%<*>} 
 
 S P E E^H 
 
 nj 
 
 yl 
 
 .IFFORD OF MAIN* 
 
 U-9 
 
 ON THE 
 
 GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL FOR 1840. 
 
 In the House of Representatives, April 24, 1840—In 
 
 Committee of the Whole, on the General Ap¬ 
 propriation bill. 
 
 Mr. CLIFFORD desired to make a few remarks 
 chiefly in reply to what had been said by others, 
 and consequently not immediately applicable to the 
 subject betoie the committee. He then spoke in 
 substance as follows: It would have beea more 
 gratifying to me, if this debate had been confined 
 to the usual range of parliamentary discussion, 
 embracing the various propositions contained in 
 the bill under consideration, and excluding a great 
 variety of party topics that have been introduced, 
 well calculated to protract the session, and delay 
 the public business, without producing any corre¬ 
 sponding benefit. The history of this session aione 
 is amply sufficient to satisfy every reflecting mind, 
 that there must be some limitation to debate in a 
 deliberative body, so numerous as the House of Re¬ 
 presentatives,'to facilitate the progress of business, 
 and to preserve order and decorum among its 
 members; and that the only practicable mode of 
 doing this, U by a careful observance of the rules 
 of the Houve, which should always be enforced, 
 when occasion requires, to promote these desirable 
 objects. These remarks are not made in any spirit 
 of complaint towards the Chair, for it is not un¬ 
 known to me that e*very effort to restrain irregular 
 debate has been met from certain quarters with a 
 determined resistance or a chilling support, and 
 the best reason I have heard assigned for it, is 
 the one given by the gentleman from "Virginia, 
 Mr. Wise, that “ latitude in. debate is the life 
 of the Opposition;” and if so, no one can feel 
 less inclined than myself, especially after 
 that frank avowal, to incur the charge of at¬ 
 tempting or desiring to destroy the vital princi¬ 
 ple of a great and powerful party. If latitude 
 in debate is desired, so let it be, with this under¬ 
 standing, that those who seek to introduce it shall 
 have the responsibility. If the Democratic party 
 cannot stand upon a full discussion, let it fall; but 
 
 it cannot be expected that the discussion will be 
 confined to one side. It is not my habit to 
 wander from the question, unless it becomes ne¬ 
 cessary to do so as a matter of defence. If any 
 apology is necessary on the present occasion, it 
 wiil be found in the remarks of the gentleman 
 from Massachusetts, [Mr. Saltsonstall,] who 
 went into an extended and ingenious argument, 
 and, as I thought at the time, in defence of the 
 Hartford Convention and of the principles and mea¬ 
 sures of the Federal party. Be that as it may, he 
 now disclaims having done so. If his expla¬ 
 nation is not now misapprehended, he ihen said, as a 
 matter of expediency, he would not attempt their 
 defence, though he admits that he participated in 
 the proceedings which laid the foundation for the 
 convention. Plis precise language is of no im¬ 
 portance. I cheerfully accept the explanation. 
 But, in other respects, 1 cannot be mistaken. 
 The gentleman himself will not deny that he 
 assured the House and the country that the 
 members of that convention had been censured 
 unjustly; that, during an angry contest for certain 
 great constitutional principles, their designs had 
 been misunderstood, and that their motives had 
 been misrepresented, and that he repudiated the 
 idea that the Federal party ever contemplated 
 the dissolution of the Union. He seems to think 
 it unkind on the part of his colleague to rake 
 j up these old affairs, and says he has scarcely 
 ■ thought of them lor the last twenty years, which, 
 to say the least of it, is a little remarkable; for if 1 
 am not greatly deceived, he has been intimately 
 connected with the Federal party in Massachusetts 
 from 1813 to the present time, advocating the same 
 principles, and maintaining the same political 
 associations. By the way of remembrance, in the 
 course of my remarks, I will endeavor to refresh 
 his recollection upon certain matters of history* 
 which, to my mind, afford the most conclusive 
 evidence that certain leaders of that party, during 
 the last war with Great Britain, and for several 
 
years prior, covering the period from 1800 to the 
 treaty of peace in 1814, were guilty of unceasing 
 efforts to excite the people of New England to open 
 rebellion and resistance of the Federal Govern¬ 
 ment, and actually plotted a dissolution of the i 
 Union and the establishment of a Northern con¬ 
 federacy under the auspices of British protection;; 
 and that in ail this they were actuated by that 
 inordinate thirst for power and inveterate hatred 
 of free principles, which are the essential elements 
 of Federalism itself. But as I propose to speak of 
 the principles and measures of the two great poli- 
 litical parties which have existed, in this country 
 from the foundation of the Government to the pre¬ 
 sent, time, and which, from the very nature of our 
 institutions and the structure of the social order 
 itself, it is reasonable to believe, will ever continue 
 to exist, at least till “the lion and the lamb shall lie 
 down together,” I will touch upon those matters 
 in the order of events in which they occurred. The 
 first organization of parties took place during the 
 latter part of General Washington’s adminis¬ 
 tration, who had been twice elected to the Chief 
 Magistracy of the nation by the spontaneous 
 and unanimous suffrages of the people, and, in 
 spite of the radical and irreconcileable differences of 
 opinion, which are known to have existed among 
 the leading minds of that eventful, period, con¬ 
 tinued to enjoy, to the very dose of his last term, 
 the uninterrupted confidence of ail classes of men. 
 In their origin, these differences of opinion in¬ 
 volved nearly opposite views as to the model and 
 form of Government which the exigencies of the 
 time demanded, with reference to its operation up¬ 
 on the frame and structure of society, and its ten¬ 
 dency to promote ihe individual happiness and 
 prosperity of the people, and, at the same time, to 
 afford sufficient strength and efficiency to insure 
 domestic tranquillity, and to provide for the com¬ 
 mon defence. The natural tendency of these con¬ 
 flicting views, after the adoption of the Constitu¬ 
 tion, led their respective adherents to widely dif¬ 
 ferent rules of interpretation of the instrument it¬ 
 self, in the application of it to the purposes for 
 which it had been formed. This gave rise to party 
 organization, which, with slight modifications and 
 occasional interruptions, has continued to this dtiy. 
 Far be it from me to insinuate that there was any 
 want of patriotic feeling, or of upright intention, in 
 the conduct of any member of the convention that 
 framed ihe Constitution; and candor will oblige me 
 to admit, that it is by no means certain that much 
 of the distrust of the virtue and intelligence of 
 the people, which all must admit was evinced 
 in that assembly by a portion of its most efficient 
 members, may not be traced to causes long since 
 removed by the light of experience, and yet while 
 they existed, affording at least strong palliation for 
 the misconceptions which they occasioned. How¬ 
 ever this may be, it is nevertheless true, that the 
 master spirit and fathtr of Federalism, Alexander 
 Hamilton,was strongly inclined to the British system 
 of Government, and indeed its open advocate for rea¬ 
 sons entirely consistent with the purity of motive 
 which has usually been ascribed to him; for it has 
 Swen said that he verily believed it “to form the 
 best model the world ever produced;” and if so, 
 no one will censure his motives, though I imagine [ 
 
 few among us can be found, that dare vindicate 
 his principles, however similar their own may be 
 in effect. He distrusted the capacity of the people 
 for self-government, and believed in the necessity 
 of a strong Executive power to control what he 
 called “the turbulence of Democracy;” and it was 
 the 'Executive feature of the British system, above 
 all ethers, that excited his admiration, as being 
 above the reach of improvement. Observe his re¬ 
 marks: 
 
 “Seethe excellence of the British Executive: he is placed 
 above temptation. Nothing short of such an Executive (a King) 
 can be efficient. I confess the plan of Government which l 
 propose is v'ery remote from the idea of the people. Nothing 
 but a permanent body [of life legislators] can check the impru¬ 
 dence of the Democracy. The people are turbulent and 
 changing; they seldom juilec or determine right; and, again, 
 all political communities ought to be divided into the lew and 
 the many; the first are the rich and well born, the other the 
 mass of the people.” 
 
 The same want of confidence in the sovereign 
 voice of the people to institute and uphold the ma¬ 
 chinery of Government through ihe medium of 
 their constituted agents, is discoverable throughout 
 his public career. It is impossible to misunder¬ 
 stand the scope and bearing of his remarks against 
 the weakness and instability of Republican institu¬ 
 tions. Upon thi« point,as upon all others,he descanted 
 with great freedom and boldness. He undertook 
 to demonstrate from experience that their inevita¬ 
 ble tendency would lead to anarchy and civil com¬ 
 motion, from which he argued their inefficiency to 
 promote the durable happiness and prosperity of a 
 great and rising people. 
 
 “I despair that any Republican form of Government can re¬ 
 move the difficulties that Greece and Rome encountered. I 
 have well considered the subject, and am well convinced that no 
 amendment of the articles of confederation can answer the our- 
 noses of a good Government, s» long dz th) State Governments 
 do in any shape exist.” 
 
 The more recent publication . of his speech va¬ 
 ries the language, but does not change the sense. 
 He is made to say, that— 
 
 “This view of the subject almo t led him to despair that 
 a Republican Government could be established over so 
 great an extent. He was sensible, at the same time, that 
 it would be unwise to propose one of any other form. In his 
 private opinion, he had no scruple in declaring, supported as he 
 was by so many of the wise and the good, that the British Go¬ 
 vernment was the best in the world, and that he doubted whe¬ 
 ther any thing short of it would do in America. The House o f 
 Lords is a most noble institution. Having nothing to hope for 
 by a change, and a sufficient interest, by means of their pro¬ 
 perty, in being faithful to the national interest, they form a per ¬ 
 manent barrier against every pernicious innovation, whether at¬ 
 tempted on the part of the Crown or of the Commons. No 
 temporary Senate will have firmness enough to answer the 
 purpose.” 
 
 Deriving his opinions from the study of ihe mo¬ 
 narchies of Europe, and especially of England, 
 where the voice of the people had been little consi¬ 
 dered, and, consequently, was greatly underva¬ 
 lued, he was thoroughly persuaded that nothing 
 short of a President and Senate for life, or during 
 good behavior, which, for all practical purposes, is 
 the same thing, could ever obviate the defects, or, 
 to any extent, supply the deficiencies which expe¬ 
 rience had demonstrated to be inherent in the arti¬ 
 cles of Confederation. His plan of Government,- 
 as it has been called, was the third in the order of 
 time that was presented to the convention. It was 
 on this occasion that he expressed his opinions with 
 so much freedom, as well as with masterly ability*; 
 and throughout h ; s life he evinced one characteris¬ 
 tic which does not belong to Federalism of modem 
 date: he spurned disguise, and always evinced a 
 

 willingness to present to his opponents a clear and 
 distinct issue. He despised truckling and hypocri¬ 
 sy, and never sought to change his name or con¬ 
 ceal his principles. He was bitterly opposed to the 
 State Governments, add he did not hesitate to 
 avow that hostility on every suitable occasion. In 
 speaking of the different propositions that had pre¬ 
 ceded his own, he remarked‘ that the States, by 
 either, will have the means to counteract the Ge¬ 
 neral Government. They have them State judges' 
 and militia all combined to oppose a National Go¬ 
 vernment.” 
 
 “Either plan is, therefore, precarious. The Na¬ 
 tional Government cannot long exist, when opposed 
 hy such a weight}' - rival.” While it is no part of 
 my intention to derogate, in the slightest degree, 
 from the merit of the honorable dead, I beg leave 
 to say, what few will deny who have any regard to 
 truth; that the sentiments so freely advanced by 
 Hamilton are known to have been entertained—in 
 some instances, perhaps, with slight modifications— 
 by very many of the leaders of the Federal party, 
 at the period of the adoption of the Constitution; 
 and that they were openly acknowledged b}' - the 
 more honest and candid, until their defeat, in 1800, 
 in the election of Mr. Jefferson. If there was any 
 concealment of their disbelief in the stability of a 
 Republican form of Government, or of their want 
 of confidence in the capacity of the people to go¬ 
 vern themselves, before that time, it is unknown to 
 me. It was not until it was ascertained that the 
 views and feelings of a great majority of the peo¬ 
 ple were averse to such principles, and that those 
 who entertained them would be excluded from any 
 participation in the public councils of the nation, 
 that the subterfuges and disguises of the present 
 time began to be introduced. Examine the speech 
 of Mr. Morris: it is no less explicit, and equally 
 candid and free of disguisq. “The second branch 
 of the Legislature ought to be composed of men 
 of great and established property—an aristocracy ! 
 men who, from pride, support permanency. To 
 make them completely independent, (of the peo¬ 
 ple,) they mast be chosen for life. Such an aristo¬ 
 cratic body would keep down the turbulence of 
 Democracy.” 
 
