£ 
 
 111 
 

 CELEBRATION 
 
 %h^\iim of tjjt (itaiistitution of tijc Mmith State. 
 
 t'' 
 
 LETTER OF WILLIAM CAEEY JONES, 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA, 
 
 To the Democratic Central Committee of Pemisi/Ivania. 
 J 
 
 Washington, Sept. loth, 1S56. 
 
 Gentlemen : — I have had the honor to receive 
 a request on your behalf, to attend a meeting of the 
 Democracy, and all friends of the Constitution, to 
 be held at Independence Square, in Philadelphia, 
 on the occasion of the anniversary of the adoption 
 of that charter of the Union and our liberties. 
 
 No invitation could have been more grateful to 
 me; for there is no occasion, and no place, in which 
 I should have so much satisfaction in raising my 
 voice before my fellow-countrymen, especially at 
 this crisis in the fate of that Union whose "more 
 perfect" formation, and that Constitution whose es- 
 tablishment you propose thus appropriately to 
 celebrate. 
 
 The day of the adoption of the Constitution ought 
 to be observed as one of our national holidays. 
 The Fourth of July brings annually a popular and 
 patriotic jubilant. The Twenty-second of Febru- 
 ary serves to refresh our recollections of the great 
 Washington, and his great associates. The addi- 
 tion of the Seventeenlh of September to those national 
 festivals, would give occasion for popular addresses 
 and writings on the character, principles and pur- 
 pose 5 of the Constitution, making it more familiar to 
 the public mind, hence more sacred to the public 
 heart. No occasion can be fitter than the present 
 to inau^nirate that holiday into our annual com- 
 memorations. 
 
 I cannot promise to be present, and shall not, 
 therefore, wish you to reserve mo a place, when 
 there are so many certain to be there, and glad to 
 
 address their fellow-countrymen on such an occa- 
 sion. Whatever I should have to say would be for 
 the Constitution and the Union : hence for that 
 great patriotic party which now alone represents, 
 if it may not indeed bo said to constitute the Union, 
 the party that alone of the political organizations 
 of the day pervades the whole Union, and in all the 
 States presents the same front, and oflFers to the na- 
 tional acceptance the same Constitutional doc- 
 trines. 
 
 To my apprehension, it is rather a 2ienersion of 
 the Constitution than a division of the Union, that 
 we are immediately threatened with. I have never 
 allowed myself to contemiJlate the possibility of a 
 division of the Union. I can no more imagine a 
 line of separation, than a line by which a human 
 body might be cleft and the parts survive. But 
 that the harmony of the Union may be broken up, 
 and hence its advantages be lost ; sectional discord 
 and hate, (already so violent in words,) be foment- 
 ed to the point of civil war ; the Constitution be 
 perverted by abuses and aggressions, and finally be 
 overthrown ; and that these dangers are imminent, 
 are facts that no reflecting person can shut from 
 his sight. 
 
 The point at which the Constitution is now 
 chiefly threatened, is in those provisions of it which 
 qualify the supremacy of mere numerical majorities 
 by the element of State representation in the Senate, 
 and in the election of the President : the features 
 which give it its distinctive characteristics, make 
 it a federative instead of a consolidated Union, and 
 
E^^^ 
 
 which are the only snfcg lards to the ijtates for re- 
 taining control over cveu their domestic legisla- 
 tion. There has been a tcudency to that radical 
 change in our Government for a long time, and 
 an evident disposition, on the part of many politi- 
 cians who are now marshaling the hetereogeuious 
 coalition that styles itself " Republican," to encour- j 
 age that tendency and hasten it. It has lately 
 been boldly and authoritatively avowed : and, in i 
 repeated instances in the recent sessione of Con- 
 gress, was attempted to be carried by a coup de 
 /•tree. One of these attempts would have succeeded 
 but for the decisive and prompt action of the Presi- 
 dent, in re-assembling Congress ; nay, would still 
 have succeeded, if the courage of the persons con- 
 cerned in it had been equal to their malice. 
 
