SPEECH Sals k OP NEW YORK. PUBLISHED BY REQUEST. WASHINGTON, D. C. BUELL & BLANCHARD, PRINTERS. 1852. *• ■iff w ■ • V ' ■■ #■ - ■ » » . / -V / • - -*a»-4 - pv. . * if & SPEECH OF WILLIAM A. SACKETT. [Prepared for delivery in the House of Representatives, which, owing to the late period of the session, he was unable to get the floor to deliver in the House.] Mr Chairman- My object in addressing the Committee at this time i3 not so much to express my views upon the bill now before us, as to avail myself of cue usual courtesy of the House, in ex¬ pressing to the country, more at length than I have heretofore done, my views upon political af¬ fairs, upon the principles of p '.rtles, and the claims of candidates for support. Tne people of this country are divided, sub¬ stantially, into two great political parties, with oae of which is to be intrusted the administration of the Government. There are, indeed, other po¬ litical divisions; divisions having the sympathies of many men of the purest, morality and most ex¬ alted patriotism; men wao are bound together by no love of place or power,'bat for the love of m m, of liberty, and the sacred truth that “all men are bora /Vee and equal/’ There is still another class of politicians, com¬ posed not S) much of the friends of the Union as of the friends of slavery; the support of slavery is the all-controlling idea of this class of men, and their perpe r ual practice i> slavery agi r ation. They m iy be properly styled an alliance of sec¬ tional agitators, who are constantly fomenting section il strife, and who seem to have no political capital except the prejudice, hatred, and alienation of one section of the country from the other. These men have more than once brought the safe¬ ty of the Union into seeming jeopardy, have open¬ ly avowed disunion sentiments, organized disunion conventions, and encouraged disloyalty. The in¬ fluence of this spirit h.>s engendered a distrust between different parts of the country, that has resulted in a widespread sectionality of feeling. Men are assailed in one part of the country and ■the other for the mo3t imaginary causes. M:n who are themselves patriotic seem to ha|ie fdlen (under the iufl lence of this groundless sentiment. I see in the speech of the gentleman from Vir¬ ginia, [Mr. Faulkner ] as I have seen in numer¬ ous speeches made on tnis floor, an attick on the position and political character of a distinguished • Senator [Vlr Seward] from my own State. After speikiog of his Ohio speech and his election to the Senate, he says: ‘ : On the 5 h of M »rch, 1849, he took his seat in that, body, to advance the great missiou for which he w is elected, aud from that day to the present he has stood forward before the country the ioapersoua'ion of every sentiment hostile to the interests and institutions of the South.” i ask the distinguished Representative on what he banes this charge? What single act of Mr. Seward’s Senatorial career has trespassed on one right of the South? I defy him to point to one. He was in favor of the admission of California as a free Scats. So were the people of California. What hal the South to do with this question more than the North? He was against giving to Texas ten millions for what she never owned. Was this Southern aggression? He was for keep¬ ing slavery out of the Territories, where it then did not exist. This the Government had been doing ever since 1787, to the incalculable advan¬ tage of the whole nation. And when slavery so far violated the rights of freedom as to at¬ tempt to subjugate free territory to its control, he resisted with all the eloquence of truth and justice. How is this “ hostility to the South?” When the slave trade in this District wts abol¬ ished, he voted for it. And when the Fugitive SLve L .w was passed, he demanded “trial by jury,” in conformity to every principle of law known to modern civilization, in this great strug¬ gle his opinions were overborne, and there that matter his ended. N o man iu this country has been so abused, traduced, and persecuted, as he, but he has sur¬ vived it all. And after all the combinations and unciring efforts, with the united energies of all the South devoted to his destruction for years, he is strouger this day than when this unmanly crusade began. The people are not deceived. They have watched and are watching now all these movements. While Mr. Seward i 3 a man of a high order of talent, his strength and power is not of himself. It is the cause to which his life is devoted that gives the power. He is armed with the full armor of Christian philanthropy, the moral power off human rights; and though the ie igued forces of ail who hate the progressive march of liberty to man should conspire agaiost him, it would be a. vain effort of tyrannic power. The Earl of Chatham said to the British Commons, “ three millions of people armed in the hoiy cause of liberty are invincible against any force you cau bring against them.” Since then the w arid has grown older, and mankind bow with a deeper reverence to the cause of human freedom And I nowsiy. one mm “armed in 'he holy cause of liberty,’* is an overmatch for all the myrmidons of power. The World sits in judgment on such an issue as this, and from its decision there is no appeal. You will be compelled to submit^o the “ finality” of its judgment. Oa the one side in 4 troth and the progressive rights of coming time ; on the other, error, passion, and the delusions of the past. “ Truth crushed to earth will rise again ; Th ! eternal years of God are hers ! But error wounded, writhes with pain, And dies amidst her worshippers ! :: NEW-LIGHT DEMOCRACY. The doctrines of the so-called Democratic par¬ ty have entirely changed since its earlier and better days. It is this spirit of novelty, this dis¬ position to turn upon tried doctrines and tried friends, that has lost to that party so many of its valuable supporters, and given to its wiser and more steady opponent the victory in two out of the three last Presidential contests. Such causes produce inevitably such results. Had Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, or Jackson, lived at this day, they could not have been the supporters of such a party. They were ail of them in favor of a tariff that would secure to the laboring population of our own country the great benefits to be de¬ rived from supplying our own wants. They ad¬ vocated a system of protection that preserved to us the fcenefi‘8 of our cwn markets, that would build up, and that in fact did begin to build up, the great interest of manufactures in this coun¬ try. They could see no reason why we should not make our own wool, aDd cotton, and flax, into cloth ; no wisdom in being dependent on England for what we require for the use of ourselves and families, la short, they were for American in¬ terests, for true national independence. Mr. Jefferson said : “ Select the articles we can and ought to manu¬ facture for ourselves. Give them full and ade¬ quate protection.” General Jackson said : “If we omit to use the gifts God has extended to us. we deserve not the continuation of his bless¬ ings. He has filled our mountains and our plains with minerals—with lead, iron, and copper—and given us climate and soil for the growth of wool, hemp, and cotton. These being the grand ma¬ terials for our national defence, they ought to have extended to them adequate and fair protec¬ tion, that our manufacturers and laborers may be put on a fair competition with those of Europe. * * * Where has the American farmer a market? Except for cotton, he has neither a foreign ncr home market. * * Common sense points out at once the remedy. Draw from agriculture this suberabundance of labor, employ it in mechanism and rcanuf .ctures; thereby crea¬ ting a home market for your b'-eadstuffs, aud dis¬ tributing labor to the most profitable account, and benefits to the couutry will result. * * * In short, we have been too long subject to the pol¬ icy of British merchants. It is time we should become a little more Americanized” Other counsels now prevail. These old guides and lights are now all cast aside—trampled in the dust—their doctrines treated with contemDt; and the new and alien giddess of free trade is placed in the honored niche of the temple of Democratic faith for worship. That party is now openly opposed to maintaining principles that will enable us to supply ourselves ; to giving to the laborers of this county the labor required to make the two hundred millions of goods imported from abroad ?' This is new-light Democracy , not of the Jefferson, Madison, or Jackson school. Now, is it strange, under circumstances like these, that so many true and faithful men—men who love their country and its prosperity—are leaving a party professing so aDti-Ameiican a creed as this ? The wonder is it retains any supporters at all. Principles like these are more the principles of a British than an American party. Under their destructive in¬ fluence, millions after millions of the hard earn¬ ings of our countrymen go annually to Bwell the aristocratic power of England, our greatest rival. THE LONDON TIMES. It is not strange that the London Times , the leading journal of Royalty in England, should claim, as it does claim, the triumph of such a par¬ ty and the election of Gen. Pierce, as a triumph of British policy in America. The following are extracts from