The spirit of democracy. [volume], July 12, 1844, Image 1

About The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994

Image provided by: Ohio History Connection, Columbus, OH

                
PRINCIPLES AND MEASURES, AND MEN THAT WILL (TARRY THOSE PRINCIPLES AND MEASURES WTO EFFECT.
V.,. - , - , ' --:v '';
at.
BY JAMES R. MOfiRIS
WOODSFIRLD,' OHIO, FRIDAY, JULY 12, 1844.
VOLUME I. NUMBER 20.
THE SPIRIT OFDEMOCRACY
IS PUBLISHED EVERY FRIDAY MORNING,
'(';, DY J. It. MORRIS.
1 TERMS: $1,60 per annum in advance; $2,00
if paid within six months; $2,50 if paid within the
year, and $3,00 if payment be delayed until after
the expiration of the year.
' (XNo paper will be discontinued, except at the
option of the editor, until all arrears are paid.
09-AII communications sent by mail must be
post-paid. ''
Advertisements inserted at the usual rates.
POETItY.
"WHAT WILL THE DEMOCRATS DO?"
CryofFedi
What will they do? They will rally to save !
Their land from the foe from mountain and glen
In strength they will come, true-hearted and brave.
Man binds not the wind, controls not the wave,
And thinks he to conquer firm patriots when
Contending for rights, they determine to be,
Though tyrants should threaten unshackled and
free? :
' .-
What will they do? What they ever have done!
Unceasingly toil for freedom and truth,
Ntr shrink from the conflict, till victory won
They see the work ended, so nobly begun.
The wisdom of age, the vigor of youth,
Will unite in the effort bless'd may it be,
That no cloud may darken the home of the free.
What will they do? They will steadfast remain,
With principles pure, with purposes high,
The laws of their country will firmly sustain,
Love for Liberty's cause will fondly tetain j
To her aid they will hasten when danger is nigh.
This, this! will they do, who determine to be
Whatever opposes unshackled and free !
,1.! , ': , SPEECH ,
OF MR. M'DOWELL, OF OHIO,
; ON THE TARIFF.
Delivered in the House of Representatives, May
, 8, 1844.
Concluded
I have now, Mr. Chairman, answered, as I
think, the assumptions of gentlemen on the other
side, an show, conclusively, that it was not the
repeal oi the tariff act of 1828, nor the enactment
of the compromise law of 1833, that produced the
prostration of all the business interests of the coun
try; and that the act of 1842 had no agency what
ever in the general revival of business, and the
present progressive prosperity of the country; but,
on the contrary, that the act of 1823 contributed
more directly than all other causes, to the paralysis
which for the last few years weighed down the
mighty energies of the American people, and kept
them prostrate in the dust. I have shown also, sir,
that it is to the increased exports of the producer
of the eounry, pending the operation of the com
promise act, that we are indebted for the vast in
crease of specie which alone saved us from im
pending and irretrievable bankruptcy, and impart
ed vitality and vigor to all the great interests of
the country. .
But, sir, there is another assumption of the friends
of a high protective tariff, equally as preposterous
as those I have noticed, as I shall be able most
clearly to establish; it is, that high dutiet make
low prices. This position, I find, is adopted in the
report of the Committee on Manufactures, made
by the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts,
Mr. Hudson. In that report the committee as
sume, first, that foreign manufacturers can obtain
their capital for about two-tliiids, and their labor
for about one-third or one-fourth, less than the
manufacturers in the United States; and thus the
idea of anything like a fair competition, under these
circumstances, is altogether out of the question
Now, after admitting this important fact, and claim
ing that the manufacturer here ought to be protect
ed by duties upon articles of foreign production, to
enable .him to compete with the foreign manufac
turer, he then turns round and asserts that the tax
thus laid upon imported goods does not increase
their cost, but rather tends to diminish it. This
awumption ho attempts to prove: in the report by a
most singular process of reasoning namely, that
the importer will be able to buy of the English or
French manufacturer, the same description ofar
tides thatbebeforepurchased.atjustsuchareduc
tion of the prime cost as will counteiact the duty
imposed by the tarifl here; or,io other words, that
the foreign manufacturer and importer will, be
tween them, sell the goods imported at just the
. amount of the duty imposed less than their previ
ous charges, and thus prevent, by the competition
for a market, any advance at least upon the prices
paid in the absence of a tariffof protection.'! Now,
ir. if I comprehend the gentleman's positions they
are absolutely antagonistic to each other; and if
either be hue, the other must be false; for, if a duty
of 50 percent be necessary to protect the cloth
maker in this country against the foreign competi
tor, how can the 60 per cent, operate as a protec
tion to the former, if the latter sells to tne importer
at lust the amount of duty under the former prices?
