in the next Congress,
they begin to fear Congress will decide against them, and admit the le
gally elected democrats to their seats. With this probability, or rather
certainty, staring them in the face, they appear all at once to me mighty
magnanimous, and offer, we understand, to give up their claim, and re
fer the whole matter again to the people at the next Fail election, if the
democrats will consent. This offer the federal papers in Connecticut
think very magnanimous, and at first sight it does appear all fair and
aboveboard; but would the whigs, having got certificates"of election,
be likely thusto waive their claim to seats to which they believed they
wete legally entitled ?—lt is rather an unreasonable supposition. At
any rate, it shows a want of independence in not maintaining what they
believe to be their rights.
Had the democratic candidates for Congress from this State, by.means
of fraud, or through any informality of returns to the Secretary of'State,
received certificates of election, would the federal papers have thought it
magnanimous in them to say they would waive their claim, and reset
the matter back to the decision ofthe people “ next year?” If so, then
are they entitled to the credit of consistency, for once; but we imagine iu
that case they would sing altogether a different tune—it would be your
Bull and my Ox. However, we have no objection to having the New-
Jcrscy dispute referred back to the people; the’Democracy have noth
ing to fear from their decision.— Litchfield Sun.
A Political Anecdote.— The following anecdote has been communica
ted to us by an eye witness of the transaction. Considering it too good
to be lost, we give it publicity. A conscientious Loco Foco in the town
of Litchfield, on the day ofthe late election, took one of the Loco tick
ets for ti c purpose of voting it. After examining it attentively for a few
moments, he erased the name of John M. Niles—he then hesitated a mo
ment, aud erased the second name on the ticket, then another, and an
other, until the name of Jeremiah Brown alone remained on the ticket.
He then endorsed on the ticket—“ The only honest man, by G—d,"
and put it in the ballot box.— Haltford Times.
Iu the above there is a small error ; but considering the source from
which it comes, it is as near correct as could have been expected. The
gentleman referred to we never before heard accused of being a “Loco
Foco.” AH he endorsed upon the ticket was simply the words—“ One
honest man," and he does not thank any one for attributing to him the
profane language above ; but he supposes it a fair specimen of Whig
morality. The cream of the joke, however, is all upon the other side—
he says he could not find even one honest man on the whig ticket.—
Litchfield Sun.
We have never seen the distinction between the Democratic and Fed
eral parties more forcibly and beautifully drawn, than in the following ,
extract from a recent speech, delivered in the Virginia House of Dele- ,
gates, by Mr Smith, of Culpepper.
“Our principle, sir, the Democratic principle, must wiu favor as it is
understood. It is a principle of humanity, benevolence and love. It ,
seeks to abuse no man, but to elevate all. It seeks to alleviate human
suffering—to bind up the broken-hearted, and make us love our brother
as ourself. It labors to put ify the affections and expel from the human ‘
heart that selfishness which isthe solute of such innumerable woe*. It
teaches without ceasing, the lofty principles of unadulterated philosophy,
in order that man may be all that the creature should be, who is made
alter God’s own image. It is a principle of renovation and change,
with ceaseless effort for the happiness of man, and bears the same rela
tion to the moral that the Christian principle does to the religious world, i
The principles ofbotb are LOVE, for both seek the happiness of man.
The one seeks to perfect the character of man hero below; the other in
addition thereto, seeks to make him fit company for the society of just
men made perfect. In fact, the only difference between these vital and
glorious principles is, that one is of Earth, and the other of Heaven. Our
principles teaches that all mankind are free and equal. Impress this doc
trine upon the heart, and we must love our brother as ourself. Let us
do this ami we must have charily and humility, and then, sir, with our
hearts thus purified, attuned to Love, the Christian laborer has nought to
do, but to invoke the regenerating principles of divine grace. The De
mocratic principle is the grand moral adjunct of the Christian principle;
and it is the bounden duty of every son of Heaven to spread it far and
wide. Sir, the foe of Democratic principle is the Aristocratic principle,
What are its characteristics? Pride, vain glory and ambition. It turns
with loathing and disgust from the laboring millions. It considers the
many as only fit to be hewers of wood and drawers of water. Its affec
tions are of this world, and it goes up into high places and thanks the
Lord it is not as that publican. What chance has the Christian laboier
here? And such is the principle which regulates the political conduct
of a very large portion of our whig adversaries.