that nrint. viz: * “The sudden turn in parties which brought up the name cf General Pierce, in preference to those of General Cass, Mr. Buchanan, and Mr Doug¬ las, placed a man at the head of one of the great political sections cf the United States, who, though less known than his competitors, is probably more worthy of confidence and esteem.” ****** “ Gen. Pierce has our best wishes for his success. “The primary question for the United States in this election, is the national sanction and inviola¬ ble establi. hment of the 'principle of free trade.” ****** “ The triumph of the candidate of the Democratic party , brought forward by the men of the South , will secure , probably forever , the ascendency of liberal commercial principles .” * • * * * * * “ la this respect, and on this point, we take Gen. Pierce to be a fair representative of the opinions of Mr. Calhoun, and, as such, a valuable practical ally to the commercial policy of this country Here is an open advocate of the election of an American President as a British ally—as a sup¬ porter of British interests; and we are asked on this side of the water to sustain the m n who holds such relations to this country. England has a trade of $150,000,000 a year involved in the quesrio# of ihe election the London Times is ad¬ vocating. She i3 accustomed to sustain her com¬ mercial and manufiCturinst ascendency at any hazard and at any cost. What can be. the meaning of this foreshadowed, support of a free trade candidate in the most influential oj English journals ? Is Brit¬ ish gold to follow, to be used in this canvass to se¬ cure the triumph of her policy ? This is a marked point in our political history, and I call on the country to take notice of this interference of the great enemy of our commercial and manufacturing prosperity. Why is it that Mr Pierce is the can¬ didate of English favor? He is for that free trade that gives to England our markets, that enables her alone to import into this country more than a hundred miliione annually. The 5 capitalists of that country might well afford to pay millions to secure his election; for, with the triumph of his policy, our markets are theirs— they will monopolize a trade of at least Five Hun¬ dred Millions in the four years of his adminis¬ tration, to the exclusion of our own people. And besides, England remembers Gen. Scott, and she fears his American policy now, as she did his American valor forty years ago BANKS In the days of Gen. Jackson, the Democratic party was so violently opposed to banks rhit it became its rallying cry; and in les3 than four years, under Mr. Van Buren, the whole party or- gmizition was so steeped iu corruption witn the pec bank system, that the people hurled it from power. DEFALCATIONS. The party heretofore, as it now does, unde loud professions of economy and strict account¬ ability ; but when in power, mostly in one short administration, the people were robbed, by offi¬ cers alone, every one of whom that party brought into office, of millions of the public treasure. Here are some of the items: The following table of defalcations, between April, 1830, and July, 1S39, (mostly between 1836 and 1839,) is furnished by the Treasury Department: Names. Places of Residence. S tmuel Swartwout, New York, - - SI William M. Price, li - - A.S. Thurston, Key West. Fla., - G. W. Green, Mobile, Ala., - - - I. T. Canby. Crawfordsville. Ind., - A. McCarty, Indianapolis, Ind., - - B. F. Edwards, Edwardsviile. Ill., W. L Ewing. Yindalia. - John Hays, Jackson. Msseissippi, - W. M Green, Palmyra. “ - - B S. Ch ambers. Little Rock, Ark. D L Todd, Opelousas, Louisiana, A R. Rogers, “ “ - - J. Cannon. New Orleans, - - - M. W. McDaniel, Washington, Miss. B. H Owen,St. Stephens, Ala, - - # G. B Crutcher, Choctaw. Miss., - G. B Ditneron, k< “ - - S. W. Dickson, lw - - (C (( 1C Amt. of Def. .225,705 69 75,000 00 2,8S2 15 11.173 48 39.031 1.308 3 215 16.754 1,386 31 92 76 29 18 19 23 57 87 2 312 2.149 27,130 6.624 1.259 23 6^000 00 30,611 97 6,061 40 39,059 64 11.231 90 S93'53 W. P. Harris, Columbus, “ - - William Taylor, Cahawba, Ala., - U. G. Mitchell, 1C JC - - J W. Stephenson, Galena, Ill, - - Littiebury Hawkins. Helena, Ark . S. W. Beall, Green Bay, - Joseph Friend, Washita, La., - - William H. Allen, St Augustine, - G. D. Boyd, Columbus, Miss.. - - R H. Stirling, Choccuma, Miss, - Paris Childs, Greensburg. La., William Linn, Vandalia, Illinois - Samuel T. Scott, Jackson, Miss, - J as. T. Pollock, Crawfordsville, Ind. John L. Daniel, Opelousas, La, - Morgan Neville, Cincinnati, Ohio, -M. J. Allen, Tallahassee, Florida, - 109,178 OS 23,116 IS 54,226 55 43,294 04 100,000 00 19.620 16 2,551 01 1.997 50 50,937 29 10J73 70 12,449 76 55,062 06 15 550 47 14,891 98 7,280 63 13,781 19 26 691 57 R.obert T. Brown, Springfield, Miss. $3,600 50 Total,.$2,064,209 86 With this catalogue of public plundering still blistering on their foreheads, these same men now ask the American people to restore them to power. RIVERS AND HARBORS. The improvement of rivers and harbors was an early and a cherished doctrine of all parties ; but the lights of the present day, that seek a restora¬ tion to power, couple with their hostility to Amer¬ ican labor, hostility to commerce and the improve¬ ment of our lakes and rivers. Elect Mr. Pierce, and there is an end of all protection to this great interest; every vote and every act of his life have been against all such improvements. The lives of our citizens. the security of their property, a just distribution of the benefits of Government, equally demand cur efficient aid on this subject. That aid he has uniformly refused; and even now, after the lapse of fourteen years of party opposi¬ tion, a bill, little more than an insult to the great interest involved, has, from the fears of political consequences, been forced out of bis supporters. But let the ides of November pass in his favor, and no such measure will see the light again. And what is this bill? A bill that gives more to a few little harbors and a few hundred miles of rivers on the seaboard, than to twenty thousand miles of river navigation and two thousand five hundred miles of lake coast in the West. Where least is needed, most is given. On the Western rivers alone, more than four hundred steamboats i have been sunk within the last fifteen years, worth more than ten millions , and property valued at eighteen millions has been lost for the want of safe navigation. Every effort to amend this par¬ tial and unjust bill w is originally voted down in the House; propositin after proposition to ren¬ der it more just and equal met with the same fate, and it was only after all hope failed, that the friends of improvement finally passed the meas¬ ure, with the small aid secured from the Demo¬ cratic side, through political fears. It has since been amended in the Senate. FREE SOIL. The next important subject upon which the Free Soil wing of that party have proved false, is the subject of slavery. While they have been the most violent traducers of the South at home, they are the most truckling sycophants of its sup¬ porters here. No language is too vile for them to apply to Southern institutions among the people of the North, and no position too humble for them to occupy before the power of the South. Eter¬ nal hostility to the Fugitive Slave Law is their deceptive cry with the masses, and a pledged and plighted faith to its support is their bond of union with their allies in the slave States. They have betrayed every profession, falsified every promise on this suhject, and are now joined baud in hand in a political race, dictated by the despotic sway of their Southern rule:8 They are devoted to the support of men and to the support of measures intended to sow broadcast, unchecked and unre¬ strained, the dominion of bondage, wherever and whenever it demands the sacrifice. This apostacy 6 is the work of politicians, cot of the people; and it shows they were false in the beginning—that in all their oaths of fealty to freedom there was no reality. Bat the convictions of the people are far otherwise—they cannot be seduced by power; they will maintain their principles, and leave the deceivers of their confidence to a fate deserved.. pierce’s nomination. Look at the history of the nomination of the candidates of that party. Every leading man of the party was cast aside at Baltimore, regardless of claims, services, or position, to find a man whose life was marked and branded with the true South¬ ern stamp. Mr Pierce was brought forward by the South, and, as is said by Southern men, be¬ cause he had a ‘‘fair record” on the subject of slavery. This is undisguised ; this indeed was his sole recommendation; but for this one feature of his character, he would never have been thought of. His nomination was the result of a sectional feel¬ ing, and cannot be regarded in any other light than as a sectional nomination. When leaders are guilty of such abandonment of ail that is na¬ tional, of principle and of right; when they so deceive their followers; when the most worthy are trampled under foot, for such reasons and for such a man, a just condemnation is as sure to fol¬ low as effect follows cause. The South was not mistaken in their man— they knew him well. Hardly had be been nomi¬ nated, when, pressed at home by popular opinion, the men who had in the face of Southern power abandoned all, began