 Similar views were taken by Mr. Read, another 
 distinguished Federalist in that convention. He 
 maintained that a State Government is incompati¬ 
 ble with a General Government, and the elder 
 Adams, though not in the convention, was subse¬ 
 quently supported by ihat party for the Presidency, 
 “by his being likely to unite the votes of New 
 England, by his favor with the English party, from 
 his speculative views concerning the British consti¬ 
 tution;” and the remark has been frequently as¬ 
 cribed to him, that it was the true policy of the 
 common people to place the whole executive power 
 in one man, though I have not been able to find 
 the authority upon which the charge rents. The 
 plan of Mr. Hamilton, to which I have adverted, 
 will be found in ths Madison Papers, recently pub¬ 
 lished, from which I beg leave to read a few ex¬ 
 tracts: 
 
 “The Senate to consist of persons elected to serve during good 
 behavior; their election to be made by electors, chosen lor that 
 purpose by the people.” 
 
 “The supreme executive authority of the United States to be 
 fceaied in a governor, to be elected to serve during good beha¬ 
 
 vior; the election to he made by electors, chosen by the people 
 in the election districts. The authority and functions of ihe ex¬ 
 ecutive to be as follows: to have a negative on all laws about to 
 be passed, and the execution of all laws passed.” 
 
 But it is useless to multiply extracts to prove 
 what is very generally acknowledged,by those 
 who have taken the trouble to investigate, and 
 have the honesty to admit, the truth, that very 
 many of the old Federalists were openly in. 
 favor of a system of Government not very dif¬ 
 ferent from that of the mother country, which, 
 to use the language of the elder Adams, 
 they regarded as “the most stupendous fabric of 
 human wisdom.” In treating of the .same subject, 
 the late Matthew Carey remarks, “that the Federal 
 parly made every possible exertion to increase the 
 energy and add to the authority of the General 
 Government, and to endow it with powers at the 
 expense of the State Governments and the people. 
 Bearing strongly in mind the disorders and con¬ 
 vulsions of some of the ill balanced Republics of 
 Greece and Italy, their sole object of dread ap¬ 
 peared to be the inroads of anarchy; and as man¬ 
 kind too generally find it difficult to steer the mid¬ 
 dle course, their apprehensions of the Scylla of 
 anarchy effectually blinded them to the Charyb- 
 dis of despotism. Had they possessed a complete 
 ascendency in the convention, it is possible they 
 would have fallen into the opposite extreme to that 
 which decided the tenor of the Constitution. This 
 party was divided among themselves; a small, but 
 very active, division weie monarchists, and utterly 
 disbelieved in the efficacy or security of a Re¬ 
 publican form of Government, especially in a ter¬ 
 ritory co extensive as that of the United States* 
 embracing so numerous a population as were to 
 be taken into the account at no distant period.” 
 
 It is a well-known fact that needs no con firmation, 
 that the present Constitution was more the issult of 
 compromise, induced by the exigene’es of the 
 country at the period of its formation, and dictated 
 by a spirit of conciliation and conscientious obedi¬ 
 ence to the will of the majority, which characte¬ 
 rized the conduct of its framers at every stage 
 of their proceedings, than the exponent of the 
 views of either of the two parties thit were 
 represented in that convention. The mass of 
 the people felt deeply the imperfections of 
 the articles of confederation, and ardently 
 wished for such alterations as would lelieve them 
 of the evils which they had experienced in conse¬ 
 quence of them; but there was a wide diversity of 
 opinion as to the character of the alterations ne¬ 
 cessary to be made to attain that object. On the 
 17th of September, 1787, the present, draft was 
 agreed to, and immediately transmuted to Congress 
 “in a letter subscribed by the President, in which 
 it was said to be the result of a spirit of amity and 
 of that mutual deference and concession which the 
 peculiarity of their'political situation rendered in¬ 
 dispensable.” Immediately after i s publication it 
 was submitted by Congress to the several States for 
 ratification. It is necessary to glance at the dix* 
 cussion that ensued, in order more fully to compre** 
 hend the aim and objects of parties, or the motive 
 by which they were influenced at the time of its 
 adoption. It is true that many of the Republicans 
 opposed it, not because they were aveise to 
 , a mere perfect union of the States for 
 
 
3 ^ 4 .VV 
 
 certain specified purposes, to regulate the 
 commerce of ihe country, and to insure the com¬ 
 mon defence, but because, in some respects, its in¬ 
 ternal powers were more ample, and in others, less 
 cautiously restricted, as they believed, than were 
 consistent with the sovereignty of the States, or ihe 
 liberty of the people. They were jealous of the 
 extent of p : we: conferred upon the Executive, as 
 conceding too much to the known partialities of 
 their opponents, and they eriticized, with great se¬ 
 verity, the omission to provide a bill of rights for 
 the security of the citizen. It was this last objec¬ 
 tion that weighed so heavily on the mind of Mr. 
 Jefferson, and it is no discredit to the soundness of 
 his judgment, that the good sense of the people so 
 far appreciated his opinions, as to supply the defi¬ 
 ciency. On this point Mr. Jefferson remarks: 
 
 “I approved as much of the Constitution as most persons, 
 and more of it was disapproved by my accuser than by me, 
 and of its parts most vitally Republican. My objection to the 
 Constitution was the want of a bill of rights—Colonel Hamil¬ 
 ton’s, that it wanted a king and a house of lords. The sense of 
 America has approved my objection, and added the bill of 
 rights, and not the king and lords.’’ 
 
 Again, he denies that he was opposed to the pay¬ 
 ment of the public debt, and says: 
 
 “He wishes it paid to-morrow—Colonel Hamilton never; but 
 always to remain in existence, for him to manage and corrupt 
 the Legislature.” 
 
 It is undeniably true, that some of ihe features 
 of the instrument, which most excited the fears 
 and jealousy of those that desired as far as possi¬ 
 ble to preserve the authority of the States, afforded 
 the strongest inducements to their opponents 
 to espouse iis adoption, which they did, for the rea¬ 
 sons assigned, as well as from the conviction aris¬ 
 ing from the fact, then made evident in the discus¬ 
 sion that immediately followed its publication, that 
 no nearer approach to that system of national pow¬ 
 er to which ail their efforts had been directed with 
 earnest solicitude, could ever receive the sanction 
 of the mass of the people. The development of 
 public sentiment on this point was so clear, that 
 the most barefaced advocates of monarchy yielded 
 to the (-iemonstrations of the voice of the people, 
 and advocated the adoption of the Constitu¬ 
 tion; and whatever may be thought of their mo¬ 
 tives, it must be confessed they contributed to a 
 praiseworthy result. It cannot be necessary or 
 useful to pursue that branch of the inquiry further. 
 My object is accomplished if I have said enough 
 to draw attention to the incipient causes which led 
 to party division at the period of which lam speak¬ 
 ing; and, if I am not mistaken, all who have ex¬ 
 amined the subject with the care which it deserves, 
 will feel obliged to acknowledge that it took its rise 
 in a radical and theoretical difference of opinion 
 as to the first principle of Government itself, with 
 reference to its tendency to promote the happiness 
 and prosperity of those for whose benefit it is insti¬ 
 tuted. Let that be as it may, of this I am certain, 
 that ever since the adoption of the Constitution, it 
 lias been the policy of the Federal party to obtain 
 )by construction, in every shape and form which hu¬ 
 man ingenuiiy can suggest, what they failed to se¬ 
 cure after repeated attempts, by express grant. 
 
 The vagrant power to incorporate, which has so 
 many advocates at this lime in the ranks of the 
 Opposition, though scarcely any two of them can 
 agree upon its locality, was directly and solemnly 
 
 refused a place in the Constitution. It was several 
 limes considered, in one fotm or another; but, as 
 often as it was proposed, it was promptly voted 
 down by a large majority of the Stales. The rea¬ 
 sons assigned for the refusal were, that the people 
 in certain portions of the Confederacy were averse 
 to a National Bank, and if the power to incorpo¬ 
 rate should be recommended, it would obviously 
 include the right to charter a Bank, and that this 
 would present an obstacle of a very dangerous 
 character to the consummation of the general de¬ 
 sign. Thus it appeals, at that early day, the pec- 
 pie of this country were fully apprised of the 
 dangerous influences and alarming tendency of a 
 corporate institution in the bosom of a free Repub¬ 
 lic, to control its currency, and to mete out its fa¬ 
 vors or its curses as self-interest might render most 
 expedient to its purpose. The people never dream¬ 
 ed. during the discussion that ensued, that any such 
 power would be found lurking in the provisions of 
 the instrument they were called upon to sanction 
 by their suffrages. But no sooner was it adopted 
 than the Federal party, true to their original de¬ 
 sign, claimed it by construction. The Democratic 
 party denied it, and they deDy it still. The oppo¬ 
 nents of this Administration, by whatever name 
 they choose to call themselves, affirm it. This was 
 the great point of division when party organiza¬ 
 tion, in its more extended sense, took place at the 
 close of Gen. Washington’s administration with 
 reference to the selection of his successor. 
 
 The objects of parties underwent no change, but 
 the system of operation was necessarily varied 
 to the altered circumstances with which they were 
 surrounded; all acquiesced in the new Constitution, 
 but their principles remained the same as before 
 its adoption. It now became necessary to fix its 
 interpretation. Here they divided. The one 
 party desired to confine its application to the spe¬ 
 cified objects for which it had been created; the 
 other was equally solicitous to extend its provisions 
 by implication, to embrace the objects which they be¬ 
 lieved ought to have been included among its enume¬ 
 rated powers. The ostensible object of the latter, so far 
 as any avowal of their intention was made, was to 
 include the power to incorporate, with the view.to 
 the establishment of a National Bank. This has 
 been a favorite object with the anti-Democratic 
 party at every stage of our history, and through all 
 the disguises of names and principles which have 
 marked its career of wickedness and folly; and if I 
 am not greatly deceived in the signs of the times, it 
 is one of the leading motives to the desperate strag¬ 
 gle for power and place now being made by a 
 great and powerful party, under the assumed name 
 of Whigs. Oil the 14th of December, 1790, the 
 Secretary of the Treasury transmitted to Congress 
 a letter, accompanying his report of a plan of a 
 National Bank. The report is full and elabo¬ 
 rate, but I will not weary attention by reading 
 more than a single passage: “It is to be 
 considered that such a bank is not a mere matter of 
 private property, but a political machine of the 
 greatest importance to the State.” It is manifest 
 that the author of that paper looked upon a bank 
 as the natural ally of the Execntive, and as a va¬ 
 luable and necessary appendage of national power, 
 calculated to give strength and vigor to the Federal 
 

 Administration, in ail its interna! operations and 
 machinery. Undoubtedly it might be so, while its 
 favor was conciliated, and the wishes of its owners 
 and managers consulted. The principle of self 
 interest would dictate so much of patriotism, and 
 no more. The reason, however, that prompted its 
 recommendation, was founded upon the expecta¬ 
 tion of its alliance with the Government. But ex¬ 
 perience has shown, beyond controversy, that, 
 while such an ins'atution 'may become a political 
 machine, to sustain an administration of its choice, 
 at is no less powerful in-opposition to one that may 
 incur its displeasure. That, in either event, it will 
 be a political machine in the hands of its directors, 
 and consequently iresponsible to the people of the 
 ■■country, needs no confirmation. But to mark the 
 I ne of party division with more accuracy, it is ne¬ 
 cessary to pursue this subject further. 
 