Is it then wonderful, Mr. Speaker, that our principles should have
borne us on conquering and to conquer? Is it wonderful that under its
rule we should have determined, as I have “to conquer
| or die” beneath its ample and imperishable folds.”
THE STRUGGLE IN VIRGINIA.
While M essrs. Rives, Garland, mid the rest of Mr. Clay’s new coali
tion friends in Virginia, refuse to tell the people whose votes they ask,
how they arc at present inclined as to the Presidential candidates whose
pretensions are under discussion, the thoroughly initiated presses of the
Opposition understand it perfectly. Hear Major Noah, of the Evening
Star :
“The effect of a Whig victory* inVirginia can be readily imagined.—
- If the Administration is beaten in that State, every Southern State,
■ with one or two exceptions, will vote for Henry Clay. Keep your eye
on Virginia—it decides great events for tho country.”—Washington
Globe, 24th ult.
1839. The year of our Lord 1839, is likely to prove a sad year I
I for federal Whiggery. That party, which can only rise as the country
sinks, and which is sure to sink as the country rises, has nothing to hope
. so long as the present national prosperity shall continue.
New-Hampshire opened tho political campaign for the year, and at the
election on the second Tuesday of March exhibited a net democratic
gain in popular votes of more than 3,500. carrying in the democratic
’ candidates for Governor and Congress-men by an overwhelming major
ity-
5 Connecticut ctimc next, and here too we have a democratic gam about
s equal to that in New-Hampshire, and a doubling the democratic mem
. hers to the Legislature—presenting such a result as cannot fail to give
1 the State to Democracy in ono more year.
f New-Vork City, the great emporium of Commerce has just spoken,
, and in a voice which will be heard from one extreme of the Union to
the other, proclaiming that the Empire State herself is rapidly escaping
! from the toils and shackles of federalism, and will resume her erect posi
-1 lion in the democratic ranks next November,
Virginia comes next, and unless all signs fail, this old democratic
1 State will show herself true to the cause of democracy and equal rights.
■ Federal whiggery, which raised its hydra head so high during the panic
! created by Biddle and the Banks, is destined to a lapid and inglorious
- decay before the bright sunshine of prosperity which now pervades every
; part of tho country. — New-Hampshire Patriot.
Political Temperanee.— ln some of the towns, the federal leaders who
profess great regard for temperance, and temperance laws, w’hen it suits
their political purposes, had tables of refreshments spread for lheir hired
- voters, with gin jug* and ium bottles in great profusion, to strengthen
1 tho nerves of those who wore to enrol undertho “Commander-in-chief
, iu and over tho State of Connecticut.” But now, since tho election is
f over, these leaders will be delivering temperance lectures, and getting
j up prosecutions against the retailors.— Register.'
, all tho effort* of the whig presses to prostrate tho popularity
t of the lion. Charles G. Atherton—after all the slang about “Atherton’s
I gag” which the Herald of Freedom has expended during the recent po
litical campaign, we rejoice to sec that he ha* been re-elected by a tri
umphant majority. The people have put tho “gag” into tho lying
mouths ofhis calumniators, in the shape of a majority of 6000 votes in
• his favor.— Coos Democrat.
3
5 Extraordinary resuscitati>n.— ln Bangor, last week, a child five years
1 of age, was resuscitated, after lying three quarters of an hour at the bot
> tom of a well with ten feet of waler in it.
I STATE RIGHTS and UNITED STATES RIGHTS.
! - ——-
gtattixtrii 0f fUgttfw.