Certainly, under such state of things, the tariffof
protection would be no protection, because tne tor
eign cloth would still raonopolyze the home mar
ket On the other hand, if the duty imposed effects
ths object of protection, the price of the foreign
cloth must unavoidably be increased 50 per cent,
T where that is the extent of the imposition, which
would enable the home manufacturer to sell at the
same price. In further illustration of the case, I
will give an example or two that, cannot be misun
' derstood or controverted. 1 will suppose (a truth
"if my information be correct) that, under a tariff-of
26 per cent , Swedish bar-Iron could be brought
to this country and sold at 2 cents per pound, which
bur manufacturer of iron tf the same quality and
kind, could not afford to sell at less, if you please,
than at 4 cents per pound. Finding that he cannot
compete with the foreigner, he appeals to Congress
to protect him sgainst the Swedish, importer, in a
duty of 100 per cent., which will compel him to
sell his importations at 4 cents also, or drive him
from the market; and Congress levies the desired
imposition. Now, sir, does not this duty of 100
per cent., thus imposed, protector enable the do
mestic manufacturer to sell his iron at the old price
of 4 cents, by raising the cost of the imported ar
ticle to that standard. If not, what has the domes
tic manufacturer gained by the 100 per cent tariff
of "protection?" Just nothing. He is in the same
predicament as before, which would certainly tend
to establish the declaration of Mr.Clay that "Mere
is no necessity of protection for protection."
But, Mr. Chairman, this is not the state of the
case. Would our manufacturers exhibit so much
anxiety, and be so lavish of their exertions and
their money, in obtaining the ascendency of the
protective party, and through them a protective tar
iff, if it resulted as the gentleman has assumed?
No, sir; far from it. The legitimate effect of the
duty of 100 per cent is, as every man of common
observation must know, the very reverse of the
operation of the tax as laid down in the gentleman's
argument.
The Swedish iron could not be sold without a
sacrifice at less than 4 cents per pound, paying the
duty of 100 per cent So, too, with all other arti
cles. Good French boots could be imported here
under a revenue tariff, and sold at $2 per pair, just
such as our boot-maker sells at $3, in which case
a duty of 33 1-3 per cent, will compel the import
er to raise the price of the French boots to $3, in
order to meet the requisition of the tariff. The op
eration of the law is clear. Upon every pair of
boots purchased either of the French importer, or
the domestic manufacturer, the purchaser pays $1
advance upon the price paid in the absence of the
tariff of 33 1-3 per cent. ; because the tax levied by
the government upon the imported article, is ad
ded to its price, and this enables the home manu
facturer, who pays no duty, to sell bis article also
at an advance of $1, and realize a profit, to that ex
tent, over the profit of the importer, conceding the
prime cost in each case to be the same. Therefore
if, in the purchase of four pairs of boots, a farmer
pays at a country store $12 this year, for which the
year preceeding he only paid $8, in the absence of
a duty of 33 1-8 per ceut, it follows that, in the
transfer of this duty to him, he lays a tax of $4 to
protect the home manufacturer upon four pairs of
common boots. The tariffof 1842, passed by a
whig Congress, laid a duty of $1,25 per pair upon
coarse imported boots, which has raised their price
to that extent upon the price at which they would
be sold were no duty levied upon them. The con
sumer pays this additional charge in every instance;
for the tariff follows all the transfers upon the goods
upon which it is laid, until they fall into the hands
of the consumer, out of whose pocket the revenues
of the government, and the duties of "protection
for protection," are all derived. If such be the
fact, (and it must be, or the doctrine of protection
is all a farce,) I have, by these two simple state
ments, demolished the paradox that "high duties
make low prices."