 It soon became evident that the people, as well 
 sls the cabinet, were divided in opinion touching the 
 constitutional power of Congress to charter such 
 an institution. The President, in pursuance 
 of a practice which then prevailed, required 
 the members or' his cabinet to submit 
 their respective views in writing. As the 
 opinions of Hamilton and Jefferson cover 
 the whole ground, I will read from. them. 
 It is worthy of remark, that the former main¬ 
 tained the power to incorporate, in its broadest 
 sense, without limitation, deriving it from every 
 .specified grant in the Constitution. Fearlessness 
 was a prominent trait of his character, and, as I 
 have already remarked, he spurned any disguise, 
 and on this occasion broached the whoie doctrine 
 of construction, untinctiued with lire concealment 
 of after times; and throughout his whole public 
 life, I believe, he adhered to it, and gave it a steady 
 and firm support. It vt-ill appear that he claimef 
 the right as an attribute of sovereignty itself,, and 
 after premising that it is the clause of incorpora- 
 ton which gives rise to objection, he re 
 marks: 
 
 “Now it appears to the Secretary of the Treasury that this 
 general principle is inherent in the very definition of Go¬ 
 vernment, and essential to every step of the progress to be made 
 by- that of the United States; namely, that every power vested 
 in a Government is in its nature sovereign, and includes, by 
 force of the teem, a right to employ all the means requisite, and 
 fairly applicable to the attainment of the ends of such power, 
 and which are not precluded by restrictions and exceptions spe¬ 
 cified in the Constitution, or not immoral, or not contrary to 
 t he essential ends of political society. The circumstances that | 
 the powers of sovereignty are, in this country, divided be'ween 
 the National and State Government, does not' afford the distinc¬ 
 tion required.” 
 
 “The power which can create the supreme law of the lahd in 
 any case, is doubtless sovereign as to such case.. This general 
 and indisputable principle puts St once an end to th e-abstract 
 question whether the U.States have power to-erect a corporation, 
 that is tosay, to give a legal and artificial capacity to one or 
 more person*, distinct from the natural; for it is unquestionably 
 incident to sovereign power to erect corporations, and , 1 conse¬ 
 quently, to'that of the United States in relation to the objects 
 entrusted to the management of the Government.” 
 
 No one can fail lo p j rceive that the opinion of 
 Mr. Jefferson is equally explicit, and precisely ihe 
 reverse, denying, in every respect, ihe premises and 
 conj&luMot s of the Secretary of the Treasury. He 
 says: “I consider the foundation of the €omtilu- 
 lion as laid on this ground, that all powers rot de¬ 
 legated to the United States by the Constitution’, 
 nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to 
 the States or the people. To take a single step be¬ 
 yond the boundaries thus specially drawn around 
 
 the powers of Congress is to take possers’cn of a 
 boundless field of power no longer susceptible of 
 any definition. The incorporation of a bank and 
 other powers assumed by this bill, have nor, in my 
 opinion, been delegated to the United Sia es by the 
 Constitution. 
 
 “I. They are not among the powers specially 
 enumerated. 
 
 “II. Nor are they within either of the general 
 hrases, which are ihe two following: 
 
 “1. To lay taxes to provide for the general wel¬ 
 fare of the United Slates; that is to say, to lay 
 taxes for the purpose of providing for the general 
 welfare; for i he laying of taxes is r ,the power, and the 
 general welfare the purpose for which the power is 
 to. be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libi¬ 
 tum for any purpose they please, but only to pay 
 the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. 
 
 “2. The second general phrase is to make all laws 
 necessary and proper for carrying into execution 
 the enumerated powers. But they can all be car¬ 
 ried into execution without a bank. A bank there¬ 
 fore is not necessary, and conseqtff.tPly hot autho¬ 
 rized by this phrase.” 
 
 To avoid being tedious, I must pass rapidly 
 over the period that immediately followed the .esta¬ 
 blishment of a National Bank. Suffice it to say, 
 rn the language of the historian of Washington, 
 that “this measure male, a deep impression on 
 many members of the Legislature, and contributed 
 not inconsiderably to the complete organization of 
 those disinct and visible parlies which, in their 
 long and dubious conflict for power, have since 
 shaken the United States ta their centre.” It has 
 seemed to me proper to draw public attention lo 
 the source of party division; as, in tne course of 
 this debate, both sides have claimed to be Republi¬ 
 can', and all seem anxious to cast off the name of 
 Federalist; and as names are subject to change at 
 all times, 'be surest test is to look at the principles. 
 The' struggle lhat ensued,\it must be admitted oil 
 all sides, was one for principle. [The Bank, or 
 Federal party, supported the elder Adams for rea¬ 
 sons which I have before stated; the Democratic 
 party supported Mr. Jefferson. The. former suc¬ 
 ceeded by a majority of three votes. That Ad¬ 
 ministration has been emphatically denominated 
 “the reign of terror.” The alien and sedition laws 
 were among the tyrannical measures which served 
 to awaken the people to a sense of the danger 
 with which they were surrounded. Tne liberty of 
 speech and the press was invaded, under the pre¬ 
 tence of affording proteciion to public officers 
 against the strictures of party, and the prevalent 
 disposition fo slander and decry the Government; 
 lights heretofore held sacred were forgotten, like 
 the dreams of the nieht, in the shameless prosecu¬ 
 tions for alleged violations of this “gag law,” and 
 the most open and barefaced infractions of the so¬ 
 cial compact were perpe'rated with impunity, until 
 “ail confidence was lost in the midst of fear and 
 apprehension.” Perhaps it is not going too far to 
 say that these several measures were partly in¬ 
 duced bv, if hot the necessary consequence of, the 
 sympathies and attachments of the party that sus¬ 
 tained them to a system of national power, in con¬ 
 formity with the Constitution and la vs of Great 
 Britain, which they had long desired to see esta- 
 
blished in this country, and which, excited so much 
 of their admiration. The sedition law was carried 
 into effect, and enforced in some instances with 
 great severity. 
 
 The case of Matthew Lyon was one of pe¬ 
 culiar aggravation, and, as a sample of the 
 bitter persecutions under that odious law, deserves 
 to be more fully considered. From his account of 
 the transaction, which is believed to be correct, he 
 was indicted, among other things equally harmless, 
 for publishing that, “ as to the Executive, when I 
 shall see the efforts of that power bent on the pro¬ 
 motion of the comfort and happiness, and the ac¬ 
 commodation of the people, thai Executive shall 
 have my zealous and uniform support; but when¬ 
 ever I shall, on the part of the Executive, see 
 every consideration of the public welfare swallowed 
 up in a continued grasp for power, and an un¬ 
 bounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adula¬ 
 tion, and selfish avarice, &c. I shall not be their 
 humble advocate.” Upon this accusation, and others 
 of no greater impoit in my estimation, a pliant, 
 packed, political jury, selected for the purpose, 
 under the direction of a party judge, inheriting the 
 spirit of a Jeffries-, and influenced with anglo-aris- 
 tocratic zeal, brought in a verdict of “guilty.” The 
 author goes on to say, that in consequence of this 
 unjustifiable verdict, and tha subsequent creel 
 judgment, he was contumaciously dragged oat of 
 his own county, where a decent jail was at the 
 disposal of the National Government, and in an 
 ignominious manner carried fifty miles, and in a 
 bad state of health, thrown in'o a dismal dungeon, 
 the common receptacle of robbers, thieves, and 
 murderers; and when three thousand citizens peti¬ 
 tioned for his release, they were told by the Presi¬ 
 dent, that submission mutt precede pardon. 
 
 In 1800 the success of the Democratic party was 
 complete. The voice of the people triumphed over 
 the slanders and falsehoods which bad been 
 heaped upon the candidate of their choice. 
 Thomas Jefferson was elected President. I will 
 pass over the characteristic intrigue of the Fede¬ 
 ral party after their defeat in the attempt to elevate 
 to that station an individual they had uniformity 
 despised, and who had not received; one vole of the 
 people with the view to any such elevation, for 
 the sole purpose of trampling under foot the 
 solemnly expressed voice of the nation. It has 
 become proverbial that traitors from the Demo¬ 
 cratic rankspnd favor with our opponents, of which 
 we have some high examples in modern times. 
 
 This glorious event was hailed with great joy by 
 the friends of equal rights, in all parts of the coun¬ 
 try, as the harbinger of better days; and no one 
 ever had occasion to say that his most sanguine 
 expectations weenot fully realized in the radical 
 change of policy (hat ensued. The schemes for, 
 ■undermining, the Constitution were defeated, and 
 the Government restored to its primitive purity. 
 But if it were desirable, it is not within the scope 
 of my present design to speak very minutely of the 
 great and salutary reform that immediately follow¬ 
 ed in the administration of public affairs. No Ad¬ 
 ministration ever commenced under more favora¬ 
 ble auspices, and none ever more fully lived up to 
 the professions on which it was created, or contri¬ 
 buted more largely to lay the lasting foundations of 
 
 Republican freedom: it was praissd at the time by 
 its friends, and it has since been eulogized by its ene¬ 
 mies; and now, after the lapse of forty years, it is 
 matter of grave dispute among us who shall be 
 considered its followers. On this last point I shall 
 have something to remark before f sit down—at 
 present I wish to deal further with its opponents. 
 The next fourteen years, embracing Ihe period of 
 the embargo, non-inteicourse, and the laic war with 
 Great Britain, is one of great interest and lull of 
 instruction as lo the motives and designs of the Fe¬ 
 deral party; their whole course, without interrup¬ 
 tion, was marked by a reckless opposition to the 
 Government of the people, and seems to 
 have been dictated by two leading mo¬ 
 tives—thirst for power and implacable ha 
 tred of incumbents »n office; and their principa 
 weapons of attack were falsehood, deception, am 
 calumny. All their efforts were directed to on^ 
 object, which is sufficiently disclosed in theit 
 motto, which was very generally adopted, that 
 “the Administration must came down.” It wa* 
 no less truest that time than it is now, that about 
 two-thirds of the political journals published in 
 New England were opposed to the Administration, 
 as weil as the great proportion of wealth It has 
 bgen said, and I doubt not with truth, that for 
 years not a single number of the Boston Centmel, 
 "Repertory, &c. were published free from attacks of 
 the most vilifying character on the Administrat on 
 —every act of the President was misrepresemed, 
 and she most unholy and pernicious means were 
 constantly employed to excite the prejudices of the 
 people, against every public functionary, however 
 elevated or humble. A large proportion of the weal¬ 
 thiest men m ths community were combined in a 
 ffagitous effort to tear down the pillars of the Go¬ 
 vernment, which had been erected at so great a 
 sacrifice in the Revolutionary struggle for indepen¬ 
 dence, not only by throwing every obstacle and 
 ernbana-sment in their power in the way of its 
 administration, but, as the sequel will show, by 
 obstructing and harassing all its endeavors 
 to protect and defend the national honor, ana 
 finally Coalescing with its ancient and invi- 
 rate toe. Now, if this was patriotism, then these 
 men were patriotic, and not otherwise. 
 
 This is not mere supposition—it is historical fact, 
 and susceptible of,the clearest demonstration; and 
 [ will freely acknowledge that it is not so much my 
 object at this time to detain the committee wrh any 
 remarks of-my. own, as to exhibit to the country 
 anew the proofs of some of these allegations. This 
 has become necessary, in consequence of the de¬ 
 nial which has been made Let us see'whether 
 this party, has been misrepresented, and examine 
 into their boasted patriotism. If I mistake no?, it 
 will be found to have consisted for a series of ycats 
 in sympathy for the interests and designs of a fo¬ 
 reign power, in opposition to the interests and 
 honor of their own country. The conduct of Eng¬ 
 land towards the United States had been one unin¬ 
 terrupted course of argresfou and violation of na¬ 
 tional faith. Jealousy and ill wi 1 were the predo¬ 
 minant features of her policy. She had on many 
 occasions, and in the grossest manner, violated the 
 treaty of peace. She had declined a treaty of com¬ 
 merce—she had impressed our seamen—she had 
 
«* v.t 
 
 instigated the savage tribes to tomahawk and scalp 
 American citizens—she had stimulated the merce¬ 
 nary and piratical of all nations to prey upon our 
 unprotected commerce—and, in a word, “she had 
 
 that subsequently opposed every effort of the Go¬ 
 vernment in themo.-t treasonable manner, to rescue 
 our national interests from the ruin which must 
 have ensued if no counteracting remedies had 
 
 insulted our flag, and pillaged our trade in every been adopted. Before this, Mr. Jefferson hadbeen 
 quarter of the world.” Of the many violations of opposed with the usual billingsgate of party war- 
 
 the laws of nations perpetrated by Great Britain, 1 
 ■will only glance at some of the most glaring, and 
 those in an especial manner which had the most in¬ 
 fluence upon political parties at home, among 
 
 tare; he had been denounced as a Jacobin, as an 
 enemy to social order and religion; he had been ac¬ 
 cused of immorality and infidelity, and all the u>iial 
 accusations of that party; he was now charged with 
 
 which were the impressment of our seamen, under! weakness and imbecility, and even cowardice; and 
 
 the pretence of right to search American vessels 
 for deserters from the British navy, and the orders 
 an council of the lGth of May, 1806, and the 11th of 
 November, 1807. 
 