to say that their candidate had whispered discontent with the Fugitive Act— a law that violates every principle of justice known to the Anglo-Saxon race—and the charge is at once denied by himself and friends, as if the unpardonable sin had been committed. Denial after denial follows in such quick succession, it is difficult to keep pace with them. The language of denunciation is fierce and unrelenting against all who dare proclaim so great profanation against the record of his life. Yes, he was required to deny, and has denied, his opposition to a law that two-thirds of the people of this Union believe to be unjust and oppressive. I believe this is the only charge of Northern’sentiment ever brought against him, and he has denied it ail. Again : in the letter of acceptance of Mr Pierce, he humbles himself, and declares his slavery prin¬ ciples, in the following words, viz: “I accept the nomination upon the platform adopted by the Convention, not because this is expected of me as a candidate, but because the principles it embraces command the approbation of my judgment , and with them I believe I can safely say, THERE HAS BEEN NO WORD NOR ACT OF MY LIFE IN CONFLICT.” These principles were an open pledge to the support of the Fugitive Slave Law and to the compromise of Liberty, for the favor and support of Slavery. Any man who will read the resolu¬ tions to which the above extract is a response will see all this. And thus has the old Democratic party been transformed into the time-serving thing of the present day—riady to do the bidding of its mas¬ ters ; thus are all required to bow the knee and give aid and comfort to practices and principles like these. It may not be too low a bow for the plastic mould of place-hunting leaders, but the people will never bend their necks to a yoke like this. Politicians may be bought and sold, but the people never can. There are Esaus in every age, ready to sell the birthright of freedom for a mess of pottage, but they are not of the masses of the people—they are the trucksters of office. WHIG FARTY—THE TARIFF. I now come to consider the principles of the Whig party in relation to the great questions of national policy, in which the American people are so much interested. The Whig party has always Btood by the cause of American labor; one of its cardinal doctrines is to so protect ourselves as to enable us to supply our own wants. We hold, it is better to employ labor in our own country than to support the capital of foreign nations; that our firet and highest duty is to our interests at home. We do not manufacture as much, by a hundred and fifty millions annually, as we ought to. Our importations show this. The doctrine of the W-hig party is, that it would be much wiser to keep the hundred and fifty millions, paid for im¬ portations, here, and not send it beyond the reach of the business, the labor, the wants of ourselves It would help to pay our taxes, build our roads, support our schools, improve our country; give labor to those who want it; better enable them to educate their children, clothe and feed their fam¬ ilies, and to provide for a day of need. This is Whig doctrine. I will illustrate the subject by evidence drawn from my own neighborhood. There are four cot¬ ton and woollen factories situated in one of the counties I represent. I am quite sure no reason¬ able man will dispute the proposition, that it is better to have these factories situated where they are, and to have them continue to do business there, than to have them transferred to England, and the work they do, the labor they supply, the money they pay out, the mechanics they employ, the trade and business they afford, all transferred with them, so as to have the whole operation per¬ formed tker'p. Such a. change would remove from a single locality four or Sve hundred thousand dollars capital, and throw some seven or eight hundred persons, men, women, and children, out of employment. Any man in favor of a transfer like this, might well be accused of hostility to the country. And still the free-trade policy of the Democratic party is doiDg this very thing all over the United States, and has been since the tariff of 1846. Of course I do not mean in a literal sense, but do mean as a substantial truth, as our importations of more than two hundred millions every year prove by the record. The factories would be here if these millions were made here; they are transferred to England, and France, and Germany, because they are made there; and so we are sending the earnings of this country to Europe at the rate of two hundred millions a year, to buy what we ought to make and buy at borne. There is not a day laborer in the whole country but is compelled to send part of his dai T y 7 wages to England to pay for what, under this free- trade system, we are dependent on England for; so that every tnan, rich or poor, is put under con¬ tribution so long as this system continues. The farmer must send the money he gets for his pro¬ duce, the mechanic the fruits of his labor, the merchant the profits of his toil; and so all in turn pay tribute for the great privilege of having our own business done abroad. It is a great loss to any country to take away a hundred and fifty millions of its business; it * would be a loss to a town to take away a hundred thousand dollars; if a farmer gets but four hun¬ dred bushels of wheat where he ought to have five, the loss of the one hundred may lose him all the real profits of his crop; if the laborer gets but six shillings when he ought to have a dollar, he feels severely the loss. So with the people of a nation ; a hundred and fifty millions of their busi¬ ness can’t be taken awav and transferred to other countries without great detriment to all their in¬ terests ; neither can any great and leading branch of business, that a people can do and ought to do, be neglected or done elsewhere without a like in¬ jury. We could not become exclusively manu¬ facturers and neglect agriculture, and flourish; we cannot be producers alone, and prosper. It is therefore Whig doctrine to adopt such a national policy as will secure to us all these advantages. This cannot be done withoat a tariff—such a tariff as will protect our interests, so long as we main¬ tain the institutions under which we live. Free trade is practically no more nor less than a doctrine calculated to change our Government from a Republic to an Aristocracy; and the reasons are these : In Europe, capital has the power over labor, and grinds it down to the lowest possible standard. The countries of Europe, and especially England, on all articles they can make, are mainly free trade, because th y have oppressed labor down to so Iowa standard that there are no other parts of the world engaged in manufacturing where labor is as low as theirs; so that what is produced elsewhere cannot come into their mar¬ kets as low as they can sell it themselves—there¬ fore, free trade for them is nothing—they lose no business by it. Not so with us. We pay a wide¬ ly different price for labor; we maintain equality of condition by this system; the poor grow rich—the child born in poverty dies the man of wealth; and thus a happy diffusion of all the blessings of society are sown broadcast, that all, rich and poor, high and low. may reap, if they will, its manifold harvest. With free trade, with nothing to secure to labor its republican standard, it is at cnce thrown in competition with the two hundred millions in Europe, who receive about four shillings where the laborer of this country receives a dollar. So great is the depression there, and so great the difference here, that it is of every day practice for the strong and the vig¬ orous, both man and woman, to emigrate to this country, end earn the money to bring their friends here, they being unable to earn enough at home to get here. We have of free laborers in this country, of both sexes, say ten millions; while Europe has a hundred and fif:y millions. Hew are our ten millions to thrive and prosper, if anything and •everything the hundred and fifty millions of Eu¬ rope can produce is to come into our markets, made for four shillings upon equal terms with what we make for a dollar? The proposition is too plain for argument. The labor of the coun¬ try must be protected, or we must give up making whatever can be made in Europe and sent here. But those who oppose the support of our own labor say all this argument shows that we shall have to pay under this system higher prices for what we want to consume, if we adopt the Amer¬ ican system. I intend to answer this proposition, for it is unsound. Every foreign country that supplies the wants of a distant nation, trades upon the principle of monopoly —and it is especially so in articles of manufacture. While we compete, prices are kept down; but without opposition they at once rise. There is no reason why Eng¬ land should sell to us cheap, if she has the power to sell dear; and this power she always has, when she has a monopoly of the trade. This advan¬ tage any nation and any individual will take to himself. If she has the sale of an article in our markets that we do not make, she can sejl dear, because she has a monopoly; and still, the mo¬ ment we began to make it, if we did not protect ourselves, she could, with her cheap labor, come down to a less price than we could live by, and break