But, Mr. Chairman, lest the arguments of gen
tlemen might not be so convincing- as they could
desire, some of them have dropped alt argument,
and attempted to drive us into the support of their
theory by designating the friends of a judicious rev
enue tariff as the British party in Congress; and
they have appealed to the people to stand up for
their own countrymen and protect them against
the pauper labor of Great Britain. Yes,sir, strango
as it may seem, though not strange considering the
quarter whence it emanates, the very party who
have been, by means the most invidious and anti
American, trying to fasten upon the people of this
country the whole British system of banks, manu
factures, privileged orders, corporations, monopo
lies, taxation, and pauperism, with all its deplora
ble concomitants; and who take the British side of
all questions that arise between that country and
ours, and who seek notwithstanding, through a
portion of Its members, to divest all foreigners seek
ing the asylum of our shores of the right of citizen
ship; strange as it may seem, such a party talk to
us and denounce us as the British party profess
ing themselves to be the exclusive friends of home
industry,, and the only guardians ol the constitution
and the rights and liberties of the people . May the
wisdom of the people save the country from the
tender mercies of such brazen-faced hypocricy.
Sir, who are the importers that we are called upon
to throttle and drive out of the country by taxation
orhigh prohibitive duties for protection? They
are, from une half to two-thirds of them, American
citizens, employed in the business of carrying off
the vast surplus produce of the country, and sel
ling or bartering it to other nations, and bringing
back in exchange the products and manufactures of
those nations. They are the commercial class of
the United States a class next to the agricultural
in its contributions to the wealth, the power, and
glory of their country. They are branded as Brit
ish importers by the manufacturing monopolist and
his advocates in this House. ' The law of 1842,
was designed to drive this commerce of interna
tional exchanges from the ocean; and thus not only
Inflict suspension of their business upon the seas,
but an injury upon the whole agricultural commu
nity who are dependent for the sales of their sur
plus productions upon the owners of ships that bear
them to a foreign market That I may be under
stood in this position, I will put a case for illustra
tion, by supposing that the county of Ross, in the
State of Ohio, has a surplus of flour per year oi
100,000 barrels; and that A, "a trader, has been in
the habit of buying it annually and shipping' it to
England or France, taking, in exchange, or invest
ing the money received, in the manufactured ai ti
des of these countries, at a rate that would enable
him to sell them in the United States at an advance
of 50 per cent, "without transcending the prices of
our own manufactures of like description. 1 We
will suppose that the law obliges him to pay 25 per
cent, from his profits to the custom house for the
support of government He does so, and still re
tains profit of 25 per cent, which enables him
again to buy of the farmers of Ross their surplus of
100,000 barrels of flour. He ships it off as usual;
but, in his absence, the domestic manufacturer
complains to Congiess that he will be broken down
if there is not a further duty of 25 per cent laid on
the goods imported by the trader. The prayer of
the petitioner as granted, and the duty is increased
to fifty per cent A returns with his merchandise,
expecting to pay the usual duty of 25 per cent;
but, much to his astonishment, the .custom-house
officer informs him that the imposition "for the
sake of protection" has been raised from 25 to 50
per cent A sells out as usual at a gross profit of
50 per cent which is just sufficient to meet the
custom-house extortion, divesting him entirely of
his profits. Will A be found again purchasing the
surplus flour of the farmers of Ross for that season,
or any other season, while the protective imposi
tion of 50 percent is drawn upon the foreign goods
he receives in exchange for his produce? The
present tariff is thus operating; and yet the advo
cates of a high protective system are attempting to
make the tarmer believe that his interests are ad
vanced by the law. I have shown how the tariff
of 1828 operated upon the domestic exports, anil
how suddenly the exports expanded upon its repeal;
and I now submit to you, Mr. Chairman, to this
House, and to the people, a table of exports since
the passage of the present law, to show that it has
already vastly reducedthe exports of the agricul
tural staples of the country. The law took effect
in September, 1842, and from that day to Septem
ber, 1843, we have the first fiscal year of its opera
tion. The report of the Secretary of the Treasury
for this period gives the amount of domestic exports
at $90,494,485, and for 1841, at $106,382,722; and
for 1842, at $92,969,998; thus exhibiting a falling
offin asinglo year, under the tariffof 1842, as
compared with the exports under the revenue tar
iff of 1841, of about $16,000,000; and as compared
with 1812, of two and a half millions of dollars; and
this, too, chiefly upon the agricultural staples, ex
elusive of cotton, rice and tobacco. The imports
and exports from the 30th September, 1843, up to
February, 1844, are, imports about forty-five mil.