 The right of search had been claimed and wan¬ 
 tonly exercised for many years, and had been re-, 
 'peatedly made the subject of remonstrance a- far 
 back as 1792. Both parties had complained of its 
 injustice and of the iniquity , of the practice, and 
 had uniformly regarded it as a violation of the 
 laws of nations. It is difficult to-esiimale the ex¬ 
 tent to which this outrage upon the rights and li¬ 
 berties of American seamen was - carried. It has 
 
 every measure was resorted to, to goad his admi¬ 
 nistration into resistance of the high-handed and 
 oppressive pretensions and outrages of the parent 
 country. Negotiation had failed. Three expedi¬ 
 ents only were left to be tried—embargo, non-inter¬ 
 course, and war. The merchants preferred the for¬ 
 mer, or, at all events 3 , were willing to leave the 
 whole subject to th? constituted authorities. To this 
 effect they certainly expressed themselves in their 
 various petitions for redress. 
 
 It is .sufficient to know that they demanded re¬ 
 dress, and admit, if you please—for I beiieve it is 
 true—they professed to be willing to leave to the 
 been estimated that, at the date of the declaration j decision x>f Congress the remedy to be prescribed, 
 of war, on the 18th of June, 1812, not less than j Public meetings were held in all the principal cities, 
 fourteen thousand persons had been seized upon the j and memorials to Congress adopted, setting forth, 
 high seas and dragged from their lawful employ- j the.r grievances in glowing colors, and pledging 
 merit and homes. The British officer on board be- their aid and support in the most solemn manner, to 
 came at once the captor, accuser, witness, and any measure of relief which the wisdom of that 
 judge, and yet one of the patriotic eommiitses of body might judge expedient. The Federal mer- 
 the Massachusetts Legislature; for the double pur- chants of Bostorr were among the first to memo- 
 
 pose of excusing Great Britain and casting re¬ 
 proach upon the Administration, reported, that there 
 were but eleven Massachusetts sailors on board 
 the vessels of his Britannic Majesty in June, 1812. 
 
 The object of the orders in council, of the 16b 
 of May, 1806, wr.s to blockade the coast of Ger¬ 
 many, Holland, and France, from Elbe to Brest, 
 a distance of eight hundred miles. *t was a mere 
 paper blockade, in direct violation of the laws of 
 nations, and a highhanded outrage of the 
 neutral rights of the United States. The 
 order in council, of the 11th of Novem¬ 
 ber, 1807, was issued professedly as a re¬ 
 taliation for the Berlin decree of France, 
 whereby all neu'ral vessels, bound to France or 
 her dependencies, or to any port from which Bri¬ 
 tish vessels were excluded, and all vessels furnish¬ 
 ed with French consular certificates, were declared 
 liable to se zure and condemnation; but their real 
 design was to compel the United States to declare 
 war against our friend and ally in the Revolution¬ 
 ary struggle for independence; and in this design 
 the Federal party concurred. These measures 
 were destructive to the rights and interests of the 
 United States, and especially to the commercial 
 class, who were in a great measure driven from the 
 ocean, and a lucrative trade, for no other purpose 
 than to administer to the cupidity and malice of 
 the “mistress of the sea;” and yet, strange as it 
 may seem, many concurred in the general design, 
 while at the same time they called loudly upon 
 their own Government to relieve them from the 
 embarrassments which it produced. Parties were 
 divided as to lhe causes of their distress; but all 
 demanded redress, and condemned the aggressions, 
 and none were more clamorous than the very men 
 
 lialize Congress, and demand redress. I ask leave 
 to read a few passages from that paper. 
 
 “Unless the present disposition of the llritish admiralty 
 courts' and navy officers can he counteracted and removed, a 
 widely dispersed and unprotected commerce, extending to every 
 region of the globe, will only serve to invite depredation, to 
 bankrupt ourselves and en#ich others, until such commerce be 
 swept from the face of the ocean.'’ 
 
 Thet furiher state, “That a tacit ?ubmisMon to 
 pretensions -thus lofty, would be an abandonment 
 of rights openly recognised, and aderelictirn of 
 the most important commercial interests of this 
 country.” And ihey add: “Reason, and the most 
 powerful considerations of equity, enjoin it as a 
 duty on the United States, to oppose these preten¬ 
 sions.” And t 1 ' 5 at “These pretensions are unsound 
 in point of principle, offensive in practice, and nu¬ 
 gatory in effect.” They charge the British Govern¬ 
 ment with “preying upon the unprotected pro¬ 
 perty of a friendly power;” and call upon the Ad¬ 
 ministration “promptly to adopt, such measures 
 as might disembarrass our commerce, assert our 
 rights, and support the dignity of the United 
 States.” 
 
 The Newburyport memorial alleges that— 
 
 “ In many cases our vesselsand cargoes have been captured, 
 tried, and Condemned, under unusual and alarming pretenses, 
 which, if permitted to continue, threaten the ruin of our com¬ 
 mercial interests. So far from obtaining redress of our griev¬ 
 ances by the ordinary modes and processes of law, vve have irx 
 most cases been subj -ct to heavy costs, and suffered embrrass- 
 ing and distressing detention of property, even when no pre¬ 
 tence could be found to authorize the seizure of it. Having 
 sustained these losses and injuries in the prosecution of our law¬ 
 ful commerce, and in the exercise of our just rights, we rely 
 with confidence on the wisdom, firmness, and justice ofour Go¬ 
 vernment, to obtain for us'that protection which a regard to the 
 honor ofour country, no less than the rights of our citizens, must 
 dictate and require .’ 1 
 
 The Saffm memorial is even more explicit: 
 
 “These obstructions are of a very serious nature. When 
 exercised in the mildest form, they produce oppressive searches 
 
^and delays, expensive litigation, and often a total failure of an 
 otherwise lucrative voyage ” 
 
 They speak of the British policy, 
 
 “As letting loose the passions to prey on the miseries and 
 plunder the property of the innocent. It would subject neu¬ 
 trals to hazards nearly as perilous as those of actual hostilities; 
 and independent of its influence in stimulating to revenge and 
 retaliation, it would transfer the benefits of peace to any victori¬ 
 ous usurper of the ocean. Your memorialists wish to take no 
 part in the contests which now convulse the world; but, ac'ing 
 with impartiality towards all nations, to reap the fruits of a just 
 neutrality. If, however, conciliation cannot effect the purpose 
 of justice, and an appeal to arms be the last and necessary pro¬ 
 tection of honor, they feel no disposition to decline the common 
 danger, or shrink from the common contribution. Relying on 
 the wisdom and firmness of the General Government in this be¬ 
 half, they feel no hesitation to pledge their lives and properties 
 in support of the measures which may- be adopted to vindicate 
 the public rights and redress the public wrongs.” 
 
 Similar memorials emanated from New York, 
 Philadelphia, and Baltimore, and from almost eve- 
 ly commercial city in the Union. . The uniform 
 tenor of the public press was in strict accordance 
 with the prayers of these petitions. Press after 
 press called upon the Government to redress the 
 grievances of which ihe merchants, without,dis¬ 
 tinction of party, complained, and in the most 
 solemn manner, and in repeated instances, plighted 
 their faith to the support of any measures to ac¬ 
 complish the object. On the 22d of June, 1807, the 
 wanton attack was made on the Chesapeake by the 
 .Leopard, in consequence of the refusal of Commo¬ 
 dore Barron to submit to the claimed right of 
 .search, and to deliver up four sailors on board the 
 former, in pursuance of the iniquitous demand of 
 the British officer. This- raised the excitement to 
 the highest pitch of indignation. All parlies alike, 
 the Federalists as much as the Democrats, cla¬ 
 mored for reparation, with just abhorrence, of the 
 insult offered to our national flag. 
 
 The excitement was so great it was deemed im¬ 
 politic and unwise to convene Congress until suffi¬ 
 cient time had elapsed for reflec'ion, and £or the 
 resentments of the public mind to subside. In the 
 mean time, to quiet the alarm which very generally 
 prevailed, and to protect the interests and honor of 
 the country from a repeti'ion of such flagrant pro¬ 
 ceedings within our own jurisdiction, the President 
 issued the proclamation of the second of July, for¬ 
 bidding British vessels of war in certain cases and 
 under certain limitations to enter or remain ia the 
 ports or harbors of the United States. This was 
 a mere precautionary step to guard against.similar 
 outrages until Congress could be convened. The 
 whole subject of our relations with Great Britain 
 was submitted to Congress at the extra session, on 
 the 26th of October following; the embargo became 
 a law on ; the 22d of December, 1807. No man 
 dare risk his veracity, or his intelligence, by af¬ 
 firming that this measure was not adopted to meet 
 the complaints of the Federal merchants,, and to 
 prepare the way for a redress of their grievance? 
 so vividly set forth in their memorials. It now be¬ 
 comes necessary to inquire how far these patriotic 
 citizens, who have so much regard for ihe military 
 reputation of their candidate for the Presidency, 
 lived up to their professions—how far they re¬ 
 deemed their hollow and deceptive pledges to the 
 country and ihe world, and with what sincerity they 
 staked their lives and property in support of the mea¬ 
 sures which should be adopted to vindicate the pub¬ 
 lic rights and redress the pub'ic wrongs. The truth 
 is, they fulfilled no one of them, and never designed 
 
 to do so when they were made. It was all a sham, 
 and pretence of patriotism which they never felr, 
 and was put forth for the purpose of deceiving the 
 people, and aiding their party to power and place, 
 at the expense of the real friends of the country. 
 It was a part of that system which has fastened, 
 upon them the name of “the war party in peace, 
 and ihe peace party in war.” One of the best in¬ 
 formed writers of that day remarks that “ihe clear, 
 indispuiable, and melancholy fact is, that, after 
 having impelled and goaded the Government into 
 measures to procure redress, they not merely with¬ 
 held their support from those measures, but actu¬ 
 ally, as far as depended on them, prevented their 
 success.” After they had formally resolved “that 
 the suffering armed vessels to station themselves 
 off our harbors, and there to stop, search 
 and capture our vessels—to impress, wound, and 
 murder oar citizens—is a gross and criminal ne¬ 
 glect of the highest duties of Government, and that 
 an administration that patiently permits the-same 
 is not entitled to the confidence of the people”— 
 when that Administration, in the mildest manner 
 possible, attempted to seek redress of the very 
 wrongs which they had so feelingly por.rayed* the 
 leaders of the Federal party, in spite of their boast¬ 
 ed patriotism, turned round and denounced the Ad¬ 
 ministration which they had just before reproached 
 for its supineness, and, in the violence of their op¬ 
 position, actually coalesced with the common foe, 
 to defeat and paralyze every erlort to redress the 
 very grievances of which they had complained. 
 But it is my principal object, as already stated, to 
 p ove what I allege; for which purpose, I shall be 
 obliged to read sundry extracts from the leading 
 newspapers of that per.od, which seem to me to 
 afford strong evidence of the motives and designs 
 of the Federal party, especially of its leaders; and 
 also to refer to sundry letters and proceedings 
 which appear to be, equally corroborative of the 
 same points. 
 
 “Every man will presume that he is hot bound to regard it 
 (the embargo,) but may send liis produce or his merchandise 
 to a foreign market in the same manner as if the Government 
 had not undertaken to prohibit it.”— Boston Centinet. 
 
 “Weknow if the embargo be not removed, our citizens will, 
 ere long, set its penalties and restrictions at defiance. It be¬ 
 hooves us to speak; for strike we must, if speaking does not an¬ 
 swer. Boston Repertory ... 
 
 “It is better to suffer the amputation of a limb than to lose the 
 whole body. We must prepare for the operation. Wherefore, 
 then, is New England asleep? Wherefore does she submit to the 
 oppression of enemies in the South? Have we no Moses, who is 
 inspired by the God of our fathers, and will lead us out of the 
 land of Egypt. ”r—Boston Gazette. 
 
 “This perpetual embargo being unconstitutional, every man 
 will perceive that he is not bound to regard it. If the petitions 
 do not produce a relaxation, the people ought immediately to 
 assume a higher tone. The Government of Massachusetts has 
 also a. dutv to perform. This state is still sovereign and inde¬ 
 pendent.”— Boston Centincl. 
 