us down, and then again resume the high prices of a monopoly. We have protected coarse cotton goods till we have thoroughly established ourselves in the trade. Does any man in his senses believe, if we had never manufactured cotton, that we would buy it as cheap a? we now do? You break down every cotton mill in America, aDd leave to Europe a monopoly of the trade for twenty-five millions of people, and prices would rise, and for the rea¬ son I have stated. But you withdraw protection, and they could sell cheaper than we, so that they would have the power to destroy our investments, and after tbej' had destroyed them they would establish their own prices. So it is with every other article—iron, nails, woollens, and all sorts of pro¬ ductions. The standard of protection should be: What will enable us to make the article ? Domes¬ tic competition will always regulate the price. The spirit of monopoly governs our own im¬ porters as much as European. They are but few in number, have large capitals, and are governed by prices regulated among themselves; so that the argument that we can buy as cheap in England as the English, amounts to nothing. The people do not buy there, but every dollar the people con¬ sume has to go through the same process of a monopolized trade, and whether an American or an Englishman import, it is the same thing to the consumer; they are both governed by the same rule of time, distance, and the monopolizing character of a foreign trade. I represent eighty thousand people on this floor, no one cf whom imports a dollar’s worth of what they U3e; they therefore have no control over the prices they have to pay. If what they use could be made profitably at home, they have capital enough, could engage in the business, an 1 them¬ selves regulate by competition the price, sc as to 8 prevent monopoly. This is always the course of a domestic trade. There is always keenness enough to engage in anything that is profitable, when it is within the reach of the mass of the people; but this cannot be done in a distant foreign trade—that the people generally have nothing to do with: it is all done by few men and large capital. I question whether nearly all of the two hundred millions imported into this country, is not imported by less than a thousand men, all collected at a few points in large cities. The fact is, monopoly in a foreign trade rises to a principle. The human mind will not consider the risks of time and dis¬ tance without the element of large profits being connected with it. The whale fisheries have been carried on for many years almost exclusively by a few towns of New England, and all because the elements of time and distance leave it in their hands as a monopoly. So of the China trade, and hence large fortunes are suddenly amassed in this business. So it is with importers. Who does not know that the large wealth of this class is out of all proportion to the rest of community ? And it all arises from the principle I have stated. The linen trade has been carried on nearly exclusive¬ ly with foreign countries, and we never have com¬ peted. What is the effect? While all things where we have entered into competition have greatly fallen, that article is nearly of the same price it was twenty or thirty years ago: so with silks, crockery, and all other articles that remain in th e same condition—so that it is no solecism to say we can ? t manufacture without protection ; and still with protection, in the end. we shall get what is made here cheaper than if imported. There is much popular error as to the extent or per cent, of a tariff 1 . There is and should be no fixed standard that should remain permanent on this subject. The only rule is, what will en¬ able us to make? When this is found, the true standard is found. This, of course, would require a higher rule in the beginning than after we have acquired experience. 1 would not have a monop¬ oly for manufacturers in this country, any more than I would allow a monopoly to be enjoyed abroad. Give us the power to make, and that is all I ask. Now, a small shade of profit or loss is prosperity or ruin. A tariff five per cent, too low is just a3 fatal as though there wa3 no tariff at all; and such a tariff is a3 much free trade as though we were to throw open our ports. All experience has shown the effect of a mo¬ nopolized foreign trade. There is not an article we are now supplied with at home, but i3 cheaper than it was when we were supplied with the same article from abroad; and still we should not have been supplied at home to this day, if we had not in the beginning so protected ourselves as to es¬ tablish us in the business. All this is eminently true of cottons, nails, glass, and numerous other articles that might be mentioned. This free-trade policy arises from the same causes in this country as in Europe. It is the doctrine of the South, and except for the South there would be no such doctrine here. Now, in the South, labor is as much depressed, and more, too, as in Europe. The people there want to adopt no policy that will elevate the standard of labor. Subjugated labor is one of their peculiar institutions, and any policy that will keep it sub¬ jugated is just what they want, and hence arises the whole doctrine of free trade in this country. It is with amazement that I see so many of the laboring classes in the North captivated with the terms, for it cannot be with the principles, of free trade. Europe and the South combine on this subject, and it is all a blow at the free labor of the North—so thousands intend it. Our free labor, in the independence it has maintained, has ex¬ cited the jealousy of the aristocratic wealth of Europe and of the slave wealth of the South. And I appeal to that labor to be true to itself; true to its own interests; true to the independ¬ ence and glory it has acquired. A gentleman [Mr. Clingman] told us the other day, that while the price of labor among the iron workers of Pennsylvania was a dollar and six cents per day, it was but thirty-nine cents iu North Carolina. One was free labor, and the other doubt¬ less slave labor: and hence arose his argument that we could not manufacture because so much was paid for labor. In other words, that we must come to the Southern and European standard. To be sure, he ^aid he would be glad if high^wa- ges could be paid : but at the same time he would take off the duty, (on railroad iron,) the effect of which would be to close our own works and give the whole trade to England, unless we come to their standard of wages. Now, I am opposed to all this policy. If his argument is good for one kind of labor, it is for all—so that the result is, in the end, all labor must come to the standard of slave labor, if the principles of the gentleman's argument are maintained. As i stated before, it is the combination of the 3lave labor of the South with the cheap labor of Europe to break down the free labor of the North: and there is a strong effort now making, under the garb of free trade, to accomplish that object. The producer is as much interested in thi3 question as the laborer. There is not a flourish¬ ing agricultural population on the globe, that has not a good market at home—that is not surround¬ ed by marts of commerce built up by substantial manufacturing pursuits. Look at the countries of Europe that are the dependencies of other countries for their supplies. Respectable civiliza¬ tion even is hardly maintained in these countries. Look at our own Southern States, where the loom and the spindle, the moulder's sand and the turner’s lathe, are hardly known. How do they prosper there, as compared with ourselves, or any manufacturing nation? A domestic market is of all things what the farmer wants. Foreign mar¬ kets are but incidental and uncertain; they only take when they cannot avoid it, and they never take anything but that part of the farmer s crop that will bear distant transportation. Domestic manufactures, to use a common expression, take the long and the 3 hort sauce—everything that is raised or grown. Who ships hay, oats, potatoes, fruits, vegetables, poultry, timber, wood, coal, and a hundred other things we produce, to Europe ? No one. The producer must have a market at home for these things, or none at all. The manu¬ facturing towns of England are the great fountains 9 . of her wealth. Strike down her factories, and you will strike down prosprity. But there is no end to the elaboration of this subject, and I must leave it with the single request that the American peo¬ ple will consider whether we had better enjoy our own markets, and supply our own wants, or sur¬ render the first, and deptnd on Europe for the last. INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS. The Whig party has at all times been the fast friend of the improvement of our rivers and har¬ bors—at all times sustained that great measure as essential to the safety, success, and promotion of commerce. As this power is expressly given by the Constitution, the destruction of life and prop¬ erty upon our Western lakes and rivers, occa¬ sioned by the want of good navigation and con¬ venient harbors, may well be charged to the per¬ verse and obstinate opposition of the party that h is opposed the performance of this national obli¬ gation. If in the last fifteen years a thousand lives have been sacrificed, and nearly twenty mil¬ lions of