 The avowal that I allude to, was by Mr. Wilson, 
 Senator of Massachusetts, at the nominating Con- 
 vention of his party, held at Philadelphia, on 
 the 17th of June last — of all places, Philadel- 
 phia, where the Union had its incipiency by the 
 first meeting of the First Congress of the United I 
 Colonies in 1774; where the Second Congress, of 
 immortal memory, was also held ; where AVashing- \ 
 ton was appointed and commissioned the Com- 
 mander-in-Chief of the Revolutionary forces ; where i 
 the Declaration of Independence was written, j 
 adopted, and announced to the world; where, after- ' 
 ward, on the .'iimo spot that it had its incipiency ' 
 in 1774, the Union was finally established in the 
 adoption of the Constitution ; of all places, the 
 place so replete of national rcmiuitcences, the 
 "City of Brotherly Love," not only in the sense 
 (hat it is usually applied, but that ought emphatic- 
 ally to be the City of Brotherly Love to the jitople | 
 of the United States ; of all places that City ; of 
 all days, and by a man of Massachusetts, the anni- 
 versary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, and of the 
 commissioning of the illustrious Virginian to take 
 charge of the armies then engaged iu the protection 
 crf Boston and Cambridge: time, place, person, oc- 
 casion, all chosen as if to give the greater empha- 
 fu to the avowal, and to cuter a defiance of all 
 patriotic associations, sympathies and tics. 
 
 Mr. Senator Wilson declared, on that occasion, 
 that the "freemen of the Xoitk haic a 'l.jkt lu 
 govern the conulry," and that they (the Convention) 
 had assembled " to tnkc the (jovcrnmcnt of the Ke- 
 jmbli,' ;" and the declaration was received by the 
 <"onvontion with " enthusiastic cheers." I cite the 
 words from the Xmiomil InttUi'jcu er, which "places 
 on record" the speech of Mr. Wilson, and other 
 prominent members of (ho Convention, iu order 
 that their readers, to use the words of those expe- 
 rienced and sagacious editors " may have a view 
 of the Ubuc» tendered, and the ohjertt urvirrd by 
 
 that body." 
 
 In pursuance of this declaration of Jlr. Wilson, 
 
 that Lin party wore assembled for the purpose of 
 
 ''Uxliiog poittsiiioii of (he (ivvtrumtni, " Ihc mem- 
 
 bers of that party in the House of Representati re- 
 proceeded to the attempt — 
 
 First, In its proceedings against certain members 
 of the House, on a suggestion that a personal en- 
 counter had taken place between Mr. Brooks and 
 Mr. Sumner, in which the former had committed au 
 assault and battery on the latter. 
 
 I do not .say any thing of the merits of that en- 
 counter, for I have nothing to do with them. I 
 regard the affair as purely personal as any other 
 affair of assault and battery. It was, moreover, 
 tried before the only tribunal that lawfully had 
 cognizance of it, the Criminal Court of the county 
 where it occurred, and the person who committed 
 the assault paid the penalty of the law. Now, to 
 make it a question of national concern, and bring 
 it in for the purpose of further inflaming the 
 public mind in a Presidential canvass, is to belittle 
 our politics, and eminently to detract from our 
 character as an intelligent peojile. 
 
 But the proceedings of the House of Representa- 
 tives, in the matter, are another affair. They arc, 
 above all, of public concern. They involve among 
 other things, an invasion of the rights of the con- 
 stituencies whom the members prosecuted represent- 
 ed; an invasion of the rights and liberties of those 
 members, both as such and as citizens; infractions 
 of the Constitution of the United States in several 
 particulars; an attempt of one branch of the legis- 
 lature to arrogate both the making and administra- 
 tion of law. 
 
