OCR Interpretation


Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, February 07, 1844, Image 2

Image and text provided by University of South Carolina; Columbia, SC

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84026897/1844-02-07/ed-1/seq-2/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for

tion should be socotstitntcd, as to't
fully andifi seot h people
and not tha .f jiolitical uianagep: or
office holders atd office seekers; and for
that purpose, H ol-d it intdipensible, that
the Delegates should beapnointed-directly
by the people, or to. use the language of
Gen. Jackson, should be " fresh from.tho
..people.". I also holdtbat the only possi
ble mode to effect this, is- for the people to
choose the Delegatesby Districts, and that
they should; voteper capita. Every other
mode oftappointing would be controlled
by political iiachinery,fanl-place the ap
pointments in'the hands of the few, who
work it.
I object, then, to the: roposed Conven
tion, because it will not be constituted in
conformity with this fundamental article
of the Republican"creed. The Delegates
to it willbe appointed from some of the
States, not by the people in Districts, but
as has been stated, by S'ate Conventious
en masse, composed -of Delegates, ap
pointed in all cases, as fat as I am in
formed, by County or District Conven
tions, and in some cases, if not misinform
ed, these again composed of Delegates
appointed by still smaller divisions, or a
few interested individuals. Instead then
of being directly, or fresh from the people,
the Delegates to the Baltimore Convention
will be the Delegates of Delegates; and of
course removed, in all cases, at least three,
if not four degrees from the people. At
each successive remove, the votes of the
people will become. less full and distinct,
until, at last, it will be 30 faint and im
perfect, as not to be audible. To drop
metaphor, I hold it impossible to form a
scheme more perfectly calculated to anni
hilate the control of the people over the
Presidential election, and vest it in those,
who makes politics a trade, and who live'
or expect to live on the Government.
In this connection, I object not the less
strongly to the mode in which Virginia has
resolved the Delegates shall vote. With
all duerespect, I must say, I can imagine
nothing more directly.it conflict with the
printiplesof our federal system of govern
meat, ab..to use a broader expression, the
principles on which all confederated com
munities have been united. I hazard noth
ing in saying, that there is not an instance
in our political history, from the meeting.
of the first Revolutionary Congress to be
present day, of the Delegates of any State,
voting by majority and counting per capita:
nor do I believe- an instance of the kind
can be found in the history of any confed
erated community. There is indeed some
thing monstrous in the idea of giving the
majori.y.the right of impressing the vote
ofythe minority into-its service, and count
pg them as its own.' The plain t ule
that which .has ever prevailed, and which
conforms to the dictates of common sense,
is, that where a State votes as a State,
by a majority of its Delegates, the votes
count one, be they few or many, or the
State large or small. On the contrary,
where the votes of all the Delegates are
counted, the vote individually and inde
pendeftly, each for himself counting one.
-And it is to be noted, that wherever this
latter:mode of voting exists among confed
erated States, it is in all cases founded on
compact, to which the consent of each
State is required. In the absence of com
pact,-the invariab1 mode of voting in
;"such States, is, in 'a l cases, by the ma
jority, their vote counting one. The
course which Virginia has resolved to
take, is in violation of this plain and fun
damental rule, and if it should become a
settled practice, would be destructive of
the foundation on wvhich the whole struc
ture ofrthe State Right doctrine is reared.
I hold, in the next place, to be an indis
pensable principle, that the Convention
should he so constituted, as to give to each
State, in the nomninaftioti of a candidate,
the same relative weight, which the Con
stitution secure to it in the electipn of the
Preident,making due allowance for its
relative party strength. By the election,
I mean the whole-the eventual choice
when it goes into the Hlouse of Represen
.tatives, as well as the primary vote in the
eletoral college. The one is as .much a
part of theelection as the other. The two
*make the whole. The adoption of the
one, in the Convention, which framed the
"Constitutioni, depended on the adoption of
the other. Neither could possibly be adopt
eil lone. The two were the result of
comipromise between the larger and smnaI
ler Statesfifter a long and donbr ful strug
gle,ulich threatened the logs of the Cotn
stttton 'itself. The object of giving
the-eventuat choice by the H~ouse, wvas to
couanterpoise the prepnderance of the lar
ger in the electoral college. Without this,
the smaller would have voted againtst the
wvhole provision, and its rejection wotild
have been the consequence. Even as it
stands, Delaware voted against it. In
confirmation of.what I state, I refer to Mr.
