LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, % 
 
 She/f v.r"^..._._ 
 
 ^ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 
 
THE ECHO; 
 
 OR 
 
 THE BATTLE OE THE SHELLS, 
 
 A SATIRICAL PARODY IN RHYME 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CELEBRATED LETTERS 
 
 OF 
 
 MESSRS. GUTHRIE, BRONSON & O'GONOR, 
 
 TOGETHER WITH 
 
 3 
 
 THE ORIGINAL LETTERS, 
 
 'VELL MY COVY, VOT'S THE ROW?" 
 
 / 
 
 By JOHN PIPER, Esq., &c. &c. 
 
 JANUARY 
 
 1854. 
 
75 2S^^ 
 
 Y9. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 John Piper's compliments to the reader, and hopes he will 
 be pardoned for this intrusion. John Piper thought it a pity 
 the letters of Messrs. Guthrie, Bronson and 0' Conor should 
 fall upon the public ear without an echo. He has, therefore, 
 echoed them. John Piper feels well assured of one of two things, 
 either the rhymes will immortalize the letters or the letters will 
 immortalize the rhymes. John don't care a fig which, being 
 perfectly satisfied with either. 
 
 Baltimore^ January^ 1854. 
 
THE ECHO 
 
 ^ttttfe of tf)e S^effs. 
 
 Onooctttion. 
 
 Echo ! awake from slumber sweet, 
 And to the wondering world repeat 
 How Guthrie hit with might and main 
 At Bronson, who struck back again. 
 How Charles 0' Conor made a dagh, 
 And knocked the Union all to smash. 
 Or Hard or Soft, come sound thy shell 
 And all their deeds of glory tell, 
 In combat deadlier far to see 
 Than Sullivan's with Morissey ; a 
 'Till savage Guthrie, with a growl. 
 Hit the poor Collector foul 
 And stretched him senseless on the floor, 
 To appoint and write and fight no more. 
 
 s;5e Secretari) to tOe Coffector. 
 
 ECHO. 
 
 Sir, since I talked with you 'twould seem. 
 Our party's union is a dream ; 
 And now, about this sad division, 
 I wish to say with more precision ; 
 
 , (a) See Appendix. 
 
6 
 
 The President is not contented, 
 
 Because it should have been prevented. 
 
 Let Russia take her slice of Turkey, b 
 
 Our sailors rot in dungeons murky, c 
 
 Let Santa Anna, sans rebuke, d 
 
 Follow the lead of bold Solouque ; 
 
 And, proud in his imperial car. 
 
 Rival Napoleon and the Czar. 
 
 Let England with her shrewd intriguers e 
 
 Turn over Cuba to the niggers. 
 
 The party's principles require 
 
 That We should look a little higher. 
 
 For having power, now our care 
 
 Should be to keep it and to share. 
 
 But you, a true dog in the manger. 
 
 Our party's principles endanger. 
 
 You will not let a Soft Shell nib 
 
 A morsel from the public crib. 
 
 You know it was the sole intention 
 
 Of the Baltimore Convention, 
 
 To get control of public plunder. 
 
 This joined those who were asunder. 
 
 Then surely now half of the spoil 
 
 Should go to those who went free soil ; 
 
 And to this course, which you have scorned, 
 
 The President is pledged and pawned ; 
 
 The less 's included in the greater. 
 
 Just as the skin contains the tater, 
 
 As his subordinate, dear Judge, 
 
 You are included in his pledge. 
 
 'Tis plain and palpable, you see, 
 
 As proposition e'er can be. 
 
 True 'tis a pity, pity its true. 
 
 The offices are quite too few 
 
 For all who voted right, but yet 
 
 The President and Cabinet, 
 
 Consider them, or sharps or flats, 
 
 Or Hards or Softs, good democrats ; 
 
And such, dear Judge, accordingly, 
 You must acknowledge them to be : 
 And show it in the only way 
 Can prove to us you mean fair play. 
 That is, as nearly as can be, 
 Distribute place impartially. 
 And though you can't give every man 
 A sop out of the public pan; 
 You can, as far's the soup'U go. 
 Serve Hard and Soft alike, you know ; 
 If you pursue this plan 'tis plain, 
 Things may be well enough again. 
 
 That all may know the true intent 
 Of our glorious President, 
 This letter, copied, shall be sent 
 To th' Naval Officer and Surveyor, 
 And to — oh ! no, not to the Mayor. 
 And, now sir, most respectfully, 
 I am yours, truly, 
 
 JAMES GUTHRIE. 
 
 SOe Q^offector to f^e Secretari). 
 
 ECHO. 
 
 Business requiring my attention 
 Was, my dear sir, one prevention, 
 Why you've not had a quicker answer ; 
 Besides, being sick, it was my plan, sir, 
 To wait, until a little better, 
 Before I undertook your letter ; 
 And, having pondered it on Sunday, 
 I now reply to it on Monday. 
 
 You first, in substance, state that I 
 Am bound and plegded to give away 
 To applicants, without regard 
 To their being Soft or Hard, 
 
8 
 
 My offices all equally ; 
 If they claim democrats to be. 
 And, from your letter, it would seem 
 I've failed this pledge yet to redeem. 
 You then lay out, in order due, 
 The course you wish me to pursue. 
 
 The fact is, and I soon will show it, 
 I did not want the place, you know it. 
 But got it, as some people catch 
 That vulgar thing they call the itch, 
 Like many frail misguided fair. 
 Was great lefore I was aware. 
 The platform, which was late erected 
 At Baltimore, I have inspected; 
 Though some were rough and some were rare, 
 I could not find a Soft plank there. 
 I therefore, willingly agree 
 To all that platform claims to be : 
 Considering it a first rate plan ; 
 And General Pierce a gentleman. 
 
 My little offices I gave, 
 With all the ability I have, 
 To democrats, good men and true, 
 I did the best that I could do. 
 The Hards, being most, got most, you see, 
 But this is no apology. 
 To apologise is not my task. 
 And favors I have none to ask. 
 The consequences which may follow 
 The party's breach, that beats me hollow, 
 What things may tread upon its heels, 
 Although I was Judge of Appeals, / 
 I must take time, ere I decide. 
 In quick decisions I've no pride. 
 Yet this I know, that with fair play. 
 We 'd flax the Softs out any day ; 
 But, 'twixt the President and you, 
 Fair play for us is not in view. 
 
9 
 
 Let me now notice, as is better 
 
 Time, manner and motive of your letter ; 
 
 The aforesaid letter, you well know, 
 
 Was sent to me, after the row; 
 
 Then what in thunder could I do ? 
 
 The appointments were already made. 
 
 And the Convention's game was played. 
 
 Was it for me to take new stitches, g 
 
 In this old split in Marcy's breeches ? 
 
 If you judged thus your judgment 's lame, 
 
 I'm not so green, though Greene's my name. 
 
 As to the manner, 'tis alone 
 
 To me that you assume this tone ; 
 
 You send no circular to Collectors, 
 
 About the appointment of Inspectors, 
 
 District Attorneys and Post Masters, 
 
 Marshals, all escape your plasters. 
 
 To me, alone, you give these orders. 
 
 Of all the Ports within our borders. 
 
 Thus from the rule you sadly wander. 
 
 That sauce for goose is sauce for gander. 
 
 The movements motive, though well dressed, 
 I know, sir, is none of the best ; 
 In fact, sir, 'tis your cool design 
 That I obey you or resign ; 
 I tell you, neither will I do, 
 For Marcy, President, or you. 
 Like Barney's wife, I'll not comply h 
 With your wishes, no, not I. 
 I'll give my offices away 
 Just as I please, that's plain as day. 
 Yet if the President or you. 
 Should want a little place or two, 
 Upon my word, I'd not say — no, 
 Further than this I will not go. 
 There, sir, 's my mind, since you provoke it, 
 Now put it in your pipe and smoke it. 
 2* 
 
10 
 
 I'll publish this, since you have made 
 
 Your letter 'jpublic, who's afraid ? 
 
 And henceforth, sir, with feelings fervent, 
 
 I'm your obedient (humbug) servant : 
 
 Not Tom Jones nor Monsieur Tonson, 
 
 But the Collector— GREENE C. BRONSON. 
 
 P. S. On other points of law or honor 
 You are referred to Counsel Conor ; 
 Than whom indeed, there's not a bolder, 
 Nor yet a better bottle holder. 
 
 ECHO. 
 
 The saucy Union, some time since, 
 Said some things which made me wince ; 
 And cut at Bronson too, but I, 
 Did not think it worth reply. 
 It said, the general government 
 In making its appointments meant. 
 And this their policy had been. 
 To share them equally, between 
 The democrats of '48, 
 And the Free-soilers of our State ; 
 In order to obliterate 
 The past divisions of the party, 
 And make it once more sound and hearty. 
 That Bronson too, as well as I, 
 By taking office, did imply 
 A promise that we would support 
 This policy, that now, in short. 
 Having secured our share of spoil. 
 We from our promises recoil ; 
 Refusing, wholly, all communion 
 With the Soft friends of the Union. 
 With whom before we were united, 
 But now by us who're wholly slighted ; 
 
11 
 
 Though, with their aid, we gladly won our 
 
 Official benefits and honor. 
 
 Stripped of its verbosity, 
 
 The article does simply say. 
 
 We got, and 'tis a high offence 
 
 Our offices by false pretence. 
 
 Although insulting in its tone, 
 
 It would have to oblivion gone 
 
 Unnoticed, had no higher name 
 
 Come forward to endorse the same. 
 