 “In my mind, the present crisis excites the most serious ap¬ 
 prehension. A storm seems to be gathering, which portends, 
 not a tempest on the ocean, but domestic convulsions. I feel 
 mysslfbound in conscience to declare, lest, the blood of tnose 
 who should fall in the execution of this masure(the embargo) 
 .may lie on my head, that I consider this to be an act which di¬ 
 rects a mortal blow at the liberties of my country; an act con¬ 
 taining unconstitutional provisions to which the people are not 
 bound to submit, and to which, in my opinion, they will not sub¬ 
 mit.”— Speech of Mr Iiillhou.se. . 
 
 This subject might be pursued much further; but 
 (he lateness of the hour admonishes me of the ne¬ 
 cessity of brevity. But I cannot forbear to giv*-* one 
 I nacre extract, to show the aim and object o: all 
 
9\«V 
 
 2>6 9 
 
 this clamor and complaint, without even proposing 
 any substitute. It is characteristic of Federal po¬ 
 licy to find fault with every thing, and propose no¬ 
 thing: , 
 
 “The original embargo act had been openly and frequently 
 violated. The public pfints in Boston had audaciously and se¬ 
 ditiously invited the citizens to set it at defiance. The British 
 Government had also, as we have seen, added the allurement 
 of its powerful invitation. Such an invitation was unneces¬ 
 sary. There are always to be found, in every community, men 
 who will seek the shortest road to fortune, whether through the 
 dark paths of smuggling or otherwise; and these men united 
 their obstreperous brawlings with the clamor raised by those 
 whose grand object was to harass the Government for the 
 chance of regaining the power they had lost.”— M. Carey. 
 
 This shows in very admirable colors the conunu- 
 aity of interest which then existed between the 
 office seeker and the speculator, and evinces the ve¬ 
 nality of motive which, governed their actions, and 
 prompted their efforts to overthow the Govern¬ 
 ment of the people. One more reference on this 
 v point, and I have done: 
 
 “You have reposed confidence in a coward [Jefferson] and 
 leaned on a broken stall' too long. The day of political proba- 
 tion is fast Verging to a close, when the fate of America will be 
 decided, and laurels, bought with the price of freemen’s blood, 
 will grace the brows of the Gallic tyrant. Let every man who 
 holds the name of America dear to him, stretch'out his hand 
 and put this accursed thing [the embargo] forever from him. Be 
 resolute—act like the sons of liberty, of God, and your country— 
 nerve your arms with vengeance against the despot who would 
 wrest the inestimable germ of your independence from you, and 
 you shall be conquerors. Give ear no longer to the syren 
 song of Democracy and Jeffersonian liberty; it is a cursed delu¬ 
 sion, adopted by traitors and recommended by syconhants. 
 Jefferson, the man who, with the dagger of popular confidence, 
 first gave the stroke to your libert esS’—Newburybort Cir¬ 
 cular. 
 
 It was during the period of these publications 
 that the leaders of the Federal party in New 
 England are believed to have plotted the dissolu¬ 
 tion of the Union, and (he establishment of a 
 Northern confederacy upon its ruins. The excite¬ 
 ment was carried to the utmost pitch of exaspera¬ 
 tion. The press teemed wiih calumny and 
 falsehood levelled at the President and his admi¬ 
 nistration, the principal object of which was to 
 prove a secret alliance with France, in her at¬ 
 tempts to prostrate the power and influence of the 
 British crown. 
 
 After the labored defence of the gentleman from 
 Massachusetts, I hope I may be excused for de¬ 
 taining the committee for a few minutes, while I 
 exhibit some of the proofs which have induced the 
 opinion which he seems to think is so uncharitable. 
 It is not necessary for me to remark that I have no 
 other knowledge upon the subject, except what is 
 available to all who will take the trouble to ex¬ 
 amine it. In the first place, I will refer to the mis¬ 
 sion of John Henry: * 
 
 Mr. Ryland , Secretary to Sir James Craig , late Governor 
 
 General of the British Provinces in North America . to 
 
 Mr. Henry. 
 
 (Most secret and confidential.) 
 
 “Quebec, .Tan. 26,1809. 
 
 “My Dear Sir: The extraordinary state of thmgs at this 
 time in the Eastern States has suggested to the Governor in 
 Chief the idea of employing you on a secret and confidential 
 mission to Boston, provided an arrangement can be made to 
 meet the important end in view, without throwing an absolute 
 obstacle in the way of your professional pursuits. The infor¬ 
 mation and political observations heretofore received from you, 
 were transmitted by his Excellency to the Secretary of State, 
 who has expressed his particular approbation of them,” &c. 
 
 From the instructions of J. H. Craig to Mr. Henry. 
 
 (“Most secret and confidential.) 
 
 “Quebec, 6th February, 1808. 
 
 “The principal object that I recommend to your attention is 
 
 the endeavor to obtain the most accurate information of the 
 
 truestate of affairs in that part of the Union which, from, itsr 
 wealth, the number of its inhabitants, and the known intelli¬ 
 gence of several of its leading wen, must naturally possess a 
 very considerable influence over, and will indeed probably lead 
 the other Eastern States of America in the part they may take 
 at this important crisis. I think it necessary to put you on your 
 guard against the sanguineness of an aspiring party. The Fe¬ 
 deralists, as I understand, have at all times discovered a leaning 
 to this disposition, and their being under its particular influence 
 at this moment, is the more to be expected from their having 
 no ill (well) founded ground for their hopes, of being nearer the 
 attainment of their object, than they have been for some years 
 past. Tt has been supposed that if the Federalists of the Eastern 
 States should be successful in obtaining that decided influence 
 which may enable them to direct public opinion, it is not im¬ 
 probable that, rather than submit to the continuance of the diffi¬ 
 culties and distress to which they are now subject, they will ex¬ 
 ert that influence to bring about, a separation from the general 
 Union. The earliest information on this subject may be ot 
 great consequence to our Government, as it may also be that 
 it should be informed how far, in such an event, they would 
 look to England for assstiance, or be disposed to enter into a 
 connection with us.” 
 
 Credential from Sir James Craig to Mr. Henry. 
 
 “The bearer, Mr. John Henry, is employed by. me, and full 
 confidence may be placed in him for any communication which, 
 any person may wish to make to me in the business committed 
 to him. In faith of which, I have given him this under my 
 hand and seal at Quebec, the 6th day of February, 1809. 
 
 “J. H. CRAIG.” 
 
 In. pursuance of this commission, Mr. Henry 
 proceeded to the Eastern States, in prosecution of 
 the design, which very clearly appears from the 
 cautious and stealthy language of his letter of in¬ 
 structions. The following are extracts from his 
 correspondence, which evinces, beyond controver¬ 
 sy, the brilliant hopes he entertained of success, 
 and the accuracy of his informatior>*as to the tem¬ 
 per and disposition of parties in this country: 
 
 “I learn that the Governor of this State (Vermont) is now 
 visiting the towns in the northern sections of it, and makes no 
 secret of his determination, as commander-in-chief of the mi¬ 
 litia, to refuse obedience to any command from the. General 
 Government, which can terid to interrupt the good understand¬ 
 ing that prevails between the citizens of Vermont and his Ma¬ 
 jesty’s subjects in Canada.” 
 
 Again, he says: 
 
 “Notwithstanding, while there is every reason to hope that 
 the Northern States, in their distinct capacity, wit! unite, and 
 resist by force a wav with great Britain, great pains are taken, 
 by men of talents and intelligence to confirm the fears of the 
 common people as to the concurrence of the Southern Demo¬ 
 crats in the projects of France, and every thing tends to en¬ 
 courage the belief that the dissolution of the Confederacy will 
 be accelerated by that spirit which now actuates both parties.’ 3 s'% 
 In another letter, he observes: 
 
 “The Federal party declare, that, in the event of a war, the 
 State of Vermont will treat separately for itself with Great Bri¬ 
 tain, and support, to the utmost of the stipulations into which 
 it may enter, without any regard to the policy of the Ge¬ 
 neral Government.” 
 
 Under date of March 5, 1809, he says: 
 
 “I have sufficient means of information to enable me to judge 
 of the proper period for offering the co-operation of Great Bri¬ 
 tain, and opening a correspondence between the Governor-Ge¬ 
 neral of British America and those individuals who, from the 
 partthey take in the opposition to the National Government, or 
 the influence they may possfess in any new order of things that 
 may grow out of the present difference, should be qualified to 
 act in behalf of the Northern States.” 
 
 Boston, March 7, he again writes: 
 
 “I have already given a decided opinion that a declaration of 
 war is not to he expected; but, contrary to all reasonable calcu¬ 
 lations, should the Congress possess spirit and independence 
 enough to place their popularity in jeopardy by so strange a 
 measure, the Legislature of Massachusetts will give the tone to 
 the neighboring States—will declare itself permanent until a 
 new election of members—invite a' Congress, to be composed of 
 delegates from the Federal States, and effect a separate Go¬ 
 vernment for their common defence and common interest. 
 
 This Congress would probably besin by abrogating the offen¬ 
 sive laws, and adopting a plan of Government for the mainte¬ 
 nance of the power and authority assumed. They would, by 
 such an act, be in a condition to make or receive proposals 
 from Great Britain.” 
 
 This letter discloses a very remarkable fact, 
 which cannot be nassed over without notice. Five- 
 
nyo 
 
 19 ;> it 
 
 years before the time of the Hartford Convention, 
 this British agent informs his superior of the out¬ 
 line of the plan which was subsequently attempted, 
 and partly carried into success, and which migh> 
 have succeeded at the adjourned meeting which 
 wasto have been held in the following summer, 
 but for the triumph of our arms at the battle of 
 New Orleans, and the news of the treaty of peace 
 that immediately succeeded. He states not only 
 some of the important details of the convention, 
 as it actually took place, several years after, but 
 the motives that would induce it, and the general 
 objects that were to be accomplished, one of which 
 was a separate Government for their common de¬ 
 fence and common interest. 
 
 It is unreasonable to believe that this informa¬ 
 tion was manufactured for the purpose of deceiv¬ 
 ing his employer; and especially is it so, as the 
 facts and speculations which he communicates 
 have since become matters of history, at least to a 
 very considerable extent, and doubtless would have 
 been fully attempted, if not successfully carried 
 into operation, but for the providential events of 
 which I have spoken, that prevented their execu¬ 
 tion, and overwhelmed their projectors with eter¬ 
 nal disgrace and infamy. But, sir, I have other 
 testimony equally conclusive, if not of a higher 
 nature, that I will submit to the committee, with¬ 
 out remark or commentary: 
 
 Mr. Jefferson to Mr, Giles, Dec 25, 1825. 
 
 “ He (Mr. Adams) spoke then of the dissatisfaction of the 
 Eastern portion of ouv confederacy with the restraints of the 
 embargo then existing, and their restlessness under it. That 
 there was nothing which might not be attempted to rid them- 
 selves of it. That he had information of the most unques¬ 
 tionable irtainty. that certain citizens ofthe Eastern States (I 
 think he namedMasaschus&ts particularly) were in negotiation 
 with the agents of the British Government, The object of 
 which was an agreement that the New England States should 
 take no further part in the war then going on; that without, 
 formally declaring their separation from the Union ofthe States, 
 they should withdraw from all aid and obedience to them; that 
 their navigation and commerce should be free ftom restraint or 
 interruption by the British; that they should be considered and 
 treated by them as neutrals, and, as such, might conduct them¬ 
 selves towards both parties; and, at the close ofthe war, be at 
 liberty to rejoin the confederacy. He assured me that there 
 was imminent danger that the convention would take place; 
 that the temptations were such as might debauch many from 
 their fidelity to the Union; and that, to enable its friends to 
 made head against it, the repeal of the embargo was absolutely 
 necessary. I expressed a justsense of the merit ofthe informa¬ 
 tion, and of the importance of theflisclosure to the safety, and 
 even salvation, of our country; and, however reluctant I was to 
 abandon the measure, (a measure which, persevered in a little 
 longer,we had subsequent and satisfactory assurance, would 
 have effected its object completely,) from that moment, and in¬ 
 fluenced by that information, I saw the necessity of abandoning 
 it, and, instead of our effecting our purpose by this peaceful 
 weapon, we must fight it out, or break the Union.” 
 