Madison's report on the proceedings of the
Convention
'. Having stated what I mean by the elec
tion, it wtill require hut a few words to ex
plain my reasons for the principles I have
laddown. They are are few and simple,
und .rest on the ground, that the nomina
* tion is in reality the election, if concurred
in, .as far as the, party is concerned. It is
so intended to be. The leading reason
assigned for making it, is to prevent a di
vision of the party;, and thereby prevent
the election from goinig into the House,
where the smaller States would have the
advantage ititended-to be secured to them
.by the Conistitution, by being placed on an
equality withithe larger. -
*Such being the intended object. and ef
fect,-I now submit to every candid mintd,
* whether the.Convention ought not to be so
* constituted, as to compensate in the nomi
. nation for the important advantage in the
election, w hieci the smaller States surrena
der by'goin~g into a Convention. Would
it not be unfair-a palpable wdht of good
. fatith and-subversive of the compromise of
the Constitution to withhold. it? Or, if
- demanded, tNould it be short of an insult to
refjise..it? Can it be thought, that-the
s'mallerStates are so debased and absor
oftli ihe party politics of the day, as to
* . pernu 'hemsolves to be thus indirectly
a.ppeiofight,which their high min
* ier p6inafriotic..ancestors sold so dear,
.as~evekto prefer tliik less of the Constiru
~on itilfrather than su~trendegit.
Ibjectz, then,.to tiie popsK Conven
tiocin this connaection, beatina.it makes
. no' eomessiitioo to. kpis itekrates for
the sifrre r tistigesii'nable and
important constitutional right. Instead of
=that, its advocates peisemptorily and' in
dignantly refuse any, and treat with scorn
every attempt'to secure - it. 'Some have
even gone so far, as to'deny, that the even
tual choice of thd House conatitute any
porlion of--the election, and to manifesl
open hostility against the provision of the
Constitution, which contains it.
If there was no other objection, the one
under consideration would be insuperable
with me. I differ utterly from the advo
cates of the proposed Convention, in refer
ence to this provision. I regard it as one
of the first importance, not because I de
sire the election to go into the House, bul
because I believe it to be an indispensable
means, in the hands of the smaller States
of pteserving their just- and constitutional
weigist in the Presidential election, and
through that, in the Executive Department
and the Government itself, which I believe
to be essential to the preservation of oui
sublime federal system. I regard the-ad
jusiment of the relative weight of the
States in the Government to he the fun
damental compromise of the Constitution,
and that on which our whole political sys
tem depends. Its adjustment constituted
the great difficulty in forming the Consti
tution. The principle on which it was
finally effected ,wai, that,, a provision
should be also made, in some form, te
preserve the originul equality of the States
in every department of the Government,
The principle we easily carried out in
constituting the legislative department,
by preserving the equality of the States in
one branch, (the Senate) and conceding ti
population its full preponderance in the
other. But the great and difficult task of
reducing it to practice was, in the Execu
tive Department, at the head of which
there is but a single officer. So great was
it, that it occupied the attention of the
Convention, from time to time, duritrg the
whole session, and was very near causing
a failure at last. It would have been an
easy task to constitute that department,
either on the principle of the equality of
the States in the government, or that. of
population. To combine the two, in the
election of a single officer, was quite a
different affair; but however difficult, it
had to be performed, at the hazard of losing
the Constitution.
It was finally accomplishe.d, by giving
to the larger States nearly the same pre
ponderance in the electoral college,- as
they have in the House, and to the smal
ler, in the event of a choice by the House,
the same equality- they possess in the
Senate; thus following closely the analogy
of the Legislative Department. To -nake
it as close as possible, it was at first pro
posed to give the eventual choice, to the
Senate, instead of the House, but it was
altered, and the present provision adopted.
for reasons which did not affect the princi
ple.
It was believed by the framers, the prac
tical operation of the provision would he,
that the electoral college, in which the in
fluence of the larger States preponderates,
would nominate, and that the House vo
ting by States, where their equality is pre
served, would elect who should he Presi
dent. To give it that operation- in prac
tice, the provision, as it originally stood
in the Constitution, was that each elector
should vote for two individuals, without
discriminating which should be Presid nt,
or Vice President, and if no one had a ma
jority of the whole votes, then out of the
five highest, the [louse voting by States,
should elect one, and the person not elect
ed, having the highest number of votes,
should be the Vice President. It has been
sitce altered, ao that the electors should
designate which should be President, and
which Vice President, and the 'selection of
the llouse was limited to the three highest.