 But Guthrie's late outrageous letter 
 
 To Greene 0. Bronson, breaks my fetter. 
 
 For, though a mere newspaper writer. 
 
 Of paragraphs, a low inditer ; 
 
 I could not notice, yet you'll see 
 
 A Secretary 's game for me. 
 
 This letter 'g published to the nation. 
 For the general information. 
 And this it is that makes me squirm, 
 Some think the letter does confirm 
 The Union's charge," which I referred to ; 
 This inference must be demurred to. 
 And in the first place, I will show, 
 The letter don't the charge avow ; 
 Then demonstrate the charge to be 
 False and calumnious, as to me. 
 Of course, it is the true intent, 
 The end and aim of government. 
 O'er office-holders to preside. 
 And the pap fairly to divide ; 
 It is for this that parties strive ; 
 This keeps democracy alive. 
 For this we write, and speak, and print : 
 And, surely now, the devil 's in't, 
 When having fought the battle, we, 
 Have gained a glorious victory, 
 Must give part of our spoil away 
 To those, though joining in the fray, 
 
12 
 
 Who're not and never mean to be 
 Of our stripe of democracy. 
 Indeed, I should be but a fool 
 To give assent to such a rule. 
 None, who bear the freesoil name, 
 With me, can ever come that game. 
 To vote with us they may have leave ; 
 But offices they can't receive. 
 
 What Guthrie says, I don't deny, 
 That Bronson, too, as well as I 
 By taking office, in some sort, 
 Pledged ourselves we would support 
 The principles and policy. 
 Which in the inaugural we see. 
 And that we, both, are also bound. 
 By any on the platform found. 
 Yet I can't find, I must confess, 
 Any freesoil in the address. 
 Nor yet, for I have searched it o'er, 
 On the platform at Baltimore. 
 Therefore, I say, Bronson and I, 
 Are not bound by this policy. 
 But this same letter does not say 
 We ever said, we 'd give away 
 A portion of our share of spoil, 
 To any votary of freesoil. 
 It does not say that he or I 
 Were told that the democracy 
 Had any sections or incisions. 
 Or any factions or divisions. 
 For aught therein that doth appear, 
 We did not know that such things were. 
 As Hard-shells, Soft-shells, Fogies, Hunkers, 
 Barn-burners, Porgies, or Moss-bunkers. 
 His letter does not say that we 
 Knew anything of this policy. 
 In fact, his letter don't allege 
 We gave this policy our pledge. 
 
13 
 
 As lie don't say these things, see you, 
 And could not say 'em and speak true, 
 From thence, 'tis decorous and fair 
 That we respectfully infer, 
 He don't mean to be understood 
 As saying so, for ill or good. 
 No one is better skilled than I 
 In making truth look like a lie. 
 And, on the contrary, in sooth. 
 In making lies look like the truth. 
 For 'tis my trade, which I have plied 
 For years, with great success and pride ; 
 Witness the Forrest trial where (i) 
 I gave Prince John more than his share ; 
 And, with that letter in the tourney, 
 Almost used up Colonel Forney ; 
 And here is really all the wonder, 
 The Union simply steals my thunder ; 
 And makes that seem, which is not so, 
 Most undoubted, really true. 
 
 The appointments in New York, in fine, 
 Including Dickinson's and mine. 
 Gazetted were the self-same day. 
 To Washington, without delay, 
 I bore and gave a declination 
 By Dickinson of his situation. 
 A few hours after, Bronson's name 
 Went to the Senate, who, the same. 
 With most amazing condescension. 
 Confirmed, forthwith, without dissension. 
 Bronson, then, was far away. 
 And in Connecticut, some say — 
 Just in this manner, by no trick. 
 He got the place of Scripture Dick, k 
 He and I are thus, you see. 
 Placed in the same cat-e-go-ry : 
 
14 
 
 And old Secretary grim, 
 Hits me, when lie strikes at him. 
 Such is my evidence, don't doubt it, 
 I was there, and know all about it. 
 Like the Auchisean son of Mars, 
 Quorum magna fui pars, I 
 
 Van Buren, the red-whiskered fox, 
 Then President, strange paradox, 
 The Little Magician, once so called, 
 And then the sage of Lindenwald, 
 When proud he grew, though by the book, 
 It was far better Kinderhook, m 
 A quarter century or more. 
 Held all New York State in his power ; 
 And had it firmly in his hold, 
 Guided its politics and controlled. 
 But, when he came before the nation 
 A third time for a nomination. 
 And found his efforts all were vain. 
 His spite he no more could contain, 
 But went and built, as we all know, 
 A new platform at Buffalo. 
 Then, from the flock of democrats, 
 He drew away the Softs and Flats 
 Called them his own, he was so bold, 
 And penned them in the Free-soil fold ; 
 And summoning his stalwart son. 
 Grave them in charge to brave Prince John ; 
 Who, as chief shepherd of the flock, 
 Has proved a chip of the old block : 
 And did more mischief in our State 
 Than I can now stop to relate. 
 The whole affair 's no mystery. 
 As you all know, 'tis history. 
 
 Afterwards, the Free-soil men 
 Commenced deserting from their pen ; 
 
15 
 
 But for their leaders all had gone 
 And mingled with us into one, 
 Like kindred drops, so that no eye, 
 Between us could the difference spy. 
 Their leaders, with consummate art. 
 Since they could not be kept apart, 
 Resolved their influence to maintain. 
 That they might know them all again. 
 Marked and numbered them each one, 
 And then they let them with us run : 
 And thus the union came about. 
 Of which I've disapproved throughout. 
 
 After this union 't would appear. 
 Though a minority they were, 
 They got control of each convention. 
 In the manner I will mention. 
 If sixty in convention go 
 With forty, though they 're three to two, 
 The forty (and it is because 
 We find it 's one of nature's laws. 
 That Hards, who in convention hail 
 As delegates, are all for sale,) 
 The forty, if they'll only buy 
 Eleven, get a majority. 
 Three or four offices will suffice 
 To do the thing up very nice ; 
 And it is as good a way as any : 
 And thus the few control the many, 
 This contradictory may seem. 
 But 's truer than Judge Edmond's dream, n 
 Who drunk on opium and brandy 
 Beheld the gates of heaven quite handy, 
 But the excitement past, he fell. 
 Into the horrid realms of hell, 
 And saw poor souls on^-ridirons quiver, 
 And dreadful sights that made him shiver ; 
 That what I say is true indeed. 
 And that 'tis thus the Softs succeed, 
 
16 
 
 In ruling us, our history, 
 Since '49 will verify. 
 Also their fortune and career. 
 Who high in office now appear ; 
 And yet I will not tell their names, 
 But let their deeds reveal their shames. 
 In my great speech at Castle Garden, 
 I plainly showed I was a Hard 'un. 
 Though not a democratic meeting, 
 I there received a hearty greeting ; 
 For they all said I Was a brick, 
 1 dealt my blows so fast and thick 
 Against Free-soil. Yes, you may flout me 
 If a soft spot you find about me. 
 The next convention I attended. 
 Finding matters were not mended. 
 In token of disgust complete, 
 I shook the dust from off my feet ; 
 And from the place forthwith did flee. 
 And Cutting cut away with me. 
 And since that time the world knows well, 
 I have been down upon Free-soil. 
 And the chief leader of that section, 
 In a speech since the election. 
 Which at Albany he made, 
 'Mong various other matters said ; 
 The truth of me, a wonder too. 
 That he so strange a thing could do. 
 For John Van Buren in his hits. 
 Grave me, what tailors can't do, fits, o 
 He said my kicking up a row. 
 As I have done, was anyhow 
 With my whole course in harmony ; 
 He could expect nought else of me. 
 Thus John, himself, is my endorser ; 
 And do you ask for any more, sir, 
 
17 
 
 To show I never could have meant 
 To give the policy my assent, 
 Of sharing the official spoil, 
 With*" any tainted with Free-soil ? 
 
 And then there is poor Greneral Dix, 
 "Who, in the way of politics. 
 Has crossed, I fear, the gloomy styx: 
 They 've got him in a pretty fix. 
 They marked him with so deep a dye 
 That it would not wash away : 
 Vain and useless was his toil, 
 He was so soiled with his Free-soil. 
 For though he had sought absolution 
 From this heretical pollution, 
 Had all his previous errors spurned 
 And to the mother church returned ; 
 Yet when the voting time was near 
 And he went out to electioneer, 
 The Free-soil presses, day by day, 
 Of the poor fellow thus would say : 
 "Cochrane, Dix and John Van Buren, 
 Made speeches, yesterday, at Turin. 
 John Van Buren, Dix and Cochrane, 
 A meeting held, to which a flock ran 
 Eagerly, their words to hear. 
 Our section does the work, that's clear.' 
 Thus crucified between two thieves. 
 The world looks on him and believes 
 That he is one, for there he 's hung 
 And in the sight of all he 's swung. 
 Therefore, he could neither get 
 A seat in Pierce's Cabinet ; 
 Nor, though it was deserved, a chance 
 To go as Minister to France. 
 Thus, even when they would repent, 
 The rascals meet with punishment. 
 * 3 
 
The Secretary's letter says, / 
 
 Which puts me rather in amaze. 
 That our respected President 
 Has given this policy his assent. 
 Whate'er appearances he shews, 
 I am sure they 're not his real views. 
 And for the President's own sake, 
 I think there must be some mistake. 
 As Chief Ruler of the nation, 
 He knows the duties of his station : 
 And has displayed assuredly 
 A measur^ of ability, 
 In dealing out the loaves and fishes. 
 And filling up the little dishes. 
 Prom more important things at home 
 He don't permit his thoughts to roam : 
 But shows a deep solicitude 
 For the whole party's general good. 
 And though the splendid New York span, 
 Of Hards and Softs, have fractious been 
 And. tried to kick out of the traces ; 
 Yet he holds them to their paces ; 
 Determined that he will see whether 
 They will not kindly go together. 
 They 've reared and plunged, but he maintains 
 For all a firm hold of the reins. 
 And though he may lack some in glory 
 He 's not weak in the upper story: 
 For if he had been, do you see, 
 He'd not have nominated me. 
 Besides, whatever may be said 
 About the softness of his head, 
 I really must say, for my part, 
 I do not think him soft at heart. 
 This much to vindicate my honor, 
 
 Chaeles O'Co-nor not O'Con-ner. p 
 
19 
 
 ^()e Secretary's SocJJofoger. 
 