 The procccdin js were under pretext of punishing 
 a "breach of privilege" of the Senate, because the 
 person assaulted was a Senator, and a "breach of 
 privilege" of the House, because the assaulter was a 
 member of the House. And the further pre- 
 texts, that senators and representatives cannot 
 be questioned outside of their respective Houses 
 for any speech or debate, and that the Senate 
 and Hoube may punish their members for 
 " disorderly behavior." The provisions of the 
 Constitution, under which alone cither House de- 
 rives any power, are j'lain. Fimt, it says nothing 
 about "breach of privilege ;" neither the words, 
 nor the idea are there ; Second, the provision that 
 for speech or debate in Congress, members shall 
 not be elsewhere questioned, only means that no 
 court or judicial tribunal shall take cognizance of 
 a complaint so founded. If the clause means any 
 thing beyond that, it cuts off all criticism by speech, 
 in public ai^semblies, or the press, of the debates in 
 the National Legislature, and so would nullify at 
 least three provisions of the bill of rights attached 
 to the Constitution. Third, the power to punish 
 for "disorderly behavior" is only intended to ena- 
 ble the Houses of Congress to protect themselves 
 in the exercise of their legislative functions, and 
 prevent interruptions and disturbances whilst so 
 engaged. Otherwise, they might institute an cs- 
 I'ionoge into all the utls of their respective mem- 
 
Ijers, and expel for wLatever improper eoiuluot ; in 
 which ease, I imagine the present Congress wouhl 
 long since have been obliged to dissolve for want 
 of a quorum. 
 
 As for the supposed " breach of privilege," there 
 is such a thing in a parliamentary sense, and in 
 that sense, the Constitution provides for it. In the 
 present case, the only breach of privilege commit- 
 ted was by Mr. Sumner, in his speech in the Se- 
 nate ; and there he ought to have been called to 
 order, and if he persisted, been "punished for dis- 
 orderly behaviour ;" a case that exemplifies what 
 that provision of the Constitution means. 
 
 Parliamentary law prescribes what that privi- 
 lege shall be, and how, in the body itself, an abuse 
 of it may be corrected and punished. Criminal 
 law, what shall be i'-.e penalty of resenting an 
 abuse of it in an extra legal manner. It follows 
 that Mr. Sumner was answerable to the Senate, and 
 ought to have been rebuked by the Senate, and on 
 the spot, for an abuse of the privilege of debate, 
 by disrespectful allusions to other Senators, and to 
 States of the Union ; and that Mr. Brooks was an- 
 swerable to the criminal law (the penalty of which 
 he suffered,) for taking redress into his own hands. 
 
 The proceeding in the House was an exercise of 
 judicial power, whereas, the Constitution declares 
 that all judicial power of the United States shall be 
 vested in the Courts thereof. 
 
 It was affixing a penalty not known to any law, 
 and hence ex post facto. 
 
 It was holding persons to answer for (what the 
 action of the House would make) an "infamous 
 crime," without a presentment by a grand jury; 
 and it was a criminal prosecution, in which the ac- 
 cused was not allowed "a speedy and public trial, by 
 an impartial jury;" and so an invasion of personal 
 rights declared by the Constitution. 
 
 The manner of getting up the indictment, and 
 carrying on the prosecution, was full of absurdities 
 and illegalities, and the result of it exhibited the 
 House in a ridiculous attitude. 
 
 Mr. Edmundson and Mr. Keitt were called 
 by the prosecutors as witnesses against Mr. Brooks, 
 without being informed that there was any accusa- 
 tion against themselves; and then, solely on their 
 own testimony, they were included in the indict- 
 ment — made their omi accusers, by means of testi- 
 mony got out of them in another case. This is a 
 slight of hand mode of getting up an accusation, 
 and procuring a conviction hardly worthy of the 
 jurisprudence of this day. 
 
 A curious feature in the case, was the character 
 of the offences charged on Mr. Edmunson and 
 Mr. Keitt. They were arraigned for not hetraying 
 the confidence of a friend ! A more curious feature? 
 that the indictment presents precisely the same state 
 of facts in regard to Mr. Edmunson and Mr. Keitt, 
 yet one was convicted by the House, the other ac- 
 quitted -! 
 
 Finally. The House rrented the ofTenoe. pre- 
 scribed the penalty, and defined the manner of the 
 prosecution and trial, all in direct violation of Con- 
 stitutional guarantees — thus at once usurping the 
 legislative power and invading the Constitution. — 
 Thej' acted in a judicial capacity — thus usurping 
 the functions of the Constitutional .Judiciary, and 
 again invading the Constitution; in both, invading 
 personal liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. 
 