It is manifest, that if this provisiont of the
Constitution had beeni left to operate by
itself, without the intervention of caucus
ses, or party conventions between the peo
plo anid the election, that the practical op
eration would have been such,.as I have
stated, and such as was clearly intended
by the framers of the Constitutioni.
The object intentded is important. The
preservation of the relative weight of the
States, as est ablished by the Constitution
in all the Departmnents,. is necessary to the
sccess and dluration of otnr system of Go
vernment ; but it may he doubted, whether
the provision adopted to effect it in the
Executive Departmenit. is not too refined
for the-strong, and I nay add, corrupt pasn
sons, which the Presidential electioA will
ever excite. Certain it is, that if the prac
tice of nominating Candidates for the
Presidency, by Conventions, constituted
as they ptoposed, shall become the estab.
lished usage, it will utterly defeat the in
tention of the framers of the Constitution,
and would be followed by a radical and
dangerous change, tnt only ini the Execu
tive Department, but in the Government
itself.
Trhis danger was -early foreseen, apdi to
avoid it, some of the wisest and most ex
perienced statesmen of former days sr
strogly objected to Cong:ressional caucus
se to nomitnate candidates for the Presi
deny, that they never cpuld be induced
t attend them, among these it will be
sufficient to name Mr. Macon and Mr.
Lowtdes. Others, believing that this
proposition of the -Constitution was toe
refined for practice, were 'solicitous to
amend it, but without impairing the influ
ence of the' smaller States in the election,
Among these, I rank myself. With that
object, resolutions wvere introduced, iii
128, in the Setnato by Col. Beaten, and
in the Houjse by Mr. McDufle, providinA
for districtitg the States, and for referring
the election back to the people, in case
there should be no choice, to elect one
from the. two highest candidates. The
principle which governed in the amend~
met proposed, was to give a fair comi
pensation to the smaller States for the sur
render of their advantage in the eventual
choice of the House atnd at the same time
to make the mode of electing the Presi
dent more strietly in coniformity with the
principles of our popular institutions and
to bess liable to corruption, than the ex
isting provision. They received the gene
ral support of the party, but were objected
to by-e (pw, as not being a full eqjuivalent
to hegmaller States. The princmple em
braced~ is idetitica1with that on which you
proposed'to caitethe Baltimore Con
vention1 but-shicbit ben so dictorially
objected.to -bygiomie..$ t-hen -took se
promient a pat iti~t avor. If you
-have not succeeded, there is at least-some
consolation in reflecting that if oihers'liave
since changed, you now stand where. ybu
then did,. in the purer and better days ol
the party. I was in favor of then, as I am
now, not because 1 consider the resolutionii
as perfect, theoretically, as the existing
provisions of the Constitution, but because
believe it would in practice more car
tainly-accomplish what the framers of the
Constitution intended. But while the pro
vision stands as it does, I would regard
myself as littleshortof a traitor to that sa
cred instrument, should I give my assent,
directly or indirectly, to any practice
which would have the elTect of divesting
the-smaller States of the due weight which
it securesto them in the Presidential elec
tion, whether designed or not. And here
let me add, that as ohjectionable as I think
a Congressional caucus. for nominating a
President, it is in my opinion, far less so,
than a Convention constituted as is pro
posed. The former had indeed many
things to recommend it. Its members
consisting of Senators and Representatives,
were the immediate organs of the State
Legislatures, or the people ; were respon
sible to them, respectively, and were for
the most part, of high character, stand
ing and talents. They voted per capita,
and what is very important, they repre
sented fairly the relative strength of the
party in their respeetive States. In all
these important particulars, it was all that
could be desired for a nominating body,
and formed a striking contrast to the pro.
posed Convention; and yet, it could not
be borne by the people in the then purer
days of the Republic. 1,'acting with Gen.
Jackson and most of the leaders of the
party at the time, contributed to put it
down, because we believed it to be liable
to be acted on and influenced by the pat
ronage of the Government-an objection
far more applicable to a Convention con
stituted as the one proposed, thah a.Con
gressional caucus. Far however was it
then from my intention, in aiding to put
that down, to substitute in its place what
I regard as an hundred times more objec
tionable in every point of view. Indeed,
if there must be an intermediate body be
tween the people and the election, un
known to the Constitution, it may be well
questioned whether a better than the old
plan of a Congressional caucus can be de
vised.