property lost, on our Western rivers, as the facts clearly prove, it is largely to that party and its evil counsels it may be justly attributed On the success of the Whig party hangs the question whether sacrifices hereafter to the fear¬ ful extent they have reached heretofore, shall be euffered by our citizens. PLATFORMS I wish now to s iy a few words on the subject of platforms I do not deny the right of gentlemen who get together in convention to pass such reso- lutio- s as they can agree upon. Any body of men has this right, but the wisdom of its exercise is quite another thing. "What effect it has. or ought to have, on the opinions and judgments of men is altogether another matter. Two men can hardly be found who agree in all thing3, and no body of men cm block out doctrine in politics, morals, or religion, for the great mass of the peo¬ ple. There is a radical difference of opinion among men of the sime party on some subjects: such opinions cannot be changed by platforms. Maty men believe it the duty of Congress to pre¬ vent the further extension of slavery. This, in common with a vast majority of the North. I be¬ lieve. while the South holds Congress has nothing tc do with that subject. Is any man so utterly demented as to suppose the consciences of men, on this great question, are to be controlled by res¬ olutions? If there is any such man. he is too weak to guide—he should listen to others, and not attempt to teach. The fact is. the American people think for themselves, and do not permit others to think for them ; they are for or against a measure because their judgments make them so, and not because some convention says it is, or is not. the doctrine of a party The doctrines of a party are made known by its practices, the meas¬ ures it supports and opposes, and not by the cau¬ cus resolutions of men who assume to 3 ay what its doctrines shall be. Men come together in parties for common purposes that they can agree upon; not that every man. or even a majority, are ex¬ pected to agree on every subject that may be brought within the range of politics While the North and the South entirely disagree on the sub¬ ject of slavery, Northern and Southern Whigs most thoroughly agree on the leading politicil questions in which the whole country has an in¬ terest. To expect them to agree on this question of sectional difference is as idle as to suppose all men will see all points of Christian belief in the same light. You might as well ask Northern men to surrender their belief in a God. as to give up their opinions in relation to African slavery. Conventions have no power on this subject. All men have a living faith upon it, (not made by pol¬ itics.) with its foundations resting on the eternal ‘ principles of right and wrong, guided by the com¬ mands of the Almighty to ‘ love thy neighbor as thyself/ 7 and to “do unto others as you would others should do unto you. 77 Resolutions on such a subject have the slightest effect on the nominee of the Whig party. Gen Scott, like other men, has a conscientious belief in relation to this question of human rights, that can¬ not be shaken by the paper proclamations of a set of delegates, consisting of one in a hundred thousand of the people of the United States I leave it to the good sense of all enlightened, patriotic mfn, to say. judging from his past life, the history of his acts, hia writings and present position, the action of the dif¬ ferent sections of the Union towards him, what that conscientious belief is. He has had nothing to do with platforms, is in no way responsible for them, and in voting for him no man votes for or against a platform, but for him. with his past his¬ tory. his opinions, his associations, and his life be¬ fore him; and upon the pledge of that life, as a security for the support of sound principles, aa stated in his letter of acceptance, viz : “With a sincere And earnest purpose to ad¬ vance the greatness and happiness of the Repub¬ lic, and thus to cherish and encourage the cause of constitutional liberty throughout the world, avoiding every act and thought that might in¬ volve our country in an unjust or unnecessary war, or impair the faith of treaties, and discoun¬ tenancing all political agitation injurious to the interests of society and dangerous to the Union, I can effer no other pledge or guarantee than the known incidents of a long public life, now undergoing the severest examination , 77 I doubt not the whole country will take this pledge. It is the only pledge a high and honora¬ ble man can or ought to give, as a candidate for President of the United States; it is, in fact, the only guarantee worth regarding. And because a platform was “ annexed 77 to his nomination, it does not change that noble life, so loDg devoted to the highest interests of the country, to progress, to the great principles of American liberty, to the preservation and glory of the Union. There it stands; the whole world has read its history in the immortal events of the past. Let the Ameri¬ can people examine it; its lines may be traced on every page of our country 7 s records for forty years; it is written in war and in peace—in the blood of battles and in the Christian s faith. GROUNDS OF SOUTHERN OPPOSITION TO GEN. SCOTT. I make a few extracts from Southern speeches and manifestoes, to show to the people of try sec- 10 tien of the Union the ground of opposition to Gen. Scott by the supporters of the slave power. 1 quote from the speech of Mr. Toombs, of Georgia, made in Congress since the nomination : “The Free Soil Whigs of the North have com¬ plete control of the Whig organization in all the non-slaveholding States, and Scott’s success will be their triumph, and a triumph fatal to the prin¬ ciples of the Union Whigs, both North and South. * * * At the opening of this session it was announced to the country that a Whig Congres¬ sional caucus had endorsed the compromise. It was very soon ascertained, though, that no friend of General Scott could be found among its sup¬ porters. * * * General Scott has not done it. He has not declared his approbation of these principles in any part of this letter. * * * I did not intend to support General Scott in any event. * * * General Scott would nave acted wisely and well not to have invited scrutiny into his past, opinions on slavery. There are no known incidents in that life which commends itself upon these great questions to the approbation of a Southern man.” The following quotations are from the speech of Mr. Faulkner, of Virginia, made in Congress, August 2d: “Again, s.ir, during all this period, from the passage of the compromise acts in the month of September, 1850, where was Winfield Scott? * * * The exclusive Northern and sectional vote which be received in the several Whig Con¬ ventions of 1840, ’44, and ’48, manifested very distinctly that there wag a large class of persons in that section upon whose conduct his opinions would have fallen with influence and power. * * * Amidst all the letters which were written to the numerous Union meetings of the North, by public men who were unable personally to attend, we look in vain for one single line from that distinguished source. '■* * * “But General Scott did not merely sin by his refusal to answer—he sinned to a much deeper extern by the direct countenance which his si¬ lence and acquiescence gave to those who arrayed themselves in hostility to the compromise pol¬ icy. “ And this leads me to advert to some incidents in the proceedings of the two great parties of the country in the States of New York. Pennsylvania, and Ohio. * * * “The Whigs of New York passed the most marked resolution, tendering the warmest thanks of the Convention to William H Seward distin¬ guished as the course of that gentleman eminently was by hostility to the compromise, and more es¬ pecially to the fugitive slave law. “The National Whig Convention assembled in Baltimore on the 16th of June, exhibiting before the country a sectional division in its ranks upon a great, momentous, and practical question, with¬ out precedent in party annals. The Northern Whigs, who had never, upon any previous occa¬ sion, recognised the justice and obligatory force of the fugitive slave law, presented the name of Winfield Scott for the Presidency. “ A portion of the friends of General Scott, per¬ ceiving that the resolutions must pass, and sati6- , fled that all opposition to them was vain, made a virtue of necessity, and concurred in their adop¬ tion. “The platform adopted may be used as a pre¬ text to satisfy some, but in my judgment the case presented is not materially variant from the fail¬ ure to adopt any platform at all. “ Will a vote for General Scott imply an appro¬ val of that policy? Will he, if the enemies of the South and of the Constitution should accom¬ plish a repeal of that law, interpose his veto?' We are told by those upon this floor who profess to know and speak his sentiments, that he would not. in such a case, interpose his veto. “It is, then, manifest that, with my views of General Scott’s position in tbe present canvass, he cannot receive my support.” The language of these quotations speaks for it¬ self. It fixes the ground of opposition to General Scott in the South. As is said by Mr. Toombs, “there are no known incidents in that life which commends itself upon these great questions to the approbation of Southern men.” THE