 Extract of an authorized statement by Mr. Adams , in ex¬ 
 planation, published in the National Intelligencer , Octo¬ 
 ber 21, 1828- 
 
 “Mv. Giles, and several other members pf Congress, during 
 this session (1808) wrote to Mr. Adams confidential letters, in¬ 
 forming him of the various measures proposed as reinforce¬ 
 ments or substitutes for the embargo, and soliciting his opinions 
 upon the subject. He answered those letters with frankness 
 and in confidence. He earnestly recommended the substitution 
 ofthe non-intercourse for theemb'argo; and, in giving his rea¬ 
 sons for this preference, was necessarily led to enlarge upon the 
 views and purposes of certain leaders of the party which had 
 the management of the State Legislature in their hands. He 
 urged that continuance of the embargo much longer would cer¬ 
 tainly be met by forcible resistance, supported by the Legisla¬ 
 ture, and probably by the Judiciary of the State. 
 
 “That to quell that resistance, if force should be'resorted to by 
 the Government, it would produce a civil war; and in that 
 event, he had no doubt that the leaders «f the party would secure 
 the co-operation with them of Great Britain. That, their object 
 was, and had been for several years, a dissolution of the Union, 
 
 and the establishment of a separate confederation, he knew 
 from unequivocal evidence, although not proveable in a court 
 of law; and that, in the case of a civil war, the aid of Great 
 Britain to effect that purpose would be as surely resorted to, as 
 it would be indispensably necessary to the design.” 
 
 All who remember the period when this sta'e- 
 ment made its appearance, eaqnot have forgotten 
 the excitement which it produced in New England, 
 and especially among the Boston Federalist-, who, 
 at the time, were among the most devoted support¬ 
 ers of Mr. Adams. The press took up the sub¬ 
 ject, and demanded of the individuals whose situa¬ 
 tion was such, at the period alluded to, as to desig¬ 
 nate them among the persons included in the charge, 
 to call upon Mr. Adams for some more specific 
 statement of the accusation. A writer in the Bos¬ 
 ton Courier says: 
 
 “This we, the Federal party, the citizens of Massachusetts, 
 the people of New England, require of them. VVeare all im¬ 
 plicated in the accusation, and ail feel its effects; nor can we 
 rest satisfied until it is brought home to individuals, or scattered 
 to the winds.” 
 
 On the 26th of November, 1828, Harrison G. 
 Otis and twelve others, all leading Federalists in 
 Massachusetts, most of whom are still living and 
 aciive members of the Whig party, addressed a 
 communication to Mr. Adams, calling for the 
 names of the persons charged, and the evidence 
 upon which the charge rests. Among other things, 
 they say: 
 
 “We were associated in politics with the party prevailing 
 here at the period referred to in the statement above mentioned; 
 some of us concurred in all the measures adopted by that party; 
 and we all warmly approved and supported them. Many ot 
 our associates, who still survive, are dispersed throughout Mas¬ 
 sachusetts and Maine, and could not be easily convened, to joia 
 us on the present occasion.” 
 
 Mr. Adams’s reply, under date of the 26th of 
 December, is very full and explicit; from which I 
 beg leave to read a few extracts: 
 
 “Itwas in those letters of 180S and 1899, that I mentioned the 
 design of certain leaders of the Federal party, and the esta¬ 
 blishment of a Northern confederacy, &c. 
 
 “This plan was so far matured, that the proposal had been 
 made to an individual, at the proper time, to be placed at the 
 head of the military movement which, it was foreseen, would 
 be necessary for carrying it into execution. 
 
 “The interposition of a kind Providence averted the most de¬ 
 plorable of catastrophes, and turning over to the receptacle of 
 things lost upon earth, the adjourned convention from Hartford 
 to Boston, extinguished (by the mercy of heaven, may it be 
 forever!) the projected New England Confederacy.” 
 
 la conclusion, he intimates very strongly, that at 
 some future day, a sense of duty may induce him 
 to disclose the evidence which he possesses, and. 
 for which they call, but says, the selection of the 
 day must be left to his own judgment—that no ar¬ 
 ray of numbers or power can induce him to make 
 the disclosure prematurely, or to wilhhold it “when 
 a sense of duty shall sound the alarm. 1 " It has 
 already appeared that Mr. Jefferson and his party 
 were obliged to abandon the embargo, to save the 
 Union from the treasonable designs of the Federal 
 party in the Eastern States. Non-intercourse was 
 substituted, on the first of March, 1809. This act 
 met with little or no better reception. It was, at once, 
 denounced as having been dictated by French in¬ 
 fluence, and as a measure of hostility to England. 
 The cry of French influence and Southern influ¬ 
 ence were the principal weapons of Federal war¬ 
 fare, in the North, throughout the period of which I 
 am speaking. After the failure of Mr. Erskine’s 
 arrangement, the bitterness of party feeling was 
 resumed, if it can be said to have subsided, while 
 it was believed that the overtures he had made 
 

 would fee sanctioned by the British Cabinet. Upon, 
 this point, I desire to make one or two remarks, toj 
 show the disengenuousness and insincerity of Fede-I 
 ral Opposition, and then I will pass on with as i 
 much rapidity as possible. While it was sup- j teok place, but was turned “over to the receptacle- 
 
 VCi 
 
 country until after the battle at New Orleans. 
 The Hartford Convention assembled on the 15th 
 of December, 1814, and adjourned to meet at Bos¬ 
 ton in the following June, which meeting never 
 
 posed that the arrangement had been made by au- % 
 thority, they openly charged that it was precisely 
 what the British Government had always betn 
 willing to do; but the moment it was ascertained 
 that it had been rejected upon the pretence that the 
 Minister had tianscended his powers, with charac¬ 
 teristic regard for truth, they unblushingly averted 
 that Mr s Madison knew, at the time, that no such 
 
 of things lost upon earth.” The victory of Nevr 
 Orleans, and the treaty of peace, made the triumph 
 of the Democratic party complete. No language 
 can describe their joy. The Federalists were over¬ 
 whelmed, as well by the successful termination of 
 the conflict, as by the knowledge of the odium 
 which would attach to their treasonable opposition. 
 It is a little remarkable that the gentleman from 
 
 instructions had been given, and that he had frau- j Massachusetts [Mr. Sai.tonstall] should suppose 
 
 dulently consented to the arrangement, to deceive 
 the people, and gain popularity. The press made 
 this charge, and the minions of party joined in. the 
 cry. It soon became evident that hostilities must 
 ensue, as all peaceful efforts to obtain justice had 
 been exhausted, without any success. All parties 
 again demanded redress,and none were more clamo¬ 
 rous than those that subsequently opposed the war 
 with so much violence and rancor. It was said that 
 the Administration wanted energy, and that all the 
 difficulty was justly chargeable to its weakness 
 and corruption, and no expression Was more com¬ 
 mon with these patriotic citizens than the one as¬ 
 cribed to their leader in Congress, that the Admi¬ 
 nistration “could not be kicked into a war,.” They 
 urged the Government on to the brink of hostili¬ 
 ties, by complaints and reproaches of the most 
 vindictive character, until it was impossible to re¬ 
 cede, without sacrifice both of the rights and honor 
 of the nation; and when the issue was presented, 
 
 that the overthrow of Napoleon, at the battle of 
 ' Waterloo, induced the Federal party to disband. 
 That battle did not take place until the following 
 season. It was another great and glorious victory, 
 on this side of the ocean, which seems to have es¬ 
 caped his recollection, that compelled the leaders 
 of that party, at least for the lime, to abandon 
 their projects of ambition, and to acquiesce in the 
 ascendency of the favorites of the people. 
 
 The next eight years succeeding the war, has 
 been called the “ era of good feeling,’’’during which 
 the Federal party endeavored to wipe off, by every 
 species of obsequiousness, the disgrace of their past 
 misdeeds, without any change of their cherished, 
 principles. Party organization was abandoned, 
 and of course the animosity of feeling which had 
 long prevailed, subsided. These “no party times, 
 as they have been called, continued, at least in 
 New England, until the election of John G,. Adams 
 by the IJouse of Representatives. The events 
 
 and no alternative left but dishonor, they not | which led to that result are familiar to all, and 
 only voted against the declaration of war, but ini- ( need not be recapitulated. Admit, if you please. 
 
 mediately adopted an inflammatory address to ex¬ 
 cite the people to oppose it. Their opposition dur¬ 
 ing the war is so well known, and so universally 
 execrated, that it is not necessary to dwell upon it. 
 The Federal party, in Massachusetts, were more 
 rancorous and uncharitable in their opposition than 
 in any State in the Union. They declared, in the 
 form of a legis'ative declaration, that “the war 
 was founded in falsehood, declared without neces¬ 
 sity, and its real object was extent of territory, by 
 unjust conquests, and'to aid the late tyrant of 
 Europe in his view of aggrandizement.” Such 
 declaratory resolutions were a very frequent oc¬ 
 currence, though, I believe, they did not require the 
 sanction of both branches of tne Legislature. 
 
 It would be an endless task, as well as useless 
 labor, to recite all the evidences of the reckless op¬ 
 position to ihe war. They withheld, as far as it 
 
 for it is true, that Mr. Adams was supported by 
 many of the- old Republicans; and it is equally true 
 that the body of the Federal party, aroused from 
 their lethargy, rallied to his support. Shortly 
 after his election, the declaration was made, with 
 some appearance of authority, that those who fell 
 with the fir.it Adams should rise with the second^ 
 and the course of his administration was supposed' 
 to furnish ground for such belief. The old party 
 feeling was aroused to a very high degree of ex¬ 
 citement at the ensuing Presidential election; the 
 mass of the Democatic party were embodied again 
 under the banner of Jeffersonian principles, in op¬ 
 position to an Administration which commanded 
 the confidence and respect of the tariff and bank 
 party in every quarter of the Union. It is impos¬ 
 sible for me, at this time, to speak of the benefi- 
 ial change in the administration of. public affairs 
 
 was wi bin their power, the means lor supporting j that was introduced by General Jackson. It is re 
 
 the army and navy; they dbcou raged enlistments 
 they prevented loans, and actually devised a regu¬ 
 lar system for exporting specie out of the country, 
 to cripple the Government, by depriving it of the 
 sinews of war; and, when victory crownsd the ef- 
 
 corded in the grateful remembrance of the people, 
 and constitutes one of the brightest and most en¬ 
 during pages in the history of the country. 
 
 The calumnies and falsehoods that were heaped 
 upon that distinguished individual, by the old op- 
 
 forts of the brave, they resolved that “it was unbe- ( posers of Jefferson, have gone to the “tomb of the 
 
 coming a moral and religious people to express 
 any approbation of military or naval exploits.” 
 This relentless and heartless opposition was kept 
 up, with unabated fury, down to the victory at 
 New Orleans and the subsequent news of the treaty 
 of peace. Peace was concluded on the 24th of 
 December, 1814, but the news did not ieach this 
 
 Capulets,” and it only remains to complete the 
 parallel, after he shall have been consigned to the 
 grave, for his enemies to pronounce his eulogy. 
 Professions of economy are becoming very fash¬ 
 ionable, and a most deliberate attempt is made to 
 fasten upon the present Administration the charge 
 of extravagance in the expenditure of the public mo- 
 
ney. Let no one accuse me of undervaluing any 
 just system of economy; on the contrary, I hoid it 
 to be indispensable, in a Republican form of Go¬ 
 vernment, to secure it from corruption, and all the 
 evil tendencies of monarchial institutions. But 
 the appropriate inquiry is, who are the friends of 
 economy, and whose principles, if adopted, will 
 lead to extravagance? I will give one fact to illus 
 trate my views on this subject, after remarking 
 tha., the only security against improvident expen¬ 
 diture, is to raise no more money from the pock¬ 
 ets of the people, than is necessary to meet the 
 obligations of the country upon the strictest princi¬ 
 ples of frugality. If taxes are levied and collected, 
 the money will be expended; and, indeed, there 
 seems to be a necessity that it should be, for no one 
 will pretend that it would be just or wi-e to hoard 
 up the currency, pr shut it out of circulation. 
 Hence the impolicy of a high tariff; for, if money 
 is collected it must be expended, and this engen¬ 
 ders extravagance, and tends to corruption. The 
 fact to which 1 wish to call vour attention, is the 
 veto of the Maysville road bill. 
 