lions exports twenty-eight millions. With these
facts from the official data looking us in the face,
are we to be told that this law in its operation is
giving prosperity to the farmer or to the shipping
interest Or shall we sacrifice the shippine inter
est, in which there are nearly as many persons en
gaged (including ship carpenters and their families)
as there are in the manufactories of the country,
and the whole agricultural class into the bargain,
to the rapacity of the manufacturing interest? Sir,
I am not the enemy of the manufacturing interest.
If the incidental protection afforded it be restrained
within fair and equitable limitations, I will be in fa
vor of it lam willing they should have all the
advantages a revenue tariff can afford them, be ths
amount ofprotection what it may; and lam sure,
sir, that such a tariff incidentally, would abundantly
protect them. I say so from the highest authority
in the estimation of the opposition authority which
they will not dispute. I allude, sir, to Mr. Clay.
He expressly declares that a revenue tanffwill be
abundantly ample for the purpose ofprotection.
But, sir, when we are called upon to sacrifice all
the other industrial interests of the nation to one ex
clusive branch of industry, I must, as a friend of the
humble tiller of the soil, and of that class who "go
out upon the great sea," protest most solemnly
against it.
I have a few words to say now to the bootmaker
the hatter and the tailor, who are appealed to by
the manufacturing intA-ests to unite in their cru
sade against the farmer and trader. They are told
that, if foreign boots and shoes, ready made cloth
ing, and hats, are not exorbitantly taxed, they will
drive the home manufacturer of these articles to
same other business, or to unavoidable starvation.
I desire them to examine the reports of the Secre
tary of the Treasury to ascertain the amount of
the importations of boots, hats, and clothing, ante
cedent to the passage of the present law of home
protection, as it is termed. By such examination
it will be discovered that the aggregate imports
were of boots aud shoes .
In 1839, , $101,000
Exports the same year, 173,000
Hats, leather, wool, and fur, imported
In 1839, ...'.'$ 15,000
Exports the same year, 123,000
1840
Boots, shoes, and slippers imported, $ 70,000
" " " exported, 214,000
Hats, leather, wool, and fur imported, . 7,000
exported, 103,000
1841 '
Boots, shoes, &c. imported, $17,166
" " " exported, 100,725
The number of boot and shoe makers in the U.
States is estimated, (but I cannot vouch for its
correctness) at 180,000. Now, sir, the average
imports of each of the years 1839, '40, '41, is about
$77,000, coming into competition with the labor
of 180,000 domestic boot and shoe makers; or a
foreign competition averaging to each domestic
manufacturer about 45 cents per annum all told.
