r,iCTf«!WHft»3«Mir«NliBa»

'p"^-^^

Yale University Library

39002008736457

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

Bought with the income
ofthe
Charles McC. Reeve
(1870) Fund

-- ':¦^^r<^3~-

SPEECHES,

CONGRESSIONAL AND POLITICAL,

AND

OTHER WRITINGS,

OF

EX-GOVERNOR AARON V. BROWN,

OF TENNESSEE.

COLLECTED AND ABBANGED BY THE EDIIOBS OF THE UNION AND AMEEICAN

NASHVILLE, TENJT.:
JOHN h, MARLING AND COMPANY.
1854.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PAQE
Biographical notice, from Livingston's Memoirs of Eminent Ameri
cans, ...-.-«-,. . J
PART I.
CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
Speech in reply to. Mr. Bell, on the Bill to Secure the P'reedom of
Elections, May I9th and 20th, 1840,  10
Speech on the Bill to Charter the Fiscal Bank of the United States,
August 4th, 1841,  -- -37
Speech on remitting the fine on General Jackson, January Sth, 1844, 56
Speech on the correspondence of Mr. Webster with the British Min
ister, in relation to the Surrender of Alexander McLeod, July 9th
and lOth, 1841,  67
Speech on the Tariff, June, 1842,  81
Speech on Abolition Petitions, January, 1844, .... 106
Speech on the Right of Members Elected by General Ticket to their
Seats, February, 1844,  120
Speech in reply to Mr. Adams on the Bill Establishing a Territorial
Government for Oregon, January 27th, 1845, ... . 138
Second reply to Mr. Adams on the same Bill, February 4th, - - 147
Speech on the New Jersey Contested Election, March 17th, 1840, - 154

IV. OOXTEXT.S. PART II.
POLITICAL SPEECHES AND OTHEE ADDP.ESSES. PiGB
Speech, when a candidate for the office of Governor, delivered at
Athens, East Tennessee, June 21st, 1845, .... 185
Speech, when a candidate for the same office in 1847, - - 204
Speech at Jonesboro', as one of the Democratic Electors for the
State at large, in the Presidential election between General Cass
and General Taylor, August 24th, 1848, - - - - 235
Speech in the Presidential election between General Pierce and
General Scott, at Columbia, August 6th, 1852, - - - 254
Speech at Charleston, East Tennessee, in same election, October,
1852, -  281
Lecture on the Progress of the United States and the Slavery Ques
tion, at Odd Fellows' Hall, Nashville, in 1850, - - - 292
Letter to the Nashville Union, on the subject of the approaching
Southern Convention, - - - - - - -321
Letter to the Nashville Union, after the adjournment of the first
session of the Southern Convention, - ... 331
Speech at the second session of the Southern Convention, . - 307
The Tennessee Platform, written by Governor Brown, reported by
Mr. Nicholson to the Delegates, and having been adopted, reported
by their Chairman, General Pillow, to the Southern Convention, - 319
Address to the Law Class of the University at Lebanon, February
15th, 1853, -  346

CONTENTS.
PART IIL
MESSAGES, EEPOETS, AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

PAGE

Inaugural Address on his installation as Governor of Tennessee, in
1845,  365
Message to the General Assembly in 1845, ... . 375
Proclamation for Volunteers in 1846, ----.- 388
Address to the First Regiment, transferring it to the United States, 394
Message of 1847,  - - - - 423
Resolutions of 1827, introduced into the Tennessee Legislature, in
relation to the defeat of General Jackson, in the election of 1824, 427
Speech in support of the same, ....... 435
Address of the Giles County Committee (prepared by Gov. Brown,)
in the Presidential election of 1836, between Mr. Van Buren, Gen.
Harrison and Judge White,  - 443
Address to his constituents in 1842, reviewing the measures of the
Whig party at the called session of 1841, and the regular session
of 1842, .... . . ... 466
Reply to Mr. Benton, on the True Origin of the Movement for the
Annexation of Texas, - - ...... 493
Reply to Mr. Adams, complaining of the publication of General
Jackson's letter in favor of the annexation of Texas, - . . 499
The same subject continued, ..... . . 517
Speech in the Legislature of Tennessee against abolishing the Cir
cuit and Supreme Courts, ........ 524
Speech to his constituents, on his return from the called session of the
Legislature of 1832,  533
Letter to the New Orleans Railroad Convention, .... 544
Report in the Legislature of Tennessee on Free Persons of Color, - 549
Report against Capital Punishments,  557

PREFACE.

The object of the present publication, is to collect, into
one volume, the principal speeches and writings of Gov.
Brown, for better preservation by his friends, and for more
easy access by all Who, at any time, may wish to make refer
ence to them.
They cover a space of many years, and embrace all the
controverted questions of public policy, State and national,
from the first canvass of General Jackson for the Presidency,
to the present time. Their publication, we believe, will pre
sent the most condensed and accurate record of the party
struggles of this State, any where to be met with, and must,
therefore, prove an acceptable work to the public at lajge.
To the younger politicians of both parties, who desire to be
familiar with the past, as well as the present political history
of the State, it must be invaluable. THE EDITORS.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH-

Aaron V. Brown, late Governor of Tennessee, was born on the 15th of
August, 1795, in the county of Brunswick, Virginia. His father, the Rev.
Aaron Browij, enlisted, wh£ii not yet of lawful age, for three years in the Rev
olutionary army. He was in the battle of Trenton, and participated in that
ever-memorable march through the Jerseys, where the course of the American
army was known to the enemy by the blood of its bare-footed soldiery. He
was also one of the sufferers in the encampment, at Valley Forge, during the
severe winter of 1777-8, where disease, and famine, and nakedness, so often
drew tears from the illustrious Washington. At the close of his term of ser
vice, he returned to the county of Brunswick, where he continued to reside for
iiearly forty years in the midst of those who had witnessed his early and patri
otic career, respected and beloved by all as a faithful and useful minister of the
gospel, of the Methodist persuasion ; an upright civil magistrate, a staunch re
publican of the old Jefferson school, and an honest man. The subject of this
memoir was the issue of his second marriage, with Elizabeth Melton, (corrup
ted from Milton,) of Northampton county, in the State of North Carolina.
Except in the simplest elements, Gov. Brown was educated in the last-men
tioned State. He was sent when very young to Westrayville Academy, in the
county of Xash, in order to be placed under the care of Mr. John Bobbitt,
one of the best scholars and teachers of the time. After continuing here for
two years, he was transferred, in the year 1812, to the University of North
Carolina, at Chapel Hill. He graduated in this institution, in 1814, in a large
class, of which Senator Mangum and ex-Governor Mauley, of North Carolina,
were also members. The duty was assigned to him by the faculty, and confirm
ed by the trustees, of delivering the valedictory oration on commencement day,
and the service was performed in a manner which produced the most striking
impression on the large assembly then in attendance. The collegiate career of
)5ut few young men is marked by incidents of sufficient importance to be recited
in a notice like this. Industry in preparing for and punctuality in attending at
the hour of recitation, as well as the most cheerful conformity to the rules
of the institution, were the most striking characteristics of his educational
course. Having finished his educational course, Gov. Brown returned to his parent? .
who in the previous year, had removed to the county of Giles, in the State of
Temiessee. About the beginning of the year 1815, he commenced the study
2

¦^ BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.
of law in the office of the late Judge Trimble, in the town of Nashville.
With this gentleman he continued to read for two years, and now often refers
to him as one of the most systematic, able and upright men he ever knew.
Having obtained a license, he opened an office in Nashville, and commenced
practice in that city with the most flattering prospects of success. About
this time, however, Alfred M. Harris, who was engaged in a very extensive
practice in nearly all the southern counties of Middle Tennessee, accepted a
place on the bench, and solicited Gov. Brown to remove to the county of Giles
and close up his extensive business for him. The opportunity was inviting,
and that being the residence of his now aged parents, he determined to settle
in that county. Taking charge at once of an extensive practice, both civil
and criminal, including the land litigation, then an important and almost dis
tinctive branch of the profession. Gov. Brown found all the resources of his
mind brought into immediate requisition. No time was to be lost in idleness
— ^none to be devoted to pleasure. We remember that one of his maxims
about this period was, " AlwaJ-s to be first at court, and never to leave it until
the adjourning order was made. " Under such habits it was no matter of sur
prise to those who observed them, that there were but few causes of importance
in the counties in which he practised, in which he was not engaged.
In a few years after Gov. Brown commenced his career in Giles, the late
President Polk commenced his in Columbia, in the adjoining county of Maury,
They soon formed a partnership in their profession, thereby extending the
field of their professional labors into more counties than they could have done
without that arrangement. This partnership continued for several years, and
until Mr. Polk engaged in his congressional career. Its dissolution brought
no termination to that cordial friendship, personal and political, in which it had
commenced, and which continued unabated until the death of the late lamented
president. Gov. Brown continued engaged in his profession until the year
1839, when, having been elected to Congress, he gave it up altogether. Much
of the time in which he was in regular and full practice he was also a member of
one branch or the other of the state legislature. This service being near home,
and the counties he represented being those in which he practised, produced no
material impediment to the progress of his professional business. But the
case was different in the distant service in the Congress of the United States.
Gov. Brown served as a senator, from the counties of Lincoln and Giles, at
all the sessions of the legislature, regular and called, from 1821 to 1827, inclu
sive, except the session of 1825, when he was not a, candidate. In the session
of 1831 and 1832, he was the representative of the county of Giles in the other
branch of the general assembly. His course was distinguished at all times, as
a legislator for the state, for his determination to sustain an independent and
able judiciary, and to build up an enlightened, liberal, and impartial system of
jurisprudence in the state ; and, we hazard nothing in saying, that, in searching-
through the statutes, one will find more laws of a general and permanent na
ture which emanated from him than from any tfne of the other public men of
the state. He was longer in that service, and, by professionaloxperience, may
be presumed to have understood the defects of existing laws, and how to rem
edy them. Throughout his service in the legislature he evinced a strong dispo-

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. >J
sition to diminish the number of oIFences which should be capitally punished.
He did not propose or wish to aholisli such punishments altogether, but only to
reduce and limit them down to the smallest possible number of cases, consis
tent with the necessary self-defence of society against the aggressions of the
lawless and abandoned. At the session of 1831-32, by the order of the judi-
<'iary committee, he prepared an elaborate and able report, which he submitted
to the house, on the subject of capital punishments, which attracted great at
tention throughout the Union.
Gov. Brown first became a candidate for Congress in 1839. At two for
mer elections the whigs had carried his district by majorities ranging from ele
ven to twelve hundred votes. His competitor, the Hon. E. J. Shields, had
served in the two preceding Congresses. He was a gentleman of fine talents,
and one of the most plausible and handsome debaters of his party. When the
election came off, however. Gov. Brown was found not only to have ovcrcoiiie
the large party majority against him, but to have overcome it by the immense
majority of sixteen hundred and one votes. He was re-elected for the called
session of Congress in 1841, without having any opposition. In 1843, the
congressional district was altered so as greatly to diminish the democratic ma
jority by which Gov. Brown had been usually elected iu the old district. This
induced hopes that he might possibly be beaten in the new one, and all the regu
lar steps were taken to present a competitor in the person of the Hon. N. .-'.
Brown, now minister to Russia. The result, however, demonstrated that the
democracy of the new district, although not in so large a majority as in the
old one, was nevertheless equally invincible.
During the period of his congressional service, beginning in 1839 and ending
in 1845, Gov. Brown seems to have been au active member, taking a part in
nearly all the great questions which came up during that eventful portion of
our political history.
In May, 1840, he delivered a speech in reply to Mr. Bell, on the bill intro
duced by that gentleman, •' to secure the freedom of elections. " He also made
a speech on the Celebrated New-Jersey case, having been a member of the
committee which reported on the same. His speech on the burning of the
Caroline, to be found in the Congressional Globe and appendix of 1841, was
listened to by the house with.profound attention and emotion, and is regarded hy
his friends as one of his ablest efforts in Congress. He was a member of the com
mittee which framed the tariff of 1842, and united with the minority in presen
ting a report against the principles and details of that measure. When the
bill came up for discussion. Gov. Brown made a clear and powerful argument
against it, opening the debate on the democratic side of the house. On the
4th of August, 1841, he delivered a speech against the fiscal bank bill, which
occupied so large a portion of public solicitude at that time. He made speeches
in 1844 on the remission of the fine imposed on Gen. Jackson at Xew-Orleans,
and against receiving and reporting on abolition petitions ; also, on the right
of members elected by general ticket to their seats.
It was in December, 18-14, that Gov. Brown found it necessary to reply to
sundry speeches of Mr. Adams, made in Massachusetts, in relation to the ne
gotiation of the Florida treaty. That reply having a direct reference to in-

^ BIOGRAPHICAL SEETCH,
3idents occurring in the congressional career of Gov. Brown, may be seen m
the Daily Globe of December 14, 1844. A reply to Mr. Adams, on the Ore
gon bill, maybe seen in the " Constitution" of January 29, 1845, and also a
reply to another speech of Mr. Adams may be seen in the National Intelligencer
of February 3, 1845.
On the 12th March, 1844, Gov. Brown, as chairman of the committee on
territories, reported a bill to extend the civil and criminal jurisdiction of the
several courts of the territory of Iowa over the territory of Oregon, and for
other purposes. At the next session he reported another bill, organizing a
territorial government for Oregon, which passed the house by a large majority,
but was lost in the senate.
Governor Brown's seivice in Congress ended with the commencement of
President Polk's administration. He declined any office under the admhiis-
tration, and determined to return home and devote himself tothe education of
his Children and the management of his own private affairs. Before he reached
hom?, however, he was nominated by the democratic party as its candidate for
governor. He met the news of this nomination at Pittsburg, and hesitated
many days whether he would accept it or not. It conflicted with all his pur
poses to retire to private life to accept it, and opened a wide field of labor
with but little prospect of success. Mr. Polk had failed twice for the same
office, and could not carry the state in his presidential race, under aUthe zeal
and excitement which it created. Besides this, Mr. Polk, in organizing his
administration, and selecting his friends for different offices, had withdrawn
from the state some of the most influential and powerful members of the party.
He himself was gone, Hon. Cave -Johnson was gone, General Robert Arm
strong was gone, and several others whose weight had been always felt in state
elections. Discouraging, however, as were the prospects, he finaUy determined
to take the field agr.inst Col. Foster, a late senator, and one of the most popular
and able men of the M'hig party. The discussion of the canvass turned chiefly
on the tariff, the Texas and Oregon questions.
In this canvass Gov. Brown was elected by a majority of one thousand five
hundred or one thousand six huudred ; but in that of 1847, he was defeated by
about half that number. For the last twelve years parties have been so nearly
balanced in Tennessee that they have carried the state alternately against each
other. The one last defeated brings to the polls at the next election a Httle
more zeal and determination to retrieve their last misfortune, and are therefore
very apt to prove triumjihant.
In the next j'ear, 1848, Gov. Brown -nas a candidate for elector for the state
at large, aud canvassed it ^vith great vigor, sustaining and even surpassinn- the
rejjutation which he had previously acquired.
In 18.'i0, he wasa member ofthe Southern Convention held at Nashville
Jle concurred fully in the resolutions passed at the first session of that bod ''
but ilisscnted from and protested against the address. At the second sessioi f
that body in November following. Gov. Brown dissented altogether from tl e
rrjiiirt submitted by tho committee on resolutions; and, to exhibit his
views and those of the democracy of the state, prepared what was called and
known as the Tennessee Platform, which, after being submitted to the deleo-a

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. b
tion of the state and being approved by them, was by their order submitted by
General Pillow to the convention. His whole course at both sessions was emi
nently conservative. At neither session, and at no stage of the slavery agita
tion, would he hear or think of a dissolution of the Union. He considered
secession or a dissolution of the Union as no remedy for alleged grievances. —
His favorite remedy against the whole series of aggressions was retaliation, as
set forth in the Tennessee Platform. This he believed would soon exhibit to
the North a greater power to injure them than they have had to injure the
South ; and that, upon the simple principle of self-interest, both sections would
presently cease the profitless controversy.
The last public station which Gov. Brown has occupied was that of a dele
gate from the state at large iu the late Baltimore convention. He introduced
a very important resolution into that body, raising a committee of one from
each state, to be appointed by the delegates from each state, to whom all reso
lutions relative to the principles or platform of the democratic party should be
referred without debate. The importance of such a reference, ivitJiout debate,
was instantly perceived, and the resolution was adopted. He was unanimously
appointed the chairman, and subsequently reported the platform, which has
given such general satisfaction to his party in every portion of the United
.States. Gov. Brown has reason to be proud of the concurrence of his party
in the platforms v.'hich, at different times, he has prepared for them. He was
the author of the Tennessee platform in the Southern Convention. He pre
pared and presented the platform which was unanimously sanctioned in the
convention at Nashville, on v/hich the last gubernatorial battle was fought in
Tennessee ; and that he had the honor assigned to him of reporting the national
platform of democratic principles at the late convention was highly gratifying
to his numerous friends.

PART I

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

SPEECH.
On the Bill introduced ly Mr. Bell, to Secure the Freedom qf
Elections, and to provide for the Faithful Administration of
the Executive Patronage. House of Representatives, May
\mh and 20th, 1840.

Mr. Brown having obtained the floor, said :
He had listened with profound attention to the arguments of
both his colleagues (Mr. Gentry and Mr. Bell,) in favor of this
bill. He had done so, because he was desirous to know on
what new statement of facts, or by what new process of rea
soning, this odious measure was now to be revived, and again
pressed on the consideration of the public, after its signal fail
ure in the other end of the Capitol, and after that deep and
decided reprobation of it which had been manifested in so
many of the elections of this country. He was particularly
anxious to discover whether misfortunes had not subdued, or
at least chastened and softened down, some of those fierce and
angry passions with which it was first advocated ; misfortunes
that have fallen with peculiar force on those gentlemen's own
personal and political friends. One of them (Mr. Bell,) a few
weeks since, on the Cumberland road bill, gave us a most
touching and eloquent description of those misfortunes. " He
had seen (said he,) during the last summer, one friend after
another dropping around him," until that proud and exulting
majority by which he used to be surrounded on this floor from
his own State, was now sadly reduced to a solitary unit. Look
ing at the other end of the Capitol, he might have told us that
this mortality among his friends had been still greater; there,
nothing was to be met with but one entire and perfect scene of
desolation and defeat. Sir (said Mr. Brown,) I was anxious

10 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
to observe that gentleman, when he should walk forth amid the
ruins which this very bill had so mainly contributed to spread
around him. I sincerely hoped that a contemplation of them
might induce him to pause, and hesitate, and finally to abandon
a measure which has heretofore produced such fatal results.
But, sir, I am sorry to have to say, what many persons have
observed before, that misfortunes, when they fail to reform, are
almost sure to harden us ; and that even the dispensations of
Providence, when not rightly improved, often superadd to our
desperation, and plunge us still deeper into those vices and
follies which they were intended to reform.
I do not intend to apply such observations as these to the
gentleman's course generally in this House. I have had fve-
quent occasions not only to approve, but even to applaud, his
calm and dignified mode of argument, during the disorders and
tumults ofthe session. But, sir, I -do mean to say, that, on
this particular subject and its kindred ones, the gentleman
never fails to lose his equanimity of temper, and to expose
himself to the imputation of being governed more by the sug
gestions of passion, than guided by the dictates of reason, or
the honest convictions of opinion. In much of that ai-gument
to which I wish now to reply, the gentleman seemed determined
to have no compeer, in bold denunciation, in reckless invective,
in wild and furious declamation. He seemed to imagine that
he had driven Democracy into its last fortress, and that he was
then making a bold and heroic charge, that was to demolish it
for ever ; or, to use his more sanguinary mode of expression,
" he was striking a deadly blow at the life-blood of the party
— that vile, corrupt, and infamous party which had so long
ruled the destinies of this country." But, sir, the democratic
party of this country was not let off" with even such denuncia
tions as these. The gentleman (Mr. Bell,) became so far trans
ported as to compare it to that fabled monster, the Parisian vam
pire, that subsisted"by sucking the blood from the warm and beat
ing arteries of sleeping innocence." He described the end and
destruction of that unnatural monster, and declared that he
could see in that end the writhing and expiring contortions of
the putrid and bloated carcass of democracy. Sir, I allude
to these extravaganzas in the speech of my honorable colleague,

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 1 1
in order to assure him that, in my humble judgment, great as
aj-e his powers of description and comparison, no one but him
self could see the slightest resemblance in this imaginary pic
ture. No. If you wish to see a resemblance of that Parisian
monster, go find it in that proud and bloated aristocracy that
has so long fed and fattened on the people of this country.
Go find it in that system of associated wealth and exclusive
privilege, in all its odious forms and varieties, which has been
so long consuming our substance, and which is now beginning to
crumble beneath its own magnitude, and to expire in the midst
of its own rottenness and corruption.
But, Mr. Speaker, I do not mean to content myself with
making general observations like these against the present bill.
It was introduced originally about three years ago, notoriously
with the view of breaking down the Democratic party of the
Union. But more especially was it intended to break down the
Jackson or Democratic party in the State of Tennessee. It is
now revived evidently for the same purpose, and was pressed
upon this House in a tone of exultation and defiance which
seemed at the time as though it was intended to provoke and chal
lenge a reply. Sir, I do not feel especially called on to repel
attacks made against the Democratic party generally. I have
no connexion with that party sufficiently notorious to justify me
in presuming to become her champion. In my own State,
however, that connexion is not quite so obscure and unknown.
Although never aspiring to be one of her leaders, I have been
for twenty years enrolled among her most zealous and faithful
private soldiers. If I seem now for the moment to step out
from her lines, and to take position above that of a mere pri
vate, it is only because those who used to bear her banner high
and proudly amid the ranks of her enemies, have now not only
surrendered that banner into the hands of her enemies, but
are foremost in the onslaught and loudest in the battle-cry
against her !
Let us now turn our attention to the provisions of this bill,
the end and aim of which are avowed to be the destruction of
the present Democratic party ofthe United States^ — that party
which the gentleman was pleased to denounce in his speech on

12

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES:

the Cumberland road bill to be " a standing fraud and imposi
tion on this country."
I begin, sir, with its caption : " A bill to secure the freedom
of elections." The elections ofthe people ofthe United States;
all the elections. State and Federal, in all the States. The
freedom of the elections of the United States ! Sir, you have
but to state the proposition, in any company, in any State or
county in this Union, to raise the smile of derision at its absur
dity. What! our elections not free enough in this country",
where every man goes forward to the polls of his own accord,
and casts his vote for whom he pleases ! goes in his own un
questioned and unquestionable majesty, asking no man's per
mission, and submitting to no limitation or restriction on his
rights whatsoever ! How can you secure more freedom to us
in elections than we now enjoy? How can you better secure,
hy law, that freedom which has been for more than fifty years
secured to us by the Constitution ? Sir, it is like substituting
statutory freedom for constitutional freedom. It is a good deal
like what the advocates of this bill call "the purity ofthe
elective franchise." Not that purity which is felt and preserved
in the hearts of the honest citizens of this country; not that
virtue which, emanating from the heart, controls and governs
the conduct of the people in administering their own govern
ment in their own way, and for their own advantage and pros
perity; but a sort of pretended legal purity; a sort of hypocri
tical statutory virtue, which would yield to all sorts of political
prostitutions on the first seducing bribe that might be laid in
its way. Away with these forms and shadows ; if the people
have not pm-ity and virtue enough (as the high toned Federahsts
have always said they had not,) to govern themselves, you can
never infuse those qualities into them by any process of the
law. So much for the caption of this bill. I call youi- atten
tion now to the preamble or recitals of it. The first one of
these recitals is the following :
"Whereas, complaints are made that officers ofthe United States, or persons
holding olfices or employments under the authority of the same, other than the
heads of the chief Executive Departments, or such officers as stand in the
relation of constitutional advisers of the President, have been removed from
office or dismissed from their employment vqion political grounds, or for opin
ion's sake ; and whereas, such a practice is manifestly a violation of the

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 13
freedom of elections, an attack upon the public liberty, and a high misde
meanor." Here, sir, is a preamble, for which there is no proposed en
actment. It alleges certain conduct to be a high misdemeanor,
yet proposes no penalty or punishment for the crime. Why,
then, is it intruded here on this paper? Sir, I take it to be a
perfect anomaly ; a thing unknown before in the history of le
gislation. 1 again demand to know why it is put down in the
preamble, but not inserted in the enacting clause of the bill?
I can draw but one conclusion from this strange fact, an"d that
is, that the doctrine will do to profess but not to practice; to
show off a speech upon, in order to excite popular feelings, but
not to be established as one of the laws of the land, which it is
known would have to be repealed so soon as its operation was
seen and understood. I mean to examine this, dangling su
pernumerary presently to show that the arguments in
its favor are all fallacious, and the facts on which it purports to
be based have no existence. I pass on to the second clause of
the preamble, in the following words :
" Whereas, complaints are also made that officers of the United States, or
persons holding offices or employments under the authority of the same, are in
the habit of intermeddling in elections, both State and Federal, otherwise than
by giving their votes ; and whereas, such a practice is a violation of the free
dom of elections, and a gross abuse, which ought to be discountenanced by the
appointing power, and prohibited by law."
" Be it enacted, Ifc, That, from and after the first day of July next, no officer,
agent, or contractor, or other person holding an office or employment of trust
or jjrofit under the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall, by the
contribution of money or other valuable thing, or by the use ofthe franking privi
lege, or the abuse of any other official privilege or function, or by threats and me
naces, or in any other manner, intermeddle with the election of any member or mem
bers of either House of Congress, or of the President or Vice President of the
United States, or of the Governor or other officer of any State, or of any mem
ber or members of the Legislature of any State ; and every such officer or
other person offending therein, shall beheld to be guilty of a high misdemeanor;
and on conviction in any court ofthe United States, having jurisdiction thereof,
shall pay a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars."
This is the first section of the bill. According to its provis
ions, it will be seen that every grade of office and every variety
of employment, under the United States, is included; also,
that every thing and any thing said or done by them (except

14 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
simply giving in their own votes) is to be taken as an intermed
dling in the election, and therefore to be punished by a fine
not exceeding one thousand dollars. Now, sir, the application
of this law to my own State is what I desire to bring before the
House. There, sir, we have but few public officers of any grade,
except our postmasters ; we have some half dozen of these, on
an average, in each county. Those at our county towns com
monly receive some two or three hundred dollars — rarely so
much as five hundred. At the lesser villages and country
stores, and at the neighborhood post-offices, it is quite frequent
that the compensation does not amount to fifty or one hundred
dollars. The office is in fact taken as an encumbrance, sub
mitted to for neighborhood convenience. Now, sir, all these
postmasters, beside being officers of the United States, are citi
zens of the United States and of the State of Tennessee.
They are deeply interested as citizens in the elections, both
State and Federal; in the county elections of sheriffs, clerks,
registers, &c.; in the military elections of those officers, under
whom they may have to serve in times of war. Yet, sir, it is
proposed that a little fifty-dollar appointment as postmaster is
to weigh down all his other interest as a citizen; and, if he
dare open his mouth in favor of one candidate or the other, he
is to be instantly fined one thousand dollars. If called on to
state a fact in his own knowledge, and perhaps in the knowl
edge of nobody else, which it is ofthe highest consequence to the
country should be known — a fact which became known to him
long before he was a postmaster — he must conceal that fact; he
must suppress and hide the truth from his countrymen, or pay
down the penalty of one thousand dollars. Sir, is this my col
league's notions of the liberty, freedom and purity of our elec
tions? To speak out will oSeci the elections just as far as
truth and character will and ought to affect them ; to seal up
his lips and suppress the truth loill also affect the election, and
put men into office who have no honesty in civil afl^airs, nor
courage nor skill for the defence of the country in military ap
pointments. Now, sir, there arc, on an average for each county
in Tennessee, a half-dozen of our fellow-citizens who have the
common rights of citizens; they have the liberty of speech un
der all the guarantees of the Constitution ; they have, however

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 15
undertaken to perform the duties of postmasters for their re-
-spective villages and neighborhoods ; and for this they are to
be disfranchised, deprived of the liberty of speech, and com
pelled to stand silent and gagged in the midst of their fellow-
citizens. Sir, is this the freedom after which my colleague has
been seeking under this bill ? If it is, God forbid that he
should ever find it. For one, I repudiate and scorn such dis
tinctions in a free country. I repudiate and scorn a principle
that sets one neighbor as a spy over another, and which ena
bles one man to propagate the vilest falsehood on another, be
cause his exposure can only be made by a postmaster, whose
lips are hermetically sealed under the enormous penalty of
one thousand dollars. Sir, this bill should be rather called a
bill offering a premium to falsehood and defamation ; a bill to
enslave a large portion of American freemen, because they are
willing to undertake the performance of high and necessary
pubhc duties ; a bill to establish slavery in all our elections, by
depriving one portion of the community of those rights and
privileges allowed to all the rest. Sir, I shall show you pres
ently that those illustrious sages and patriots, who lived in the
earher and purer days of the Republic, rejected with scorn the
very provisions of the bill now under consideration. Before I
present their opinions on this branch of the subject, let me ad
vert to the arguments and doctrines of my honorable colleague
in relation to the appointing and removing power of the Exec
utive ; remember that the argument of the gentleman was
made on the preamble of his bill, for which there was no cor
responding prohibitory or penal enactment. The argument
then, like the preamble, might therefore be regarded as a mere
abstraction, calculated to do no particular good nor harm any
way. But I know my honorable colleague too well not to un
derstand that all the labor he has bestowed in ascertaining the
opinion of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and other illustri
ous individuals, is not intended to be lost as a mere abstraction,
accidently brought up in the course of this discussion. No,
sir, that portion of the gentleman's argument will no doubt, in
due season, make its appearance in the Whig papers of our
State in blazing capitals. Well, sir, and what were the opin
ions of those illustrious men on the question of appointments

16 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
to office, which necessarily includes also their opinions in rela
tion to removals wherever the right to remove has been
conceded. I begin with Gen. Washington. In his letter to Mr. Picker
ing, dated September, 1795, he uses the following emphatic
language : " I shall not, while I have the honor to administer
the Government, bring a man into any office of consequence,
knowingly, whose political tenets are adverse to the measures
which the General Government are pursuing ; for this, in my
opinion, would be a sort of political suicide : that it would
embarrass its movements is most certain. But of two men
equally weli affected to the true interest of their country, of
equal abilities, it is the part of prudence to give the preference
to him against whom the least clamor can be excited." Ob
serve, sir, that in this opinion of Gen. Washington, he makes
no reference to monarchist, or to persons opposed to that Rev
olution which secured to us our nationai independence. He
goes beyond all this, and speaks of political tenets adverse to
the measures of the General Government. This preamble
recites that removals on political grounds are high misdemean
ors. Gen. Washington declares that a difference in political
tenets is sufficient grounds for refusing appointments. This
preamble recites that removals upon political grounds is an
attack on public liberty. Gen. Washington declares, that
appointments to office of such as hold political tenets adverse
to the principles of his administration of the Government,
would be a sort of political suicide. Sir, this brief parallel
between this recital in the bill and the opinions of Gen. Wash
ington, directly on the point, ought for ever to seal the fate
of this proposition, so far as his distinguished authority is
concerned. Immediately after "the retirement of Gen. Washington, a
contest sprung up for the succession between the elder Adams
and Mr. Jefferson. The elements of party, before that time,
had taken no definite form, or shape ; they were " rudis indi-
gestaque moles." In that contest, however, they became settled
and distinct. The Federalists adhered to Mr. Adams ; the
Republicans to Mr. Jefferson. Mr. Adams succeeded, and under
him, the Federalists took ppssession of nearly every office of

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 1'7
his administration. In support of this fact, I refer to the 3d
volume of Mr. Jefferson's works, page 476. In his celebrated
New Haven letter he remarks, " It would have been to me a
circumstance of great relief, had I found a moderate participa
tion of office in the hands ofthe majority ; I would gladly have
left to time and accident to raise them to their just share ; but
their total exclusion calls for prompter corrections." In his let
ter to Levi Lincoln, 3d volume, page 477, he remarks : " I had
foreseen, years ago, that the flrst Republican President who
should come into office after all the places in the Government
had become exclusively occupied by Federalists, would have
a dreadful operation to perform ; that the Republicans would
consent to a continuation of every thing in Federal hands was
not to be expected, because neither just nor politic. On him
was then to devolve the office of an executioner — that of
lopping off."
I read these extracts now only"" to establish the fact of a
toted exclusion from office of the Republicans under the elder
Adams's administration. Mr. Jefferson succeeded Mr. Adams.
He was elected by the Republican party, and was its great
apostle and founder. The lapse of years has only thrown a
holier reverence around his name, and the political researches
of the age have only given a brighter lustre to the principles
of simplicity, economy, and equality, which he inculcated on
his followers. Sir, it is that hallowed reverence for his name
and his principles, which is yet cherished by a large proportion
of the American people, that my colleague attempts now to
make subservient to the destruction of his true friends and
followers, and to strengthen the reviving energies of that old
Federal party which he so signally vanquished in 1801. Yes,
sir, strange as it may seem," the watchword of " Jefferson and
liberty" is now being stolen by that very Federal party into
whose ranks it once carried dismay and terror and destruction.
What has any party to do with that watchword that holds in
its rank and hugs to its bosom every anti-war Federalist on
this floor, save one whose reformation dates back for twenty
years, and whose devotion to Republican principles, during all
that tinie, gives double assurance ofthe sincerity and thorough
ness of his reformation? What, I repeat, has an Essex-junto
3

18 COKGRESSIONAI SPEECHES.
man, and an anti-war Federalist, to do with the watchword of
" Jefferson and liberty ?" It should blister the tongue that re
peats it, and crimson with shame all who concur in the pro
fanation. Sir, I have reached the point where I mean to give
battle to my honorable colleague. " War to the knife," if he
may choose to have it so. He maintains that Gen. Jackson's
administration, and that of Mr. Van Buren, was not, and is not,
Jeffers onian in its character; or, in other words, that General
Jackson and Mr. Van Buren are not " Democrats of the Jeffer-
sonian school," because they have both outraged the principles
of Mr. Jefferson in making appointments and removals from
office : that they have proscribed men for opinion's sake, and
ejected them from office against all the principles and practices
of that great apostle of hberty. I not only deny these asser
tions, but 1 here undertake to disprove them altogether.
Sir, 1 repeat, for greater perspicuity, that I now here under
take to show that both General Jackson's and Mr. Van Buren's
administrations have been far less prescriptive than Mr. Jeffer-
s.on's was. That great man's principles and practices, on the
subject of appointments and removals, have been extensively
misunderstood, because they, have been misrepresented. I now
refer to his own lettergforproof of his true doctrine.
He came into office on the 4th of March, 1801. All the
offices of the Government were in the hands of the Federahsts.
That whole party, with a furious desperation, then, if not yet,
unequalled in the annals of political warfare, resisted his elec
tion. The Republicans, however, taunted as they were a^
" greasy Democrats," derided, then as now, with being but as
the rabble of the nation, bore him onward, until they placed
him in the highest office in the gift of a free people. Intsalled
into office, the question instantly arose, what cotirse he would
pursue in making appointments and removals from office.
The whole Federal party had denounced him: would he no*^
denounce them? The question was soon solved. He drew a
distinction between Federalists. 1. The Federalist proper.
2. Those who were called Federalists, but, in fact, were Repub
licans in principle, but who had been deceived and so made to
act with the Federalists, while at heart, they were sound Re
publicans. The first class or Federalist proper, he rejected on

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 19
all occasions, turning them out, without exception and without
ceremony. They were monarchist in principle, and were, there
fore, not proper agents under him, to carry out and perpetuate
our Republican institutions. The second class (the Federal
sect of RepubUcans, as he termed them) he permitted to par
ticipate in the offices, to a certain degree. To show that I have
stated Mr. Jefferson's principles with entire and perfect ac
curacy, I will read from his letter to Mr. Lincoln, dated July 1 1 ,
1801 :
" Dear Sir : Your favor of the I6th came to hand on the 25th June,
and conveyed a great deal of that information which I am anxious to re
ceive. The consoKdation of our fellow-citizens in general, is the great
object we ought to keep in view ; and that being once obtained, while we
associate with us in affairs to a certain degree, the Federal sect of Repub
licans, a;e mii^i s/rip of all the means of influence, the Essex-Junto and
their associate monarchists in eveiy part of the Union. The former diflFer
from us only in the shades of power to be given to the Executive, being
with us attached to Repubhcan government. The latter wish to sap the
repubhc hy fraud, if they cannot destroy it by force, and to erect an English
monarchy in its place ; some of them (as Mr. Adams) thinking its corrupt
parts should be cleansed away, others (as Mr. Hamilton) thinking that
would make it an impracticable machine. We are proceeding gradually in
the regeneration of offices and introducing Republicans to some share in
them. I do not know that it will be pushed farther than was settled before
you went away, except as to Essex men. I must ask you to make out a list
of those in office in yours, and the neighboring States, and to furnish me
with it. There is a little of this spirit south of the Hudson. I under
stand that J****** is a very determined one, though in private life amia
ble and honorable ; but amiable monarchists are not safe subjects of Re
publican confidence. * * * * Our gradual reformations
seem to produce good effects everywhere except in Connecticut. Their
late session of the Legislature has been more intolerant than all others.
We must meet them with equal intolerance. When they will give a share in
the State offices, they shall he replaced in a share of the general offices.
Till then we must follow their example."
To what degree of participation in the offices, Mr. Jefferson
admitted the second class of Federalist, may be seen in his let-
^r of the 11th September, 1804, to Mr. Adams, in which he
States, thatthey were admitted in fair proportion to their num
ber throughout the United States. Sir, I have now spread out
before you, as on a map, the opinion and practices of Jeffer
son. They admit of no cavil and no misunderstanding. Now

20 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
I demand to know when and where — in what year of his admin
istration or in what State of this Union — was General Jackson
more intolerant than Mr. Jefferson? When did he say " We
must meet them with equal intolerance ?" When did he say to
those States who were most opposed to him, and who proscribed
all his friends from office, " Until you will give a share in the
State offices, we will follow your example V Never, never ! In
my own State, there never was a day or an hour, during his ad
ministration, that General Jackson did not retain a greater
number of his enemies in office than they would have borne to
the number of anti- Jackson men in that State ; and yet, sir, we
are told that General Jackson exceeded Mr. Jefferson in in
tolerance toward his enemies !
How does the same question now stand under the present
Administration? Throughout the United States I do verily be
lieve that a majority of the office-holders have been and still are
opposed to Mr. Van Buren. The very best estimates that have
been made show the fact satisfactorily to every impartial mind.
Does this look like proscription for opinion's sake? In my own
state the fact has never been denied. In my own district, three
out ofthe five postmasters of the county towns which I repre
sent, are thorough-going Whigs : active, zealous partisans.
Some of them made heavy bets against the candidates of the
Administration in the last elections. They attended public as
semblies out of their respective neighborhoods, and exerted all
the influence they possessed in the election. Sir, let me assure
my honorable colleague, that if his bill had passed before the
last Tennessee elections, it would have cut right and left
among his Whig friends in that State. Instead of dealing a
deadly blow " on the life-blood of the party there," it would,
have rebounded on the heads of his own friends.
But it is often said, while Mr. Van Buren may have retained
an equal number of his enemies in office, it has only been in
the inferior ones, such as postmasters. Sir, a postmaster
is very far from being an inferior appointment, so far as
political results are to be attained. It is, in my judgment,
to precisely such officers that General Washington allud
ed, when he declared he would appoint no person to any
office of consequence, who was opposed to the principles

ON THE FREEDOM OP ELECTIONS. 21
of his administration of the Government. It is through
the postoffices that the press exerts its mighty power on
the public mind. Every postmaster has it in his power,
more or less, to paralize its exertion, by suppressing public
documents ; or, if he dare not go so far as that, by laying them
away upon some dusty shelf, and not handing them out to the
people, until regularly and distinctly demanded. On the con
trary, a willing postmaster, favorable tothe views of one party,
may hail his fellow-citizens as they pass, and notify them that
letters and packages have arrived at the office, addressed to
them, and thus give them a wide and instantaneous circulation.
If any man desires to be convinced of all this, let him but ex
amine and inquire at the postoffices after the adjournment ofthe
present session, and see, at some of them, what heaps of let
ters and doQuments will remain piled up and undistributed for
weeks and perhaps months after their arrival. I mean to look
into this practice on my rcturij, and no instance of partiality,
such as I am commenting upon, shall go unrebuked. I assure
my honorable colleague that even the biography of General
Harrison, and the speeches of the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Stanly,) with which he has been deluging my
district, shall be faithfully and impartially distributed. So far,
therefore, as political results are concerned, your postmaster is
an officer of the highest consequence ; and it is, therefore, the
best proof of liberafity and toleration, that Mr. Van Bm-en and
General Jackson could have given, to have let in their enemies
into an equal if not greater participation in them. A liberality
greater than Washington's, or Jefferson's, or any other Presi
dent's, unless it may be that of Mr. Monroe.
Sir, I have not yet said anything in relation to the opinions
of Mr. Madison. My honorable colleague was pleased to
hold him up as a most perfect model of a great statesman,
whose opinions should make a deep and lasting impression on
his countrymen. I concur with him in his high eulogy on that
illustrious patriot. Reared in Virginia, that mother of so many
presidents, I was early taught, next to that of Washington, to
revere the names of Madison and of Jefferson. Then, as now, I
paid no homage to the opinions of one which was not paid
equally to those of the other. Then, as now, I regarded them

22

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

as two bright but equal luminaries, by whose light it will be
safe, at all times, for their countrymen to walk. I now invite
my honorable colleague to test his bill by the lights of Mr.
Madison's opinions. My honorable colleague has, no doubt,
often consoled himself with the belief that he stood foremost
of, all others, in discovering this favorite remedy for preserving
the purity, and securing the freedom, of elections ! But what
will be his surprise when I inform him that this same gag^
remedy was discovered and proposed almost fifty years ago ;
actually discovered and proposed almost fifty years ago! Yes,
sir, there were " Surgeon Crittendens" then as well as now !
But they were then, as now, pronounced mere empirics ; and
their quack remedies, rejected and condemned, as they now
are; rejected and condemned by Mr. Madison himself, that
favorite authority to which the gentleman referred, and on
which he so confidently relied. Dropping all figures of speech,
I will now give you the recorded opinions of Mr. Madison. I
read from Dunlap's Daily Advertiser of January 22, 1791 :
"House of Representatives, January 22, 1791.— Excise bill was un
der discussion ; Mr. Jackson [I think of Georgia] moved to amend the bill
by inserting the following :
" And be it further enacted, That if any inspector or other officer, or per
son concerned in the collection of the revenue to be raised by this act,
shall by any message or writing, or in any other manner, persuade or en
deavor to persuade, any elector to give, or dissuade, or endeavor to dissuade,
any from giving his vote in the choice of any person to be a member of the
House of Representatives, member of the Senate, or President of the
United States, such inspector, or other person so offending, shall be for
ever disabled from holding an office under this act, and shall be subject to a
penalty of  dollars."
The vote was taken by ayes and noes — ayes 21, noes 37 :
Mr. Madison and the celebrated repubhcan, Wm. B. Giles,
voting in the negative. Sir, here was the first gag bill ever
offered in America. It was confined to those officers concerned
in the collection of the revenue, and prohibited an interference
only in the election of certain officers in the Federal Govern
ment, and yet it was rejected by a majority of nearly two to
one, and by the votes of both Mr. Madison and Mr. Giles
two of the soundest republicans that ever lived in this country.
Where now, let me ask, is the boasted authority of Mr. Madison

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 23
in favor of this bill ? It stands recorded against it, on a bill
much less objectionable than the one now proposed by my
honorable colleague.
[Mr. Bell, here rose and said that he wisheil it to bo understood by tho
gentleman apd the House, that he would have voted against the amend
ment himself.]
Mr. Brown replied, then he apprehended he need not spend
90 much time against the gentleman's bill, since he began to
suspect that when it might come to the test he did not mean to
vote for it himself. But how can the authority of Mr. Madi
son be invoked in favor of this bill, when it is known that it
was his giant arm that dealt the blows that terminated the ex
istence of the alien and sedition laws : The great principle
thatpervadedtheseditionlawis the same as in this bill. That bill
punished all those who should utter or publish anything defama
tory against our rulers ; this punishes all who shall intermeddle
in elections, either for or against our rulers ; not those only
who are, but those who desire and offer to become our rulers ;
not in a few of the higher departments, but in all of them, both
State and federal, civil and military. That punished all offend
ing citizens, this only such as have superadded to the duties of
citizenship those of official station. That was, indeed, less
odious than the present bill. There the truth could be given
in evidence in order to shield the citizen from punishment ; here
truth has no advocate, and innocence finds no protection ; true
or false, one single word, uttered in an election more favorable
to one party than the other, shall subject the citizen to the
enormous fine of one thousand dollars. He may have ex
pressed an opinion unfavorable to his own party ; he may have
only insisted on the superior qualifications of one candidate
over those of another ; or he may have only urged some gal
lant achievement in war or some noble self-denying deed in
time of peace, as a consideration which entitled one party to
the gratitude of the country over his competitor and rival.
But I need not compare the relative merits of the present bill
and the sedition law. The same spirit animates them both —
a spirit that seeks to prostrate the dearest rights and privileges
of the people — a spirit that alike destroys the freedom of the
pres^ and the liberty of speech — a spirit which Mr. Madison

24

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

more than any other man then living contributed to subdue
and to extirpate. Sir, I challenge casuistry itself to draw any
sensible and clear distinction between the sedition law, Mr.
Crittenden's bill, and the bill of my honorable colleague. They
all contain the same principle, and that principle stands at
open war with those great provisions of the Constitution which
secure to the people the freedom of the press and the liberty
of speech.
From 1791 to 1837, with the exception of the ahen and
sedition laws, no attempt was made to force such legislation
as this on the country. During that long period the people
were contented that every citizen, whether a public officer or
not, should enjoy his constitutional rights. That the assump
tion of office was but the assumption of new duties and habili-
ties for the public good, and should, therefore, be attended with
no sacrifice, or destruction of his personal rights as a free citi
zen of this great republic. During all this time, I maintain
that our elections — all of them — ^both State and federal, were
eminently free : free as they could be — ^free as the air we
breathe and the water we drink. Everywhere through this
wide country, on our election days, every American citizen
walked forth to the ballot-box in his own personal majesty,
paying no homage, save to himself and the laws and the Con
stitution. I appeal to the history of our elections in the great
contest between the elder Adains and Mr. Jefferson ; to the no
less excited canvass between the 2d Adams and Gen. Jackson ;
to the contest between Mr. Clay, the now " great discarded,"
and General Jackson ; in fine to every one of our elections, to
show that all of them, every where, have been as free as our
glorious Constitution, and the proud, indomitable spirit of our
countrymen could make them.
What occasion, then, was there for the revival of this twice-
repudiated doctrine of abridging the privileges ofthe people 
repudiated by the wisest and best men that ever hved in any
age or in any country? The first reason given, and the one
most refied upon, is, that the President in office may use his
patronage so as to give him an undue advantage over all com
petitors. This patronage consists in the power of makino-
appointments under the express, or implied understanding.

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 25
that the appointee shall use his influence to promote the elec
tion of the President. Now, if all this were conceded, does
not my colleague perceive that the appropriate remedy would
have to be found, not in a gag bill, but in the amendment of
the Constitution, changing the appointing power into other
hands, or fimiting the period of presidential service to a single
term of four or six years ? By the last amendment, no contest
ever could take place between the ins and the outs. It would
then be, in every instance, not who should be put out, but who
shouldbe put into the presidential seat. Then, sir, there couldbe
no selfish motive prompting to an abuse of Executive patronage;
nor any adequate one for charging corruption and ambition on
any man who was faithfully endeavoring honestly to administer
the Government. It was under these views that I have already
•ubmitted a proposition to amend the Constitution ofthe United
States, in awaythat will, in my opinion, be the true and proper
remedy for all complaints, real and pretended, against Executive
patronage and dictation. I shall call it up in a few days, and see
what course the gentleman and his friends will take on this
subject.' But, sir, in the meantime, I hesitate not to say, that
this patronage is greatly overrated, as to its influence on elec
tions. On an average, the President cannot make more than a
dozen or two important appointments in each State; these
could not produce even a ripple on the broad and mighty sur
face of its population; beside this, an over-active zeal never
fails to weaken the cause it espouses.
The infiuence of office-holders is more than counterbalanced
by that of office-seekersv Let us examine it, first as to the per
sonal exertions ofthe parties themselves. Mr. Van Buren since
March, 1837,has been in. Mr. Clay, Mr. Webster, and General
Harrison, have all wanted to get in by putting Mr. Van Buren out.
Mr. Webster makes his electioneering tour through the north
west; Mr. Clay moves out upon the north, and arrogantly traver
ses Mr. Van Buren's own country. Gen. Harrison takes charge
ofthe mighty West, keeping up a brisk correspondence, remod
eling his old political opinions, and putting himself in as ac
ceptable a position as possible between the contending parties
of the day. Sir, do you not see at once that, on the score of
personal exertions, it is precisely three to one in favor of the

26 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
outs ? But it is said that the President in office has so much
patronage, so many offices to bestow, that it gives him an over
whelming advantage over all competitors. Well, let us pause
and examine the weight of this objection. Pie can appoint
one Secretary of State, and that one will have to work against
three Secretaries expectant without — that is, against Mr. Clay's
Secretary, Mr. Webster's Secretary, and General Harrison's
Secretary — three to one again — and so of the Secretary c^
War, and all the other secretaries ; and, in fact, of all the other
officers and agents of the Government, great and small. I
have always doubted whether this power of conferring office
was much calculated to advance the popularity of a President.
Many are always expecting to be called, while but few can ac
tually be chosen. The disappointed often fall back into a state
of indifference as to the future success of the President, and
sometimes find revenge for his supposed neglect and ingrati
tude in the open abandonment and denunciation of him. Sir,
I do not pause in the line of this argument to give you instances
of this sort during the period of General Jackson's administra
tion; they abounded to an extent which few have suspected;
they have no doubt abounded more or less in the history of
every administration.
Mr. Speaker, I have already stated that, for nearly half a
century, the people of the United States were contented and
satisfied with the unbounded and unquestioned freedom of their
elections. What occasion was there, then, for the revival of
this twice rejected proposition? twice rejected, at the time of
introduction, by my honorable colleague, in 1837. Sir, I re
member well ihe pretext then offered for its revival. It was the
alleged dictation of General Jackson — his dictation in writing
his Gwinn and Shelbyville letters, and expressing himself freely
and fully on the public men and the public measm-es of the day-
These, sir,were ihepretexts for all this cry oi dictation and of bring
ing Executive patronage to bear on the freedom of elections. And
yet, sir, now that the occasion has gone by — now that the smoke
of party contest has cleared up, so far as General Jackson is
concerned, no man can be found who can lay his finger on a
single line or sentence, ever written by General Jackson about
those times, that has the slightest resemblance to dictation to

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 27
his countrymen. To dictate, is to suggest, to point out with
authority, and is nearly synonymous with command. It is some
thing much stronger than mere counsel or advice, and j^et
is a shade lower than an imperative order. In the light of this
definition, I defy any man living to show, me a single expres
sion in the Gwinn letter which evinces the slightest wish on the
part of General Jackson to dictate — to order or command his
countrymen what course to pursue in the selection of his suc-
eessor. General Jackson was the acknowledged head of the
Republican party; he saw the dangers which surrounded it ; he
knew well the numerous and powerful enemies that were en
gaged to overthrow and destroy it; he knew well its strength
and power and invincibility, so long as it should remain undi
vided. When Judge White was brought forward, he instantly
perceived the dangers of division, and wrote his Gwinn letter
of counsel and advice, but not of dictation ; a letter expres
sive of no preference of Mr- Van Buren over Judge White ; a
letter exhorting only to unanimity, and pointing out, in his
judgment, the best means of attaining it. Yet, for doing this,
he was denounced by my colleague and his party as a tyrant,
a despot, and dictator. Yes, sir, for writing such a letter as
this, that man, whose whole hfe had been one continued scene
of noble and gallant daring in defence of his country, was de
nounced as a Roman dictator — ready and resolved to overturn
those very liberties which he would have died to maintain.
Sir, the advice and counsel of General Jackson on that occa
sion might by many have been considered injudicious, or even
indelicate, according to the taste and fancy of individuals.
But I maintain, before my countrymen and the world, that the
charge of dictation, so loudly and repeatedly made by my col
league and his party, is no where sustained by that letter.
But this unfounded charge of dictation is sometimes attemp
ted to be sustained by a reference to his Shelbyville letter ; a
letter written in reply to an invitation to partake of a pubUc
dinner proposed to be given to him by the noble-hearted Demo
cracy of Bedford county. He declined attending; alluded to
the recent and frequent political tergiversations which had oc
curred, but prophesied boldly that the people of Tennessee, in
spite of them, would stand true and steadfast to their ancien1>

28

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

Republican principles. Time has now subjected to its unerring
scrutiny the truth or falsehood of every statement made in
that letter. The banner of Mr. Clay under which my two col
leagues (Mr. Gentry and Mr. Bell) and their whole party fought
the battles of the last Tennessee campaign, was at once the
evidence of their change, and the signal of their defeat. If
further proof shouldbe required to tear away every shred of doubt,
which might yet hang around this question of imputed change, .
let it be found in the nomination of the Harrisburg convention.
No, not in that convention, for Tennessee was not there ; her late
leaders had not the face to ask her to be there. They knew
that, on direct proposal, Tennessee would shrink from the ad
justment of rival pretensions between three individuals, every
one of whom she had rejected on former occasions. No, not in
that convention, but in that confirmation of its proceedings
which took place in this city ; a confirmation in which both of
my honorable colleagues participated, and which has since re
ceived the sanction and approval of nearly their whole party
in Tennessee.
This Shelbyville letter was the first warning given by General
Jackson, that a deep laid scheme had been formed to throw
Tennessee out ofthe Republican ranks, and to place her among
the opposition or Federal States of the Union. The improba
bility of success in so daring an attempt, encouraged the bold
est and most unequivocal denials of the charge, denials so bold
and so unequivocal that the known sagacity of General Jackson
and his deep and holy devotion to the Republican institutions
of his country, could scarcely save him from the imputation of
having slandered and traduced the alleged authors of the at
tempt. But time, I repeat, has dissipated every doubt on the
subject. Those who were designated in that letter as newborn
Whigs (to indicate that they were not of that ancient and im
mortal band who so justly and so proudly bore the name) now
no longer attempt to conceal their purposes ; but boldly and
pubhcly claim Tennessee to be an opposition State; trained,
during the last summer, under the banner of Mr. Clay, but to
h& enlisted permanently, 'm.ihene:i.i,v,ndev that of General Har
rison. Sir, I thank God that General Jackson lived long enough
to see the refluent wave of the popular will in the last elections.