THE TBVE ISMS-UE.
a OF THE RANKS.vr a GOr
0E THE PEOPLE! Shall we have a CONSTI
trEASVRY, or an UNCONSTITUTIONAL NA
IX' RANK? Shall tee have a CONSTITUTIONAL CUR
OJOOLD AXD «IK.VKK. or <me of IRREDEEMABLE PA
u.Tii Sh " wr livt w,d ' T the despotism of a MONIED ARISTOC
RACY, orunder the safeguards of a FREE CONSTITUTION ?
[Washington Chronicle.
TlTSim- UOKNING, MAY T.
DEMOCRATIC TICKET.
FOR PRESIDENT,
MARTIW VAN BI KEN.
FOR GOVERNOR,
CHARLES J. McDonald
MR. VAN BUREN—STATE RIGHTS.
The reckless assertions which are going their daily rounds iu the whig
papers relative tolhe political principles of Mr. Van Buren, demand at
the hand* of his friends, and the friends of State Right*, a prompt and'
conclusive refutation.
It is well known to all who are conversant with the characters and
conduct of our distinguished men, that Mr. Van Buren was nurtured in
the school of democracy; that he not only gained his early distinction in
the iepublican ranks, but that hi* whole life has been devoted to the
maintenance of those great fundamental principles of liberty, upon
which our institutions were founded, and which alone can preserve tho
proud superstructure of our government mi its original strength and gran
deur.
Going back to the period of the last war, at a time wheu the Picker-'
ings and the Wcbsters, and th* whole phalanx of federalism, wer<
standing iu open and violent opposition to their own government, and'
virtually inviting the aggression* ofthe enemy upou our borders, we find
Mr. Van Buren on the side es hi* country, and from that time to the*
present, such has been the able and effective aid which ho has rendered to'
the republican cause, a* to bringdown upon him the most vindictive hatred'
of the federal par ty; and there was a time, when the self-same party in
Georgia, which now denounces him by every epithet which malice itself
can rake up, were singing hallelujahs to his name. His support of Mr.
Crawford for the Presidency, seemed at that period to have identified
him with Southern men and Southern feelings, and the vote which they
gave him for the Vice Presidency in J 832, must be fairly considered a*
an act of absolution, on their part, of all his previous sins and transgres
sions, had he even have been the chief of sinners; but notwithstanding
the plaudits which then rung from their presses, and the exalted attri
butes of talents and patriotism ascribed to him by ten thousand touguss
—now, how changed 1 they can fiad nothing iu his character to admire
—everything to condemn. His whole life is now held up as a tissue of
federalism—inconsistency and political juggling, the most of which they
date prior to 1832. How can this be explained ?we answer, only in one
of two ways: either that they played off a most unwarrantable deception
upon the people in 1832, or that their object is to humbug them now.-
Let the good sense ofthe people decide.
But as we are not dependent upon the whigs for a correct understand
ing of Mr. Van Buren's political principles, we will turn the attention
of «ur*readers to such evidence as will lead them to the truth, and fur
nish them with unerring data, from which to draw their own conclu
sions.
We maintain that no President of these United States has ever pro
claimed in his InauguraFAddresf, or carried out in practice, mote genu
ine, constitutional State Rights doctrines than are embodied iu the Ad
dress of Mr. Van Buren, or than ma-k the course of his administration tn
the present hour.
In speaking oftho principles by which he should be guided, Mr. Van
Buren says:
“For myself, therefore, I desire to declare, that the principle that will
govern mein the high duty to which my country calls me, is a strict ad
herence to the letter and spirit of the constitution, as it was designed by
those who framed it. Looking back to it as a sacred instrument, care-
fully and not easily framed ; remembering that it was throughout, *
work of concession and compromise; viewing it as limited to national
objects ; regarding it as leaving to the people and the States all power not
explicitly parted with I shall endeavor to preserve, protect and defend
it, by anxiously referring to its provisions for direction iu every action.—
To matters of domestic concernment which it has entrusted to the fed
eral government, and to such as relate to our intercourse with foreign
nations, I shall zealously devote myself ; beyond those limits I shall never
pass.”