 To THE Collector. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 Yours of the seventeenth is received, 
 Though unimportant, 'tis believed. 
 Its contents indicate that we 
 Can't get along harmoniously. 
 Your words and conduct I condemn, 
 Because I can't approve of them ; 
 In fact, you've been so impudent, 
 I had to tell the President, 
 You knew it was against the rule, 
 And yet you would talk out in school, 
 And when you're told how to behave. 
 You flare about and rant and rave. 
 Reproof, advice, alike are vain, 
 You boldly answer back again. 
 But hearken, sir, we have a way 
 To punish you, mind what I say. 
 Thus, though Congress lately passed q 
 To our brave oflScers disgust, 
 A law, forbidding in our ships 
 The cat-o'-ninetails, blows and whips, 
 Yet even they find wit to invent 
 For saucy sailors punishment. 
 This foolscap, sir, is sent to you. 
 With that very end in view. 
 Don't make faces, sir, nor tear it, 
 Like it, or lump it, you must wear it. 
 
 Certainly, sir, it does appear, 
 To me to be a little queer, 
 A man, experienced as you, 
 A judge, aye, and a lawyer too. 
 And of acquirements great, should fall 
 Into such error, as at all 
 
20 
 
 To think in you the power should be 
 
 To make appointments, when you see 
 
 The authority is all in me. 
 
 The constitution makes that plain ; 
 
 You'd betterfread it o'er again. 
 
 If afterwards you still avow, 
 
 The same opinion you do noAV, 
 
 Your legal light will make quite paly, 
 
 The half cent candle of Judge Daly, r 
 
 Who from the bench once sagely said, 
 
 That prostitution was a trade ; 
 
 An evil, true, but, in his view, 
 
 A necessary evil too. 
 
 This dictum rather made a stench 
 
 'Mongst his associates on the bench, 
 
 But his associates off thought it 
 
 Good Daly law ; 'twas Daly wit. 
 
 The tone and temper of your letter, 
 Would certainly have been a fetter 
 Embarrassing to both, but now 
 You such assumptions bold avow, 
 And show such insubordination, 
 As we can't tolerate in your station. 
 This letter, which I send by mail. 
 Wasp-like, its sting has in its tail ; 
 For my reply to all your scoff is, 
 You can't continue, sir, in office ; 
 Your name, sir, is struck from the list, 
 In fact, my dear sir, you're dismiss'd. 
 I have the honor, sir to be 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 JAMES aUTHEIE. 
 
 P. S. Tell Charles O'Connor that the crown s 
 Of martyrdom is all your own : 
 We wont serve him as we've served you, 
 And make him thus immortal too. 
 
£etter from Secretari) *9utfjrie to Coffecfor Ironson. 
 
 WASHiNaTON, Oct. 3, 1853. 
 
 Dear Sir — Since the conversation we had upon the subject of 
 the unfortunate division in the democratic party in New York, 
 I feel more and more convinced that the present disorganization 
 cannot fail to endanger the success of the principles of the par- 
 ty there, and to prove injurious elsewhere. But the separation 
 is effected. A conviction has forced itself on my mind, that, by 
 democrats pledged to each other upon a common platform of 
 principles, the division could and ought to have been prevent- 
 ed. You are aware that the principles of the Baltimore Con- 
 vention and the policy intimated in the inaugural address, the 
 President and his constitutional advisers stand pledged to, be- 
 fore the world. They have been, and are, united as one man 
 upon these principles and that policy, and had reason to believe 
 that all gentlemen who consented to accept office under the ad- 
 ministration stood pledged to the same principles and policy. 
 
 As the President understands the principles avowed as the 
 platform of the party at Baltimore, all democrats who joined 
 in upholding and carrying out the same were entitled to be re- 
 cognized as worthy of the confidence of the united party, and 
 consequently eligible to official station. 
 
 That all could not obtain office was manifest, and that the dis- 
 tribution could not be exactly equal amongst the different sec- 
 tions of the party, was equally certain. Yet the distribution 
 was intended to be so made as to give just cause of complaint 
 to no one section, and it is believed that this intention has been 
 carried out not only by the President himself, but by most of 
 his appointees, in respect to the offices under the latter. 
 
 It has so happened that your appointments have been very 
 generally made from that portion of the party to which you 
 adhere. This you thought best calculated to secure union and 
 harmony. That desirable object has failed to be obtained, and 
 and the other portion of the party feel that they have not been 
 fully recognized by you, and as things now stand, may not do 
 3* 
 
22 
 
 justice to your motives. I call your attention to this subject, 
 and to the fact that the President and his Cabinet, with entire 
 unanimity, recognize that portion of the party as democrats, 
 distinctly avowing and firmly maintaining the principles of the 
 Baltimore platform, and entitled to be recognized by appoint- 
 ment to official stations in your department. Allow me to ex- 
 press the expectation that you will so recognize them in the 
 only way that will carry conviction with it. 
 
 I have not hitherto deemed it necessary to make any par- 
 ticular inquiry as to the section of the democratic party to 
 which persons nominated for positions in the Custom House 
 at New York belonged prior to the reunion of the party in 
 1849 — which reunion was supposed to have been thoroughly 
 cemented in. the great and triumphant contest in 1852. But 
 as the present excited state of feeling among political friends 
 who acted together in 1852, and who now stand unequivocally 
 upon the same platform of principles in New York, is suggestive 
 of a discrimination of which the administration will not ap- 
 prove. I shall send a copy of this letter to the Naval Officer 
 and Surveyor of the port, in order that there may be no misap- 
 prehension as to the policy which the President will require to 
 be pursued. I am, very respectfully, 
 
 JAMES GUTHRIE. 
 
 G-. C. Bronson, Esq., Collector, New York. 
 
 Copies of the above letter were sent to the Naval Officer and 
 Surveyor, with the following note : — 
 
 Washington, Oct. 3, 1853. 
 
 Dear Sir — I enclose herewith a copy of a letter this day 
 addressed to the Hon. G. C. Bronson. It will explain itself, 
 and show you what the President expects in relation to th'e dis- 
 tribution of patronage in the respective offices of the New York 
 Custom House, to which you will conform your action in any 
 future nominations you may have occasion to make. I am very 
 respectfully, JAMBS GUTHRIE. 
 
 Goffecfor 35ronson's ^lepfi). 
 
 New York, Oct. 17, 1853. 
 
 Sir — The pressure of official business and confinement to a 
 sick room have prevented an earlier answer to your letter of 
 the 3d instant. 
 
23 
 
 You first state, in substance, that I have been under a pledge 
 ■which has not been redeemed, to distribute the offices in my 
 gift among different sections of the democratic party, and then 
 prescribe the course you expect me to pursue in future. You 
 do not complain that my appointees are not proper persons for 
 the places they occupy, or that they are sound, democrats, sin- 
 cerely attached to the principles of the party^ and firm support- 
 ers of the national administration. But you think I have not 
 properly regarded all sections of the party. 
 
 When Mr. Dickinson declined the Collectorship of this port 
 in April last, I was asked by several friends whether I would 
 allow my name to be mentioned to the President for the place, 
 and answered in the negative. I thought no more of the mat- 
 ter until two days afterwards, when I saw in the public prints a 
 telegraphic despatch announcing my appointment. I had two 
 years before resigned my place as Chief Judge of the Court of 
 Appeals, with the intention of never again accepting a public 
 office ; and grateful as I was for this new mark of confidence, 
 I should have declined the appointment ; but for the high opin- 
 ion which I entertained of the President and his principles, 
 and the assurance of friends that he earnestly desired my ac- 
 ceptance of the trust. 
 
 When I accepted the place, I had never seen nor had any 
 communication with the President, and of course there were no 
 pledges between us, save such as may be implied between honor- 
 able men holding the like relation to each other. He had a right 
 to expect that I would diligently and faithfully discharge the 
 duties of the office, and maintain, in all proper way, the prin- 
 ciples which restored the democrat party to power ; and, so long 
 as I performed that implied obligation, I had a right to expect 
 that his confidence in me would not be withdrawn. I have 
 never complained that the President has not discharged his 
 part of the obligation, and am not conscious of having omitted 
 to discharge my own. 
 