 It is in this view that those proceedings in the 
 House of Representatives are arraigned, as one of 
 the attempts on the part of leaders of the "Repub- 
 lican" coalition to break down, by force of numbers, 
 the limitations of the Constittition, and concentrate 
 the powers of the government in factious majorities 
 of the House, and the power of the country in a 
 local, sectional majority, regardless of State rights; 
 in short, in the words of Mr. Senator Wilson, to 
 ''take possession of the government." 
 
 In this respect, those proceedings ought to be 
 analyzed, and held to the view of, not alone the 
 "free men of the North," thus unjustly charged 
 with desiring to usurp the government, but by the 
 freemen of the country, to whom alone belongs 
 the "right to govern the country," and to tliem only 
 in accordance with the Constitution. 
 
 The other attempts that I have alluded to, as 
 made at the late session of Congress, on the integ- 
 rity of the government and to pervert the Constitu- 
 tion, are those persistant propositions to attach to 
 the bills for the support of the government, matters 
 extraneous to the irarpose of the bills, and known 
 to be objectionable to the other branch of Con- 
 gress and to the executive. Those propositions 
 were wrong in themselves, and their unconstitu- 
 tionality as they were originally presented, was so 
 clearly shown, that their advocates were compelled, 
 in mere self-defence, to pass them through a series 
 of modifications ; but at last, and as finally insisted 
 on, they exhibited at least this unconstitutional 
 and aggressive feature, that they proposed to de- 
 prive the President of his constitutional function 
 as Commander-in-Chief of the Army. In other re- 
 spects also, they were objectionable, considered 
 even as naked propositions,offered for the free con- 
 sideration of Congress and the Executive. 
 
 But it is not a question touching the merits of 
 the propositions, that I suppose to be before the 
 country, but the manner in which they were at- 
 tempted to be forced on the acseptance of the Sen- 
 ate, and the approval of the President. 
 
 In this view, they were clearly a premeditated 
 attempt on the part of a sectional majority in the 
 House of Representatives, to seize the powers of 
 the State, and coerce the Senate and the President 
 into their support, under pain of a dissolution of 
 the government. 
 
 In this aspect it is they are serious. In this 
 aspect they are pursuant of Mr. Senator Wilson's 
 declaration of the intention of an exclusively sec- 
 
tional coalition, hy force of numbers, and regard- { in a sectional interest, and in a sectional majority 
 less of the rights and independence of the States, of the House of Representatives, the government 
 and of the limitations of the Constitution, to "lake \ of the Rcpuhlic; and what the consequences of that 
 possession of the Government." Had this attempt j revolution would be, do not need to be depicted, 
 succeeded in all the bills to which the propositions But, moreover, the essential idea, even now, on 
 were attached in the Uouse, it would have amount- | which the Opposition has coalesced, is that there is 
 ed to a dissolution of the Government, or a change j a natural and necessary antagonism between the 
 in its character, according as the Senate and people of those States which do, and of these which 
 
 the President had yielded to the coercion of the 
 House, or remained true to their constitutional 
 functions. In the Army bill the attempt was very 
 near succeeding; and the only reasons why it did 
 not succeed, are those stated above. Had it suc- 
 ceeded, it would have worked, to that extent, a dis- 
 solution of the Government, and aflorded a prece- 
 
 de not, admit of domestic slavery. Eead their res- 
 olutions, their addresses, their speeches, their let- 
 ters, their presses. The most moderate of them 
 enunciate distinctly that idea. It is their rallying 
 point — their war cry. Now, the proposition must 
 be false, or one of two things must happen. 
 If it bo not false, then the Union must cither be 
 
 dent to future factious and sectional majorities in | broken up, or it must be held together by force. If 
 the House, that must have led to the destruction of 
 our present form of government. 
 