 It has been said very justly, I believe, that, at 
 the time when that measure was arrested by the 
 moral courage of General Jackson, unconsti¬ 
 tutional appropriations were contemplated to the 
 vast amount of cue hundred millions of dollars, by 
 the advocates of the system of which that bill was 
 the germ. Some of the friends of the President 
 were alarmed when they learned his intention to 
 veto it, and even went so far as to desire him to 
 yield to the wishes of a majority of Congress. The 
 result is known. The Democratic party sustained 
 him with increased vigor; and, though a few desert¬ 
 ed, the mass remained firm. This was a specimen 
 of economy worth talking about, the influence of 
 which will be felt, it is to be hoped, through all 
 coming time. One would think that the advocates 
 of this system of wasteful and unconstitutional ex¬ 
 penditure would be restrained, by a sense of delica¬ 
 cy, from making charges of extravagance against 
 those whom they have uniformly derided as the up¬ 
 holders of a niggardly policy of retrenchment. It 
 is not denied, that, for a time, many honest Demo¬ 
 crats were found in opposition to that Administra¬ 
 tion, through a feeling of distrust of the fitness or 
 prudence of the incumbent, which had been engen¬ 
 dered by the violence and wickedness of his op- 
 posers, and by the wide-spread calumnies which 
 had been circulated for the purpose of blackening 
 his character and blasting bis reputation—-a repu¬ 
 tation which had been earned in the field of danger, 
 through toil and peril, in defence of the honor and 
 glory of his country. But as the policy of his Ad¬ 
 ministration was developed, these ill-grounded fears 
 were dissipated in the cheering exhibitions of wis¬ 
 dom, patriotism, and sound Republican princip'es, 
 which characterized his course, and furnished 
 the most gratifying assurance of that devotion to 
 principle which so signally marked his public ca¬ 
 reer. At his second election, the whole Demo¬ 
 cratic party in New England, with the exception 
 of a few individuals, who became traitors to their 
 own principles, were united, and gave to the hero 
 of New Orleans a generous and hearty support. 
 No one can oppose to this declaration a successful 
 denial. Each party rallied under the respective 
 
 banners of their long cherished principles, and en¬ 
 tered into the contest with spirit and determination. 
 With very few exceptions, the Federalists gave 
 their support to Mr. Adams. It is a veiy common 
 saving, that “one swallow does not make summer,” 
 or, as the legal maxim has it, that “a single in¬ 
 stance does not make law:” so, the patty associa¬ 
 tion of a few individuals, after the lapse of many 
 years, does not afford any evidence of the princi¬ 
 ples of the party with which they happen to be 
 classed, with reference to a previous organization, 
 or the position of the masses of which that organi¬ 
 zation was composed. I am willing to admit that 
 a few Democrat? remained, in opposition, and that, 
 generally speaking, they maintain, to this day, like 
 all traitors, that every body has changed his prin¬ 
 ciples and position, except themselves; that, while 
 they have stood firm and inflexible, each of the two 
 great political parties of the country has changed 
 sides—that is, the Federalists have become Demo¬ 
 crats, for their particular accommodation, and the 
 Democrats have abandoned their cherished prin¬ 
 ciples and joined their enemies, although, if tie 
 story be true, there was scarcely any one left for 
 them to oin. 
 
 On the other hand, I am not disposed to deny 
 that a small portion of the Federal party supported 
 the elecion of General Jackson, most of whom 
 have deserted and gone back to their old asso¬ 
 ciates; and, wilhout meaning any disrespect to in¬ 
 dividuals, it is my sincere desire that they may ne¬ 
 ver return to make further trouble in the Demo¬ 
 cratic ranks. Those that remain, are believed to 
 be sincere, in the change of princip'es which they 
 profess. Generally speaking, they acknowledge 
 their past errors* and avow their change of princi¬ 
 ple and position. This I believe to be the true 
 state of the case. I can speak with the utmost 
 confidence, when 1 say that within the limit of my 
 own acquaintance, it is an undeniable fact, that 
 the mass of the old Republicans then living, were 
 the warm and zealous supporters of the second 
 election of President Jackson, and continued 
 throughout to approve of the principles and mea¬ 
 sures of his administration; the distinctive features 
 of which were a strict construction of the Consti¬ 
 tution, opposition to a National Bank, the reduction 
 of the tariff and the receipts of the Treasury, as 
 far as possible without injury to the great interests 
 of the country, to the wants of the Government 
 upon the strictest principles of accountability and 
 economy, and an undeviatins hostility to unconsti¬ 
 tutional appropriations upon local objects of im¬ 
 provement. That the Federal party opposed this 
 Administration, its principles and policy, with un¬ 
 relenting and uncompromising hostility, is suscepti¬ 
 ble of the clearest demonstration, if the fact does not 
 stand confessed. All the old Federal presses, includ¬ 
 ing the Boston Centinel, teemed with abuse and 
 misrepresentation of the same reckless character 
 as had marked their opposition to Jefferson and 
 Madison. But proof on this point would be a 
 work of supererogation, and therefore I will desist. 
 Mv confidence in the intelligence of the people, 
 induces me to believe that they cannot be deceived 
 in this matter, relating, as it does, to events which 
 are fresh in their recollection. If these things be 
 so, an inference will follow, when one other fact is 
 
& 
 
 t 
 
 
 established, about which I imagine there is still less 
 dispute, of great importance in the inquiry which I 
 am pursuing. The additional fact that I wish to 
 establish, I presume no one will deny, and there¬ 
 fore does not require proof, but may be fairly as¬ 
 sumed; and it is, that the supporters, principles, 
 and policy, of the present Administration, are 
 identical wi h the one that preceded it. It may be 
 said that it is in contemplation to substitute the In¬ 
 dependent Tieasury system for the collection, safe 
 keeping, and disbursement of the public money, 
 in the place of the State banks; but this does not 
 afford the distinction required. The State banks 
 were selected as an experiment. It has signally 
 failed, through the misconduct and bad faith of the 
 banks themselves; and it is well known, that, after 
 the suspension of specie payments in 1837, and 
 the refusal of the banks to pay over nearly thirty 
 millions of the public money, which had been col¬ 
 lected from the people, and deposited with the 
 banks for safe keeping, General Jackson, no less 
 than Mr. Van Buren, became satisfied that no 
 further confidence could be reposed in them as de¬ 
 positories of the public treasure, and both alike ap¬ 
 proved of the new recommendation that was made, 
 and which, I trust, before this session terminates, 
 will become the law of the land. One accusation of 
 the Opposition is, therefore, fully sustained, and 
 will be cheerfully admitted, that Mr. Van Buren 
 is “treading in the footsteps of his illustrious pre¬ 
 decessor.” I hope gentlemen will not back out of 
 tiiis charge, because it may be convenient to do so 
 to avoid the consequences of an issue they 
 wish to escape. Will any one undertake 
 to deny that the principles and measures of 
 the two Administrations are the same in all 
 the essential elements of national policy? Surely 
 no one will attempt it; and that their sup¬ 
 porters are the same in New England, with indi¬ 
 vidual exceptions, I appeal to every city, district, 
 and village in that section of country, for the con¬ 
 firmation of what I affirm; and I am willing to 
 stand or fall before my constituents, upon the truth 
 of the fact which I have now stated, confining i?s 
 application, of course, to the limits of my acquaint¬ 
 ance, which is not very limited, in two or three 
 of those States. Every member of the Hartford 
 Convention now living, is opposed to this Adminis¬ 
 tration. The talented and distinguished committee 
 that addressed Mr. Adams, and called upon him 
 for the evidence to sustain the charge he had 
 made against themselves, or their associates, 
 who were “dispersed throughout Massachusetts 
 and Maine,” at least so many of them as are 
 now living, are members of the Whig party; 
 and the Boston Centinel, and other old Fe¬ 
 deral journals, constitute the leading organs 
 of that party in the unparalleled and unheard of 
 struggle to overthrow the present Democratic Ad¬ 
 ministration; and if all these things be so, it re¬ 
 mains for the people to determine, as they surely 
 will, who are the followers of Jefferson, and who 
 are Federalists. The principles of parties at the 
 present time will now be considered with a little 
 more particularity, but with as much brevity as 
 possible. It has already appeared, rhat, throughout 
 the period of party organization, they have been 
 separated by an impassable gulf in tieir views and 
 
 feelings, upon the construction of the Constitution. 
 In the progress of events, other questions, tempora¬ 
 ry in their nature, have largely contributed to the 
 bitterness and acrimony of party strife, which at 
 times has threatened the existence of the Union, 
 itself; but as these temporary causes of irritation 
 pass away, parties are seen to settle down upon the 
 standard of principle, upon which the division 
 first took place. Such is the case at the present 
 time, in spite of all the efforts in certain quarters 
 to conceal it. The present contest is one for prin¬ 
 ciple, and its dividing Jine is bottomed upon the 
 construction of the Constitution as leading to dif¬ 
 ferent measures of policy in the administration of 
 public affairs. Of the many essential grounds of 
 division between parties under he existing organi¬ 
 zation, I shall only be able to speak of some of 
 those which have attracted the largest share of pub¬ 
 lic attention under preceding Administrations. This 
 Administration, and the party supporting it, are 
 opposed to a National Bank, believing it to be both 
 unconstitutional and inexpedient. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to remark, that this 
 question has lost nothing of the importance that 
 was originally attached to it by its early opposers, 
 from the lights of experience; but, on the con¬ 
 trary, its dangerous tendency has been fully de¬ 
 monstrated, in the fearful exhibitions of the pow¬ 
 erful and despotic sway over the property and 
 liberty of the citizens, which such an institution is 
 capable of exerting, when placed under the con¬ 
 trol of corporate power, and subject to the direc¬ 
 tion of designing men. The conduct of the late 
 Bank of the United States is fresh in the recollec¬ 
 tion of the people of this country, and need not be 
 recapitulated. It is sufficient to say, that the worst 
 fears and apprehensions of its opposers have been 
 realized to their utmost extent, and so much so 
 that it is my delibera'e opinion that a great majo¬ 
 rity of the American people have become sick and 
 tired of the periodical fluctuations in the currency, 
 which are the inevitable consequence of a paper 
 standard of value. The reasons of this opinion E 
 will forbear to state, as it would be inconsistent 
 with the general design of my remarks. It is 
 more my object to ascertain what are the principles 
 of the Democratic party, for the purpose of con¬ 
 trasting them with those of the other side, than 
 to detain the committee by entering into a full 
 explanation and defence of them. The soundest 
 principles of economy, as welt as of justice, are op¬ 
 posed to a high tariff. It is a perversion of the taxing 
 power which wa-confided to Congress by the Con¬ 
 stitution for the purpose of providing for the general 
 welfare of the whole Union, and not for the 
 benefit of a few individuals at the expense of the 
 many. Any system, therefore, which imposes bur¬ 
 dens upon the body of the people to confer favor 
 upon a limited class of individuals or corporations, 
 is a perversion and infraction of the grant to lay 
 taxes, because it is not to provide for the generaL 
 welfare of the whole, but to adminis'er to the cu¬ 
 pidity and avarice of the few; and, therefore, any 
 exaction for the sole benefit of one branch of in¬ 
 dustry, at the expense of all others, is a germ of 
 Federal construction, not authorized by the Con¬ 
 stitution, the whole tendency of which is to per¬ 
 vert our Republican institutions from a state of 
 
parity and simplicy, into a splendid system'of fture in every system of national policy. Taxes mast 
 national power, in subversion of the rights of the I be levied, in some way, and, to a greater or less ex- 
 States, and of the liberties of the people. A strict tent, in all Government*; and the money must be 
 constitutional limitation of the taxing power, is the collected and disbursed in one currency or another, 
 only safeguard against corruption and extrava-1 The policy of the Democratic patty, in this behalf. 
 
 gance. Henee the sleepless vigilance of the De¬ 
 mocratic party in their opposition to an unautho¬ 
 rized tariff. The ftim and objects of its projectors 
 will be hinted at hereafter. Again: no one pre¬ 
 tends that there is any express grant ip authorize 
 the appropriation of the national treasure upon lo¬ 
 cal objects of improvement. This, too, is based 
 upon construction, and is claimed by implication. 
 The Democratic party oppose it upon constitu¬ 
 tional grounds, as well as on account of the injus¬ 
 tice and inequality of its operation upon the dif¬ 
 ferent sections of the Union. It is a gambling, 
 log-rolling system, calculated to corrupt, the de¬ 
 liberations of Congress, and to foster division and 
 heart burnings among the several States of the 
 Confederacy. 
 