In taking the ground I have, in favor of
maintaining the right secured the smaller
States by the compromisa of the Consti
tution, 1 am actuated by no partisan feel
ing or desire to conciliate their good opin
ion. If the case was reversed, and the
rights of the larger instead of the smaller,
were invaded, I would with equal readi
ness and firmness, stand op in their de
fence. I am the parti.an of neither one,
nor the other, but simply a supporter of
the'Constitution, and what I believe to be
just and fair. I regard the Constitution,
as the only ark of safety for all, and I be
lieve that in defending it, 1 defend the in
terest and safety of each and all; the grea
ter as well as the smaller--the States in
vading tie right of the others,as the States
whose right are invaded.
I have laid down the principle, on which
I rest the objection in question, with the
limitation, that the relative weight of the
States should be maintainei.mtakjng.due
allowance for their relative party strength.
The propriety of the lirmitation is so ap
parent, that a few words.. in illustration,
will be required. The Convention is a
party Convention, and professedly inten
ded to take the sense of the party, which
cannot he done fairly, if States having hul
little party strength, are put on an equal
ity with those which have much. If that
were done, the resulr might ha, -that a
small portion of the party from States the
least son, politically, end which could
give but little soupport to Congress, mnigh
select the candidate, and make the Presi
dent, against a great majority of the sound
est, and on which the President and hi!
administration would have to rely for sup
port. All this is clearly too unfair and
improper to he denied. There may be u
great difficulty in applying a remedy in
Convention, but I do not feel myself called
upon to say how it can he done, or by
whet standard the relative party strength
of the respective States should be deter
mined ;.perhaps the best would be theii
relative strength in Congress at the lime,
In laying down the principle, 1 added the
limitaton for the sake of accuracy, and tc
show how imperferctly the party must-b'
represented when it is overlooked. I see
no piovision in the proposed Conventiot
to meet it.
But, in order to realize how the Conven
tion will operate, it will be necessary tc
view the combined elfectsof the objec
t ions which I have. Thus viewved, tt wtll
be founid, that a Convention so constitui
ted, tends irresistibly to centralization
centralization of the control over the Pres
idential election in the hands of the few o
the central, large States, at first, and final
ly in political managers, office holders anc
office seekers ; or to express it diflerently
in that portion of thte community, whc
live, or expect to live on the Government
in contradistinction to the great mass, whc
expect to live on their own means, or theil
honest industry; and who maintain the
Government, and politically speaking, em
phatically the people.
That such would be the case, may he
inferred from the fact, that it would alor<
the means 10 some six or seven States
lying contiguous and not far from the een
tre of the Union, to control the nomnina
tion, and through that the election, by con
centrating their united voice in the Con
vntlion- Give them the powver of doing
so, and it would not long lie dormant.
What may he done by combination,' whern
the temptation is so gr-eat, will be sure cri
long to be done. To combine and con
quer, is not less true tas a maxim, wvher
poer is cotncerncd, than to "Divide anc
conquer." Nothing is hatter established
than that the desire for power can brinj
together and unite -the most ,disordan
materials
But the tendency to centraization) will neo
stop there. The appointment of delegates en
masse by State Conventon, would tend, a
the same timne and even-with greater force, ti
centralize this control ins the hands of the few
who mnake politics. a trade. The farther the
Convetion is removed from the people, the
more certainly the control over it will be plac
ad in the hands of the interested few, and whet
removed 'three or four degrees,.as has beet
shown.,,,t will be. wvhere the appointmnent is b3
State Conventions, the power of the peopl
will cease, and the seekers of Executive favo
will become supreme. At that stage, an ac
tive, trained and combined corps will he former
in the party, whose whole time and attentiot
will' be directed to politics. It will be their soli
business. Into their hands the appointment
of delegates in all the stages will fall, and the:
will take special care that none but themselve
or their humble and obedient dependants shal
be appointed. The central and State Conven
lions will be filled by the mostexperienced any
cunning, and after nominating the President
they will take good care to divide the. patroc
age and offices, both of the General and Stat
d'overnneints, among themselves and their de
pendents. But why say will ? Is it not alread
the case? Have there not been many instance
of State Conventions being filled by office hold
era and office seekers. who after making thi
nomination, have divided the offices in the Stat
among themselves and theirpartisans, and join
ed in recoaimending to the candidate whon
they had just nomnmatedto appoipt them to the
offices to which they have been respective2
allotted. If such be the case in'the infancy o
the system. it must end. if such convention
should become the established usage, in ti
President nominating his successor. When i
comes to that, it will not be long before thi
sword will take.place of the Constitution.