 But, again, what is the essential idea of the 
 '•■Republican" coalition? Its leaders profess that 
 they do not contomplato or desire any interference 
 with any domestic afl'air of any of the States; and 
 many of them treat with contempt the idea that 
 they care anything for slaves or slavery, beyond 
 the use of the words to inflame the prejudices of 
 their constituencies in order to gain political power. 
 
 I think that many of them are actuated by that 
 motive — though, if there could be a worse one, I 
 have never heard it suggested — and that no im- 
 mediate aggressions, in that respect, on the Slave- 
 holding States, would follow the success of the 
 "Republican" coalition. But it has never been given 
 to persons who excite and use popular passion, pre- 
 judice and fanaticism, to control the fires that they 
 light; and thougii those leaders would now per- 
 .>-uade tho friends of the Constitution and the Union, 
 and have deluded many sincere persons into the idea 
 that nothing is intended against tho internal rights 
 of the St-ites, they know that the promise is falla- 
 cious, and that the present success of their 
 party would necessitate to those who would 
 keep at its head further and further concession, 
 and more and more stimulus to the passions 
 they aro now arousing. The " t.aking possession," 
 therefore, of the government, according to Mr. 
 Wilson's programme, by a sectional part}', dominated 
 
 the two parts are actually antagonistic, it is impos- 
 sible that they shall bo kept together but by coer- 
 cion. It is the belief of the Democratic party that 
 the proposition is false — totally false ; that there is 
 no necessary antagonism ; that, on the contrary, 
 there is a mutual interest, a mutual attraction, and 
 that all parts of the Union may remain harmoni- 
 ously together, to the mutual advantage of all 
 parts, by a mutual reaction of benefits. The con- 
 trary idea — the idea of antagonism — is the key to 
 Air. Wilson's declaration of the intention of his 
 party, to " take possession of the government." It 
 means, we will overcome the antagonism by subju- 
 gation. It means that, if it means anything. 
 
 ■Whilst preparing this letter, I have met with a 
 remarkable extract of an address of Mr. Speaker 
 Banks, lately made in Mass.achusetts. Says that 
 gentleman : "At no moment of my life, in no par- 
 oxj-sm of indignation, under no feeling of excite- 
 ment, have I ever uttered a word or cherished a 
 thought, except that of the highest veneration and 
 deepest love for tho union of these States. Long 
 may it continue as it is, unchanged ! Long may it 
 continue ! — so long as the stars of the firmament of 
 God above us shall bo the bright prototype of tho 
 stars of our glorious Union. But I have to say 
 what I know to be true, that in tio event of human 
 histori/ irill the Union of these States be dissolved. 
 
 "I can conceive o/ a time ichen this Constitvtiojt 
 shall not he in clstcnce, when we shall have an abso- 
 
 \)y secti()nal ideas, its ambition inflameil by the lute military dictatorial government, transmitted 
 possession of power, and with the belief that it j from age to age, with men at itd head who aro 
 was engaged in a iihilanthropic enterprise, could i made rulers by military commission, or who claim 
 not fail ultimately, (and Ijcfore long), to lead to en- I an hereditary right to govern thtVo over whom 
 croachments on tbo internal affairs of the States. I they are placed. But the dissolution of these States 
 ■Wo have not, then, a question of tho good faith or | will never come. \o j)arti/ that has rossEssiox of 
 good intentions of this or that candidate, or this or I *Ae I'nion will allow the minority to break the 
 
 that leader of tho Republicans, or of .nil combined; 
 but the tendency — tlio eonstqncnccs of tho ideas, 
 principles, desires and sentiments that have brought 
 about the ])rescnt formidable conibiniition of (in 
 other respect.-*) discordant elements. That tondcn- 
 
 bands." 
 