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 29
to hear the coming murmurs of an indignant and deceived peo
ple ; but I sincerely pray that he may live to see (and, living,
heivill see) how proudly that noble and gallant State will resume
her position among the Republican States, faithful and devoted
as she was at the moment when her most illustrious citizen
retired from the toils and labors of public life to repose be
neath the shade of her majestic forests. Sir, I but glance at
these things. I refer to and comment on the Gwinn and Shel
byville letters, because they constitute a part of the history of
this bill, the original pretext for its introduction. I have no
disposition to revive them unnecessarily in the public remem
brance, but a reference to them is indispensible, to show that
the original pretext was as groundless as the present necessity
for it, under this Administration, is notoriously insufficient.
Mr. Speaker, I desire now to reply to some of the com
plaints made by one of my colleagues (Mr. Bell) against the
Democratic party of our State, in his speech on the Cumber
land road bill. On that bill, scarcely noticing the merits of
the question, its constitutionality or expediency, he took occa
sion to denounce the past and present administrations " as a
standing fraud on the country." A standing fraud in having
professed to be opposed to internal improvements ; when, in
truth and in fact, it only pretended and feigned such an oppo
sition just before an election. By means of this fraud
the Democratic party of his own State had been imposed upon
and had read him out of the church as a heretic and unbeliever.
I might take issue with him on all these points. I might de
mand the proofs of these bold assertions ; but they are stale
charges which have been often refuted, and would lead me off"
from the alleged imposition on the Democracy of Tennessee.
Sir, from the day of the veto message of President Jackson on
the Maysville road bill, the people of our State have under
stood that subject well. In her primary assemblies, in het
legislature, and in her convention of 1835, Tennessee approved
that message. All her public men, with no remembered excep
tion, then paid homage to its principles and doctrines. I do not
understand my honorable colleague as now questioning its pro
priety, but as resting his complaints on the ground that he has
been excommunicated, not for any vote given, or speech made

3^ CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
here in favor of internal improvements, but because his polit
ical associations in this House were with those who were op
posed to that message. I fear that the gentleman has in some
degree mistaken the grounds of his excommunication. It was
because, professing to be opposed to the whole scheme of in
ternal improvements himself, he enlisted under the banner
and became the warm and zealous advocate of those who were
in favor of them ; exerting his great talents and inffuence to
transfer the power of this Government to hands which he knew
would engage in these wasteful and extravagant expenditures.
There, sir, was the true point of his offending. He became the
advocate of the father of the whole system, and it will surely
lend nothing to his restoration to his old political church, that
he is now ranged under the banner of General Harrison, who
stands committed, by his votes, his speeches, and his letters,
to carry out the same policy. Of what avail was it, then, that
the gentleman took his pilgrimage over the Ohio, ranging
about in search of some Democrat whose peculiar opinions and
position in reference to the Cumberland road, would seem to
save him from the imputation of evil associations ? In that
pilgrimage he happened to come across my excellent friend
from Indiana (Mr. Howard,) and instantly exclaimed, " Behold
what good Democratic society I am in !'.' Sir, it is not from
one or two associations that we judge men; it is from their
general intercourse, their common walk and conversation, that
we judge them. If the gentleman had never taken up Mr.
Clay; if he will now surrender General Harrison; if he wiil
come out from among the ancient and bitter enemies of Gen
eral Jackson and his doctrines ; " if he will come out from
among them as not being of them," then he may expect for
giveness and restoration to his ancient church. I repeat, to
his ancient church. I remember when, twenty yeai-s ago, we
were both youthful and zealous meimbers of the same church ;
admiring the sfeime men, and advocating the same doctrines
of Democracy. Soon after we commenced our career, the
gentleman passed by me, as in merit he should have done, and
rose upward and higher in public observance and approbation,
until the Democracy of Tennessee claimed him as one of her
proudest and noblest sons. She had no treasures which she

ON THE FREEDOM OP ELECTIONS. 31
did not open to him, and no honors which she did not gladly
confer. In this early and high career, theggentleman had no
rival in the esteem, and confidence, and admiration of the peo
ple of Tennessee — no rival save one. Not that one whose
fame and achievements had made him the common property
of the nation; (and when I except him, none can be at a loss
to .know to whom I allude.) I know that the actions and espe
cially the motives of pubhc men are often subjected to unjust
misrepresentation and censure. I will not, therefore, even
allude to those that have been so often attributed to the gen
tleman, further than to say, that from the period of his last
unsuccessful competition here for the honors which you now
enjoy, suspicion followed suspicion Uke the shadows of the
passing cloud, until the Democracy of Tennessee was forced
into the reluctant belief that the ardor of the gentleman had
greatly abated, if his affections were not totally estranged from
her. His separation was the work of time — not accomplished
at once by any sudden and overt act of defection. But though
gradual, it was nevertheless complete, thorough, undeniable,
and final. It was, on that very account, the more prejudical.
There never was an hour when the Democracy of our State
could not have given up the gentleman and half a score of oth
ers like him, and still have moved onward unchecked and un
harmed by the loss. But by this slow and gradual process he
carried off with him hundreds and thousands of confiding
friends, who would have sacrificed any thing sooner than sus
pect his devotion to the true and genuine principles of De
mocracy. Here may be found the true cause of those dreadful disasters
and defeats whicbthe gentleman and his friends sustained in
the last summer's election. A generous and confiding people
had followed the gentleman into the support of Judge White
for the Presidency ; they had returned members to the General
Assembly to help out in the accomplishment of that object;
they had sent here almost an entire representation favorable to
his wishes. So ingenious and artful was the gentleman's with
drawal from the Republican ranks, that before the people were
aware of it they were enhsted in their primary assemblies, in
their Legislature, in the halls of Congress, in fact every where,

32

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

in accomplishing the political purposes of the gentleman and
his friends. ^
But, sir, all these precautions and preparations would not
do. In spite of them. Judge White's pretensions weakened as
the election approached. When it was over, the failure was
so great, the discomfiture so complete, that the people of Ten
nessee began seriously to inquire why and how it was they
had been so much deceived. They had voted for Judge White,
as a Republican or Democrat — as a Jaxskson man — a better
Jackson man than Mr. Van Buren. In giving that vote, she
stood undaunted at the polls, ready to deny, in the face ofthe
whole world, that she intended either to desert her principles,
or to separate herself from the other Democratic States ofthe
Union. Proud in the consciousness of these truths, when that
vote was afterward challenged, she looked to those leaders
who had instigated her to the act to stand forth and vindicate
her before the world. But, sir, what was her surprise, her deep
mortification, when those leaders refused to do so — when those
very leaders proclaimed that she had changed — that she had
left Jackson and his doctrines — -that she had separated herself
from the other Democratic States of the Union. When they
went even farther than this — when they called on her not to
recede ; that she had gone too far ; that retreat was impossi
ble, and that henceforward she must range herself under the
banner, the so often rejected banner, of Henry Clay, of Ken
tucky ! Sir, the annunciation was astounding. What had only
been suspected, was now openly avowed ! What was at first
only hinted at, in obscure and misty prophecy, now stood forth
in full and undoubted fulfilment !
[Here Mr. C. H. Williams rose and denied that Judge White had ever
changed his opinions on any important political principl«s, and called on
his colleague to point them out, if he meant to impute them to that distin
guished individual, now no more.
Mr. Bkown rephed, he was not then discussing the pohtical opinions of
Judge White, but endeavoring to explain and adjust certain charges of his
other colleague (Mr. Bell,) against the Democracy of Tennessee • his
business was, therefore, with the living, and not with the dead. Beside
this, Mr. Brown said he did not mean to allow this debate to take any
direction which would enable that gentleman to raise a false issue in the
case, and represent him as disturbing the repose and invading the sanctity

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. S3
of the grave. He hoped he was too well acquainted with his business to be
taken in that way.]
From the hour when the gentleman (Mr. Bell,) about five
miles south of Nashville, at a dinner occasion, admitted that
he was in favor of Mr. Clay, the people of Tennessee began
to take the alarm. Many of them, like my honorable colleague
from the Bedford district, began to suspect that they had been
betrayed ; betrayed by men, too, in whose political and personal
fidelity they would have intrusted their lives. My colleague
(Mr. Watteeson) first came into public life when he was
scarcely eligible to its honors, and when the excitement in our
State in favor of Judge White was at its highest pitch. Young,
ardent, and confiding, he never permitted himself to distrust
the assurances given by the friends of Judge White, that he
and Mr. Van Bm-en were of the same political party; and that
all that was stable in principle, or honorable and consistent in
character, must be lost, before either ^ould join the opposition.
Under these assurances he united himself to the White party,
and it was not until he saw the flag of Mr. Clay "floating
aloft in the breeze," and borne lustily by those very men on
whose assurances he had relied, that he abandoned that party,
and returned to his position in the Jackson ranks. Under the
explanation which he has just given, the rebuke of my col
league (Mr. Gentry) fell harmless at his feet.
The same explanation belongs to hundreds and thousands of
others in Tennessee, who, like him, refused to leave the Jack
son party, and to go over tothe arms ofthe opposition ; an oppo
sition then headed by John Quincy Adams, Daniel Webster, and
Henry Clay ; I say then, not now. These great leaders of the "
opposition no longer bear about them the insignia of com
mand. They have fallen back as mere subalterns in the ranks
of Federalism, giving up the command to what they know to
be feebler, but hope may prove more available hands. This,
I believe, is conformable to what was at one period the Roman
practice ; not to select their ablest generals to command their
armies, but rather to choose those who had proved themselves
most fortunate. But, sir, it is not my purpose to complain of
this strange selection of a commander-in-chief for the opposi
tion ; but to inform my honorable colleague that it was the
4

34 CONGRESSIONAI SPEECHES.
discovery that Tennessee was to be transferred to that opposi
tion, whoever might be its commander-in-chief, that sacrificed
so many of his friends in the lairt election. It was this that
made them drop one by one by his side, reducing to a bare
majority of one, that proud and faithfiil band of friends that
used to surround him on this fioor. The gentleman portrayed
these losses in most touching and eloquent lamentation, but
seemed wholly at a loss how to account for them.
Mr. Speaker, I have not done with the associations of my
colleague yet, nor with his charge against the Democracy of
Tennessee, for having excommunicated him on account of these
associations. It is the theme of reiterated complaint that, du
ring the last summer, he was denounced throughout the State
as a Federalist, and that he was doomed to see his friends fal
ling in all directions around him under the same charge. While
I do not become his accuser in this particular, I am sorry to
say that I have witnessed nothing in his associations, during
the present session, at all calculated to relieve him from such
a charge. What were those associations in the election of
Speaker? I saw him of Massachusetts (Mr. Adams,) I saw
another (Mr. Saltonstall,) whose connexion with the Hartford
convention is now notorious ; and yet another (Mr. Reed,) an
avowed Federalist, I believe, during the war and ever since ;
all supporting the gentleman for that important office. So also,
I beheve, did every other FederaUst on this floor. They all
came flocking to his standard. These were ugly associations
for Repubhcan Tennessee to witness. Mark, sir, I do not say
that all who voted for him were Federalists ; far from it ; but I
do mean to say that as far as I have learned the politics of
gentlemen here, every Federahst on this floor voted for him.
There never was such a party in this or perhaps any other
country hke the Federal party. Though often subdued and
conquered, itnever disbands. In the darkest hour of its peril,
existing in secret and mysterious organization, it will suddenly
reappear, and, uniting itself to one of two nearly balanced
competitors, decide the victory in his favor, claiming the fu
ture control of his actions as the reward of its services. In
satiate in its demands for power, when rendered odious by its
usurpations, it often assumes some sacred form or some conse-

ON THE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. 35
crated name, and by the very impudence of the assumption,
again recommends itself to public favor. I feel sorry that my
colleague should have been ever charged with having united
himself with any such party ; but I must regard it as ominous
that, at the moment of his withdrawal from the Democratic
ranks, he should have found so many of that party ready to
receive him with open arms, and to help him onward to one of
the highest offices of the Republic. I trust that I make this
allusion to my colleague's having been run as the Whig can
didate for Speaker, and to his having been supported by the
Federal portion of that party, without personal indelicacy; I
advert to it only as a part of the history of parties in this
House. The office of Speaker is worthy the ambition of any
man, and I do not call in question his qualifications to dis
cbarge its duties. But I will not dwell further on this point; I
come to another that has opened a gulf between him and the
Democracy of Tennessee, deep and wide as ever separated
Dives from Lazarus. I mean the gentleman's course in rela
tion to Abolition petitions. Sir, not only have the people of
Tennessee, but of the South generally, looked upon that course
with infinite pain and mortification. It was a course new and
unexpected to them ; a course not sanctioned by any thing in
his former conduct, and only to be accounted for by his anxiety
to place himself in a proper attitude or condition to support the
Harrisburg nomination. I do not make the point now that the
nominee of that convention is an Abolitionist, but it is notorious
and undeniable that his nomination over Mr. Clay was effec
ted by abolition influence. The exulting and fanatic shout was
instantly raised " that another President shall never come from
a slaveholding State." I allude to this nomination in order
that I may account for the unexpected position now taken by
my honorable colleague in favor of receiving, referring, and
reporting on these petitions.
[ After Mr. Brown had gone into an examination of the former course
of Mr. Bell on this subject (not here inserted,) he was called to order by
Mr. Cooper and Mr. Banks. The Speaker decided that Mr. Brown was
giving the debate too wide a range to be relevant to the bill under dis
cussion.] Mr, Brown said he would conform with pleasure to the sug-

36 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
gestion of the Speaker, and conclude what he had to say by
desiring the House not to give this bill the go-by, but now that
it had been fully discussed and examined, to pronounce a
solemn and deliberate judgment either for or against it.
The vote was then taken,
« Shall the bill be rejected?"— Ayes 108, noes 53.
So the bill was rejected, by the following vote :
YEAS— Messrs. Judson Allen, Hugh J. Anderson, Atherton,- Banks,
Beatty, Beirne, Blackwell, Briggs, Aaron V. Brown, Albert G. Brown,
Burke, William O. Butler, John Campbell, Carr, Carroll, Casey, Chap
man, Clifford, Coles, Conner, Mark A. Cooper, Wihiam R. Cooper,
Craig, Cushing, Dana, John Davis, John W. Davis, Doan, Doig,
Dromgoole, Duncan, Earl, Eastman, Ely, Fine, Floyd, James Garland,
Gerry, Goggin, Hammond, Hand, John Hastings, Hawkins, Hillen,
Hollemsn, Hook, Hopkins, Howard, Thomas B. Jackson, Jameson, Cave
Johnson, Nathaniel Jones, Keim, Kemble, Kille, Leadbetter, Leonard,
Lewis, Lucas, McClellan, McKay, Mallory, Marchand, Medill, Miller,
Montanya, Montgomery, Samuel W. Morris, Newhard, Parrish, Parmen-
ter, Parris, Paynter, Petrikin, Pope, Prenfiss, Ramsey, Reynolds, Rives,
Robinson, Edward Rogers, Ryall, Samuels, Shaw, Shepard, John Smith,
Thomas Smith, Starkweather, Steenrod, Strong, Stuart, Sumter, Swear-
ingen, Taylor, Francis Thomas, Jacob Thompson, Turney, Underwood,
Vroom, David D. Wagener, Warren, Watterson, Weiler, Wick, Jared
W. Williams, Henry WilUams, Joseph L. Williams, and Worthing-
ton— 108.
NAYS — Messrs. Andrews, Barnard, Bell, Bond, Brockway, Anson
Brown, Calhoun, WilHam B. Campbell, Chinn, James Cooper, Crans
ton, Davies, Garret Davis, Deberry, Dellet, Edwards, Evans, Everett,
Fillmore, Gentry, Giddings, Patrick G. Goode, ' Hiland Hall, Hawes,
Henry, Hoffman, Hiram P. Hunt, Kempshall, Lincoln, Morgan, Calvary
Morris, Osborne, Palen, Randall, Randolph, Rariden, Ridgway, Russell,
Saltonstall, Sergeant, Simonton, Slade, Truman Smith, Stanly, Taha-
ferro, Toland, Triplett, Peter J. Wagner, John White, Thomas W.
Williams, Lewis Williams, Christopher H. Williams, and Wise— 53.

SPEECH,
On the bill to charter the " Fiscal Bank of the United States."
Delivered in the House of Representatives, August 4, 1841.

Mr. Chairman : I engage in the discussion of this bill with
the most profound and unaffected reluctance; a reluctance
greatly increased by that inexorable argument, which no
refutation can silence — that discussion is useless ; the people
having decreed, in the recent election, that a national bank
shall be established. No man bows with a more cheerful sub
mission than I do to the clear and decided mandates of the
popular will on all subjects of constitutional legislation. But,
on the present occasion, I must be allowed most respectfully
to question the fact that the people of this country ever have
pronounced such a decree in favor of a bank. When or where
was such a decree pronounced? On what record of party
proceedings is it to be found? Can you find it in the pro
ceedings of the Harrisburg convention, where, of all other
places, it should have been found? No, sir, it is not there.
Not one word was said by that assembly, showing that either
of its nominees was in favor of a United States Bank. Will
you search for it in Virginia, every page of whose history will
furnish some illustrious name to chide you for the foul in
sinuation that she had been faithless to the principles of her
Jeffersons, her Taylors, her Roanes, and her Pendietons ?
No, sir; do not go to Virginia, the land of my birth and the
home of my youth, for what the most errant of all her sons
(Mr. Rives) has never ventured to assert.
Can you find this decree in favor of a bank in North
Carohna, whose vote for the late President was so over
whelming as to astonish even those who gave it? No, sir ;

^® ONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
for one ol ner own citizens, now rewarded for his real or
supposed influence in bringing about this result, by a seat
in the Cabinet, standing in the presence of hundreds and
thousands of the people of that State, pronounced the
charge that General Harrison was in favor of a national
bank to be false — utterly false. In Georgia, so great was
the variety of opinions as to what were the sentiments of
General Harrison on the subject, that it would be the very
height of disingenuousness to attribute his vote in that
State to any known preference in favor of such an institu
tion. In Alabama, the great whig convention of that State ,
in a very able appeal to their constituents, not only aver
red the fact, but collated the proofs, to show General Harri
son's opposition to a national bank on every ground what
soever. That the bank question was more or less involved
in that election everywhere, I do not mean here to deny;
but that it was blended with others, of local and exciting
influences, is equally manifest. Who in this hajl would be
bold enough to aver that in the Keystone or the Empire
State the election turned exclusively on the question of
bank or no bank? It is notorious that the other ques
tions mingled in the canvass, and that anti-masonry and
abolition contributed in no small degree in producing the
results in those States. So it was in Ohio and Indiana,
where the bank question may be regarded as the least
distinctive and controUing one in the canvass.
Yet, sir, in the face of these well known facts, we have
been silenced by the previous question— restricted to a sin
gle hour in debate — all the ancient forms and rules of those
who have preceded us have been broken down; and this
measure, with others, hterally forced upon us, in rapid suc
cession and indecent haste ; all under the plea that dis
cussion is useless — that the season for debate and argu
ment has gone by ; and all that remains is but to register
the solemn decrees of the people in favor of such an insti
tution !
Mr. Chairman, there is one thing which that inexorable ma
jority, by which all these things have been said and done, has
never yet pretended to deny. It is well known that the Ameri-

ON THE FISCAL BANK BILL. 39
can people are greatly divided in opinion as to the best mode
or form of banliing in this countiy — whether by individuals,
by joint-stock companies, by banks owned by the General
Government, by banks belonging exclusively to the States, or
by banks jointly owned and governed by the States and the
General Government in partnership. It is known that all
these various plans have their advocates, numerous and pow
erful, in every State of the Union. Now, it is not pretended
that these various plans were presented, and their relative
merits passed upon by the people, in the recent election. On
the contrary, it is known that the canvass was otherwise con
ducted. No specific plan was presented — no details were
gone into. The evils of a depreciated currency, the necessity
of having a great regulator to control the local institutions,
constituted the theme of every orator, whose generalities were
intended to embrace every one who might be in favor of any
species of banking.
Nay, I will venture to record another fact, which never has
been nor can be successfully controverted : that, in a very
large majority of cases, the travelling rhetors of the dominant
party expressly disclaimed the old United States Bank as the
sample or model of the new one. They scarcely ever con
troverted the objections taken by General Jackson, and which
they knew the American people had over and over again sus
tained. This was emphatically true in the State of Tennes
see. There, every public man in our legislative halls, as well as
in the convention which revised our constitution, had sustained
and approved those objections. Our whole population, whether
devoted to General Jackson or to Judge White, had condemned
the old, or the Biddle Bank, as it was commonly called, every
where and on all occasions. Hence it was that no public
debater in that State, as far as I have ever known or heard,
ever distinctly avowed the old bank to be his favorite model
of a new one. Nor do I believe that there is now, or ever has
been, one-third of that population who would say that it was
their model of a national bank. They had formed a deep and
fixed abhorrence of that institution ; and when looking out for
rehef under the commercial revulsion of 1837, they looked
to an institution owned by the United States, governed by the

'*0 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
United States ; its profits going to the people of the United
States ; with each State having, and, when able, owning a
branch and applying its profits to its own State purposes.
Sir, this now is, and has been for years, the plan or model of
a bank which has made so many bank converts in that State.
I will adduce only one other proof to show that the people
in the last election did not pronounce any such decree as is
now pretended, — that the whole argument is a gross attempt
to pervert, and, in fact, to falsify their proceedings. It is the
authority of President Tyler himself, a party in that election.
In his message to Congress, now lying before me, he has ex
pressly told us : " What is now to be regarded as the judg
ment of the American people on the whole subject, [the banks
and the currency,] I have no accurate means of determining,
but by appealing to their more immediate representatives.
The late contest, which terminated in the election of General
Harrison to the presidency, was decided on principles well
known and openly declared ; and while the sub-treasury re
ceived in the result the most decided condemnation, yet no
other scheme of finance seemed to have heen concurred in."
Sir, the President was right — the nation knows he was right.
The people, if they decided against the sub-treasnry, did not
decide /or a United States Bank; and least of all did they
decide in favor of such a bank as this, modelled and fashioned
as it is, with slavish exactness, after the old United States
Bank. Since the election, that institution has expu-ed, amid
the groans and sufferings of those who reposed in it a too fatal
confidence to the last. Its inherent defects and hideous cor
ruptions are now lying open and bare to public inspection.
The committee who reported this bill have profited nothing by
its past history, and have taken no warning from its disastrous
overthrow. They still hold it up, in the person of this bill, to
the admiration of the American people, and challenge for it
their approbation for twenty years to come !
Regarding, then, as I do, this whole subject as fairly open
for debate, I shall proceed to the discussion of the bill, with
that candor and impartiality which its importance deserves.
My first objection to this bank is, that it is a charter of in
corporation, which I hold this Government to be incapable of

ON THE FISCAL BANK BILL.

41

granting. The constitution contains, as is admitted, no ex
press grant of such authority. The records of the conven
tion, now published to the world, clearly show that the power
to create corporations generally was proposed, referred, re
ported on, debated, and the vote taken by yeas and nays, and
expressly refused by the convention. Can any thing be more
conclusive than this? We are now searching for some con
genial spot in this constitution where we can locate this power.
We must find it, or the passage of this bill will be a rank and
perjured usurpation. Well, we search for it — we cannot find it
in the constitution. We go back to the journals and records
of those who formed it. There we find it was refused in
every form and in every shape in which it could be proposed.
What then? We are told to look for it by implication. Impli
cation, sir, against the express and positive record of the con
vention ! Ay, to implication ; for we are told that the conven
tion declined putting down this power plainly and distinctly in
the constitution, lest the people — particularly those of Pennsyl
vania, who were very hostile to banks — might see it, and re
fuse to ratify the constitution.
Sir, this is the argument universally employed to overtui'n
this important, this omnipotent fact. Let me repeat it. If
the convention had given this power plainly, the people would
have seen it, and would have rejected the constitution. It
was therefore, designedly left, to be claimed by intendment or
implication in aftertimes, when it would be too late for the peo
ple either to reject the constitution or to prevent its exercise.
Now, sir, what is all this, but the imputation of a design in
the framers of the constitution to practice the most reprehen
sible fraud on their constituents — constituents whose noble
and gallant deeds in the war of independence, then just ter
minated, eminently entitled them to precisely such a form
of government as they might freely choose, without being
duped and deceived in the selection. This imputation against
the venerable fathers of the republic is too foul and monstrous,
and throws us back on the records of the convention, contain
ing a clear, express, and oft-repeated rejection of the power
of establishing a bank or creating a corporation. Mr. Chair
man, in the absence of an express grant, there is a potency

42

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

in those records second only to the constitution — a potency
that outweighs a thousand-fold the opinions of individuals,
however eminent — a potency which cannot be destroyed, but
by the degradation and infamy of those whom America has
most honored and most revered.
The location of the principal bank within the District of
Columbia is but a poor evasion of this constitutional objection.
A vast and mighty power — not expressly granted to Congress,
as the Legislature of the whole Union, and which, when dis
tinctly proposed, was expressly refused — is now claimed to
have been conferred by that clause which gives it exclusive
legislation over the little District of Columbia. Our legis
lation may be exclusive, as against Maryland and Virginia,
by whom the Territory was ceded ; and still be limited in its
objects, and restricted by the general prohibitions of that in
strument. But, without insisting on this principle, and cer
tainly without abandoning it, I assume another, about which
casuistry itself cannot hesitate. If Congress have the power
of exclusive legislation over the District of Columbia, it must
be for as well as in the District — local in its objects, and
territorial in its action. To seize on a power granted for such
limited and special purposes, and expand it over a mighty
continent, is a shameless perversion of the constitution — a
mean and fraudulent usurpation, far more wicked than the
boldest interpolation of that instrument could be. Sir, the
little dwarf which you pretend now to be harmlessly planting
in this District, will presently lift his giant form high above it;
and, " looking abroad over this empire republic, will wave
his money sceptre over crouching sovereignties and a prostrate
people." Sir, do not believe that its location here, where
there is no commerce, was intended as a concession to consti
tutional scruples, honestly entertained in any quarter of the
Union. No, sir ; it was to bring the bank in sight of the
White House at the other end of the avenue ; not for his
benefit who now inhabits it, but for his whose heart pants for
its occupancy, and whose ambition even now is moving heaven
and earth for its attainment. It is brought here, the vile
and corrupting instrument of party, to be ever at hand, ready
and willing to perpetuate the ascendency of those who gave

ON THE FISCAL BANK BILL. 43
it existence. Heretofore, the pohtical has been separated
from the money power of the nation. Instead of a union,
there has been a war between them. But henceforward there
is to be peace — alliance — ^partnership. What before has been
fiction, is now to be reality ; the sword and the purse are to
be joined in united potency, to strengthen the arm of execu
tive domination. If allowed to use an illustration less war
like than the last, 1 would say, — ^this fiscal harlot, banished
under the preceding administrations, now returns from her
exile, leaning on the arm of her dehverer, ready and willing
to pay, in adulterous gratitude, the guilty price of her ransom.
My next point of objection is, that this is a charter of in
corporation of individuals, to whom the effectual control of the
institution is conceded. The desire of gain is a principle so
deeply engraven on the nature of man, that it cannot be era
dicated. This truth is nowhere found in stronger illustration
than in the business of banking. The more paper issued, the
greater their profits ; and from the natural propensity to which
I have alluded, they are sure to overleap the feeble barriers
of their charter, and to issue paper far beyond their ability of
redemption. This desire for excessive profits, so subtle and
insinuating, never has been, and never will be, successfully
resisted. It is the real cause of all our former failures in the
business of banking. . It is the simple but potent principle
that lies at the bottom of all the expansions and contractions
of our paper currency, and consequently of the commercial
revulsions and pecuniary distresses of the age. This cause
must be removed before the evil can be remedied. Withdraw
the business of banking from the hands of individuals — ^take
it away from the suggestions of individual avarice — and you
at once eradicate the fruitful cause of all our former failures.
in this charter, the fact that the nation is to own one-third of
the capital can make no possible difference. Just as sure as
two-thirds are more than one-third, just so sure will individual
avarice govern the institution, and cause it to run the same
profligate career with its great prototype, and perish, like it,
amid the stench and rottenness of its own corruption.
Mr. Chairman, I must take time here to mention another
objection which I have to this bank, as well as to all others

44 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
owned by individuals, and conducted by them for ' their own
benefit. I regard banking, or the making of paper-money, as
the most enormous speculation of modern times. I allude not
simply to the rate of interest, but to all the advantages, direct
and collateral, which those enjoy who have ready access to the
funds, and who have control over the banks. These enormous
profits, accumulating in the coffers of individuals, introduce a
proud and bloated aaristocracy in our land, and thereby destroy
that plain republican equality of rights and of fortune which I
have ardently desired might be long preserved in our country.
I would join in no crusade against that wealth which may be
acquired by honest industry and sagacious enterprise ; but I
will forever protest against those special privileges which give
to one favored class exclusive advantages over all others, and
which must introduce into our young and rising country all the
aristocratic distinctions of the old world. Other objections
exist to individual or joint-stock banking, which do not fall
within the range ofthe present debate, and which time will not
allow me to enumerate. Repudiating, as I have done, all indi
vidual and joint-stock banking as banks of issues, there remain
only two other modes of making paper-money in this country.
These are, either by the nation in the aggregate, or by the sev
eral States of the Union, excluding individuals from all parti
cipation whatsoever. Neither of these forms of banking is
now before us ; and the few precious moments ofthe brief hour
which your rule allows, will not admit of their discussion. I
leave them, therefore, with this declaration, — that I reject every
plan of banking by the General Government, and infinitely
prefer seeing a paper currency emanating, if at all, from the
respectivie States of the Union ; — not from corporations of in
dividuals created by them ; but from banks, owned exclusively
by the States ; governed by them ; and all the profits made by
them received and enjoyed by all the people of the States.
As a member of Congress, I have nothing to say or do for or
against such a system of banking by the States : the question
belongs exclusively to themselves ; but, as an American citizen,
I am free to declare that, of all the different modes of banking
which have been heretofore tried or proposed, I prefer such a

ON THE FISCAL BANK BILL. 45
system by the States as I have mentioned. But I return from
tills digression to further objections to this bill.
"^ The creation of this corporation is the introduction of a new
power into our form of government, more potent than any
other known to the constitution. The legislative, judicial, and
executive departments constitute the three great powers of
the government. Buthere is a power more potent than any —
I had almost said than all of them put together. Neither the
Executive nor Judiciary can directly reach one in ten thousand
of our population. In reference to currency, the Legislature
only is authorized to coin and regulate the value of gold and
silver, which the industry of individuals has dug out of the
earth, or procured in the course of lawful commerce. But
here is a power that can make and circulate a currency many
times greater in amount than all the gold and silver on this
continent. By doing so, they are enabled to take the real
money of the country out of circulation; lock it up, and sub
stitute their own manufacture for it; and thus bring their powers
to bear upon almost every individual of our seventeen milhons
of population. This new artificial person, making and then
wielding the capital of a whole continent, regulates and con
trols the value of all the property, real and personal, and of all
the labor, mechanical, agricultural, and commercial, of amighty
people. It is made to regulate the currency ; that is, to set up
and pull down other institutions ; to make money plenty or
scarce ; to, make property high or low, according to its own
good pleasure. On every discount day, nine men are to as
semble in this city, on whose fiat hang the fortunes and des
tinies of this whole people. They send forth their high com
mands, east, west, north, and south, to their subordinates in
the branches ; and in twenty days a whole continent hes pros
trate at their bidding. The friends of this bill tell us that these
orders may go forth bearing the blessings of prosperity and
plenty on their wings. If this be true, is it not necessarily true,
also, that they may he laden with curses — with blight, and mil
dew, and death to the hopes and business of the country ? A
power so mighty, either for evil or for good, is now to be sprung
into existence ; and no other power is to stay, or check, or con
trol its tremendous action, for twenty years to come.

46 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
I pause, to demand if the people of this country would be
wilhng to confer so great a power even on the Executive of
their own choice? Would they bestow it on any nine members
within these walls ? or on any nine men who ever Uved in this
country, however illustrious their names or eminent their ser
vices ? If they would not, can they be willing that a number
of. capitalists, — living at great distances from them, and who
never had any sympathy with them in their wants, their suffer
ings, and their labors, — shall get together and appoint nine
agents — for themselves, not for the country — for their own
benefit, not that of the people — to regulate the currency, which
isto control the price of all the property and all the labor of
the country ? Sir, it cannot be so. It cannot be that the
American people, so jealous of their rights, are prepared to
surrender them to a mercenary oligarchy — the more odious,
because owing no responsibility tothe people whom they plun
der and destroy. Sir, if it be the duty of Congress to regulate
the currency, (which I deny,) let Congress do so itself, by its
own officers, appointed by and responsible to them, as they in
their turn are responsible to the people : but do not, 1 pray you,
make an assignment of your duties to this avaricious, mercen
ary, soulless corporation, which will have its high interest and
large dividends, although the people were staiwing for the
bread of life. I pray you perpetrate no such wicked and hor
rid thing in this land. Make your own bank ; found it on your
own, resources ; govern it by officers of your own selection, if
you can do so under the constitution. Let all the profits ofthe
ojieration enure to the benefit of all the people of the United
States. Do this, bad as it would be, rather than form a corpo
ration in which you are to be a subordinate partner, impotent
for all purposes of control ; and in which you will be compelled
by your stock-jobbing partners to inflict the most heart-rending
exactions and oppressions on the people you represent. Sir,
the accumulated aversion of many years to a degraded and
degrading partnership like this, induces me to repeat the ira-
ploration, that, if it be your duty to regulate the currency,
do it yourself, without the agency and partnership of this
corporation. What necessity is there, let me ask, for this amazing and

ON THE FISCAL BANK BILL. 47
da^ngerous delegation of power ? Is it the too great s carcity
of gold and silver to meet the demands of the growing com
merce of this country ? This bank with its thirty milhons will
not permanently add one solitary dollar to the specie on this
continent — not one solitary dollar. Is it to make paper-money
more abundant? Why, sir, that is the very disease of which
this country has been dying for years. The excessive paper
issues of 1834, '35, and '36, are known to have produced the
revulsion of 1837. The veriest quacks and impostors now
admit this. The process of diminution has been going on ever
since 1837, with slow and painful but invaluable success. It
was the universal prescription for the disease, that we should
lessen the amount of paper, and bring it down to a fair and
reasonable proportion to the precious metals. We have fol
lowed that prescription, until the country is evidently emerging
from that state of indebtedness induced by extravagance and
speculation, from which at one period we awfully feared it never
could be rescued. But, after all, and in spite of all, we have rode
out the storm; we have neared the port; we have gained sight
of the land. And shall we be again thrown back on the same
wide ocean of paper-money, from which we vainly hoped soon
to be rescued? Look to the hundreds of millions of paper-
money now in circulation ; then look to the beggarly amount
of specie provided for its redemption ; and say if there be not
gross quackery, if not something worse, in the present propo
sition to increase the amount some sixty or seventy millions.
Let me employ another illustration of our present condition.
We have been for years drunken by extravagance and excess
in every thing; and now that the care of sincere and kind
friends has nearly restored us from the vile debauch, one of our
old bottle companions intrudes his prescription upon us, and in
sists that we shall run the same round of guilty dissipation as
before. And, sir, it is astonishing to see with what ready and
even eager willingness the infatuated patient, breaking away
from the custody of his best friends,- will follow the counsels of
those who will but delude and destroy him.
But, Mr. Chairman, I turn away from this bank, as the means
of relief to the people, and as an institution to regulate the
currency and general business ofthe country. I wish now to

48 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
consider it as " the Fiscal Bank of the United States," — a bank,
as its name imports, necessary and proper, for the Government,
in some way or other, in the collection, safekeeping, and dis
bursements of the public revenue.
trhe eighth section of the first article of the constitution is
an enumeration of the powers of Congress ; amongst which,
that of collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, is one of
them. At the close of the same section, it is declared that
" Congress may make all laws necessary and proper for car
rying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers
vested by this constitution in the Government of the United
States, or in any department or officer thereof." This is the
congenial spot on which the bank has ever dehghted to locate
itself. The false pretence that it is necessary tothe Govern
ment in the collection of its taxes and duties, is seized upon
to give it existence ; whilst in truth and in fact it is solely in
tended for the benefit of the commercial business of the coun
try, and to subserve the interest of stock jobbers, speculators,
and all others who live by their wits, instead of the honest
labor of their hands. I repeat that it is a false pretense, for
the experiment has been now repeated — which was first made
in the earliest and purest days of the republic — of collecting,
keeping, and disbursing the public revenue, without the agency
of any bank whatsoever ; — an experiment which Washington
first adopted; which Jefferson subsequently recommended
should be again adopted ; which Judge White maintained to
be entirely practicable; and which Mr. Bell declared could
do no great good or harm to any of the great interests of this
country. That experiment has been actually tried, tested,
proved, for more than one entire year, with eminent and
complete success. The much abused sub-treasury has de
monstrated that a bank is not necessary to carry on the finan
cial concerns of this nation. Although condemned, as the
President says it has been, it retires full of honor, carrying
with ita proud justification of its friends, and casting back upon
its enemies a triumphant refutation of all their predictions of its
entire failure.
But, Mr. Chairman, not even the pretense of such a necessity
is sustained by the provisions of this bill. The bank is not

ON THE FISCAL BANK BILL. 49
to be charged with the duty of collection at all. Your collec
tors of the customs and your receivers at the land offices are
still to be continued, and every dollar is to be collected by them
as heretofore. Nor is it true that the bank is to be charged
with the payment or disbursement ofthe revenue : these, under
the warrants of your Treasurer, are to be made by your pay
masters, pursers, and other public officers, as they have been
from the foundation of the Government. All that this fiscal
concern is to be employed by the Government to do, is to have
the simple custody of our revenue during the brief period be
tween its collection and disbursement. And is this all the
necessity — all the propriety for this mighty institution? Cer
tainly it is, all — all. Simply to keep your surplus revenue,
when all agree that there should be no surplus ; and to keep it
for a little while, until you can find some creditor willing to take
it off your hands. What amighty edifice to be reared on so
small a foundation ! a mountain resting on a pebble !
Unable, as it is now falsely pretended, to keep our own reve
nue, we are called upon to establish this ponderous agency for
that purpose, and for that purpose only. We must advance
certainly ten millions — ^probably sixteen millions — to set this
agency in operation. I mistake, sir; we do not advance the
money; we have it not to advance. We must borrow it at
home or abroad, and pay an interest of at least half a million
of dollars. Ten millions, at five per cent., make that sum;
and if we have to take the sixteen millions mentioned in the
bill, it will be nearly three-quarters of a million. This ama
zing sum we must pay annually for the benefits of this won
derful agency. What was the cost of the Independent Treas
ury, which we are so often told the people have rejected? It
did not exceed fifty thousand dollars per annum. Fifty thou
sand against five hundred thousand ! Yes, sir, carry this fact
home, faithfully home to the people, — that for this new Fiscal
Bank they must pay at least ten times as much as for the Inde
pendent Treasury. What a commentary on the economy of
this reformed and reforming administration ! Where we for
merly paid ten dollars for the temporary custody of our reve
nues, we are to pay now one hundred ; and where one hundred,
we must now pay one thousand ! You point me in vain to the

50

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

profits and dividends of this Fiscal Bank, for the reimbursement
of all this interest. The fate ofthe old bank, an(4 of hundreds
of others now lying like shattered and broken wrecks over the
whole ocean of incorporated insolvency, will furnish ample
refutation to the argument. With all their profits and nearly
all of their original capital wasted and plundered, what hopes
can we have of future profits and dividends from this institu
tion, made by party, and whose proceeds will be prostituted
and wasted for the vilest purposes of party ?
Mr. Chairman, it is on a slender necessity, such as I have
described, that the present charter is asked for with convul
sive anxiety. It was on such a foundation as this that the con
stitutionality of the old bank was sustained by the Supreme
Court of the United States ; not that the judges thought such
an institution to be necessary and proper, for that they have
never decided ; but that if Congress thought it so, it was not
for them to decide to the contrary ; — that it was the exclusive
province of Congress to decide on that question, and, haying
done so by passing the charter, it was not their province to set
aside that decision. The celebrated opinion of Chief Justice
Marshall, in the case of the Bank of Maryland, "has this ex
tent—no more."
And yet the gentleman from Pennsylvania, in this debate, has
pressed the argument on the House that this was the decision
of the tribunal of the last resort, and that all the other depart
ments of the Government must yield and conform to its adju
dication. Sir, it is in exact accordance with its decisions that
this House is now considering this very question of constitu
tionality. They have declared that it is our business to de
cide that question, and not theirs. If more than this is claimed
to have been decided by that court, I deny its authority to have
gone further. We are co-ordinate and co-equal with the judi
ciary. It is our business to prescribe the law; it is theirs to
administer it and enforce it between individuals. But the con
stitution is above both. Each, in its own department, must
construe for itself, and neither can control or lord it over the
other. That solemn oath which you administered to every
member on this floor, embraced nothing but the constitution,
and had nothing to do with those commentaries which the judi-

ON THE FISCAL BANK BILL. 5 1
clary may have made upon it. The oath was personal ; the in
fraction ofthe constitution would be personal, and the high penal
sanctions of that oath would be personal, both in time and
eternity. But the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Botts) claims more
than a Popish infallibility for this tribunal. Their decisions
are to be above and to supersede the constitution. Instead of
that sacred instrument being laid on our table, in order to be
before us for perpetual reference, it is to be laid upon the shelf,
or hid in some obscure recess of this vast Capitol, and the de
cisions of the Supreme Court substituted, in its stead. This ,
sir, is what the gentleman's argument would do for the consti
tution. What does it do with the President? The gentleman
declares that, in the face of the decisions of that court, the
President has no right to think about the high injunctions ofthe
constitution ; that the court has thought for him — ^has expoun
ded for him ; and it is his bounden duty to conform, with implicit
obedience, to its commands. The same argument leads to
the stultification of this House and ofthe Senate ofthe United
States. But, sir, I am not surprised at it. Throughout this
session we have been told that we had no right to debate ; now
we are informed (what it was easy to anticipate) that we are
not to think adversely to the Supreme Court.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, the freedom of debate has been cloven
down ; the liberty of thought has been denied to this House
and to the President ; and these two great departments of our
Government are proclaimed to be the mere agents to register
the edicts of the judiciary.
Sir, I am admonished that I have but three minutes more to
protest against the passage of this bill, — ^three minutes more
to protest against the monstrous doctrines by which it is sus
tained. Sir, I have no use for them, but to give them back to
that inexorable majority by whom they were granted.

NOTES.

Hr. B. does not wish to be understood as saying that theyoMrwaZs of the
convention show that the proposition to authorize Congress to charter a
bank was, eo nomine, submitted tothe convention and rejected. That there
was such a proposition, however, is satisfactorily established by other tes
timony. He submits the following from Mr. Jefferson's Memoirs : " Mfirch
the nth, 1798. When the bank bill was under discussion in the House of
Representatives, Judge Wilson came in, and was standing by Baldwin.
Baldwin reminded him of the following fact which passed in the grand con
vention. Among the enumerated powers given to Congress, was one to
erect corporations. It was on debate struck out. Several particular powers
,were then proposed. Among others, Robert Morris proposed to give to Con
gress a power to establish a national bank. Gouverneur Morris opposed
it; observing that it was extremely doubtful whether the Constitution they
were framing could ever be passed at all by the American people ; that to
give it its best chance, however, they should make it as palatable as possible,
and put nothing into it not very essential, which might raise up enemies.
That his colleague (Robert Morris) well knew that a bank had been the
great bone of contention between the two parties of the State, from the
establishment of their constitution ; having been erected, put down, erect
ed again, as either party preponderated ; that, therefore, to insert this power
would instantly enhst against the whole instrument, the whole of the anti-
hank party of Pennsylvania : whereupon it was rejected, as was every
other special power, except that of giving copy-rights to authors, and pat
ents to inventors. The general power of incorporating being whittled down
to this shred. Wilson agreed to the fact."
The argument here submitted, as to the rejection of this power, is fully
s.ustained, however, by the following extract from the journal ^-the conven
tion. (Ist vol. Elhott's Debates, page 278.)
"Saturday, August 18, 1787.— The following additional powers proposed
to be vested in the legislature of the United States, having been supmitted
to the consideration of the convention, &.c., were referred, &c. The fifth
proposition of the series was as follows :
" To grant charters of incorporation in cases where the public good may
require them, and the authority of a single State may be incompetent.
" The 12th of the same series was in the following words :
" To grant charters of incorporation."

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES. 53
These two propositions being in the same series, offered by the same in
dividual at the same time, cannot be considered as tautological, but as really
intended for different objects. The first should be regarded, most probably,
as intended for corporations for cutting canals or other improvements, where
several States were interested, and other similar purposes. The second, as
intended expressly for conferring banking powers ; that being the almost
universal mode of creating banks in those days as well as now. If the se
cond proposition did not look exclusively to banks, it certainly included
them, as did also the first proposition.
On Wednesday, September 12th, the Committee of Revision report a
revised draught ofthe]^Constitution, from the various, irregular, and detached
decisions which had been made, in which they do not propose to confer on
Congress the right of creating corporations in either ofthe ways proposed
in the above series.
On the 13th (the next day after the report) it was moved and seconded
" That the House proceed to the comparing of the report from the Com
mittee of Revision, with the articles which had been agreed to by the
House, and to them referred for arrangement ;" and the same was read by
paragraphs, compared, and in some places, corrected and amended. This
was to be carefully done, in order to see if they had arranged it correctly,
according to the decisions of the House. The report does not embrace
corporations, in either of the forms mentioned ; hence, it is fair to conclude
they had been rejected by the House, and therefore rejected by the com
mittee in their compilation. On the 14th of September, whilst this pro
cess was going on, they reached the eighth section of the first article.
No one complained that anything had been omitted by the Committee of
Revision; that they had left out improperly "the right to create corpora
tions," in either of the forms above mentioned. But a new proposition, to
grant letters of incorporation for canals, &c., was presented, and voted down
by the convention : Yeas, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Georgia — 3; Nays,
the other eight States. This was either a new proposition to procure the
power, or it is a summary mode of identifying the old ones which were re
jected by the above vote.
Mr. B., in his comparison of the relative expensiveness of the Inde
pendent Treasury and the Fiscal Bank, has placed the annual expenses of
the former entirely too nigh. One-half of the amount stated would have
been much nearer the mark.

SPEECH,
On Remitting the fine on General Jackson — Delivered in the
House of Representatives, in Committee of the Whole, Jan
uary 8, 1844.

Mr. Pratt, of New York, introduced the following Resolu
tion :
Whereas the Legislatures of eighteen States of this Union, containing,
at the last census, about fifteen millions out of the seventeen millions of
the inhabitants of the United States, have instructed their Senators and re
quested their Representatives to refund the fine imposed on General Andrew
Jackson by Judge Hall : And whereas strong expressions of public opin
ion have been made in favor of the' same measure, in the reinaining States
of the Union : Therefore,
Resolved, That at four o'clock, this day, all debate in Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union, on House bill No. 1, to refund the
fine imposed on General Jackson shall cease, and the committee shall pro
ceed to vote upon such amendments as may be pending, or as may be of
fered to said bill, and then report the same to the House, with such amend
ments as have been agreed to by the Committee.
Which said resolution was adopted ; and thereupon the
House resolved itself into a • Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union, and proceeded with the considera
tion of said bill.
Mr. Aaron V. Brown obtaining the floor, said: That
it had not been his intention to say one word in favor of the
passage of this bill. So far as he was concerned, he had in
tended to let its fate depend on the known wishes of the
American People, and the express instructions of seventeen
or eighteen of the sovereign States of this Union ; but chiefly
on the resolutions of the Legislature of Louisiana, declaring,
that if this fine was not refunded by Congress at the present
session, the Legislature of that State would feel bound to re
fund it themselves-^a noble resolution, reflecting everlasting

ON REMITTING THE FINE ON 6EN. JACKSON. 55
honor on those who adopted it. But this bill had been oppos
ed by arguments so extraordinary, that he now felt it to be
his duty, as one of the Representatives of Tennessee, to make
reply to them. '
The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Grider] had asserted,
that if this bill were passed. General Jackson would never
touch a dollar of the money. Is the gentleman sure of that?
Why not, then, vote for this bill, and let it stand out as a bright
and shining example of a nation's gratitude and justice? It
would be cheap enough, I am sure, said Mr. B. to meet that
gentleman's views of national economy. In one point of view,
that gentleman was right. General Jackson would never receive
this money as a mendicant at your door. He will never touch
it if he must come here, according to the allusion once made
on this floor by the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Adams]
like the old Roman General, begging from door to door, hold
ing out his wooden trencher, and crying " Date oholum Belis-
ario." No, no. It is the amendment offered by his enemies
that would bring the greatest General of our age, as Belisa-
rius was of his, to this degrading attitude. This bill but re
turns to General Jackson his own money, extorted from him by
a cruel and unjust Judge, for a noble and praiseworthy action.
In this light General Jackson will receive it. He will receive
it with pride and gratification. He will look upon it as the
last act of his countrymen, paying homage to justice, and bear
ing testimony, for posterity, to the purity and patriotism of his
motives. The same gentleman [Mr. Grider] contended that the glory
of New Orleans would by tarnished by the passage of this bill;
that it' was a common glory, in which he and his constituents
participated, and therefore he was opposed to passing the bill.
Surely that gentleman, nor his constituents, would wish to take
the glory, and keep the money too ! Ought he not rather to
have concluded, that if the infamy of fining General Jackson
one thousand dollars for achieving so much glory, should be
considered by posterity as a common infamy, he and his con
stituents, if they refuse to refund, might be considered as par
ticipating in it? He was pleased further to remind us that we
had assembled here forthe purpose of general legislation, suc?h

56

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

as our constituents and the country now stood in need of. Why,
said he, should we bring up this antiquated and almost forgot
ten subject — the fine of General Jackson, imposed almost thirty
years ago? Surely the gentleman and his party do not mean
to plead the statute of limitation? To plead it in the face of
fourteen millions of the people of this country, who have com
manded this thing to be done? to plead it, too, against a great
act of national justice and honor like this? Never, never, if
you are really in earnest in claiming any share in the glory of
that great man's achievements.
Mr. Chairman, (said Mr. B.,) I now wish to advert to some of
the extraordinary arguments of one of my colleagues, [Mr.
Peyton,] the honored Representative of the illustrious patriot
who is the subject of this debate. What, sir, did he tell us?
Why, that he should vote for this bill, but that it was the great
est humbug of the age. And will the gentleman really vote
for a humbug? First put down the solemn declaration on the
permanent records of the nation, to go down the stream of
time to all future generations, that it is all a humbug, and yet
that he is wilfing to vote for it! But how did he make it out
a mere humbug? He said many fanciful things about the ivy
twining around some sturdy pillar for support ; and the misle-
toe drawing its nutriment from some majestic hickory; and,
finally, more than insinuated, that the whole purpose of this
bill was to advance the political fortunes of Martin Van Buren.
How, then, can he vote for it? How can he vote for any bill
brought forward for the purpose of advancing the fortunes
" of a mere parasite," whom he despises and abhors? No,
my coheague does injustice to the friends of this bill, and to
the people of this country. Their purposes are open, direct,
and avowed, to do justice to the man who exposed his hfe and
his all in defence of his country, and was then fined one thou
sand dollars for it. They ask forthe passage of this bill the
unanimous vote of Congress— of all men, and of aU parties;
and it never would have been, never could have been a party
measure, but for one of the parties of this country having met
it with such fixed and never-dying opposition. That has
made it, and may continue to make it, a party measure ; but
let not that be charged to the friends of this bill. He com-

ON RfiMITTING THE FINE ON GEN. JACKSON. 57
plained that the fame of General Jackson was not likely to be
best preserved by those who had taken it in keeping. Would
he have us to put it in the keeping of the enemies of this bill?
Of the gentleman from Georgia, who had proposed to amend it
by eulogizing Judge Hall? Of the gentleman from New
York, or of Massachusetts, or even my colleague himself, after
the speech he has made? God forbid that the good name and
fame of General Jackson should be entrusted to such guardians
as these. But my colleague says, that as those who set them
selves up to be the especial friends of General Jackson on this
occasion desu-e it, he will vote for it, although, in his opinion,
it will strike down the noblest monument of his fame. Can it
be possible that the gentleman would really do that? Would
he remove even the smallest pebble that lies at the base of
that noble monument? Let him but convince the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Barnard] and the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts [Mr. Adams] that such will be the effect of passing
this bill, and they will instantly turn to its support, and become
co-workers with my colleague in striking down that monument
which, until now, I had fondly hoped was dear and sacred to
every American bosom.
Mr. Chairman, there is something strange and contradictory
in the position of both my colleagues, [Messrs. Peyton and
Dickinson,] in reference to this bill. They have both made
speeches against, and yet declare that they mean finally to
vote for it. Their speeches are one way, their votes are to be
another. How is this anomaly to be accounted for? Sir, in
making their speeches they have consulted their heads, but in
casting their votes they have consulted their hearts — all the
pulsations of which tell them to give back this ill-gotten money.
I think, too, it may be accounted for on another principle. In
the State of Tennessee, whatever 'divisions of opinion may
exist on the great political questions of the day, there is every
where and amongst all classes, but one fixed, steady and im
movable sentiment of gratitude and devotion to the man " who
has filled the measure of his country's honor." These gentle
men cannot, will not, I had almost said dare not, however in
sensible to fear, do violence to this universal sentiment.
Mr. Chairman, I desire now to reply to the extraordinary

58

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

speech of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. Barnard.]
Extraordinary for its general bad temper. Why so hot and
fiery on this occasion, and yet so cold, and even stoical, on all
others? 1 fear the gentleman has grown jealous of the vener-
ble gentlema,n who sits near him, [Mr. Adams,] and is deter
mined hereafter to outrival even him in turbulence and violence.
Why, too, was the gentleman so nearly presumptuous, if not
arrogant, in the language which he was pleased to employ on
this occasion? Addressing himself to the known majority on
this floor, some of them of his own party, he proclaimed we
should not pass this bill ignorantly, or in our ignorance, or some
such courteous language as that. Sir, have seventeen or
eighteen States of this Union instructed this bill to be passed
in ignorance? Are the people of this country, nine-tenths of
whom are in favor of it, are they too, in ignorance? Is that
overwhelming majority of this House, which the gentleman
himself said he knew could and would pass the bill, were they
about to do it in ignorance? I submit it to him whether there
is not danger that those who do not know him personally — his
great modesty — may be ungenerous enough to consider such
language as presumptuous and even arrogant.
But whilst adverting to the gentleman's manner and lan
guage, let me give you another specimen of that high courtesy in
debate, which distinguishes an American statesmanr Address
ing himself again to the known majority here, some of them
his own party friends, he was pleased to say, " You cannot
lick this bill into any shape that will make it acceptable to the
other branch of Congress." How chaste and elegant, and even
classical, is such language! " You cannot lick this bill into any
shape!" But I pass from all this, to the matter and substance
of that gentleman's speech.
With great earnestness, he demanded to know why this fine
was not remitted during the administration of General Jackson
or of Mr. Van Buren. Let me answer him by putting to him
"another question : Would he and his party have voted for it
at any time? Would the old Federal party have ever voted
for it? Would those who refused to cross a State line, to meet
and give battle to the enemy ; would those who, at midnight
on the high cliffs of the ocean, hung out blue lights to guide the

ON REMITTING THE FINE ON GEN. JACKSON. 59
enemy into our harbors, that they might burn our ships and
murder our people ; would those who had been in secret con
ference with John Henry, the British spy, would they have
voted for this bill at any time, orunder any circumstances? No,
sir, never. The glorious victory of New Orleans not only drove
the British army from our coast, but, it drove a British spy
from the bosom of our country. It not only suppressed the
spirit of muntiny and revolt in a small portion of the people
of Louisiana, but it routed and dispersed the more guilty
traitors at Hartford. All these would have opposed the remis
sion of this fine at any andsall times. They will oppose it now.
They will resort to every device to defeat it. We cannot mould
it, or, in the more elegant language ofthe gentleman from New
York, we cannot lick it into any form which will induce them
to do justice to the greatest captain and noblest patriot of the
age. Well, Mr. Chairman, after all, what is the great constitu
tional argument of the gentleman against the passage of this
bill? It is, that General Jackson had no right, under the Con
stitution, to declare martial law; that, consequently, he had no
right to arrest Louallier ; and, having no right to arrest him,
he was bound to obey the writ of habeas corpus,, commanding
him to bring the said Louallier before the court ; "and for not so
obeying, he was guilty of a contempt of court.
Now, all this I deny, and maintain that, to the extent Gen
eral Jackson did declare and enforce martial law, he had a
right to do it, under, or consistently with, the Constitution.
Not that the Constitution commands martial law to be declared
in any case, but that it permits, or allows it to be done, in pre
cisely such cases as occurred at New Orleans. That city and
its environs were within the military encampment of General
Jackson. His outposts and sentinels were planted around it.
Within the bounds of every encampment, piilitary, and not
civil, law must prevail. In time of repose and safety, military
law in its mildest, and lowest grade, but in time of war and
invasion of the place so occupied, military law in its most rigor
ous form; — high and rigorous in exact proportion as the
peril was great and the danger imminent. This is the
prihciple ; let me give you an illustration : A nation is