Hero is an avowal, not made in a corner, but proclaimed to fifteen
million* of freemen, of a strict adherence to the constitution in letter aud
spirit, a* it came from the hand* of those who framed it, and which
must meet a-hearty response from every unprejudiced individual who
duly regards the right* of the State*; but how far it may accord with
whig notions of State Right*, we shall not pretend to determine.
Have the State Rights party, io called, ever placed a different con
struction upon the constitution? Have they not contended, and did they
not justify even the measure of nullification upon the very same cou
stiuction ? and yet they deny that Mr. Van Buren has any principle*
at all, with this solemn pledge before their eyes, that upon this construc
tion alone xvill he act, and the further evidence of good laith on hi* part,
by having scrupulously observed it since he came into office.
We ask, what was his course when a desperate faction attempted to
usurp the government of Pennsylvania, and to defy the expressed will of
a majority of her people ? Let hi* answer to Governor Ritner speak for
him, in which he refused to lend the aid of the United States army, be
cause, among other substantial reasons, that the sligfitest interference on
the part of the federal government, would be an invasion of State sove
reignty, and that no such interference could be justified in any case what
ever until it was clearly shown that the authorities of the State were una
ble to maintain her constitution and laws. But had Mr. Clay been tho Pre
sident with his constitutional and whig opinions, he would have had no
such scruples to overcome, aud the people of Pennsylvania might now
be suffering under a despotism, inflicted upon them by federal bayonet*.
But why should we waste words upon tho whigs ? Their minds are
made up, to take any other man in preference to Mr. Van Buren, and a*
far as they can do so, without seeming to intend it, to make Henry Clay
that man. Yet as there may he some among them who are still open to
conviction—whose eyes are not closed, and whose ear* are not shut to
the light of truth and the voice of reason, we shall continue to “cry aloud
and spare not”—to warn our fellow citizens against the consequence*
of lending their aid eitherdirectly or indirectly, to the promotion of a
man to the Presidency, svho holds in utter contempt the principles of
State sovereignty.
It is not to the whig politicians, who have taken their stand against
the present democratic administration of the geueral government, that
we speak—we have long since given them over, but to the unsophisti
cated men of the countiy, who revere the constitution, aud uphold the.
principles of democracy for their happy influence upon the rights ancE
liberties of the people; and to such men we shall not speak in vain.—
They are too patriotic and independent to sacrifice their own principle*,
and be made instrumental in delivering over their government to federal
hands, in the name of parly. They are moreover intelligent, and will
compare the relative opinions of those who seek their suffrages for th*
highest office in lheir gift, and decide in favor of him who approaches-*
nearest to their own ; and we ask, iu what is there the slightest agree
ment between Mr. Clay and a genuine State Rights man ? Iu uothrng.
He maintains for the federal government, all the powers which were con
tended for by old John Adams—Banks—tariffs—internal
and every thing else which may be claimed under the broadest construc
tion of the constitution.
The Presidential contest will be one of principle alone—it will be the
second battle of’9B and ’99—Van Buren and State Rights on one side—-
Clay and consolidation on the other.
OUT AT LAST.
The charge that the Georgia whigs are “at heart” the friends of Mr.
Clay, can no longer be questioned, and but for the apprehension that
the influence of their party might be jeopardized by such a movement,
his name would be hoisted at the head of their papers.
They have been rather shy, it is true, in committing themselves openly
upon the question—have offered a few faint objections to Mr. Clay’s po
litical principles, at the same time applauding him for his distinguished
talents and services, while they have denounced Mr. Van Buren in terms
sufficiently strong to satisfy every rational individual of their decided
preference for Mr. Clay.
Bat we are no longer left to conjecture upon the subject. The Geor*-
gia Messenger of the 2d iust. furuishos the most conclusive evidence that
Mr. Clay is their first choice.
Iu concluding an editorial upon the merits of those individuals, th>
editor remarks ;