 Ah, Mr. Banks, Mr. Banks, arc not the thoughts 
 developed in thuso lines that I have emphasized, 
 fathcix'd by tho wish? You arc a man of too keen 
 a perception and too doiluctivo a mind, not to h.ave 
 
 cy is, to break up the federative principle of the followed to their con.«icfiuences the measures dis- 
 union, pervert the Constitution, and conccntrulc tinctive of your party at the late session of Con- 
 
gress, of which, by your superior talents, activity, 
 and decisive character among your associates, 
 you Avere the stay and support. At all events, you 
 now shadow forth those consequence. If you 
 have not foreseen, and do not desire them, be warned 
 by them, and by the boastful menace uttered by 
 the principal character in your late Convention at 
 Philadelphia, with the approbation of that assemb- 
 ly. You may be right, sir, that by geographical 
 necessities, by force of circumstances, or force of 
 arms, the Union may be preserved, though the 
 Constitution be lost. But youi- brilliant compari- 
 son will not then serve. 
 
 The constellation of our Union can only be pro- 
 totyped by the stars of the firmament, whilst the 
 orbs that compose it, like those of the Heavenly 
 constellations, move in their separate tracks, and 
 all harmoniously together. That figure can no 
 more charm our imaginations, or warm our hearts, 
 when the avowed purposes of others, and the appa- 
 rent pm-poses of yourself, shall have been accom- 
 plished, and, instead of a constellation, we see but 
 a single orb, and that with all fiery and bitter ele- 
 ments raging in its midst. You may be right, that 
 no party that shall "have possession of the Union " 
 will permit a division, a separation of it : and hence 
 that it cannot be divided. But I will tell you what 
 can happen to it, and what no party, no human 
 power can save it from, if you and those who are 
 with you succeed in sufiiciently combining the bale- 
 ful elements with which you work, inflaming the 
 passions of those who trust and honor you, and ex- 
 asperating their countrymen elsewhere. If the 
 Union cannot be divided — if it cannot be rent in 
 twain^ — these angry heats that you are raising, will 
 certainly explode it, burst it in fragments. Where, 
 then, will be your brilliant comparison of th e gems 
 on our flag, with the stars on high? The regions 
 of space will still offer you a similitude: those frag- 
 mentary bodies, that nightly present to the eye of 
 science the dark spectacle of ruined worlds. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Committee, there will be pre- 
 sent, no doubt, at your Constitutional Celebration, 
 many citizens of your neighboring States of New 
 Jersey and Delaware, and the more distant one of 
 Rhode Island. Those are gallant States. None 
 stand more conspicuous, or with more honor re- 
 flected on them, in the struggles foreign and inter- 
 nal, that so happily ended in the adoption of the 
 Constitution. They showed an unsurpassed mag- 
 nanimity of character, (and which they have ever 
 since maintained,) in perhaps the most trying hour 
 of all our history; that which preceeded the ratifi- 
 cation of the Articles of Confederation. The 
 question of the ownership of the great territo- 
 ries west of the then populated portions of 
 the States, and which, if won, were to be 
 won, as well as the independence of the 
 States themselves, in a common cause, threat- 
 ened to break up even the loose alliance that then 
 
 existed. In this emergency, ;hose States more in- 
 terested than any of the others could be in a prior 
 settlement of the question, with that trust which 
 consciousness of rectitude inspires, entered into the 
 Confederation unconditionally, and the articles 
 proposed by the general Congress were ratified. 
 Then the great domain of the West was voluntarily 
 ceded for the common cause, and so the Govern- 
 ment was enabled to sustain itself, and push to 
 triumph the war of the revolution . The first named 
 of these States (Delaware) was the first to adopt 
 the Constitution — namely, 7th December, 1787. 
 The second named (New Jersey) was only eleven 
 days after. Rhode Island was the last of the 
 THiRTEE>f that consented to merge any portion of 
 her sovereignty more than she had yielded in the 
 articles of confederation. 
 