Or, in other words, if do importations had been
made, but their amount equally divided among our
home manufacturers of the specified articles, each
man would have an addition to his yearly aggregate
derived from the making of boots and shoes, of the
enormous sum of 45 cents. Yet, sir, he is taught
to believe that the importer will ruin him without
a prohibitive duty of protection. The excess of
exports over the imports of these goods, however,
will dissipate the delusion. The same regulations
of trade will apply to the hatters. The competi
tion which they have to encounter is $13,000
worth of hats annually imported, which, divided
among the domestic manufactures, would scarcely
exceed the pro rata of 10 cents per man. v
: Let us now, Mr. Chairman, ascertain the amount
of competition against the tailors of the United
States. The report of the committee of ways and
means shows that titer was imported in 1840, '41,
'42, about $28,000 of ready made clothing, paying
d. valorem and specific duties; giving for each
year an average of some $9,000. There are in the
country (as I have seen stated) about 100,000 tail
ors; the average competition, therefore, would be
to each man a sum not exceeding the trifle of 10
cents per annum; or, in other words, a tariff of
absolute prohibition against foreign clothing would
give to the domestic makers 10 cents more per
annum to each man than they have received under
the late and existing laws. And notwithstanding
the American tailor is called upon to defend the
cause of home protection against foreign competi
tion, or else be driven from his shop board.
But there is one more fact, Mr. Chairman, which
I desire to give the committee from this report.
It is this: that under the operation of the first three
fourths of the present year, there was imported
into the country $175,000 worth of ready made
clothing; nearly twenty times the annual amount
imported during the periods mentioned under the
revenue tariff of the preceding years; and yet it
is claimed that the present is a tariff of home pro
tection! But, sir, let me ask of gentlemen how the boot
and shoe maker, tailor, and batter, are benefitted
by a law which gives them but 33 1-3 to 50 per
cent, protection, when at the same time, it places
a similar imposition upon all other manufactured
articles which they have to buy ? The tailor pays
on his boots, hat, and clothing; and the ciulhing
of his family; and upon his salt, sugar, pepper,
spice, fish, &c., a far greater tax than is levied to
protect him. So, also, with the hatter, and boot
and shoe maker They all pay, more or less in the
protective tax upon their articles of family con
sumption, many times the amount of protection
secured to them. I admit, sir, that if each man
could, by law, be equally protected, neither would
lose at the end of the year, nor could either be
gainer; but such cannot be the operation of an
insidious protective tariff. The protected classes
will get along pretty Bmoothly, but the unprotect
ed will feel the disadvantages of the burden im
posed. The farmer you cannot protect, because
there can be no competition to his business from
abroad. The law, therefore chains him down, and
tells the protected classes to fleece him at their
discretion. Yet, sir, the farmer, too, is exhorted
to go for protection.
I shall now pass on, sir, to some other positions
assumed by the advocates of an exoibitant tariff of
protection. Gentlemen in this discussion have
said that the fathers of the constitution were pro.
tectionists, and refer to the revenue law of 1790 to
establish this declaration, quoting from the prcam-
ble of that law as their assumed evidence in the
case. The word "protection" is found in that
preamble, I admit; but does the preamble fix the
impositions upon foreign goods specified in the
law? The law itself, sir, is the true test; and by
reference to the act of 1790, you will discover
that the average duties upon imports were about 7
per cent Descending fynm this period to 1815,
the tariff laws averaged but an ad valorem scale of
duties of 15 per cent. Sir, it is ridiculous for gen
tlemen to charge that we are disciples of free trade
who advocate a revenue tariff of 25 or 33 1-3 per
cent, upon imports, while the fathers of the gov
ernment, who levied a tariff of from 7 to 15 per
cent are claimed as having been the advocates of
the federal doctrine of protection. I leave them
to reconcile as they can the contradictory positions
which they occupy in the attempt made by them
to mislead the public mind, and impose doctrines
on the country as emanating from the fathers of
the constitution that never were originated or sane
jioned by them.
Sir, the end and object of this high protective
policy should arouse the agricultural interests of
the country to a just sense of the ultimate burdens
that will rest upou it; for the prohibitory character
of the policy is as certainly tending to direct tax
ation as that it exists. Can- any one doubt the
truth of this position, with the arguments of the
advocates of protection before them ? Do they not
assume that (he manufacturers of this country must
be protected by law against the competition of
other countries? And how is this competition to
be ore vented but by destroying it. Is it not insist
ed that such protection will, in a short time, enable
our own manufacturers to furnish all we need, and
at prices as low as any other country? What
source of revenue, I ask, then, will be left to sup
ply the wants of the government, after the impor
tations of all foreign goods are at an end? But one,
sir; and that the landed interest of the country..