CANDIDATES. I now proceed to speak of what is of far more importance than platforms—of the Presidential candidates, and of their claims for support. The so-called Democratic party have gone tc the only spot in this land of religious toleration, to the only State where the liberty of conscience is abridged and Christian faith proscribed, for a can¬ didate, for a man to put at the head of a free Government; and thus to transfer the intolerance of religious persecution to the councils of the na¬ tion. “ How are the mighty fallen ! ” The tried, the known, the experienced, the emi¬ nent in all that distinguishes man, trodden under foot, blotted from the lists of Democratic favor, to bring from out the dark loins of the land of bigoted superstition—where to worship God ac¬ cording to the dictates of conscience is the mark of Cain upon the worshipper, that crushes him to earth and holds out to him the poisoned chalice of damning prejudice—a party leader to mould popular opinion throughout the nation! How strange this choice—how repugnant to ev¬ ery principle of American liberty ! Lewis Cass, the free Representative of a free State and a free religion, has the iron heel of destiny stamped upon his long career. James Buchanan, surrounded by the descendants of the follow¬ ers of Penn, and his free, his generous faith, is brought a sacrifice to the altar. Governor Marcy is declared an outcast, and if the plot succeeds will be kept an outcast, for his too free association with those who once declared for “free soil, free speech, and free men.” Then, there is Young America, the chosen champion of progress, of the young, the energetic, the hopeful, the progressive masses. Where is he? Alas! he, too, is among the slain. His laurels droop— his banner, raised on the great plains of the migh¬ ty West, trails in the dust before thi3 oracle of the New Hampshire test. Locking at this army of martyred leaders, we 11 are naturally led to inquire, what has this valiant eon of the New Hampshire Line—where for seventy years they have kept one religion in, and persecuted one religion out—done? With what great or saiall measure has he been connected, in the past history of the country, that he should be made the instrument of so much wrong to others, to secure so much glory to himself? he has always acted with the supporters of THE TEST. I propose to show some of the principal features in his career. He has stood, for his whole life, silently by, and seen every citizen of New Hamp¬ shire, who loved the liberty of conscience and the worship of God according to its dictates, more than place or power, proscribed, made an out¬ cast, deprived of the equal rights of an American citizen : held unworthy of any place, office, or station. He has stood shoulder to shoulder with that party in New Hampshire that has had the whole power of that State in its hands for a quar¬ ter of a century, and that has sustained this odious, this unchristian, this accursed principle to the last. Of the Convention of 1791, that framed the Constitution still in force in New Hampshire, Benjamin Pierce, the father of Franklin Pierce, was a member, and voted for the test in these words: {Extract from the Constitution.) Form of Government. —Section 14. “Every member of the House of Representatives * * * shall be of the Protestant religion, and shall cease to represent such town, parish, or place, imme¬ diately on ceasiDg to be qualified as aforesaid.” Section 29. “Provided, nevertheless, that no person shall be capable of being elected a Senator who is not of the Protestant religion.” Section 42. “The Governor * * * shall be of the Protestant religion.” Section 61. “And the qualification for Coun¬ sellors shall be the same as for Senator.” In 1850 the people voted whether a Convention should be called to frame a new Constitution. It will be seen how the Pierce party voted. Here is the vote of several of the towns : WHIG TOWNS. On Convention. ' On Cover nor. * Dover, - - - Yeas. 447 Nays. 98 Whig. 619 Loco. 504 Somersworth, - Keene. - - - i 201 59 361 186 281 64 319 199 North woe d LOCOFOCO TOWNS. 64 132 30 • 157 Nottingham - 54 132 17 134 Albany - - 7 84 16 57 Brookfield - - 16 90 9 58 Stafford - - 3 183 147 271 Warner - - 67 168 26 320 Ellsworth - - 7 60 6 49 But the Whigs and Free Soil Democrats voted for the Convention, and it was carried. The Con¬ vention met, framed a Constitution, and struck out the test. The Constitution was submitted to the people in March, 1851. and the 8th question voted on was as to the repeal of the test. Here follows the vote of the Pierce party in many of the leading towns, set forth in detail, and iri the whole State, in the aggregate, on the question, and for the Pierce candidate for Governor. See the difference. It shows where the opposition comes from : Brentwood For Dinsmore, Loco Pierce Candidate. 76 For Catho lie Eman¬ cipation.' 11 Seabrook - - • 85 12 Windham - - 46 7 Durham - ' - - 155 8 Farmington - - 204 11 New Durham - - 113 4 Stafford - - - 244 12 Chatham - - • 82 7 EffiDgham - - 129 1 Ossipee - - 194 12 Sandwich - - 113 6 Wakefield - - 176 1 Wolfborough - - 279 11 Loudon - - 120 12 Alexandria - - 134 12 Ellsworth • . 59 1 Hill - 130 11 Holderness - . 153 9 Milan - • 64 6 The vote in the whole State was, for Dinsmore, (Pierce’s candidate) ... 24,425 For Sawyer, (Whig) - - - 18 458 For Atwood, (Free Soil) ... 12,049 Atwood had been the regularly nominated Loco- foco candidate. The vote on the Constitution was : For Catholic Emancipation - - 13,575 Against it. 24 971 So it will be seen that the opposition to Catho¬ lic emancipation was almost the precise vote given for the Pierce candidate for Governor. In 1852, the same question of religious liberty was again submitted to the people, and the Pierce party voted as follows: The Vote by Counties on Governor , and also on strik¬ ing out the Anti- Catholic Test in the Constitution , in March , 185*2. FOR GOVERNOR. FOR CATH. EMANCIPATION. Martin (Pierce Can,) Yeas. Nays. Rockingham - 4,669 1,374 1.856 Strafford 2.381 764 852 Belknap 2.155 323 1,037 Carroll - 2,239 257 1,101 Merrimack 4 614 1,163 2.455 Hillsborough - 4 550 1,451 1.300 Cheshire 2,338 1,322 716 Sullivan 2.074 1,030 660 Grafton / 4.404 1317 1,758 Coos 1.575 559 » 357 Total 30 999 i 9.566 12,092 Here the Pierce candidate got 30 999 votes, and Catholic emancipation 9/(66—the Whigs voting for emancipation,and the Pierce party against it, or refusing to vote at all. In 31 towns, where the Pierce candidate for Governor received 4,797 votes, emancipation received but 340. In 14 of these towns, there were but 317 Whig votes al- 12 tog-ether, jast about the number for emancipation. In 19 Whig town3, giving 4,135 votes, there-were but 791 vote3 against emancipation, a little les3 than the Pierce vote. As the supporters of Mr. Pierce have very un¬ necessarily drawn the name of hi3 father into the canvass, I will make one extract from his history. This extract, like the foregoing, is from an au¬ thentic source: ALIEN AND SEDITION LAWS: June 14, 1799, a series of resolutions in favo* of the Alien and Sedition Laws were introduced into the New Hampshire Legislature. One cf them was in these words: “That if the Legislature of New Hampshire, for mere speculative purposes, were to express an opinion on the act3 of the General Government, commonly called‘the Alien and Sedition Bills,’ that opinion would necessarily he that these acts were constitutional, and. in the present situation of our country, highly expedient The father of Franklin Pierce was a member of the Legislature, and voted for these resolutions. So that the “test” candidate comes by his oppo¬ sition to foreigners in the natural way. Gen. Pierce has assented to all these acts of his party, as these evidences clearly show. He has voted for and continues to vote for men. for ev¬ ery kind of office, who have at all times acted for, ’ voted for, and sustained the proscription and the proscribers of Catholics in New Hampshire; been in constant consultation and alliance with men who, by every word and deed of their lives, have said Catholics are unworthy of taking part in the administration of public affairs. Where he has lived the nnjority has been overwhelm¬ ingly in favor of religious bigotry. Has he ever abandoned such a party, and tried to put it down ? Never. He has frequently been its candidate, and a common partner of its wrongs; he has eaten of its fruits with his confederates in power, from boyhood to old age. This is the man,this is his history, and these are his associations, who has been chosen by the Democratic party as its guide, as the representative of its faith. Let the country take warning at this first great apostacy from that religious freedom that makes us free. Is there an abasement to which a once triumph¬ ant party can fall lower than this ? What would be thought of a politician who should, tnrough his whole life, sustain and vote for a party that proscribed Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, and hold that none but the rich should vote; who had combined for thirty years with those who exclude all such men from public affairs. Would such a man be sustained by any than who loved liberty and the rights of conscience? I think not. Still, this is just what Mr. Pierce and his party havebeen doing against Catholics, and continue to do to this day. The shallow pretence that