60

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

about to be invaded ; you post your army at some moun
tain defile where you can more successfully repel his ad
vances. Within its lines are a few shepherds' huts. Can
these go in and out as they please? Can they pass the senti
nels of your army without permission, and so carry, if they
please, secret intelligence to the enemy? Cannot the Com
manding General guard against such danger, by suspending,
for the time being, their constitutional right of locomotion? I
do not say that he can by the command of the Constitution, but
I maintain that he may by iia permission. So if his encamp
ment include a village, or town, or great city, as was New
Orleans. Let me now submit another case to illustrate my
opinions : Suppose, duringthe siege, the owners of all the cot
ton bales, aiifciciputing from his orders that he contemplated
their use in the formation of breastworks, had apphed to Judge
Hall, or some State Judge, for an injunction to prevent their
removal from the ware-houses, alleging that they were private
propsrty of such great value that the Commanding General's
private fortune would be totally inadequate to the payment of
their probable damage or destruction; suppose General Jackson
to have refused obedience, as he assuredly would, and an at
tachment for contempt had been issued, returnable on the mem
orable 23d of December, the time of the first battle. On that
day and within that encampment what law was to govern? The
civil law which commanded him to be present in court, or the
military law, which commanded him to be present on the
fines, cheering and directing his army to triumph and to victory?
Sir, in that case, or in any similar one, if the civil law was to
govern, your Commanding General might have been pining
in a dungeon for a contempt of court, whilst the enemy was
thundering ivith its artillery against the city.
But, sir, it matters not to pursue this question of constitu
tional right any further; for the gentleman expressly admitted
that the right to declare martial law might be sustained in some
cases under the great law of necessity. But I contend that in
no case does the law of necessity abrogate the Constitution.
It only rises above it, but yet stands consistent with it. How
ever this may be, still the admission of the gentleman goes the
whole length of the vindication of General Jackson. It is under

ON REMITTING THE PINE ON GEN. JACKSON. 61
this law of necessity we may do many things not affirma
tively warranted by the Constitution, but yet entirely consistent
with it. What right have 1, affirmatively, under the Constitution,
rudely to seize the gentleman from Ohio, (who has just closed his
speech against this bill,) and rescue him by the hair of his head
from a watery grave? What riglit have I, affirmatively, under the
Constitution, to blow up my neighbor's dwelling with a train
of gunpowder? Yet, if I do so, to arrest the progress of de
vouring fiames, the law of necessity rises higher than the Con
stitution, but still consistently with it, and justifies the act. So
to save a city from capture, or a nation from subjugation, we
may go far beyond the express letter of the Constitution, and
suspend many of the personal rights secured to individuals.
No one has ever sustained this doctrine: more ably than Mr.
Jefferson. He says in one of his letters, vol. 4, p. 150, of his
works, as follows :
" The question you propose, whether circumstances do not sometimes oc
cur which make it a duty in officers of high trust to assume authorities be
yond the law, is easy of solution on principle, but sometimes embarrassing
in practice. A strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the
high duties of a good citizen ; but it is not tlie highest. The laws of ne
cessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of
higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the
written law itself, with hfe, liberty, property, and all those who are enjoying
them with us : thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means. When, in
the battle of Germantown, General Washington's army was annoyed from
Chew's house, he did not hesitate to plant his cannon against it, although
the property of a citizen. When he beseiged Yorktown, he levelled the
suburbs, feeling that the laws of property must he postponed to the safety
of the nation. While the army was before York, the Governor of Virginia
took horses, carriages, provisions, and even men, by force, to enable that
army to stay together till it could master the public enemy ; and he was
justified. * * * * All these constituted a law of necessity and self-
preservation, and rendered the solus populi supreme over the written law.
The officer who is called to act on this superior ground does, indeed, risk
himself o» the justice of the controlling powers of the Constitution, and
his statio* makes it his duty to incur that risk. * * * * It is incum
bent, however, only on those who accept great charges, to risk themselves
on great occasions, when the safety of the nation, or some of its very
highest interests, are at stake. An officer is bound to obey orders ; yet he
would be a had one who should do it in cases for which they were not in
tended, and which involved the most important consequences. The line of

62 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
discrimination between cases may be difficult ; but the good officer is bound
to draw it at his own peril, and to throw himself on the justice of his coun
try and the rectitude of his motives."
These, sir, are the opinions of Mr. Jefferson, expressed in
1810, and they go the whole extent ofthe principles on which
we vindicate the conduct of General Jackson in declaring mar
tial law. How does the gentleman from New York escape
from the force and power of such "Authority ? Simply by say
ing, that although the great law of necessity may, in some
cases, authorize the exercise of such authority, yet in this case
there was no sufficient or adequate necessity. No adequate
necessity, sir ? When did General Jackson overrate any dan
ger impending ov^ him, or the brave army he commanded?
What could have induced him to overestimate the dangers at
New Orleans? Was he not on the ground? Could he not
hear every discharge of the enemy's artillery? Could he not
see every signal of his rockets, and every advance of his col
umns ? What, then, could have led him to an exaggerated es
timate of the danger? Not the fears of General Jackson, I
am sure ; for he had been born and had lived insensible to
fear. There had never been a day nor an hour in his life
when he might not have exclaimed, but for its excessive
egotism — "  Danger knows full well.
That Csesar is more dangerous than he.
We were two lions littered in one day,
And I the elder and more terrible."
The gentleman knows but little of the personal or military
history of that great man if he supposes him capable of hav
ing been influenced by so ignoble a passion.
This extraordinary position is attempted to be sustained,
however, on another ground : that New Orleans and its envi
rons never were actually invaded — that the enemy, in other
words, never did enter within its chartered boundaries. And
why did he not ? It was because General Jackson and his
brave comrades met him on the lines, drove back his legions,
routed and dispersed them, with a courage and a triumph that
filled America with joy, and the world with admiration ! New
Orleans and ita environs were never actually invaded ! Well,

ON REMITTING THE FINE ON GEN. JACKSON. 63
let the gentleman have it so. Let him have it that the enemy
was at the lines, but not within the lines of the city. Does he
not know that if the enemy had once entered within the city,
all would have been lost ? His fires would have been seen
blazing from every steeple, and his artillery would have bat
tered down every pubhc and private building. Then might you
have realized the full import of their watchword, in the screams
of American wives and daughters, under the rude grasp of a
licentious British soldiery. Sir, I repeat it : if ever the enemy
had once entered within the city, all would have been lost.
Your heroic General and his brave officers would have been
slain ; your noble army would have been captured or dispersed;
your city would have been sacked and burnt, and the then
young, but rising, and now mighty West, would have been
ruined. Sir, I love the West. It is the land of my youth, and
the home of my manhood. I love her lofty mountains, her wide
luxuriant valleys, her deep majestic rivers. Need I say that I
love, and honor, and cherish in my heart of hearts, that immor
tal man who saved and preserved them all ! To guard against
a great and mighty calamity like this, he proclaimed martial
law. Let me read to you his own eloquent exposition of the
motives which impelled him to the act. It is to be found in
his defence before an inexorable Judge, sitting in the very city
he had just saved, and before he had left the scene of his tri
umph and glory :
" In this crisis, and under a firm persuasion that none of these objects
could be effected by the exercise of the ordinary powers confided to him ;
under a solemn conviction that the country committed to his care could be
saved by that measure only from utter ruin ; under a religious belief that he
was performing the most important and sacred duty, — respondent proclaimed
martial law. He intended, by that measure, to supersede such civil powers
as in their operation interfered with" those he was obliged to exercise. He
thought that, in such a moment, constitutional forms must be suspended
for the permanent preservation of constitutional rights, and that there could
be no question whether it were best to depart for a moment from the exer
cise of our dearest privileges, or have them wrested from us forever. He
knew that, if the civil magistrate were permitted to exercise his usual func
tions, none of the measures necessary to avert the awful fate that threat
ened us, could be expected. Personal liberty cannot exist at a time when
every man is required to become a soldier. Private property cannot be se
cured, when its use is indispensable for the public safety. Unhmited

64 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
liberty of speech is incompatib le with the disciphne of a camp ; and that of
the press is the more dangerous, when it is made the vehicle of conveying
intelHgence to the enemy, or exciting mutiny among the soldiery. To have
suffered the uncontrolled enjoyment of any one of those rights during the
time of the late invasion, would have been to abandon the defence of the
country. The civil magistrate is the guardian of those rights ; and the
proclamation of martial law was therefore intended to supersede the exercise
of his authority, so far as it interfered with the necessary restriction of
those rights, but no farther."
Here, sir, is his own exposition of the pure and patriotic mo
tives — an exposition that ought to have softened down the
heart of that " British inebriate," though that heart had been
made of stone. Nothing, however, could move the inexorable
Judge : he spurned the defence from the record, and the enor
mous fine of one thousand dollars was imposed on the saviuor
of the city. It was excessive — it was enormous ; so excessive, so
enormous, that it ought to be remitted. Here is common ground
where all can stand. Here the gentleman from New York, from
Massachusetts, from Kentucky, might stand ; common ground,
where both my colleagues (Messrs. Peyton and Dickinson) might
have stood, both in their speeches and their votes — the enormity
of this fine. It equalled the net income of one whole year of
General Jackson's resources. Whatever any man may think of
hispowerio declare martial law, no man can doubt the purity of
his motives. That purity should have disarmed the law of its
vengeance, and wrapped its victim in the mantle of mercy,
gratitude and honor.
Mr. Chairman : I fear that much of the reluctance of gen
tlemen to the passage of this bill is to be found in the fact that
this was a pecuniary punishment. Suppose, instead of a fine
your Commanding General had been cast into the prisons of
Louisiana. Suppose the same mail that brought you the news
of that unparalleled victory had brought the news that your
General was in a dungeon ; that whilst the brave army which
he had commanded had returned home in safety and honor, its
heroic commander was pining in prison for the very act which
had closed the second war of Independence in a blaze of
glory ! How long, think you, would Mr. Madison, then Presi
dent of the United States, have permitted him to remain un
pardoned and unliberated from that loathsome condition. How

ON REMITTING THE FINE ON GEN. JACKSON. 65
long would it have been, before the Congress of the United
States, then in session, would have interceded, if necessary, in
his behalf? Sir, that whole Congress would have rushed from
both ends of the Capitol, and gone in solemn procession to im
plore his instant liberation. Would the gentleman from New
York [Mr. Barnard] have deserted from the lines of that pro
cession, and exclaimed, as he has now done, "We have a Con
stitution to preserve," and therefore let him rot in jail? Would
the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Grider,] then have said, let
him pine in his dungeon, because he and his constituents were
entitled to their share ofthe glory of his achievements? Would
my colleague, [Mr. Peyton] have travelled onward in a pro
cession whose object, if obtained, would strike down the no
blest monument of his glory, pluck the proudest feather from
his war-plume, and dim the lustre ofthe brightest jewel that
glitters in the coronet of his fame? Would the venerable gen
tleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Adams] have been seen then
lingering far behind in that procession, and refusing to ask for
the fiberation ofthe man by whose defence on a previous oc
casion he had secured his warmest lodgement in the hearts of
his countrymen? No, sir ; there would have been no halting
and hesitating in such a case in the Congress of 1815. All men
of all parties — save only those who loved England, whose
proud myrimdons he had conquered, more than they loved
their own country — would have rushed to the Executive man
sion, and implored the liberation of General Jackson. His
punishment by fine stands on the same principle as his pun
ishment by imprisonment. With the same patriotic ardor
that the Congress of 1815 would have implored the remission
of the one, the Congress of 1844 ought to remit the other.
But the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Schenck] has just told us
that this was not the right time ; that, if done at all, it should
have been done on the day when the fine was imposed. I fear,
sir, the right time will never come with him and his party friends,
who evince such a never-dying opposition to this bill. Thirty
years have now rolled over the memorable scenes of New Or
leans ; but they have neither dimmed the gratitude of his coun
try, nor softened down the malevolence of his enemies. This
is the Sth of January, the day which he has rendered ever mem-
6

66 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
orable in the annals of his country ; it is the very day on which
this cruel and unjust judgment should be reversed — when this
excessive and enormous fine should be remitted. He has ren
dered it illustrious by the noblest victory on record ; let us ren
der it, if possible, still more illustrious, by a great act of national
justice and honor.

SPEECH,
On the Correspondence of Mr. Webster with the British Minis
ter, in relation to tke surrender of Alexander McLeod. Deliv
ered in the House of Representatives, July 9th and iQth, 1841.

The following resolution being under consideration in the
Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union :
Resolved, That the President ofthe United States be requested to inform
this House, if not incompatible with the public service, whether any officer
of the army, or tha Attorney General of the United States, has, since the
4th of March last, been directed tr> visit the State of New York for any pur
pose connected with the imprisonment or trial of Alexander McLeod ; and
whether, by any Executive measures or correspondence, the British Gov
ernment has been given to understand that Mr. McLeod will be released
or surrendered ; and, if so, to communicate to this House copies of the in
structions to, and report of, such officer.
Mr. A. V. Brown, of Tennessee, addressed the House as
follows :
Mr. Speaker: I offer no apology for further discussion of
this subject. It has not been discussed enough yet. It was
not discussed enough last winter, when the British Government
half confessed that she had invaded our soil, burnt our prop
erty, and murdered our people. She so nearly confessed it,
tliat when her minister's letter was received, containing the
impudent avowal "that the destruction of the Caroline was
the pubhc act of persons in her Majesty's service, obeying the
orders of their superior authorities," this hall rung with indig
nation from one side of it to the other.
The now chairman of the Ways and Means, and the present
Postmaster General, both coming from the region of country
where this outrage was perpetrated, made the most animated
appeals to our sympathies and patriotism.
But the cold suggestion was made then, as now, that the

68 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECEES.
negotiation was yet pending, and we must beware how we
aroused the sleeping lion of Enghsh power. Soon afterward,
the Committee on Foreign Relations submitted a report, rather
spirited in its tone, commenting with some shght severity on
British aggression and ambition ; when we were again admon
ished of her fleets and armies, and the ease with which she
could reduce our towns and cities to ashes.
These admonitions were effectual. Debate subsided; the
first flashes of our indignation died away; and we ad
journed, half regretting that we had (/are^ to debate the sub
ject at all.
Sir, Lord Palmerston observed all and read all that was ut
tered in this hall ; and concluding, from the too cautious tem
per of that debate, that Mr. Forsyth would not be sustained in
the lofty stand he had taken, determined at once to make a
peremptory demand upon us — to appeal to our fears "ofthe
serious consequences of a refusal." I hope in God that no
action of this House, on this resolution, will ever confirm his
degrading estimate of its disposition and determination to resist
all foreign aggression at every hazard.
It is time, high time, for us to speak out boldly, and without
reserve. England's ministry have spoken the words of burning
shame to the insulted honor of this country. One of her mem
bers of Parliament has even threatened to arm our slaves, and
to excite all the Indian tribes against us. And shall an Amer
ican Congress be afraid to speak — afraid to call even for ne
cessary information — lest, peradventure, it should embarrass
our future negotiations ? Sir, I am free to declare that I de
sire to embarrass all such negotiations as have been lately go
ing on. Were I the American Executive, my Secretary of
State should never write another line in the way of negotiation,
until England withdrew that degrading threat, which is yet
hanging over my country, and which Mr. Webster has never
had the heart to repel — all American as that heart is, according
to the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Wise.]
But, sir, can this call, by any possibility, embarrass future
negotiation? It cannot, for the resolution on its face confers
on the President a boundless discretion in giving or withholding
the information. Besides, a large portion of the call relates

ON THE MoLEOD CASE. 69
only to the mission of two of our own public officers to the
State of New York, with whose instructions England should
never have been made acquainted. But, instead of this, it is
highly probable that the British Government knows all about
them, whilst our own countrymen are profoundly ignorant on
the subject.
This mission was so extraordinary — so unlike any thing that
had ever occurred under any former Administration, that cu
riosity alone might prompt us to inquire why a brave and gal
lant general of our armies had been sent off four or five hun
dred miles — not to meet and battle (as he had often and glori
ously done) the enemies of Ms country, but, strange to tell, to
attend to a law-suit in court. Only think of it, sir ; an old sol
dier, covered with his scars and his honors, sent out to assist
the law officer of the Government to argue a demurrer to an
indictment, or to file a plea to the jurisdiction of a county court.
Heavens ! as the eloquent gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr.
Marshall,] would say, " what an immortal petrefaction" of
human folly !
But, sir, to be serious. Was General Scott despatched to
New York for any purpose connected with the trial of McLeod?
And, if so, what could have been that pm-pose ? Was it to
effect a release by the sword, if the Attorney General should
fail to procure it by the purse ? Such a purpose is incredible.
What then ? Why, the most probable conjecture is, that Mr.
Webster had learned, from some source or other, that McLeod
was to be liberated at all events, and at every hazard, by the
British authorities in Canada; that, in the event of a conviction,
our soil was to be again invaded, our jail at Lockport to be
pulled down or burnt like the Caroline ; and, if necessary, to
shoot and sabre and murder our people, as they had done
before !
Sir, I want to know all about this military expedition; and,
if my conjecture should prove correct, then I want to know
why Mr. Webster should feel so much sympathy for this Eng
hsh subject, who inhumanly boasted that his sword was yet
red with the blood of an American citizen, — why he should
send him testimony and counsel, and render him every assis
tance in his power to escape justice and to elude the law.

70 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
Surely Mr. Webster was under no obligation to the British na
tion so to volunteer his services inbehalfof one of her subjects.
That would make him more like a British consul than an
American Secretary of State. From that hour (if not before)
when Mr. Fox declared the approval of the burning of the
Caroline, and the murder of her crew, by his Government, Mr.
Webster should have said : " Then go and defend McLeod your
self; employ his counsel with your own or your nation's money;
collect his testimony for him yourself; henceforth and forever
I leave him to his fate, to answer to the insulted and violated
laws of New York in the best manner he may." The more
especially should he have said and acted in this manner, after
those threats which I suppose to have given rise to General
Scott's expedition to New York.
But, sir, this whole mission has been marked, throughout, not
more by the most morbid and misapplied sympathy, than by
the novelty and inconsistency ofthe duties which it imposed on
the Attorney General. It is the duty of that officer io prosecute,
not to defend, criminals ; to give counsel to our President, and
to the heads of departments — not to traverse the country for
the release of foreign felons, who, at the dead hour of mid
night, by boats propelled by muffied oars, invade our territory,
burn our property, and imbue their hands in better blood than
ever flowed in English veins.
Such are the duties of the Attorney General, as declared by
the statute of 1789. What duties were assigned to him in this
degrading mission — degrading to him who sent, and to him
who was sent ? You may find them in page 25 of document
No. 1.
"The President is impressed with the propriety of transferring the trial
from the scene of the principal excitement to some other and distant coun
try. You will take care this be suggested to the prisoner's counsel.
" Having consulted with the Governor, you will proceed to Lockport, or
wherever else the trial may be holden, and famish the prisoner's counsel
with the evidence of which you will be in possession, material to his de
fence. You will see that he have skillful and eminent counsel, if such be
not already retained ; and, although you are not desired to act as counsel
yourself, you will cause it to be signified to him, and to the gentleman who
may conduct his defence, that it is the wish of this Government that, in
case his defence is overruled by the court in which he shall be tried, proper

ON THE MoLEOD CASE, 71
steps be taken immediately for removing the cause, by writ of error, to the
Supreme Court of the United States."
You perceive, sir, that he was not to go as public, but as
secret counsel — not to plead for McLeod himself, but to see that
he had others, " skillful and eminent," to do so ; that he was to
furnish him with testimony ; and, above all, in case of convic
tion, that it was the wish ofthe Government that the case should
be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States ; that the
prisoner's counsel was to be told that such was the wish of the
Government. The defendant, it was supposed, might not feel sufficient
anxiety to save his neck from the halter by appealing to a
higher tribunal, and must, therefore, be encouraged to do so
by the assurance that the Government wished him to do so.
Mr. Attorney General is to signify to him that he had better
appeal than die !
Mr. Speaker, I pause to ask if, after this, you can believe
that wonders will ever cease? At all events, can you believe
they are likely to cease during this life-preserving, felon-sav
ing, 6ranc/i of this Administration? I say nothing of its head,
who had come in too unexpectedly, and was surrounded by too
many perplexities at that period, to be presumed to have given
much attention to this subject; but I speak emphatically of
this branch of the Administration.
Mr. Speaker, I wish now to call your attention to the remain
ing clause of this resolution, to wit : " whether the British
Government has been given to understand that McLeod will be
released or surrendered." ^
It is probable that the President can give us but little more
than the information contained in his message. I shall, there
fore, under that supposition, submit my views on the merits of
the McLeod case, and the course pursued by the Secretary of
State in the correspondence, as it now stands.
To understand the merits of this case, and to judge ofthe
propriety or impropriety of the course pursued by Mr. Webster
in it, we must have a clear and distinct understanding of the
facts. For these, I refer you to the speech of the honorable
chairman of the Ways and Means at the last session ; to the
statement of the case made by Mr. Webster himself; and.

72 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
lastly, to a condensed and nervous statement of them in the
other end of the Capitol, which has never been denied or con
tradicted there or on this fioor.
"This brings me to the case before us. What is it? The
facts of the case are all spread out in official documents, and
the evidence is clear and undeniable. An American steam
ferry-boat traverses the Niagara river ; she carries passengers
and property from one shore to the other. The English be
lieve (and perhaps truly) that she carries men and arms to tbe
insurgents in Canada ; and without any appeal to our Govern
ments, either State or Federal — without applying to us to put
our own laws in force against her — an English officer, of his
own head, without the knowledge ofthe British Government,
determines to do — what? Not to watch the suspected vessel,
arrest her in the fact, seize the guilty and spare the innocent ;
but to steal upon her in the night, board her asleep, and de
stroy her at the American shore, under the flag of her country.
In the evening of the meditated outrage volunteers are called
for — fifty or sixty dashing, daring fellows — ready to follow their
leader to the devil, — for that was the language used; and it
proves the expedition to have been a diabolical one, and wor
thy to be led as well as followed by demons. The arms were
sabres and pistols ; the season of attack, midnight; the means
of approach, light boats and muffled oars ; the progress slow,
silent, and stealthy, that no suspicious sound should alarm the
sleeping victims. Tlxe or der waa death and no quarter. Thus
prepared and led, they approach the boat in the dead of the
night — reach her without discovery — ^rush on board — ^fly to the
berths — cut, slash, stab, and shoot all whom they see — ^pursue
the flying, and, besides those in the boat, kill one man at
least upon the soil of his country, far from the water's edge.
Victorious in an attack where there was no resistance, the con
querors draw the vessel into the midst ofthe current, set her on
fire, and with all her contents — the dead, the living, the woun
ded, and the dying— send her in flames over the frightful catar
act of the Niagara. McLeod, the man whose release is deman
ded from us, was (according to his own declarations, made at
the time in his own country, repeated since in ours, and accor
ding to the sworn testimony of one of the survivors) an actor

ON THE McLEOD CASE. 73
in that piratical and cowardly tragedy. According to his own
assertions, and the admission of his comrades, he was one of
the foremost in that cruel work, and actually killed one of the
^damned lanArees,' (to use his own words,) with his own hands."
— Mr. Benton^s speech in Senate United States,
Now, sir, on these facts, which it warms one's American
blood to recite, can this band of merciless desperadoes be lia
ble to punishment under the laws of New York, where their
crimes were perpetrated? To my mind, after the best exam
ination I have been able to give to the subject, there can be
but one response. McLeod, one of the perpetrators, is answer
able, unless he can show that it was a public military expedi
tion, set on foot by the proper authorities in Canada, with or
without a previous declaration of war against this country,
commanding the specific things to be done for which he now
stands indicted in the State of New York. I repeat — com
manding the specific things to be done for which he is indicted.
In time of open public war, such authority would be presum
ed. The courts would look to the public acts, proclamations, de
clarations of war, and other proceedings of notoriety ; and out
of these would find immunity to the individuals engaged,
whilst the Government would retaliate on the enemy by like
incursions into their territory. But in time ol profound peace,
with all subsisting treaty stipulations of amity in full force, no
such presumptions can be resorted to. Express, positive, and
unequivocal com.mands irom. competent authority are all that can
justify him. Were such commands given? The whole case
turns upon that fact. The case will turn on that fact in the
courts of New York. The prisoner must come forward with
the orders of Sir Francis Head, I believe then Governor Gen
eral of Canada. If not direct from him, he must show order
from sorne military commander who issued them, and who re
ceived his orders from the supreme Colonial Government.
Further back than that ii would not be necessary, as 1 conceive,
to trace the orders. If such orders covered and embraced the
specific act for which he was indicted, the courts of New York
will and ought to discharge him. But if the orders were gen
eral, " to break up the establishment at Navy Island," that
would not do ; or if they were " to destroy any vessel convey-

74 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
ing insurgents to or from the island," that would not do. If
they were " to take any steps, and to do any acts, which might
be necessary forthe defence of her Majesty's territory, or for
the protection of her Majesty's subjects," such orders would
not do. They would not justify an invasion of our territory , nor
the burning of a vessel lying peaceably moored to our own
shores, with no military stores, and with no troops for trans
portation. No prior use of the boat and no prior conduct of
her crew could justify the attack, because not essential "tothe
defence of British territory nor of British subjects." It might
be an act of revenge for the past, but it could not be necessary
for protection in future.
In any event, capture without burning, capture without the
murder oi her crew, would surely have been all that could
have been necessary. But, sir, when only ordered to defend
•British territory, they come at the dead hour of midnight and
invade American soil ; when only ordered to protect British
subjects, they shoot, and stab, and murder American citizens —
instead, at most, of taking and towing the vessel over to the
British side, and detaining her until the insurgents were ex
pelled from the island, they tow her out to the middle of the
river, set fire to her, and thus commit to the flames the remain
ing portion of her crew, sending them and the blazing wreck
over the mighty falls of the Niagara. Sir, place yourself in
that dark and bloody night, on the shore of that river, stand
ing proudly as you would do on American ground. In the
stillness of that night, listen to the landing of hostile soldiers
on our shores, to the attack on one of oui* vessels ; hear the
groans of our dying countrymen : a moment after, look at that
blazing sheet of fire, slowly moving on to the dreadful catar
act, till at last it makes its awful leap on the floods below.
Sir, the waves of Niagara have extinguished the fires of that
vessel — they have silenced forever the agonizing shrieks of her
remaining crew ; but the cry of vengeance still comes up from
her deep and agitated bosom, in tones louder than the thun
der of her own mighty cataract. I carry you back to that
midnight scene — the tramp of British soldiers ; I point you
to the dead bodies of your countrymen — to the blazing victim
of the falls. Contemplating all these things, in the stillness

ON THE McLEOD CASE. 75
of that night, can your heart find one throb of approbation
to the cold, unfeeling diplomacy — to the tame and ready sub
mission of the American Secretary of State?
Submission to what? I answer, first. To the impudent
menace or threat of the British Government. Do you ask me
what he should have done? I answer, that he should have
stopped all negotiation at once — instantly have stopped it —
until that menace was withdrawn. I answer further, that the
least he should have done would have been, the moment the
British Government avowed her approbatien of the act, he
ought to have retorted her own language of peremptory de
mand of satisfaction, and to have flung back her own menace
of the serious consequences of a refusal. This, sir, is the least
he should have done on that proud and insulting occasion.
What else should he have done? Answering at all, he should
have said to Mr. Fox : Your avowal of this act by the British
Government is vague, prevaricating and unsatisfactory.
I ask yom* attention, and that of this House and nation, to
the precise words of that avowal :
" The grounds on which the British Government make this demand upon
the Government of the United States are these : That the transaction on
account of which Mr. McLeod has been arrested, and is to be put upon his
trial, was a transaction of a public character, planned and executed by per
sons duly empowered by her Majesty's colonial authorities to take any
steps and to do any acts which might be necessary for the defence of her
Majesty's territories, and for the protection of her Majesty's subjects ; and
that, consequently, those subjects of her Majesty who engaged in that
transaction were performing an act of public duty, for which they cannot
be made personally and individually answerable to the laws and tribunals
of any foreign country."
These are the precise words of the British minister. It is
fair to presume thatthey are the precise words ofthe orders of
Colonel McNab, under whom McLeod was acting. Well, sir,
suppose these orders to be before us now, or before the courts
of New York on the trial : will such orders cover the case
of McLeod? WiU they justify the burning of the Caroline, the
invasion of our territory, and the murder of our people? Sure
ly not ; because these acts did not come within the scope of their
orders or authority. They were only authorized or ordered to
do such acts as were necessary for the " defence of her territory.

76 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
and the protection of her Majesty's subjects." The things
done, and for which he stands indicted, were for none of these
purposes ; and they, therefore, stand without excuse or justi
fication, because they exceeded their authority. When is it that
individuals by the law of nations, are exempted from municipal
liabihty in such cases? It is only when the act done was by
the command of the sovereign. Of course that command must
precede the act, and must clearly and satisfactorily cover it.
Sir, Vattel, nor Grotius, nor any other writer on the laws of
nations, any where lays down the doctrine that subsequent ap
proval, without previous commands, would excuse the individual
committing the crime. Such a doctrine would perish by its
own absm'dity. It is true that a subsequent approval may also
involve the nation, and, in the language of the books, " make
it a matter of public concern" — as it was, before that avowal,
only one of individual concern. This, however, only adds
another party to the controversy, without releasing the first.
Hence it is said by Vattel, " if the offended State has in her
power the individual who has done the injury, she may, with
out scruple, bring him to justice, and punish him."
This case from Vattel is precisely the case of McLeod. He
was, to say the best for him, but the servant, or agent, or sol
dier of the Canadian Government, ordered and sent to do one
thing, to wit : to defend the British territory, and protect the
British subjects; but exceeding his authority — going beyond his
orders — he invaded our territory, burnt our property, and mur
dered our citizens. He fied back to his own country; and, if
he had remainded there, our only recourse would have been to
demand him of the British Government. When demanded, if
the British Government refused to surrender him, she would
have made it a "public concern," and we might have looked
to her for satisfaction forthe ?-e/MMZ; not for the original act
of her subject, but forthe refusal; and the measure of satisfac
tion for that refusal would justly be, indemnity for losses sus
tained by the original act. But if, before, or pending, or sub
sequent to such a demand, the individual returns within our
jurisdiction, we may hold him responsible for his transgression
of our laws, and punish him accordingly. When that is done,
the original offence is atoned for. No double satisfaction for

ON THE McLEOD CASU. 77
that can be demanded ; but we should be still at liberty to pro
ceed for the subsequent refusal, according to the circumstances
of aggravation attending it.
But, sir, I repeat, that nothing short of a previous order to
do the specific act complained of, given by competent au
thority, can save McLeod in the courts of New York. No
subsequent approval of it by the British Government can do it.
McLeod will find it so on his trial ; and the American Secre
tary of State should have told the British Government so, and
should have demanded the production of the original order, or
a copy of it, so as to see precisely its extent and operation.
And here is my highest objection to the conduct of our Secre
tary of State. He never had the fearlessness to say to Eng
land, " Show me your order to this man or his leader ; show
me that — its date, its every word — that my Government may
see whether these crimes are yours or his. If yours, the courts
of New York, in due season, will send him home unharmed
and uninjured, whilst I will hold you instantly responsible for
his conduct."
This is what Mr. Webster, in my humble opinion, should
have said and done. What did he say and do? He affects to
see no distinction between a prior order and a subsequent ap
proval of the conduct of McLeod. In fact, he substitutes the
latter for the former, and, with indecent haste, gives the British
Government to understand that the claim of New York con
stituted the only difficulty in the way of an instant compli
ance with its demand. What more? Why he gives Mr. Fox
a copy of his instructions to the Attorney General, and thereby
informs him of the hasty and extraordinary means by which
he was endeavoring to snatch McLeod out of the hands of
New York, the only remaining obstacle to his surrender.
Sir, Mr. Fox saw at once that his threat had told — the British
ministry saw the same thing — the British Parliament saw it —
and they are all now waiting in full assurance the heroes of
Acre will have no opportunity to increase their laurels on the
coast of America.
But, sir, they may be mistaken after all. There is but one
thing can save him on his trial. If indeed he were absent from

78

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

the scene of these outrages — if indeed he was no member of
that " public force," he will and ought to be acquitted.
But the Supreme Court will require him, as Mr. Webster
ought to have done, to produce the order under which the party
acted. They will look closely to the extent of that order ; and
if that order was exceeded, he must die. No subsequent ap
proval of the British Government can shield him — no over
sight of the American Secretary can set aside the strict and
impartial administration of Justice. Die he must; and all
the thunder of the British navy cannot frighten the American
people from approving and applauding the sentence.
If such should be the fate of McLeod, there remains but one
question to be considered — and that is, one of peace and war.
Will Great Britain feel bound and pledged to declare war
against this country to avenge his death? Sir, England would
never have thought of such a thing, but for the timid policy
and unwise admissions of the Secretary of State. As it is, she
may, and probably will, venture to appeal to that " ultima
ratio regum ;" and, sir, in the very declaration in which she ap
peals to arms, she will present the correspondence of our own
Secretary to vindicate the act. She will spread it before all
Europe as her justification, and will engrave it on the very
banner under which she will march to the conflict.
Mr. Speaker, it is to avert the horrors of war lihat this ap
parent severity of remark on the course of the Secretary has
been indulged in ; and, if it must come, we wish to rescue the
country from the imputation of having induced it, by having
too tamely surrendered the rights of our citizens.
It is not too late yet for Mr. Webster to review the fatal ad
missions he has made, and to place this correspondence on a
more elevated and more defensible foundation. If no ex
hortation on this floor can prevail with him, let him learn it
from Lord Palmerston himself. Let him learn it in the reply
of that nobleman to Lord Stanley in the British Parhament
on the 9th of February, 1841 . On that occasion he stated:
" With regard to the ground taken by Mr. Forsyth, in reply to Mr. Fox,
I think it right to state that the American Government undoubtedly might
have considered this transaction either as a transaction to be dealt with be
tween the two Governments, by demands for redress by one to be granted

ON THE McLEOD CASE. 79
or refused by the other, and dealt with accordingly : or it might have been
considered, as the British authorities consider proceedings between Ameri
can citizens on the British side of the border, — as matter to be dealt with by
tlie local authorities.
" But the American Government chose the former course, by treating this
matter as one to be decided between two Governments ; and this is the
ground on which they are entitled to demand redress of the British Gov
ernment for the act of its subjects ; and from that ground they cannot be
permitted lo recede."
Sir, here is an admission of our original right to seize and
punish McLeod, infinitely stronger than is any where asserted
by Mr. Webster; — an admission but little weakened by the
sophistry which seeks to show that this original right had been
lost by an appeal to the British Government for redress. That
redress has never been granted — nay, it has not even been
promised; and, therefore, upon every known principle this
Government stands remitted to her original right to punish
McLeod whenever she can get hold upon him. She has him
now. She recurs to that admitted original right, notwithstand
ing its surrender by Mr. Webster.
I wish now to refer to another speech of Lord Palmerston,
in reply to Mr. Hume in the same debate. He said :
" With regard to Mr. Forsyth's letter, I beg leave to say that the princi
ple stands thus : In the case of the American citizens engaged in invading
Canada, the American Government disavows the acts of those citizens, and
states that the British authorities might deal with them as they pleased,
and that they were persons who were not in any degree entitled to the pro
tection of the United States. But in the other case they treated the affair
of the Caroline as one to be considered as that of the Government, and not
to be left on the responsibility of individuals. Until, therefore, the British
Government disowned those persons, as the American Government disa
vowed their citizens in the other case, they would have no right to change
their ground on the question."
Now, sir, observe the position taken in this last extract by
Lord Palmerston. Until the British Government disown the
persons who made the attack on the Caroline, they were not
to be treated as the British authorities treated the Americans
taken on the Canada side. And how was that ? By making
them responsible to the local authorities. And why not treat
them on both sides alike ? Because we have not disowned our
people, say they, as you have done yours. But if you have

80 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
not disowned them, have you ever owned them, or acknowledged
their acts to be yours ? No, never.
For two years we demanded of the British Government to
say whether it did or did not disown these persons ; but she ut
terly failed during all that time to say whether she did or not.
In the mean time, whilst she is standing mute and will not utter
a single word either way, McLeod returns to the United States,
impudently brags of his exploits in the affair, is arrested, and
confined for trial. Up to this time, we could not get England
to say a word on the subject; but wow she comes very suddenly
to her speech. One of her felon subjects is about to get the
rope around his neck, and she speaks up at once with full vol
ubility. Is she entitled to her demand? Is she entitled to take
our people on her side ofthe border, and hang them up at the
yard-arm or shoot them like dogs ; whilst /ler people, taken on
our side, with their hands yet reeking with the blood of our
fellow-citizens, may stalk, and strut, and vapor through our
land, with utter impunity?
Sir, Mr. Webster virtually says all this may be done. He
virtually surrenders the rights and privileges of our border citi
zens, and lays them exposed to every marauding expedition
that may be set on foot against them in Canada. But, sir,
were this the last pubhc act of my hfe, I would protest against
bia doctrines, and appeal from his decisions.

SPEECH,
On the Tariff, delivered in the House of Representatives,
June 18, 1842.

The House having resolved itself into Committee of the Whole, and the
bill reported by the Committee of Ways and Means, and that by the
Committee on Manufactures, together with the amendment offered to the
latter by Mr. HabeSsham, beingunder consideration —
Mr. Aj V. Brown addressed the Committee as follows :
Mr. Chairman: I have searched most diligently for some
redeeming virtue in the two bills reported by the committees,
which might so far reconcile me to their provisions as to ex-
tfuse any participation on my part in their discussion. But I
have searched in vain. I can find nothing — literally nothing
— to rescue them from the deepest and most unmitigated ab
horrence. They both seek to revive the odious principle of
direct protection, and to repudiate the most solemn and sacred
covenant ever entered into since the formation of the Federal
Constitution. But I mean to speak only to one of these bills —
to the one reported by the Committee on Manufactures. That,
sir, is the one which the dominant party in this House mean
finally, by the mere power of numbers, to force upon the peo
ple of this country. I will not speak to the Ways and Means,
for they would not speak to their own bill — having thrown it
upon the House, without any report illustrating its principles,
or explaining its details. They seem to have gotten it up on
the spm- of the occasion, and to rely on nothing for its support
but the enormity of its exactions, and the poor device which
they have labelled on its front — that it is a hill for the raising of
revenue. Mr. Chairman, by the act of 1833, all the duties above twenty
per cent., by whatever law imposed, were brought down to
that amount; and, by the act of 1841, all duties below twenty
7

82 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
per cent, were raised to that rate, with the exceptions contained
in the act.
By these two acts, we have a full, complete, and perfect
tariff system, for the supply of the treasury, without further
legislation on the subject. Hence it is that 1 assume the posi
tion, that beyond the correction of the error of last session, in
regard to the list of free articles, and the enactment of a few
obvious provisions in relation to home valuation, we ought to
have nothing to do with this delicate and exciting subject. To
take it up for thorough revisal, and the establishment of a
higher rate of duty, I hold to be an act of legislative perfidy,
which can find no parallel in the history of this country. Ta
no member here can it be necessary to refer to the fierce col
lision of parties on the tariffs of 1816, 1824, and 1828. It is
enough to say that, in every conffict, the doctrine of protection
was victorious. What sort of protection? Was it only inci
dental ? or was it claimed as a distinctive and independent
.principle of the Constitution? Let the father of the whole
system tell you. Hear him who, in 1833, informs us that he
had cherished it with paternal fondness, and that his affectioift
even then (though he had been compelled to abandon it) were
undiminished. Replying to Mr. Webster, who was then sepa
rating from him on the compromise act, he says : " all that
was settled in 1816, in 1824, and in 1828, was, that protection
should be afforded by high duties, without regard to the amount
ofthe revenue they would yield." Mark the emphatic admis
sion of Mr. Clay — "protection without regard to revenue." It
was on this vei-y ground that all three of these acts had been
so warmly opposed ; but yet there was no declaration on their
face that such was their object. The doctrine dai-ed not to
sbow itself there, lest the judicial tribunals of the country
should pass sentence of condemnation upon it. No sir • it
skulked behind the revenue power, meanly evading the just and
manifest principles of the Constitution. Such a device could
not long be sustained, nor its enormous exactions endured. It
disquieted and almost convulsed the country. It filled the land
with apprehensions of ruin and disaster on the one hand and
civil war on the other. It became so abhorrent to the Ameri
can people, "that he who had sustained it with paternal fond-

ON --THE TARIFF. 83
ness," could sustain it no longer. He came forward with the
compromise act of 1833. He declared that the American sys
tem of protection must go down. He saw it in the deadly
blows which President Jackson was dealing upon it — -he saw it
in the solemn protestations of every southern State in the Union
— he saw it in the determined spirit of resistance in South Car
olina — and, more than all, he both saw and felt it in the then
recent elections, which had all gone against him and his friends.
Under this thorough conviction, (so thorough, that no argument
of Mr. Webster, his great compeer in estabhshing the system,
could shake or remove it,) Mr. Clay came forward with the
compromise. 1 pause here, Mr. Chairman, in order that you may consider
the position of the two great parties of this country at that
eventful moment. The one was insisting on the permanent
continuance of the protective system; the other was boldly
demanding its instant repeal and total abandonment. Now,
the compromise was to reconcile these hostile parties — to find
some middle ground on which both could stand, and the Union
be preserved. Mr. Clay himself remarked on the occasion :
" I am anxious to find out some principle of mutual accom
modation, to satisfy, as far as practicable, both parties ; to in
crease the stability of our legislation ; and, at some distant
day, (but not too distant, when we take into view the magni
tude of the interests which are involved,) to bring down the
rate of duties to that revenue standard for which our opponents
had so long contended."
Here, sir, is an open and distinct avowal ofthe objects and
purposes of the compromise. That it was intended by him to
be a permanent settlement, not of the details, but of the great
principles of the future tariff" legislation of the country, I refer,
for further illustration, to his arguments addressed to his man ¦
ufactm-ing friends in favor of its adoption :
" The most that can be objected to the bill by those with whom he had
co-operated to support the protective system was, that, in consideration of
nine and one-half years of peace, certainty, and stability, the manufacturers
rehnquished some advantages which they now enjoy. What was the prin
ciple which had always been contended for in this, and in the other House !
That, after the accumulation of capital and skill, the manufacturers would
he able to stand alone, unaided by the Government, in competition with

84 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
the imported articles from any quarter. Now, give us time ; cease all fluc
tuations and agitations for nine years ; and the manufacturers, in every
branch, will sustain themselves against foreign competition. If we cansee
our way clearly for nine years to come, we can safely leave posterity to
provide for the rest. If the tariff be overthrown, (as may be the case at
the next session,) the country will be plunged into extreme distress and
agitation. I (said Mr. Clay) want harmony; I wish to see the restoration
of those ties which have carried us triumphantly through two wars ; I de
light not in this perpetual turmoil. Let us have peace, and become once
more united as a band of brothers."
Sir, i have made these extracts and references in order to
remind this House, and this country, of the true object and
extent of this compromise. It was accepted. When he, [Mr.
Calhoun,] who had as strenuously opposed, as Mr. Clay had
supported the system, rose up in his place in the Senate chamber
and accepted it, the galleries responded in tumultuous appro
bation. The whole nation responded with joy and acclama
tion. The assent of Congress, and the approbation of the
President, soon crowned this noble act of concession on both
sides, and the process of reduction commenced. It has pro
gressed through all the stages of the law, until we are now
within a few days of its entire completion. Yes, sir; and
ivhen the 30th of this month shall have anived, the whole
South and Southwest can rise up as one man, and proudly
boast that, although their burdens were great, and the process
of alleviation slow and tedious, yet they have adhered to the
covenant, not only in the Spu-it, but to the very letter of it.
But, sir, when that day shall come, and this bill shall have
been passed, what can the North say? Can she point to the
same preservation of her plighted faith in vestal puritj' and
honor? No. I repeat, if tliis bill be passed, she can do no
such thing. The bill itself would wring from her inmost soul
the reluctant confession, that she had adhered to the compro
mise only whilst it was profitable, and cast it off the moment
when the other party waste have entered on its enjoyment.
The present distinguished Governor of Massachusetts seems
to have contemplated the possibility of something of this
sort. " Suppose, then," (said he, in the House of Representatives,) "that
South Carolina should abide by the compromise, whilst she supposes it

ON THE TARIFF. 85
beneficial to ,the tariff States and injurious to her; and when that period
shall close, the friends of protection shall then propose to re-establish the
system : what honorable man who votes for this bill would sustain such a
measure 1 Would hot South Carolina say, You have no right to change
this law — it was founded on compromise ; you have had the benefit of your
side of the bargain, and now I demand mine? Who could answer such a
declaration ¦! If, under such circumstances, you were to proceed to abolish
the law, would not South Carohna have much more just cause of complaint
and disaffection than she now has V
What Governor Davis, then a Representative in Congress,
said and asked in relation to South Carolina, might have been
said and asked of all the other anti-tariff" States. It was no
compromise between individuals — it was one between large
sections of the Union. It was a compromise between oppo
sing interests; and neither can abandon it with honor, until
each has enjoyed it for at least an equal peripd of time. Sir,
I repeat, (because the sentiment has left an indelible impres
sion on my mind,) that the North cannot repudiate this con
tract, after having pocketed milhons upon millions under it.
Mr. Clay himself, whatever he may do now, could not then
submit to the degrading anticipation. In the speech which
ushered the compromise act before the world, he said :
" But if the measure should be carried by the common consent of both
parties, we shall have all security. History will faithfully record the trans
action — narrate under what circumstances the bill was passed ; that it was
a pacifying measure ; that it was as oil poured from the vessel ofthe Union,
to restore peace and harmony to the country. When all this was known,
what Congress, what Legislature would mar the guaranty ? What man,
who is entitled to deserve the character of an American statesman, would
stand up in his place, in either House of Congress, and disturb the treaty
of peace and amity 1"
Mr. Chairman, 1 know not how this bill can escape the stern
a,nd withering rebuke contained in these extracts, but by the
denial that it does revive the protective system, so distinctly
and solemnly renounced by the compromise. True, it is not
expressly revived, in terms, on the face of the bill. Its advo
cates, like those who originally established it, are too sagaci
ous thus to label its unconstitutionality on its front. Like
them, they hide its protective character from judical detection.
Still, sir, no man can doubt the fact, who will look either at the
origin of the bill, the evidence on which it was prepared, or the

86

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECEES.

rate of duties it establishes. I propose to examine and test
it in all these particulars.
In the first place, it was prepared and reported by the
Committee on Manufactures and not by the Committee
of Ways and Means. It is the peculiar business of the
latter committee to look after the condition of the treasury,
and to see that it is kept in condition to meet all the appropria
tions made by law ; but the Committee on Manufactures,
as its very name imports, has no such duties assigned to it.
Its whole structure, for a long series of years, evinces no pur
pose connected with the revenues of the country. Look at the
constitution of the present committee. Massachusetts has one,
Vermont one. New York one, New Jersey one, Pennsylvania
one, and even little Rhode Island one ; whilst there were Only
three from the whole Union beside. Now, sir, why this amaz
ing disproportion in favor ofthe Northern States? Evidently be
cause they were manufacturing States, deeply interested in the
deliberations ofthe committee. The States of Maryland,. Vir
ginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, and Alabama, were agrieuhural
States, and therefore were supplied only with two members;
whilst the whole West — all the ten or twelve States lying on the
majestic Mississippi and its noble tributaries — had only one
member ofthe committee. No one here, I hope, will be so un
gracious as to suppose that the Speaker ever constituted such
a committee with the slighest reference to the raising of reve
nue. No, sir, the Speaker could never have had such purpose.
But the tariff" party of this House, ever watchful of such tilings,
looked over the committees, after their appointment, and found,
in the structure of that on manufactures, one more favorable
to their views than the Committee of Ways and Means.
By the closest concert of action, they wrested the President's
message from the Committee of Ways and Means, to whom it
rightfully belonged, and transferred it to the Committee on
Manufactures. So much for the geographical structure ofthe'
committee. I now ask, upon whose and what sort of evi
dence was this bill prepared? Was it on the oral or written
statements of the Secretary of the Treasury, of the wants and
condition of the treasury now, or for years to come? No, sir;
we heard not a word from him. Was any witness called, or

ON THE TARIFF. 87
statement received, on the subject? Not one. Even the re
port of the majority ofthe committee glances but slightly ov6r
the subject of revenue, barely saying enough about it to save
even a decent appearance. Sir, the information on which
this bill was prepared, was derived wholly from the manufac
turers — several of them the same persons who were here in
1828. The majority of the committee have complained of
the House on the subject of testimony. I now complain of
them. The House refused to give them the power to send for
witnesses : they determined they would have them without
lending after them. The House refused to give them power
to qualify witnesses in the case : they determined to take their
testimony without oath. Nay, more : the House amended
their application, by saying that none but disinterested wit
nesses should be examined, and then laid their proposition, so
amended, on the table. In the face of this solemn decision of
the House — made by ayes and noes — the majority of the com
mittee determined they would examine witnesses directly in
terested in the case= — men whose daily bread or annual profits
on their capital depended on the answers which they were
to give. Was anything like this ever heard of in the proceed
ings of any of the courts of this country — to receive testi
mony from those directly interested? Sir, it was never before
heard of in any investigation where truth was to be obtained,
or justice to be administered. Let me not be told — as I was
on a former occasion, when I had no opportunity to reply —
that none can know the facts as well as the manufacturers
themselves. True; and it often happens that no one knows
some material fact so well as the plaintiff or defendant in a
cival action : and yet you would never examine either of them
to prove such fact in his own favor. So, in criminal cases,
none know the facts as well as the culprit himself; but yet you
never examine him on trial for his own justification. But I go
be3^ond these analogies, and maintain that this country is filled
with persons who have discontinued or retired from manufac
turing establishments, or who are otherwise well-informed and
impartial on all the subjects within the range of our investiga
tion. Solar from having called on such as these, not a single

88

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

person whose statement was received is now recollected, who
was not deeply interested.
Here, then, are two important facts, that six out of nine ofthe
committee were from manufacturing States ; and the testimony
on which the bill was constructed, furnished by interested
manufacturers, who have voluntarily left their homes, and
travelled great distances for that purpose alone. And from
both of them I infer that the protection of manufactures was
the controlling consideration in the preparation of this bill.
But, sir, I will now look into the bill itself for intrinsic evidence
of the fact. We have the evidence of Mr. Clay himself, that
" all that was settled in 1816, 1824, and 1828, was, that pro
tection should be afforded by high duties, without regard to
revenue." Now, test this bill by that of 1828, and see what a
vast number of articles are now to pay the same duty as in
1828, or so nearly the same as not to change the protective
character of the duty.
I will present you with the foUovving list of comparative
duties :

October, 1828.

Present bill.

Cloths and cassimeres,

33K

to 45 pi

er cent.

40. cts.

sq. yard.

on various minima.

Other woollen manufac
tures
-
same
40
do.
Flannels and baizes
-
14
sq.
yard.
14
do.
Clothes ready made
-
60
per
cent.
60
per cent.
Brown sugar
-
3
cts.
? a
2
cts. f m
Lead, pig,
-
3
do.
2}i
do.
Cordage, tarred -
-
5
do.
5
do.
Copper, rods and bolts
-
4
do.
4
do.
Iron, cables and chains
-
3
do.
2
do.
anchors
-
2
do.
2
do.
nails
-
5
do.
4
do.
anvils
-
2
do.
2
do.
castings
-
IK
do.
IK
do.
sheet or hoop
-
3)4
do.
2>2'
do.
Shoes, silk
-
30 cts.
pr pair.
25 cts.
per pair.
prunella
-
25
do.
20
do.
leather
-
25
do.
20
do.
Boots andbootees
-
$1 50
do.
$1 25
do.
To this list might be added a great number of other articles
ON THE TARIFF.

89

which are taxed at rates precisely the same as by the act of
1828, or so nearly the same as to leave no doubt that this bill,
in its general structure, is highly protective. I beg leave to
present another short statement, which, I think, can scarcely
fail to convince the most skeptical.
Table of duty per cent, on certain articles of British manufacture, calculated
upon th-. cost of manufacture, according to the tariff of 1828, 1832, 1833.

-6

t-i

cS

>-,
Lt '
a
P.
..J
CQ
O
O
Sheetings
6cs.
Checks
8
Cahcoes
12
Flannels
15
Baizes
25
Kerseymeres
f 1 25
Bar iron per ton
38 40
Coal, do
2 40
o
fa
145 109 72
150 9090
100 50
CO
CO
COCO
1— 1
u-(
o
o
Eh
to
tS
oi
Fh
H
125
112-i
109
100
72
66
106
sn
64
66
50
47
112
88
50
69
a CO
CO n-{
2020 2020 20 20
2020
120100 55
100 100 70
100 75
Mr. Chairman, what plea or apology can be offered for such
a wanton breach of the compromise, as I think these tables es
tablish? In the first place, it is said that without the propos
ed increase of duties beyond the rates agreed on in 1833, some
of the manufactories cannot exist at all, whilst others can
not realize reasonable and satisfactory profits without it. In
reply, I do not hesitate to say that some of them ought to go
down. One of the crying evils of this manufacturing system
is, that nothing can be attempted in foreign countries which is
not soon essayed to be imitated here. No matter what it
might be — however unsuited to our condition — it must be tried,
under the favorite principle, that if it be found that it cannot
succeed in this country by its own merits, we have only to in
sert a new clause in thetariffbill for its protection, and thereby
make it a profitable concern. It were better, far better, for
our countrymen to betake themselves to the substantial and
useful branches of manufacturing, which can and will succeed
by their own intrinsic importance, rather than be running after
90 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
the many useless and silly inventions of the Old World. Let
me give you an example. Some years ago, the manufacture
of patent steel pens was commenced abroad, where it might
have been, probably, well enough. But straightway some of
our Yankee friends took it into their heads that they could
carry on the same business here. Well, away they went at it,
and succeeded in making quite a superior article ; they mo
nopolized, for awhile, all the common-school patronage of the
Northern States. Presently, however, the foreign article began
to come in cheaper in price, and quite as good for use, superse
ding, in a great degree, those manufactured here at a much
higher cost. All this has been of recent occurrence ; and, ac
cordingly, at the present session, we had before the committee
the American manufacturer begging for protection against the
foreign article ; in other words, asking Congress to impose a
tax on all the poor and orphan children of those States for his
benefit. Sir, it would have been better for those children to
have raised, by contribution, a sufficient sum to buy out this
man's establishment, and to have cast it into the Hudson, than
for Congress to have granted his petition. If a mechanical
business of no more importance to the country than that, can
not support itself without the aid of unjust and excessive tax
ation, let it go down; and let those engaged in such betake
themselves to agriculture, to commerce, or to other mechanical
employments of greater importance. 1 could furnish many
such cases — all showing a strong inclination to avoid the more
laborious pursuits of life, and to resort to every light andti'ivial
handicraft, whether the situation of the country, or the price of
labor, will justify it or not.
Mr. Chairman, let us not lose sight of the precise objections
to the rate of duties established by the compromise act, which
we are now considering. I entertain no hostihty to the manu
factories of the United States. 1 cherish, for the valuable and
important ones, the very highest regard; but the fight and fri
volous ones 1 am willing to see go down to-morrow. There are
more noble and invigorating employments, throughout this
broad land, for all who may be engaged in such. But to the
important ones, 1 will cheerfully give all the incidental advan
tages which the collection of the national revenue can bestow.