The farmers will not only have the State govern
ments to support, but the general government,
with its immense expenditures. Think you, sir,
that the interest which has been begging the gov
ernment for half a century for indirect bounties to
support it, will agree to contribute a cent for its
support? No; the cry of oppression will be raised,
and appeals to the sympathies and patriotism of the
country to save them from destruction; and as now
they will be heard, and the burden rolled over
upon the farming class of the country as it ever
has been. There is no ear to hear their remon
strance, no eye to pity them; they ate to be the
beasts of burden, from whose labor all the depart
ments of the machinery of civil government are
to be sustained, and the manufacturers into the
bargain. Sir, nearly all the revenue collected and
consumed by the government is drawn from the
pockets of the farmer by the indirect operation of
the tariff, and the manufacturing class, if their
prohibitive system is carried out, will change this
indirect ttax of eighteen millions of dollars, to a
direct tax of the like amount ' And if we submit
much longer to their dictation, the chains of a
manufacturing despotism will be fastened upon us,
and the interests of all the other classes sacrificed
to its unhallowed cupidity. Sir, as I remarked
before, I do not wish to be regarded as the enemy
of this important branch of national industry and
enterprise, whilst it is kept within its proper sphere;
but when its gigantic strides to power and exclu.
sivenes. already threaten to annihilate (as it now
paralyzes) the agricultural and commercial inte
rests of the country, it is time to prescribe bounds
to its encroachments, and expose its policy to the
people. The history of the manufacturing intSj
rests in other countries is one of rapine and pau
perism; and though it may never be potent enough
here to victimize all the other interests of the
country, yet its virus, struck deep as it is into our
system, will impair more and more its healthy
action, retard the developement of its resources,
and finally reduce it to impotency.and ruin. Sir,
such monopolies as the present law is designed to
foster, at the expense and almost sacrifice of all
other interests, are but the disguised competitors
for power with the government itself, and their
influence the cancer that is eating out the vitals of
the constitution. And if we contribute much
longer, by such laws as the present, to give a pre
cocious maturity to them, they may well claim to
be the government, and proclaim that the consti
tution is but a bundle of abstractions; unworthy of
the present age, and unfit for the government of
the people. There is but one hope of escape from
such a catastrophe; and it is in the firmness, hones-
ty, and patriotism of the farmers and mechanics of
the cduntry. Their united voice can avert the
usurpation, and their brawny arm protect the con
stitution from the ravages of such an enemy. But
if they should much longer slumber upon the
outposts of the constitution, the citadel of liberty
will be in the possession of a worse than Gothic
foe, who will prostrate its noble pillars, strike down
the eagle of liberty, and in their places erect the
throne of the despot, and the whelp of the British
lion. Already the links of the cold chain of ava
rice are entwined around the hearts of a portion
of our people, and deadened their sensibilities, I
fear, to the calls and influences of patriotism; and
nothing can arouse them but a true sense of the
condition of the country, to an effort to reinstate
the constitution, to impart once more its life-giving
principles to the great interests of the country.
JVownow is the time for the effort; and he who
suffers the present occasion to pass unimproved
will live to condemn his error, and weep over the
lost liberties of his country.
THE FARMER OF ASHLAND.
THAT COULD NOT MAKE BOTH ENDS MEET
AT $12 A DAT !
In 1816, an act was passed by Congress, chang
ing the compensation of the members from six dot
lars per day, to $1500 the session, which, as the
sessions then scarcely averaged one hundred day:
each, was upwards of fifteen dollars per day. Mr.