his opinions are one way, while he acts another, is too contemptible to merit consideration. Men are known ly their works , and not by their words. Thir¬ ty years’ support of a party that has continued in full power in the State where Mr. Pierce resides, and that has sustained this outrage upon the rights of a part of its citizens, speaks louder than the cant and hypocrisy of newspaper and political hacks on the eve of election. These are acts of persecu¬ tion under which men Live lived and died in New Hampshire, and they cannot be effaced, so long as this crying injustice remains in the Constitu¬ tion that Franklin Pierce, and every officer of his State , swears to support and maintain. But I must leave this subject: its whole history is offen¬ sive to every true American heart ; it is a libel upon our Pilgrim history, a blot upon our nation¬ al character. Now that an opportunity is fairly given, let it be rebuked by the voice of the Amer¬ ican people, and political pirties taught to avoid it as the leprosy of death; its sting is fatal to freedom—let no man spread the contagion. national politics. I now come to the course of this New Hamp¬ shire hero as a National politician ; and what is this history? I will give his votes, and nothing more, for that is all there is to sive. AGAINST THE RIGHT OF PETITION. Mr. Pierce entered Congress in 1833. In 1S35, Feb. 2, he voted to lay on the table several petitions presented by Mr. Dickson, praying for the abolition of slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia. 1835, Dec. 16. He give a like vote to lay on the table a like petition presented by Mr. Fair- field. He voted to iay the motion to present the same petition on the table. 1835. Dec. 18. On the presentation of a simi¬ lar petition by Mr. Jackson, a debate sprung up, in which the enemies of the right of petition tried to get a direct vote so a3 to reject the prayer of the petition without a hearing. Mr. Beardsley moved to lay it on the table. Mr. Mason, of Vir¬ ginia. hoped he would modify his motion so that “they could have a direct vote on rejecting the petition,” when Mr. Pierce took part against the right of petition, and said— “ Franklin Pierce hoped tbe motion to recon¬ sider would be withdrawn, and that Mr. Beards¬ ley would so far modify his motion as to meet the approbation of all who are most sensitive upon this agitating question; and he rose to add his request to the suggestion made by his friend from Virginia, [Mr. Mason ] He was anxious for a direct vote upon the question ; he could not bear that any imputation should rest upon the North in consequence of the misguided and fanatical zeal of a few—comparatively few,” &c. As before, he voted to lay this petition on the table. 1835, Dec. 21. Mr. Pierce voted to suspend the rules to enable Mr. Owen to offer the follow¬ ing resolutions: “ That, in the opinion of this House, the ques¬ tion of the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia ought not to be entertained by Con¬ gress: “ That in case any petition praying the abo¬ lition of Slavery in the District of Columbia be hereafter presented, it is the deliberate opinion of this House that the same ought to be laid upon the table without reading.” These resolutions were introduced to absolutely cat off the right of petition and ptifle all debate on the subject of slavery. Mr. Pierce was for their passage. 1835. May 18. Mr. Pickering, from a Select Committee, introduced the following resolution: u Resolved, That all petitions, memorials, reso¬ lutions, propositions, or papers, relating in any way, or to any extent whatsoever, to the subject of slavery or the abolition of slavery, shall, without being either printed or referred, be laid upon the table, and that no further action shall be had thereon.”— Gales Seaton's Register, Vol. xii, Part 3,p 3,758. Mr. Pierce voted for this resolution. This was the first gag passed by Congress against the right of petition, and with Franklin Pierce’s vote in its favor. He voted, in numerous in¬ stances, on other occasions, in the same way, du¬ ring that Congress. But I have shown enough of his course to show his alliance and his principles. A continuation of the same course can he found in every vote he gave on this subject. During the next session, Mr. Pierce voted for the following resolution, introduced by Mr. Thompson, of Sout h Carolina: u Resolved, That slaves do not possess the right of petition secured to the people of the United States by the Constitution.” SENATOR. In 1837. Mr. Pierce became a member of the Senate. December 18, Mr. Wall presented a pe¬ tition on the subject of elavery. Mr. Pierce said u hi would be prepared to act upon them without delay, to reject the prayer of the peti¬ tions, to lay them upon the table, or give them any other direction that might be thought best calculattd to silence the agitators 1837, December 27. Mr. Calhoun brought in resolutions on the subject of slavery in the Terri¬ tories, District of Columbia, &c., avowedly to ab¬ solutely suppress the discussion of all questions of Blavery. Mr. Pierce voted for them all, and against all amendments. Against Mr. Morris’s amendment, to 9trike out of the second resolution the words i£ moral and religious ,” so as to ex¬ empt from denunciation the religious discussion of slavery , etrange to say, Mr. Pierce voted against such an amendment. Mr. Clay even, a slaveholder, thought the resolutions unjust, and moved to amend, so as to leave out “ that attempts to bring about the abolition of slavery here were a direct and dangerous attack upon the institu¬ tions of all the slaveholding States,” and so as to recognise the right of petition, but Mr. Pierce voted against that also * 1838, January 9. Resolutions of the State of Vermont, against the Atherton gig, and against s’avery in this District, were presented. Mr. Pierce votot, that no man can mistake. WHIG NOMINATION. There are conflicts in as well a9 between parties. Tne Whig party met in Convention, with rival candidates for its favor; men who were known to the history of the country — who were distin¬ guished for high order of talent, and for eminent service; men whose names will go down to pos¬ terity as am mg the most distinguished patriots, statesmen, and heroes, of the age in which they lived; men who have shared largely in the con¬ fidence of their countrymen — who have been equally successful ia the distinguished posi'ims they have occupied—who have executed with fidelity and marked ability every trust committed to their hands. That there should have been at¬ tachment, warm and ardent attachment, on the part of friends, to such men, wa3 inevitable; u- 15 deed, it would have been a sad commentary on human nature had it been otherwise. MR. WEBSTER. For gigantic powers of mind ; for mighty grasp of intellectual greatness; for comprehensive thought and power of logical deduction, Mr Webster wears throughout the world the peer¬ less name of The Great American. MR. FILLMORE. For a firm and faithful administration of the laws; for enlightened, patriotic nationality of feeling; for love of Union that “ knows no North, no South,” the events of a most eventful Admin¬ istration have proved Mr. Fillmore a statesman in whom the nation may confide in safety. GEN. SCOTT ► For that high order of powers which command universal confidence in the hour of trial; for that energy in execution, that secures whit philosophy bf thought and a wise forecast has marked out; for all that makes the name of hero honored by mankind ; for all that makes the vindicator of his country’s wrongs adored ; for all the blended powers of warrior, statesman, sage ; for many a victory won ; for fraternal strife assuaged ; for capacity, iu peace or war, to do what should be done, forty years of our country’s history proves General Scott has no superior. GEN. SCOTT NOMINATED—HIS CAREER. After a gallant and generous rivalry among friends, the nomination fell on General Scott, and he now srands the unanimously nominated candi¬ date of the Whig party. The history of the past, the record cf nearly all the important events in the Government for forty years, attest bis distin¬ guished character, and his eminent fitness to fill the exalted station for which he is now presented. Wise in council, firm and energetic in execution, experienced by a long life devoted to the public service; the accomplished soldier, the successful negotiator; having a profound knowledge of all the civil relations of the country, and being familiarly acquainted wivh the wants and neces¬ sities of the great mass of the American people, by an intimate knowledge of all parts of the coun¬ try. I believe General Scott is better calculated to meet the exigencies of the times, and to carry on successfully, to the eqml advantage of all. a National Administration, than any candidate who could be presented. A lofty, glorious, and con¬ stant intercourse with the wir power, has made him the most brilliant captain of the age. O n* foreign relations, iu case of war, are safe in his •hands. Danger has never deterred, nor sudden sickness prevented, his winning honors with our countrymen in arms. Though a soldier by pro¬ fession, he is a man of peace, and every act of his life has shown that he is against shedding the blood of battles, except, as a stern necessity. He has don* as muon, by treaty and negotiation, to avoid uitional