 You tell me that the President and his constitutional advisers 
 stand pledged before the world to the principles and policy 
 laid down in the Baltimore platform and the inaugural address, 
 "and had reason to believe that all gentlemen who consented to 
 accept office under the administration stood pledged to the same 
 principles and policy." I agree to that ; and, though it is but 
 an implied pledge I admit its full force. But it proves nothing 
 to the present purpose ; for there is not one word either in the 
 Baltimore platform or the inaugural address about distributing 
 offices among different sections of the party. If the President 
 
24 
 
 or his appointees are pledged to any such distribution, you must 
 look to some other document to find evidence of the obligation 
 — some document which I have never seen. 
 
 It may be inferred from the acts of the President that he 
 regards as eligible to office all democrats who cordially united 
 on the Baltimore platform in 1852, and are sincerely attached 
 to the principles of the party, although at some former period 
 they may have been out of the way. That is a proper rule. 
 It is the one on which I have acted in making appointments to 
 office' — not because I was under any pledge to do so, but be- 
 couse I thought the rule just in itself. But your letter pro- 
 ceeds upon the ground that I should go beyond the inquiry 
 whether applicants for office are good democrats now and ascer- 
 tain to what section they formerly belonged ; and then make 
 such a distribution of offices between the different sections that 
 no one of them will have just cause for complaint. It is not 
 only impossible to administer such a rule as that with success, 
 but the consequence of adopting it must be that we shall never 
 have one democratic party, united upon a broad basis of princi- 
 ple, but a mere combination of different sections, held together by 
 no better bond than a love of office, and ready to fall to pieces the 
 moment one section thinks itself aggrieved in the distribution. 
 
 Notwithstanding what has been said, I think it would be 
 found, on a proper scrutiny, that the section which has so 
 loudly and bitterly complained of injustice has received its full 
 share of the offices which I have bestowed. It is undoubtedly 
 true that more appointments have been made from one section 
 of the party than from the other ; and a single reason will be 
 sufficient to show why it was proper to pursue that course. 
 Most of the Custom House appointments for this port have 
 always been made from the counties of New York and Kings, 
 in which are the three large cities which form a part of the port. 
 In 1848 the democrat and free soil vote in those counties bore the 
 relation of more than four for the former to one for the latter. 
 From the free soil vote should be deducted the whig abolition 
 vote, which went in the same direction. After making the proper 
 allowance on that account, I think it safe to conclude that not 
 more than one out of seven of the democrats in those counties 
 voted the free soil ticket in 1848. In this view of the matter. 
 I think it will be found that the free soil section is far from 
 having just cause for complaint. I have acted in this liberal 
 manner — not because I was under any pledge, but because I 
 wished to do what I reasonably could to promote the harmony 
 and continued ascendancy of the party. 
 
25 
 
 It is possible that I am mistaken in supposing that the free 
 soil section has got its full share of the places ; for, in dis- 
 tributing the little offices in my gift, which have for the most 
 part gone among the rank and file of the party, I have neither 
 had the time nor the inclination to do much by way of investi- 
 gating the antecedents of men who were supposed to be all 
 right now. 
 
 Upon the recent rupture of the party at Syracuse, that the 
 division could and ought to have been prevented. It is enough 
 for me to say, that I not only had no agency in bringing about 
 that division, but I tried to prevent it ; my counsel was given in 
 favor of the united action of the convention, and I sincerely 
 hoped harmony would prevail. If any government officers are 
 chargeable with what took place at Syracuse, the burden must 
 rest on those who where there, of whom there were three from 
 this city, and not upon the Collector who was at home 
 attending to the duties of his office. 
 
 I do not state these things by way of apology, for I have none 
 to make, nor by way of courting favors, for I have none to ask. 
 
 You speak of the re-union of the party of 1849 which re- 
 union was supposed to have been thoroughly cemented in the 
 great and triumphant contest in 1852, although I ardently de- 
 sired a re-union if it could be effected upon principle, I never 
 .approved the manner in which the attempt was made to bring 
 about that desirable end. I thought then and think still, that 
 those who had deserted the democratic standard in 1848 and 
 thrown the state and national Government into the hands of the 
 whigs, should, if convinced of their error, return again to our 
 camp Y/ithout exacting conditions, and should then be treated 
 with the utmost kindness. The party would then have been 
 strong, and we should have heard no more about sections. 
 But a very different course was pursued ; and the free soil lead- 
 ers came back, so far as they came at all, under a league or 
 treaty between them and a few leading democrats, with no 
 stronger bond of union than an agreement to divide the offices. 
 The arrangement was based upon no principle. The free soil 
 leaders were left at liberty to adopt the course which they pur- 
 sued ; and, instead of again hoisting the national banner, they 
 marched into the democratic camp with their own sectional col- 
 ors flying, and thus became an independent element in the party. 
 Indeed, your letter proceeds upon the ground that the party 
 has all along been divided into sections ; and, consequently, that 
 accounts must be balanced between them in the distribution of 
 offices. All experience proves that such a coalition as was form- 
 
26 
 
 ed in 1849 can never be thoroughly cemented. Sooner or later 
 it will fall to pieces. The cohesive power of patronage cannot 
 long save that which has within itself the elements of dissolution. 
 It is not therefore any matter of astonishment that the "re- 
 union" was dissolved at the late Syracuse Convention. 
 
 After the league of 1849 had been broken, and the two sections 
 had again become separate parties in form as well as substance, 
 it became necessary for me, as a citizen of New York, to make 
 my choice between the two tickets which had |)een nominated. 
 My reasons for preferring one and rejecting the other are before 
 the public ; and no one has the right to impute to me any other 
 motives than those which I have avowed. I rejected one ticket 
 because the nomination had been effected by means which no 
 honest man could approve, and because the nominees had been 
 brought forward by men who had been hostile to what I deemed 
 the best interests of the State in relation to the canals. I ap- 
 proved the other ticket because the nominees were right on the 
 question of State policy and because those who supported it 
 were "contending for the principles which restored the demo- 
 cratic party to power, and placed Franklin Pierce at the head 
 of the government." I presume there can be no objection at 
 Washington to my maintaining now as I have always done be- 
 fore, the principles on which the national administration stands ; 
 and with questions of mere State policy you must allow me to 
 say the administration has no rightful concern. 
 
 What consequences will follow the recent break in the party 
 is more than I can tell ; but I feel reasonably confident that if 
 the national democrats had a fair field, and the free soil dem- 
 ocrats were not fighting under false colors, their ticket could 
 not get votes enough to help the whigs through with their nom- 
 inations. But we have not got a fair field. The Washington 
 JJnion^ while professing to speak the sentiments of the admin- 
 istration, has thrown its weight on the side of the free soil tick- 
 et. It has undertaken to decide upon the regularity of our 
 conventions, and to sit in judgment upon questions of mere 
 State policy. It takes the side of those who have once proved 
 faithless to the party, and put the Union in jeopardy, and de- 
 nounces those who have all along supported the principles which 
 restored the party to, power. It is now a co-laborer with the 
 free soil prints in this State, some of which it so lately read out 
 of the democratic party. Though that print is not m itself of 
 great importance, yet when it professes, without rebuke, to do 
 these things as the organ of the administration, much mischief 
 may be done. It matters little what disclaimers there may be 
 
27 
 
 in private circles, so long as there is no public declaration that 
 the paper speaks without authority. However unfortunately 
 the election may terminate, the responsibilities will rest upon 
 others, and not upon me. 
 
 Let me now notice the time,.manner and motive of your letter. 
 
 As to time ; it was after the rupture and nomination of two 
 tickets at Syracuse, and the two ratification meetings in this city ; 
 after the Collector had been denounced by the free soil leaders 
 and presses, and the President had been called upon to remove 
 him ; after hungry oJB&ce seekers and bitter politicians had 
 visited Washington to misrepresent and traduce that officer, 
 and to whose clamors as you well know, he never made any 
 reply ; after the Union had taken ground against the ticket of 
 the national democrats, and in favor of the ticket of their op- 
 ponent ; then it was that you first discovered cause for com- 
 plaint of any kind against the Collector. You had approved 
 all his nominations, with a single exception, and in that case 
 the office was abolished. Down to the receipt of your letter of 
 the 3d inst. you had never intimated to the Collector, in any 
 form, that you disapproved of his appointments, or of the manner 
 in which they had been distributed. 
 
 As to the manner: you did not pursue the usual course, and 
 issue a circular laying down a uniform rule for the government 
 of all Custom House officers having patronage to bestow ; but 
 confined your instructions to the port of New York alone. 
 If the doctrine of the letter is a sound one, it is obviously prop- 
 er that it should be applied in other places as well as here ; and 
 it should regulate the conduct of all classes of government 
 officers having patronage to bestow. Marshals, postmasters, 
 district attorneys, and others, should act upon it in the selection 
 of their deputies, clerks, and other agents. 
 
 I will here mention another fact of no little significance. The 
 next day after the letter was written it was followed by another 
 requiring me to submit for your approval the names of all 
 clerks proposed to be employed in the bonded warehouses and 
 public stores. In this matter you not only departed from the 
 practice of all former Secretaries of the Treasury — who had 
 left those appointmeats to the sole discretion of the Collector — 
 but, so far as I have learned, you again departed from the 
 usual course of issuing a circular to all the collectors at our 
 great ports, singled out the Collector at New York, and pre- 
 scribed a new rule for him alone. These facts need no comment 
 — they speak for themselves. 
 
 As to the motive of this movement, let others judge. 
 