Such are my objections to the node in whicl
the proposed Convention is to be constituted
and my reasons for entertaining them. Thej
are such, that I cannot refuse to obey then
without ronounci ttg the principles which I havi
often avowed in public and private, and which
have guided me through the whole course o
my public life.
In coming to this conclusion, I have not pas
sed over, without careful examination, the rea
sons assigned by its advocates for constitutini
the Convention as they propose. They hav
not diminished the force of my objections.
propose to notice the most prominent.
That which they have urged with the great
estconfidence, is, that each State has a right ti
appoint Delegates as she pleases. I meet it
by utterly denying that there is any such right
That each State has a right to act as it pleases
in whatever relates to it exclusively, no onr
will deny; but it is a perfect novel doctrine
that any State has such a right, when she come
to act in concert with others in reference ti
what concerns the whole. In such cases it i,
the plainest dictate of common sense, that what
ever affects the whole should be regulated bj
the mutual consent of all, and not by the die
cretion of each. That by the appointment o
Delegates to the proposed' Convention is i
case of this description, I trust I have conclu
aively shown. I have, I-also trust shown more
that the supposed right is perfectly deceptive
for while it claims for each State the right ti
appoint Delegates. as it pleases, it in. realita
gives the larger States the right to dictate hog
the others shall appoint. If, for example, thr
Empire State. as it is called, adopts the mode
of appointing (as she has) which will concen
trate her whole strength, what discretion woulh
she leave to others, if they go into Convention
but to appoint as she has appointed. or to bi
ruled by her. It is thon, neither more nor lee
than a claim to dictate, under the garb of i
right, and such its exercise has proved in thr
present case. It has left no option, but to con
form to her course, or be overruled, or refusi
to go idito the Convention.
I regret this, because I sincerely desre ti
preserve the harmony of the party. I had stron
hope that the rally after the defeat in 1840 wouh
be exclusively on principles. This hope we:
greatly strengthened by the truly republica
and noble stand, taken at the extra session an
the earlier portion of the succeeding regula
session. During that period of rigid adhei
ence to principle, perfect harinony pervade
the ranks of the party. I beheld it with joy.
believed the moment highly favorable for the
thorough reformation of the Government ant
the restoration of the Constitution. To th
Republican party, I looked for the ascomplish
mont of this great work; and I accordingi
felttlie deepest solicitude. that the stand taken
and the-harmony which existed, should be pre
served. In order that it should, I made up in]
mind to waive the objection, which I have lon
entertained to any intermediate body, unk nowi
to the Conastitutien, between the people ant
the election of the President, in the hope tha
the proposed Convention would be so constita
ted that I might consistently with my princi
pIes give it my support. In this I have beet
disapointed, and heing so, I am compelled ti
decide asl have done. The same motives whuicI
impelled me to separate from the adnmiistra
tion of Geni. Jackson, in the plenitude of it
power, and to come to the rescue of Mr. Val
B urea's at its greatest depression, compels m
now to withhold my name from the propose
Convention.
Having now assigned my reasons for refusin
to permit my iiame to go before the Baltimor
Conventiin, it rests with you who have place
it before the people and assented to abide by
Convention fairly constituted to determin
what course you will pursue.
Be your decision what it may I shall be coni
tent. But I re'ard it as due to the occasion,t
you any myselF to declare that under no ci
cumtances whatever shall I support any can
didate, who is opposed to free trade, and in ft
vor of the protective policy, or whose prom
net and influential frieds and supporters arc
I hold the policy to be another name for a syt
tern of monopoly and plunder, and to be tho
rouglty anti repobtican and federat in its char
acter. I talso hold that so long as the dutie
ae so laid as to be in fact bounties to one pot
tion of the community, while they operate a
oppressive taxes on the other, there can be n
hope that the Government can be reformed, c
that its expenditures will be reduced to the pri
per standard.