 On this point I desire to be distinctly understood. 
 It is not the danger of exasperation of sectional 
 feeling that constitutes the essential ground of the 
 opposition of the Democratic party to this system, 
 for that has reference to its expediency; but it is 
 regarded as the exercise of an unauthorized power, 
 contravening the Constitution and infringing upon 
 the sovereignty of the States. There are very 
 strong objections to it on the score of expediency. 
 In addition to what has been said, it leads to un¬ 
 necessary and exorbitant taxation, by creating new 
 objects of appropriation, without number or bound, 
 except in the discretion of Congress. It has been 
 called the sluiceway of the tariff system, and I do 
 not know of a more appropriate name. The 
 friends of the tariff have uniformly supported it, 
 for the reason, undoubtedly, thst the drain from 
 the Treasury, which it occasions, would further 
 their designs. In all its consequences it is produc¬ 
 tive of evil, without any counterbalancing good. 
 Again: the power to collect monev to tiny amount 
 from the people and to distribute it as a matter of 
 favor to the Slates, or to corporations, is a species 
 of despotism of the most odious character. The 
 projected schemes of distribution find no favor 
 with the Democratic party. They have resisted it, 
 and will continue uf resist it, in any and every shape 
 and form in which it may be presented, whether 
 under tha pretence of donation or under the dis¬ 
 guise of the assumption of the State debts. 
 
 The policy to be pursued in relation to the pub¬ 
 lic domain demands the most solemn consideration 
 of the community, and is likely to excite very much 
 of public attention, for many years to come, both 
 on account of its bearing upon the finances of the 
 country, and the principles involved in the vari¬ 
 ous schemes that have been projected to divert the 
 accruing profit of the annua! sales from the Na¬ 
 tion Treasury. The distribution system is the mo-t 
 formidable and the most dangerous of anv that has 
 been presented, on account of the bait which it of¬ 
 fers to the indebted States.no less than to the manu¬ 
 facturers, who see that, if it prevails, it must lay 
 the foundation for a very great increase of taxa¬ 
 tion, and contribute very largely to their interests 
 and designs. The mode of collecting, keeping, and 
 disbursing the public money, is an important fea- 
 
 is well known, though it has been shamefully mis¬ 
 represented in all its objects and effects. It is true 
 that Government dues will be prospectively col¬ 
 lected in gold, and silver, and that the paymentsto 
 the army and ri^ivy, and all the public creditors, 
 will be made in the same currency, es they ought to 
 be, and must be, if we are to have a Government 
 of the people and not of the banks; but the States 
 will be left to regulate their own institutions in 
 their own way; ami it should not be forgotten that 
 the specie that the Government collects is immedi¬ 
 ately distributed among the people, and goes into 
 the general circulation. The effect of this 
 measure will be to infuse into the circu¬ 
 lating medium of the country a larger propor¬ 
 tion of the precious metals, and to contribute in no 
 smalUdegree the means to secure the convertibili¬ 
 ty of bank paper in the several States by preventing 
 the exportation of specie, while the process of col¬ 
 lection and payment will distribute it among the 
 people, where it is less exposed to the grasp of the 
 speculators and brokers at the moment of pecuniary 
 distress, and, by the natural laws of trade, it will 
 flow back to relieve the banks in the hour of peril, 
 and enable them to maintain a specie basis. Ano¬ 
 ther, and a very important consideration at this 
 time, is the subject of Abolition. A sincere attach¬ 
 ment to the union of the States is among the cardi¬ 
 nal doctrines in the creed of Democratic Republi¬ 
 canism, and ever has baen, from the foundation of 
 the Government to the present time. It has already 
 appeared that the cry of Southern influence was a 
 prominent topic of Federal warfare in the North, 
 in the days of Jefferson and Madison, to excite the 
 prejudicesof the North against the South, and the 
 seeds of political abolition may be seen in the pro¬ 
 ceedings of the Hartford Convention, where they 
 propose an amendment to the Constitution, “so that 
 Representatives and direct taxes shall be appor¬ 
 tioned according to their respective numbers of 
 free persons, excluiing Indians not taxed, and all 
 other persons.” The supporters of this Adminis¬ 
 tration in the North, with a few exceptions, are 
 utterly opposed to all the mean and incendiary 
 schemes of political Abolitionists. They are 
 determined to maintain inviolate the com¬ 
 
 promises of the Constitution, in good faith, 
 and under all circumstances. I mean not 
 to say that the Whig party are all Abolitionists, but 
 most of the Abolitic nists are Whig-; and some of 
 their political leaders are incessant in their efforts 
 to make political capital out of the natural preju¬ 
 dices of a free people against the institution of 
 slavery, and also out of the past proceedings of 
 Congress touching the disposition of Abolition pe¬ 
 titions. The Abolitionists in the district I repre¬ 
 sent, almost to a man, vote the Whig ticket. If, at 
 the time of my election, I received one vote from 
 that quarter, it is unknowm to me. I do not be¬ 
 lieve that any such case can be found. Having 
 said thus much, I will only add on this point, that 
 many of the Abolitionists are honest and upright 
 men, aud sincerely believe they are engaged in 
 
God’s service, without the remotest intention of 
 doing any thing to hazard the peace of the coun¬ 
 try, or the union of the States. It was my intern 
 tion to have made a few remarks as to the right of 
 the people to be informed, of the views and princi¬ 
 ples of candidates for elective offices; but this ground 
 has been so ably and fully occupied by those that 
 have preceded me in the debate, that I despair of 
 being able to offer any thing either new or useful, 
 and therefore I will forbear. 
 
 Now, Mr. Chairman, I approach a more diffi¬ 
 cult inquiry. What are the principles of the party 
 calling themselves Whigs? If wc look at the pre¬ 
 sent, we have no means to form any conclusion 
 whatever; silence and secrecy reign throughout 
 the land. Recent information discloses the 
 fact that they have gone through the parade 
 and form of a national convention, and presented 
 candidates to the American people for the first two 
 offices within their gift, but adjourned without 
 “any general declaration of the views of the great 
 Opposition party;” and we are since told, with the 
 air of authority, that “it was deemed impolitic, at 
 the then crisis,” to make any such exposition—for 
 the rea on, undoubtedly, “that no new issue be 
 made to the public.” But the people were not sa¬ 
 tisfied to take these important matters on trust; and, 
 when they found they were seriously called upon 
 to discard rheir public servants, and give their 
 places to others, the inquiry, as was natural, at 
 once arose, wherein will the country be benefited 
 by the change? It seems the people supposed they I 
 had a ri;iht to know what they were to expect, if 
 they should consent to the change. They believed 
 it was a matter in which they had some interest; 
 and, as the convention had neglected to inform 
 them, they thought they would apply to the Gene¬ 
 ral himself. Knowing that General Jackson was 
 an honest, frank man, and never concealed his opi¬ 
 nions, they could not doubt that General Harrispn 
 would take great pleasure in informing them upon 
 matters of such vital interest, to enable ihem to 
 determine what course they would adopt at the ap¬ 
 proaching election. But the only answer yet re¬ 
 ceived is the one from his confidential committee, 
 in which they 'say “that their policy is, that 
 the General make no further declaration 
 of hi* principles for the public eye, whilst 
 occupying his present position.” So that 
 the people are still in the dark upon the subject of 
 the inquiry, and likely to rcma : n so, unless infor¬ 
 mation can be had from other sources than Gene¬ 
 ral Harrison or his confidential committee. To 
 prevent misrepresentation, I will say, once and for 
 all, that it is no part of my intention to disparage 
 General Harrison, or to speak disrespectfully of 
 any man living, but it has been my object through¬ 
 out to deal with the party opposed to this Admi¬ 
 nistration with the freedom which the Constitution 
 secures to every Representative of the people. The 
 inquiry is still to be answered, what are the prin¬ 
 ciples of the Opposition? One of the best defini¬ 
 tions that I have seen, is to be found in a letter of 
 J. &. Adams to Dutee J. Pierce, dated 7th Sep¬ 
 tember 1835. Here Mr. C. read the letter, ol 
 which the following are extracts: 
 
 “lam yet convinced that the parly which has been these 
 stwo years .strugglingto break you down, the base compound of 
 
 Hartford Convention Federalism and royal arch masonry, is so 
 rotten with the corruption of both its elements that I hail with 
 joy the victory which you have achieved over it.” 
 
 Again he says: 
 
 “ Of that party, treachery is so favorite an instrument, that 
 I have heard Mr. Burgess complains that they have used it even 
 with him. It is their nature and their vocation.” 
 
 And again: 
 
 “ They have no honest principle to keep them together; (heir 
 only cement is a sympathy of haired to every man of purer 
 principles than themselves.” 
 
 It is proper to.remafk, that Mr. Adams does not 
 use the term Whig party, but he was speaking of 
 the party opposed to Mr. Pierce, and every one 
 knows which party that was. Now, it wouid net 
 be parliamentary for me to say that any member of 
 this committee was destitute of political principle, 
 but I have a right to say, that the Whig party, as 
 such, has no principles of national policy, which 
 they dare avow. If this be a mistake, why is it not 
 corrected? If it is not convenient for the hero to 
 speak, why do not his friends speak for him? If 
 one committee is not sufficient, give him more, but 
 let us have an answer. The people want light— 
 they demand it, and if their reasonable request is 
 refused, does any one so far undervalue their intel¬ 
 ligence as to suppose they will be deceived as to 
 the reasons which dictate the refusal? It is impos¬ 
 sible. What is the course of the Opposition press 
 at this time? Absolutely filled with mere hurrah, and 
 nothing but hurrah. When the inquiry is made 
 of them, Is your candidate in favor of a national 
 bank? we are met with the answer, Hurrah for 
 Tippecanoe. Is he in favor of a high tariff? a 
 similar answer is ready: hurrah for the “log cabin 
 and hard cider;” and so on throughout the cata¬ 
 logue. What sort of an issue is this to present to 
 a free and intelligent people, capable of governing 
 themselves, and claiming the right to choose their 
 own public agents to administer the affairs of a Go¬ 
 vernment of their own creation, and which every 
 motive of interest and patriotism prompts them to 
 uphold? Do not be deceived, gentlemen; this 
 shallow trickery will not avail you; it cannot suc¬ 
 ceed. You must come out from your hiding places, 
 and avow your principles, and expose them to pub¬ 
 lic scrutiny, or you will be overwhelmed in the re¬ 
 sult. The people of this country cannot be de¬ 
 ceived by any such devices. Even in the midst of 
 the torrent of abuse and complaint against this 
 Administration, they will turn round to its revilers, 
 and ask them—What do you propose, to remedy 
 the evils of which you complain; and what does 
 your candidate for the Presidency propose; and 
 what authority have you to speak for him, after he 
 has refused to speak for himself? Then gentle¬ 
 men will find that all this talk about the poor 
 man’s candidate will not stand the test of the scru¬ 
 tiny and intelligence of the laboring man in the 
 Northern States. I am sure that this class of ray 
 constituents would feel themselves insulted by any 
 such flummery; they have too much good sense, 
 and understand Federal treachery too well, sir, 
 to be thus easily deceived; and let any party 
 that does not believe it, make the attempt—I am 
 willing to witness the result. But it is useless tio 
 pursue this matter further; for one, I am satisfied 
 what the country must expect, if the Opposition, 
 should be successful in their efforts to overthrow 
 
O A c! 
 
 this Administration, of which I do not believe th^e tl 
 is the least danger; but if, contrary to all reasona¬ 
 ble calculations, they succeed, then we must pre¬ 
 pare ourselves for another reign of Federal 
 misrule. A National Bank will be chartered, the 
 tariff will be restored and increased, unconstitu¬ 
 tional appropriations will follow, and the proceeds 
 of the sales of the public lands will be divided 
 among the States, and the State debts will be as¬ 
 sumed, and, lo complete the catalogue of mischief 
 
 thjft will ensue, the North and the South will be 
 arrayed against each ether- upon the subject of Abo¬ 
 lition, the effect of which I will not undertake to 
 predict, but the future will show. Now if, in alt 
 this, as a humble member of the Democratic party, 
 1 am mistaken, is it not true that thousands of the 
 people of this country honestly believe that it is all 
 likely to take place; and if there is any mistake 
 about it, why does not the Whig candidate speak 
 out and remove the impression 1 ? 
 
 3 0112 061614373