Clay warmly advocated the passage of this law,
coming from the Speaker's chair to make a speech
in its favor. It is to be observed that his wages as
Speaker, were then twelve dollars per day.
sketch of his remarks was published in the Lexing.
ton Reporter of May 31st, 1816, a paper which
has always been warmly devoted to bis interests
from which we extract the following notable sen
tence :
"Mr. Clay said his own personal experience do-
termined him in voting: for the bill. He had at
tended Congress, some times without his family,
and others with a part of it, and although his com
pensationwhilst he had enjoyed the honor of pre
siding in this house, WAS DOUBLE OF OTH
ER MEMBERS, he declared with the utmost sin
cerity, THAT HE HAD NEVER BEEN ABLE
TO MAKE BOTH ENDS MEET AT THE
TERMINATION OF CONGRESS."
Think of that ! ye hard-fisted farmers and mechan
ics! This is the farmer of Ashland, the Mill-boy
ofthe Slashes! Could'nt make both ends meet
at TWELVE DOLLARS A DAY I Just think
what kiud of a farm it would take to keep him go
ing with champagne and cologne water in the day
time, and hig h-low-Jack, at night! It was just
about the time he made this speech, that Mr. Clay
discovered the constitutionality and great necessi
ty of a National Bank. JVew England Democrat.
A PERFECT HURRICANE!
It is imposiblefor us to give full accounts of, or
even to notice, all the democratic meetings which
are being held all over the Union, in response to
the nomination of Polk and Dallas. There has
been nothing like it since the election of "Old
Hickory." The name of " YOUNG HICKORY,"
has aroused the slumbering energies of the dem
ocracy, and every where the people lire rushing, as
if upon the wings of the wind, to utter their joy and
pledge their best exertions to promote the success
of the democratic party. The fire of enthusiasm
burns brighter and brighter it spreads wider and
wider It rushes like lightning along the plains,
through the vallies and over the mountains, and
we reckon whig federalism and bard cider coonism,
will either be blowed away, burnt up or sent up
sort rieer.JVew England Democrat.
Piety and Profanity A fair average
The Hartford Tiroes states that an ardent Whig,
who has been particularly active in extolling the
very excellent and pure character of Mr. Freling-
huysen.the Whig candidate for the Vice Presiden
cy, was a few days since, particularly officious in
trying to impress upon a very honest and conscien
tious Democrat the exemplary worth of the Whig
candidate for the Free-Presidency. The Demo
crat inquired how it was with Mr. Clay, but the
Whig said he was speaking of the Vice President,
whose character was most exemplary and pure
that there were few such men in the country. The
Democrat inquired, if the character of Mr. F. was
so good, how it would be if the character of the
two were averaged. The Whig thought they
would be about a fair average. He claimed no
more. But the Democrat would not admit that
good as might be Mi. Frelinghuysen's character,
it could hardly atone for the duelling, bullying, de
based and profligate career of Henry Clay.
An invalid sent for a physician, the late Dr. Well-
man, and after detaining him tor some time with a
description of his pains, aches, fcc., he thus sum
med up: "Now, Doctor, you have humbugged
me long enough .with your good-for-nothing
pills and worthless syrups; they don't touch the
real difficulty. I wish you to stiike at the cause of
my ailments, if it is in your power to reach it."
"It shall be done," said the doctor; at the same
time lifting bis cane he demolished a decanter of gin
that stood upon the side board Organ
CIRCULAR. -
TO THE PEOPLE OF MONROE COUNTY.
Fellow Citizens: .
Ours is emphatically a government of the peo
ple. All power is inherent in them, and all power
n every department is immediately exercised oy
their agents and representatives. Communication,
therefore, must and will take place between th
candidate and the elector, the representative and
constituent Discussion is favorable to light and
knowledge; the widest range of discussiou there
jore on public subjects is the best, and, in the
opinion of many citizens, it is better that this dis
cussion should be open and avowed than private
or concealed.
It would be gratifying to the subscriber to visit
you personally, to take you by the hand and coo-
verse with yon about those important matter
which immediately concern our common interest
and welfare as citizens of the state and county.
But this is utterly impossible. In our happy coun
try the numbers of the people are so great, that to
converse personally with every man, in one of our
populous counties, would be the work of years.