ON THE TARIFF. 91
Such incidental encouragement is given by the compromise,
and, I contend, is entirely sufficient to sustain the chief manu
facturing interests of this country — such as the woollen, the
glass, the leather, the cotton, the iron, &c.
That act allows three distinct points of incidental pro
tection :
1st. It imposes a duty of 20 per cent, ad valorem, or on the
value of the goods imported.
2d. It provides that that value shall be fixed in reference to
our own markets, instead of those of foreign countries, as
was the case before the compromise.
3d. That the duties shall be paid down in cash, instead of
being secured by bond, on a credit, as formerly.
This is the rate of duties, and the extent of protection, for
which I contend, and those with whom (with few exceptions) I
am pohtically acting. We find this rate of duties already ex
isting and established by law — a law intended, by those .who
established it, to be fixed and permanent ; a law which he who
proposed it [Mr. Clay] denominated " a treaty of amity and
peace ;" which no man, who was entitled to deserve the char
acter of an American statesman, would dare stand up in either
House of Congress and disregard.
' Now, sir, as to the ability of the manufacturing establish
ments to sustain themselves at the rate of duties which we are
insisting on.
The rate of twenty per cent, ad valorem on the home valua
tion, including something for cash duties, I estimate as equiva
lent, at the least, to twenty-five per cent.
For illustration : An article is purchased in Liverpool at a
cost of $100. But the same article, when brought to this coun
try, may be fairly worth $120. Now the duty is not to be laid
on the $100, its cost abroad ; but on the $120, its value here —
making a difference in favor of the manufacturers of fom- per
cent. Making some little allowance, also, for the payment in
cash, instead of credits, I assume twenty-five per cent, as the
actual rate or degree of protection incidentally afforded by the
compromise act. In the allowance of twenty per cent, as the
difference between the foreign and home valuation, I estimate
transportation, insurance, &c., to be equal to about ten per

92 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
cent.; and the other ten are allowed for profits. Thb question,
then, recurs — is this duty of twenty-five per cent, a sufficient
protection to enable the manufacturers to sustain themselves ?
Sir, it must be, at the first blush, exceedingly strange if they
can not. What ! not keep up, when the Government grants
them an advantage of one-fourth over all foreign competition!
Not keep up, when the Government turns every $4,000 of their
products into $5,000; every $40,000 into $50,000; and every
$80,000 into $100,000! for that is precisely the effect of the duty
imposed on the foreign producer. Still, however, great as this ad
vantage is, the statements laid before the committee insist that, if
the compromise act (equal, as I have stated, to twenty-four or
twenty-five per cent.) shall go into effect, most, if not all, of our
manufactories must go down. Mr. Chairman, I am free to de
clare that I do not believe these statements. They are made
by men deeply and directly interested — whose wealth or poverty
was at stake ; made without any sanction of an oath, and
with no direct responsibility whatever. Manufacturing, like
almost everything else, has been over done. The high and
exorbitant protection of former times has induced too many to
rush into the business ; and, on this account, I dare say, many
establishments will have to go down — not for the want of ad
equate protection, but for want of real capital originally. All
the moneyed fictions of the day are now vanishing, and none
but the real, substantial capitalists can stand the shock.
Even some who had such capital, have lived in such luxury, or
so disregarded the wholesome suggestions of a prudent econo
my, that they must and will be compelled to go down. So it is
with all the other pursuits of fife. Like causes of imprudence
and extravagance have ruined them in like manner. But I
do firmly believe that our woollen, cotton, iron, glass, leather,
and all our important manufactories, can be sustained at a
duty of 24 or 25 per cent.; all, certainly, that are located un
der favorable circumstances, and are conducted with that in
dustry and rigid economy which characterized this country be
fore the late inundation of extravagance, speculation, andifolly.
None of them may realize the same extent of profit as former
ly; but they must be content with less: all our occupations
must be content with less. The farmers, graziers, and plan-

ON THE TARIFF. 93
ters, have long since become content to realize 3, 4, or 5 per
cent, on their investment in land, stock, laborers, &c. If,
however, 25 per cent, will not do, rather than increase the duty
on the consumer, and thereby add to the burdens of those who
are already sufficiently prostrated, I would recommend the
suggestion contained in the minority report :
" The valuable principle of our Government is equal rights and equal
protection to all. If you encroach upon the rights or interests of one for
the benefit of another, you violate this great principle, which lies at the
very foundation of the Government. Wliy sacrifice any? The duty on
wool, by the proposed bill, is twenty-three per cent, ad valorem, and four
cents per pound. Strike ofi' the four cents, (leaving, under my proposed
rate of duty, twenty five per cent.) and you add to the profits of the wool
factory of Dutchess county (above referred to) $7,000, or five per. cent.,
on the capital, and still leave twenty-three (twenty-five) per cent, ad val
orem, as a protection to the wool-grower. Strike oif a part of the duty
proposed on pig-iron, and you add to the profits of all the workers in iron
in the United States, and still leave the producer a heavy protection.
Strike off but one-fourth from the duty on dressed or tanned leather, and
you at once enable the shoe and boot-maker better able to compete with
the foreign labor whilst the tanner will still enjoy a heavy protection. Re
duce the duty on all other raw materials used in manufactures to a revenue
duty, (twenty-five per cent.,) and you relieve all other branches of manu
factures. " As evidence of the effect which the reduction of the duties on the raw
material would have on the profits of the manufacturer, we will again re
fer to the statements annexed to the report of the majority. The average
price of wool in this country appears to be about 40 cents a pound. The
average in Europe is about twenty-five cents. A 20 per cent, duty and freight
would add about 6 cents. — say it would be imported here at 31 cents, and
sold to the manufacturer here at that price; he, thereby, saving 9 cents per
pound. The amount of wool produced in England alone (according to Mr.
McCulloch) is, in value, about £3,000,000, or nearly $15,000,000. The
duty proposed by the bill is 23 per cent., and 4 cents per pound, to protect
the wool-grower. In England the duty is only 1 cent per pound to protect
the wool-grower there. The cost of pig-iron in New York is $30 per ton.
The foreign cost of the best Scotch pig-iron is .about $17 50. The duty
proposed by the act is $8 per ton, or nearly one-half ofthe first cost of the
best Scotch pig-iron. By the proposed bill, dressed or tanned skins and
hides are to be subjected to a duty varying from $1 25 to $4 per dozen;
and sole and band leather to 8 cents per pound. Undressed hides, however,
(as they are the raw materials of the tanner,) are admitted free of duty, and
are imported to the amount, in value, of $2,750,000. If then, the manu
facturers of wool, iron, and leather, are really, or would be, under a protec-

94

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

tion of only 25 per cent, in the distressed condition in which they are rep
resented to be, we may give them essential relief by reducing the duty on
the raw material — by subjecting it to a moderate duty only, instead of a
duty of exclusion, as in the three cases we have named. "
In addition to all this, it is well understood that an unsound,
inflated paper-money system, which has abounded in this
country, has operated very unfavorably on the manufacturers.
This inflated paper system has, or rather had, raised the prices
of all our merchandise and property far above their inti-insic val
ue. The effect of this on the subject we are investigating was this;
The English manufacturer could ship his goods to this country,
sell them at auction on a little time, or through the agency of some
house in this country, " at the high but artificial prices'' of our
paper-money system ; and then vest the proceeds in cotton or
tobacco, whose prices were not regulated here by paper-money,
but by the markets abroad, where the currency was sound ;
and, by means of this purchase of produce, realize the full
value of his goods, even after paying the duties in this coun
try. The artificially high prices here were equal to the duty
paid ; and the investment in cotton, rice, or tobacco, at prices
regulated by the sounder currencies abroad, enabled them to
import and sell their merchandise, greatly to the annoyance
of our own manufacturers. The United States is now rap
idly returning to a sound currency, which, of itself, will greatly
benefit the manufacturer. Aided by this restoration of our
currency, and the duties contemplated by the compromise act,
the manufacturer can not fail, in my opinion, to realize profits
at least equal to those of the agricultural portion of our popu
lation. The 20 per cent, ad valorem, and a full equivalent for
home valuation and cash duties, I have stated at the sum of
25 percent. In effect, it will operate much more than that, in fa
vor of the manufacturers. It will drive adventurers out of the
importing market, fictitious capital will disappear, and none
but responsible and discreet merchants will import foreio-n mer
chandise into the country. Our markets, no longer glutted
with imprudent importations, nor disturbed by forced sales,
will acquire a steadiness and uniformity highly beneficial to
the manufacturer.
Mr. Chairman, having stated the rate of duties ao-reed on

ON' THE TARIFF. 95
in the compromise act; and having shown, I think, clearly, that
they are sufficient to sustain our most important manufacto
ries, if not all of them, I now demand to know on what prin
ciple of justice or propriety the duties should be carried higher
than 25 per cent. ? The statements of the manufacturers, pub
lished in the report of the committee, all put it on the ground
of protecting American against the pauper labor of Europe.
Sir, this is a specious pretence. It is taken up and repeated
by the public press, until it has evidently made some impression
on the public mind. Well, what is the force of the argument ?
It is admitted that labor is cheaper in most countries of Eu
rope than in this ; and it is to supply this very defect that the
Government has given the incidental advantage of 25 per cent.
in the collection of her revenue. I contend that this, with the
advantage of cheaper living, more abundant water-power, our
inexhaustible supplies of fuel, the lightness of our taxation on
property, and the general advantages of our free institutions,
fuUy make up for this inequality of labor. But suppose they
do not ; what right have the manufacturers to ask the Govern
ment to impose a tax on all the other people of the Unitetl
States, in order to raise a sum of money equal to this alleg
ed difference in the price of labor — to be paid, not into the
treasury, but into the pockets of the manufacturers ! What
right have they "to send round the hat" to the farmer, the gra
zier, the planter, the carpenter, the blacksmith, and the other
mechanics of the country, to collect from each his five, ten,
fifty, or one hundred dollars, to be paid over to the iron-master,
to the wool or the cotton manufacturer, to the workers in glass
or in leather, to equalize the prices of labor ? — who, in turn^ is
to go round for them? Protection to all would but lead
to prohibition; prohibition would lead to the destruction
of all revenue from imports; and then comes direct tax
ation on all property — real, personal, and mixed. But can
the other interests of the country sustain this sort of contribu
tion, to be levied annually off" them, for the benefit of the man
ufacturing interests ? The planter can find but a poor market
for his cotton, rice, or tobaccp. The grazier finds his stock
accumulating on his hands, until their very support threatens
him with ruin. The grain-grower is compelled to sell at sac-

96 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
rificing prices, or to leave his wheat, and corn, and rye, and
oats, to rot on his farm. Yet, in the midst of this universal
gloom and depression, they are called upon to contribute more
than one-fourth of their hard earnings to a single favored class
of their countrymen !
Mr. Chairman, I do boldly maintain, that, with the protection
of twenty-five per cent., and the other incidental advantages
growing out of the cash system of duties, and the return to a
sound currency in this country, the manufacturers can make a
larger — much larger — profit on their capital than those relying
on agriculture and the ordinary mechanic, arts'can possibly do.
Let us examine a little the enormous duties proposed by this
bill, remembering always that they are so much taxes imposed
on one portion of the people for the benefit of another who
choose to engage in a business which, they say, a premium, or
bounty, or protection of one-fourth will not sustain.
I begin with iron, which all who cultivate the earth must
have — the plough, the axe, the hoe, the saw, the wedge, the
nail, &c., &c.
The bill proposes the following duties :
On iron castings, vessels, &c. 1|- cts. per B).
blacksmith hammers, &c. 2 do.
sheet or hoop 2^ do.
nails, wrought - - • 4 do.
cut - - - - 3 do.
bar,rolled - - 125 per cent.
hammered - - 85 do.
A knowledge of the prices, at our chief cities, of the four or
five first named articles, will show the enormous per centage
which they pay. Wrought nails, for instance, sold, in January
last, (1842,) in New York, at about ten cents ; here they are
put down at four cents duty ; cut nails, at the same time and
place, sold for five and five and a half cents per pound ; here
they are taxed three cents — more than one-half of the price
of the article. Every farmer may thus be enabled to see how
he is taxed in that article, which he can not dispense with.
Let us glance a little, also, at woollens :
" 3d SECTION. On woollen yarn, four cents per pound, and thirty per cen
tum. On wool unmanufactured, the value whereof, at the place of expor-

ON THE TARIFF. 97
tation, shall exceed eight cents, four cents per pound, and twenty-six per
cent ad valorem. On ready made clothing ; all milled and fulled cloth,
known by the name of plain kerseys, or Kendall cottons, of which wool
ehall be the only material ; merino shawls made of wool, and on all other
manufactures of wool, or of which wool is a component part, subject, by
any former act, to a duty of fifty per cent. — a duty of forty per cent. ; and
on flannels, bookings, and baizes, fourteen cents per square yard."
Why this doubling of duties — so much by the pound, and
also so much on the value? Blankets, cassimeres, cloths —
which multitudes of laboring men, without families to make
what is called homespun, must have — are to be taxed forty
per cent. ; ready-made clothes, forty. This is an enormous
protection — too much, by fifteen or twenty per cent.
How does the case stand with regard to cotton goods ?
" Section 4. All manufactures of cotton, or of which cotton is a compo
nent part, thirty per centum ad valorem ; provided,
" 1st. That all plain white cottons, not exceeding in value twenty cents,
shall be valued at twenty cents the square yard, &c.
" 2d. And if dyed, colored, stained, printed, or stamped, not exceeding
in value twenty-five cents, shall be valued at twenty-five cents.
Without giving the balance of this section, I pause, that you
may see and understand the duty on plain and printed cot
tons. In New York, a yard of plain cotton cloth I suppose to
cost five cents ; yet it must be considered as costing twenty
cents ; or, if costing ten cents, the law says it must be con
sidered as having cost twenty cents, and pay a duty of thirty per
cent., not on the actual cost, but on the presumed cost. So of
all the various-priced calicoes — whether costing ten, or fifteen,
or twenty cents — they must be considered, in law, as hav
ing cost twenty-five cents, and pay a duty at that rate — being
a duty of one hundred, two hundred, or, in some cases, of three
hundred per cent., or more. Why this enormous duty, but for
the entire exclusion of all cotton goods whatsoever? Under
former duties, all such have been excluded, except about six
millions' worth; and, under this rate of duty, even that will
be swept overboard, and the whole home market be entirely
suiTendered to our own manufacturers. Where, then, is your
revenue ? Not a dollar in the treasury from this formerly
mighty source of revenue. Not a dollar ! And yet a duty,
ranging from one hundred to three hundred per cent., has been
6

98 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
paid by consumers. Paid to whom? Why, to the manufac
turers. What is the proposed duty " on brown sugar, and sirup of
sugar-cane in casks?" Two cents per pound. On the plant
ations of Louisiana, it only costs from four to six cents. In
the Havana much less. How much brown sugar is used in a
State ? How much in a county ? How much in any given
town? How much in each family? Sir, an estimate might
be made which would startle this country as to the amount an
nually paid by the people for the peculiar protection of a few
hundred sugar plantations in Louisiana. Look, now, a little
into the proposed duty on leather manufactures :
On shoes for men
On shoes or slippers for women, of silk
On shoes or slippers for women, of other
material
On men's boots and bootees
On women's boots and bootees
On calf sldns
On morocco
On kid skins
On sole and bend leather
These rates may not seem so high to those who refer to the
prices of such things after th^y are carried to the interior of
the country for sale; but to those who know anything of the
cheapness of the first cost when imported, they cannot fail to
appear enormous. The article of salt is to be taxed eight
cents on the bushel. This I take from the prices in the large
cities, (to which it can be brought as ballast to our vessels,) to
be a duty equal to 100 per cent, on the very last article which
should be taxed one cent. The majority have reported, on the
notion that coffee and tea are necessaries, and not luxuries,
and should therefore be exempted from taxation. I shall seek
an opportunity to procure the same exemption for salt.
I know how this argument against the injustice and oppres
siveness of such high rate of duties has been usually met.
The manufacturers tell us that high duties do not increase the
price of articles to the consumer. The majority of the Com
mittee on Manufactures have given a guarded and cautious

30 cts

. per pah.

25

do.

20

do.

$1 25

do.

50

do.

4 00 per

¦ dozen.

3 00

do.

2 00

do.

8 cts.

per lb.

ON TIIE TARIFF. 99
approval to this strange and inconsistent doctrine. Did the
committee believe that the sanction of their names could give
even a decent plausiblity to a position which the very presence
of the manufacturers sufficiently refuted ? High duties not
raise the price to the consumer or purchaser ! Why, then,
have all these manufacturers abandoned their work-shops ?
Why have they crowded into this city? Why have they
swarmed about this Capitol like the locusts of Egypt ? Why
all this, if they expect no advance upon their manufactures by
the high duties which they are imploring Congress to impose ?
Can we believe that they are spending all this time and money
on some patriotic project; which, when crowned with success,
will but raise up (as they pretend) a more formidable competi
tion at home than they now encounter from abroad ? Sir, I
know not which most to despise — ^;he impudence which could
fabricate, or the credulity which could be deceived by such
an artifice.
There is another argument resting on a foundation no more
solid than the preceding one. It is this : that high and dis
tinctive protection should be given, at least to those articles
which are essential to our national independence.
Sir, I deny that there are any such articles. Iron for the
manufacture of arms, and coarse woollen cloths and blankets
&r our armieS; are usually mentioned as articles of this de
scription. But, sir, who ever heard that war with any one'
nation would put a stop to the importation of such things from
the other nations who produce them ? In a war with England,
for illustration : would not the iron of Sweden and Russia still
find its way in increased quantities to this country ? — both in
eager competition for the market from which England had so
recently retired. Nay, more : if all the nations of Europe
were united in the war, or so far leagued against us as to with
hold foreign iron, what becomes of the iron-estabHshments of
the West ? — of Western Pennsylvania, Western Virginia, of
East and Middle Tennessee, of Missouri, and Kentucky?
These are all situated so far in the interior as to be safe, in a
good degree, against importations ; and will go on to prosper
ity under a 20 per centum protection, or, indeed, no protection
at all. But the idea of a war at the same time against all, or.

100 CONaRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
indeed, more than one or two foreign countries, is too improb
able to be admitted into this argument. Iron is not, and never
can be, considered as contraband; and, therefore, is not liable
to be seized and captured when found on board a neutral ves
sel transporting it to this country. Hence there can be no
pretence for considering a high duty on that article to be called
for, on any pretence of its being essential to our national in
dependence. The same thing may be said of coarse woollens. France
and Germany would be prompt to supply them in time of war
with Great Britain. The whole argument is addressed to the
ever-sensitive patriotism of our countrymen; but implies
a poor compliment to their sagacity or commercial discern
ment. This reference to foreign countries, particularly to Great
Britain, reminds me of an argument which, I believe, has done
more to make converts to the high-tariff system than aU others
beside — I mean that argument which points to the power and
glory of England as the fruits of a similar system. Ah, sir,
there is the great fallacy of the argument. It has deceived
thousands. It points to the power and glory of England — not
to her shame. It points to her splendid palaces, to her cosfly
temples, to her navies and armies, and to her dominion over
distant and populous empires ; but never, never does it unveil
to our view the awful mass of individual poverty, and suffering,
and wo, which that system has inflicted. I say nothing of un
happy, oppressed, and ruined Ireland ! Nothing of her one
hundred millions of indigent laborers in India ! No, I afiude
to England herself — to her naked, starving, suffering people-
made so by her unequal, unjust, and oppressive taxation — tax
ation which pampered her grandeur, but which ruined her peo
ple — taxation, which her present minister, backed by more than
one hundred of a majority in Parliament, at this very moment
is repealing. I cannot but refer, on this point, to an eloquent
j)rophecy of one of my former colleagues, [Mr. Bell,] nearly
Jten years ago. " The day will come, and must come, when
what is now considered the glorious fabric of British Govern
ment and British poficy will be held a failure in reference to
the ,true end of all governments. The day will come when

ON THE TARIFF. 101
the English system will be regarded as the most stupendous and
ingeniously devised system of fraud and oppression ever inven
ted by the craft of man — a system of fraud and oppression
distinguished from all others in the annals ofthe world, because
carried on under the guise of freedom."
Sir, this eloquent prophecy is now fulfilled. The day has
come when the British policy is acknowledged to be a failure
by her proudest statesmen. The wretchedness and ruin it
has inflicted onher starving millions, is nowhere better described
than by one of our most gifted American poets :*
" Thy masses in their hovels pine ;
They curse thee while they toil.
Thy nobles, of illustrious line.
Like vampyres, suck thy soil.
And now, proud mistress of the sea.
The meanest wretch gives food to thee.
" A Queen upon a throne of gold,
A Parliament of drones,
A nation's voice that's bought and sold,
While every cottage groans.
An army o'er the wide world spread,
To gather garments from the dead."
Mr. Chairman, I go no further into the arguments by which
this wretched system, either here or in England, has been at
tempted to be supported. I mean to say nothing of the propor
tionate loss orgain by the different sections of the Union; and
least of all do I mean to warn gentlemen against reviving those
fearful questions which once shook that Union to its centre.
All that I propose further to show in this argument is, that the
rates fixed by the compromise, which I estimate at 25 per cent.,
will yield a sufficient revenue to meet the wants of the Gov
ernment—not her wants when running a career of wild ex
travagance, but when prudently and economically adminis
tered. To show the amount which will probably be realized,
I estimate the imports for several years to come to average
$100,000,000, of what 1 presume to be dutiable articles, esti
mated by foreign value ; by our home valuation, $125,000,000.
Twenty per centum on that amount would yield a revenue of
*l)ow.

102 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECEES.
$25,000,000 gross. From this deduct $1,000,000, the cost of
collection, to which sural think it entirely practicable to reduce
them by a few prudent regulations — leaving the amount of
$24,000,000, subject only to the drawbacks allowed by law.
This system of drawbacks, by which foreign goods, once
brought in and paying duties are allowed to be reshipped, or
exported, and the duties returned, I have no doubt is greatly
defective, and ought to be revised. If that were done, I have
no doubt the item for drawbacks would be greatly reduced.
But at present I put down the sum of two and a half millions
for drawbacks; which, being deducted, leaves $21,500,000 —
the net revenue from customs for the first year after the com
promise act shall go into operation. This twenty-one millions
and a half do not include any duties on tea and coffee. I esti
mate the imports to be one hundred millions, exclusive of them;
and repose with entire confidence on the estimate. The ques
tion, then, arises, whether this revenue of twenty-one millions
and a half will be sufficient to defray the necessary and proper
expenses of the Government. 1 do not hesitate here to affirm
that, with my knowledge of public affairs, the ordinary and
current expenses of this Government can and ought to be
brought within that compass. Nay, I believe they might well
be reduced to twenty millions, and still be conducted on a
scale creditable and worthy of a great and gallant nation.
The two last years of Mr. Van Buren's administration were ra
pidly approaching that amount. The Committee on Manu-
factm-es were careful to remind us that the average ordinary
expenditures of the four years (Mr. Van Buren's) were nearly
twenty-eight millions ; when they knew that the large expen
ditures of 1837 and 1838 could find no parallel necessity in the
present or subsequent years. There is no cause for similar
expenditures. The Florida war, the purchase and payment
for Indian lands, &c., have now ceased, and had begun to do
eo in 1839, and still more in 1840. Hence, fairness required
them only to have taken the average of Mr. Van Buren's tioo
last years ; which, being done, would have shown about twenty-
two and a half, instead of twenty-eight millions. But such a
course would have diminished the necessity for imposing such
duties as would give high protection ; and, therefore, it is not

ON THE TARIFF. 103
strange that the majority of the committee preferred the for-
nier mode of computation.
But if twenty-one and a half millions will not be sufficient
to administer the Government on that scale which those who
now control her destinies desire, how shall more than thet
amount be raised? You may increase it, 1st. By a tax on
tea and coffee between three and four millions ; or, 2d. You
may increase it about the same amount by the restoration of
the land-fund to the treasury. Here, then, are the alterna
tives distinctly presented to the choice of the majority, who
now control the action of this Government — either to bring
down the Government from the twenty-six millions, or more, to
which you have carried it since you came into power, to twen
ty-one and a half millions; or impose your tax on tea and coffee;
or, finally, abandon the distribution ofthe proceeds ofthe public
lands among the States. Sir, these alternatives are presented
to both the great political parties of this country. The Dem.-
ocratic party, with but few exceptions, will not hesitate which
of them to choose. They stand pledged, by their principles,
to the most rigid economy ; they have vowed, in the present
emergency, to push forward the most vigorous reductions; and,
more than all, they stand pledged to this economy by all the
consecrated provisions of the compromise. Yes, sir, they
stand here this day under the solemn conviction that twenty or
twenty-one millions will be enough for the ordinary expenses
of the Government for years to come. But they stand here
determined that, if their adversaries will have more than this,
it shall not be raised off of the necessaries of life — the essen
tials of human subsistance. Tea and coffee are now articles
of that description, whatever they might once have been. So
is the article of salt : it is indispensable to man, and to all
the animals which he makes tributary to his convenience or his
necessities. But all these essentials — tea, coffee, and salt —
we know cannot be exempted from taxation, unless our ad
versaries restore the land fund, — that fund which they ought
not to give away, at, a time when they have to borrow from any
body, and to tax everybody, to make up the deficiency; that
fund which is too small to do any sensible good in liquidating
the enormous debts of the States. Yes, sir ; I repeat the great

104 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
Democratic creed in the present posture of our public affairs.
Give back the land money, thereby enabling us to exempt from
taxation the three great necessaries of life; reduce your ex
penditures to the standard of strict and necessary economy;
and then you can leave unviolated that glorious treaty of amity
and peace which was so solemnly ratified in 1833.
Mr. Chairman, I assume another position, for which I be
speak the serious attention of this committe. Your commerce
is now in the most depressed, not to say paralyzed, condition.
It can bear no increased burdens. What it wants is, to be
rendered more free and unencumbered. The condition of the
currency in most other countries, and the general embarrass
ment of all, would seem to require that very weight should be
removed, and the freest interchange of commodities should be
encouraged. It is under such convictions as these that the
wisest statesmen of England are relaxing their restrictions,
and removing their prohibitions. The general range of Eng
lish duties is now being reduced, on an average, nearly one
hundred per cent. This is a great concession to free and un
restricted commerce between her and the other nations of the
earth — a concession forced upon her by the accumulated ex
perience of ages. ShaU the United States, at such a moment
as this, recede from the great principles of free trade, which
she proclaimed to the States and to the world in 1833? She
then proclaimed that she would impose no other fetters on her
commerce with the world than such as were absolutely neces
sary for the support of her Government when economicaUy
administered. This bright and beneficent example has been
held up to the other nations for imitation. It has produced,
and is producing, wonderful eff"ects, in England especially — that
country with which we have the greatest and most profitable
intercourse. At such a moment as this, I repeat, shaU we put
out the fight of our own glorious example? No, I trust we
shall not. If we shall but steadily adhere to it, we shall soon
reap a harvest of national and individual prosperity, which
has never been surpassed : — not that hollow and deceptive pros
perity by which we were lately so much elated; but prosperity
as lasting and solid as those great principles of equality and
justice by which it will be acquired — prosperity which, in two

ON THE TARIFF. 105
or three years, at most, will yield you an income, not of twenty,
but of thirty millions at least. Yes, sir ; it is only of the first
year of the compromise act that any man need doubt the suffi
ciency of your revenue. The second, third, and future years,
under a reanimated and reinvigorated commerce, will give you
enough, and more than enough, for every reasonable demand
on a plain, economical, and republican Government like ours.
Beyond that, let no one here desire to go. Let no American
statesman ever consent to impose heavy and unjust taxation on
the people, in order that this Government may rival the luxury
and grandeur of the Old World.

SPEECH,
Against receiving, referring, or reporting Abolition Petitions;
delivered in the House of Representatives, January lO, 1844.

The unfinished business of the morning hour being the Report of the Se
lect Committee on the Rules, and Mr. Deomgoole's motion to recommit ¦
the Report to the Select Committee.
Which motion Mr. Black, of Georgia, had moved to amend, by adding In
structions to the Committee to report the Rule commonly known as the
21st : (i. e. which excludes Abohtion Petitions.)
Mr. A. V. Brown, who was entitled to the floor, resumed his
remarks of a preceding day, and continued them during the
remainder of his hour.
The Committee on Rules had reported to this House, (he
said,) and in that report they had furnished no rule whatso
ever for its government in relation to abolition petitions. He
had already, in his remarks on Saturday last, offered every
complaint upon this subject which he intended to offer. But,
having reported no rules at all, what would be the condition of
this House with reference to this matter ? There were three
courses, one of which must be adopted. The first was, accord
ing to one motion now pending, that the 21st rule should be
reported by the committee ; that was, in other words, that these
abolition petitions should not be received. Another course,
provided for by the instructions which had been offered, wasi
that they should be received, but laid on the table without ref
erence, without report, without debate, or any other action
whatever. The third proposition was, according to the report
of the committee, that these petitions should not only be re
ceived, but be referred, reported, and acted on, like the ordi
nary business of legislation. Now, some one of these three

ONABOLmON PETITIONS. 107
modes must be embraced by this House, and be decided on by
the question now pending before the House.
Mr. B. did not hesitate to be in favor of the 2 Ist rule. He
had often voted for that rule; he was prepared to vote for it
again ; and not only was he prepared to vote for it, but he was
ready here in his place to stand up in vindication of that rule
against the arguments by which it had been assailed. What
had they heard against the 21st rule ? Every body knew what
they had heard from the gentleman , from Massachusetts [Mr.
Adams] and the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Giddings.] He asked
not what they had heard from them, for they knew it well. Nor
did he ask what they had heard against that rule from the ra
ving fanatics of the day. He would rather enquire what
they had heard from gentlemen in this House during this ses
sion. What had they heard from gentlemen here in their pla
ces, and especially from the gentleman»from New York, [Mr.
Beaedsley ?] Why, they had been told that the 21st rule was
a violation of the great constitutional right of petition. The
gentleman from New York had told them so ; the gentleman
from North Carolina, [Mr. Clin^man,] coming from a region
greatly interested in this subject, had told them so. Mr. B. de
nied it. The gentleman said that it not only violated the
great constitutional right of petition, but had driven the peti
tioners out of this Hall ; that it had driven them from their door
with scorn and contempt. Mr. B. denied it, and defied gen
tlemen — (the word " defy" seemed well understood on the other
side of the House, but its use, a few days since, had not seem
ed so well understood on this side of the House) — he defied
these gentlemen, one and all, to the proof. Where was the
proof upon the subject? It was on their journal, and lying
on their tables ; and he defied gentlemen to the proof upon
this subject. They might take what petition they pleased;
they might take the one said to have been signed by fifty thou
sand petitioners, presented some sessions since by the gentle
man from Massachusetts, [Mr. Adams,] or that other one which
had, at the last session, been brought in on a great reel and
.set upon the table of the gentleman from Massachusetts for
ornament to it ; or they might take the one presented by him
for the dissolution of the Union, or that one presented at this

108 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
session of Congress from citizens of New York, asking to be
forever separated from the institution of slavery. They might
take anyone or all of these petitions, and he would appeal to
the record to settle the question, whether in any of these cases
we had violated the great constitutional right of petition ;
whether we had turned the petitioners out of this Hall ; wheth
er we had driven them with scorn and contempt from our
doors. What had been the proceedings of these and all similar ca
ses? What had been the practice under the 21st rule ? The
petitioners in any and in all those cases had " peaceably as"
sembled." Had the 21st rule prevented that? When they
had assembled, they had petitioned this House. Did the 218*
rule prevent that ? They had, as the next step, sent their pe
titions to their chosen and selected agent. Did we prevent
that by the 21st rule ? ,We did not. What was next? That
agent, in every one of these cases, had brought their petitions
here within these walls. Did the 21st rule prevent that ? No;
What next? The gentleman from Massachusetts rose in his
place ; all eyes were fixed upoa him, and all ears were opened
to his voice. What did he do? He presented these petitions:
he stated distinctly to the House what they contained, where
the petitioners resided, what were the grievances complained
of, how they reasoned upon the subject, and, finally, made
known to this House what was the redress they prayed for.
That was the precise process. The record showed the fact.
And now the question waa, whether we had abridged or in any
wise violated the great right of petition in this course of pro
ceeding? The petitioners had been heard. By themselves ?
No; for they had not come here to be heard; they had been
heard by their own selected agent, who came within these
walls, presented their petitions, and made known their prayers.
Would it, then, be pretended that we had violated their rights,
or treated them with scorn when we had heard their own agent
speaking for them, and stating what grievances they prayed
to have redressed?
The question now which he wished to put to the gentleman
from New York and others who seemed disposed to object to
this 21st rule was, whether, in fact, under that rule, we had

ON ABOLITION PETITIONS' 109
ever violated the great right of petition? There could be no
difficulty in understanding the subject. He could bring illus
trations of it from every domestic circle, and from the scenes of
every-day life. A parent was bound to hear the complaint of
her off"spring; but, pausing and hearing them, she might
promptly repel them. Although the child might say that the pa
rent was precipitate, or even unkind, yet it could never say that
the parent had refused to hear its complaints. Now, here was
the great principle of petition. Mr. B. admitted the right in
its broadest and fullest extent ; and he admitted further the
duty of this House to hear these petitioners. After these pe
titioners were heard, (as they did hear them under this 21st
rule,) the right of the people was perfect. The duty of the
House then began, and that duty was to dispose of the peti
tions promptly or slowly, as they deemed proper.
It was a great issue, not only elsewhere but here, whether
the argument was true, so often used by the gentleman from
Ohio and the gentleman from Massachusetts, and now sustain
ed by the gentleman from New York and the gentleman from
North Carolina, who had come forward and endorsed the argu
ments used in former times upon this subject, whether by this
21st rule the great constitutional right of petition was violated,
as they affirmed it was. Mr. B. denied that this right was vio
lated, and he appealed to the record, relying upon the known
practice of the House, (for what he had told them with regard
to the practice upon these petitions was known to be true by
every member ofthe House.)
But by what sort of an argument was it that the gentleman
from New York maintained that the 21st rule ought to be
abandoned ? The gentleman told them that this was the very
best way in the world to put down abolition. His great object
was to put down abolition ; and the best way to do so, he told
them, was to receive, to refer, and to report upon these peti
tions. The gentleman might as well tell him that the best
way to save a city was to surrender its fortifications ; or that
the best way to repel an invasion was to give up all the moun
tain passes and strongholds where the enemy might be most
readily and eff'ectually met and overcome. Put down the
spirit of abolitionists, defeat their objest by doing what ? By

110 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
granting them four out of five of the very things they desired.
What did they ask for ? To have their petitions received. Well,
said the gentleman from New York, " Oh, yes, let us receive
them ; that is the way to put them down." What was the
next thing they asked for? To have their petitions referred
to the committees of the House. The gentlemen from New
York and the gentleman from North Carolina also said, "Oh,
yes, let us put down these abolitionists by sending their peti
tions to a committee to be examined and reported upon."
They asked more — that they should debate these petitions.
And gentlemen professing to be opposed to abolition (and Mr.
B. doubted not sincerely professing) still tried to persuade the
House that the best way was to yield every inch of ground, and
refuse nothing but the solitary principle of relief for which they
finally prayed. Now, it was impossible for Mr. B., as a South
ern man, or as a statesman who had watched the progress of
this abolition question, to believe that this could be safely
done. [Mr.BEARDSLET (Mr. Brown yielding for explanation) inquired if the
gentleman said that he (Mr. Beardslet) advised debase upon the subject.
Surely he had never taken this position. His course was well known : it
was in favor of taking the final vote upon the whole matter ; and gentle
men well "knew what that would be.]
Mr. Brown resumed. But did not the gentlemaiv perceive
that if they referred these petitions they must reportupon them;
and if they reported, they must debate the subject ? If they
began, on what principle would they avoid carrying out the
regular process, involjjing reference, report, and debate? But
why would gentlemen agree to refer these petitions at all ?
They all said they were as much opposed to abolition as any
one, and yet they proposed to refer the petitions to a commit
tee which should collect facts, examine laws, and consider the
subject, and see if some plan could not be devised for carrying
out the views of the petitioners. If this was not the object,
they could have no object at all. Why, then, would they re
fer, why report upon, why debate these petitions, if they did
not mean finally to grant their prayer ?
[Mr. Clinsman (Mr. B. yielding for explanation) said the gentleman
had misunderstood him (Mr. C.) if he had understood him as being in favor
of debating these petitions. He was averse to it ; he was willing to see

ON ABOLITION PETITIONS. Ill
this rule debated, and to see the report of a committee debated. But he
thought it beneath the dignity of the House to debate any petition. They
had enough to do to debate bills, resolutions and reports from committees.
After reference, if the committee reported for or against the prayer if any gen
tleman chose he might then with propriety discuss the matter.]
Mr. Brown continued. He was glad the gentleman from
North Carolina had had an opportunity for explanation. But
did not the gentleman see that the only way to get along with
this subject with safety to the South, with safety to the gentle
man's own State, with safety to the portions of North Caro
lina bordering' on the rivers of that State where the heaviest
slave population was to be found , was not to go beyond the
great question of the right of petition, but there to stop ? to
take no jurisdiction, by reference, by report, or debate over th^
subject? There was comparatively safe ground ; and from the
explanation of the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. B. in
dulged strongly the hope that when they came finally to act
upon the subject, he [Mr. C] would not be found going beyond
that. Mr. B. admitted, notwithstanding their rule was so plain,
and notwithstanding their practice under it had been so plain,
that there might be extensive misrepresentations and miscon
structions of the rule of the country. Now, he asked of the
gentleman from New York and ofthe gentleman from North
Carolina, why they did not stop at that point ? Why they did
not propose in the report of this committee to clear up, to eluci
date this subject, and make it manifest in its. true light to all
the people of the country, and to remove all doubts and diffi
culties, by going on according to their views to perfect the
great right of petition? What was requisite for that ? Why,
simply to declare that the petitions should be received; that
would perfect the great right of petition in a manner safe to
the North, and which would be safe to the South in a great
degree, and it would have saved the Democracy of the North
from the suspicion of their enemies of a disposition to form al-
hancee with, or to propitiate at leaet, the fell spirit of ablition-
ism. Why did not the gentlemen pause at the point of recep
tion, and go no farther, if their object was to clear up the mis
conception on the public mind ?
It might seem strange to the gentleman to whom Mr. B. had

112 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
referred — to the gentleman from New York, to the gentleman
from North Carolina, as well as others — ^that he had laid so
much stress upon not referring, not reporting, and not debating
these petitions. Why, it was evident, if these petitions were
received and laid upon the Speaker's table, that there, under
the rule, they would lie forever. No great harm or mischief
perhaps would grow out of this practice. But the very moment
they referred them to a committee, that moment they took ju
risdiction over them, and jurisdiction in such away as to alarm
the whole country. He was opposed to an action which might
result in such consequences.
The argument had been used, that if they would receive,
refer, and report upon these petitions, as in ordinary cases,
this would allay the excitement which now exists on this sub
ject. Mr. B. had one conclusive answer, one irresistable ar
gument, inhishumble judgment, against this proposition: They
had already tried it. Many gentlemen were here discussing
this question, as though the experiment had never been made,
of receiving these petitions, and referring and reporting upon
them. Why, the very speech the gentleman from New York
had made, if not word for word, yet argument for argument,
had led to the adoption of the celebrated Pinckney resolution.
Under this they had been received, referred, and reported on ;
a dignified, manly, respectful report had been made, and the
decision of this House had been had lipon the question. Now,
had that allayed excitement? Had that had the tendency to
put down the spirit of abolition? So far from it, the gentleman
from Massachusetts, at the next session, had come within this
Hall with fifty thousand petitioners at his heels. So far from
iti the very moment they had adopted the Pinckney resolution,
and determined to receive, refer, and report upon these peti
tions as they did upon all others, the abolitionists all over the
country said : " Now is the time to make your effort ; send
men to Congress able to be the speakers of that body — able
to serve upon the committee, able to speak and vindicate the
abolition question. The doors of Congress are wide open;
they may not long remain so. Therefore, now is the time,
and put all your machinery in motion to eflfect your object."
And abolition had grown and flourished, and they were now

ON ABOLITION PETITIONS. 113
reaping a rich harvest from the seeds which had then been
sown under the Pinckney resolution.
[Mr. Adams (Mr. B. yielding the floor) said he wished simply to ask
the gentleman whether the report of Mr. Pinckney vta.B in favor of receiv
ing these petitions 1 That was what he had understood the gentleman to
assert. Mr. Brown. Certainly it was not in favor of granting their prayer.
Mr. Adams said it was not in favor of receiving the petitions, and that
fact had been the occasion ofthe multitude of petitions which had been pre
sented to the next Legislature. The refusal ofthe House, under that very
resolution, to receive these petitions, had been the reason for the multidtue
of them that had been ofiered since that time.]
Mr. Brovto continued. With regard to the Pinckney reso
lution, it had been a long time since Mr. B. had examined it,
but it had always been pointed to as being in a degree liberal,
and that very resolution the abolitionists themselves would
now prefer, a thousand times prefer, to the 21st rule. His im
pression was that it did receive these petitions, but laid them
on the table.
Mr. B. relied, then, on the clear, manifest experience of
this House for demonstration that, if they received these peti
tions — if they referred and reported upon them — ^if they gave,
in other words, a respectful response to these petitioners, he
relied upon the practice of the House and the experience of
the country that such results as gentlemen anticipated would
not grow out of this course of proceeding. Why did gentle
men insist so strongly upon referring these petitions ? Why
would they refer them? Did they mean to grant their prayer ?
No. Why then did they profess that they were about to do so,
by referring the petitions to a committee ? Was it done in hy
pocrisy? He did not charge it, and he would not think it.
Why, then would they refer them ? Was it in order to mani
fest respect to the petitioners ? If that were the reason, Mr.
B. would not show it, for he did not feel it,
Mr. B. wished now to state some reasons why he was so
much opposed to the reference of and the report upon these
petitions. The first was, that if at every session of Congress
their title to their property was to be brought in question upon
this floor, it must of necessity diminish, if not destroy the value
of that property. He wanted gentlemen to consider this : that
9

114 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
every year, session after session, if they had no rale upon this
subject, their title to this description of property (which title
they admitted, and which he believed everybody was prepared
to admit, except abolitionists) would annually be brought into
question, in this Hall. Would not this finally destroy its value?
Suppose a member of this House to have a good and indefea
sible title to a tract of land, but yet to be sued for it every
year, and that he was able to effect recovery in every Utiga-
tion : would it not be very natural for him finally to be compel
led to say, that although he knew there was no outstanding
title, yet, if he was to be sued every year for it, it would be bet
ter to give it up tothe man who asked for it, although he knew
that he had no title to it ? If they had the practice of refer
ring these petitions at every session of Congress, the question
would be, " How does that committee stand ?" How many of
its members are favorable to abolition, and how many opposed
to it? How many will stay here all the time ? Will not some
go home, and, by an accidental meeting ofthe committee, may
there not be found a majority favorable to the purpose of abo
lition ?" The veriest accident in the world might extract from
the committee a report favorable to the petitioners. Alarm
and* excitement under such a state of things would pervade
the whole Soutfi; our whole Southern population would be
tossed to and fro, like the waves of' the ocean, at every vibra
tion and change of parties upon this floor. That was one rea
son why Mr. B. would not begin to take jurisdiction of this^
question, by reference to a committee.
But there was another reason which actuated Mr. B. in his
course upon this subject. Gentlemen surely did not know
what was going on in the South. In the spirit of liberality,
and just humanity too, they had taught many of their slaves
to read; they had relaxed the rigors of their fetters; andwijh
their children they had learned to read, and some to write.
Did they not see in a moment the danger, under this state of
things, of the debates here annually — not now and then, once
fel four or five years, but annually — ^being thrown out upon our
elave population ? The abolitionists had abeudy sent missives
to that region of country. They had first addressed the ow
ners of slaves, and had afterwards sent their addresses to the

ON ABOLITION PETITIONS. 115
slaves themselves. They were there now, and were read by
their slaves by the flickering lamp at midnight; and so their
reports and debates, if they were to be made here annually,
would be read by them in like manner.
But in these addresses, and particularly in the addresses of
the abofitionists themselves, what had their slaves been told ?
They had told them.' to shed no blood, but that they might steal
their masters' property of any description necessary to expe
dite their ffight to the free States ; and they were assured that
their friends were standing with open arms ready to receive
them, and conduct them to Canada. That was what they
were reading now, and no man coulH tell what the result of that
reading would be, much less could they tell what dreadfiil re
sults might ensue when they read the celebrated Pittsburg let
ter. In this letter a new idea was brought forward and pre
sented to their view. The opinion was advanced in it that
emancipation would come ; that the abolition of slavery would
be effiected in some way or other — whelSier peaceaibly, or by
blood, it was not known ; but, in whatever way it should come,
the writer of that letter was in favor of it. When that should
be read by their slaves, no mortal man could tell what the con
sequences would be. Where had the idea of blood been taken
from? (asked Mr. B.) The gentleman from Massachusetts had
snatched it from the incendiary fires and massacres of St. Do
mingo. There they shed the blood of the sleeping infant, and
piercing its yet warm and writhing body with a stake, marched
under it as their banner with the swords im one hand, and the
fagot in the other. Who could tell, when these things were
read at midnight by the very slaves whom they had favored
and taught to read for another and better purpose, what would
be the result ? No man could predict. Hence it was that
they of the South stood here asking their real friends of the
North never — if they comld not go with them for the exclusion
of these petitions ; if they thought that was too strong a pro
position, and insisted upon their reception — never to go be
yond the reception, or make these petitions the subject of ref
erence, report, and debate in this Hall. Our safety (said Mr.
B.) depends upon it; the safety of the bright aiwi glorious.
Union depends upon it. And he wished to say to gentlesnen

116 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
of the North, " You understand what is the intimation of your
people upon the subject; you know better how this 21st rule
has been mystified, if not misrepresented. If your safety de
pends upon the relaxation or explanation ofthe rule, why, give
it; but when you have done that, be satisfied. When you have
secured the great constitutional principle of petition, there
stop. There your principles stop. Beyond that you are not
bound to go ; beyond that you ought not to go ; beyond that you
cannot go, in my humble judgment, consistently with the great
compromise contained in the Constitution."
Now, this was the position of Southern gentlemen here.
They were of course prepared to vote the strongest measure;
they were prepared to exclude these petitions. They did vote
to exclude them. The question was, whether this House had
any constitutional jurisdiction over the subject. Everybody
knew they had not. But they of the South — many of them—
thought the reception of these petitions was taking the first
step in the assumption of jurisdiction. I (said Mr. B.) go for
the strongest rule ; but if that is too strong either for your
judgment, or for that of the people you represent, then give
us another rule which will not violate the opinion of your con
stituents, but which will ensure comparative safety and repose
to the South. Southern gentlemen could not so much object
to that. If they could not get the strongest and best rule,
then they had a right to the next strongest and next best rule.
That rule might admit of the clear reception of petitions, but
not of their reference to a committee, or of report, or debate
upon them, as would occur if there were to be no rule upon
the subject; not occasionally, once in five or six years, but
every year. Session after session they would come up to be
debated here, which, in his humble judgment, could not be done
consistently with the great principles ofthe Constitution; and
let him again ask gentlemen, who did not mean finally ever to
give the redress asked for by the petitioners, why they should
be debated, or reported on, or referred ? To do so would be
but an idle mockery, or a hypocritical pretension.
Mr. B. said, so far he had spoken to those who were sensi
tive on the right of petition. He had attempted to show that
jhis right was not violated in the sfightest degree by the 21st

ON ABOLITION PETITIONS. 117
rule. He had ollten sustained this opinion by his votes, and
he meant now and forever so to sustain it. He hoped that no
man, either in the South or in the North, who entertained the
same opinion, would falter or hesitate one moment on the sub
ject. But he could not be insensible to what was passing
around him. He saw, or feared he saw, in the already recor
ded votes of this House, in the report now under discussion, in
the speeches of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. Beards-
ley,] and in that of the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr.
Clingman,] and, more than all, in the exulting shout of the
gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Adams,] that this 21st
rule was doomed to fall. Hence it was, that he had made an
appeal, not to him of Massachusetts, not to him of Ohio; but
to all those who professed only to be desirous of preserving the
right of petition, to go that far, but no farther. All beyond
that, was concession to the fell spirit of Abolition, and no man
could be held guiltless who pandered to its wickedness and its
folly. The South will hold no man guiltless who shall go one
inch beyond the right of petition. He must answer for every
fire that may be kindled, and for every drop of blood that may
be shed. Yes, sir, I will say to the gentleman from New
York, and from North Carolina, if this House shall go one inch
beyond that, they may have to stand answerable for the shat
tered and broken fragments of the Union itself. Going be
yond that, the highest hopes and the blackest designs of aboli
tion may find at last their accomplishment — no, (said Mr. B.,)
I am wrong in that. These designs, whatever else may hap
pen, can never be accomplished in any of the ways now pro
posed. All the eff"orts now making by them only rivet the
chain of slavery more securely, or make their weight more gal
ling and oppressive. In God's own time, and by means of his
selection, these chains may fall, and the bondsman go free.
Left to these means unprecipitated by the officiousness of fa
naticism, the enlightened humanity of the age, the diff"usion of
religious knowledge, and even the better estimated self-interest
of the master, will soften the rigors of bondage, and render the
slave, as he now is in many cases, but little inferior, in the
great elements of happiness, to the master he serves. Give
slaveiy but scope and compass — ^let it dilate itself over ample

118 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECEES.
space, and it loses much of that oppression which even a mor
bid humanity could deplore. In much of Tennessee, of Ken
tucky, of North Carolina, and other States of the South, where
slavery is not too much condensed, I hesitate not to say that, in
point of care and anxiety — in point of abundance of food and
of raiment — of healthful but humble habitation — the slave is
but little distinguished from the master. They labor in the
same fields, partake of the same food, repose during the same
period, and often participate in the same amusements. All
ancient barbarity of punishment has disappeared, and the
criminal code of the master has kept pace with the amelora-
tion of the criminal code of all civilized nations. This cheer
ing picture, I admit, assumes a darker coloring as you approach
the more densely populated regions of the South. But even
there hundreds and thousands of our slaves, were they to visit,
as some of them have done, the free States in the North, and
scan with an eye of intelligence the condition of their colored
brethren, would turn revolting from the spectacle, and chng
with gratitude and joy to the protective care and enlightened
humanity of their masters. Mr. B. would repeat his solemn
convictions, that the means now used by abolitionists could
never bring any thing to the colored man of the South but an
increase of discontent with his present condition. That dis
content may bring to him death and destruction. It may lead
him to revolt against his master. Without arms, without am
munition, without discipline, without numbers compared with
the whites, what could he do? He is hung up on the gibbet,
or shot down by his pursuers in the fields which he once content
edly cultivated, or in the forest where so often he pursued his
game, the more joyous companion of his master. If the in
judicious and really inhuman projects of the abolitionists
were to induce our slaves to runaway from the South, and seek
the aid of their supposed friends in the North, what would be
their condition? Would the abolitionists prove to be their friends
then ? No. They would be refused a settlement among them.
They would be forced away to the cold and frozen regions of
Canada, to perish or to starve ; or be driven away like beasts
among the Indian tribes of the West, to be enslaved by them,
or butchered by the Camanche or other savage nations of the

ON ABOLITION PETITIONS. 1 W
forest. Sir, it is impossible to tell the precise manner of their
expulsion and destruction ; but expelled and destroyed they
would be, whilst true religion and humanity would long weep
over their unhappy destiny. Sir, they are comparatively happy
now ; let them alone. They are fed well, they are clothed well,
they are housed well ; they do not labor more or harder than the
poor of our own color, whose necessities require that they should
labor for their subsistence. Let them alone. They are ours by
purchase. You ofthe North (some of you) first kidnapped them,
and then brought and sold them to us. Were we to liberate
them to-morrow, you would not receive them. You would treat
them with a thousand-fold more barbarity than ever they were
treated by us. Then let them alone; your benevolence, false
and often hypocritical as it is, would but kill and destroy them.
Then let them alone. God in his love, and Religion in her ho
liness, will do more and better for them than you ever can or
will do. But I forget (said Mr. B.) that I speak to a bigotry
that has no heart, and to a fanaticism that has no ears . I turn-,
therefore, from them to the men and patriots who belong to
these Halls — the successors of those illustrious men who reared
this temple, and consecrated it forever to Union and the Con
stitution. If thy people shall hft up their eyes to this temple,
and pray thee for what it is lawful to grant them under -that
Constitution, hear thou and answer them. But if they ask thee
for what will rend that Constitution, and sunder forever that
bright and glorious Union, be thou as deaf and insensible as
the marble pillars which surround you.

SPEECH,
On the Right of the Members elected hy general ticket to their
Seats ; delivered in the House of Representatives, February
9, 1844.