Were I, with the evidences before me, I
say otherwise of my conrse, it would be, pram
ticaly, to declare that I regard the protectiv
policy to be an open question, so far as th
party is concerned; which I would consider a
my part, a virtual abandonment of the cause<
Free Trade. That can never be. I have doe
pand suffered too much for it, when its friend
pwere few and feeble, to abandon it now-now
when the auspices every where, on this an
ie other side of the Atlantic, proclaim the al
proaching downfall of protection and the pe
manent triumph of Free Trade. I, who "1
held it against monopoly and plunder, in tli
worst of times, and braved the menaces of Am
Iministration and Opposition, when backed ht
Iby a single State,-will not-cannot abando
the glorious cause now, when its banner wavn
in proud triumph over the. metropolis of th
commercial world. No, I shall maintain it
moably the gronnd I have so long occupie.
until I have witnessed its great and final victi
ry if it shall please the Disposer of Events i
spare my life, so long. It will he, indeed,
vidor-the barbinger of a new and brightn
Iand higher civilizeation.
Much less, stIll, can I give my support to at
candidate, whoe shall give his aid or countet
Iance to the agitation of abolition in Congret
or elsewhere; or wvhose prominent and inl,
ential friends and supporters shall. I doul
the sincerity of any man, who declares he is i)
abolitionist, whilst at the same time, he aids a
countenaces the agitation of thie question, t
his pretext what it may. If we have a right
our slaves, wve have the right to hold them
peace and quiet. If the Constitution guarai
tees the one, it guaraniteets the other ; and if
forbids the one I rom being attacked, it equal
forbids the other. Indeed the one stands, to ti
other, as means to an end, and is so avowed t
theabolitiists; and on the plinmest princ
pies of morals, if the end be prohibited, it
means of effecting italso are. Of the two.
reg..a the. ,d.lded lianatic far lees gruilty art
dagerdus than lie, who, fot political or party
purposes, aids or countenances bm, in-what
he kn9ws is intended to do that, whieb he ac.
I knowledges to be 'forbidden-by the Constitu
I tion. -
It is time that an end should be put to this
system of plunder and agitation. They have
r been borne long enough. They are kindred
measures and hostile, as far, at least, as one
I portion of the Union is concerned. While the
- tariff takes from us the proceeds of our labor,
I abolition strikes at the labor-itself. The one
robs us of our income, while'the other aims at
destroying the source from which that income
is derived. It is impossible for us to stand pa
tiently much longer, under their double oper
ation, without being impoveiished and ruined.
JOHN C. C'ALHOUN.
CONGRESSION AL.
correspondencef the Charleston Pabiot
W ASHINGTON, Jan. 24.
In the Senate, aller the presentation of
a host of petitions on the subjectof postage,
the bill' for the improvement of the Fox
and Wisconscin Rivers, was debated and
again postponed.
The resolution of the Finance Commit
tee, relative to the Tariff bill of Mr. Mc
Dufflie, was again taken up.
Mr. Berrien raised a point of order, to
wit, that the only question -legitimately
before the Senate, was whether the bill
could originate in the Senate, and that de
r bate on the merits of the bill could not be
in order.
This was debated by. Messrs. Bagby,
Sevier and others. Finally Mr. Berrien
moved to lay the whole matter on the
table. The motion was subsequently
withdrawn to enable Mr. McDulfie to
reply to Mr. Evans. The former how
ever, is bound to renew the motion.
The Senate spent the remainder of that
day in Executive Session.
in the House a report was made from
the minority of the Committee on Elec
tions, in the case of the non-districted
members. Its takes opposite ground to
the report of the majority, and contends
that said members were not lawfully elec
ted. Ten thousand extra copies of both
report, have been ordered to be printed.
1 presume the debate on this knotty sub
ject will occupy at least a month.
After the disposal of several unimpor
tant matters; the House resumed the con
sideration of the report of the Select Com
mittee on the Rules. The question was
still o the motion to re-committ the Re
port with instructions to re-insert the 21st
Rule.
Mr. Winthrop resumed and concluded
his remarks against the rule.
Mr. Payne followed. and intimated that
all this abolition cry was raised by men
who sought to create a storm in the hope
that they might ride upon the whirlwind.
Sie incidentally defended the institution
of slavery, and argued that it is a neces
sary connomitant of civilization.
The morning hour having expired, the
subject was again laid over.
A bill was reported from the Commit
tae on Claims, providing for,the payment
I of the passage of Lafaye:te from this
r country to France, in 1824.