But as before observed, communication between
the candidate and the elector will take place, and a
wide discussion and consideration of public affairs
ought to take place. I adopt the medium of the
printing press as a means of abridging labor. In
doing so, I am no doubt impelled in part by that
disposition so natural to a man who has been dep
utied by his neighbors to perform difficult and la
borious duties on their behalf, to render them an
account of his stewardship. Impressed as I am
with a feeling of gratitude and good will to the
citizens of this county, for many tokens of their
confidence and regard bestowed upon me in times
past, it could not be supposed for a moment, that
1 could be indifferent to their approbation ordissp
probation; more especially as in the present state
of affairs, the sweetest and the chief reward, which
a diligent and faithful representative can receive,
is the approval of bis fellow citizens and the answer
of a good conscience.
The kind attention of the reader is therefor
bespoken for the following remarks, they shall
be as much condensed as possible.
The last session of the General Assembly was
characterized by a very considerable degree of
excitement and party hostility. The debates were
often warm and even acrimonious. The subscriber
constituted one of a political minority, and was
therefore prevented from doing many things which
he would gladly have done. Two great subject
became prominent in the debates and discussion
of the Assembly. One of these was
THE BANKING SYSTEM.
No less than seven sets of bank incorrjortio
passed the House of Representatives, to wttt
To incorporate the Franklin Bank of Columbus,
the Bank of Ohio, the Bank of Chilicothe, the
Bank of M'Connelsville, the Bank of the Valley,
at Lancaster, the Bank of Steubenville, and the
bill to"authorize the business of banking in Ohio.
These were introduced, defended and passed by the
majority power in the House. They were compu
ted to incorporate capital to the amount of teariy
sixteen millions of dollars, a far greater amount in
the opinion of the subscriber than the necessities
or laws of trade demanded and far greater than
could find legitimate business or employment in
our State. An attempt was made to render these
bills accepabtle by infusing into them some good
and wholesome provisions such as the democracy
have uniformly contended for, but they wer
strongly tinctured with the old irresponsible and
objectionable joint-stock principle, and did not
contain those guards and restrictions for the safety
of the bill-bolder, which disagreeable experience
has taught us to regard as indispensable. In one
word they were intended to be'banks upon the old 1
unsafe and unsound principles with some modifi
cations and improvements. The last named act
contained the additional objectionable principler
that it was calculated to occasion gambling in Ohio
State stocks, and to give an unjust monopoly tof
those who might happen to be holders at the com.
mencment oi the banking operations. It provided
that the holders of our canal debt might deposite
their certificates in the State treasury, put in 80
per cent, in specie as a banking fund, proceed tor
business, issue one hundred dollars in paper- for
each thirty in specie paid in enjoy all the profits
of their banking speculation, and at the same time
draw the interest on their stock semi-annually from
the State treasury! It is evident that this small
fund of 80 per cent was the only real security
provided for the bill bolder; stocks are not ready
money, to produce money they must be sold in the
market, and a sudden alarm and run upon the bank
would lorce vast quantities into the market at once,
reduce the price almost to nothing, turn the secu
rity of the bill-holder into thin air, and spread
feast of fat things for the stock gambler and specu
lator. For these and many other reason I con
ceived that the only relation which your represen
tative could sustain to these bills was that of psjre
and unmixed hostility. They received no coaa
tenance, therefore, from me by rote or word er
action. I also felt constrained in point of duty to
vote against the proposed continuation and exten
sion of some charters on the old unsafe principles.
The above mentioned bills failed in the Senate, so
hat no new bank was created during the session.
But though we could give no countenance to
these wild and visionary speculations in banking,
calculated to produce a fever-fit of unreal prosper
ity to be succeeded by a griping chill oi actual and
agonizing adversity, there were many circumstan
which rendered the currency matter of interest
ing consideration to the democratic members of
the Assembly. It is an old proverb that the go Idea
mean is best; extremes ere to be avoided. It i
notorious that the bank note circulation of our own
banks is now contracted within a very narrow
compass. Our paper currency consist almost
exclusively of notes issued by the banks ef other
States, which are not subject to our laws, ef whose
charters ire know but little, of whose mean of
I