difficul'y, as any man. statesman or soldier, the country has ever produced. And he has at all times had the peculiar faculty to inspire confiience in bis capacity to succeed in etfor's at amicable adjustment. Even his political oppo¬ nents have never failed to ascribe to him this pe¬ culiar power. NULLIFICATION In the palmiest days of General Jackson, when his iron will was fixed iu its firmest intensity against the insubordination of South Carolina, the first and only man selected by him, to quiet the disturbing elements of discord, was Gen. Scott. And with a few patriotic associates he repaired to the midst of this raging storm of nullification, to re-open the council fires of union, of concord, of loyalty, and of peace. Aud he re¬ turned from his mission with no victorious wreaths in battle won, but bearing the olive branch of peace restored—and thus the warrior and man of peace scattered the gathering clouds, ready to pour upon the country a storm of dissolution REMOVAL OF THE CHEROitEES. War had raged in the red man’e camp, and many a noble Cherokee had laid his stalwart form cold in death, in a vain defence of his native land. The lust of power was upon him, and his struggle was but to die. The Anglo-Saxon race wanted land—and they m .rched to its possession torough the hearts of its possessors But there wa3 a power behind the throne, greater than the throne itself. The bleeding red man saw the hand of mercy, and listened to its counsels. The defenders of their fathers’ graves gather round the media¬ tor of their wrongs, and again the council-fires were opened, and the brave, the just, the pitying Scott negotiates, concludes, secures an honorable peace The .ruthless strife was ended, the Indian saved, and our country’s honor preserved from darker blot. For this noble deed there is not a philanthropic Christian spirit that breathes iu a Christian land, but blesses the name of Scott. NORTHEASTERN BOUNDARY. An exciting and dangerous question had long existed in relation ro the Northeastern boundary between this couatry and the British Provinces. Negotiation after negotiation had failed, and the people of Maine bee .ms exasperated, and actual hostilities had nearly broken out, when General Scott was sent by Mr. Van Buren to the Beene of difficulty. And the wild passions of thetimes, that threatened to imbrue the two mtionsiu a general war, were allayed; the public mind was quieted, and confi leuce restored, till time wis given for the ultimate settlement of this mist dmgerou3 question. Thus again the wise mediator dispelled the lowering clouds of war, and the nation wi3 agiin saved from the desolating hand of murder¬ ous slaughter. REFLECTION It is wise for men. as well as nations, to reflect on the great poia's of human character Here was a d>8 r iuguishad hen, who never failed to reap unfading laurels for himself ou the great theatre of war, bending oil >he energiasof his min i to avert,, for tlie sake of his country, the direful cdimities that follow in the iraiu or the last ar¬ biter of nations. Taough iu such a dhoik of arms he might have made his own name immortal, he hushed the voice of person il ambition, put under his feet all consi lerations of a selfish char- 16 acter, and breasted the storm of prejudice, pas¬ sion, and heated imagination, till cooler counsels could prevail, and in the end, in this as in all things else he has undertaken, triumphantly succeeded. ■ A SOLDIER. Need I say anything of him as a soldier, or to awaken the American heart to a just sense of his unparalleled career in the wars of his country? From youth to manhood, from manhood to old age, he has done nought but lead our victorious armies on to conquering and to conquest. From Niagara’s flood, from Lundy’s Lane, through many an Indian fight, to the burning plains of Mexico, he has borne aloft our stars and stripes, unchecked, unconquered, and unsubdued, till our country, our countrymen, and the world, hail him as the unconquerable chief—the heroic soldier who has braved the storm of war and borne down his country’s foes on every field of conflict, in every clash of arms. In arms, in council, and in State, he has ever been the bold vindicator of our rights, and the fearless avenger of our wrongs. HIS REVILERS. With a character like hi3, how depraved and worthless appear the viper sycophants of party, that assail his war-worn name with the filth of their own depravity ! While he was fighting the battles of his country, baring his bosom to the deadly fire of the legions of a British King, the}', in the nursery of their mothers, were growing up to enjoy the national renown of hie valorous deeds. While he was with his own hands pulling down the British fltg at Fort George; battering down the walls of Vera Cruz; piercing the de¬ files of Cerro Gordo, in the face of the thunder of the enemy’s artillery; when sweeping the plains of Churubusco; when, after fearful cartidge, plant¬ ing our flag on the wall of Molino del R.ey; and when, after & campaign of more fighting, and more glorious in its triumphs, than is recorded in modern history, he is seen unfurli- g the American Banner in the Halls of the Montezumas—where, during all these thrilling scenes, that astonished jan admiring world, was this little viper race—this paltry band of paid hirelings ? Echo answers, where ? But pay the price, and they can be hired to traduce the character of Gen. Washington, cr any soldier of his country. That Gen. Scott bears honorable scars, or cirries the ball of a British musket in his body, ;s nothing to them ; they have no blood to shed for their country, and no respect for the ghed blood of others. Bat the country will vindicate, gloriously vindicate, him who shed the first blood of youth and perilled the life of age in his ciumry’s cause. HIS MILITARY CHARACTER. G^n. Scott, in his military career, is pre-emi¬ nently the first mac in America. His conduct in the war with Mexico is held by all military men, in this country and in Europe, as evidence of the highest military genius. In every battle tri¬ umphant success was the result. He march-: d into an enemy’s country, with a little army of not more than ten thousand men, and in the course of a few mont hs secured, by a succession of bat¬ tles unparalleled for brilliancy and successful achievement, a line of communkafion from the seaboard to the capital of the country. In fact, he conquered the country. The great city of Mexico fell into his hands. He gave to his coun¬ try, in one campaign, the Eldorado of the world; the fields of golden harvest;* the great gateway of commerce on the Pacific; the land that De Soto south', but. never found. After all his victories, after the conquest of near a quarter of North America, this brave General, while still in a foreign land, at the head of our victorious armies, and in the face of a lurk¬ ing enemy, was deprived of his command, recalled from the field of his glory, to answer to petty charges originating in low. political hatred. To so deep a depth was this scene of persecution car¬ ried that he was actually put on trial as a public offender. That this attempt to compass his ruin struck the public mind with disgust, that it failed, totally failed, wa3 no fault of those who contrived • the plot for his overthrow. The people will avenge this wrong. It was no less a wrong to the people than to Gen. Scott. The rights of the whole country were violated by this attempt, in the time of war, to destroy the commander of our army and the conqueror of Mexico. HIS HUMANITY. The humanity of Gen Scott is not surpassed by his military prowess. Such was his conduct in Mexico, when he held the whole country at his command, that even the people of that subju¬ gated country offered to him the whole civil power, and to place him at the head of the Republic, with an immense salary, if he would accept so dis¬ tinguished a position. But having no selfish ends to serve, in the spirit of patriotic devotion to his country alone, he refused the proffered power. THE CONTRAST. In every point of view, the contrast between the two candidates is so marked, I am sure the great body of enlightened, patriotic men will come to the same conclusion as to duty in this canvass. They will sustain the man who has sustained the great interests of the country on all occasions, in every trial, both in peace and in war. Elect Gen. Scott, and all is safe—safe from outward foes and from internal commotion. Honor the man who has done honor to his country, and all wi.l be well. IRISH PRISONERS. One incident, and I am done. Gen. Scott never forgets bis duty. While a prisoner, and in the power of his enemies, he learned that among the prisoners w^re several Irish soldiers, and that the English officers were endeavoring to separate, them from the others, to send them to England for trial as traitors to the Brit'sh Crown. He at once bid defiance to his guard, and declared to those who held him in their power, that, if they attempted to carry their ^purpose into execution, he would retaliate on English prisoners in the hands of the American forces. He procured the passage uf a law to that effect, and dispatched the information to the British c;mp, and every one of these Irish patriots were saved from the vengeance of their old oppress .rs. These men lived to re¬ turn to America, and to thank their brave de¬ fender for their deliverance.