28 
 
 This is, I believe, th.e first instance in which a member of 
 the Cabinet has interfered with the discretion of a collector, 
 marshal, postmaster, or any other government officer having 
 patronage to bestow, and laid down a rule for his government 
 in the selection of his deputies, clerks, or other agents ; and it 
 certainly is the first instance in which a public officer has been 
 instructed to go into an inquiry about sections, and see that a 
 just distribution of offices was made between them. You have 
 a right by law to give instructions on many subjects connected 
 with the collection of the revenue and such instructions it will 
 be my duty to follow. But when you go beyond that and un- 
 dertake to direct in matters which the law has confided to my 
 discretion, no such obligations exist. 
 
 As to some offices of the customs the Collector has the right 
 of nomination and the Secretary the right of approval or re- 
 jection, and as to other officers the power of appointment is vest- 
 ed in the Collector alone. I shall not interfere Avith the exer- 
 cise of your powers, and I wish you will render the like justice 
 to me. If you or any other high officer of government, desired 
 the appointment of a particular individual, I need not say it 
 would give me great pleasure to comply with his wishes. But 
 I respectfully deny that you have any right to issue instructions 
 for the government of my conduct in making selections for 
 office. 
 
 So far as relates to the mere disposition of patronage with- 
 out regard to my responsibility for the acts of the persons ap- 
 pointed, I would gladly transfer the trust to another. I have 
 no taste for such matters and my comfort — aspirations I have 
 none — Avould be greatly promoted if some one else would per-- 
 form the same for me, but the law and my commission have 
 laid the burden upon me and I cannot surrender it to another 
 without a dereliction of duty. 
 
 As you have given your letter to the press, sn ying, "the sub- 
 ject is a public one," I shall give the same direct answer. 
 
 I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 GREENE C. BRONSON. 
 
 Hon. James Guthrie, Secretary of the Treasury. 
 
29 
 
 Jrom 3Hr. (COas. 0%onoY, llniteb States District Mornei). 
 
 A REPLY TO THE "UNION." 
 
 The Washington Union, in its assumed character of govern- 
 ment organ, gave to the public, on the 27th ultimo, an elabo- 
 rate article censuring the course of Judge Bronson and myself 
 in withholding our support from the second State ticket recent- 
 ly nominated at Syracuse. 
 
 It alleges that, in respect to appointments in this State, the 
 general administration had adopted the policy of dividing the 
 offices in its gift between the free-soilers of '48 and the democrats 
 of that period, "as a mode of obliterating all past schisms and 
 divisions of the party," and that Judge Bronson and myself, 
 knowing this fact, had accepted the offices "tendered" to us, 
 under an implied promise that we would give our "influence 
 and co-operation" in promoting the success of that policy. It 
 asserts, also, that a political connection existed between us and 
 the leaders of the late free-soil faction, "from which we are en- 
 joying high official honors and benefits," sarcastically observ- 
 ing, in this connection, "how scrupulously conscientious" we 
 "now are" in refusing to continue the association. 
 
 Stripped of the verbosity in which, for unworthy purposes, 
 the writer has clothed his out-givings, the charge fairly and dis- 
 tinctly stated is, that fraudulently concealing our sentiments, 
 and impliedly promising to aid the policy indicated, we led the 
 President tx) entrust us with office, and that, having by this dis- 
 honest artifice secured a portion of the "spoils" we are now be- 
 traying his confidence. 
 
 Studiously insulting in its tone, replete with falsehoods un- 
 supported by even a shadow of plausibility, and deeply incul- 
 patory as this article is, it would have gone down to merited 
 oblivion, along with the many anonymous libels of the day, 
 wholly unnoticed and unanswered by me, had no higher or better 
 authority been vouched for its statements. The paper, it is true, 
 claims to be the organ of the President ; but it has never advanced 
 that claim, except in a circuitous and argumentative form ; it 
 has never ventured directly to assert that it spoke by his au- 
 thority, as I knew that it was not his organ, I felt free to treat 
 it as the hireling of a nameless libeller. 
 
 Subsequent events, however, have imparted to this charge a 
 complexion which may justify me in giving it this public refit- 
 4 
 
30 
 
 tation. A letter from the Hon. the Secretary of the Treasury, 
 to Greene C. Bronson, Esq., Collector of this Port, bearing date 
 the 3d inst., transmitted to him and other officers, and promul- 
 gated in the Union for general information, is now before the 
 public, commanding, as it justly deserves, almost universal at- 
 tention. That letter contains expressions which are generally 
 understood as in some measure verifying the charge in question, 
 and which, if read with no more than ordinary attention, would 
 be likely so to impress even the most intelligent reader. Con- 
 sidering the high authority from which the letter emanates, it 
 cannot be expected that I should be so regardless of my good 
 name as to lie still under the general belief of my fellow-citi- 
 zens, that it confirmed the charge put forth by the Union, es- 
 pecially as the honorable signer could not possibly have intend- 
 ed so to be understood. 
 
 I will, therefore, show, in the first place, that the Hon. Sec- 
 retary has borne no testimony in support of the charge ; and 
 secondly, that the charge itself is false and calumnious. 
 
 The Hon. Secretary says to Judge Bronson : — 
 
 "You are aware that to the principles of the Baltimore conven- 
 tion and the policy intimated in the inaugural address, the Pres- 
 ident and his constitutional advisers stand pledged before the 
 world. They have been and are united as one man upon these 
 principles and that policy, and had reason to believe that all 
 gentlemen who consented to accept office under the administra- 
 tion, stood pledged to the same principles and policy." 
 
 The letter then proceeds to state, in the present tense, that 
 the administration recognizes as existing in this state, distinct 
 sections of the democratic party, and desires Judge Bronson to 
 do justice to one of those sections by also recognizing it and al- 
 lowing it a share in his distribution of the Custom House ap- 
 pointments. It states that Judge Bronson has not hitherto act- 
 ed on this principle, and has made the appointments generally 
 from his own section. It further speaks in the following words: — 
 
 "As the President understands the principles avowed as the 
 platform of the party at Baltimore, all democrats who joined 
 in upholding and carrying out the same were entitled to be re- 
 cognized as worthy of the confidence of the united party, and 
 consequently eligible to official station. That all could not 
 obtain office was manifest, and that the distribution could not 
 be exactly equal amongst the difi"erent sections of the party 
 was equally certain. Yet the distribution was intended to be 
 so made as to give just cause of complaint to no one section, 
 and it is believed that this intention has been carried out, not 
 
31 
 
 only bj the President himself but by most of his appointees, 
 in respect to the oflfices under the latter." 
 
 The quotation first above made from the Hon. Secretary's 
 letter, when read in connection with what follows concerning 
 appointments, opinions as to the import of the Baltimore plat- 
 form, and the intentions of the administration, might very well, 
 on a casual reading, appear to verify the charge in question ; 
 but a careful perusal and scrutiny will satisfy any one that it 
 only asserts what no one would think of denying^-i. e., that the 
 appointees of the President were, by the very act of acceptance, 
 pledged to support the principles and policy indicated in the Bal- 
 timore platform and in the inaugural address. The letter does 
 not assert that either to Judge Bronson or any other appointee 
 of the administration, it was ever, in any way or shape, intima- 
 ted before his acceptance that he was expected to recognize dis- 
 tinct sections of the party, or any section of the party, either in 
 appointments under him or otherwise. It does not assert that 
 any one imparted to Judge Bronson, or to any other ap- 
 pointee of the government, the fact that there existed in the 
 State of New York, or elsewhere, distinct, "sections" "portions," 
 factions, or divisions of the democratic party, which it was the 
 policy of the administration to recognize in its immediate ap- 
 pointments, or to require to be recognized by its appointees ; 
 neither, to use the languag-e of the Union's anonymous article, 
 does this letter assert, as that article does, that Judge Bronson, 
 or any other appointee of the government, accepted office under 
 any other pledge, promising or understanding, express or implied, 
 that he would give his influence and co-operation in "promo- 
 ting the success of any such policy, or indeed, upon any under- 
 standing whatever in respect to the conferring of offices." 
 
 Nothing of the kind could have been asserted with truth, as it 
 respects Judge Bronson or myself ; and, as it neither is asserted 
 nor could have been truly asserted, it is proper and decorous 
 to say that the Hon. Secretary never intended to convey any 
 such idea to the public. 
 
 Even truth itself may be stated in such a manner, and under 
 an arrangement as to deceive, thereby "assuming the nature and 
 engaging in the guilt of falsehood." Consequently, the adept in 
 misrepresentation, rather than risk a direct untruth in his details, 
 generally aims to work out a false inference. The article in 
 the Union is framed upon this principle. Its author moves on- 
 ward to his deceptive purpose with the wary tread of an habit- 
 ual and practiced falsifier. As usual in such composition, (and 
 several specimens are now before the public,) the due coherence 
 
32 
 
 of language is wanting, the regular sequence of ideas departed 
 from, and the subjects under review, instead of being distinctly- 
 named, are described by an obscure circumlocution, or by terms 
 of doubtful or ambiguous import. In this way many of the most 
 important and misleading of its sentences, taken singly, are ren- 
 dered so close a counterfeit presentment of the fact, that while a 
 simple denial would be an unsatisfactory method of refuting them, 
 a thorough dissection would be intolerably tedious. Neverthe- 
 less, the libeller must not escape confrontation ; and, therefore, 
 as the best method of avoiding the obscurity and misapprehen- 
 sion which might result from his indirect forms of language, the 
 accusation is above restated in a distinct and intelligible form. 
 I proceed to refute it. 
 