The Report ofthe Committee on Elections, relative to the right of certain
Members to their seats in the House of Representatives, being under
consideration :
Mr. A. V. Brown addressed the House as follows —
Mr. Speaker : There is now lying on your table a bill which
I had the honor to introduce at an early period of the session,
proposing a repeal of that section of the apportionment act
which is the exciting topic of this debate. Whilst the report
of the committee maintains that section to be void and of no
eff"ect, that bill declares that it shall be stricken at once from
your statute-book. The subjects are identical, the arguments
on them nearly the same ; and, at the close of this debate, I
shall move the bill on its passage, that both subjects (as nearly
as possible,) may be disposed of at the same time. Having
introduced that bill, and being also a member of the commit
tee by which this report was made, I stand in such responsible
connection with both, that I trust I shall be excused by the
House for participating in this debate.
This, however, I would not think of doing, did I entertain
the opinions which have just been expressed by the gentleman
from Georgia, [Mr. Stephens.] If I were deeply and thorough
ly convinced, as he says he is, that I was not duly and constitu
tionally elected to this House, I vvould neither speak in it, nor
act in it. I would leave it at once, whatever the opinion of
others might be. So I would do in every other similar case.
Were I unlawfully appointed the Judge of a court, or if the

EIGHT OP MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 121
court had been unconstitutionally created, I would neither
clothe myself with its ermine, nor sit on its woolsack.
The second section of the apportionment act provides, " that
where a State is entitled to more than one Repesentative, the
number to which each State shall be entitled, under this appor
tionment, shall be elected by districts composed of contiguous
territory, equal in number to the number of Representatives to
which said State shall be entitled — no one district electing
more than one Representative." The introduction of that
section into the apportionment bill was too singular to have
escaped observation. The gentleman from Georgia, [Mr. Ste
phens,] had adverted to the fact, and was pleased to ascribe
to it a Democratic origin. I think I shall be able to satisfy
the gentleman that he has looked into the history of its intro
duction into that bill with a too careless eye. [Here Mr. Ste
phens (Mr. B. yielding the floor) inquired if the gentleman de
nied the fact he had stated, that this portion of the bill had
been introduced by the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr.
Campbell.] Mr. B. replied that he did not deny the correctness of that
assertion ; but he did not doubt but the gentleman understood
the fact really to be as he had represented it.
[Mr. Campbell ( Mr. B. further yielding for explanation) observed that
the gentleman no doubt had a correct recollection of the origin of the
second section of this act. It had been in this way : A resolution had been
introduced by him (Mr. C.) instructing the Committee of Elections, to inquire
into the expediency of regulating the subject of Congressional elections in
BUch a way, by law, as that they should be by uniform districts throughout the
United States. Sometime afterwards the Committee of Elections, in con
formity with these instructions, reported a clause, from which had origina
ted this second section ; which clause had been amended on his motion,
and assumed the shape which it now occupied in the law. So, Mr. C. had
originated the proposition in the first instance, and in the second instance,
by his motion, it had assumed the form in which it now appeared as the
second section of the act.]
Mr. Brown replied, that he did not mean to say that the
gentleman was not the real, as he certainly was the putative
father of the disfrict proposition of that session ; but he must
insist that the gentleman should content himself with the more
humble relation of mere god-father to the thought of making

122 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
it a part and portion of the apportionment bill. That was the
great matter about which he was complaining. The appor
tionment bill was one which was obliged to be passed in some
form or other. Without it the Federal Government would run
down and be at an end. The forcing of this section on such a bill
as that he denied to have had a Democratic origin. He meant
to demonstrate that, in the further progress of his remarks, to
every man's satisfaction. The gentleman's own resolution
contemplated no connection whatever with the apportionment
bill — it expressly called for a separate and distinct bill by it
self, to stand or fall by its own merits. Mr. Brown said he
would now proceed on his observations.
More than fifty years of our poUtical existence had rolled
by, and no such legislation had ever been proposed. State af
ter State had risen up and become members of this Confede
racy, not one of which had ever failed cheerfully and promptly
to furnish its proportion of our national representation. In
peace and in war — in prosperity and in adversity — amidst the
fiercest conflict of pai-ties — all had done their duty ; not one
had failed or refused to regulate " the time, place, and man
ner" of holding elections, as required by the Constitution.
What, then, could have induced the Congress of 1842, with
no derelictions on the part of the States, with no memorials
from the seventeen or eighteen milfions of the People of this
country, to wage this wanton and unprovoked war on the con
stitutional rights and the ancient usages of the States ? It
was the blind, infuriated spirit of party, vainly endeavoring to
perpetuate a triumph which chance or fraud or folly had
achieved. Those who were influenced by it had the sagacity
to devise, and the heart to meditate, but not the hardihood to
consummate the deed. They could declare that none should
be admitted to membership here but those who had been elect
ed by districts ; but they dared not rouse the sleeping lion of
public indignation, by laying off the districts themselves. To
show you that I am not mistaken in the party character of this
war, let me advert to the fact, that the idea of introdueing this
second section into the apportionment law was engendered in
the Committee of Elections — a committee eminently partisan
in its head, and, indeed, in. its whole structure. That Com-

RIGHT OF MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKE T, 1 23
mittee had no charge of the apportionment bill ; it had no ju
risdiction over it. The preparation of that bill had been con
fided to a special committee of thirteen, who had reported it
with no such clause in it. It was, therefore, gross usurpation
in that committee to attempt to supersede the special one, by
reporting amendments to it; and nothing but the inveteracy
of party would have sustained its arrogant pretensions. On
the 26th of April, whilst the apportionment bill, as reported by
the special committee, was under discussion in committee of
ths whole, Mr. Halsted, of New Jersey, as he said (for he made
no report, and could have made none in Committee of the
Whole) by order of the Committee of Elections, proposed the
second section. The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr.
Campbell] offered an amendment to Mr. Halsted's, changing its
phraseology, but not its meaning, which was accepted by Mr.
Halsted; and adopted by him in lieu of his own. The whole
Democratic party contended against the amendment at every
stage of its progress ; not because they were opposed to the
districting plan, but because they were unwilling to see it en
forced on the States by the strong arm of Federal domination.
They fought it on every inch of ground, and finally recorded
a unanimous vote against it. [Here Mr. Campbell reminded
Mr. B. that he was certainly mistaken.] Mr. B. Unanimous,
did I say ? No, I am wrong in that ; the gentleman from South
Carolina, [Mr. C] did not vote with us, nor fight with us. Nay,
he fought against us. He went over to the enemy ; and they,
delighted with the acquisition, instantly promoted him to the
command, and he actually led on their proud imperious co
horts to the charge. I need not tell you the result. ' Turn to
your journals of the 3d of May, and you will find that the Dem
ocratic party was overcome by a vote of 101 to 99. The gen
tleman's vote, and that of his colleague, Mr. Sampson Butler,
would have saved us from that mortification. It would have
saved, too, twenty members of this House from the humilia
tion of having to stand, as they have stood, unbonneted and
dishonored at the door of one of your distant committee rooms.
This section was thus literally forced into the apportionment
biU; in despite of all the exertions and resistance ofthe Demo
cratic party. What, then, was to be done ? An apportionment

124 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
bill was obliged to be passed. The Constitution expressly
commanded that it should be passed. Without it, there could
be no members elected — in fact, no Congress ; and the Fed
eral Government would have been at an end. To avoid a
great calamity like this, I do not hesitate to say that the whole
Democratic party would have been justified in voting for the
bill, regarding the second section as a mere nullity. The
Whig party, with the assistance aforesaid, had forced this ob
noxious section into the bill ; but as the existence of the na
tion is of infinitely higher importance than all considerations
of the forms and modes of administering it, the Democratic
party might have been well justified in voting for the biU.
Well, what did they do ? As long as there was the slightest
hope that, by rejecting the bill, another might be introduced)
on which the second section might not be engrafted, we voted
against it. First, we voted against the engrossment. It was
a test vote, substituted for a vote on the final passage of the
bill ; but we voted in vain. A motion was then made by Mr.
Cooper, of Georgia, to lay it on the table : we voted for that,
but all in vain ; and the bill was sent to the Senate. Some
hopes were entertained that the Senate might come to our re
lief, by striking the section from the bill. Here, too, we were
disappointed ; and the bill was returned to us from that body
with sundry proposed amendments. We resolved to make
one more effort. The gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Boyd,]
moved to lay the bill, with all the amendments, on the table.
The motion, like the previous one, failed; and with it expired
all hope of our ever being able to get clear of the odious section
of the bill. Sir, this was the last effort of the Democratic
party to get clear of this section. But a motion was after
wards made by Mr. William Cost Johnson to lay the bill on
the table ; and the question is sometimes asked, why we did
not all vote for that with the same unanimity as on the previ
ous motions. Sir, I will tell you. The previous motions to
lay on the table by Mr. Cooper and the gentleman from Ken
tucky, [Mr. Boyd,] were made bona fide, to get clear of the se
cond section. Mr. Cost Johnson's was not. He was a great
friend to that section. He had voted for it, and I believe had
voted against every proposition to get clear of it. His only

RIGHT OP MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 125
object was to get an alteration of the ratio. With the ratio
we were satisfied, and wanted no alteration. It was palpable
that his purpose was to use a portion ofthe Democracy in get
ting a ratio to suit himself, and then turn round and use the
Whig party to again fasten the second section upon us. Sir,
Democracy may be overpowered ; she may be borne down by
numbers ; but she can not be played upon in that manner. We
knew his purpose went no farther than an alteration in the
ratio. We voted against such an alteration. This was the
substance and true nature of the vote, and so it was under
stood at the time.
So much, sir, for the action of Congress on the passage of
this law. What has been the action of the States since its en
actment ? Precisely what it was before. The Constitution of
the United States expressly provides that the time, place, and
manner of holding elections, shall be prescribed by the Legis
latures of the different States. In pursuance of that provision,
all the States had made the necessary and proper regulations
for holding them — four by the general ticket, and all the rest
by the district system. These four were New Hampshire,
Georgia, Mississippi and Missouri. Then' Representatives,
presenting themselves here with the commissions of their re
spective States, have been recognized as members, not only in
the organization of the House, but in all its proceedings, up to
this time. This report maintains that they are rightfully and
lawfully here, and ought to continue here, with all the rights
and privileges of members of this House. Why should they
not have been recognized as members of this House? They
were here with commissions precisely like our own ; signed by
their Governors, countersigned by their Secretaries, and attes
ted by the great seal of their States respectively. On the face
of these commissions it does not appear whether they were
elected by the district or general-ticket plan. No rival claim
ants were here, as in the New Jersey case, presenting counter-
credentials, nor calling on the House to go beyond or behind
these commissions. The shattered remnants of that party
which had passed the law, protested against their recognition ;
but they protested in the face of credentials precisely like their
own ; in the face of their own favorite doctrine, so much refied

126 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
on in the New Jersey case, that the broad seal of a State waa
prima facie evidence of a right to a seat in this Hall. Day af
ter day they clamored for the privilege of recording at full
length their protest against their admission. According to. all
Parliamentary law, and all the rules of correct practice, they
had no such right; but, in a party point of view, it might have
been better to have allowed them to spread it on the Journal.
It would have established against them, to all future genera
tions, an inconsistency in docfrine, an instabifity of principle,
only equalled by the atrocity of their attempted invasion on
the rights of the States.
It is a proud reflection that, in the whole history of this sub
ject, the Democratic party has preserved the most exact and
beautiful consistency. It has followed the light of all the ex
amples of its illustrious founder. In originally voting against
this section, and in afterwards admitting the members on the
presumptive validity of their credentials, we have maiUifested
the most delicate and scrupulous regard for the righits of the
States. Mr. Speaker, I come now to the consideration of the consti
tutionality of the second section of the apportionment Mil of
1842. If it be construed as a command to the States, it is evi
dently unconstitutional. If it fall short of a command, but is
to be regarded as a penalty suspended over the heads of the
States, depriving them of representation if they shall fail or
refuse to conform to the declared will of Congress, it is equally
unconstitutionaL Who ever authorized this Government to hold
penalties, conditional or unconditional, over the heads of the
sovereign States of this Union? The Constitution may com
mand them, but the Congress of the United States cannot.
The Constitution did command them to prescribe the time,
place and manner of holding the elections, and the States of
New Hampshire, Georgia, Mississippi, and Missouri, have done
so. On the days of the election of their present members,
they are obeying this command of the Constitution ; for they
were acting throughout the election under laws which their
Legislatures had enacted in precise accordance with the requi
sitions of the Constitution, Their laws, then, were as valid
and binding as any law passed on the subject by Congress

RIGHT OF MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 127
could be, 80 far as the source of power for such legislation
was concerned — the power in both cases running back aad
resting on the Constitution. It is, therefore, perfectly plain
that the regulations of those States were valid and binding
at the time of their elections, unless Congress had either made
new ones or altered those ofthe States. I am desirous, sir, to
fix your attention on the very day, and on the hours of their
elections. The people were assembled to exercise the great
est privilege of freemen ; they were assembled on the right
day, for Congress had not interferred with that ; they were
assembled at the right places, for Congress had not legisla
ted at all as to them; what, then, remained of doubt or
of question? Why, it must be as to the manner of
holding the election — ^what officers should hold it — how
the votes should be taken in, whether viva voce or otherwise.
If the word mannerh.as a wide signification in the general, it is
here expressly fimited by the word holding. Now, remember
that the Legislatures of those States had provided everything,
necessary as to the manner of holding the elections ; they had
done that, too, by the express command of the Constitution.
But did Congress, by the act of 1842, either alter these regula
tions as to the manner of holding the elections, or make new
ones inconsistent vidth them? Congress did not touch that
subject at all; it did not allude to the manner of holding these
elections — ^who should take in the votes — ^whether they should
be given viva voce or otherwise : all these matters were, there
fore, unrepealed or unaltered by the act of Congress.
The elections so proceed. The people assembled — -on the^
right day — at the right places ; they gave in their votes to the
right ofiicers, whoi declared the result, and certified according
ly. Well, so far, none wiU deny but that the people have done
all in their power, and that they have acted not only in accor
dance with the laws of the State, but with those of Congress.
Why, then, can they not have their Representatives on this
floor ? They have compfied hterally with the laws of the
State, and these laws were passed precisely according to the
Constitution of the United States ; nor have they acted in any
wise inconsistent with any law of Congress in relation to the
manner of holding their elections ; why, then, cannot they

128 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
have the benefit of representation here ? Gentlemen answer,
because those States have not been laid off into districts. Well,
I take the answer. Who did not lay off the districts ? First,
Congress did not ; secondly, those States did not : no other
body could have done it. And so between the action of Con
gress or of the Legislatures, the people are to be deprived of
the great and inafienable right of representation. Sir, it can
not be so — it must not be so. Every intendment must be made,
and every construction must be given to the action of Con
gress and of the Legislatures, which will preserve, and not de
stroy, a right so justly dear to freemen. Gentlemen reply to
this by saying, that although Congress did not lay off the dis
tricts, yet she declared that the number to which each State
should be entitled should be elected by districts, and that these
districts should be composed of contiguous territory, and that
it was left to the States to lay them off or not, as they might
think proper. Mark, sir, the high imperative words which
these gentlemen employ — which their law of 1842 employs:
" Shall he elected by districts" — " shall be composed of con
tiguous territory." To whom is this language addressed but
to the Legislatures of the States ? If Congress did not, who
else could lay off the districts but the Legislature ? who are
even told how to lay them off—" of contiguous territory ;" and
yet gentlemen have over and over again admitted that as a
command pi the General to the State Governments, it is entire
ly null and void.
Let us now take another step in the progress of this argu
ment. Suppose these four States to have obeyed this command
of Congress, and to have laid off" the districts : then, of course
the election would have been held by districts. Why ? Sim
ply because the last law of the State, establishing the district
system, would have repealed the former law of the State es
tablishing the general-ticket system. So, if Congress, instead
of issuing a command which it could not enforce, had proceeded
to lay off the districts for and within the several States, then it
might have been argued, on the other side, that the later act
of Congress, establishing the district system, repealed and
disannulled the former laws ofthe States, estabhshing the gen
eral-ticket system. In both these cases the argument is, that

RIGHT OF MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 129
the setting up of the one system is the pulling down of the
other. WeU, letus test this question by that argument. Did Con
gress set up a district system so incompatible with the general
ticket of the States as to supersede or displace it? Did Con
gress set up or estabfish a district system at all? She declared
there should be one set up or established by somebody, but by
whom, she did not say. She did not set it up herself; and the
advocates of her laws say she did not mean to command the
States to set up or estabfish it ; and these four States, accord
ingly, have not done so. The conclusion foUows this state
ment of the facts, that, by not laying off" tbe districts herself,
Congress has only issued an abstract declaration of her will
and pleasure, without setting up any system superseding or
displacing that of the States. As a rule of action for the gov
ernment of the people, it is impracticable. As a system for
the preservation of their rights, it is impossible of execution.
But shall their rights, therefore, perish ? Certainly not. Un
secured by tbe vague and impracticable legislation of Con
gress, they shall live and abide in the legislation of the States ;
founded on the same authority as that of Congress — the Con
stitution of the land. It was to guard and preserve to the
people this great right of suffrage, that a double protection
was provided by tbe Constitution. It was to be protected both
by the Legislature of the States and by Congress : neither
could destroy it. If the Legislature should assail it by pre
scribing no regulations as to the time, place, and manner of
exercising it, then Congress might make them. But the true
question is, can Congress, under this conserratory provision,
do anything, not to preserve, but to destroy this great right?
Could Congress say, "I have left this power long enough with
the States, and will therefore take it to myself" — the whole
power over the time, place, and manner of holding elections ?
Saying and resolving this, could she pass a law declaring that
all laws and parts of laws passed by the States provid
ing for the holding of elections for Congress, should be
repealed, and that hereafter aU laws upon that subject
shall be passed only by herself? If she went no farther
than that; if she did not actually make the necessary laws
for holding elections, would such a law be a vafid repeal
10

130 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
of the State laws, and would the right of suff'rage be lost
and sacrified? No, sir, never. Congress would have no
right to repeal the State laws at all. Her abstract declara
tion would pass for nothing ; and it would be only by going on
beyond such abstractions, and actually building up a system
of regulations totally inconsistent with those of the States,
that she ever could supersede them. This glorious right, lying
deep in the foundations of our free institutions, could not have
been better secured. If it may ever die in the Legislatures
of the States, it is because it springs into new fife in the Con
gress of the United States ; and when it dies here, it is re
animated in the States. Sir, in the theory of our form of
Government, it is an imnaortal right, and can never perish
but with our free institutions.
Mr. Chairman, there are many other views of this constitu
tional question, but I have not time to take them. I think it
may well be questioned whether the term manner has allu
sion to the laying off of districts at aU ; Mid I entertain strong
doubts whether, if Congress assume jurisdiction over any part
of the regulations of elections, she must not take jurisdiction
of the whole. However these question may be solved, I am
clear in the opinion, that if she assume to regulate the time,
she must specify the time ; if the place, she must designate
the place ; and if the manner relates to districts, she must create
the district, or ofber territorial division. These are my opin
ions ; and I was in nothing so much surprised as that the
dotninant party, who passed fiie law, should have stopped
short of actually laying off" the districts ; that being the most
effectual way to have secured the accompfishment of their
purposes. What were those purposes? I have already stated
them — ^the perpetutation of their ill-gotten power. The elec
tions were turning rapidly against them. Something must he
done. This plan was devised. The ancient usages ofthe
States were to be disregarded, and a command was to be sent
forth which they knew many of the fion-hearted Democratic
States would scorn to obey. Scorning to obey, they might re
turn members to this House, who might sue in vain for admis
sion here. Rejected, as they hoped all such would be, and as
all such would have been but for the unusual Democratic

EIGHT OF MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 131
strength of this session, the sceptre of power might still be re
tained by them, in spite of the murmurs of a deceived and in
sulted people. Did you not mark the promptness, as if by
concert and premeditation, with which the question of their
admission was sprung upon the House on the first day of the
session. Never before, since the foundation of this Govern
ment, was a document found ready printed and laid upon our
tables before Congress was even organized. The speech of
one ofthe advocates of this second section, made in 1842, was
here, bright and fresh from the press, by ten o'clock in the
morning. Besides this, did you ever see so long a protest pre
pared and presented in so short a time ? Everything seems to
have been " cut and dried" for the occasion. Now, sir, sup
pose your majority here had not exceeded twenty, do you not
perceive the consequences ? With a large majority of the
people of the United States Democratic, you would have had
a Whig Speaker — Whig Committees — ^Whig Printers — Whig
organization throughout ; and the whole system of Whig mea
sures might have been still fastened on the country — condemn
ed and repudiated as they had been by the American people.
What could have saved this country from such results ?
Nothing I know of, nothing but a repetition of those Execu
tive votes, which entitle the President to the lasting gratitude
of the nation. Even now you every day hear the sound of
the guillotine from the other end of this building, and behold
the headless bodies of their victims borne away from the Capi
tol ; what would have been the state of things then, with both
branches fully organized against you ? What could you have
done to stay the arm of Federal domination ? In connexion
with this view of the subject, take that other bill passed at
that session auxiliary to this — the bill providing for the organ
ization of this House. The Constitution expressly provided
that each House should be the judge of the election, qualifi
cation, and return of its own members. By that bill all this
power waa given to your then Clerk, a warm and devoted
friend to the dominant party. No appeal could be taken
from his dicision — ^his decree of admission or rejection was to
be final and conclusive. I know it is often said that such ad
mission was to last only during organization, and until the

132 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
Committee of Elections might report on the case. When
milt that be ? Look at the New-Jersey case ; the Naflor and
rng^sSllse; at the Florida case, and others, and td me .
this might not be at the end of the Congress ? That biU wa
11" flagitious outrage on the right of this House. It brought
Jou mpotent and powerless, at the feet of your own Clerk.
Z'Zt bill passed ; and nothing saved you from its opera
tion fufthe noble con'duct of the President, in not retiirning it
wUh'n the time required by the Constitution, it being the very
Tlorof the session. Taking, then, these two laws together
and they exhibit the deepest laid scheme for the perpetuation
of power overlaid since the formation of this Government.
Mr. Speaker, there is one point of view m which the pas-
sale of this second section should be peculiarly obnoxious to
he American people. The adoption of the Federal Constitu
tion after it had been made, was of vast importance and of
painful solicitiide. Many of the illustrious -- who fr^ed
ft were extremely doubtful of its ratification. The State Con
ventions, to whom it was referred, participated fully and deep
ly in this solicitixde. They found many things in ^t which they
did not really approve; but rather than hazardthe whole of tha
sacred instrument, they concluded to let them pass and trust
to the future wisdom of Congress not to abuse the powers
which they had conferred. The clause of the Constitution
which declared that Congress might make or alter the regu a-
tions of the States, as to the time, places and manner of hold
ing elections, is a most apt and striking illustration. The
power was too broad in its language. They desiredTongress
to have the power only in the single case where the btates
would not or could not make such regulations ; but the terms
seemed to extend beyond that. What should they do? Ke-
ject the Constitution, and trust to the formation of another.
The difficulties they had encountered in the formation of this,
and the incalculable mischief growing out of the want of a
Constitution, induced them at last to ratify it as it was ; but to
leave on their records, for the guide and instaruction of their
posterity, the most solemn instructions that they should never
take advantage of the defect. It was a known, declared, ad
mitted defect. But they appeal to their posterity to appre-

RIGHT OF MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 133
ciate the trying circumstances by which they were surrounded,
and never to take advantage of it. That appeal sunk deep in
the heart of every American bosom, and was never disregard
ed till 1842.
Su-, let us go back to the records of that ancient time, and
read the very words of exhortation and instruction which were
uttered by those immortal patriots who ratified the Constitu
tion. I begin with Massachusetts. What did she say as to the
very clause under discussion ? She placed upon her records
the following declaration :
" The Convention do therefore recommend that the following alterations
and provisions be introduced into the said Constitution : Section 3. That
Congress do not exercise the powers vested in them by the fourth section
cf the first article, but in a case when a State shall neglect or rrfuse to
make the jegulations therein mentioned, or shall make regulations sub
versive to the rights of the people to a free and equal representation in
Congress, agreeable to the Constitution. And this Convention do, in the
name and in behalf of this Commonwealth, enjoin it upon their Repre
sentatives in Congress at all lifnes, until the alterations and provisions
aforesaid shall have been considered agreeably to the fifth article of said
Constitution, to exert all their influence, and use all reasonable and legal
methods to obtain a ratification of said alterations and provisions, in such
manner as is provided in said article."
Sir, had any State failed or refused to provide for the elec
tion of members to Congress ? Not one. Did the Represen
tatives of that ancient Commonwealth " exert all their in
fluence" against the exercise of this power in any other case?
They did not ; but voted for this seetion, in disregard to the
most solemn injunctions of their fathers.
I next advert to the State of South Carolina — the Palmetto
State — so proud, and so justly proud, of those illustrious pa
triots who adorn her Revolutionary history. Her Convention
declared that the power to make regulations for the election
of members should be forever inseparably annexed to the
sovereignty of the States, except in the single case of refusal
or neglect by the States ; and they adopted the following reso
lution :
" And whereas it is essential to the preservation of the rights reserved to
the several States, and the freedom of the people, under the operations of
a general government, that the right of prescribing the manner, time, and

134 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
places of holding the elections to the Federal Legislature, should be in
separably annexed to the sovereignty of the several States : This Conven
tion doth declare, that the same ought to remain, to all posterity, a per
petual and fundamental right in the local, exclusive of the interference of
the General Government, except in cases where the Legislatures of the
States shall refuse or neglect to perform and fulfil the same, according to
the tenor of the said Constitution."
" Resolved, That it is a standing instruction to all such Delegates as may
hereafter be elected to represent this State in the General Government, to
exert their utmost abilities and influence to efiect an alteration of the
Constitution conformably to the foregoing resolution."
Need I pause to inquire whether, in tbe adoption of this se
cond section the Representatives of that gallant State did exert
their utmost abilities and influence in obedience to these stand
ing instructions ? I have already told you that two of them
felt at liberty wholly to disregard them — solemn and time-
honored as they were, these gentlemen felt at liberty to dis
regard them.
The State of New Hampshire comes next in order — ^the
granite State — granite in her Democracy, as she is in her
geology. The declaration of her Convention is in nearly the
very words of Massachusetts ; limiting the exercise of this
power to the single case of neglect and refusal, and enjoining
at all times on her Representatives to make such Umitation an
express and positive provision of the Constitution.
" The Convention do therefore recommend thatthe following alterations
and provisions be introduced into the said Constitution :
" III. That Congress do not exercise the powers vested in them by the
fourth section of the first article, but in cases when a State shall neglect or
refuse to make the regulations therein mentioned, or shall make regula
tions subversive of the rights of the people to a free and equal representa
tion in Congress ; nor shall Congress in any case make regulations con<'
trary to a free and equal representation."
"And the Convention do, in the name and in behalf of the people of this
State, enjoin it upon their Representatives in Congress, at all times, until
the alterations and provisions aforesaid have been considered agreeably to
the fifth article of the said Constitution, to exert all their influence, and
use all reasonable and legal methods, to obtain a ratification of the said
alterations and provisions, in such manner as is provided in the said
article." Virginia (next in order) went fai-ther than all this. She not

RIGHT OF MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 135
only declared in favor of an amendment limiting the power to
the case of refusal or neglect, but she expressly enjoined it
upon her Representatives, until such alteration of the Consti
tution shall be made, " to conform to the spirit of the amend
ments, as far as the said Constitution will admit."
" XVI. The Congress shall not alter, modify, or interfere in the times,
places, or manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives,
or either of them, except when the Legislature of any State shall neglect
or refuse, or be disabled hy invasion or rebellion, to prescribe the same."
"As the Convention do, in the name and behalf of this Commonwealth ,
enjoin it upon their representatives in Congress to exert all their influence ,
and use all reasonable and legal methods, to obtain a ratification of the fore
going alterations and provisions, in the manner provided by the fifth article
of the said Constitution ; and in all congressional laws to be passed in the
mean time, to conform to the spirit of these amendments, as far as the said
Constitution will admit."
The State of New York was peculiarly guarded and cau
tious in her ratification of the Constitution. Amongst other
limitations and conventional constructions of that instrument,
she declares "her adoption of this clause, under the expecta
tion that Congress will not make or alter any regulation in this
State respecting the time, place, and manner of holding elec
tions for Senators and Representatives, unless the Legislature
of this State shall neglect, or refuse to make laws or regula
tions for the purpose, or, from any cause, be incapable of
making the same ; and in those cases such power will only be
exercised while the Legislature of this State shall make pro
vision in the premises." But the New York Convention did
not stop even here ; they adopted the very words of Virginia,
and in the name and in behalf of the people, instructed their
Representatives that until this clause should be amended, " all
laws to be passed by Congress in the meantime to conform to
the spirit of such amendments, as far as the Constitution will
admit." I come now to the State of North Carolina. She gives a
most emphatic expression of her views and wishes in relation
to the extent of this power in Congress over the " time, place,
and manner of electing Representatives to Congress." Her
seventeenth amendment provides "that Congress shall not

136 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
alter, modify, or interfere in the times, places, or manner of
holding elections of Senators and Representatives, or either
of them, except when the Legislature of any State shall neg
lect or refuse, or be disabled by invasion or rebelUon, to pre
scribe the same." '
When Rhode Island soon after the rest, came in, it was un
der a ratification, declaring the same ptu'pose to amend the
Constitution on this point ; and until it was done her positive
injunctions to her Representatives were, like those of New
York and Virginia, that they should conform to the spirit of
such amendments.
Thus, sir, I have given you seven out ofthe old thirteen States,
who contended against a literal construction of the Constitu
tion as it was worded ; seven out of the thirteen who declared
that its wording must be changed ; seven out of the thirteen
who declared that, until it was so altered, their members of
Congress must conform to the spirit of that clause as they had
expounded it. What a sacred, what a holy injunction was
here ! They did not like the words of this section ; but they
approved the balance of the Constitution. They believed the
future glory and prosperity of their country depended on its
immediate adoption. They were unwilling to risk losing all
for the sake of some few amendments to it. In this great
emergency they ratified it as it was ; but called on their pos
terity to the remotest generation, not to take advantage of its
specified defects, but to conform to its spirit with fidefity and
honor. Sir, I will not speak for others ; but I will say for myself,
that I would tear the seals from a father's will ; I would disre
gard his last dying request, as soon as I would have disre
garded the consecrated instructions of these great benefactors
of their country. Sir, let us restore these instructions — let us
re-estabUsh their will, by repeafing the second section of the
apportionment act. Let us, moreover, re-affirm the invalidity
of this section, by continuing a full representation of all the
States on this fioor. There is not a warmer friend to the dis
trict plan of electing members of Congress than I am. But
let it be done freely and voluntarily by the States themselves
and not be forced on them by the strong arm of Federal

RIGHT OT MEMBERS ELECTED BY GENERAL TICKET. 137
power. Almost every State in the Union is now electing by dis
tricts. Repeal this section of the law — withdraw your uncon
stitutional mandamus, as some regard it — ^remove those pains
and penalties which you have suspended over the States, and
I do not doubt that, in less than two years, scarce a sing-Ie
State will be found electing by the general ticket.

SPEECH,
On the Territorial Government of Oregon; delivered in the
House of Representatives, Monday, January 27, 1845.

Mr. A. V. Brown said, in reply to the gentleman from
Massachusetts, why he had made the motion to strike out the
word " nine," he would state that, at the last session, when
the Committee on Territories reported this bill, it was reported
correctly but by some mistake in copying, or otherwise, 49
minutes was inserted instead of 40. Where did the commit
tee get the 54 degrees 40 minutes from ? he supposed was the
question substantially which the gentleman intended to ask.
He read from the report of the Committee on Territories of
last session, showing that that parallel was taken from the
treaty between the United States and Russia of April, 1824.
The gentleman from Massachusetts seemed anxious that
this subject should lie over. Mr. B. had called it up this morn
ing because of its importance to the whole country, and be
cause he had given assurance that he would move it immedi
ately after the settlement of the great Texas question. Thus
he had called it up ; he had no design however to press it with
a precipitancy unbecoming the magnitude of the question.
So far as related to the American title to the country, to the
full extent of the limits proposed by the bill, as reported by the
committee, he knew of no public man in the United States who
did doubt the title of the United States to the full extent of
fifty-four degrees forty minutes. But the Committee on Ter
ritories, when they proposed to extend our laws to the whole
extent of that country, did not imagine that they were interfer-

TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON, 139
ing in the sfightest degree with the negotiation now in progress
upon the subject ; and the committee believed that the United
States was asserting only the same jurisdiction over that entire
country that Great Britian was now exercising. It was well
understood that the laws of the United States now extended
over that whole territory. Why, then, might not we do what
they proposed ? Our people had gone to that country, to
which few, if any, entertained the slightest doubt of our title;
and being there, they stood every day in need of our legisla
tion. Great Britian had her magistrates there ; she had sent
thither her code of laws, her judicial tribunals ; she had forti
fications studded aU over that country ; and what was there in
existing treaties which forbade our doing the same thing?
Should we lag behind — ay, should we longer lag behind on
this great question ? We did not propose to do more than she
had done, but to do as much; and he trusted that this House,
would never hesitate to do it, which they might do without
violating any existing stipulations between the two coun
tries. He had never believed that, under the treaty of 1818, or of
1827, Great Britain, or any of her subjects, ever held joint
possession or occupancy of that territory with the United States.
The Committee on Territories entertained the opinion that we
had had, at least since 1812, exclusive right of possession; and
Great Britain had never divided that right with the United
States at all. The stipulation of the treaty was only that
they should have the privilege of entering through the bays and
harbors of that country into Oregon, for the purpose of carry
ing on their trade, for purposes of hunting and fishing, &c.;
but while they had this privilege it never was intended by the
stipulations of our treaty that they should come in and claim
undivided possession of the territory. However that might be,
if they claimed joint possession with the United States, and
had extended their laws there, was there any reason why the
United States might not do the same thing ? There might be
collisions, to be sure, in joint occupation; and when they
arose, they must be provided for; but the question of the pro
bability of collision was not one which addressed itself to this
House at all. That was a question for the consideration of

140 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
the executive, whether he should give the notice contemplated
by the convention of 1827. Now, the Committee on Territo
ries believed, when they reported this bill, that they were ac
ting strictly and exclusively within the legislative powers of
Congress ; that they were leaving the executive to act when
and how it pleased with regard to giving this notice to termi
nate what was usually called the joint possession of this coun
try. That was a question with which they did not intend to
interfere. The gentleman from Massachusetts had stated that
he had no doubt as to the ownership by the United States of
that country from forty-two to forty-nine degrees. Well, over
BO much of the territory it would be right to extend our laws
and our institutions ; and the committee believed our title was
good from forty-nine degrees to fifty-four degrees forty minutes,
and they proposed to extend our jurisdiction over the whole
country. Suppose, now, this jurisdiction progressed and terminated by
the loss of that portion of the country, (which he supposed
only for the sake of the argument, and which he had no idea
would be the case,) why, to that extent the treaty stipulations
between the two countries would curtail our legislation, and
would leave our resolutions in full force, and our laws in full
operation over the whole territory south of the fine ultimately
agreed on by this negotiation. So, that in no possible point of
view could he imagine any reason why this House should not
go as far as they were called on to go by the Committee on
Territories. Let the negotiation terminate as it might, there
must be a large portion of the territory to which Great Britain,
although she had claims, had yet no just claims; and over that
territory our legislation was to be extended.
But inasmuch as Great Britain, as the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts had said, exercised jurisdiction as far as forty-two
degrees, could we not as well exercise jurisdiction up to fifty-
four degrees forty minutes, with as much propriety ; leaving aU
questions with regard to settlement of boundary to the negotia
tion, as now progressing, and leaving this House and the other
branch of Congress to establish a territorial government in
that country, subject to whatever was the result of the nego
tiation ?

TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON. ' 141
In this view the bill was reported ; and he desired, in order
that every gentleman should be fully apprised of the grounds
on which the bill was presented to the House, that a few pages
of the report of last session accompanying the bill should be
read. They were read by the Clerk accordingly, as follows :
In presenting this bill thus modified, and recommending its
passage, it is a source of satisfaction tothe committee to know
that it is in precise accordance with the avowed opinions not
only of the present, but of several preceding Presidents of the
United States. As far back as December, 1824, Mr. Monroe,
in his annual message to the two Houses of Congress, strongly
recommended the propriety of establishing a military post at
the mouth of the Columbia river, or at some other point within
our acknowledged limits. This he did, not only as a protec
tion to our then increasing commerce, and to our fisheries , but aa
a protection to all our interests in that quarter, and as a means
of concifiating the various tribes of Indians throughout our
northwestern possession. He further added, "that it was
thought, also, by the establishment of such a post, the inter
course between our western States and Territories and the
Pacific, and our trade with the tribes residing in the interior,
on each side of the Rocky Mountains, would be essentially
promoted. Mr. Adams, in his message to the next succeeding
Congress, follows up this suggestion of Mr. Monroe, and re
commends not only the establishment of a military post at or
Kiear the mouth of the Columbia, but the equipment of a pub
lic ship for the exploration of the whole northwestern coast of
this continent. If these recommendations are fimited to the
protection of our commerce and fisheries, to the trade with
intermediate Indian tribes, and to the promotion of our in
tercourse with the Pacific, it must have been only because at
that time we had no fixed population there, looking to the per
manent settlement of the country for agricultural purposes.
Since 1824 and 1825, however, we have advanced far beyond
the then necessities of our people, and are now called upon to
give the protection of our laws and the benefit of our free in
stitutions to those who have made it their permanent abode,

H2 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
and whose purposes are to bring into cultivation that vast por
tion of our empire.
The President of the United States, in his annual message
at the commencement of the present session, presented these
altered circumstances in the condition of that country to the
attention of Congress, and with much cogency recommended
the very measure which the committee have reported. He says :
"In the mean time, it is proper to remark, that many of our
citizens are either already established in the Territory, or are
on their way thither, for the purpose of forming permanent
settlements, while others are preparing to follow ; and, in view
of these facts, I must repeat the recommendations contained
in previous messages, for the establishment of military posts
at such places on the line of travel, as will furnish security and
protection to our hardy adventurers against hostile tribes of
Indians inhabiting those extensive regions. Our laws should
also follow them, so modified as the circumstance of the case
may seem to require. Under the influence of our free system
of government, new republics are destined to spring up, at no
distant day, on the shores of the Pacific, similar in poficy and
in feeling to those existing on this side of the Rocky Mountains
and giving a wider and more extensive spread to the principles
of civil and refigious liberty.
In the bill which we have reported, it will be found that we
have responded not only to the opinions of Mr. Monroe and
Mr. Adams in relation to the estabfishment of military posts
but we have adopted the just and proper sentiments of the
present executive in reference to the increased settiement of
our population in that distant region. Our people have gone i
to Oregon, and we are only sending our laws after them. It
might be greater precision, however, to say that our laws had
preceded them ; that they had been always there, coeval with
our rights to the country; and that we are now only proposuig
to give them activity and force by government organization.
In doing so, we introduce no new poficy into the action of the
federal government. At the time of the establishment of our
national independence, our population was confined to a com
paratively narrow slip of country bordering on the Atiantic.
As fast, however, as our settlements extended into the West

TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON. 143
in sufficient numbers, new Territories were estabhshed. These,
at first, were confined to the Mississippi river for their common
western boundary. After the acquisition of Louisiana, the
same wise and necessary policy has been pursued, observing
limits, in several cases, but little short ofthe Rocky Mountains.
In the rapid march of our empire-republic, the time has now
arrived for the extension of the same policy beyond those
mountains, recognising the shores of the Pacific as the only
final terminus of our donunions.
The propriety of this extension is dependent, of course, on
the validity of the title of the United States to the territory
embraced in the bill. This question we were obfiged to meet
anterior to all action on the subject. In its investigations we
have looked into the most authentic histories of voyages and
discoveries on the northwestern coast of America. We have con
sulted the opinions of our most distinguished and best-informed
pubfic men, from Mr. Jefferson down to the present time. We
have carefully examined all the treaties among the several na
tions claiming to have an interest in the subject; not neglect
ing to profit by the reports made by Mr. Baylies to the 19th,
and Mr. Cushing to the 25th Congress, and by the several
reports and speeches of the late lamented Senator from Mis
souri, who had devoted so much of the labor of his great nund
to the investigation of this subject. The result of all this inves
tigation has been a thorough conviction that the United States
has a good and indefeasible title, as against any foreign power,
to the country extending east and west from the Rocky Moun
tains to the Pacific ocean ; and north and south from the limits
of Mexico, in latitude 42 degrees north, to those of Russia, in
latitude 54 degrees 40 minutes north.
The southern boundry was fixed by the treaty with Spain
in 1819, commonly called the Florida treaty. By that treaty
it is agreed that the boundary line between the possessions of
the two nations west of the Mississippi, after reaching the
river Arkansas, shall be, "following the course of the south
ern bank of the Arkansas to its source in lalitude 42 degrees;
and thence by that parallel of latitude to the South sea." In
1828 this line was confirmed by Mexico, as the successor of
Spain, in a treaty of linuts between herself and the United

144 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
States. Southern boundry is, then, fixed and certain. As to
the northern one, it was settled at 54 degrees and 40 minutes,
by a treaty between the United States and Russia, dated 17th
April, 1824, by which it was agreed &at there should not be
formed by the citizens of the United States, or under the
authority of the same, any establishment upon the northwest
coast of America, nor in any of the islands adjacent, to the
north of 54 degrees and 40 minutes of north latitude ; and, in
like manner, none by Russia or her subjects south of the same
parallel of latitude.
By virtue of these treaties, Russia oh the north, Mexico on
the South, and the United States on the east, are all agreed
and well satisfied as to the boundaries of the Oregon country.
Great Britain alone asserts or pretends any title to it, or any
part of it, adverse to that of the United States.
Before we enter upon any examination of her title, we re-
spectfutlly beg leave to submit our views on another question
presented to our consideration. It is contended that the pas
sage of tbe bill now reported would be inconsistent with the
actual relations ofthe two governments defined by the conven
tion of the 20th October, 1818. The 3d article is as foUows:
" Art. 3. It is agreed that any country that may be claimed by either party
on the northwestern coast of America, westward of the Stony mountains, shall
together with its harbors, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers
within the same, be free and open for the term of ten years from the date ot
the signature of the present convention, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects
of the two powers. It being well understood, that this agreement is not to
be construed to the prejudice of any claim which either of the two higii
contracting parties may have to any part of said country ; nor shall it be ta
ken to affect the claim of any other power or State to any part of said coun
try : the only object of the high contracting parties, in that respect, being to
prevent disputes and differences among themselves."
The provisions of this article were indefinitely extended by
the convention of 1827 — with, however, an agreement that it
should be competent for either, at any time after the 20th Oc
tober, 1828, on giving due notice of twelve months to the other
contracting party, to annul and abrogate said convention.
The first remark which the committee will submit on the pro
visions ofthe 3d article ofthe convention of 1718, is, that they
do not refer to the possession of the territory at all. That pos
session had always been in the United States until the war of

TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON, 145
1812. It was then lost by conquest ; but it was fully restored
by the treaty of peace, and the formal surrender of it to the
United States under that treaty. It was only the right of en
tering into the country — into its bays and harbors — for the mere
purposes of such trade and commerce as was then carried on
in that region, that was secured to the subjects of Great Britain.
The same rights might have been extended to any ofthe ports,
bays, and rivers ofthe Atlantic; but if extended in the pre
cise words of the convention of 1818, who would have thought
that Great Britain would have been admitted to the joint occu
pancy of Massachusetts, New York, Virginia, the Carolinas,
and the other States ofthe Union?
If the possession of the territory was in the United States at
the time of the convention of 1818 — a fact which no one has
ever attempted to deny — the provision of the 3d section can
only be regarded as a permission to the subjects of Great
Britain to participate with ours in the individual rights of trade
and commerce enjoyed by our own citizens within the territory.
The bill which is now reported does not eject them fromi the
country at all. It does not deprive them of the privilege of en
tering into the country, its bays and rivers ; not at all. But it
even guaranties a fuller and more perfect enjoyment of these
individual rights, under an organized and well- administered
system of laws. From extreme caution, and to exhibit towards
Great Britain the most scrupulous regard for all existing stip
ulations, which might be supposed to have an application to
the subject, the bill proposes a speedy surrender of all British
subjects who may be charged with any violation of our laws
to the nearest British authorities having jurisdiction over such
cases. The permission given to British subjects to participate
with our own citizens in the enjoyment, of personal or individual
rights within the territory, never can be considered; as circum
scribing the right of the United Sates to establish a proper
government for the regulation of all persons inhabiting the
country, of which she had the undisputed possession. In this
view, the provision for delivering up British subjects to their
nearest tribunals could not have been justly required; but
the same has been conceded by the committee, on the scrupu
lous principle just adverted to.
11

146 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
As to the twelve months' notice required to be given by the
convention of 1827, the committee do not regard that as at all
necessary, in order to open the way to such action as is con
templated by this bill. The committee do not know that, for
the purpose of organizing such a government as is now con
templated, it is at all important to annul or abrogate that
convention. That country is large, and there is evidently
room enough for the subjects and citizens of both countries,
in the exercise of all their enterprise in trade and commerce.
All that will be required of them is to conform to the laws, and
to respect the institutions, which we may estabfish. Doing
this, we shall never envy the equal participation in the bene
fits and advantages to be derived from a well organized system
of government. Any possible inconvenience arising from the
continuance of the convention of 1827, not now anticipated
by the committee, can, and doubtless will, be looked to by the
executive, who can at any time abrogate the same, by giving
the notice contemplated in it. The giving of that notice, be
ing a matter of treaty stipulation, belongs, perhaps, exclu
sively to the executive ; on whose province there is no occasion
and the committee have no inclination to intrude.
In connection with this branch of the subject, the commit
tee will advert to the fact, (as it is now understood to be,) that
negotiations are in progress between the United States and
Great Britain on the subject of this territory. They conceive
that this should make no difi'erence in the action of the com
mittee. They have to act on the subject as it is now presen
ted to them — not as it may be changed or altered hereafter, by
any future arrangements between the two countries. If the
United States have now the right to the Oregon country — if
they have now the sole and undisputed possession of it — ^if our
people have now permanent settlements in it, and every day
suffering for the want of properly-organized government to
protect the virtuous and restrain the vicious — we ought not to
withhold our action, under the possibihty of some alteration in
the relations of the two countries in that region, at some uncer
tain and indefinite period. That negotiation can still progress;
and any treaty stipulation inconsistent with oui- legislation,
will control it to the extent of such interference. No one, we

TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON, 147
believe, supposes that the pending negotiations can ever result
in the entire loss of the Oregon country. Enough will doubt
less remain of it, under any circumstances, to require the ex
tension of our laws in the manner now contemplated. If the
present negotiation relates (as the committee apprehend it
does) solely to the ascertainment and settlement of the north
ern boundary of the territory, they can anticipate, from no ex
amination which they have been able to make, any such loss of
country in that direction, as will at all affect the propriety of
the passage of the bill which is now presented to the House.
There is enough, doubtless, for that negotiation to act upon,
without resorting even to the supposition that any portion of
our territory south of latitude fifty-four degrees forty minutes
north may be lost. We propose the extension of our laws
fully up to that latitude, and will now submit the grounds on
which we maintain that the United States has a full and inde
feasible right and title to that point. We adopt as our own,
and submit to the house, the views of a former committee on
the question of title ; which we believe must carry conviction
to every disititerested and impartial mind.

February 4th.
Mr. A. V. Brown supposed it was necessary that he should
submit some few remarks in reply to the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts, [Mr. Adams.] The gentleman seemed to think that
some days ago he treated him with some degree of rudeness in
decfining to postpone this bill to a day that he proposed. In
reply to a suggestion at the time made by the gentleman, he
said that he had no disposition to drive this bill*through, but
that it was subject to the direction of the members of the
House, who could hasten or retard its progress as they pleased.
What was the reason the gentleman gave for wishing to post
pone it? Why, there was a book which very few had heard
of, that gave so much information on this subject that every
difficulty would be settled by getting it, and he wanted to delay

148

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

the action of the House till that book was procured. Why,
this book had been published years ago by order of the Senate,
and every member of the House could get it by application
for it. But it was said there was a new and enlarged edition
of it, which gave new lights which were not found in the first
edition, But who did not know that the reports made to the
House by Mr. Pendleton, and by Mr. Cushing, on this very
subject, contained all the information that could be given on
it? Indeed, either of them was far more valuable than Mr.
Greenhow's book, and could be had by any member that
desired, at a moment's warning. Again, the gentleman said
that he was satisfied that our title to the country was indispu
table. Why, then, wait for any body's book? The gentleman
quoted hini a^ saying that he considered it the duty of the
executive only to give the twelve month's notice to end the
joint occupancy, and that this House had nothing to do with
it. Now, the gentleman did not explain his (Mr. B.'s) position
Oorrectly. He did say that the executive was competent to
give the notice, without the action of the House, having more
information on the subject than they could possibly have; but
he did not say the House had no right to give the notice.
That was a point which the committee did not touch on in their
report, and which he did not make in his remarks of yesterday.
The gentleman from Massachusetts had read a portion of
the correspondence between the two countries at a former
period, and by examination of the report, part of which had
been read, it would be found that the committee had adverted
to the same correspondence, and incorporated in their report
the material part of that correspondence — or such as they
supposed would have a material influence on the question.
He wished the gentleman from Massacuhusetts had read a
little further than he did of that correspondence. On the 23d
page of the report the committee speak as follows :
" The injustice done to the United States by the double use which Great
Britain maltes of the Hudson's Bay Company, was strongly urged by,Mr.
Gallatin, in his conferences with the British ministers on the subject, in
1826 and 1827. The British ministers were not insensible to the force of
his objections. And the following passage of Mr. Gallatin's letter of De
cember 20th, 1826, is important in its hearing upon the question of what

TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON.

149

legislation Congress may adopt, without infringement of the treaty rela
tions of the two powers:
" ' The establishment of a distmct territorial government on the west
side of the Stony Mountains would also be objected to as an attempt to
exercise exclusive sovereignty. I observed that, although the Northwest
company might, from its being incorporated, from the habits of the men
they employed, and from having a monopoly with respect to trade, so far as
British subjects were concerned, carry on a species of governtnent without
the assistance of that of Great Britain, it was otherwise with tis. Our
population there would consist of several independent companies and indi
viduals. We had always been in the habit, in our most remote settle
ments, of carrying laws, courts, and justices of the peace with us. There
was an absolute necessity, on our part, to have some species of govern
ment. Without it, the Isind of sovereignty, or rather jurisdiction, which it
was intended to admit, could not be exercised on our part.' "
Now what follows, the gentleman from Massachusetts did
not read.
"It was suggested, and seemed to be acquiesced in, that the difficulty might
be obviated, provided that the erection of a new territory was not confined
exclusively to the territory west of the mountains ; that it should be defined
as embracing all the possessions of the United States west of a line that
should be at some distance from, and east of the Stony Mountains."
After commenting on these extracts, the honorable gentle
man proceeded. The bill at the last session was drawn in con
formity with these suggestions, and the jurisdiction of Iowa,
was proposed to be extended over the Territory of Oregon ;
but at the present session Iowa was to be admitted into the
Union, and to take her laws would be inconvenient, if not
inconsistent. What then, was the committee to do, with the
prospect of Iowa coming into the Union ? Why, they went
on to establish a distinct Territory, beginning at the summit
qf the Rocky M'buntains. In this they had departed from the
letter of the admissions made by the British minister ; but had
they departed from them in substance ? What had they done ?
He put the law of 1803 — and it was that law which had de
ceived so many gentleman on this floor — it was in that law
that they pretended to find an exemption of American citizens
from the operation of British laws. But in 1803 they knew
that American citizens were not there in any considerable
numbers ; there were Europeans there, and it was in their
favor that the exemptions were made. But in 1821 our claims

150 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
had ripened up, our citizens had gone there, and it became
necessary to make a new provision. What, then, did the Brit
ish Parliament do ? Extended the jurisdiction of the laws in
force in Canada to the Oregon, appointed justices of the peace,
who, being sent there, had jurisdiction in certain cases ; and
every m^n, whether an American citizen or a British subject,
was subject to the laws passed by the British Parliament. For
the higher offences, the party committing them was arrested
and taken to Canada for trial. He invited the attention of
gentlenien to an examination ofthe law of 1821, which exten
ded the laws of Great Britain over that country, to see if they
could find one solitaiy exception in favor of American citizens.
He hoped they would be able to do it ; he should rejoice at the
discovery if such a provision could be found ; but be could not
find it himself, and he questioned if anybody else could.
He now came to the question of what they proposed to do
by this bill. Was it anything which the British Parfiament
had not done by its legislation ? He maintained that they
proposed to do no more than the British Parfiament had done
— not one solitary thing. Was it said that the British Parha
ment had not sent governors to Oregon ? Be it so : but the
British governor was in Canada, and, by virtue of his office,
he was governor of Oregon, though not actually being in the
territory ; and when we appoint a governor and send him to
the place where his duties are to be performed, there was no
difference in point of principle. The English Judges, too, re
side in Canada, and ours would reside in Oregon. Was there
any actual difference in principle in that? Were we carrying
out rights beyond what Great Britain had done? Where and
in what respect, were we going one inch beyond the example
which England had set us ? And if we do not go beyond that
example, where is the cause for war? What provication do
we give for war ? Not the slightest ; and Great Britain could
not declare war against us for anything contained in this bill,
unless she sought a war for another purpose, and if that was
her desire, he would say, let her have it — in the first day and
hour that she desired it, let her have it. Since he had had a seat
on this floor, he had seen more than one day when he could
have said, let her have it. Who did not remember the case of

TERRIT0RL4L GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON. 151
the " Caroline," when British soldiers were rowed with muffled
oars to our shores, and cut loose an American steamer which
they sent blazing down the stream and over the cataract of the
Niagara, with all her unfortunate inmates ? The waters of the
Niagara have been long since closed over that ill-fated vessel,
but a cry for vengeance came up from the deep and troubled
waters in which the Caroline was engulfed. For the present,
however, he would let that pass. Why should England talk of
war? Was it because we take possession ofthe disputed
Territory just as she has done ? He could not believe that
such a result would ensue.
He then proceeded to say that he had never seen an Ameri
can Congress take hold of an American question with abetter
spirit than on this occasion, and therefore he had heard, with
pleasure, the suggestions which had been made, come from
what quarter they might. One suggestion offered and reasoned
upon by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, had convinced him,
and he adopted the suggestion, and had prepared an amend
ment precisely in accordance therewith. It had been said, you
are breaking the third article of the convention by passing
tiiis bill ; but this he denied. But again, it was urged, suppose
it should be so understood, and Great Britain should befieve
that they intended to do so. Well, to negative this, he had
prepared a provision reciting that third article, and then guar
ding against such a conclusion. Now he supposed that would
obviate all objections, but another gentleman rose and said,
oh ! you are taking a step that Great Britain never intended
nor contemplated. What was that? Oh! you are dividing
out and partitioning the land, regardless of the rights of
Great Britain. To this he replied, that they knew very well
that any grant of land must be subject to the future adjust
ment of the two countries ; but if they would rather have it so
expressed in the bill, be it so ; and to meet that he had pre
pared a provision. But how would that operate ? Were the
people who were settling south of the Columbia river ever to
be disturbed under any circumstances? Were we ever to
lose a foot of land there ? There was not an American citi
zen whose heart would not leap in his breast at the bare idea
of making any concessions south of the Columbia river. But

152 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
suppose our citizens should settle north ofthe Columbia river
beyond forty-nine degrees of north latitude, or fifty, fifty-one,
fifty-two, fifty-three, fifty-four, and beyond the line that might
be drawn whenever this question shall be settled by negotiation,
or by war if they pleased : the moment our title failed to the
part on which those citizens resided, they would drop down to
our undisputed territory and say they had lost their pre-emp
tion right ; and who would say that this government could not
at once give them another pre-emption right as good ? Did that
embarrass the case ? Not at all. Who was there, then, that
was not willing to give a pledge to every man that should go
to that country and cultivate it, of a liberal renewal of pre
emption right elsewhere, if he should be dispossessed by the
establishment of the British title to the land he might occupy?
Would that injure the British government ? Could she take
offlsnce at such a provision in our law ?
From these remarks the committee would perceive that he
had availed himself of every suggestion which had been made,
so as to make the bill acceptable to the House, as he thought
it would be acceptable to the British government. He came
next to speak of the suggestions made by the gentleman from
Massachusetts, which coming from him, were of great weight
and importance. The objection was, that they had started at
the wrong end, and that they should give the notice first. Now
he (Mr. B.) did not so understand it. If that were the cor
rect course, he would, with pleasure, follow in the wake of the
gentleman from Massachusetts ; but he did not so understand
it. Why did they propose to pass this measure? Simply be
cause, our people hafe gone to that country, and are there
without government, and we want to give them the benefit of
our laws. They had not fled from their country, nor from our
laws and institutions; they have carried all with them, and what
was now proposed, was, to give them the beneflts of our laws
in their urgent necessities. Some gentlemen said they had got
judges there already ; but they were laws for organized British
society, and they were British judges. They preferred our
laws to British laws. But it was said they had organized their
own society, and had framed their own laws. True, they had
for some government was necessary ; but nothing could induce

TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON. 153
them to adhere to their own organization, but our refusals to
meet their wants and necessities. But if they should first give
the notice of twelve months, they would be met with the plea
that the British settlers could not abandon the territory, be
cause they had contracts made and business unsettied. And
if they gave notice to quit, and the British did not then quit,
what would be the next step ? , Would they drive away the
foreign settlers ? In such a case would they not resist on the
ground of the necesssity to stand in self-defence. This bill,
however, avoided the evils of a different course, and gave to
American citizens a government and the protection of laws
which the British settlers enjoyed.
The honorable gentleman recapitulated some of the pro
visions of this bill for the trial of persons guilty of crimes,. to
show their Uberality; and that they must prove unexceptiona
ble to Great Britain. He said he was careful that they should
do nothing wrong; and then he could bid any power defiance.
He confessed that he was afraid of an unjust war with Eng
land or any other nation ; but when we had justice on our
sidcj he would quail before no power on this globe ; and this
would account for the zeal which he felt on this and on the
Texas question too. He wanted Texas because England
wanted it. Great Britain did not desire any increase of our
power which would make us more formidable to the nations
of the earth. The stars of our republic shone so bright that
they have attracted the envy of foreign nations : the crowned
heads of Europe looked upon our prosperity with amazement ;
for they knew the impression which our example produced on
their own population, and hence they were desirous to destroy
the influence of our example.
He wanted Oregon for the same purpose ; he wanted our
population to spread from ocean to ocean — from the Aroos
took on the north to the Rio Del Norte on the South — a mag-
niflcent empire which should strike terror and dismay to the
enemies of our institutions, and of republican forms of gov
ernment. Give us this bin, (said Mr. B.,) guarded cautiously
benevolently guarded, as it was ; give us Texas, and we will
have an empire before us which will fill every American heart
with pride and with joy.