The House then went into Committee,
and took up the resolution reporied yester
day from the Committee on Foreign Af
fairs. Ii puts forth that in the opiuion of
the Committee, it is not expedient, at this
time, to interfere with the question of Ore
gon, inasmuch as the negotiations are
about commencing.
Mr. Owen has moved to amend by in
serting "it is expedient." On tbis mo
tion, lie again took the floor, and resumed
his remarks from yesterday. He argued
that it is the duty of this Goverument tn
give immediate notice to Great Britain ojf
our intention to annul that portion of the
reaty of 1818, which relates to the joint
occupation of Oregon. In his opimnn
Great JDritain has not the shadow of a
title to the Territory ; also, that it is the
height of folly for us to negotiate about
that which is clearly our own.
Mr. TFhomasson followed in support of
the resolution of the Committee.
Mr. Wentworth advocated the amend
ment, and made a real war speech.
The subjc was then laid aside, and
Sthe Committee tookt up a bill authorizing
the transfer of certain appropriations, so
- as to enable the Navy Department to con
tinue the works recently suspended at the
various Navy Yards.
-A debate ensued, after which, without
-taking the question, the Committee arose,
-and the House adjourned. Jnay~
.In the Senate, the resolution of Mr.
.Semple, calling oii the Secretary of State
a for information relative to our consular sys
-temn, was adopted, with an amendment re
e quiring a statement of the number of
Consuls in our service who are not citi
rzens. The number is I believe, great. 1t
is the intention of Mr. Semple to insert a
Sclause in his bill, prohibiting the appoint
-ment of any Consul who is not a citizen.
B Should the bill pass in that shape, it will
5 he difficult for the Government to procnre
a Consuls at some-of the remote stations, for
the reason that the amount of fees is so
trfigthat no citizen would think it worth
wieto go from this country. It is on this
account that the services of resident Con.
- suIs of other nations have been secured.
The resolution of Mr. Semple, request
- ing the President t6 notify the British Go
article of the treaty of 1818, which relates
n to the joint occupation of Oregon, was
anext taken up.
e Mr. Archer desired it might be referred
.- to the Committee on Foreign Aff'airs,there
I, to remain until the result of the approach
' ing negotiations should be known.
0 Mr. Sample contended that the resoln
r tion will in no way interfere with the ne
gotiationsa.
A fter some remarks from Messrs. Buch
- anan and Atchison, the sabject was laid
5 over:
-A bill was reported from the Military
t Committee to-i-epeal the act of last Sea
0sian, dismounting the 2d Regiment of
r~ Dragoons.
o A fter some debate on the bill to improve
n the navigation of Fox and Wiscontsin Riv
eror, the Senate adjourned to Mlonday next.
it In the House, the whole day was taken
Sup on a motion to print a report made this
*morning on the contested election case
fof Mesara. Goggin aid Gilmer. Finally,
~e the motion to print prevailed. The Re
I port is in favor of Mr. Gilmer.
d There are se-erl cases of sickness
among members,. Mr. Phoenix, oPfe1w
York, lies at the point of deatliwith-ihe
billious fever.
This morning, just before the Speaker
took the Chair. a fracas occurred bet Mu ..y
Mr. Weller and the Reporter of the BaliiJ'
more Patriot. * In the fight, soveral
of glass were broken. Mr. Broadflelde f
sired to separate the parties,but awapr& -
vented by 'Mr'. Payne.' It a
the affair grew out of a report
paper relative-to the proceedingsbetes
Messrs. Weller and-Stewart last-week.
The weather to-day is at least twenty
degrees colder. We 'shallIpresume,
have to pay with interest for the iecint
mild temperature.
At the -Assemibly Roomns last evenin
after the dancing, some of the ge,,dq1ue
got up a fight, and amused hese bj" $i
throwing decanters at each othrr/is 3j
Among tbose mentioned as likelyto fr
ceive the nomination of seiremtryioit
Navy, is R. M. Saunders. one of the -
Democratic members from N. -Carolis.a
-January27.
In the House this morning, Mr. Caves
Johnson desired to introduce .hisproposed
amendment to the rules, so that none but
the Reporters of the Washington City pa
pers shall have desks on the floor. It not;
being in order. bowever,.at present, the
matter lies over. Should thiefarieidmentr
prevail, the people will know but. very
little of thejeal movements of their Repre
sentatives. It is well known that the City
papers, depending as they do, on the pat
ronage of Congress, dare not in many ca
ses report the whole truth. Hence. it falls;
to the lot of the reporters for .distant news
papers to supply the omission, and to givoe
the political doings, etc. behind theseenes.