 The New York appointments, including Daniel S. Dickinson's 
 and my own, for the offices of Collector and Attorney, were 
 gazetted on the same day, and soon afterwards I bore to Wash- 
 ington, and delivered to the President, the written declinature 
 of Mr. Dickinson. Judge Bronson had not then as yet been 
 named in connection with the Collectorship ; but within a few 
 hours thereafter, and upon the same day, he was nominated by 
 the President, and unanimously confirmed by the Senate. I am 
 morally certain that from the first suggestion of his high and 
 honorable name until his confirmation as Collector, neither the 
 President nor any member of the Cabinet had an opportunity 
 of conferring with any friend of Judge Bronson, unless, indeed, 
 it had been thought fit to confer with me. He was at the time 
 travelling in Connecticut, and his exact whereabouts being un- 
 known, it was impossible to have conferred with himself, even 
 by telegraph. From these circumstances, it will be seen that I 
 am as competent to testify in respect to his acceptance of his 
 appointment, as in respect to my own acceptance of that which 
 was conferred upon myself. No one concerned in his appoint- 
 ment could have inferred from any facts then appearing, that 
 his political sentiments differed from mine ; and, consequently, I 
 shall henceforth speak only to exonerate myself from this 
 scandalous imputation, claiming on the strength of what has 
 already been stated, that Judge Bronson, when his appointment 
 was made, must have been considered and treated as standing 
 in the same category with myself. 
 
 From me no pledge of any kind in favor of the distribution 
 policy was ever obtained or could possibly have been implied. 
 To prove this, it will be convenient briefly to review the rise 
 and progress of the "sections." 
 
 For more than a quarter of a century prior to 1847, Martin 
 
33 
 
 Tan Buren had guided and controlled the democratic party in 
 this State. In that year opposition to him as a candidate for a 
 second Presidential term assumed a form and a force which 
 led to his opposing, in 1848, all the democratic candidates in 
 the State and the Union. Accustomed as they were, to follow 
 his lead, and long connected with him by the ties of political 
 association, a considerable number of democratic politicians were 
 deceived and drawn into his party. His friends constructed 
 the Buffalo platform, raised the standard of the free-soil agita- 
 tion, formed an alliance with the whig abolitionists, and obtain- 
 ed for their mixed State ticket a vote slightly exceeding that of 
 the regular democratic candidates. 
 
 Very soon after the general election of '48, the democrats 
 who had supported the free-soil ticket began to return to their 
 old associations. The rank and file needed no leaders in this 
 easy and natural movement. Neither compacts nor coalitions 
 were necessary ; and if the leaders would have permitted the 
 honest masses who had inconsiderately gone into the revolt, 
 would soon have been found side by side with, and undistinguish- 
 able from their fellow democrats. No sections would then have 
 been known in the democratic party ; it would have become, as 
 it was originally, united and harmonious — one and indivisible. 
 The free-soil leaders could not consent thus to disband their sec- 
 tion, and permit a perfect fusion and reconciliation of the dem- 
 ocrats who had erred with those who had held fast to the faith. 
 Such a course would have left them to win what honors they 
 could as mere working democrats in a fair field of individual 
 competition, unaided by party feuds or sectional divisions. 
 They determined upon a different policy — it was to keep up 
 and continue their faction, mark and number its members, so 
 that they might always be distinguishable, unite it by compact 
 with the unchanged democracy, call it a section of the demo- 
 cratic party, procure its recognition by authority as an integral 
 portion of the party, and claim on its behalf and in its name a 
 rateable proportion of the offices. 
 
 Whatever partial and temporary success may seem to have 
 attended this design, every attempt toward its execution has 
 been met by a steady and determined resistance. 
 
 It was evident injustice and folly to admit into the bosom of 
 the party an unrepentant corps of political rebels, with its 
 officers at its head, its drums beating and its colors flying. In- 
 stead of acknowledging its errors, dissolving its organization and 
 mingling with the party, it was clear that the members of this 
 
 section would keep up a line of separation between themselves 
 4* 
 
34 
 
 and other democrats, and claim, not that they had received a 
 pardon, but that they had achieved a victory. The leaders of 
 such a section must necessarily be disturbers. Their claims to 
 office and promotion would rest not upon their personal merits, 
 but upon their influence over a faction having its origin in re- 
 volt, and distinguished only by the history of its political offen- 
 ces. True to its original instincts and its antecedents, the sec- 
 tion itself would ever stand ready to renew its assaults upon 
 just authority. The project was justly denounced as an effort 
 to organise a body of political Dalgettys within the party, which 
 the timid could be made to propitiate, and with which knaves 
 could deal. 
 
 The effort to establish this kind of coalition was, nevertheless, 
 persevered in, had a partial success, and thence to the present 
 time, the free-soil faction and some politicians whose interests 
 are promoted thereby, have constantly struggled to maintain 
 distinct sections in the democratic party, thus seeking, under 
 the false pretence of a desire for "union and harmony," to 
 give undying perpetuity to faction and discord. 
 
 In the autumn of 1849, men witnessed the singular spectacle of 
 two conventions, composed of delegates nominally democratic, 
 convened at Rome, openly endeavoring to form such a coalition, 
 but these bodies separated without coming to any agreement. 
 The free-soilers aimed at too much, and in that instance failed 
 to accomplish the union they desired. 
 
 Soon afterwards they passed, at a meeting of those who hap- 
 pened to be present one day in an interior country town, cer- 
 tain resolutions, affirming free-soil doctrines, and through their 
 presses announced that upon the basis of these resolutions a 
 union between themselves and the late Cass party— as they styled 
 the democrats — had been formed and was in actual existence. A 
 falsehood well persisted in, sometimes wins at last a degree of cred- 
 it ; and from this small beginning arose the union of the sections. 
 
 In the same autumn the democratic nominating convention for 
 State officers most unwisely authorized a committee to withdraw 
 one half of the names upon its ticket, and to form, with the 
 free-soilers, a mixed one This was done. The aim of the free- 
 soil leaders now appeared to be approaching its accomplishment ; 
 they henceforth attended the primary elections, sent delegates 
 to the democratic State conventions, and introduced into the 
 political vocabulary that pernicious phrase, "our section of the 
 democratic party." 
 
 In the State conventions of '50, '51 and '52, a large number 
 of delegates, calling themselves "the section," and claiming tobe 
 
35 
 
 recognized as such, attended and were allowed seats. Asa 
 consequence, mixed tickets were nominated. At first the demo- 
 crats on such tickets were generally defeated and the free-soil- 
 ers elected •, but after a short working of this system, the poi- 
 son which it necessarily carried into the democratic party had 
 its full operation— nearly all the important nominations fell 
 under the control of the free-soil "section." In all these con- 
 ventions the national democrats elected a majority of the dele- 
 gates ; but it is a fixed and irrevocable law of such associations 
 that a recognized minority faction can always control, and that 
 their control leads to the utter demoralization of the whole body, 
 substituting a capacity for intrigue in place of all the virtues 
 which should command popularity and lead to eminence. The 
 members of a minority faction are bound to fidelity toward each 
 other by the ties of a common danger, and are per force kept in 
 unity by the external pressure of a superior opposing force. 
 The honors of official station in the convention itself as the 
 presidency, &c., and the offices to be filled afford them ample 
 means of temptation, and are in their hands efficient weapons 
 of offence and defence. They have but to assign to themselves the 
 lion's share of the^e, and enough will still be left as a corruption 
 fund_ wherewith to purchase the small number of votes usually 
 required to turn the scale. If the factions stand as forty to 
 to sixty, it is only necessary to purchase eleven votes ; and 
 where four good offices, as is usually the case, can be offered 
 to the weak, the wicked, or "the soft," among the sixty it will 
 rarely be difficult for the lesser faction to prevail. This may 
 seem paradoxical; but, however contradictory it seems to 
 theory, a^very little reflection will convince any sound thinker 
 that it is practically true. The political history of New York 
 since 1849 illustrates and verifies it to the letter. 
 
 I have said_ that this system of bringing together and keep- 
 ing up recognized opposing sections, within the same political 
 party, corrupts and demoralizes the whole body. Witness its 
 effect upon the free-soilers. Universally condemned as insin- 
 cere in their professions of sentimental loyalty to the principles 
 adverse to those on which their section was founded, they are 
 subjected to the contempt of all honest men, and to the derision 
 of each other. 
 
 What has been its effect upon the democratic party, upon my 
 section, as the nomenclature sought to be legitimatized by author- 
 ity would require me to do it ? Nominations to office at these 
 conventions in which the free-soil section had seats, could be ob- 
 tained only by an intrigue, except in rare and exceptionable 
 
36 
 
 cases ; and commonly the existence and consummation of that 
 intrigue were demonstrably proved by the very fact and method 
 of the nomination. A democratic candidate was observed to 
 have the entire and undivided vote of the free-soil or minority 
 faction ; this elected him, being added to a small corps of his 
 own personal friends, and those of two or three other democrats 
 who, like himself, obtained nominations at the same time and 
 by the same vote. A combination with the free-soil or minor- 
 ity faction against his own section was at once apparent, and 
 was denounced accordingly. Driven by that denunciation into 
 the ranks of his former foes, now allied to him by the advanta- 
 ges resulting to both from their successful intrigue, the nominee 
 was soon found employing the power and influence of office in 
 forwarding the views of the faction which elevated him — in se- 
 curing office to its members, or wreaking vengeance upon the 
 members of his original section, who were honest enough to be- 
 come disgusted with his. intrigue, and "hard" enough to oppose 
 its consummation. These men — to cap the climax of their de- 
 moralization — always claimed to be continuing members of 
 their original section. They might be known by their contin- 
 ual use of the following conversational phrases — i. e., "the 
 united democracy," "union and harmony,'' "the union of the 
 party," "our section of the party," "your section of their par- 
 ty," and the like. 
 