SPEECH,
In the House of Representative, March 17, 1840 — On the Resolu
tion reported from the Committee of Elections by Mr. Camp
bell, their chairman, proposing to print all the testimony con
nected with the Neiu Jersey contested election, and the amend
ment of Mr. Garland, of Louisiana, to print other testimony
referred to that committee, subsequent to its report :

Mr. Brown desired that the resolution might be read, on
which this exciting and extraordinary debate had been going
on. He desired it, that the House might be brought back to
the precise character of the proposition before it — not one
touching the merits ofthe controversey ; not one'involvingthe
truth of the facts set forth in the report, nor the action of the
House, in admitting five of these gentlemen to temporary
membership on this floor. All these things have passed by —
the report has been made — it has been sanctioned by the
House, and the five gentlemen are now here present in their
seats. All the testimony on which these proceedings have
taken place, has been reported to the House, and the commit
tee now stand here desiring and insisting that it should be prin
ted. But these papers, now desired to be also printed, were not
considered by the committee, because they were never before
them in the form of evidence. Not one solitary member ever
saw the inside of that package until after the report was made.
It was sealed up from afi inspection, and therefore constituted
no part of the foundation of this report. Why then should it
be printed with it, as a part of it, when in truth and fact it

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. 155
was never opened here, nor referred to the committee, until
after its report had been made ? We desire all the testimony
before the committee, and on whicbthe report was founded, to
be printed and sent out with it, in order that the people of this
country may be able to see and determine whether the com
mittee and this House have done right in the New Jersey
case. To print these depositions, which came in after the re
port, can shed no fight on the propriety of what has been done.
They are now before the committee, and should continue there
until the remaining depositions shall arrive, and the whole
case come on for final hearing on the ultimate rights of the
party. They will then be printed in connection with the others,
and go to the world as a part of the New Jersey case, and re
ceive that attention which they may be found to deserve.
But it is useless to dwell on this point ; for it is evident to
every one that the proposition is submitted only for the pur
pose of furnishing an occasion to assail the conduct of the
majority of the committee who made the report, and of the
House by whom it was confirmed. Sir, it is now notoriously
a question of crimination. Having failed to get in the five
claimants commissioned by the Governor, and having further
failed in excluding the five who actually received the majority
of the votes, gentiemen turn round, in the rage and fury of
their disappointment, and seek to criminate the conduct of all
those by whom their purposes have been frustrated. Proud in
the consciousness of having done right, as one member ofthe
committee, I stood ready to meet any and every charge that
might be preferred against me, or any of the honorable gen
tlemen who had concurred in making this report. I expected
those charges, if made at all, would surely be preferred by
members of the committee— by those whose situation enabled
them to form an opinion worth submitting to the American
people. Judge, then, Mr. Speaker, my surprise, when I saw
the gentieman from Maryland suddenly thrust himself into
this controversy, which I had considered as a sort of " family
affair," and gravely prefer a long list of charges against the
majority of the committee. I do not deny the gentleman's
right to do so, nor do I question the sincerity of his declara
tion, that, in his opinion, there had been something wrong in

156 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
the action of the committee. But, sir, I now admonish him in
advance not to be too precipate in his conclusions — his situ
ation has not been favorable to a correct knowledge of the
facts ; and I pledge myself now here, to the House, and the
nation, that he has not preferred one solitary charge that can
not be triumphantly refuted.
The gentleman told us that he had looked into our journals,
but was constrained to admit that he had only done so slightly.
Now, sir, this very admission ought to have suggested to him
to have been more sparing in his denunciations. What did
the gentleman think he could examine the contents of this
huge volume in a single night ? That he could comprehend
the profound legal learning of the gentleman from New York,
the skillful special pleading of the gentleman from Alabama,
and the willy tact of him from Virginia, on so slight and so
hasty an inspection ? The gentleman can have no sort of
idea of the profound mysteries of this new and interesting
work. With no better opportunity than this to obtain correct infor
mation, the gentleman selected one portion of the journal here,
and another there — a fragment from one place, and a scrap
from another, and drawing his conclusions from such disjointed
premises, proclaims to the country " that there was something
wrong in the committee room." Sir, I expect there was some
thing wrong in that committee room— something wrong in this
House — something wrong before the Governor and Privy Coun
cil of New Jersey. But I stand here to say, after a fuU ex
amination of this case, that that wrong is not on the side of
those who have maintained the rights of the people of ISSew
Jersey against its Governor and Council.
Let it be remembered that no gentleman has ventured to
dispute the great and controlling fact which constitutes the
sum and substance of this report, to wit : who received the
greatest number of votes cast in the New Jersey election. No
man has, because no man could deny it. The parties holding
the Governor's commission, so far from denying that their com
petitors did receive the majority of votes, in their written
pleadings have substantiafiy admitted it. They have so plain
ly admitted it, that the committee need not have called a sin-

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. 157
gle witness in the case ; they need not have taken a solitary
deposition; but, wafldng into this haU, might have laid that
written admission on your table, and said to you : " Behold
the fact which you required us to ascertain !" In one hour
after the pleadings of the parties were closed, the committee
might have made the report which they have made, and the
House have taken the very action they have taken, on the
parties' own admission : If it be asked why such a report was
not made sooner, under such circumstances, my answer is,
that those who are now so much abused as an unjust and over
bearing majority, never became a majority until the orders of
this House had been given, commanding this report to be
made. Until then we were in a minority, incapable of con
trolling anything. Our propositions were voted down or stricken
out, or so altered and amended as to make us finally repudiate
them ourselves. This was effected by the chairman generally
voting and acting with the other party on all questions involv
ing a report on the state and condition of the poll-books. At
length, however, the instructions of the House were given — •
the chairman yielded obedience to them, and we stood released
from that thraldom to which we had been so long subjected.
[Here the morning hour having expired, the House went into Com
mittee of the Whole on the Treasury Note hill.]

March 18th.
Mr. Brown of Tennessee resumed. I wiU now proceed, in
continuation of the remarks began on yesterday. I then com
plained, and yet think I had a right to complain, that the pro
ceedings of the committee had been so harshly and unjustly
condemned by the honorable gentleman from Maryland. It
did seem to me, that when this controversy had been narrowed
down to the mere crimination of the majority whilst in the com
mittee room, that the gentieman should have left it to be

158 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
settled by the members of the committee. I advert to this
topic again, in order to assure the gentleman that I refer the
injustice he has done, which / know he has done to the ma
jority, more to the want of personal information than to any dis
position to send forth to the world a groundless imputation of
our motives and conduct. But 1 may be mistaken as to the ex
tent ofthe gentleman's information. He may have learned from
others, in whom he confides, much more than he could find
out from his necessarily slight and superficial inspection of our
journals. However this may be, the gentleman day after day,
indulged in a freedom and boldness of crimination, that demands
a prompt and decisive refutation. Scattered, as they were,
through a very long speech, I feared at one time, that I should
not be able to collect and arrange them. But he was kind
enough yesterday to recapitulate, and to condense them into a
small compass.
His first charge was, that the committee had failed to dis
charge its duties, as pointed out by the standing rules of the
House giving existence to the committee. The rule declares :
" That it shall be the duty of the Committee of Elections to examine
and report upon the certificates of election, or other credentials, of mem
bers returned to serve in this House."
Now I desire to know whether the gentleman from Mary
land did mean to make the impression on this House, that the
committee had not performed that portion of its duty ; that
we had not examined the commissions, and decided on them.
If these were the gentleman's objections to our proceedings, it
was easy to show that he was mistaken.
[Mr. Jenifer here explained.]
If I understand the gentleman's explanations, I have not
misapprehended his meaning. I refer him to the resolution
under which this case was referred to the committee. That
goes beyond tbe standing rules, and requires us to ascertain
and report who were entitled to occupy the five vacant seats
from the State of New Jersey. This opened up the whole
question : the commissions, the returns, the poll books ; in fact
every thing on which the right of membership depended.
Now, sir, it has been asserted here, and the pubfic press has
spread it aU over this country that the committee paid but lit-

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION.

159

tie or no attention to the Governor's commissions ; that they
were treated with no respect ; regarded as amounting to no sort
of evidence in the case whatever. This bold and reckless as
sertion has no doubt gone where no refutation of mine can
ever overtake it. But, as far as I am able, I will send the
denial after it. I will send the journal, too, so soon as it shall
be printed, beneath whose withering rebuke such assertions
cannot stand. Every member of that committee must know,
and does know, that the credentials occupied a large portion
of our attention, and were the subject of anxious and serious
consideration. I refer to page 79 of that journal :
" Whereupon Mr. Botts moved the following resolution :
" Resolved, That this committee will now proceed to decide on the legal
ity and validity of the commissions granted by the governor of New Jersey."
It being the first question presented and the whole testimony
relating to that branch of the subject having been read. The
same fact of these commissions having been read and con
sidered is indelibly engraved on other pages of this book, and
leaves no ground for cavil or dispute. I shall have frequent
occasion to refer to this book, and I must beg pardon of the
gentleman from Virginia in advance, if I should happen to
designate it as " Botts' journal." I can hardly open it any
where, without coming across his name, standing in bold relief,
in almost perpetual conspicuosity. Besides this, the gentleman
was admittedly the chief architect of this large superstructure;
I mean the plainer and more substantial (if any be substantial)
parts of the work. The ornamental parts were executed by
the gentleman from New York and Alabama, with the excep
tion of a little fretwork by the gentleman from Connecticut.
On the authority of this record, then, I aver that the commis
sions of the Governor were read— that they were considered —
were argued at great length by the parties, and a distinct vote
taken on their validity and sufficiency. Yet, sir, the country has
been told, often told, directly the reverse. The majority of
this committee, at this very moment, stand arraigned at the bar
of public opinion, for having given to the commissions no at
tention, and for having treated with silent indifference, if not
contempt, the broad seal of one of the old and gallant thirteen

160 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
States of the Union. On what evidence have they been ar
raigned ? On none. Bold assertion was substituted for evi
dence, and reckless invective suppfiedthe place even of pro
bability or presumption. By what evidence is the charge dis
proved? By this record, and by the personal knowledge of
every member of the committee.
The gentieman from Virginia, from the beginning, had.enter-
tained the opinion that nothing but the commissions couM
entitle the gentlemen to their seats. He had avowed and en
forced that opinion in an elaborate argument on this fioor, be
fore the committee had ever sat upon, the case. Was it likely,
therefore, that he would permit the questions growing out of
those commissions to lie neglected and unnoticed before the
committee? So far from it, sir, the supremacy of the commis
sions seemed to fill all his thoughts ; it was the beginnlAg and
the end of his whole judgment in the case.
Mr. Speaker, I come now to the second charge preferred by
the gentleman from Maryland against the majority of the com
mittee. He says that the committee passed a resolution that
it would not proceed to determine the question of ultimate
right between these parties until the second Monday in April,
and that this report is in violation of that resolution. Well,
sir, the resolution says that the committee would not decide
on the question of ultimate or final right, until the time desig
nated. Have we decided on such right? Have we reported
on it ? Not at all. We have only decided and reported, on
the right of present occupancy of the contested seats, whUst
the inquiry as to the. ultimate right was going on. The ultimate
right depended on the purgation of the poUs. In New
Jersey the vote is given by geaeral ticket ; the whole. State
would have to be ransacked in search of illegal votes, which
would necessarily require much time. The question, therefore,
arose who should be the sitting members during the period
allowed for collecting this testimony ? The report made only
covers that point of present occupancy, and has no reference
to the ultimate rights of the parties at all. Where, then, is
the violation of this resolve of the committee ? The gentie
man should have spared his refiections on the committee on
another ground. He should have remembered that even this

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. 161
report on the present occupancy of the seats was not made un
tfl we received the express and peremptory orders of this
House. When these were given, afi that was left to us was
^ the simple duty of obedience. Wfll the gentieman censure us
for that ? Would he have had us to set up our own resolves
of a prior date, in open defiance of the resolves and commands
of this House ? Surely the gentieman could not have matured
this objection in his own taiind before he preferred it against
the committee. But he evidently preferred this only as induce
ment to his third and most objectionable and groundless charge
of all. He says that the committee having adopted that reso
lution and sent off" the claimants in search of their testimony,
it was a violation of its faith and solemn pledges to have made
this report without giving them notice. True, he attempts to
draw a distinction in favor of the committee, by regarding it
only as accessory, whilst he looks upon the House as the
principal in the perpetration of this foul deed of violated faith.
Sir, I reject the distinction. If the charge were true, I should
consider the magnitude of the offence as constituting all prin
cipals concerned in its commission. But, sir, is that charge
true ? The gentleman preferred it in a tone and manner so
excited, that he found it necessary to explain or apologize to
Ahe House for it. He illustrated his opinion of the conduct of
the committee and the House, by referring to his frequent
agreements to pair off with members of this House, until a
specified time, and declared that he should have considered
himself dishonored by a violation of any such pledge or agree
ment. All this, sir, was reiterated through a speech of several
days' length — reporters and letter writers have sent the
charges to the public press, and that has distributed them
to every portion of this continent. Denunciation and asser
tion may achieve a temporary triumph over truth and evidence.
But it will be only a temporary one. This record shall go
forth to the world. It shall follow up these high charges of the
gentleman from Maryland, and show to the American people
how destitute of foundation they are. I refer to page 127,
where it appears that the committee reserved the right to make
a prefiminary report, whenever they might think proper to do
so. To page 129, where a proposition to that effect was made
12

162 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
by Mr. Medill. To page 147, where another was made by Mr.
Fisher. To page 138, which shows that the parties on both
sides were then present, and heard the discussions, and wit
nessed the action of the committee on the proposition. How,
then, can it be said or pretended that they left the city without
notice that a preliminary report was contemplated? They
knew that the right to make such a report had been always
reserved. They knew that every attempt to take away that
right had been defeated. They knew that making of such a
report would not interfere with their preparations on the ques
tion of ultimate right. They knew that they would have to go
home to take the balance of their testimony, whether such a
report was made or not. They knew all this. I say they knew
more. They knew that a resolution instructing the committee
to make such a report, had been introduced by Mr. Turney of
Tennessee, and was then actually pending before the House.
These facts are all recorded, and yet it is pretended that they
retired to New Jersey in conscious security, confiding in the
honor and integrity of the committee, and of this House !
They were deceived and taken by surprise ! suprise about
what? surprised by a report, declaring that their opponents
had received a higher number of votes than themselves in the
New Jersey election? That was impossible, for they had
never denied the fact; they had substantially admitted, it.
The records of New Jersey demonstrated it beyond all possi
bility of denial.
Sir, I have no patience for a further exposure of this ground
less charge of broken pledges and violated faith. I pass t»
another charge, equally unmerited and equally unfounded.
We are charged with making our report with unjust precipita
tion, without ever having examined the testimony referred to
us by the House. That, in so doing, the committee had prac
tised a fraud on this House, and the nation, who had a right
to expect that we had examined all the testimony in the case;
others have made the same imputation on the proceedings of
the committee, and I will, therefore, appeal again " to the law
and the testimony;" to the gentieman's (from Virginia)
own book; to that favorite record, which he watched and
guarded with more care than all the other members of the

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. 163
committee beside. The testimony was gone over twice. The
first time to read the evidence, to hear the parties on it, and to
note down the objections made by them. This may be all
seen on the journal, from page 70 to page 89. The second
time it was gone over, was for the purpose of deciding on the
various points made by the parties, touching the admissibility
and competency of the evidence in the case. Our proceedings
for this purpose may be seen from page 96 to 126. The tes
timony was examined under the following resolution :
"Resolved, That we will now take up the testimony which has been re
ferred to this committee in the New Jersey case." It was taken up with
out any limitation or qualified purpose whatsoever. On page 70, we find
this entry : « And thereupon the committee proceeded to the hearing ofthe
testimony" and " the certificates ofthe Governor of New Jersey were read."
Again on page 76, " And the following documents being the same that
were referred, &c., were severally taken up and read." On page 79, may be
found the following entry :
" Mr. Botts moved the foUowing resolution :
"Resolved, That this committee will now proceed to decide on the legality
and validity of the commissions granted, &c., it being the first question
presented, and the whole testimony relating to that branch of the subiect
having been read."
On page 81: "The paper No. 13, was then taken up; and
page 73 : « And thereupon paper No. 13 was read," This
same paper, No. 13, relating to the polls at South Amboy was
again taken up and rejected, Mr. Botts only, of all the commit
tee, voting for it. It is further shown by the journals « that
tiieir being no further testimony before the committee, Mr
Botts moved the foUowing resolution, &c." The different
portions of testimony were designated by numbers, and the re
cord shows inrelation to every one of them, ^that they were
read. In gomg over the testimony the second time, we heard
the parties on the various objections made and noted doiVn the
first time, and decided whether each number was admissible
or competent testimony. Those depositions which were rejected
were laid aside, the parties avowing that they desired and in
tended to take them over again.
It is on this ground that gentiemen on tiie other side have
taUen mto a great error. They have contended that the com
mittee had never heard or considered the testimony, except a&

164 CONlJRESSIONAIi SPEECHES.
it relates to the question of competency. I have already read
to the House the resolution under which it was taken up and
considered. It contained no limitation of purpose whatsoever.
On the contrary, an attempt was made and strenuously insisted
on, that it should be taken up and considered for that pm-
pose only ; but the fimitation was stricken out and the inquiy
gone into unrestricted. But it seems that its sufficiency was
never passed upon by the committee in pubfic vote, so as to
constitute a hearing or consideration of the testimony in re
ference to the making up of a report. Was such a thing ever
heard of in a committee room as an abstract question of suf
ficiency ? Sufficiency for what ? You could never determine
that, until a distinct action on the case was proposed, and then
each member would decide for himself, whether the testimony
was sufficient to sustain such a proposition. Look to analogies
from the proceedings of our courts of justice. Our Judges
and Chancellors decide and pass on all questions of the com
petency or admisibility of evidence, raised by counsel in the
progress of a cause, but you can never learn their opinions on
its sufficiency until they pronounce their judgment or decree in
the case. That judgment or decree will of course be accord
ing to their opinions of the sufficiency ofthe testimony to sus
tain it ; but no separate or distinct judgment is passed upon
it. It is a silent process of the mind, unannounced, and only
to be inferred from the nature of the decision made. Tiie
verdict of a jury on the issue of guilty or not guUty, evinces
the opiaiont ofthe jury of the sufficiency or insufficiency ofthe
evidence ; but it is only in the act of rendering that Verdict,
that a jury could be called on or considered as expressing
such opinions. So, sir, of the proceedings of this committee.
This testimony having been taken up without restriction-
having been heard as competent in the case, would be treas
ured up in each member's mind until some report or other
action on it was caUed for, and then each would decide (by a
silent process of his own mind) for himself, whether the evi
dence was sufficient to sustain and justify such report or other
action. Thus it is, sir, in the face of this analogy from the
practice of the courts and against the very reason and nature
pf the case, gentlemen on the other side have often exclaimed,

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. 1 65
Where is the evidence thatthe sw^ciency of this testimony was
ever examined and decided by the committee ? My answer is
stiU given from this record : The vote on the following resolu
tion was a decision on the sufficiency of the testimony.
« Mr. Brown introduced the foUowing :
" Resolved, That the report just read be adopted."
The vote on this resolution was a test of every member's
opinion of the sufficiency of the evidence ; and the first test
that could have been appUed, without a gross violation of all
parliamentary and judical practice.
[The morning hour having expired, the House went into Committee
of the Whole on the Treasury Note bill.}

March 19th.
Mr. Brown of Tennessee resumed as follows :
At the close of my remarks on yesterday I thought that I
had sufficiently refuted the charge preferred against us of not
having examined the evidence referred to us by this House.
The gentleman from Maryland now informs me that his chief
complaint was and yet is that we did not open and examine
the depositions now generally known "as the mysterious
package." I thank the gentleman for any suggestion calculated
to abbreviate our defence and explanations of this report.
I think I can satisfy any candid and impartial mind, that said
package was never before the committee ; that it was never
there as evidence ; never there in any form or manner, so as
to enable us to act on its contents. I remember well when it
made its first appearance in the committee room : it was on
the day when the committee assembled for the purpose of re
ceiving the report which the chairman had been directed to
prepare, in obedience to the orders of the House. We had
assembled for that special and only purpose. True, we might

166 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
have met there at any rate. We had met there so often, that
it is very likely that the mere force of habit might have taken us
there again. However this may be, when we were assembled,
it was not for the purpose of re-opening the case, or of taking
any new order in it, but simply to ascertain whether the chab-
man had prepared the report, agreeably to the directions of
the committee, given on the Saturday previous. When so as
sembled, and for such purpose only, this mysterious package
made its appearance. It was brought there by the gentieman
from Connecticut. It was laid by him on the table at which
the chairman was sitting. After permitting it to lie there for
some time, the gentleman said something that called the at
tention of the chairman to it. It was found to be a sealed
package, directed to the Speaker of the House, but to the care
of the chairman of the committee, and endorsed, " Deposi
tions in the New Jersey case." Mr. Smith, moved, informally,
(not being in writing,) that the chairman should open the pack-
a.ge. He replied that the package was not directed to him,
but to the Speaker, and he did not feel at liberty to break open
its seals, but it being directed to his care, he would dehver it
to the Speaker as soon as his convenience would admit of it,
The motion, or proposition, not being in writing, no vote ofthe
committee was taking on it. The chairman then read his re
port, and I moved that it should be adopted ; and pending
that motion, the gentleman from Connecticut moved that the
package should be sent to the Speaker, to be by him opened,
and an order of reference be obtained from the House. During
aU this time, our proceedings were to stand suspended. It
might be several days before the order could be obtained from
the House, and if debate happened to spring upon it, which
was very probable, it might even be weeks before it was ob
tained ; and the instructions of the House to us, to make a
report forthwith, to be entirely disregarded. The committee
refused to submit to any further delays ; they confirmed there-
port, and ordered it to be submitted to the House. It is for
this they have been so often and so severely censured by gen-
tlemen in the course of this debate. It is now said that if the
committee had examined this package, it would have estab
hshed a number of illegal votes sufficient to have prevented at

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION, 1 67
least one of these gentlemen from being admitted to his seat.
Sir, who ever pretended that this package related to illegal
votes, untU we heard it in debate ? Did the gentleman from
Connecticut, who presented it, say that it related to illegal
votes? Did he ever once hint such an idea before the com
mittee ? Not at aU. There, we were told on the face of his
own resolution, that it related to the manner of holding the poll
at South Amboy ; here we are informed that it related to the
reception of iUegal votes. Why this strange discrepancy
between the information given then, and the complaints made
now? Sfr, I think- 1 can tell you why.
On the question as to the manner of holding the South
Amboy poUs, gentlemen do not desire to make too prominent
an issue. These objections stand on too narrow and techni
cal a foundation. They therefore fiy off in pursuit of a new
idea — a mere after-thought — which either never occurred to
themselves, or was suppressed by them at the time this decis
ion was made. Let it be remembered, Mr. Speaker, that this
sealed package was no part of the old testimony. It had
been recently taken, whilst both parties were engaged in taking
testimony in New Jersey. They had been allowed until the
second Monday in April for that purpose. When that time
should expire, they were expected to return to this city, bring
ing with them the depositions which they had taken. Now, sir,
why was it that this particular deposition had strayed off from
the others, and been hurried to this city by itself? Why had
it not been sent to the Speaker of the House, to whom it was
directed, and as it is expressly required to be by the laws of
New Jersey. I have those laws now before me, and they ex
pressly require that they should have been sent to the Speaker.
It was not sent by the pubfic mail. When and by whom it
had been sealed did not appear, and there were no endorse
ments to guard its alteration. What is required generally in
our courts of law and equity in similar cases ? The commis
sioner must certify that the deposition was sealed up without
having been out of his possession, and without alteration.
If sent by private conveyance the person conveying it must
certify. on oath that he received it from the commissioner, and
that the same has been unaltered whilst in his possession.

168 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
The committee did not require all these things to be complied
wiih.. Indeed, they considered that they had nothing to do
with all these precautions, because the House, it was to be
supposed, would guard all these points before they opened
and referred all such papers to the committee. But, sir many
of the committee did look with suspicion on this package. It
had not come through accustomed channels, and it might be
to avoid the necessary scrutiny, that it had sought to qome
into the committee, through channels unknown to the laws of
New Jersey, and unsanctioned by parliamentary practice.
I am free, however, to state, that I never permitted these
suspicions to fasten on the gentleman from Connecticut per
sonally, for having brought them from his lodging to the com
mittee room for delivery to the chairman, to whose care they
were directed. But, sir, they did fasten on the package itself
— on its abrupt and precipitate transmission to this city, in ad
vance of all the other depositions, either then or in the course
of being taken in the State of New Jersey. These suspicious
circumstances, as I regard them, no doubt influenced my mind
to some degree, in refusing to suspend our obedience to the
orders of the House, and to await the opening and reference
of the package. But I put that refusal on stiU higher ground.
I maintain that that package was never before us in such con
dition as to allow official action. It was never before us as a
committee. Nothing could be properly so, but what had been
sent through the House and by the House. We had, therefore,
no right to take action on the paper. That action depended
solely on the chairman, into whose hands it came, which the
committee had no right to accelerate or retard, by any order
on the subject. The gentleman from Maryland, however, as
sumes the ground that the chairman had the right to break
the seal, and to open the package, without presentation to the
Speaker or any order of the House. The Speaker, however,
was of a diflferent opinion. Every member of the committee
present thought differently, except the gentiemen from New
York and Connecticut. The gentieman from Alabama has
no recoUection of hearing the proposition made, thatthe chair
man should open it ; but, at the same time, he tells you if he

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. 169
had heard it, he would not have sanctioned the idea for one
moment. [Mr. Crabb here rose and submitted some remarks of explanation.]
Mr. Brown was glad that the gentleman from Alabama
had submitted his remarks : he wanted his position to be per
fectly understood, for it was one on which he did not intend to
bestow the slightest censure.
On the question of sending this package to the Speaker, and
waiting for its reference and return, only two of the minority
present voted for it, the gentleman from Alabama not being
one of them.
[Mr. Ceabb again explained, and said that his vote against sending it,
was owing to certain recitals on the resolution of the gentleman from Con
necticut, which he did not think correct in point of fact.]
Mr. Brown then read the resolution, and the vote taken on
it, and said that he meant to furnish the House with the pre
cise facts as they had existed, but did not doubt the motive
which the gentleman had stated, controlled his vote on that
occasion. Mr. Speaker, I have been much astonished at the opinions
which the gentlemen from Maryland advanced on this part
of the case. I understand he is a distinguished member ofthe
bar, and it is with extreme reluctance that I would undertake
to question any of his legal opinions. StiU I beg leave to sub
mit to him a few, very few, cases for his solution. Suppose an
ordinary letter to be dfrected to A. B. to the care of C. D.; or
suppose a letter to be written to the president of the Bank of
Maryland, to the care of E. F., one of its stopkholders or di
rectors; or to the clerk and master in chancery at A., to the
care of the sheriff attendant on the court. Now does the gentle
man mean to advance the opinion, that in all these eases, the
persons to whose care they were directed could lawfully break
the seals, and publish their contents ? The gentleman's argu
ment seemed to affirm that they could, and opens up to my
mind new principles of law, which have heretofore eluded my
research. I put to the gentleman, in becoming deference, another ques
tion; whether, if he be right on the general principles of the

170 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
science, he may not possibly be mistaken in his opinions on
this point, under the special provisions of the law of New
Jersey. That law, as I have before remarked, expressly re
quires these depositions to be addressed and forwarded to the
Speaker of the House of Representatives. How comes it,
then, that any one else can interrupt them — stop their progress
towards the Speaker, to whom they are required to go — break
open the seals, make use of their contents, and still invoke the
law to sanctify and approve the deed ? Sir, aU this may be so,
but I must be permitted to say that it chaUenges a very high
order of credulity to believe it. At all events, the committee
did not understand either the general law or the statute of
New Jersey in that way. They found this package not in your
hands, but in the hands of the gentleman from Connecticut ;
not on your table, but on theirs ; not coming dfrect by the
public mail, but wandering about first in one man's hands,
and then in another's, covered by another envelope, which is
torn away from it ; and having, in fact, none of those safe
guards which the law throws around depositions in analogous
cases. Under these circumstances, the committee determined
to have nothing to do with the package for the present, but to
let it reach its ultimate destination, the Speaker's hands, by
him to be laid before the House, and by the House be referred
to the committee, in due and regular form. It is now before
us, and will take its place with the other depositions ; will be
considered when they are considered ; and be allowed its due
weight in the final report.
Thus far, Mr. Speaker, most of what I have said has been in
justification of the conduct of the committee. I wish now to
say something in vindication of the action of the House in
requiring this report to be made. The very terms ofthe reso
lution refisrring this case to the committee, show that it was the
intention of the House not to leave New Jersey long without
her full representation on this fioor. Present occupancy of
her vacant seats until the final rights of the parties could be
ascertained, was evidently intended. It was expected that a
report on the present right could have been made in a few days,
or weeks, at farthest. This right depended either on the com
missions or the poll books, which, it was thought by the House,

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION, 171
could soon be determined. The final right depended on the
purgation of the polls in all the townships of the State ; and it
was known that it would take much time and trouble to perform
it. These were the known views of the House. Well, sir, the
case had been before us for about two months, instead of as
many weeks. Questions of great importance to the country
were daily arising, and New Jersey stood deprived of her full
number of Representatives in this hall. The Governor of that
State seized on the occasion to appeal to the other States of the
Union. The impression was spreading far and wide, that too
much delay was taking place in the investigation. During all
this time, not one word was heard from the committee. True,
we were seen reparing early and retiring late from the scene of
our labors. Night after night the burning lamps of our com
mittee room attested our industry and devotion to business ;
but stUl no signs or tokens of a report being made could be dis
covered. Almost every member was asking us when ?
The vacant and unoccupied seats of New Jersey as we
passed seemed ready to ask us when ? The country at
large was loudly addressing to us the same question.
But stiU no solitary response could be obtained. Even now
that we have reported, I can often detect a sort of inquisitive
curiosity to know what we have been about during all this
time. I will tell you, sir. We have been making this great
book — I beg pardon for having almost said " Bott's book" — on
the commissions of the Governor; on the records of his pro
ceedings ; in malting a computation of the votes on the certifi
cate of the Secretary of State, and the written pleadings cf
the party. We could and ought to have made this report in
one-fourth part of that time, which we have wasted on tech
nical trifles, and in a poor, miserable, and (as I fear the coun
try will say) contemptible system of special pleading.
It was after such delays as this, and in the midst of the uni
versal complaint of that delay which I have mentioned, that
my honorable colleague, Mr. Cave Johnson, submitted his res
olution of instructions to report forthwith who received the
greatest number of votes at the election of New Jersey, and
all the evidence appertaining to that fact. Sir, I shall never
forget the sensations evidently produced on a portion of the

172

CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.

committee by the introduction of that resolution. The pride
of the gentleman from Alabama, and of the gentleman from
New York revolted at the word "forthwith!" They revolted
at the very idea of instant compulsion. The gentleman from
Connecticut did not care so much about the word " forthwith ;"
but seemed to shrink with horror from the intrusion of the
chairman of Military Affairs! In touching and eloquent
strains, he implored protection from that man of war " with
glittering helmet, and with nodding plume !" That whole de
bate went off" on a collateral and false issue, and was evidently
intended to direct the public mind away from the true merits of
the proposition. It was said to be indelicate, and even insul
ting to the committee, to call on them for a report, which the
House and the country had been expecting for many weeks, ,
with breathless anxiety ! The House was, however, resolved
to wait no longer, and after amending, adopted the resolution.
This amendment consisted in the insertion of the word " law
ful," before the word "votes." It was proposed by the gentle
man from New York, [Mr. Fillmore,] who was in full practice
on similar motions in the committee room. There, whenever
it was proposed to ascertain " who received the greatest num
ber of votes polled at the New Jersey election," so as to be able
to report that fact to the House, the gentleman, or some other
member of the minority, would move to insert the word lawful,
so as to throw us off from the poll books as they stood at the
close of the election, into the purgation of the poUs. They
stood on the commissions as the foundation of right to a seat.
We stood on the poll books that conti-adicted the commissions,
and clearly showed that five other persons received the votes
of the majority. Now, sir, the fair mode of proceeding would
have been to take a vote on the validity and sufficiency of the
commissions, and if the majority ofthe committee ofthe House
was found in favor of Messrs. Aycrigg and Co. to place them
in their seats ; and if no such majority was found, then, to
have taken a vote on the vafidity and sufficiency of the poU
books, and to have placed Messrs. Dickerson, Vroom, etc., in
their seats, if a majority was found in their favor, I repeat, sfr,
would have been the fair, plainsailing mode of proceeding.
But it has been denied to us throughout this whole proceeding.

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION.

173

We have been, from time to time, forced off" from an examina
tion and report on the poU books, showing in fact who were
elected by the people, and compelled to report on presumptions,
instead oi facts, or give the commissioned gentleman another
chance, by searching over the State of New Jersey for iUegal
votes. Sir, the motion made here was a part of the same sys
tem. But the gentieman did not remember that the word
lawful could have none of its magic influence on this resolu
tion, where there were so many other expressions to command
and control it. We were ordered to reportforthwith, but not so
as to stop or delay our investigations into the ballot box. So long
as these expressions continued in the resolutions of instruction,
the word lawful could be made to apply only to those votes
cast in the election, which the law and the rules of evidence
declare lawful, until the contrary be shown by evidence. In
his zeal and precipancy, and mislead by the effect of the same
word in dissimilar propositions in the committee room, the
gentleman from New York failed to follow up his motion to
insert the word lawful, by other motions to strike out the word
forthwith, and the whole proviso at the close of the resolution.
This failure was fatal to his object. It lost every advantage
virhich he was seeking to acquire. The gentleman and his
friends soon perceived it, when they found the whole Demo
cratic party of the House still voting for the instructions, not-
vrithstanding the insertion of that word. Thereupon the whole
Whig party, with no remembered exception, voted against it,
in the face of their own favorite word " lawful." This, sir, is
the resolution, as finally adopted :
" Resolved, That the Committee of Elections be authorized to report to
this House such papers and such of their proceedings as they may desire
to have printed by order ofthe House and that they be instructed also to
report forthwith which five of the ten indviduals claiming seats from the
State of New Jersey, received the greatest number of lawful votes from the
whole State for Representatives in the Congress ofthe United States, at the
election of 1838 in said State, with all the evidence of that fact in their
possession : Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be so construed
as to prevent or delay the action of said committee in taking testimony, and
deciding the said case on the merits of the election."
The gentleman from Maryland, as the minority of the com
mittee, have complained much of the construction which was

174 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
given to this resolution by the majority. They have industri
ously sought to make the impression that it was resolved to
put Messrs. Dickinson and Vroom and their associates into
their seats, right or wrong, on legal or illegal votes. Sir, noth
ing can be further from the truth. We have not counted one
single vote for them which has not been passed upon and de
cided to be legal by the constituted authorities of New Jersey,
the judges and inspectors of elections. They have solmny
adjudged every vote to be lawful before we have aUowed it.
The law takes their judgment as binding, until the country shall
be shown by evidence taken in the case. Not only did the
majority decide that the votes received should be presumed and
taken as lawful votes, but every member of the minority de
cided so with us. They voted without exception for the follow
ing resolution:
" Resolved, That all votes received by authorized officers acting in con
formity with the laws, &xe prima facie legal."
Now, sir, we have not counted one solitary vote which was
not of that description. To escape from this, we are told on
the other side that the word " lawful" was not used by the
House in this prima facie or presumptive sense, but referred
to the final and absolute lawfulness which might be estabhshed
by the evidence. Sir, how can this be so, when the House
knew that the testimony had not yet been taken — ^when the
House knew that the parties had just left the city for the pur
pose of taking it — when the House knew that two months had
been allowed them for that purpose ? How then could they
have meant to call for a report to be made forthwith, on testi
mony not in existence, and which would not be in our posses
sion before the second Monday of April next. They must have
meant that we should report without delay on the lawful votes,
as they stood as such on the records of New Jersey and the
testimony before the committee—on the votes which <Aen stood
as lawful, according to the laws of New Jersey, and not on
the votes which might hereafter be found legal when the taldng
of the testimony was completed. The House was demanding
the report only to settle the right of present occupancy, as to put
one party or the other in their seats, until the final right should

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION, 175
be determined. They therefore called for a report on the evi
dence as it then stood, not on the evidence as it might hereafter
appear. This is put beyond all question by the proviso which
expressly declares that the inquiry into the merits of the elec
tion should not be suspended or prevented.
The next day the committee met. They settled down on the
construction of the resolution for which I have contended,
and ordered the report to be prepared by the Tuesday follow
ing (that being Saturday.) On Tuesday the report, as prepared
by the chairman, was adopted and ordered to be presented to
the House. It was presented, resisted, debated; but was
finaUy confirmed, and five of the claimants admitted to their
seats by an overwhelming majority. I again affirm that
every vote counted in making out that report, stood, at the time
it was counted, as a good and lawful vote, according to the
rules of evidence and the laws of the land. But it is true, that
in making out the report the committee did not, and could not,
know but what some of the votes counted might hereafter be
proved to be illegal when the parties returned, on the 2d Mon
day in April, from taking their testimoyin New Jersey. We
were not gifted with the spirit of prophecy so as to know how
that might be, and the House called for present and immediate
action, and did not choose to wait the developments of the
future. But whatever doubt might have existed before as to
the correctness of our construction of its orders, they must be
removed by the subsequent action of the House. When the
report came, it was resisted on the express ground that we had
misconstrued the resolution of instruction. The question was
debated and considered by the House. Surely the gentlemen
do not mean to deny that the House understood its own orders.
WeU, what was its decision? It sanctioned our construction
by confirming our report. Before the House we were charged
with stupidity and mental delusion ; now nothing can save the
House itself from the same unmerited denunciation. What,
sir, after all, have we done ? Nothing but what the Governor
of New Jersey himself declared we ought and should do.
Hear his declarations, made at the time when he was cleaving
down the rights of his own people. " But it will be asked, with
force and propriety, is a candidate to lose his seat in Congress

176 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
because a country clerk does not make a return of the votes ?
Certainly not. If, through inadvertance or by design, any
votes have not been returned by the clerk, it is in the power of
the House of Representatives, in their discretion, to allow these
votes, and give the seat to the person who, with these votes,
may be elected." Well, what have we done ? The votes of
Millville and South Amboy had not been returned, or rather
had not been counted. The committee and the House have
counted them, and have given the seats accordingly. Precisely
what Governor Pennington then said we ought and would do.
Let me tell gentlemen we have not only done this, but we have
done more. We have done what Governor Pennington ought
then to have done, but which he did not and would not do.
He knew that the clerks of Middlesex and Amboy had not
sent up all the returns of all the townships of their respective
counties, and yet he would not send an express after them as
the law directed. He knew that the votes of MiUville and
South Amboy had not been included in their computations,
and if included would have changed the result. He knew, in
other words, that Messrs. Aycrigg & Co. had not received "the
highest number of votes " as required by the laws of New Jer-
Boy, yet he gave them commissions at declaring them "to
have been elected," contrary to the truth of the case and the
laws of the State. In the commissions which he gave, he could
not and dare not say, that those to whom they had been given,
had received the highest number of votes. He therefore intro
duced the word " elected," not known in the laws of New Jer
sey. Who is " elected," is a compound, and often a difficult
question to be determined, and is left under the Constitution in
such a case, as this, to be decided by the House of Representa
tives : But " who received the highest number of votes " in an
election, is a simple matter of arithmetical computation,
and has been entrusted to the Eexcutive of New Jersey as
the returning officer. He has made a return, at open war
with the facts of the case, and has only offered to an in
sulted people the poor consolation that the outrage he
was committing was within the correcting powers of this
House. We have corrected them. We have restored to the
people of New Jersey the great and fundamental right of self-

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. 177
governmentj of which their own Governor, in an evil hour of
partisan madness, had deprived them. In restoring to them
the high guarantees of the Constitution, we have met with revil
ings and reproaches at every stage of our progress. Misrepre
sentation have followed upon our footsteps, and we have been
held up, in the view of many of our misguided fellow-citizens,
as a lawless and tyranical majority, ready and willing to sacri
fice every thing on the altar of parisan idolatry. The minority
who acted with us have given occasion to much of this news
paper defamation. That minority submitted a counter report,
which they have laid in the form of an appeal before the
American people. In that report and appeal, they have cast
imputations on the majority of the committee and the House,
which it is now my purpose to repel.
The minority have been pleased to represent that this House
ha,s perpetrated a daring outrage in putting five men into their
seats " who presented no return, no credentials, no commis*
sions." Why, Mr. Speaker, this is no new thing under the sun.
Look at that book on contested elections. There you will find
from fifty to one hundred cases of the same kind. In almost
every instance where the sitting member was ousted out of his
seat, his competitor came in "without return, credential, or com
mission." (Remember, sir, I am not responsible for the tauto
logy of this sentence.) How could they come in under any of
these things ? They had been cheated out of them by the fraud
or stupidity of the Governor and Privy Council of New Jersey.
The people of that State had done all in their power to secure
to themselves the inestimable right of suffrage. They had
gone to the election on the day, and at the places specified by
law, and deposited their votes in the ballot boxes.. This was
all they could do. At the close of that election, whoever re
ceived the highest number of votes, were the only true and
lawful members of Congress. It is so expressly declared by
the laws of New Jersey, and must be so from the very nature
and spirit of our institutions. The people having, voted and
made choice of their own Representatives, all that remained
to be done was, to commission those on whom that choice had
fallen. The records or returns, when full, clearly showed that
choice to have fallen on Messrs. Dickerson, Veoom, and Co.
13

178 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES.
They carried these records, laid them down in the presence of
the Governor, and demanded their commissions. What was
his answer ? " Go and get them from the House of Represen
tatives." This House has granted them. Your resolution of
admission is their commission ; a prouder credential than was
ever issued under the sign manual of Governor Pennington.
But we are told that this foul deed was done to secure a ma
jority, to carry through certain favorite measures of the Ad
ministration. I solemnly declare, Mr. Speaker, that I never
heard such an idea advanced any where, or by any person,
until I saw it in the address of the minority. What are these
measures : the Sub-Treasury ? The Treasury Note bill ?
The resolutions refiising the assumption of State debts?
Sir, I know not, I care not, to what measures the minority
may allude, the assertion must fail from its own absurdity.
It is incredible that the Administration should be able to
perpetrate all the outrages charged upon it in the New Jersey
case, and that too by so large a majority, and yet be un
able to carry through its own favorite measures of pubhc
policy. Sir, the credulity of this country is taxed even to
bankruptcy, when called on to believe such monstrous
allegations. I mean next to notice a very extraordinary observation to be
found in the appeal of the minority. They remark that this
House, with a madness and bfindness belonging to desperation
only, not only adopted the report, but even went one step
further and admitted these five claimants to their seats. What
beautiful and respectful language toward this House — a House
of which they are members, and with which their own reputation
and character are so intimately connected. The minority pro
ceed with the bold assertion that all this was done, " the House
being wholly ignorant of what the evidence established." Igno
rant of what the evidence estabhshed I What was that report
intended to show ? Simply the fact who received the greatest
number of votes at the New Jersey election. The instructions
of the House went no further than that. The report, on its
face, purported to go no further. Now the question is, whether
the House was ignorant of the evidence bearing on that point.
It stands recorded on your journals, that it was aU read, on

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION, 179
the call of the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Duncan] plainly
and distinctly read ; and if your records were silent on it, there
are now here within this Capitol more than two hundred wit
nesses to attest the fact.
Sir, this charge of ignorance has not even the merit of
novelty to recommend it to public favor. We have long since
yielded the claim of " all the talents and all the decency" to
those who have so modestly claimed it. I mean, sir, that we
had yielded to that modest assumption before the jpresent ses
sion of Congress. Since the occurence of this New Jersey
case, howeve ,1 believe they have, by common consent, discon
tinued any further claim to a monoply of all the decency, at
least. Mr. Speaker, I have been surprised at the remedy proposed
by the minority for all these alleged outrages committed by
this House in the New Jersey case. They call on the people
to " rise in their majesty, and assert and vindicate their rights
at the ballot boxes." At the ballot boxes ! What, sir, have
we been doing but that, throughout this whole controversy?
What the people can do there, let them learn from the conduct
of Gov. Pennington and his Privy Council at the ballot boxes !
I did not expect that the gentleman had the heart to utter such
a word. What avail the ballot boxes, in an age and country
where it is boldly maintainedthat a partisan Governor can set
them aside at his pleasure, substitute his own friends in their
stead, and, by affixing the broad seal to the nefarious deed, de
fend and protect it from all correction ? If these things can be
done, and then justified here, I again ask, of What avail are
the ballot boxes against party misrule and Federal domina
tion ? The ballot boxes may speak in the voice of thunder,
and yet a Whig Governor can speak louder than they. New
Jersey knows the truth of what I declare, because New Jersey
has felt it. The majority ofthe committee, and of this House,
have sustained throughout this controversy, the rights and
liberties of the people of that noble and gallant State ; the
minority have, throughout, justified the usurpations of its
Governor and Privy Council. We have succeeded in putting
into their seats those who have been in truth and in fact
chosen by the people. They have been prevented from in-

180 CONGRESSIONAL SPEECHES,
troducing, as members, on this floor, those who were rejected
by the people, and whose only recommendation was, " that
they had found favor in the eyes" of Governor Pennington.
Baffled in the committee room, defeated in their views on this
floor, the minority have appealed to the American people.
They appeal as an oppressed and much injured minority,
whose counter report has been rejected and suppressed by
those who should have acted on it. This faint and sickly cry
of persecution and oppression is to be another one of those
false issues which have been raised, in order to divert the pub
lic mind from the real merits of this controversy. The minor
ity have not made a fair statement on the subject. They
have neither stated all facts, nor stated them in a proper order
and connection. How were the facts in the committee-room ?
The minority asked that the presentation of our report should
be suspended until theirs should be prepared, and both be sub
mitted together. Two periods were mentioned by them. The
vote was taken on the longest time first. The majority did
vote against the longest, intending to vote for the shortest
time. But, sir, to our surprise, the proposition as to the short
est time was withdrawn by one of the minority, and now the
complaint, is, that we would give no right at all. Gentiemen
seem to have gone on the idea that every thing must be done
in their own way, or not done at all. This was strUtingly
illustrated on this floor on the presentation of their report.
When they came in with it, the House was actually engaged
in discussing and considering the report ofthe majority. Now,
what was the very reasonable and modest request of these
gentiemen ? It was that the House should lay down the busi-.
ness then on hand— put aside the further consideration of the
report of the majority, and take up that of the minority.
The question was asked of the Speaker, whether, if this was
done, the report of the minority, in the event of a debate on
it, would not take precedence of aU debate and action on
that of the majority. The Speaker decided that it would.
Thereupon the House determined to proceed in regular order ;
to debate and decide on the report first presented, and when
that was done to take up that of the minority. Sir, was there

ON THE NEW JERSEY CONTESTED ELECTION. , 181
any oppression in all this ? What right had these gentlemen
to come bustling into the House, and to demand that every
thing should stand aside for them, and that their report should
have a preference over that of the majority ? At the first mo
ment after the report of the majority was disposed of, the
gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Dromgoole,] rose in his place,
and expressed a hope that the House would now, by universal
consent,, agree to receive the report of the minority, and that
both reports and testimony be printed. Sir, from what quarter
did opposition come, to this proposal ? Not from us, but frore
two of their own friends. One of them expressly declared,
that he did not want it received ; " that he wanted it to go forth
to the world a suppressed report." The minority seized on
the suggestion, ceased to ask for its reception, and have sent
it forth in blazing capitals as a suppressed report.
Mr. Speaker : in the appeal to the American people, which
the minority have been pleased to take, we most heartily unite-
We are perfectly willing to meet them at the bar of an en
lightened and impartial public opinion. But we want that
appeal to be /azr/^/ presented, with no errors of fact to mis
lead, and no false clamor of injustice and oppression to ex
cite public sympathy. We mean to stand at that bar as the
advocates for the supremacy of the popular will ; they must
be there as the defenders of the conduct of those who have
violated and outraged that supremacy. W'e will be there,
relying on the broad merits, on the truth and justice of our
cause, they standing on nothing but technical presumptions,
at open war with the facts, and on the supposed magic of the
broad seal, desecrated as it was in this bold attempt to destroy
the rights and liberties of the people of New Jersey. The
minority, in sending forth their appeal, invoke a decision in
their favor, in order to save this Government from becoming
" worse than a Turkish despotism I" We assert that the
danger lies altogether in a different direction. We maintain
that whenever the time shall arrive when returning officers be
gin to substitute their wills for that of the people — when your
State Governors assume to make Representatives in Congress,
in face of the very records of our elections, then indeed " a
worse than Turkish despotism" mjiVZ have fallen on this country.

PART II.

POLITICAL SPEECHES AND OTHER ADDRESSES.

SPEECH.
Extracts from the Speech of Aaron V. Brown, the Democratic
candidate for the office of Governor, delivered at Athens, East
Tennessee, June 21 si, 1845.