There can he no excuse for wilful misrep
sentation. but I am persuaded that far
greater order is now obserhed, than therd :,
would be were -this wholesome. but hated'"
restraint removed. -
Mr. Black made an unsuccessfu? '..
to suspend the rules., for the purpose'
introducing a resolution, providing for they.
appointment of a Committee to consider -
the expediency of appointing a corps -of
sworn reporters far the service of the
House; and reportes to report verbatim:
This would never answer, for the reports
would be so volumnious that no ten a
pers could contain them. And if this diffi
culty were, removed, who could be found
to read such a mass of uninteresting. mat
ter. The people care nothing about the
dry details of Congress. They desire to
have the principal points of the speeches,
with the. line of argument. Al Fbeyond
this is seldom read. - M d
Mr. Wise from the Select Committee on
the Rules made a minority report.. Among.-.',
other matters, it provides for the retention
ofithe 21st Rule. '
Several executive communications in
answer to resolutions, were received.
Among them was one from the President
giving the atest information relative to'the
remainin indians in Florida.
In hiuidespatchof N ov. 1843, General
Worth states: "As yet few have manifest
ed a disposition to emigrate, and the time
has not yet arrived to effect their removal
by coercive measures, as they are some- -
what shy and distrustful of the it bites.
All have visited Tampa except a few of
the very aged. but in parties of 10 to 13
only. These apprehensions under' the
policy pursued will soon wear away, when
if considered desirable, advantage may-be'
taken of a favorable occasion to send -off
the whole. Precipitancy will occasion
much and vexatious difficulty. Since the
pacification of A"ug. 14, 1842, these people
have observed perfect good "faith, and
strictly fulfilled their engagements. Not
an inistance of unkindness towards 'the
whites has yet occurred."
The remainder of the day was spent in
Commrittee of the Whole on private hills, .
It is said that Mr. Shriver of the Balti-.
more Patriot, who had the fight with Mr.
Weller on Thursday, has demanded' sat
isfaction. The bearer of the challenge
was a highly' distinguished ex-member of
Congress from Maryland. It appears
however that Mr. Weller has declined to
accept it. Mr. Shriver is of one of th6
frst families in Maryland, and was re
cently a candidate for the Senate of that
State.
From the Charkston Mercury, Feb. 3.
We had no letter from Washington yes
terday, hut the proceedings of the House
on Saturday ,vere without interest. The
Senate was not in session. Tie Mails
will lbe due from Washington to-day.
The Madisonian of Saturday defineas-s
position on the Presidency.. It is opposed
to Van Buren on various grounds-one of
which is the uniform hostility of the grea
ter portion of Mr. Van B's. friends to Mr.
Tyler during his term of office-and an.
other is the Caucus system of nomination
adhered to in Mr. Van Bnren's favor, by
which as the Madisonian argues, candi
dates are forced upon the people, instead
of being selected by them. But that pa
per also declares utter and irreconsible ho.
tility to Mr. Clay and his measures, and
ends by saying its position is one of armed
nentrality between the parties.
In the same number we find a corres
pondenco that ha. interested us, between
Mr. Saunders of the House, and Mr. Hen
shaw, late Secretary of the Navy.. The
latter reviews the various petty slanders
that have been put in circulaniom against -
his character as an honest man, and which
have even been set up as the pretexts of
his rejection by the Senate. Mr. Hlenshaw
shows in a very simple and very conchs
sive way that these imputations WOES
slanders, nd very silly and .poorly .o -.
trived ones. We trust there-is to. mueh
dignity in the Senate to keep the veil ever'
their proceedinigs in this case. Mr. Hen
shaw has been considered ao able, faithfdi
and efficient administratOr of the .Navy
Departmentwe have ever considered
him, amid have no doubt that the -country
has suffered a loss by his rejection.s This
general belief is that he was rejseeie
-cause he was neither a7Clay man nor a
Van Buren mao. But whatever the rea
sons, wve presume the Senate will not
'shrink from avowing them.
Important -Law Suit.-A Washingtoin
letter says-"Two of the most important
law suits ever brought so issue in this cono.
try, are now being tried before the Sm
preme Court. That of Mrs. Gainsaiaths
fistean the cender. and Involves the

xml | txt