 Will the citizens of those small States — New 
 Jersey, Delaware, Rhode Island, Connecticut- or 
 of any of them, consent to the scheme by which 
 their weightin the Federal Government, their equal- 
 ity with their more powerful neighbors in the Senate, 
 and their participation as States in the electorship 
 of the President, are to be lost ? I cannot believe 
 that they, or any of them, will aid in the 
 destmction which is threatened of that Con- 
 stitution hy which alone they live — by which 
 alone they retain their respective names ; by 
 which alone they remain New Jersey, Delaware, 
 Rhode Island and Connecticut. Their absorption 
 by their powerful and populous neighbors — their 
 utter demolition as States — is the fate that threat- 
 ens them, is the fate that will befal them, in the 
 event of the success of that formidable coalition 
 whose dark portent shadows the land. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Committee, there are many of 
 our fellow citizens, who are irresistibly led, in this 
 juncture, to the support of our candidates, who do 
 not adopt the "platform," or the general principles 
 of the Democratic party. The true doctrine is, 
 let them come; open wide your doors; invite them; 
 spread the feast; so only that they accept so much 
 of the platform as sustains the Constitution and 
 the Union, welcome them with hand and heart. 
 The candidates presented by the Democratic party 
 are worthy to be supported by any patriot; and the 
 position of the party itself, as the party of the na- 
 tion, draws to its support large numbers who never 
 before acted with it. They are entitled to be heard 
 in the management of the contest; and their feel- 
 ings, wishes, preferences, to be consulted; and that 
 will greatly aid in our success. 
 
 The part of the "platform" which has, perhaps, 
 been most criticised, is that which relates to the 
 foreign policy of our country. But, let the warmest 
 lover of peace, the most timid of capitalists, or 
 any other person tell us in what instance our coun- 
 try has lost either in dignity and respect abroad, or 
 power at home, by holding a firm attitude in re- 
 pcct of any question with foreign States ? Indeed; 
 
6 
 
 I am ronvinreil thiit our country never lia= acted ' 
 fully up to its part among nations; and the more ! 
 fully that it does act up to it, the less it will be 
 liable either to threatenings or war. I 
 
 A distinctive feature of the declaration of prin- 
 ciples and intentions announced at the Democratic , 
 Convention at Cincinnati, is particularly gratifying I 
 to the people of the Pacific coast, of which I am — i 
 that which pledges the Democratic party to use the ' 
 powers of the government in the construction of a [ 
 railroad — a national highway — through the territo- [ 
 ries of the Union which lie between the Atlantic 
 SUtes and those of the Pacific. Such a work is 
 not of so much pecuniary importance to California 
 as to the States of the Atlantic. But in our isola- 
 ted condition, it has to us a peculiar and absorbing 
 interest. Out in that remote part, we are quite a« 
 loyal to the Union — perhaps more so, because your 
 sectional feuds arc there hardly felt — as aay of the 
 States on the Atlantic side. Besides that, wo have 
 our social relations here ; our parents and kin of 
 all degree, our friends and old associations. For 
 these reasons we wish, and now, such a communi- 
 cation as the telegraph and a railroad would fur- 
 nish, that our political connection may be more 
 complete, and our social attachments be kept alive. 
 We know, moreover, that though pride in the Am- 
 erican name, the love for the Union in which we 
 were bred, and the ties of kindred and affection, 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 hi I TDDr>Dv rtir (^n»i<~r«r-or- esamecou- 
 
 rith the suc- 
 !ans of corn- 
 community 
 nd we know 
 
 '' 011 897 907 2 # We our- 
 
 se , ver to be a 
 
 part of, cannot reach the height of power and re- 
 nown of which it is capable, except its borders ex- 
 tend to both the great oceans. A resolution, that 
 such a communication shall be made, was therefore 
 peculiarly appropriate, from that party to which ig 
 committed, at this moment, the preservation of the 
 Union — the Union of East and Weft, as well 03 
 North and South. With the sagacity that marks 
 that party, it has perceived, that without a direct 
 communication, the long continuance in the Union 
 of the Pacific slope would be not only a moral and 
 political, but a physical impossibility ; and henco 
 have resolved, that such a communication .«hall bo 
 made. You of the Atlantic States know and feel 
 what stores of wealth are added to you twice a 
 month from the Pacific: but you have not per- 
 ceived, nor reflected, how important and conserva- 
 tive a part is to be acted, in the future of the Re- 
 public, by the nine or ten States that are to come 
 of the Golden Hesperia. Very respectfully, your 
 fellow-citizen, 
 
 WM. CAREY JONES. 
 
OBBABVOFCO;.GBESS 
 
 Oil 897 907 2