Mr. BRovra commenced by adverting to the high and respon
sible office for which he had become a candidate. One so high
and so responsible, that he never should have aspired to it, but
for the unsought and undesired designation of the late Demo
cratic Convention. Most earnestly had he desired the nomin
ation of some other individual, more able to vindicate and
sustain the great principles of that party with which he had
been acting for more than twenty years. Not that he was in
sensible to the honor of presiding over the destiny of such a
noble and gallant State as Tennessep. To contribute any
thing valuable to the prosperity of her brave and hardy people >
might well kindle up the pride and ambition of any man liv
ing. But he desired no elevation, not even the highest which
the people of the State could confer, if it had to be obtained
by either the concealment or the abandonment of his princi
ples. He was here to-day to make known these principles to
his fellow-citizens now assembled, and he invoked their patient
and kind attention. He did not propose to say any thing
about the removal of the deposites, the specie circular, or the
different vetoes of a United States Bank. All these were
now dead and buried questions. So also is the chartering of
another United States Bank, Mr. Foster will presently tell
you that the democratic party will have a large majority (forty
or fifty at the least) in the next Congress opposed to every such

186 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
institution. Well, this covers the whole period of the two
years during which we are proposing to serve you. Why then
should we have one word tO say on the subject? I know well
and must therefore anticipate his answer. He will say to you
that the Bank is not dead, but like Lazarus, only sleepeth. It
may be so, but it seems to me (said Mr. B.) that if it be asleep,
it is the very soundest sleep I ever saw. Day after day and
week after week, have I seen Mr. Foster apply his galvanic
battery to it, without the least effect upon it. No fiutter of
pulse, no heaving of the breast, no fiush of the face, no open
ing of an eyelid inspires the hope of returning animation.
But notwithstanding all these unfavorable circumstances, Mr.
Foster- still persists in cherishing some faint hope of its future
resuscitation. Truth, he says, never dies ; and throwing
himself into a lofty and I suppose poetic attitude, exclaims,
" Truth crush'd to earth by power riven.
Will rise again and fly to Heaven !"
Well, if by truth he means the Bank, (and he is talking about
nothing else,) I must be permitted to say that he has at last
located his Bank in a very singular place. " Will rise again
and fly to Heaven I" Why it sounds to me a little like profan
ity. Besides, I should very much fear that many of your
friends might find it very difficult to obtain discounts in it
there. What will you do for a President to attend to the bu
siness, for it is very well understood that the old President
(Biddle) has gone in another direction.
But, gentlemen, why should Mr. Foster desire to keep up
this everlasting and useless argument about a Bank? He, it
seems to me, ought to be the last man in the State who should
wish to do so. He was here with you in 1840 — prophesying
then as he is poetizing now, about a Bank. His first prophecy
then, was, that our local Banks could never resume specie pay
ments without a national Bank to lead the way. WeU, what
has become of that? Gone the way of all false prophecies
before it. What was his second prophecy ? Why, that our
exchanges could never be reduced and regulated without a
Bank. What has become of that? Gone likewise the way
of all the Earth. What was his third prophecy about the
Bank? That our circulating medium could never become

SPEECH AT ATHENS. 187
sound and uniform without such an institution. Well, what
has become of that? He himself now admits, that the precious
metals have flowed into the country, until we now have about
three times as much gold and silver in the United States as we
have of paper money. Well, we all know gold and silver to
be sound, and we never heard of any thing more uniform all
the world over. Thus it is that the third prophecy has been
falsified by time and actual experience and must be sent off
to travel "in the footsteps of its two illustrious predecessors."
I am glad to have an opportunity to advert to these things. I
have shown you the prophecies and the prophet of 1840. I
brought him here with me that you might see him in 1845.
Here he stands, look at him — "guilty or not guilty?" But
why ask him that question, when we know from the good book
that there never were but two kinds of prophets. The prophets
of the Lord and Baal's prophets. The former all died up with
the dispensation in which they were employed, but the false
prophets of Baal seem determined to live forever ! (pointing
to Mr. F.)
But, said Mr. B., I must pass away from this subject. Let
Mr. Foster come forward and tell you, as he will, that Gen.
Washington signed the first and Mr. Madison the second char
ter. So did Gen. Washington sign the commission of Bene
dict Arnold, but when he found by experience that he was a
bad man, and would have betrayed him and ruined his coun
try, would he have signed him a second commission ? So of
Mr. Madison after Hull had surrendered one of the finest ar
mies of the last war. Sirs, they both acted in reference to the
future, which no human foresight can penetrate,
" Shadows, clouds and darkness rest upon it."
But you, in deciding on a Bank, can now look back on ihe past,
with all the clear sun-light of experience shinning upon it, and
warning you, as you love yourselves, your families, your liber
ties and your country, to make no more Banks and no more
paper money than you are obliged to have. It is an artificial
and speculating system, which robs the laboring man of much
of the hard earnings of his toil and his labor. Taking it in
connection with the tariflT, on which I shall presently speak, it

188 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
is no stretch of the imagination to say, the farmer plants one
grain of corn for himself, one for the banks, and one for the
tariff. The blacksmith, with his lusty strength, strikes one
blow for himself, one for the banks, and one for the tariff.
So of the cotton planter, the tobacco grower, and the stock
raiser, and in fact, so of all the agricultural and mechanical
employments of our country.
I pass now to the distribution of the proceeds of the sales
and entry of the public lands. I do not know whether to say
much on this topic. Mr. Foster has evidently neglected it of
late. Has he discovered that, according to his own admission,
the democrats would have a large majority in the next Con- '
gress, and therefore it is useless to debate it any further? If
so, I commend his discretion and forbearance. Or does he
begin to discover that the shrewdness and good sense of the
people look too easily through the sophistry that sustains the
whole project. I will only ask him (to save you the trouble) a
few questions for his answer and solution. At any time when
you have not too much money in the treasury, if you take out
two millions of the land money, will you not leave a vacuum
of two millions ! When this vacuum comes to be filled tp,
must it not be done by taxing the people through the tariff", the
same amount of two millions? Well, how can it benefit any
people to give them two millions and then make them pay it
right back ? Try it by individuals ; how can it help a man to
give him five dollars to-day and then make him pay it back to
morrow ? But the ease is much worse than that. For the two
millions taken out of the treasury, you must pay back two
millions and a quarter or half, to cover all the commissions, ex
penses and loss of the distribution and collection. Well, you
give a man five dollars of distribution money and then demand;
six or seven dollars in return ! Sir, such a process can neither
help a nation nor the individuals of it. It can neither advance
the cause of education nor internal improvement. No, it is
but a delusive bribe held out to tempt the virtue of a confiding
people into the support of a wild and desperate ambition. But
there is another reason why distribution cannot take place
whilst the present tariff continues in force — j'^ou cannot have
this tariff and distribution both. You covenanted in the Sen-

SPEECH AT ATHENS. 189
ate — you covenanted in the House by your amendment to the
distribution law, that if ever the tariff" was raised above the
rates of the compromise, distribution should cease. You did
raise the tariff above the compromise — ^you know you did — you
admit you did. Well, how can you now ask for distribution ?
You solemnly covenanted that you would not — your party
signed the deed in both Houses — Heaven and earth were the
witnesses ! Shall posterity have to weep over the violated
faith, the pfighted honor of your party. 0, I trust not. I ap
peal to the sturdy, honest old whigs that are here to-day —
whigs whose word is their bond, to rise up and command Mr.
Foster to stop and not perpetrate a deed of such foul dishonor.
It will be foul indeed. Its rankness will smell to Heaven for
ages to come, if this horrible thing shall be done. What is a
gi-eat party worth — what can it be .worth in any country when
it cannot be restrained by its most solemn and imposing cove
nants ? Made with no foreign enemy — made with no rival
party — but made with themselves !
Next in the order of our usual discussion, said Mr. Brown,
I invite you to the subject ofthe Tariff. The democratic party
insists that it is too high in its rates, unjust in its discrimina
tions and ought to be greatly reduced and re-adjusted. The
whig party are opposed to its reduction and alteration, and
Mr. Foster, as its organ standard bearer, in Tennessee, is pe
culiarly zealous and determined in its support. He tells you
to stand by it to the last, for it is the rock of your political sal
vation — the goose that lays for you the golden eggs. The
rock of this people's salvation — rather say the rock on which
you are to split in this election. The sfippery rock on which
you stand, whilst the fiery billows of public indignation are
rolling below you. You may hear those billows every day
murmuring in the distance, indicating, with unerring certain
ty, the return of the people to the ancient revenue creed of
Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson and Hugh Lawson White.
" The goose that lays the golden egg .'" I would not presume
to say he were a goose to say so ; far be such discourtesy from
me, but I feel greatly tempted to say he must be a goose who
can befieve it. " The goose that lays the golden eggs !" No,
they are the eggs of the Cockatrice, hatching a brood of ser-

190

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

pents that will sting this people to death. " Hold on to the
tariff." Sirs, in the better days of that gentleman such was
not his counsel. In the better days of the party which he now
represents, such was not its counsel. He and they would have
scorned such eulogies at any time prior to 1843-4, when it be
came evident that Mr. Clay was to be their candidate for the
Presidency. I know that Mr. Foster's friends who nominated
him, addressing the public in his behalf, have denied this
change of opinion — declared that it was a slander, and defied
their opponents to the proof. I take up that glove of defiance,
and here offer the proof to an impartial world. Who are the
present whig party in Tennessee? It was the White party of
1836. The Harrison party of 1840, and the Clay party of
1844. Well, what were the opinions of the White party, of
1836, in relation to the Tariff?
1st., I rely on the fact, that Judge White, the head and
founder of the party, lived and died an enemy, unflinching and
unwavering, to a protective tariff. This is proved by many of
his speeches and other writings.
2nd. That Mr. Bell, the most conspicuous member of that
party at the formation, was opposed to it ; and I now, here,
have present the best speech he ever ma^de in Congress-^de-
livered in 1832.
3rd. I rely on the speech of Mr. Bailey Peyton, another
very conspicuous member of the party ; also present for inspec-'
tion, delivered in 1824.
4th. Irely on the resolutions ofthe Legislature of 1835,
and the journals are now present.
5th. 1 rely on the whig address of 1836, after they voted for
Judge White, in which they expressly declare " that he was
opposed to a tariff for protection."
6th. I rely on the whig address of the Legislature of 1842^.
in which they clearly indicate their devotion to the doctrine of
free trade. It is here present for inspection.
7th. I rely on the fact, that every whig member of Ten
nessee (except one) voted against the Tariff" of 1842— now >
sought to be reduced.
8th. I rely on the address of my competitor, of 1839, to the
Legislature to which he was then resigning his seat in the Sen-

SPEECH AT ATHENS, 191
ate here present for his inspection. But I know he does not
desire to inspect it. It is ever present before his eyes, and
hke Lady Macbeth, he might well exclaim " out ! out, thou
damned spot."
Let us now examine this celebrated document of Mr. Foster.
I do not read it to convict him of change. Oh ! no, for he has
long since confessed the fact. " I have changed," said he at
Purdy, " and glory in it. I have changed my views of Gen
eral Jackson's policy." But why did not your committee say
so too ? How dare they to write, print and circulate that it
was false to alledge that they had changed ! I read it, there
fore, not as against Mr. Ephraim H. Foster — but against him
as "the great embodiment" of the whig party in Tennessee.
The great embodiment, of whom it is slander to say he has
changed ! Mr. Foster says in that address, " the general gov
ernment, as I have elsewhere observed, collects its immense
revenue by what politicians call a indirect tax ; and the mys
teries of a system which steals in silent impunity from our un
conscious purses, may easily deceive a well informed com
munity," &c. Now look at the contrast right here ! He calls
it a stealing system in 1839,. and now in 1845 he calls on you
" to hold on to it." What, hold on to stealing ! On another
page he said, " this mysterious system steals from you more
than a million of dollars per annum." Now, in 1845, when it
must be double that sum, he says : " It is the rock of your
salvation." What ! can it be the salvation of the people to
pay two million of taxes instead of one ! On another page
he used the following language, "yearly, then, do we pay into
the Treasury at Washington this enormous sum of money ; and
though few perhaps know the fact, or stop to calculate the
cost, it is a constant drain on our resources, and abstracts, from
our sweat and our toil, by increasing the price of our salt and
our iron, our sugar and our spices and almost every arti
cle we use or consume.
Now, mark you, these were the sentiments of Mr. Foster in
1839 and in 1840, when he first appeared as a teacher amongst
you. Then he taught you that a high tariff was a drain on
your resources, just as Jackson, White, BeU and Peyton had
taught you before. Then he told you that a high tariff" made you

192 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
pay too much for your iron, salt and sugar and almost every
article we use or consume. Now he comes to teU us high
taxes make low goods, and that the more money the general
government steals from us the more we have left to live upon
and educate our children. His present doctrine is,
" A little thieving is a dangerous art.
But thieving largely is a noble part ;
'Tis vile to rob a hen-roost of a hen.
But stealing largely makes us gentlemen."
Mr. Foster further adds on same page, " who is he that
refiects and does not see the oppressive inequality of such a
state of things. When pay-day comes we are told in frater
nal accents, we are one household, but when the bounties of
the family chest are to be distributed the Lion's share falls to
an elder Brother, the crumbs and the bones are ours." This,
was in 1839 and 1840, when he first came among you; now in
1845, he comes to tell you that crumbs and bones are good
enough for you, and that your elder Brother (New England) is
entitled to the Lion's share ! I know what my competitor will
reply to all this. He will declare, as at Purdy and other'
places, " whereas I was blind, lo ! now I see." Aye, my
competitor blind ! — blind when he was more than forty-five
years of age — blind when a Senator in the American Con
gress. Well, what assurance have we that he is not bUnd
now ; and the good book assures us that when " the blind lead
the blind,, both are like to fall into the ditch." Sirs, let me
tell my competitor that he has not yet to fall into the ditch-
he has been there afready, and had better try and scramble
out as fast as he can and wash oflT all the dfrt and CZay stick-.
ing about him. But let me say, I have no humor ior humor on
such a subject as this. I want to call your attention to the
articles of necessity mention by Mr. Foster. The first one
salt. What did the whig tariff" tax it?--72 per cent. What
did the democrats try to reduce it to? — 20 per cent.; being a
reduction of 52 per cent. Would Mr. Foster help us to do it?
He would not. Would he now help us ? He wiU tell you he
would not. What is the next article? Iron. The demoT
crats tried to reduce that which the whigs had previously laid

SPEECH AT ATHENS. 193
very high — some 4 per cent. — some 16 — some 46-some 19, &c.,
according to qualities and descriptions. Would Mr. Foster or
his party assist us ? No, neither he nor they would do so.
His next article is sugar. The whigs taxed that 66 per cent. —
we tried to reduce that 14 per cent., and Mr. Foster and his
party would not assist us even in doing that much. Mr. Fos
ter' merely adds "almost every article we use or consume" —
none of which, now recollected, would he then or now consent
to reduce ! And yet we are told the whig party now stand
where they have always stood ! I know well what Mr. Foster
will say to this also. He will say General Jackson changed
from the time he wrote his Coleman letter. I do not think my
competitor (said Mr. Brown) ever understood that letter ; but
granting, for argument sake, that General Jackson did undergo
some change from 1824 to 1832, did he not change with him
and stand by him on the same platform with Judge White,
Mr. Bell, and all the rest of the Whig party ? I have proven
that he did; and so it follows if General Jackson changed
once, (which I do not admit) Mr. Foster and his party have
changed twice to his once. Will he put up with this poor con
solation? He may say others have changed. We are not
talking about others — I have nothing to do with others in this
contest ; I have only to do with the embodiment of the whig
party in Tennessee ; and if he and they have changed, my
proof is full and this issue is settled. I care not what he says
about Martin Luther, the Pope of Rome granting absolution
to the Irishman for a stack of hay which he intended to
steal but had not yet stolen. I care nothing for all such things.
1 hold this contested issue to be settled by the proofs, and that
neither the whig party nor their standard bearer can sustain
that claim to consistency in politics which they have challeng
ed the democracy to refiite.
Mr. Foster talks much about the home market. Mr. Bell
long since overturned all he says on that subject. Does
he not see likewise that in trying to build up a home
market in the north, by a high tariff" which cripples the south
and forces them to raise their own provisions, that he strikes
down and destroys a home market five times as good to us as
the northern one can be ? He talks of shutting up the fac-
14

194 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
tories and closing the doors ofthe workshops of our mechanics.
Who proposes to do this ? No democrat in America. All we
ask is to lower the tariff so as to equalize the burdens of all
classes — lessening, it is true, to some extent, the profits of the
manufacturer, not the ordinary mechanic, but increasing those
of the farmer, planter, and the stock-raiser.
Mr. Brown said he had hurried over these different subjects,
in order that he might have something to say on the two great
questions of Texas and Oregon. Day after day were wasted
by his competitor in the discussion of subjects whose impor
tance compared to these did not weigh as the dust in the
balance. They were attracting the attention of all the coun
tries of Europe. The kings of the earth were in daily consul
tation with all their high Minister of State in relation to them.
The news from this young republic filled them with astonish
ment and terror. Her light was beginning to shine too
brightly, her power was increasing too rapidly, and the moral
influence of her march to prosperity and greatness was begin
ning to spread among the immense masses of the old World,
until every sceptre is weakening and every throne tottering
under it. At first we started with only thirteen States, and
although every few years they saw some solitary additions to
the number, yet they stiU looked upon us with unconcern and
indiff"erence. During the last winter, however, they saw two
States admitted at once, Iowa and Florida, making twenty-
eight States of this glorious confederacy. They saw at the
same time the admission of Texas, covering the whole of the
important coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Instantly they took
the alarm, and have resorted, and are yet resorting, to all the
schemes and devices in their power to prevent its annexation.
Is it not strange, my feUow-citizens, said Mr. B., that any por
tion of our countrymen should sympathize and unite with
foreign nations in wishing to check the growth and to arrest
our onward march to greatness and prosperity ? There was
a time when it was not so. There was a time when we were
all united like a band of brothers in favor of acquiring that
fine and noble country. Tennessee led off in the great work.
Her heroic sons had moistened the soil of Texas with their
blood, and the bones of many of them lay bleaching on her

SPEECH AT ATHENS, 195
battle fields. In 1838 her Legislature, with no division of
opinion, instructed her Senators to do all in their power in or
der to procure her admission. In 1842, with equal unanimity
through the same organ, she made known her wish for the suc
cessful accomplishment of the great object. In the mean
time, her greatest and wisest citizen — he who having filled
the measure of his country's glory, now rest with all the just
made perfect in heaven, was directing his best efforts to rouse
up President Tyler to make the attempt by negotiation and
treaty. His eff"orts were successful — John Tyler, with the
sanction of his great name, was encouraged to make the at
tempt. The treaty was made. It was submitted to the Sen
ate of the United States. To a Senate that hated John
Tyler — to a Senate that hated Andrew Jackson — to a Senate
that hated John C. Calhoun — to a Senate that loved party
more than country. It was rejected. Let me read what my
competitor said were his reasons for rejecting it.
" I object," said he, " to the time and manner of getting up
this treaty, and to the selfish and ambitious motives which I
faithfully believe actuated the President in bringing forward
and pursuing this negotiation." What, object to the time !
When should it rather be done, than when it can be done ?
Beside, those who instructed you, determined the time. They
said the right time had come now — as soon as possible. What
right had you to overrule their determination ? But you ob
ject to the selfish and ambitious motives of John Tyler in
bringing it forward. What had his motives to do with yotir obedi
ence to instructions ? The deed was good — yoM admitted that
it was good, and yet you refused to confirm it because John
Tyler had done it. Had Lucifer done it — you should have
confirmed it. The treaty was rejected in the spring. The
Presidential canvass was opened in the summer. My com
petitor and all his friends threw themselves into the canvass
and appeal to you to sustain Mr. Foster in his ^^ote. What
did they tell you ? Do not annex Texas — if youdo, you will
bring a stain of everlasting dishonor on your country. Do
not annex Texas — if you do you will involve your country in a
war so unjust, that Heaven itself will frown upon you and take
sides with Mexico, Do not annex Texas — if you do, you

196 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
will dissolve forever this bright and glorious Union ! By such
fervid, but as it now seems unfounded appeals, many a good
man, I might say thousands of them turned, away from Texas.
Tore from their bosoms all the natural sympathies of their
hearts, and resolved to leave a brave and gaUant people to their
bloody fate. The kings of the earth were in conspiracy against
them. The tyrant of Mexico was mustering his army, and
had sent out his orders in advance to kill and murder every
living creature found in the country. The mother fleeing
with her infant in her arms, was to be shot down, and tottering
old age, unable to flee, was to receive the same savage fate.
Little did our people think that they were called upon to do
all this only to aid in the election of Henry Clay to the Presi
dency. But it was even so. My competitor now often states
that when he first saw this Texas question it appeared like a
dark cloud on the horizon, and that he told his friends to have
nothing to do with it until they saw who was to be President.
Treasure these words up in j^our memory, carry them home
with you to your neighbors. They shed a fiood of fight on
this whole subject—" ha,ve nothing to do with it until you see
who is to be President." Well, the election was over. The
flag of Texas waived in triumph over the nation — but, alas, it
could have no triumph in Tennessee ! By a majority of 113
it was made to trail in the dust. The flag of San Jacinto— the
flag under which Houston fought and under which Crecket
fell ! The flag, I repeat, was made to trail in the dust ; but,
thank God, only by 113 ; and even these were obtained by pre
tended and cunning and heartless devices.
Do you ask me for proof that it was accomplished by such
devices ? My competitor himself has said so. He said so, by
offering resolutions of annexation himself, so soon as Congress
met. What a reflection was that on Mr. BeU, on Gov. Jones,
on Mr. Henry, on Mr. Neil S. Brown, and Gen. Heiskell— on
his own brother Senator setting every day by his side, uncon-
sulted as I understand on this great movement — right in the
face of all that these gentlemen had said to the people ! What
was it but saying that these gentlemen did not deal honestly
with the people, or that they knew nothing of what would be
national honor — what would be displeasing to Heaven— what

SPEECH AT ATHENS. 197
would have a tendency to dissolve the Union. What a thrust,
too, at the whig press of Tennessee, which had fully sustained
all these gentlemen in their arguments before the people.
Gov. Jones' organ, at Lebanon, accordingly rebuked Mr. Fos
ter severely for the movement — Mr. Bell's organ, at NashviUe,
rebulced him — Mr. Henry's organ, at Clarksville, rebuked him —
Gen,. Heiskell's, at Jackson, rebuked him, whilst the whole
whig press of East Tennessee did the same thing. It was
to this incident that the Enquirer, a whig paper at Memphis,
must have alluded when speaking of Mr. Foster's nomination
by his party :
"It is, therefore, of no small moment, that our candidate should come in
to the field as free as possible from those incumbrances which existing pre
judices will not fail to throw into his way. He should, as far as may be, have
no ancient political sins to answer for — no offences against popular notions
to explain away — no alleged inconsistences to reconcile, &c. * * The first
impulse, therefore, as we have just said, was with scarcely a dissenting
voice, in favor of his [Mr. Foster's] nomination. For some weeks past,
however, a sober second thought has been working its way in the minds of
many of our most sagacious and reflecting friends ; and at the present time
we believe we represent truly the ripened judgment of the Whigs in this
region, when we say that it points as decisively to the selection of a younger,
though not less gallant soldier in our ranks, as under all the circumstances
by which we are surrounded, and in view of recent developments the most judi
cious selection of a leader that could be made.''
Such was the tone of the Whig press, and such the condi
tion of the great leaders of that party in Tennessee, as mani
fested after Mr. Foster and Mr. Milton Brown offered their
resolutions of Annexation. It was a matter of the highest
moment to them to wait and see what that tone and that con
dition would be when the news of their introduction should be
received in Tennessee. They did wait. They were over
whelmed by the returning and regurgitating tide. For the first
time in his life, Mr. Foster saw that the whig party of Ten
nessee would not go with him. He now saw that they would
go with Mr. Bell and Gov. Jones and the other leaders, rather
than with him. Mr. Milton Brown saw that his great rival.
General Heiskell, could hold them back in spite of his teeth,
and that he and Mr. Foster had no alternative left but to re
treat. Retreat! retreat! was sounding in their ears. They

198 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
did retreat, and they who started so gallantly with the Demo
crats in achieving the noble work, first hesitated, then faltered
and finally turned back and recorded their votes against her.
Mr. Brown recorded his against Walker's amendment, and
Mr. Foster his against both the amendment and his own origi
nal resolution. It was a sublime moment when that vote was
recorded in the Senate. It was recorded at night, but when
an hundred lights illuminated the HaU. The learning and the
beauty of the land were there, crowded almost to suffocation,
but yet so still and breathless in their attention that the fall of
a pin might have started you by its echo. In the stillness and
grandeur of such a sconce I saw Texas standing at the door
of the Senate Chamber, asking for admittance. There she
stood leaning on her sword, with her garments dyed in the
blood of freedom. There she stood, pleading that she might
be permitted to lay down her sword by the side of Washing
ton's and deposit her glorious banner of San Jacinto beside
those under which your fathers won the battles of Brandywine,
and Princton, and Yorktown, and all the glorious battles ofthe
Revolution. But what did I behold ? My own Senator, (Mr.
Foster) who had himself invited her there, rushed forward,
rudely slammed the door in her face, crying, begone ! begone !
Your sword is a trator's sword, and the blood on your gar
ments is the blood of rebels !
0, why was not the ungracious deed left to be performed by
other hands ? If Mr. Foster, after inviting her there, had
only stepped forward and gracefully handed her to a seat
around our National altar, he would have filled Tennessee
with gratitude and America w^ith joy. But the golden moment
was lost, and he who might have been the " observed of all
observers," is now compelled to fix up this excuse and patch
up that apology for a course so extraordinary and unexpected.
He wiU presently teU you that he was sincerely in favor of
Annexation, and cite you to the speeches which he made both
on the Treaty and on his resolution. I know he spoke for
Texas — spoke handsomely for her. But nobody wanted
speeches — speeches were plenty as black-berries for Texas.
We wanted votes for her, and these we could never screw out of
Mr. Foster no way we could manage it. Speaking for Texas,

SPEECH AT ATHENS. 199
the voice was Jacob's voice ; voting against her, the hands
were the hands of Esau.
He will further tell you that he was driven from the support
of his own or Milton Brown's resolution, by the amendment
of Mr. Walker in the Senate. What was there in the words
of Mr. Walker's amendment thus to frighten' him from his
purpose? The words were precisely those used by the Ten
nessee Legislature — ^by Burchett Douglass, Jno. B. Ashe, H.
M. Burton, and aU your friends in that body. If you con
demn the words of that amendment, you condemn your own
friends, and if you save yourself by this excuse, you ruin and
destroy them forever. They told you to admit Texas into the
Union " on an equal footing with the sovereign States." The
amendment did admit her " on an equal footing with the ex
isting States." The one seems to have been copied from the
other. But Mr. Foster will tell you that this amendment con
tained a concession to the Abolitionists of the North, which he
would have died sooner than make. A concession to the Ab
olitionists I A sacrifice of the institutions of the South to the
foul demon of fanaticism ! Why, how is this ? She was to
come in " on an equal footing with the existing States." What
are the rights of the existing States in relation to holding
slaves ? To have them or not to have them, just as the peo
ple may choose. Why do they not have slavery in New York?
Only because the people of that State do not choose to have
it. Why have we slaves in Tennessee ? Only because we
choose to have them. So it was to be with Texas, precisely.
So far from being frightened off by the amendment, he should
have seized on it with avidity, so far as the slave question was
concerned, for that extended slavery, if the people of Texas
wanted it, all over Texas, whereas Mr. Foster's resolution con
fined it to South of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes, the Mis
souri Compromise line. To sum up the whole on this point,
Mr. Foster called for a guarantee. The amendment gave it in
express words, as plain as the English language could make
it. It gave a broader and better guarantee than Mr. Foster
had given to himself It was but a delusion of the brain that
induced him to think or to imagine that he thought he could see
an Abolitionist in Walker's amendment. Henderson nor John-

200

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

son, nor Merrick could see it. Crittenden looked, and told Mr,
Foster that there was nothing in it. Mr. Senator Choate, of
Massachusetts, himself an Abolitionist, was called upon to ex
amine it carefully. He did so examine it, and shaking his head
at Mr. Foster said, " there is no Abofitionist there, Mr. Fos
ter. I wish there was, I would then vote for it. But I see
slavery there — all over Texas — worse than in your own resolu
tions." So Mr. Choate votes against the amendment because
he sees a great big negro in it, whilst Mr. Foster votes against
it because he sees a red hot Abolitionist in it. What wonder
ful discrepancy between these two great Whig Senators ! EIr.
Choate might well cry out to Mr. Foster
" He must have optics keen, I ween,
Who sees what is not to be seen."
Mr. Foster may again, to-day, give you his old argument
that he wanted Texas, but that he loved the Union and the
Constitution better than Texas. It is the old argument of
last summer. Then we were told the same things. We were
even told that the convention had been actually called for its
dissolution to be held at Nashville, and that Andrew Jackson
was to preside over it. Well, time drove the false and infamous
prophecy back on all the prophets of Baal who had uttered it;
no convention of the sort was called ; Andrew Jackson now
sleeps in the tomb, and the last throb of his soul was for the
Union and for his country. Texas, too, has been annexed, and
now who sees any marks of the displeasure of Heaven on ac
count of it. The earth puts forth its verdure, the clouds send
down their showers, the sun sends forth his beams to gild the
mountains and to gladden the plains just as he did before.
The Union, too, the bright and glorious Union, fike the rain
bow of promise, still bespands the continent. See how beouti-
fuUy it curves along the blue arch of Heaven, from the great
lakes of the north to the Gulf of Mexico on the south. How
gloriously does it shine all along the shores of the Atlantic—
' then rising above the eastern mountains, pours its full blaze of
glory over the magnificent valley ofthe Mississippi; still on-
wardjOver the Rocky Mountains, itpassesthefar distant Oregon,
until it illuminates the great Pacific with aU its bays and rivers

SPEECH AT ATHENS. 201
and harbors. The Union its glorious arch — the rainbow of
hope and promise — oh, may it last and endure forever.
But I have spoken of Oregon. She is yours by discovery,
yours by settlement, yours by purchase from Spain. Your
own people are there, many thousands of them, and more are
on the way or preparing to set out at no distant period. It is
larger and richer by far, than all the New England States put
together. The English are there likewise ; they are there by
your permission, for the distinct and specified purpose of fishing,
hunting and trading chiefiy in furs. Being there for one pur
pose, they insist on staying there as either sole or joint owners
of the country. I have Hot time now to investigate the Eng
lish claim; but I have examined it well. I have reported on
it to the American Congress, and I do not hesitate to reaffirm
the declaration of President Polk, that " our title to Oregon is
clear and unquestionable." Session after session has the dem
ocratic party been endeavoring to extend our laws over our
people and to give them the benefit of our protection. At the
last session I reported a bill for that purpose. It was opposed
by Mr. Adams, Mr. Joseph R. Ingersoll and others of the
whig party, but finaUy passed by a large majority, (two or
three to one,) many of the whig party voting with us. I was
pained to see that every whig from Tennessee voted against it.
Still it passed and was sent to the Senate. There a motion
was made to take it up. That motion failed, I think, by two
votes, and 1 regretted extremely to see a measure so national
in its character, so just and necessary to our own people, fail
by the votes of the two Senators from Tennessee. Sirs, I can
excuse a Senator or any body else for voting against Texas a
thousand times sooner than for voting against Oregon. Texas
belonged toothers, and we might buy it or except of it as we
chose; but Oregon was our country, those who were there
were bound to us by aUegiance, and we were bound to them by
all the ties of duty, of honor and of blood to give them our pro
tection. They are there in sight of British court houses and
dungeons, liable every day to be arrested and cast into those
dungeons ; to be tried before British judges and juries, and
then finally taken away to the whipping post and lashed by a
British officer until the blood runs from the quivering flesh to

202 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES,
the very ground on which they stand. And yet when they turn
their eyes to the American capitol for protection, all they can
get is some idle anecdote of a Dutchman whohad never heard
of Oregon. An American Senator cracking his jokes whilst
his countrymen may be bleeding ! The negotiations are still
going on between the two countries, and I sincerely hope may
lead to an amicable adjustment. Still, however, it becomes
the American people to stand prepared at all times to assert,
maintain and defend their rights. America may be the last
asylum of liberty for the human family. In almost every other
country, the just and equal rights of man have been cloven
down by the sword, or usurped by the kings, princes, and po
tentates of the earth. Here liberty has reared her favorite
temple. She has laid its foundations deep and wide. Her
bulwarks have been made strong, and the ministers who attend
her altars and the worshippers who throng her gates should
never surrender it but with their fives. Never was there a peo
ple who possessed a finer or nobler country. Go up with me
in imagination and stand for awhile on some lofty summit of
the Rocky Mountains. Let us take one ravishing view of this
broad land of liberty. Turn your face toward the Gulf of
Mexico, what do you behold? Instead of one lone star faintly
shining in the far distant south, a whole galaxy of stars of the
first magnitude are bursting on your vision and shining with a
bright and glorious effulgence. Now tm-n with me to the west
— the mighty west — where the setting sun dips her broad disk
in the western ocean. Look away down through the misty
distance to the shores of the Pacific, with all its bays and har
bours and rivers. Cast your eyes as far as the Russian pos
sessions in latitude fifty-four degrees and forty minutes. What
a new world lies before you. How many magnificent States
to be the future homes of the sons and daughters of freedom.
But you have not yet gazed on half this glorious country.
Turn now your face to the east, where the morning sun first
shines on this land of liberty. Away yonder, you see the im
mortal old thirteen, who achieved our independence ; nearer
to us fie the twelve or fifteen States of the great valley of the
Mississippi stretching and reposing like so many giants in their
slumbers. 0 ! now I see your heart is full — it can take in no

SPEECH AT ATHENS, 203
more, who now feels like he was a party man, or a southern
man, or a northern man ? Who does not feel that he is an
American, and thankful to Heaven that his lot was cast in
such a goodly land ? When did mental vision ever rest on
such a scene ? Moses, when standing on the top of Mount
Pisgah, looking over on the promised land, gazed not on a
scene half so lovely, O ! let us this day vow that whatever
else we may do, by whatever name we may be called, we
will never surrender one square acre of this goodly heritage to
the dictation of any king or potentate on earth. Swear it I
swear it my countrymen, and let Heaven record the vow for
ever. What if the English Lion shall begin to growl ? What
if he shall presently fill the air with his roar ? Armed with
right and justice on our side, we fear him not. Our fathers did
not fear him before us. Let him roar. The American Eagle,
yom- own high bird of liberty, is even now pluming her wings
for her loftiest flight, and will presently utter notes of bolder
defiance than England's Lion ever heard.

SPEECH.
Extracts from the Speeches of Aaron V. Brown, at Gallatin,
Clarksville, and Jackson, June, 1847.

When Gov. Brown rose to reply, he said, that he addi-essed
the large assembly present as the democratic candidate for
Governor. For nearly two years he had enjoyed the honors of
that exalted station, and he wished now to return to his fellow-
citizens at large who contributed to that event the homage of
his sincere and profound gratitude. To preside over such a
noble and gallant State, to contribute any thing valuable to
her prosperity in peace, or to her glory in war, ought to fill up
the measure of any man's ambition. To me (said Gov. B.)
such an honor ought to be, as it has been, peculiarly gratifying.
She is the land of my youth and the home of my manhood.
Within her verdant bosom lie buried nearly all of my kindred.
No wonder, then, that I should honor a State consecrated by so
many sad and tender remembrances. No wonder that I
should love her lofty mountains, her deep, majestic rivers, her
wide luxuriant valleys, and more than all, her brave, hardy,
and industrious people. Before such a people I again appear,
and will hold their approbation of my past conduct as my
highest reward, and the richest inheritance to be transmitted
to my children.
How I have performed my civil duties, (continued Governor
Brown,) may be judged of by the great fact that neither my
competitor, the convention which nominated him, nor the pub
lic press of the country, has complained of any failure on my
part. How I have performed my military duties may be found

THE MEXICAN WAR. 205
in that page of our country's history, where it stands recorded
that our brave and gallant volunteers — drawn equally and
fairly from every portion of the State — were earliest in the
field, foremost in the fight, covering themselves, their kindred,
and their country with unfading laurels and undying honors.
But, (says Gov. Brown,) I must leave whatever relates to
myself and to the humble part which I have borne in the great
events connected with my official action, in order to reply to
the extraordinary speech of my competitor, to which you have
just listened : the most extraordinary one, I will venture to re
peat, that any one in this large assembly ever did hear. He
himself has told you that we are in the midst of war, that a
bloody flag is waving over us ; that the Goddess of Peace, in
her white robes, has departed from our land, and that, in her
stead, the grim-visaged God of War is now scowling over our
country. And yet, in all that hour and a half which he occu
pied, he breathed not one word- of censure against our Mexi
can enemy. He spoke loud and eloquently against his own
countrymen, but could not find it in his heart to say one soli
tary word against the Mexicans. He has charged that Con
gress has done wrong, that the democrats have done wrong,
that the President has done wrong ; but the Mexicans, our en
emies who came over in the night time and first commenced
this war, by killing and murdering our citizens, my competitor
does not blame for a single act, so far as we can learn from
him. When Deniosthenes rose to address his countrymen of
Greece it was to denounce, in tones of thunder, the ¦ Macedo
nian enemies of his country. When Patrick Henry rose to
address his countrymen, in the dark and trying years of the rev
olution, it was to nerve the arms and embolden the heart of the
people to resist the despotism of England. When Clay, and
Grundy, and Lowndes, rose to speak in the second war of in
dependence, it was to pour forth the full tide of their eloquence
against the proud misfress of the seas, for the impressment of
our gallant seamen. But now, how changed the scene ! Now,
in time of war, when our gallant countrymen are bleeding on
every battle-field of Mexico, an American orator can rise up
and talk for hours against his own countrymen, and utter not
one word against the wanton and wicked invaders of hia own

306 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
country!. Look, (said Gov. Brown,) even to that anecdote
with which my competitor sought to amuse you. He has told
it all round the State. It is the story of the two gamblers,
playing at cards; the one an old gambler, the other young and
inexperienced. In the same town, he tells you, there was an
infirm, harmless old man, whose name was Harsey, not pres
ent with the gamblers, nor in any way concerned in their dissi
pation. Presently, says his story, the old gambler began to
cheat the young one, who resented it by saying, " if you do
that again I'll knock your teeth down your throat." " Don't
do that I" says the old gambler, " for if you do I'll go down in
town and beat old Harsey to death. 1 offer you no opology,
said Gov. Brown, for introducing my competitor's anecdote
into so serious a part of this debate. I do it to show you the
great fact, that every thing is to be said in disparagement of
our own countrymen, and nothing prejudicial to our enemies.
Here our Government is compared to an old bloated, cheating
gambler, while Mexico is compared to a poor, harmless, inno
cent old man ! The idea is, that our Government was too
cowardly to return the threatened blows of England about Or
egon, but meanly turned to get satisfaction out of poor, harm
less, innocent Mexico ! Would the immortal orators and pa
triots of the revolution, or ofthe second war of independence,
ever have consented thus to disparage their own countrymen ?
Mexico innocent ! Gracious God ! Only remember our country
men who have been " plundered, and maimed, and imprisoned,
and, without cause and reparation," in the emphatic language
of Gen. Taylor, and repeated substantially by Mr. Allen A.
Hall, the ablest whig editor of the State. Mexico innocent !
Look at this very invasion, (for your whole party in the Senate
declared that it was an invasion,) — for what was it made ? Not
to burn a few towns and to slaughter a few thousand of our
people : no, not for that, bad as it would be, but to tear the
whole State of Texas out of this Union — to tear downherwhole
constitution and laws, to overturn the altars of her religion, and
to carry her once more under the yoke of Mexican anarchy,
worse than despotism itself. Yet in the face of such an out
rage as this invasive war — in the face of aU the "plundering,
and maiming and imprisoning" of our people — in the face of

MEXICAN WAR. 207
all this injustice, and outrage, and crime, and murder, my
competitor every day compares Mexico to a "poor, innocent,
harmless old man" whilst his own country is compared to a
dissipated, bloated, cheating old gambler !
And now, said Gov. B., I am ready to answer the question
of my competitor — " why James K. Polk has not gone to the
war ?" He could not leave the government at Washington
without evil consequences. Did Mr. Madison go to the war
of 1812! But my aim is mainly to answer his question, why I
have not gone to the war. It might be answer enough to say to
him yon have set me no example, and until that is done you have
no right to complain. But more seriously ; I have not gone
to the Mexican war because my countrymen have assigned to
me duties as Governor of the State for two years in prefer
ence to all others ; and I so performed them that neither he
nor the Convention that nominated him have cpmplained of
any failure on my part. I have so performed them, too, in re
ference to this war, that her gaUant volunteers were among
the earliest in the field, foremost in the fight — covering them
selves, their kindred and country with undying honors. I have
another reason for my competitor. My countrymen have
lately assigned me my present position of meeting you in this
canvass, to fight against you, and Corwin and Webster, and all
your coadjutors, in all your varieties of opinion about this war.
We need soldiers at home as well as in Mexico. I have been
more than two months engaged in this warfare, and with the
blessing of God I will fight it out to the last. When the 5th
of August shall come, it shall find me bravely battling under
that noble banner, on which is inscribed " FOR MY COUN
TRY IN PEACE, FOR MY COUNTRY IN WAR."
When, this warfare is ended, that banner shall be the proud
emblem of my victory. But if I fall from sickness, if some
pestilential disease of the West shall strike me down I will
fall nobly, with that glorious banner waving over me.
Let us now for a moment examine this favorite position of
my competitor. What is it ? However this war may have
come, rightfully or wrongfully ,justly or unjustly, he is for prose
cuting it to a successful and honorable peace ! What ! prose
cute an unjust war ? How can you prosecute an unjust war

o CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
to an honorable peace ? It is an absurd.ity in morals. You
may discontinue an unjust war by making a treaty of peace,
which might be honorable according to circumstances, but you
can never make an honorable peace by the prosecution of ah
unjust war. But my competitor relieves himself from this di
lemma by adopting the maxim that he is for hia country right
or wrong. That is the maxim of the regular soldier and sailor
acting under the command of his superior officer. Not so with
the statesman or the private citizen, who may or may not, at
his own vocation, engage in the campaign. With him ,the in
quiry rises up high above all others : Is this war just or un
just ? Justice is the highest and noblest attribute of God — in
justice, whether of individuals or of nations, is the unhallowed
work of evil and demoniac spirits ; and I this day declare, tha,t
if I believed this war was unjust in its origin, I would not vote
another dollar to the debt, nor send another man to swell the
tide of blood already shed in its prosecution. No. I would
say to Taylor and Scott, come home, come home with your
armies — ^yo.ur cause is unjust, Mexico is an innocent and in
jured nation — come home — the lightnings of heaven wih blast
your eagles, or the earth open her mighty bosom and swallow
you up with an earthquake. My competitor tells you that the
land is burdened by the debt of this war ! Will he swell and
increase that debt, or will he caU on you to swell and increase
it, until he has first shown you that the war is just ? He teUs
you the land is filled with mourning and sorrow — with the
lamentations of widows and orphan^, and yet proclaims it,
that he would deepen the mourning and sweU the tide of lam
entation and woe, whether the war be right or wrong — just
or unjust.
This is the great question which my competitor declines dis
cussing with me — ^the justice of the war. For more than
fifty days have I invited him to it, but up to this good hour
he stands mute and silent as the grave.
Gov. Brown said that he maintained the affirmative of this
proposition and would now proceed to prove it.
My first witness (said Gov. Brown) shall be Mr. Clay him
self In a speech at New Orleans after the war had com
menced, he said, " and when I see around me to-night Gen.

THE MEXICAN WAR, 209
Brooke and other old friends I feel half inclined to ask for
some fittle nook or corner in the army in which I might serve
in avenging the wrongs of my country." Now Mr. Clay was
old — the fires of his youth had gone out, but when he thought
over the wrongs of his country, he earnestly desired to avenge
them. My next witness shall be General Taylor. In his pro
clamation opening the war on Mexico, — a proclamation inten
ded to satisfy all christian and enlightened nations of the
earth as to the justice of our cause, he expressly states:
"For many years our citizens have been subjected to repeated
insults and injuries — our vessels and cargoes have been seized
and confiscated — our merchants have been plundered and
maimed and imprisoned without cause and without repara
tion. Our late effort to terminate all difficulties by peaceful
negotiations has been rejected by Parades, and our minister of
peace who your rulers agreed to receive, has been treated with ,
indignity and insult, and Parades has declared that war exists
between us. This war first proclaimed by him," &c. Now
here is an enumeration of the wrongs, only alluded to by Mr.
Clay. Let me not be told that this proclamation was made
out at Washington and was not written by Gen. Taylor. If
it had contained one fact that he did not know to be true
Gen. Taylor would have signed it " by order of the War De
partment." But as every word was true — as Gen. Taylor
knows it to be true, he signs his name, makes the document his
own, and sends it forth to the world, under his own proper
name and signature.
But (said Gov. Brown,) this recital of our wrongs is fully
sustained by Mr. Allen A. HaU, editor of the NashviUe Whig,
who said, on the 28th May, " that we had a just claim of long
standing against Mexico, for not less than six miUions of dol
lars for wanton spoliations committed by her on the property
of our citizens." He further adds that she refuses to receive
our ministers sent to settle all difficulties " after having
promised to do so." Here was a theme on which my competi
tor might have poured out the indignant eloquence of his soul
against the injustice of Mexico. Instead of the widow scene
which he so often describes with a tearful eye, in order to throw
some censure on his own government, here one was founded on
15

210 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
a stern reality, which might have moved the hardest heart.
Why did he not draw you the picture of some weeping
widow — shivering in her hovel, with her half starved and
half naked orphans around her. Who is she ? She is the
widow of one of those American citizens, mentioned by Gen.
Taylor and Mr. Allen A. HaU, who had been first plundered
of all that he had in the world, then imprisoned without cause
in the mines of Mexico, until exposed in the cold damp vaults,
far from his wife and children, who are now left without a
home or a shelter, to live on the cold and doubtful charities of
the world. Here is a picture from real life, and I call on you
to join me in denouncing that Mexican injustice and tyranny
that struck so foul a blow on one of our countrymen.
But (continued Gov. Brown,) I have not done with the tes
timony of Mr. Hall yet. He says expressly " that Mexico
had pursued a course to the United States which rendered it
'imperative on the latter to force her to a settlement of the
grave difficulties existing between the two countries," and
challenges any man of any party to maintain to the contrary.
Yes, Mr. Hall challenges any man of any party ; as much as
to say to my competitor, " I don't care if you are the candidate
of the whig party, I am the Editor of the whig party and 1
challenge even you to controvert my position." But my
competitor has taken up the challenge and they may fight it
out lustily between themselves.
But my competitor may ask, was this war commenced by us
for this indemnity of six miUions ? I answer that we did not
commence it all. Mexico commenced it by an invasion for the
reconquest of Texas, and we have carried it on " for indemnity
for the past and security for the future." So the question
still recurs, is it not just io have carried it on for these pur
poses ? After the battles of the 8th and 9th on the Rio
Grande, our country was refieved, it is true, from invasion for
the present, but no one could tell how soon it might occur
again. Mexico refused to negotiate at all, or even hold any
sort of diplomatic intercourse with us, and might ' dash her
armies back upon us at any moment she might please. We
were therefore bound to carry on the war first commenced by
her until safe and honorable peace could be extorted from her,

THE MEXICAN WAR, 211
securing us against future invasion, and extorting from her
that indemnity which she herself had often acknowledged to
be justly due to our people. So much then for the justice of
this war.
Gov. Brown further maintained that it is a war of self-de
fence against invasion, and could not, therefore, have been
avoided without dishonor. Mexico (said the Gov.) declared
this war first ; Gen. Taylor tells you she did. She not only
declared it first, but she commenced it first ; she crossed the Rio
Grande in the night time, and made the attack on Thornton's
detachment, killing some and taking others prisoners. This
was the first blood shed in this war. What next ? The next
day they way-laid General Taylor on the road-side, when he
was passing from one encampment to another, and made an
attack upon his army, and the battle of Palo Alto was fought.
This was the second time that the blood of your countrymen
flowed in this war. What next? The next day he was
assailed by the Mexican army on the same march to his upper
encampment, and the battle of Resaca de la Palma was
fought, which was the third time that the blood of your coun
trymen was made to fiow like water in this war. Congress
heard the news. The President recommended a declaration
of war. It was declared, with only fourteen dissenting voices.
The nation flew to arms, and more than 200,000' of our coun
trymen offered to volunteer to drive the insolent invader from
our soil.
And now, (said the Governor,) my competitor every day
makes an argument to prove that this march oVer the Rio
Grande and these attacks on our army we7-e not an invasion
of our country. I maintain that they were, and will now
furnish him with proof that he never wUl be able to overturn.
When Congress heard the news that the river had been crossed
and our army attacked, they voted ten miUions of dollars and
50,000 volunteers, and directed the President " to prosecute
said war to a speedy and successful termination." Mr. Critten
den moved to strike out these words and to insert the foUowing :
" to repel invasion, and otherwise prosecute hostifities until the
country be secured from the danger oi further invasion ;" and
Crittenden, and Corwin, and Barrow, and Berrien, and ipdeed

212 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
every whig Senator present, voted for them ! So by the vote
of the whole whig party in the Senate, when the Rio Grande
was passed, our country was invaded. Let this record be
transcribed on your memories ; for as long as that journal ex
ists, so long must it prove that my competitor is wrong — wrono'
in saying that Mexico extended to the Neuces — wrong in say
ing that Texas did not extend to the Rio Grande. Crittenden
says he is wrong ; Berrien, and Archer, and Barrow, and all
his whig friends in the Senate, declare that he is wrong. Be
sides these, his friends, Mr. Adams, and Clay, and Webster,
have all stated that Texas did extend to the Rio Grande. Mr.
Jefferson, and Mr. Madison, and Monroe, and Jackson, all held
the same thing ; and the only authority relied on by my com
petitor is Mr. Senator Benton, in his speech on the Tyler
treaty. Mr. Benton, in that speech was evidently alluding to
the upper Rio Grande, not the lower part, on which the army
was marched. Judge Breese, a Senator from Illinois, making
a speech, as I understand, in Mr. Benton's presence, drew this
distinction in reference to Mr. Benton's speech, between the
upper and lower Rio Grande, without correction by that Sena
tor. With that distinction Mr. Benton would be right — with
out it he would be wrong, and the only man of distinction in
all America who, to my knowledge, holds a different doctrine.
My competitor should remember that Mr. Benton was speak
ing against the boundary of the Tyler treaty, when annexa
tion was rejected. It was afterward accomplished, under reso
lution for which Mr. Benton voted, and to which he made what
he considered an important amendment. Now, if his opinions
were such as my competitor ascribes to him, how could he
have finally voted for annexation as he did ?
But I proceed, said Gov. Brown, to give some further evi
dences that Texas as annexed to the United States did extend
to the Rio Grande. 1st. I rely on old maps showing that river
to have been the boundary of Louisiana. 2d. On old histories
referred to by our negotiators in relation to this fact. 3d.
That after the battie of San Jacinto, the whole Mexican army
was ordered out of Texas, and over the Rio Grande, and never
did return, and make any reconquest of any portion of the
country on the east side of that river. Now why did Texas

TEE MEXICAN WAR. 213
estabfish her independence up to the Colorado ? Only be
cause she drove her enemies over that river. Why up to the
Nueces ? Only because she drove her enemies over that river.
Why up to the Rio Grande ? Only because she drove them over
the Rio Grande. Why no further than that river ? Because
she drove them no fm'ther. I rely not on the treaty made with
Santa Anna, when a prisoner. That might possibly be void,
but I rely on the fact that the Mexican troops did actually
withdraiu from the country, clear over the Rio Grande river,
and never after successfully re-invaded it. 4th. That when Gen.
Wool, (the Mexican General of that name) was about to invade
Texas, the year before annexation was accomplished, he is
sued a proclamation clearly indicating where Mexico consider
ed the boundary of Texas to be. His work of death and
destruction was to begin, the moment he passed one league
on this side of the Rio Grande — one league on this side, and
every living soul that he might meet with was to be treated as
Texan rebel. But why not those who lived on the river and
within one league? Because he knew that those persons were
mere temporary occupants of huts, near the river for purposes
of fishing, or in some way concerned in the navigation of that
river. Such temporary occupants, he knew to be Mexicans in
fact although living in Texas, and therefore spared them in his
bloody decree.
I have, said Gov. Brown, one other Mexican authority,
which I will now present to my competitor. After the battle
of Buena Vista an American officer had occasion to be sent to
Santa Anna's quarters, and something was said about Gen.
Taj4or's desire for peace. His reply should forever engrave
itself on the memory of my competitor, "we can never say
anything of peace whilst the Americans are on this side of the
Bravo." Not whilst the Americans are on this side of i\^
Nueces — no, no, whilst they are on this side of the Bravo. Will
my competitor out Herod Herod ? Will he beat Santa Anna
himself, in surrendering more of his own country than Santa
Anna is willing to claim ! But he insists that several of the
Mexican States had been extended in modern times over the
Rio Grande, as far as the Nueces. Well, and suppose for
the sake of argument only, that they had been. In 1835

214 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
the States had been all consolidated by the usurpations oi
Santa Anna; and when Texas was invaded she drove her
enemies back, and drove them back, as I have already
shown, to the Rio Grande, and so obliterated the boun
daries of so much of Tamaulipas as ever projected on
this side of that river. By revolution as to part and by con
quest if you please of the balance, the whole republic from the
Sabine to the Rio Grande became free and independent.
That republic by her constitution claimed up to the Rio
Grande — she laid off counties up to the Rio Grande. The
county of San Patricio, in which Corpus Christi is situated, ex
tends from the Nueces to the Rio Grande, and up the latter
river more than one hundred miles. That county votes, 1 un
derstand, about one hundred and forty or one hundred and eighty
votes, and within that county resides one of the present mem
bers ofthe American Congress. In this very disputed territory!
How came he to be recognized as a member, if the United
States did not extend to the Rio Grande ? We may well ima
gine how your Congress would be startled by the claim of a
Mexican, to a seat in the American Congress. His credentials
are presented, his residence in the county of San Patricio, in
the very territory now in dispute, is avowed, and yet the whole
house hails him as a true and lawful member of that illustrious
body. Is this no recognition of boundary to that river, by the
Congress of the United States ? However this may be, I will
give another directly and unequivocally on the point ; previ
ously to the march of our army to the Rio Grande, Congress
had declared that disputed territory a collection district, by es
tablishing a custom house at Corpus Christi, west of the Nueces,
and appointed a proper officer to discharge the duties of the
station, Here is direct, positive and undeniable evidence that
Qongress, our Congress, recognized Texas as a State, west of
the Nueces. But how far west of the Nueces ? Certainly far
enough to take in the town of Corpus Christi. But no farther?
Yes as far west as our population extended in the county of
San Patricio. How far was that ? The answer of to day, will
not be the answer of to morrow, for settlers are widening out
and settling north and west, in that county, every day, and is
it possible, that we have no more fixed and certain boundaiy

THE MEXICAN WAR. 215
up to which the President can extend the protection of our
arms than this ! And yet so runs the argument of my com
petitor — on, Texas, settled, populated Texas, now goes far
west of the Nueces — her counties have gone clear to the Rio
Grande river, her land officers have gone there, her judicial
districts have gone there, and her judges take jurisdiction over
persons and property there ; up to that boundary, the Presi
dent was bound by law, by his oath, by the constitution to ex
tend the protection of your armies.
Gov. Brown said, that the point on which his competitor
had lately dwelt with the greatest emphasis, was, that " the
war was brought on by James K. Polk, in ordering the army
to be marched to the Rio Grande," " that whether that river
were the proper boundary or not, it was left, in the resolution
of annexation, an open boundary, and Congress alone, and not
the President, could say where the boundary was."
To all this Gov. Brown replied, that his competitor had main
tained this long enough, others had maintained it long
enough, and that it was now high time to stop it. "I
maintain," said Governor Brown, " that this western bound
ary was not left open at all — not open for a moment — that it
was closed up forever — closed as to Texas, closed as to the
United States, closed as to the whole world, but only liable to
be opened at some future time, if any foreign government
should choose to open it." He repeated, " closed now against
the whole world, but only liable to be opened and settled if
Mexico should desire it." He then read the resolution of an
nexation, thus : "Congress doth consent that the territory pro
perly included within and rightfully belonging to the Republic
of Texas, may be erected into a new State," &c.; " said State
to be formed subject to the adjustment of this Government of
all questions of boundary that may arise with other Govern
ments." These are the words — "that may arise" — ma^ here
after of course. But of course if no such question should ever
arise, Texas stands in the Union, fully in the Union, a part of
the United States, to be defended from invasion like all other
States, no further action of Congress being at all necessary in
relation to her boundary. With what boundary was Tennes
see admitted into the Union ? With that mentioned in her

216

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHEE SPEECHES,

constitution. With what boundaries were Iowa and Wiscon
sin admitted ? That mentioned in their constitutions. So
Texas was admitted, with the boundary mentioned in her con
stitution; but if or provided any question of boundary should
be raised by any other Government, then and not till then,
could the boundary be opened for further settlement. Now
had any Government, up to tliis time, attempted or desired to
open the question of the western boundary of Texas ? None
whatever. We thought Mexico might wish to open it, and sent
a minister there for the purpose ; but she drove him away, say
ing she had no question of boundary to open — she was aiming,
to reconquer Texas, not to the Nueces, but the whole of Texas,
even to the Sabine. Well, we sent him again ; he was driven
off, and again the cry was, " the whole of Texas or none."
Now with this plain statement of facts, who can contend that
the boundary of Texas was left open for the future action of
Congress ? Look to the absurdity and cruelty of such an ar
gument. The President sends our army to the Sabine. There
Gen. Taylor takes his position, and he and his brave army
lo.ok over to the west. They see the Mexican army pass over
the Rio Grande and invade Texas. Can't we fight them now?
" No," says my competitor's argument, " the western boundary
is open and unsettled." But look ! they cross the Nueces !
Can't we fight them now ? "No," says my competitor's argu
ment, " the western boundary is open." But look ! they have
crossed the Colorado ! the towns are all on fire ! The Texan
people are fleeing before them ! Can't we fight them now ?
"No, not yet," says my competitor's argument, "the western
boundary is open !" But look ! yonder are the Mexican lancers,
striking down and piercing through the poor decripedold men,
unable to flee from them, and yonder the licentious Mexican is
laying his rude hands on the shrieking female — we almost
hear their screams underthe outrage — 0! can we not fight
them now ? "No, no," says my competitor's argument, " not
yet, not yet ; tlie western boundary is open!" Good God ! have
reason and justice and humanity fled the earth, that such doc
trines are maintained among an enlightened people ?
Such musthe the consequences at least of my competitor's ar
guments on this point.