 All this is well exemplified by the career and fortunes of sev- 
 eral distinguished citizens now high in office under the State 
 and general governments, whose name will at once occur to 
 every well-informed New Yorker. It is not necessary, and 
 might be thought invidious, to name them. By their deeds 
 they are known. 
 
 What experience has proved in respect to this recognition of 
 sections was apparent to me in 1849. From the instant the 
 coalition was first proposed — from the first broaching of the idea 
 that there might be two recognized sections in the party, down 
 to the present hour — in all places where the subject came up, 
 and to all persons before whom I have ever spoken upon eith- 
 er subject — with the most undeviating consistency, and in the 
 strongest terms of reprobation I could command, I have de- 
 nounced both the coalition itself and the pernicious policy of 
 recognizing sections or sectional divisions in the same party. 
 
 This was known to every democrat who has ever had occasion 
 to know anything concerning my opinions ; it was known to 
 all who were concerned in conferring office upon me. 
 
 In the state convention of 1850, where for the first time 
 
37 
 
 free-soil members sat with democrats, they held themselves 
 aloof as a section claiming to act as such ; they denounced the 
 leading democrats of that day, such as the Hon. William L. 
 Marcy " for their political conduct ;" they voted against the 
 democratic platform, and yet they were not expelled, but on the 
 contrary were awarded a share of the offices ; but I openly and 
 most distinctly opposed the unhallowed combination. In the 
 same season I was a member of the so-called democratic conven- 
 tion for the district of my residence, which nominated for Con- 
 gress a notorious free-soiler and abolitionist. I pronounced, 
 both of these conventions heterodoxical, irregular, and possessed 
 of no binding authority ; because they had in effect admitted 
 the section which the Hon. Secretary now requires to be for- 
 mally and distinctly recognized as a section, and as such fed 
 from the public treasury. I declared my opinions, and an- 
 nounced in the most public manner my determination to wage 
 unceasing war against the policy of maintaining the sections. 
 At the celebrated Castle Garden meeting, held just after these 
 conventions, and before the election, I delivered an address 
 which was circulated throughout the Union. Among other re- 
 marks of like import, I there expressed myself as follows : — 
 
 "In future elections, let us single out for preference those 
 candidates, no matter of what name or political sect, who are 
 faithful to the Constitution, -and devoted, before all other earth- 
 ly duties, to the preservation of the Union. Both of the exist- 
 ing great political parties have allowed themselves to become 
 more or less contaminated with the sin of supporting or tolera- 
 ting these agents of sectional strife and disunion, the abolition 
 or free-soil agitators. Between the free-soil managers and the 
 expediency men of sound opinions, true, staunch, and reliable 
 men can with difficulty be found amongst the nominees for office. 
 It may, consequently, be difficult to select ; but the best must 
 be done that the circumstances will admit. I shall single out 
 for my ticket, men who* are in favor of peace measures, frater- 
 nity with the South, and the permanency of the Union. If I 
 cannot find such, I will take those who pretend to be so, and 
 thus give my voice for the principle." 
 
 In reference to that class of pretended democrats who are 
 known as free-soiler, I said :— r- 
 
 "The tactics and purity of that class were well exemplified in 
 the proceedings of the late Democratic State Convention, held 
 at Syracuse ; nor did their nominal opponents appear on the oc- 
 casion in a light much more creditable. I had the honor to 
 present a set of resolutions, affirming the principles of the na- 
 
38 
 
 iional democratic party, and among them that of the non-inter- 
 vention of Congress in the anti-slavery agitation. Those res- 
 olutions were adopted by a great majority. But lo ! when the 
 nominations came up, three noted free-soilers, devoted advocates 
 of the principles and practices denounced by the convention, 
 were recommended to the people as suitable candidates for im- 
 portant offices. It was said that the union of the party required 
 and sanctioned this sacrifice of consistency. A union of two 
 political bodies entertaining opinions diametrically opposed 
 upon the only question now agitating the public mind, or effect- 
 ing legislative action, was deemed lawful, just and honorable, 
 because it might combine a sufficient vote to defeat the whigs, 
 and secure a portion of the public offices to each of the tempo- 
 rarily united sections. To no such union have I ever been, or 
 will I ever be a party. It is unworthy of both sections, 
 amounts to a desertion of its principles by each, and can serve 
 no honest purpose. I prefer a union of all the friends of 
 ^union throughout this menaced republic, to a combination of two 
 hostile political factions for temporary success and a participa- 
 tion of spoils. Nevertheless, these candidates were forced up- 
 on me, and in the congressional district of my residence, a 
 thorough paced political abolitionist has been put in nomination 
 by professing democrats. For none of these shall my vote be 
 cast. Shall I vote for the abolitionist against the national 
 whig, now a representative in Congress, who supported all the 
 peace measures in which we rejoice, and who has thus given 
 earnest of his devotion to his country ? Never. Fellow citi- 
 zens, let us resolve to withhold our suffrages from any and from 
 every candidate for office who is tainted in any degree with 
 the sin of fostering anti-slavery agitation for political purposes, 
 no matter what his party or his professsed political associations, 
 no matter with what studious observance of the forms of party 
 nomination he may have been robed for the canva,ss." 
 
 Sent by the same district to the next State Convention (1851) 
 I attended and soon learned that the same policy was to be 
 pursued. The. "section" openly held its separate caucus, and 
 though in the minority, carried the organization by the usual 
 intrigue. Shaking the dust from my feet, I left the convention 
 before any platform was adopted or candidate nominated. 
 
 The Hon. Francis B. Cutting, now a democratic representa- 
 tive in Congress, adopted the same course. 
 
 If anything connected with the political course of men in 
 this State was a fixed fact, known and conceded on all hands, 
 it was that I would not, either in conventions or at the polls. 
 
39 
 
 vote for any free-soiler of 1848 who continued to act with his 
 associates in maintaining a distinct section of so-called dem- 
 ocrats. 
 
 The chief leader of the free-soil party, in his speech at the 
 Albany ratification meeting, held a few days ago, truly assert- 
 ed that my course in opposing his ticket harmonized perfectly 
 with my whole previous political action toward his section, and 
 that nothing else could have been expected from me. 
 
 So much for my connection with free-soilers or free-soilism, 
 or with sections of the democratic party. 
 
 I next refer to the alleged violation of implied pledges. 
 
 Neither when I consented to accept office from the President, 
 nor, at any other time had any human being the slightest rea- 
 son to suspect from any act, word or acquiescence of mine, that 
 I stood pledged to the principles and policy in relation to the 
 distribution of offices between "sections" or "portions" of the 
 democratic party, mentioned in the letter of the Secretary of 
 the Treasury, or that I would give "influence or co-operation" 
 in aid of the policy mentioned by the Union. No one who ev- 
 er spoke to me, or with me, on the subject, could possibly have 
 doubted that I stood pledged against those principles and that 
 policy. 
 
 It is intimated that these principles and this policy ^re em- 
 braced in the Baltimore platform, and were indicated in the 
 inaugural address. I cannot find that the slightest countenance 
 is offered to them in either document. "Principle" it cannot 
 be called; but if the "policy" of keeping the democratic party 
 in this or any other State, forever divided into contending and 
 jealous sections, by recognizing such sections and patronizing 
 their leaders, could be found in the platform or in the address, 
 I should at once withdraw from the former my adhesion and 
 from the latter my admiration. 
 
 If, indeed, as a counterpoise to, and qualifying set-off against 
 the true and trusty national democrat, at the head of their tick- 
 et, the Baltimore Convention had nominated for the Yice- 
 Presidency Cassius M. Clay, Joshua H. Giddings, or even some 
 noted free-soil democrat who was willing to recant his errors, 
 that body might be charged with having approved the distribu- 
 tion policy. That is said to be the only way of recognizing a 
 section "that will carry conviction with it." The course of the 
 Convention was not marked by any such dereliction of princi- 
 ple. 
 
 It is said by the Union that the President's announcement of 
 his Cabinet was a distinct avowal of his policy. His enemies 
 
40 
 
 have often said so. I never gave credit to their assaults, as- 
 sertions or opinions. When the New York appointments were 
 published, it was said that the names of Mr. Dickinson and my- 
 self were merely used to whiten the sepulchre in which lay en- 
 tombed the mutilated hopes of the national democratic party. 
 I did not subscribe to this imputation on the motives of the 
 President. 
 
 Neither the Baltimore platform nor the inaugural address 
 contained the slightest hint in favor of a distribution of offices 
 between the sections of the democratic party, or any recognition 
 of such sections ; without concurring in the reproach cast upon 
 the Cabinet by its political enemies, and now for the first time 
 given on authority in the Union, I could not have supposed 
 that its very material and construction indicated such a policy : 
 my own action had been uniformly hostile to the policy ; my 
 speech had always been, and still was, openly, frankly and 
 distinctly adverse to it. What right, then, had any one to im- 
 ply that I would aid in or conform to it ? 
 
 I deem it unjust in itself,and subversive of political morality : 
 I believe that an adoption of, and adhesion to it, would be mis- 
 chievous, if not fatal to the democratic party. 
 
 If any man should say public events gave good reason to 
 fear that this pernicious policy might obtain an ascendancy in 
 the councils of the administration, and should ask why, in view 
 of that fact, I accepted office, I might be willing to acquiesce 
 in his judgment and to assign that as the very reason of my 
 acceptance. Apprehension that a friend may have hearkened 
 to evil counsels — that he has erred in a degree, and may per- 
 chance err more seriously — furnishes no just reason for standing 
 aloof. My political and social morality is to adhere the more 
 firmly, in proportion to the degree in which I conceive my par- 
 ty or my friend to be in danger. The true hearted mariner re- 
 mains by his ship while a single hope remains. Willing to 
 contribute my little stock of influence toward preventing what 
 I deemed a catastrophe, I stood by the President. He had 
 been, I hoped he would remain, I still believe he will remain, 
 the sheet anchor of the democratic party. 
 
 The Union says, that in judging the free-soilers to be insin- 
 cere, there is "a severity that leaves no room for repentance or 
 reformation." This is evading the question. No one objects, 
 or ever can object, to receiving into the ranks of the democratic 
 party any one who will vote for and support it. But the ques- 
 tion is whether, in party conventions, and in the dispensation 
 of offices, honors, and rewards, we shall especially recognize aa 
 a. section of the democratic party the set of men who revolted 
 
41 
 
 against the party and defeated it in '48, whilst they still con- 
 tinue to act as a distinct section, and arrogate to themselves as 
 a merit, the distinctive character which results from the memory 
 of their treason. [I am the negative of this question ; others 
 have taken the affirmative. "Time, which at last brings all 
 thmgs even," will decide between us.] The doctrine which re- 
 pels from the democratic threshhold all organized bands of polit- 
 ical opponents, presents no opposition to the return of erring 
 brethren. I have shown how the masses who had gone off upon 
 the Buffalo platform could and if permitted would have quietly 
 returned, without form, ceremony, compact or coalition. The 
 same peaceful method of healing differences and reuniting the 
 temporarily severed ties of party association is equally well 
 suited for the timely and early return even of the most distin- 
 guished leaders. This latter fact is demonstrated in the case 
 of that eminent citizen Gen'l Dix. He took a very active part 
 m the free-soil movement, among other things running for Gov- 
 ernor of this State in conjunction with Gates a whig abolitionist, 
 against the democratic candidates. The course of that gentle- 
 man shows the path whereby even the foremost leaders of a re- 
 bellious and defeated faction, may easily and quietly reinstate 
 themselves in the confidence, and even in the affections of the 
 original or parent party. From the close of the single ill-star- 
 red campaign of the free-soil party, he took no further part in 
 thatmovement. He sought to return, and as far as depended 
 on himself, he did quietly and unobtrusively return to the demo- 
 cratic ranks. At the next general election, without attempting to 
 keep up any faction or section, he diligently and faithfully worked 
 with the ^party and for the party, and for its candidates. 
 
 He sought to obliterate from the memories of men all traces 
 of his action as a free-soiler, and evidently desired that the 
 fact of his ever having been one should itself be forgotten, in- 
 stead of making it, as others have done, a mark of distinction, 
 and through the instrumentality of faction and intrigue, a pass- 
 port to favor. In this righteous object, pursued by this just and 
 proper line of conduct, he would have been perfectly successful 
 but for the lovers of "union and harmony." By recognizing 
 and perpetuating the sections, they have kept fastened to him, 
 m despite of himself, the badge of free-soilism— the stigma of 
 imputed membership in one of the New York sections. The 
 South could not be permitted to forget or even to forgive his 
 errors. Though his atonement had been ample, his old asso- 
 ciates could not let him escape. Day by day during the Pierce 
 and King canvass, the free-soil press recounted his speeches 
 5 
 
42 
 
 and services as good works of their section. " Mr. J. C," 
 said thej, " and G-en. Dix, and Mr. J. B., made speeches last 
 Tuesday night at, &c. All the work is done by our section." 
 Thus was innocence crucified between two unrepentant thieves 
 upon the fatal tree of free-soilism, and kept constantly hung up 
 in that attitude before the public gaze. The consequences, 
 probably, were most injurious. Common fame reports that the 
 President desired to give this gentleman a seat in his cabinet, 
 and was only deterred from so doing by information that in 
 consequence of his free-soil associations he could not be confirmed 
 in the Senate. It is also stated that a desire existed to favor 
 him in reference to the French mission, and that his preferment 
 was here again prevented by similar means. 
 
 I know nothing as to the truth of these suppositions ; but, as- 
 suming the fact, byway of illustration, we see how injuriously the 
 policy of recognizing sections in the party operates even upon the 
 free-soilers themselves. 
 
 No one of them eminent enough to be of value as an associ- 
 ate, will be permitted to separate himself from his faction, or 
 to re-enter the ranks of the original party in a proper and le- 
 gitimate way. 
 
 We are told in the Hon. Secretary's letter that the Presi- 
 dent has adopted this policy. I trust and believe that the as- 
 sertion is founded in as great a misapprehension of his real 
 views as seems to exist in relation to the import of the Balti- 
 more platform. I know him to be pure, upright and patriotic ; 
 I am sure that under the embarrassments which have surrounded 
 him from the hour of his election, he has exerted a high mea- 
 sure of ability ; and if he has not overcome them all, it is from 
 the impracticable nature of the task, and not from any failure 
 on his part, in diligence, mental power, or fidelity to the consti- 
 tution. Ch. 0' Conor. 
 
 New York, October 17, 1853. 
 
 £etter from Secretari) ^gutOrie to .greene (C. 33rotisoii. 
 
 Washington, Oct. 22, 1853. 
 
 Sir : I have received your letter of the 17th inst. It is not 
 my purpose to respond to the many positions of that letter, 
 because most of them bear their contradiction upon its face, 
 and others are too unimportant to require refutation ; and also 
 
43 
 
 because, while, in several phrases of it, admitting your implied 
 obligation, as a man of honor, to act in accordance with the 
 known policy of the administration, and, moreover, recognising 
 the propriety and justice of that policy by declaring that you 
 yourself deprecated and endeavored to prevent the divisions 
 now existing in the democratic party in your State, you neverthe- 
 less indulged in a tenor of remark, as to various relations of the 
 subject, which not only impugns my motives, but indicates an 
 attitude on your part wholly imcompatible with harmonious 
 co-operation between us, and the proper conduct of the busi- 
 ness of the government. 
 
 One suggestion appears in your letter which demands ani- 
 madversion. You allege, by implication, that I have desired 
 you to appoint free-soilers to office, and, in doing so, you 
 strangely misunderstand or misinterpret my letter of the 3d 
 instant. I neither entertained nor expressed any such desire. 
 It has been my pleasure and my duty, not to inquire into the 
 opinions which may have been held by yourself and others as 
 far back as the year 1848, but to regard the claims to consid- 
 eration of all who have acted with fidelity to the principles and 
 organization of the. democratic party since the convention at 
 Baltimore in 1852, and those only. And with these views, I 
 must condemn your course when in this letter you inform me 
 that you have selected free-soilers for office, without having 
 given me the notice of the fact, which would have enabled me 
 to withhold my approbation from any such appointments. I 
 will add, that the imputation that I have required you to act 
 with reference to controversies of a local or State character, is 
 wholly gratuitous. My letter was intended to guard you against 
 distinctions between democrats, founded upon local politics and 
 local divisions. 
 
 The concluding portion of your letter has left me no alterna- 
 tive but to lay the whole matter before the President and take 
 his direction concerning it. 
 
 You assume that in relation to certain things you are to re- 
 ceive instructions from this department, and in others that you 
 are to proceed without, or contrary to such instructions. This 
 cannot be admitted in any branch of the public service ; for 
 where the department is not expressly empowered to give in- 
 structions to subordinates, it has the authority to do so, as inher- 
 ent in the power to remove a refractory officer. 
 
 You also assume that you are to appoint the various persons 
 employed in the custom house — some as you admit, subject to 
 my approval, and others, as you seem to conceive, on your sole 
 
44 
 
 authority. I cannot but regard it as singular tliat a gentleman 
 of your legal acquirements and experience should have fallen 
 into such error. The constitution of the United States has em- 
 powered Congress to confer the appointment of inferior officers 
 "in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of 
 departments." Congress has not attempted, nor, if it had, could 
 it have effected any modification of this provision of the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Those who are employed under you in the custom-house do, 
 both by the constitution and the laws, derive their appointment 
 and their authority as public officers from the Secretary of the 
 Treasury alone. What the language and temper of your 
 letter would have rendered embarrassing, these unwarrantable 
 assumptions, marked as they are by a manifest spirit of insub- 
 ordination, render impossible — namely your continuance in the 
 office of Collector of the district of New York. I am, therefore, 
 directed by the President to say that your successor in the 
 office will be promptly appointed. 
 
 I have the honor to be, very respectfully, 
 
 JAMES GUTHRIE. 
 
 Greene C. Bronson, Esq., New York. 
 

 THE ECHO; 
 
 *^ 
 
 dR 
 
 THE BATTLE OF THE SHELLS/ 
 
 A SATIRICAL PARODY IN RHYME 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CE-LEBRATED LETTERS 
 
 OP 
 
 MESSRS. GUTHRIE', BRONSON & O'CONOR, . 
 
 TOGETHER WITH 
 
 ' THE'ORIGIxNAL LETTERS.. 
 
 "VELL MY<:;OVY, VOT'S TH?: ROWP* 
 
 By JOHN PIPER, Esq., &c. &c. 
 
#