THE MEXICAN WAR. 217
And now (said Gov. Brown) I come to ask the question,
who advised the march of our army to the Rio Grande ? General
Taylor himself ! In his letter of the 4th October, 1845, he
says : " For these reasons, our position thus far has, I think
been the best possible. But now that the entire force will soon
be concentrated, it may well be questioned whether the views
of Government will be best carried out by our remaining at
this point. It is with great deference that I make any sugges
tion on topics that may become matter of delicate negotia
tion, but if our Government, in settling the question of boundary
makes the line ofthe Rio Grande an ultimatum, I cannot doubt
that the settlement will be greatly facilitated and hastened
by our taking possession at once of one or two suitable points
on or quite near that river. Our strength and state of prepa
ration should be displayed in a manner not to be mistaken.
However salutary may be the effect produced upon the border
people by our presence here (Corpus Christi,) we are too far from
the frontier to impress the government of Mexico with our
readiness to vindicate by force of arms, if necessary, our title
to the Rio Grande. * * * Our advance to the Rio Grande
will itself produce a powerful effect, and it may be that the
common navigation of the river will not be disputed."
Here you see (said Gov. Brown) he advised the march as
well calculated not to provoke war, but to preserve peace.
He advised it as necessary and proper to vindicate our title to
that river and to secure its joint navigation. He advised as
an able General and a wise statesman. The President followed
it, and now the strange spectacle is presented, that Taylor,
who gave the advice, is to be exalted to the Presidency, whilst
the President, who followed it, is to be pulled down with dis
honor from it. It is no answer to say that Taylor only ad
vised it in the event that the Government, in settling the boun
dary, should make the Rio Grande an ultimatum ; for I have
shown that the Government had so settled and negotiated
the boundary — in other words, that Congress had so settled it.
Settled it by receiving a member residing in the disputed terr^
tory — settled it by having been notified for more than a year
that the American army had been located in the disputed ter
ritory. Such information had been reported to Congress, and

218 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
was lying upon the table of every , member of that body from
day to day for months together, without complaint and with
out objection. If then the Government, and not the President,
had the settlement of that question, the government had set
tled it, repeatedly, and conclusively settled it.
In the face of these recorded and undeniable facts, my com
petitor still insists that the march to the Rio Grande was the
cause of the war, and cites Mr. Calhoun as his authority. Mr.
Calhoun did say so in one of his speeches, but I have shown
my competitor several times that he was corrected the very
next morning by the publication of Marks' letter. Marks was
not authorized by Gen. Arista to communicate any thing to
Gen. Taylor. He was acting on his own individual opinions
and resposibility.
So much for Mr, Calhoun's authority.
What are the opinions of Mr. Benton, my competitor's fa
vorite witness as to boundary, as to the march of the army to
thatriver ? " In saying this, I do not consider the march to the
Rio Grande, to have been the cause of the war, any more than
I consider the British march on Concord and Lexington, to have
been the cause of American revolution, or the crossing of the
Rubecon by Csesar to have been the cause of the civil vrar in
Rome. The march to the Rio Grande, brought on the collision
qf arms, but so far from being the cause of the war, it was
itself the effect of these causes." This authority of his fa
vorite witness, throws my competitor back on the position, that
after all, the annexation of Texas was the true cause of this
Mexican war. In assuming this position, his competitor dif-
ferred with all his whig friends from Tennessee, and with
Messrs. Ewing, Gentry, Crozier, and Milton Brown in partic
ular. Gov. B. read from the speech of the latter gentieman,
declaring " that he took issue with any one who assumed that
position." How his competitor would settle that issue, so
boldly tendered by Mr. M. Brown, when he reached the Wes
tern District, he did not pretend to know ; but he was willing to
talie it, that annexation was the cause of the war, and would
now demand of his competitor why he and his party friends
of this State had annexed her ? When John Tyler first pro
posed it, they rejected it — they voted down his treaty and said

THE MEXICAN WAR. 219
the right time had not arrived for its consummation. The
following winter, they came forward and declared that the right
time had then come, and Mr. Milton Brown and Senator Fos
ter offered resolutions in their respective houses for the con
summation of that great measure. In the House of Represen
tatives, every whig from this State finally voted for them. Mr.
Brown wrote to Gov. Jones that his proposition was " an ori-
ginal whig proposition, and received only a reluctant support
from the democrats." He wrote, also, that what he had done
" was entirely consistent with the course and the doctrines of
the whig party in the Presidential campaign of the preceding
summer, and that Texas was then free as any nation on the
globe." Well, does not all this show that annexation, though
at first rejected by the whigs of this State, was finally adopted
and sanctioned by them ? I repeat (said Gov. B.) that it was
finally adopted and sanctioned by them. Why, sir, did you do so?
Why, if you knew that war would come of it, did you do so ?
You prophecied that if done in the way and at the time it was
proposed by Mr. Tyler, with the sanction and approbation of
Gen. Jackson and the democratic party, that war would be the
consequence. But you never did prophecy that it would pro
duce war if done at the time and in the manner proposed by
Mr. Foster and Mr. Milton Brown. You said expressly to the
contrary. NOw, it was finally done in your own way, and in
your own time, and still you cry out that it has produced the
war ! Well, I repeat then, why did you do it? My competi
tor (said Gov. Brown) often says that I prophecied falsely when
I used to say that war would not come of it. Why, sir, you
said the same thing ; for no member of your party in Congress
from this State ever said or believed that war would come of
it as finaUy adopted upon your own proposition. It was only
your prophecy, that it would have come if annexation had ta
ken place at that time and in the manner it was first proposed.
But it has come, says my competitor. Aye, it has come, but
not of annexation — not of the march of the army to the Rio
Grande — no, it has come of the course pursued by you and
your party. Mexico had slumbered for nearly ten years over
her title — she had heard all the great powers of Christendom
declare that she had no title ; but when she heard from my

220

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

competitor and his party in 1844 that she did have a title to
Texas — that it would be downright robbery to take it away by
annexation, her hopes revived, her cupidity was awakened, her
thirst for power and dominion over a portion ofthe Anglo Saxon
race was increased ; and thus this war, with all its debt and
horrors, might well be laid at the door of my competitor and his
party friends. They gave " aid and comfort" to Mexico in as-
serting her claim to Texas, whatever they may have done in
the way of giving aid and comfort to her in maintaining it in
this war. You, sir, said Gov. Brown, by your speeches and
arguments, and your whole tribe of public speakers, in 1844,
substantially told Mexico to assert her title— that it was a
good one — so good, that in any war which might come from her
asserting it. Heaven itself would take sides with her against
your own country. And now, sir, said Gov. B., if war has
come from annexation, it was your annexation ; and if your
projjhecies that war would come have been fulfilled, you have
wrought their fulfilment by encouraging Mexico to assert her
claim. That assertion of her claim, is this very war which we
ai"e diiscussing.
And now, said Gov. B., I have said all that my time will al
low on the justice of war — on its being a war of self defence
against the invasion of Mexico. Let me now ask when was
the justice or the necessity of this war, first questioned in
Tennessee? Not when I issued my proclamation twelve months
ago, for volunteers to engage in it. No, not then, for when
I called for three thousand, lo! thirty thousand of the brave
and hardy sons of Tennessee, rushed to our standard. Whigs
and Democrats equally and alike, rushed forward to the call.
But they came not alone ! fathers and mothers, and kindred,
and friends, came with them to the place of rendezvous, to
see their final departure. When drawn up in line, just before
the orders were given to embark on board the boats, you might
have seen the tall fine looking young volunteer, leaving the
line and wending his way to some group stationed on the
beach. Where is he going ? To shake hands with his father
for the last time, or to kneel before his mother to receive her
last blessings. What is it that sustains his noble heart, at such
a trying moment? It is the proud thought that although part-

THE MEXICAN WAR, 221
ing with his nearest and best friends, he is going to fight for
his country, in a just cause. What is it, that makes his mother
willing to give up her child, perhaps her only child, to all the
hardships and all the perils^ of so distant and so hazardous a
campaign ? It is " because she is an American woman, and
would surrender not only her child, but if necessary, would
lay down her own life for the service of her country. " Go, go
my son, it is like death to part with you, but go and drive
back the insolent invaders of our soil, and if necessary carry
the war to the enemy's country." The parting is over, and the
young volunteer, springs back into line, and on he goes, never
once doubting that he is going, in the emphatic language of
Mr. Clay, to avenge the wrongs of his country. So went forth
om' brave and gallant volunteers, and so felt and thought all of
their kindred and friends, who were left behind. But one
sentiment then pervaded all classes, and all parties, in Ten
nessee. When did you first hear anything to the contrary of
all this ? It was when Congress was about to assemble, Mr.
Webster came down from the north, like a roaring lion, crying
"impeach the President" for involving our country in war.
The whig members from Tennessee responding too readily to
Mr. Webster's sentiment, cried out, this is James K. Polk's
war; and my competitor, responding too readily to them,
boldly cries out in this very canvass, " this is James K. Polk's
war, waged by him to glorifiy his administration" — " an
unnecessary war brought about by an unconstitutional
order of the President marching the army to the Rio
Grande." Sirs, this sudden questioning of the justice, the
necessity and propriety of this war, is the work of whig poli
ticians in Congress — not ofthe whig party of ihe country gen
erally. No, God forbid. But the work of the whig politicians
ofthe last Congress. They saw the old issues one by one
evaporating before them. The bank was dead ; distribution
was dead ; the protective tariff of 1842 was dead ; and nothing
seemed to be left to them but a new party, with new issues
and new elements to compose it. I firmly and conscientiously
believe that such a scheme was formed at Washington, and is
now in the process of consummation in the United States,
WiU Tennessee now unite in the formation of any such anti-

222 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
war party? Will either whigs or democrats, go into such an
arrangement ? You belong to no such party now. You have
escaped from such a vortex as yet. Will my countrymen ever
go into it, by uniting with those who denounce this war as un
just, and unnecessary, or a war of aggression, on a weak, help
less and innocent nation? I appeal to the glory of the past —
to the honor of the present, and to all the proud hopes of the
future to prevent it.
And why should you unite with those who declare this war
to be James K. Polk's war ? Did James K. Polk declare it ?
No he did not — you know he did not. He advised it and Con
gress declared it. So James Madison advised the war of 1812
and Congress declared it. Then it wa.s called James Madi
son's war by the blue light federalists of the north, now it is
called James K.. Polk's war. Why not call it Mr. Ewing's
war, Mr. Gentry's, Mr. Crozier's, or Mr. Cocke's, or Mr. Milton
Brown's war. They all voted for it, and declared on the face
of the bill that it was brought about by the act of Mexico.
Now, my competitor will have it to be James K. Polk's war,
brought about, not by any vrrongful act of Mexico, but by the
unconstitutional order of the President. Not by any wrongful
act of Mexico ! Gracious God, look at this very invasion. It
was to re-enslave a brave and gallant people who had a.chieved
their independence by years of blood and suffering. They
had achieved it by the acknowledgment of nearly all the civil
ized nations of the earth — they had achieved it by the solemn
act of our country admitting them into our glorious Union-—
they had achieved it, and the flag of our country, proudly
waved over them for their safety and protection. To invade
such' a people, forthe purpose of re-enslaving them, was the
greatest outrage recorded in the annals of crime and of blood.
Not to have resisted and prevented the foul deed, would have
disgraced and dishonored this proud Republic forever. You
did resist, and the uniform success of your arms, furnishes
proof that justice and Heaven are on your side. You did re
sist, and the noble men who proudly bore yom- banner at Mon
terey, Vera Cruz, and Cerro Gordo are now at home in your
midst. How did you greet them on their return ? How did
the old man, leaning on his staff", hobbling his way down to the

TfiE MEXICAN WAR. , 223
river bank to receive his son, how did he receive him ? Did he
say to him, " welcome back my son, welcome back ; but would
to God you had never gone. I have lately learned from our
members of Congress, from our whig candidate for Governor,
and from the public papers, that you have been fighting in the
war of James K. Polk against a weak and innocent nation,
and I fear that all the blood you have shed will some day cry,
like Abel's from the ground against you." Oh L did be give
him such a greeting as this ? If he did, that son had rather
have died on the bloodiest field of Mexico, than to have heard
such a rebuke from the lips of one whom he so much honored
and loved. But no, he gave him no such salutation. You
kindled bonfires and illuminated all your dwellings on their
return. Honor and kindness, and every thing that gratitude
could bestow was theirs. Would you now pluck one proud
feather from the war plume of the soldier by telling him that
alt his toils and labors and suffering had been, not to serve
his country, but only to glorify the administration of a mere
man ? And what of that brave and gallant soldier who hEts
not and will never retm-n ? He fought hard and nobly in the
battle — at last he is stricken down by the enemy. There he
lies — ^his manly form stretched upon the earth, the glaze of
death is coming over his eyeballs, the last death rattle is gurg
ling in his throat — ^he is dying in a foreign land, far from home,
and kindred, and friends. What is it that supports him in
this last struggle ? What is it but the hope of heaven and the
consolation of dying in a just cause. Oh I would not make
a speech in Congress, or anywhere else, that might rob him of
that hope and consolation, or shake his confidence in the cause
for which he was dying, for all this world would give or take
from me. No, no, let him die with the confidence of that gal
lant volunteer from lUinois. He was stretched on the earth,
stricken down by the enemy's ball's — he was nearly gone, but
his hand yet clinched the trusty sword with which he had fought
so long and so valiantly. One of his comrades came by him
in the midst of the fight, he reached him his sword — " take
it my friend, it can be no more service to me now — take it, and
tell our brave comrades to fight on, fight on, our cause is just."
These were his last words ; and oh, that they were written in

224 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
letters of gold on every glorious banner that has been unfurled
in this war! Tennessee is even now making arrangements to
erect a monument to the gallant dead who have fallen in battie
in this war. You will rear (said he) the massy column with its
lofty summit towering to the skies. You will engrave the name
of Allen and Elliot, and Martin, Ewell, and Kirkpatrick, and
all the pest — but with what honorable memorial of their glori
ous deeds. A very distinguished member of Congress from
Tennessee comes forward with his inscription — "Died atMonte-
rey,in a war of conquest and plunder." Other members from
this State propose about the same thing. And last of all comes
my competitor with his inscription. What is it? "Died at
Monterey, (or Buena Vista,) in the year 1847, in an unneces
sary war — in James K. Polk's war, waged by him to glorify
his administration." Oh! (said Gov. Brown) a monument
with such an inscription can never stand. The earth will heave
up her bosom and by some mighty earthquake will level it to
the ground ; or the lightning of Heaven will descend and blast
its towering column, and shiver the massy rocks that compose
it. No, no, let me give you a memorial worthy the noble deeds
of these gaUant dead —
" How sleep the brave, who sink to rest.
By all their country's wishes blest ;
Here honor comes, a pilgrim gray,
To bless the sod that wraps their clay ;
And freedom shall awhile repair
To dwell a weeping hermit here."
Gov. Brown said : Having now disposed of aU the questions
in relation to the war, I must follow my competitor in his long,
and loud, and numerous complaints, not against the Mexicans,
but against his own countrymen. Congress has done wrong,
the democrats have done wrong, the President has done wrong,
every body has done wrong, but the plunderers and murderers
of our people. WeU, what has Congress done? She has
repealed the protective tariflTof 1842, and substituted a much
lower one in its stead. My competitor denounces this repeal
and vehemently advocates the restoration of the tariff of 1842.
Two years ago, I stood on this very spot, and before a

THE MEXICAN WAR. 225
large portion of this very assembly, debated this subject
with my then talented and gallant competitor. What did he
tell you ? That James K. Tolk did not intend to repeal the
high tariff of 1842 — ^that he would not dare to do it — that
James Buchanan, one of his Cabinet, would not allow him to
do it. Well, time has overruled this vain prophecy, and we
now know that James K. Polk did intend to repeal it ; we now
know that he did dare to do it, and that James Buchanan did
not prevent him. What next did he tell you ? " To hold on
to the tariff" of 1842 as the rock of your salvation ; that if you
did repeal it, it would shut up the workshop of the mechanic,
bring ruin on the manufacturer, strike down the wages of labor,
and by destroying the home market of the farmer, would leave
him with a large surplus of his crops rotting and wasting in
his granaries." I can almost yet hear his eloquent voice call
ing on you to hold on to the tariff of 1842 ; to hold on to it, to
save the mechanic, the manufacturer, the day laborer, and the
farmer. Well, gentlemen, said Gov. Brown, time that tries
afi things— -that confirms every truth and explodes every error —
has again interposed and convinced you whether he was right
or wrong. The tariff has been repealed, and now what do we
behold ? The workshops of the mechanic have not been closed ;
the blacksmith with his lusty strength is yet striking his blows
on the anvil ; the shoemaker is drawing his thread ; the tailor
is plying his needle ; the manufacturers of iron and wool eire
dividing their wonted profits ; whilst the farmers and planters
are realizing prices for their stock and their produce of which
avarice itself cannot complain. Let us pause for a moment
and contemplate the wonderful prosperity which the people of
happy America are this day enjoying. Look out on the broad
ocean and see the crowded sails of commerce — bending to
every breeze, and visiting with rapid velocity all the nations
of the earth. Glance your eye along the course of your
mighty rivers, and behold the thousands of steamboats, loaded
down to their guards with the rich productions of your varied
soils and climates. Gaze on this broad and fertile land, with
its teeming abundance gladdening the hearts of our own hus
bandmen and sending life and sustenance to the famishing
miUions of Europe. Whose heart does not heave upward,
16

226 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
big with joy and gratitude to God, for so much goodness and
mercy ! Would my competitor mar, if not totally destroy, all
this prosperity and happiness, by going back to the high tariff
and low prices of 1842? Daniel Webster himself would not
do it. Daniel Webster, whose deep and full voice was heard
at the preceding session of Congress crying "Repeal, re
peal," would not do it. The boldest whigs in the last ses
sion of Congress, who had united with Mr. Webster in the cry
of "down with the democratic tariff of 1846," would not do
it. They met at Washington city — at the time and place
when and where these vows of repeal were all to be fulfilled.
But when they saw that our low tariff was bringing more
money into the Treasury than their high one — when they saw
the iron, the cotton, the wollen, and in short the manufacturers
of every sort, the mechanics of every description, the farmers,
and planters, and stock raisers, were aU more prosperous than
they ever had been before — ^they had not the heart to repeal
it — they had not the heart to try to repeal it. They met, and
gazed through the winter with wonder and astonishment on
the swelling, booming prosperity of the whole country, and
finally adjourned and went home without once offering to re
peal the democratic tariff of 1846.
Thus it is, my countrymen, that tim£, experience, and actual
knowledge, have now settled the question between a high and
low tariff. When we stood on reason and argument, you
would not believe us. Now we stand on time, on experience,
and actual knowledge — your knowledge, your experience.
The great ocean crowded with commerce ; your mighty rivers
burdened with trade ; the earth with all her mines and mineral,
with all her fruits, and herbs, and flowers, all teU you that a
low tariff is the best. Can my competitor stand out any longer
against all these ? — against the roar of the ocean, the mur
murs of the rivers, the soft whispers of the teeming earth—
against fight, and truth, and knowledge? Nay, nay ; give it
up and return to the ancient faith of Tennessee — ^to your faith
up to 1837 ; to the faith of Hugh Lawson White and Andrew
Jackson. Yield obedience to that light, and truth, and actual
knowledge, which fike three angel forms bending from some
azure cloud, now beckon you to return to that faith, from which

THE MEXICAN WAR. 227
you never should have departed. But I cannot leave the sub
ject of the tariff" until I have furnished you with the great fact
which my competitor now denies, and which weighs down like
a millstone nearly ever)rthing which can be said against the
tariflTof 1846. That fact is that the duties received under the
present tariff for the first five or six months largely exceed (pro
bably by more than half a million of dollars,) the amount re
ceived during the same period of the preceding year under the
tariflTof 1842.
What next in the catalogue of charges is preferred against
Congress by my competitor ? They have established the Inde
pendent Treasury. Here, also, time, experience, and actual
knowledge, have done sad work with the predictions of my
competitor and his party. You were told by them that if the
Independent Treasury was ever established, it would make one
currency of rags for the people and another currency of gold
and silver for the office-holders — that it would be a declaration
of war against the Banks by banishing specie from the country;
that it would become a great government bank, the most
odious, they said, of all systems of banking; that it would be
a union of the sword and the purse, and enable a President
to stand erect like Ccesar, holding in the one hand the sword
of the nation and in the other its vast treasuries, while pub
lic liberty would lie lacerated and bleeding at his unhallowed
feet. 0, what a picture of prophetic despotism ! Caesar,
the great tyrant of Rome, standing aloft with a bloody sword
in his hand, while pubfic liberty lies pale, bleeding and dying
at his feet 1
Now turn your eyes slowly and gently away from this horri
ble and bloody picture, to the cities of New York, PhUadelphia,
Charleston, New Orleans, and St. Louis, where the Indepen
dent Treasury is quietly and gently working its way, collecting
the public dues of the nation and paying them out to our sol
diers of the revolutionary and present war — to the officers and
sailors of our gallant navy, and to all others who have just claims
on the Government — accomplishing it all through the instrumen
tality of our fellow-citizens, without the aid of any bankwhat-
soever, and inflicting, in the language of Mr. Bell, " No great
sharm to the great interests of either trade, agriculture, or com-

228 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES,
merce," Here were four distinct predictions of my competitor,
every one of which has been signally disappointed. The
oldest citizen of our country never saw the currency in a
sounder or better condition — never saw our exchanges better
regulated — never saw our local institutions more able to re
deem their liabilities — never saw such an amazing influx of
gold and silver into the country ; still my competitor tells you
it was not borrowed from any of the free governments of the
earth, but finds its origin in the dark and despotic governments
of the old world. There is no other really free government
on earth from which it could have been borrowed ; and, in fact
it was not borrowed from any government, either free or des
potic. It dates its origin in our own free and happy govern
ment — ^to the law of 1789 — the first law regulating the receipts
and disbursement of the public moneys. The law of 1789,
passed in the very morning of our repubfic, when it came pure
and fresh from the patriots of the revolution — the law of 1789,
signed by George Washington himself, but now extended and
enlarged only to suit the growth and increase of our country.
Such is the Independent Treasury now in operation — precisely
such as Mr. Bell said it would be, speaking of it just after it
had been passed in 1840. My competitor was a prophet, Mr.
Bell was an historian — the one guessed at it, the other knew it.
Thus it is that time and experience have likewise settled this
great question, so long disputed between the parties of this
country. But to that Athens speech. What was I endeavoring to do
in making that part of it which he reads ? You and your
party were opposing the annexation of Texas — ^you were op
posing the extension of our laws over Oregon — you were im
peding, by all the means in your power, the growth and en
largement of your own country. I wanted to liberalize and
enlarge your patriotism. I told you that the kings of the
earth were every day plotting your destruction — that they
wished to put out the light of freedom in the new world, in
order to reign more triumphantly over the prosti-ate rights and
liberties of mankind. I called on you and your party to unite
with me in this noble work of self-defence — to unite with me
in extending the area of freedom from ocean to ocean, and

THE MEXICAN WAR. 229
from the Gulf of Mexico in the south, to the great inland seas
of the north. To induce him to do so, I called on him to go up
with me, in imagination, to the top of some lofty mountain of
the west, there to look abroad upon the goodly inheritance
which God had given us. I called on him to look toward the
Gulf of Mexico, and gaze upon those beautiful constellations
that were rising np there. But to my astonishment he would
not look in that direction at all.- I called upon him to look
away toward Oregon — on all her bays, and rivers, and harbors;
but I soon found that he would not look up in that direction.
Baflled in this, I called upon him to turn his face to the east,
where t|ie morning sun first shines upon this land of liberty —
to look at the old immortal thirteen who achieved our inde
pendence ; but, to my utter amazement, he would not look even
at these. Thereupon I turned to him and asked, in the name
of conscience, what country is it that you want to see ? "Oh,
Governor, only show me some country where some day or
other I can be a Governor !" There, now, I cried, you are too
hard for me. Why, Moses and Aaron both put together can
never show you such a sight as that.
The return of Santa Anna is the next theme of unmeasured
censure against the President. Why, says he, was not his re
turn prevented ? I answer, because the President could not
have prevented it. There were a dozen ports through which
admittance could have been obtained. But why, again asks my
competitor, did the President give orders to Com. Connor not to
try to prevent his return ? The President himself has answered
the question. Parides had vowed that he never would make
peace with the United States. A strong party in favor of
peace was determined to turn him out, and sent to Santa Anna,
at Cuba, to come home and assist them in the work. Now it
would have been a strange sight to see the President shutting
out from Mexico, by his blockade, the very man who had been
sent for to come home, to depose Parides, and to make peace
with this country. The pubfic records and journals of Mexico
all prove the fact that he was sent for expressly for these pur
poses. But again : no attempt was made to prevfent his return,
because Parides and many of the priests of that country had
formed the plan of turning the government of Mexico into a

230 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
monarchy, and caUing a prince, from either France or England,
in order more effectually to prosecute the war against the Uni
ted States. This great fact is proved by the proclamation of
Gen. Taylor at the commencement of this war ; it is confirmed
by the proclamation of Gen. Scott to the Mexican people
after the late battle of Cerro Gordo, and also by the corres- ,
pondence of Mr. Sfidell, our minister at Mexico, frequently
read by my competitor. It is a great fact. A monarchy es
tabhshed on this continent ! at the very door of our Republic !
A monarchy sustained by an army of perhaps two hundred
thousand men to fight against you in this war! Santa Anna
was called for by the party opposed to this scheme, to come home
and defeat it. Who did not then wish to see it defeated ?
All our Presidents, from Mr. Monroe down, with perhaps one
exception, had solemnly declared, that such a step ought to be
and would be opposed by our Republic at the very mouth of
the cannon. Now if President Polk had prevented Santa
Anna's return, and this monarchical scheme had been accom
plished, who of his enemies would not have exclaimed, quite
borror stricken, behold the short-sighted imbecifity' of your
President 1 But my competitor objects to his return, because
by it the war has heen protracted. No, sir, no ; not by his re
turn. It has been protracted by the course and conduct of your
own great leaders in politics. By Webster, Corwin, Severance,
and a host of others, whose speeches and writings have been
published throughout Mexico. Hear what the Mexican papers
declare about Mr. Webster and others: "By the last arrival
from New Orleans, we have been placed in possession of late
papers from the United States, and a majority of them magnan
imously denounce and condemn this war against this country
(Mexico) as infamous, unholy, and unrighteous. Daniel Web
ster, the most liberal and enlightened statesman of the coun
try, says that the expenses of the war are more than half a mil
lion a day, and he has introduced resolutions into the Senate
to impeach the cowardly Jim Polk, and turn him out of office.
These northern barbarians cannot carry on this war very long
at this rate, and Mr. Webster deserves the thanks ofthe whole
Mexican nation, for the noble stand he has taken on the side
of right and justice. Arise, Mexicans, and drive the invaders

THE MEXICAN WAR. 231
from our soil ? Mexicans can derive comfort from the fact that
the greater part ofthe people ofthe United States are opposed
to this war, as their papers show, and the base man who is at the
head ofthe government will be exiled from power." Here is the true
cause why this war has been procrastinated. Now look at some
ofthe newspapers doubtless referred to in this Mexican newspa
per, (the Diario.) The HaverhiU [Massachusetts] Journal says :
"To volunteer or vote a dollar to carry on the war, is moral
treason against the God of Heaven and rights of mankind."
Come now nearer home, and read from the speech of Sena
tor Corwin, three or four hundred of which I found franked to
one county in Tennessee : " You must call your army back !
you must ! unless you are willing to be thought a robber — an
invader of your neighbors — and if your President asks me for
men and money to carry it on, he shall have neither." Read
now from " the Roman," one of Mr. Corwin's Ohio papers I
think: "The volunteers — these jackasses are going off to
haf, prowl, murder and steal in Mexico, while the orderly part
ofthe community, are to take care of their wives and children,"
&c. So much for Ohio ; now look still nearer, to Kentucky,
your next door neighbor. The Louisville Journal, speaking of
the faU of the Mexican Capital, says : " fallen in one of tbe
most iniquitous wars ever recorded in the dark and bloody
annals of mankind." Yes, sirs, here is the true cause of the
procrastination of this war, the pubUcation of all such things
as these amongst the bigoted, ignorant and degraded people
of Mexico — worse a thousand times worse than the return of
Santa Anna ! But my competitor is filled with utter horror and
amazement, that Congress did not sustain a call for informa
tion, as to who was sent to Cuba by the President, to inform
him that he might return, &c. Sirs, the President never sent
any body there — he never wrote a line to Santa Anna, in all
his life, nor did he ever receive one from him ; the whole insin
uation was a vile slander on the President, and an insult to
the American people. The resolution was so intended and
was voted down accordingly. If my competitor was ever to
become a Governor,, would his friends sustain a resolution in
the Legislature, caUing upon him to state what sum or sums
of money, he distributed among the delegates at NashvUle in

232 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
order to secure his nomination, over his competitor ? It would
be an infamous slander on him, and an insult to the people
of the State, and they would vote it down accordingly. No,
in both these cases, the only way would be to introduce a res
olution, raising a committee, with power to send for persons
and papers, to investigate the charges, and if found frue to
bring forward an impeachment against the President, or the
Governor. I repeat that this would be the only regular and
proper mode of proceeding in either case.
My competitor next raises complaint against the democratic
party in Congress, for not raising the pay of the volunteers in
this Mexican war. Not raising their pay ! why every demo
crat from Tennessee, when the bill raising their pay was finally
on its passage, voted for it — every one, I repeat every one.
But he answers that they did not vote so at the preceding ses
sion. Well, I answer «Aey rfitf, with only one exception. My
competitor has spread a wrong opinion on this subject, nearly
all over the State. I now tell him to look to House Journal of
1846, May the 11th, page 793. There in the very bill declaring
the war, a motion was made by Mr. Chapman of Alabama, to
amend the bill as foUows: '^ In the 10th section ofthe bill
strike out the word $8 and insert $10," so that the biU might
read, " privates of infantry, artillery and riflemen, shaU re
ceive $10 per month ; for this every whig voted except one,
and every democrat also except one, and both these could
doubtless give satisfactory explanations of their votes not im
plying opposition to increased pay at all, so that both parties
ought to be fairly put down as equally in favor of raising the
monthly pay of these gallant men.
But the volunteers were not allowed to elect their Brigadier
and Major Generals. WeU, who is to blame for that ? Not
the President surely ! He appointed them precisely because
the law commanded him to do it. But who passed the law ?
Congress of course. My competitor must therefore hurl his
thunder against that body — agednst his own party friends there,
too, as well as the democrats. Did his friends want to en
large the rights of volunteers, by giving them the privUege of
electing Brigadier and Major Generals ? — no such thing — let
me read to you from the journals of 1846, page 1008, June 26:

THE MEXICAN WAR. 233
Mr. Cocke moved to amend bill (211) by striking out aU of the
same that related' to Brigadier Generals, and inserting the
foUowing : " and when the number of volunteer regiments
from any one State offered and accepted, under the said act of
13th May, 1846, shall be sufficient to compose a brigade,
a Brigadier, General for the command of the same shall
be appointed (not elected) by the authority of the State
to which they belong, in the manner prescribed by the
laws of said State." Sirs, you see this amendment did not
apply to Major Generals at all; they were left by the
admission of aU parties in Congress, to be appointed by
the President. It was confined to Brigadier Generals,
and these were to be appointed, not elected, taken away
from the President, who is responsible for this war, and
transferred, not to the volunteers, oh no not to them, but the
Governors of States, of North Carofina, of Kentucky and
others. In Tennessee, we had no law to cover such an amend
ment, and to have had the benefit of it, we must have had
a called session of the Legislature. Besides this, look to the
date of the amendment, the 2Qth June, 1846. Where were
our volunteers then ? One regiment was almost on the
theatre of their gallantry and glory, a second one was on
its way, whilst the third one, (cavalry) were wending their
way through the State of Arkansas. When and where did
they meet, when they could have elected their Brigadier
General ? Never, if at all, until the period of their service
was almost expired.
He next objects to the appointments made by the President —
that they were made from the shades of private life — that they
were mer^ partisans who had never heard a hostile cannon
roar. No special complaints have been made-— no individual
cases are mentioned of partisan or incompetent appointments.
I must therefore meet the charge in its general aspect ; and here
I call for the oldest and most learned man of this assembly :
Come forward, you who have read the history of all the wars
of ancient and modern tunes, and tells us whether you ever
heard or read of any war, where every legion and every officer
had so completely fiUed up the just and high expectations of
their country ! Every man seems to have proved himself a

234

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

soldier, and every officer seems to have emulated the fame of
those illustrious captains who have gone before him. Honor,
then, to all for deeds of courage, activity and skill, that would
have emblazoned the names of a Jackson, a Carroll, or a Cof
fee, in the palmiest days of their glory.
And now (said Gov. Brown,) in the last few moments of
my time, I have a few words to say, in conclusion, to those
gallant men who have returned from the wars, and taken their
places again in society. Look well to what is now going on in
the State, and elsewhere in this Union ; look well to the efforts
now making to bring this war into disrepute. The moment
that is done, away go all the fame and the honors you have
won in this arduous service. Let but this war become doubt
ful, as to its justice, its necessity and its constitutionality, and
all the proud honors of Monterey, Buena Vista and Cerro
Gordo, wither and perish in a moment — the war plume of
the soldier trails in the dust, and you who are so justly the
pride, boast and ornaments of our country, sink down neglect
ed, if not scorned, for those noble achievements that so justiy
entitle you to a nation's thanks — a nation's gratitude.

SPEECH.
Extracts from the Speech of Gov. Aaron V. Brown, one of the
Democratic Electors for the State at large, at Jonesboro', East
Tennessee, August, 21, 1848.

I rise, said Gov. Brow^n, to address you as one of the Dem
ocratic Electors of President and Vice President for the State
at large. If I had consulted my personal ease, or had fondly
fingered over the endearments of home, had I looked only to
themany years of my life already devoted to the public service,
or to the number of times I have already traversed the State,
crossing her rivers and scaling her mountains, I might well
have decfined a positions, so full of labor and responsibifity
But, fellow-citizens, (said Gov. B.) I did not feel at liberty to
decfine it. Identified with you in so many former struggles,
your leader and standard bearer in some of them, I did not
feel willing to retire whilst the enemy was yet in the field,
flushed with a recent victory, which chance and slander, not
valor, have achieved for him. Sirs, I ought not to have de
clined it, because I came freely amongst you in 1844, and I may
say, had no small agency in persuading you to bring this ad
ministration into power. I exhorted you to commit your po
htical destinies to its guidance, and assured you that in my
opinion it would lead you in the way of prosperity and of honor-
Now that it is drawing so nearly to its termination, it was pe
culiarly proper that I should come back among you, that j^ou
might look me in the face and justly upbraid me, for any dis
asters which it may have brought upon you. You were then
confidently told that James K. Polk, the democratic nominee,
was incompetent to fiU so exalted a station. That in peace or

236 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
in war, he would be alike unable to sustain the credit, the honor
and the glory of the republic. The most insulting and invidi
ous comparisons were instituted between him and his competitor.
In ornothology, the one was the stupid moping bird of night,
whilst the other was the majestic Eagle, soaring aloft among
the clouds. Among quadrupeds, one was the great American
Eclipse, whilst the other was the little Shetland poney of the
circus. Among mortals, the one was so nearly allied to Divin
ity, that if he should chance to fall into a mesmeric slumber,
you might extract virtue enough from him to make half a dozen
such men as James K. Polk ! ! Well, time, the great expoun
der of human events, has rolled onward and I stand to-day
present before you, to point you to the proudest refutation of
all these insulting predictions.
Look first in the order of time, as I know it is first in your
affections, to the state and condition of your Federal Union.
Instead of finding, as you were told you would do, its broken
and shattered fragments everywhere strewed around you, you
behold its bright and golden arch with more than adamantine
strength, still bespanning the continent. Its western terminus
that used to illuminate only the summit of the Rocky Moun
tains, now pours its rich eff'ulgence on all the rivers, and bays
and harbors of the Pacific. Look again on this bright and
beautiful picture, less bright and beautiful 'by far than its glo
rious realization. In the last four years, four new States have
been added to the confederacy. Florida and Texas, two
"bright particular stars" shining in the South, whilst Iowa and
Wisconsin, twin sisters of the LaJies, in sylvan loveliness lie
reposing in the North. A new constellation, for every year of
this administration, to shine upon it and to adorn it. That
the act of Congress admitting Florida and the resolution of
annexation of Texas, did a little antecede the advent of this
administration, can make no difference, because they were
but the ripening fruits of that democratic policy, which through
out its career, has so much distinguished it.
Look now to his alleged incompetency to manage the civil
affairs of the nation. History — impartial history — with its
iron pen, has recorded a succession of able messages to Con
gress, which wiU compare favorably with those of his most

ON THE "PRESIDENTLAL ELECTION. 237
distinguished predecessors. It has recorded, too, a brilliant
series of contested measures, which can find no parallel in
any equal period of the republic. So successfully have these
measures gone into operation, that they have extorted from the
whig party the reluctant admission, that they cannot and dare
not run a Presidential candidate, who will publicly avow his
opposition to one of them. In the Deloney letter, the question
is expressly asked, " Gen. Taylor, are you in favor of a United
States Bank?" No, says the General, I am not prepared
to say that I am. In the same letter, " General Taylor, are
you opposed to the democratic revenue tariff of 1846 ?" No,
says the General, I am not prepared to say that I am. Again,
" Gen. Taylor, are you opposed to the independent or sub-
treasury, which the democrats have lately established and
against which the whigs have warred with such undying oppo
sition ?" No, says Gen. Taylor, I am not prepared to say that
I am opposed to that either. These are substantially the
questions and answers of that celebrated letter, and as long aa
they shall live, they will constitute the loftiest eulogium on
the civil measures of James K. Polk's administration.
I come now to his alleged incompetency in the event of a
foreign war. You will remember how it was more than inti
mated, that in that event, he would not have the nerve to stand
up to such a crisis. WeU, the war did come. I speak not
yet of why and how it came. But it did come, and what was
said then ? Why, the counter cry was instantly raised that he
had too much nerve ! so much that he even provoked the war —
that he even run out to meet it, by ordering the march of the
army tothe Rio Grande. When afterwards in the further pro
gress of the war, your triumphant Eagles had perched on all
the domes of her capitol, what was said then ? Why, this
democratic President of ours is altogether too bloody minded.
He is a very Tamerlane or Ghensikhan and don't want to make
a treaty, until he can swallow up the whole national sover
eignty of Mexico I And yet this bloody accusation had scarcely
fallen from the lips of the Senator who pronounced it, before
the President sent in a treaty eminently distinguished for ita
liberality and its forbearance.
With the ratification of that treaty, the bright and beautiful

238 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES,
goddess of peace again returns to our country. She comes,
" Like a beautiful cloud to its Haven of rest.
On the white wings of peace floating up from the West."
She comes bearing in her hands all that was ever demanded ;
" indemnity for the past and security for the future." She pro
claims too, to the everlasting honor of this administration and
of the Christian age in which we live, that in all this war, not a
gun has been fired, not a city has been taken, not a province
has been invaded, without her having first tendered to our
deluded enemy the Olive Branch of Peace.
With her also has returned that gallant army, that has borne
your standard so high and so proudly on every battle field of
Mexico. They come — ^having never lost a battle, never sus
tained a defeat. They come, having covered themselves, their
kindred, their country, and this administration, with undying
honors. They come, having filled America with joy and the
world with admiration. The world ! All the civifized nations
of it, gazing on the wonderful prowess of our arms and the
sublime operations of our republican system under this and
preceding democratic administrations, are even now kindUng
up the beacon fires of liberty, to light their way " to the model
republic of America." France, springing up fike a young giant,
is already in the path, whilst the other nations of the continent
are preparing to follow. England, too, hoary and veteran as
she is in the ways of oppression, begins to feel the mighty im
pulse ; whilst Ireland — down-trodden and oppressed Ireland—
slowly lifts herself up and looks mournfully around her for re
lief. But alas ! I fear there is no relief for Ireland ! I fear
that her own immortal poet has too well described her con
dition :
" Alas, for his country ! her pride has gone by.
And that spirit is broken that never would bend ;
O'er her ruin in secret her children must sigh.
For 'tis treason to love her, and death to defend.
Unpriz'd are her sons, till they have learned to betray,
Undistinguished they live, if they shame not their sires ;
And the torch that would light them through liberty's way.
Must be caught from the pile where their country expires."
I know, gentlemen, that you will excuse this rapid review of

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 239
the past four years, as indispensable to the contemplation of
the four which are to follow. It exhibits the glorious triumphs
of democratic principles and measures, and brings us directly
to the question, whether there should be any change or aban
donment of them in the pending presidential election. Oppo
sition to these principles and measures laid the foundation of
the present whig party. That opposition has been for sixteen
years bold, fierce and unrelenting. Its author, and I may now
say its finisher, has been ever in the field, urging his followers
to victory or death. But in every election they have had some
well known and well understood platform on which to stand.
But how stands the case in the present election? Has either
of the great political parties of this country, so far forgotten
what was due to its own honor or to the people of the United
States, as to conceal their opinions and utterly refuse to dis
close them ? Let impartial and undeniable facts answer the
terrible question. Go with me first to the records of the con
vention of the democratic party at Baltimore. Read over the
long series of resolutions, fully covering every great doctrine,
and principle, and measure of our party. Turn next to the
letters of acceptance of our nominees. Gens. Cass and Butler,
and see how fully and completely our creed is endorsed. Every
democratic heart must swell with a just pride, that all is so
plain, and public, and patriotic.
Now turn to the records of the Philadelphia whig convention.
Read over its pages — every line of them — and you will not find
one word about principles, or docfrines, or measures — not
a word against any of the democratic measures ; not a
word for or against a banlc, for a protective tariff, for distribu
tion, against the sub-treasury, against the war, against the ac
quisition of territory to pay the expenses of the war — nothing
for or against that firebrand of hell, the Wilmot Proviso ! It
was no accidental omission in that convention, for more than
one proposition was made to make known, in some way or
other, the principles of their party as involved in this election,
but they were ruled to be either out of order, or lost in the scuffle
and clamor for avaUabUity. Nor was it left to the response of
General Taylor, their nominee, to elucidate their party senti-

240 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
ments on all these subjects ; for when you read over his letter of
acceptance, you are forced to exclaim,
" Silence, how dead ! and darkness, how profound !"
Remember, gentlemen, we are searching for the principles
ofthe whig party, involved in this election. We have searched
for them in the high places of the party, but have searched in
vain. Let no man point us now, as formerly, to the votes and
speeches of Mr. Clay as the true exponents of whig principles.
Time was when he was the living and true oracle. Time was
when he was regarded and called the very embodiment of whig-
gery itself. But, alas ! that " embodiment" is now dead, politi
cally dead — slain, not by his enemies, but murdered outright
by those whom he had nourished into life and protected be
neath the shadow of his own great name. Like Caesar, he was
slain in the capitol, hy his own friends. He expired, too, like
him, not at the foot of Pompey's statue, but at the base of that
great monument of whig principles which he himself had reared.
Who, of all " the conspirators," dare, now in their extremity, to
go down to the lone resting place of the departed, to pluck up
from his tomb the principles and doctrines with which to em
blazon the blank and naked standard which they have committed
to the hands of General Taylor ? Fancy to yourself some en
vious Casca, or some well beloved Brutus, if you please, start
ing on such a pilgrimage. He arrives — ih^ hour is midnight.
Standing beneath the gloomy arches of the sepulchre, he calls
aloud on " the Sage of Ashland !" The very grave would burst
open on such a caU, and a form like that of Samuel of old,
slowly rising to his view, would cry, " Aback ! aback ! I hear
the voice of one who murdered the whig party when they mur
dered me."
Sir, said Gov. B., (turning slov^dy to Gov. Jones,) say not that
it is a strange spectacle to see me shedding tears over the
grave of Henry Clay — I, who twenty years ago, introduced
resolutions into the Legislature of Tennessee, condemning his
imputed bargain, intrigue and corruption in the election of Mr.
Adams. No, sir, I was his public enemy — struck at him as such,
in open day. He expected it from all good Jackson men, and'
struck back giant blows in return. But I never struck at

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, 241
him as a false friend in disguise ; Judas like, I never " betrayed
him with a kiss^' — I never opened to him the arms of pretended
friendship, whilst I drove the keen stiletto to his heart ! No,
sir, I shed no tears over the grave of this fallen Csesar. I only
point his old and sincere friends to
" the deep damnation of his taking off."
The old principles of the party having expired with Mr. Clay,
and his party having in fact killed him off on account of his
principles, it remains only to be seen what new ones have
been substituted in their place and stand involved in the pres
ent election. Before I proceed with this distinct proposition, I
mean to call my competitor to the stand, to prove by him that
the nomination of General Taylor was a total and final aban
donment of all the old principles of the whig party. He has
denied it to-day, and on former days, and I will now prove it upon
him by the words which have fallen from his own lips. On
the 8th of April last, standing at the head and in the presence
of his, party, he warned his friends " ofthe fearful precipice on
which they rushed," in the nomination of General Taylor : "An
abyss," said he, " which if not avoided I fear is destined to
swallow up our brightest hopes and most cherished principles."
Well, Governor, they would not avoid Taylor's nomination, and
«o, sure enough, away went "yom* most cherished principles."
Again : now turn to the 13th page of that speech, where you
ask, after enumerating your principles," how stands General
Taylor on these important subjects ? Who can answer ? Who
shall speak ? The deep, awful silence ofthe grave is notmore
profound. And yet we are urged to select him as the cham
pion of our principles, the safe depository of our faith, the
great expounder of our creed." Gov. Jones, you were then
horrified at the very idea of doing such a thing ! You proceed,
" are gentlemen ready thus to abandon their principles, for I
can regard it as nothing less than an abandonment." Gov.
Jones (said Gov. B.) mark the fullness and power of this lan
guage, "nothing less than an abandonment ;" not of one, two
or three, but of all the cherished principles of your party. In
that or some other speech, you have declared that a party
without principles is like a body without a soul ; and putting
17

242 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
together your arguments and admissions on former occasions,
you leave the old Clay whig party truly " in a lost and ruined
condition." But, sir, said Gov. Brown, no man should be sur
prised at such a result, who looks at the astounding declaration
on the 14th page of your speech. There you proclaim that,
although you will not " willingly make the surrender of your
principles," yet you will obey the decision of the great whig
convention, " choosing rather to do what my judgment con
demns, standing and acting with my friends, rather than by
standing out, giving aid and comfort to the enemy." Sir, said
Gov. B., I am amazed at such sentiments, and I enter my eter
nal protestation against them. "I will not," says he, " willingly
make a surrender of my principles." No, sir, a man must die
a martyr to his principles, although he may often yield up his
opinions and notions of expediency and policy to the judgment
of his party friends ; but if he would be true to God, to truth
and virtue, he must surrender his principles to no power upon
earth ! But Gov. Jones gives his reason for this sentiment,
so shocking to all the high elements of morafity ; " choosing
rather to do that which my judgment condemns," &c. Now
what is a man's judgment ? what his reason ? It is that high
and noble faculty which God has planted in the mind of man
to mark his superiority over the brute creation, and he that
rudely tears the bright jewel from his brow, is no safe counsellor
and guide to this large Christian assembly.

'tis a base

Abandonment of reason to resign
Our right of thought.
But I mean to fortify my position, that the old whig principles
are abandoned, and are not involved in this election, by a wit
ness greater than Gov. Jones himself. Gen. Taylor declares,
in his answer to the Deloney letter, in relation to a bank and
the tariff, that he was not prepared to give his opinions, and
could only do so after duly investigating them, which he de
clared he had not the time then to do, all his time being taken
up in his official duties. Now how can questions be at issue,
on which a candidate has not yet formed his opinion ? Again :
on the 15th February 1848, Gen. Taylor writes a letter to a
gentleman at Cincinnati as follows : " I have to inform you

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, ^3
that I have laid it down as a principle not to give my opinions
upon or prejudge in any way the various questions of policy
now at issue between the political parties of the country,
nor to promise what I would or would not do, were I elected to
the Presidency of the United States, and that in the cases pre
sented in your letter, I see no necessity for departing from
that principle."
Now, I put it to all honorable men, to all right thinking men,
whether a silent, undisclosive candidate like this puts any thing
whatsoever in issue — new or old, good or bad, right or wrong.
His only jorincipfe is to declare no principle. Sir, it was this
letter, and others like it, that made you declare in your Nash
viUe speech that no man can command the confidence and i#uf-
frage of the whig party who refuses lo speak out plainly, fully
and freely. Here we see that Gen. Taylor refuses to speak
out at all — on any subject — to any body. It was this letter, and
others like it — it was your speech at Nashville, condemning
his dogged and obstinate concealment of his principles, that
turned hundreds of your party and of my party away from
him, and keep them from him to this hour, in despite of all
your back-sliding and tame surrender of your reason and your
judgment to the commands of party. Sir, said Gov. B. to
Gov. Jones, you sometimes charge me with having been once
in favor of Gen. Taylor. I was never for him but on the ex
press condition that he should make a full and frank exposition
of his principles, and that these, when made, should be found
satisfactory to the great mass of the American people — then,
and not till then, was I willing to support him on national
grounds; but never — never, as a mere party candidate, to be
swallowed down, as he subsequently was, by a fraudulent de
vice, and then vomited up amidst the party orgies of the Phil
adelphia Convention. Sir, these things released me, and re
leased all other democrats, from all and every teal or supposed
obhgation to vote for Gen. Taylor. If any further reason
were wanting to justify our surrendering all ideas of his sup
port, let it be found in the bold and insulting declaration of my
competitor in his speech at Philadelphia, that " he cared not
whether Zachary Taylor was a whig or not — or what he was ;
provided he was against locofocoism, he was with him." Let

244 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER -SPEECHES.
him be native American — anti-mason — abolitionist — saint op
devil — any thing or nothing, so he is opposed to the democra
cy ! ! To that democracy which, in another part of the same
speech, notwithstanding all his gentle cooing to them now, he
denominates " that lying, double-dealing, spurious deniocracy,
modern locofocoism, [which he declared] he utterly abhorred
and repudiated." What democrat in all this broad land conld
sit down to a Taylor entertainment with an insulting invita
tion like this ?
But Gov. Jones endeavors to escape from all these uncom
fortable clilemmas, by saying that, since the Sth of April last,
General Taylor has come out with a satisfactory declaration of
whig principles, and therefore it is that he now supports him.
That if he had not, he would not advocate his election. I thank
the gentleman, said Gov. B., for the admission, and will hold
him to it with an iron grasp. I will enumerate the" whig prin
ciples, known and admitted to be such, and then demand to
know of Gov. Jones which one ef them has Gen. Taylor ex
pressed his opinion upon since the Sth of April to this very
hour. Note them. Gov. Jones, and tell me one. 1st, the bank
— ^2d, the tariff — 3d, internal improvements. Has he expressed
his opinions for or against any one of these ? No, not one.
In his Allison letter he speaks of how he would apply the
veto power to them, but his opinions on them, for or against, he
does not pretend to intimate — not at all, not at all. 4th, op
position to the war as unjust and unconstitutional. This is an
other whig doctrine. Does Gen. Taylor give his opinions on
this point in his* Allison or any other letter up' to this day?
No, he does not. He speaks of the evils of war generally,
and deprecates the subjugation of other nations by " conquest,"
but gives no opinion as to the Mexican war in particular. 5th,
unwillingness to take from Mexico territorial indemnity against
the expenses of the war, is another whig doctrine on which
Gen. Taylor is profoundly silent in the Allison letter. Remem
ber, sir, I am now through the enumeration of whig principles
and measures, and I yet hold you in an iron grasp, and demand
to know on what one has GejU Taylor developed his opinions
since your NashviUe speech. You tell me that he has come
'pH-t at least for the whig doctrine of the veto. No such thing,

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 245
sir — to use your own favorite mode of expression, " not a bit
of it." Look to the whig speeches in Congress after Tyler's
vetoes — look to your own speech at Nashville, where the whig
doctrine is, a total abolition ofthe veto power. Listen to your
own words : " Who does not remember the lofty denunciations
against not only the improper exercise of this power, but
against its very existence? Have we not pointed out the hor
rors of this one man power ? this spirit of monarchy ? and
have we not solemnly pledged ourselves to the country — have
we not invoked the genius of liberty to attest our sincerity,
that, when in power, we would use the proper means to rid tlie
constitution of this incubus and strike from the hands of the
people this last fetter?" Now, hear what Gen. Taylor says
about this " abolition and annihilation" of the veto power.
In his Alhson letter : " The veto power. The power given by
the constitution to the Executive to interpose his veto is a high
conservative power," &c. There, now, you see that so far
from coming out /or your whig anti-veto power, he knocks it
right on the head, and leaves you with the poor excuse of hav
ing gone /or Taylor only because he went against you and one
of your favorite doctrines. So 1 hold you in that iron grasp
j'et. You seek to escape by saying that he lays down a good
whig rule for the exercise of the veto power under the consti
tution. And is this all^all the platform on which you and
your party, and your candidate, have to stand in this great
election? With no one opinion expressed, on any one subject
in the world, except the application of the veto power in almost
the very words of nearly every President that ever went before
him. What are they ? " But in my opinion, should never be
exercised except in cases of clear violation of the constitution
or manifest haste and want of consideration of Congress."
Sir, if the constitution be violated by an act of Congress,
who would thank Gen. Taylor to veto it ? He takes an oath
to support the constitution, and if Congress send him a bUl
which he cannot sign consistently with that instrument, the
scorn of the world and the hottest fires of perdition await him
if he dare to put his signature to it. So there is no platform in
that. But he adds the other clause you say, that he will not
veto it unless it be in cases of " manifest haste and want of

246 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
consideration of Congress." Who would? Why, every Pres
ident who ever vetoed a law not on constitutional grounds, put
it on the footing expressly that Congress had not duly considered
the subject. No President ever presumed a wilful and deliber
ate purpose in Congress to do wrong, and none ever wiU. As
it relates to the balance of the AUison letter, where Gen. Tay
lor declares that " on the subject of the currency, the tariff, and
internal improvements by Congress, the will of the people as
expressed by Congress, ought to be respected and carried out
by the Executive." If the previous rule in relation to the apph
cation of the veto power is to be applied to this, it means noth
ing — absolutely nothing. But if it is not, then it means what
Gen. Taylor can never stand up to — what his oath and the
constitution would never allow him to stand up to. But I need
not argue this, because Gov. Jones every day admits that on
the currency, the tariff", and internal improvements, if Congress
violated the constitution, or legislated "without due consider
ation," Gen. Taylor would have to veto on these as on all other
subjects. This admission sweeps away the whole Allison let
ter, and the fancied platform which it reared tumbles to the
ground, and I hold you yet, sir, in the iron grasp of your admis
sion, not to support Gen. Taylor if he has not come out fully
and freely with his principles. But, sir, I feel that it is useless
to press you further on this admission, for I am satisfied in my
mind that it is no disclosures of Gen. Taylor that have worked
out your conversion to him — ^but that surrender of reason, that
throwing away of your better judgment,ihat unwilling abandon
ment of principles at the high commands of yonr party, which
you avow in your NashviUe speech.
But before I leave this AUison letter, aUow me to ask why
this fresh and furious onslaught on the veto power of the Consti
tution ? It has been there ever since the repubfic was founded.
It was put there unanimously by the convention who framed
the Constitution — by Washington, and Madison, and Franklin,
and a long list of the best men that God in his mercy ever sent
to this earth — under it the republic has grown from thirteen to
thirty States, and from three or four to more than twenty millions
of inhabitants. In commerce and navigation ; in agriculture
and the mechanical arts and sciences ; in all the elements of

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 247
national greatness, both in peace and in war, she sfeinds the
wonder of the age and of the world. Is it possible, that this
canker worm has been working at the bud and eating out the
vital principles of our government, unfelt and unperceived du
ring aU this while? WeU, look to its mighty ravages. Out
of more than seven thousand laws, twenty-five only have been
vetoed — one out of about two hundred and eighty ; twice by
George Washington ; six times by Mr. Madison ; once by Mr.
Monroe ; eight or nine times in the eight years of Gen. Jack
son ; four times by Mr. Tyler, and three times by James K.
Polk. That is to say, in twenty-five out of seven thousand
laws, the different Presidents of the United States have called
on Congress to re-consider laws which they had passed and
sent to him for approval — twenty-five times out of seven thou
sand ! If any of these laws were, on re-consideration, thought
to be decidedly good ones. Congress could have passed them
over the head of the President and in spite of his veto, and no
mischief could have come to the Republic.
My competitor claims Alexander Hamilton as the author of
the veto as it stands in the Constitution. He must have read
the history of the convention to a poor purpose to have come
to that conclusion. Hamilton proposed and advocated an
absolute veto. Mr. Madison or Mr. Edmund Randolph proposed
a qualified or limited one and it was adopted, Hamilton's
having been rejected by the convention. And at what moment
is it proposed to obliterate this veto power, or to render it
nugatory and vain by non-user and neglect ? In former years
the power of numbers was with the South, and she rested in
assurance and confidence beneath the shadow of that power,
but now " the sceptre has departed from Judah," and an in
exorable majority of more than forty votes is daily cast against
you from the North — from the North, where the fires of fanati
cism are now burning and threatening every year to consume
you and your institutions together. It is at such a moment as
this that you are called upon to heave overboard your last an
chor, or to throw away the last shield of your protection and
safety. But I must pass away, said Gov. Brown, for want of time,
from a further examination of this subject, in order to answer

248 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
some of the objections taken by Gov. Jones to the democratic
nominee. Gen. Cass, one of the purest patriots and wisest
statesmen this country has ever produced.
Gov. Brown then reviewed and most triumphantly answered
the charge that Gen. Cass was a federalist in 1798, or at any
other time. He showed by extracts from one of Gov. Jones'
northern speeches, that he had declared, that Gen. Cass had
been a democrat all the days of his life. He denied that Gov.
Jones had brought forward one particle of proof to show that
Gen. Cass voted for or approved the vagrant law of Michigan —
that it had as well be said that the Speakers ofthe two houses
of the Legislature, or of Congress, voted for all the bills they
signed, or that the foreman of the grand jury must have voted
for every bill of presentment or indictment which he signs and
presents to the court. He adverted to the charge that Gen.
Cass had received large sums of extra allowances for his pub
lic services, but said that Gov. Jones admitted that he had not
received one dollar whicbthe laws ofthe land did not authorize
to be paid to him. This he said settled that charge forever.
If the law allowed and authorized the payment there was an
end of the matter. He showed that the statements of Mr.
Wise before the committee prejudicial to Gen. Cass, were all
founded on the hearsay and information of others, and not on
any knowledge of Mr. Wise himself. He adverted to certain
extracts from a speech of Mr. Yancy, of Alabama, pronounc
ing Gen. Cass to be a time-serving politician and an enemy to
the South; and said, Mr. Yancy was a disappointed member of
the Baltimore Convention, who had returned home, and whatever
he was saying, was morethan counterbalancedby the high testi
mony of respect for the public character and private virtues of
Gen. Cass, which had been borne by such whigs as Abbott Law
rence, S. S. Prentiss and Bailie Peyton. Gov. Brown after
pronouncing the highest eulogium on Gen. Cass and Gen.
Butier in peace and in war, in the Cabinet and the field, said
he must pass on to a more grave objection taken by Gov.
Jones to the election of Gen. Cass.
That objection was, thatthe election of Lewis Cass to the
Presidency of the United States would be an endorsement of
the war policy of this administration — " a policy of invasion —

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 249
of aggression — of territorial aggrandizement  whic^, if per
sisted in, must lead to the destruction of our government."
And pray, sir, have you not already endorsed that policy, by
the selection of yom- own candidate ? He has been the very
head and front of that war. He has gathered all his laurels
in it. Without it he had been nothing — with it he has be
come your proud and boasted candidate. He adcised every
step in it. He advised the march to the banks of the Rio
Grande, and afterward that the war should be carried
over the Rio Grande into the very heart and vitals of
the Republic. He entered so deeply and cordially into it,
that in his letter to Gen. Gaines, he advised the capture and
retention of six or seven of her finest provinces ; and yet,
sir, after all, you go down into the blood and carnage of
this unjust and damnable war and pluck up your candi
date for the Presidency. Posterity will be amazed at the
inconsistency and absurdity of the act. But I meet the charge
of Gov. Jones with a positive and unequivocal denial. The
war policy of this administration has not been aggressive — has
not been for territorial aggrandizement, and I challenge him at
once to the proof. Sirs, he offers you none, and will offer
you none. He prefers charges against his own govern
ment which, if true, ought to sink it to the lowest depths
of infamy and dishonor — charges that present this noble
Republic as standing out amongst the other nations of
the earth, as a proud despot, bloated with the plunder
and reeking with the blood of a weak, innocent and help
less people ; and yet stops not and cares not to bring for
ward one fact, or to adduce one argument, to support the foul
impeachment. Well, if he will not prove it, 1 will disprove it.
Since this war has been ended and our armies withdrawn,
Mexico, by her commissioners who negotiated the treaty, has
acknowledged that she did not own one acre of territory on
this side the Rio del Norte ; that she had not owned one acre
of it since the battle of San Jacinto ; that in every attempt she
had made to regain it, she had been whipped off from it, " leav
ing the country between the Rio Grande and the Nueces abso
lutely free." Absolutely free ! This is the free and voluntary
confession of one of the parties to the controversy, and is the

250 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES,
very highest and best authoi^y. Reverdy Johnson, one of
your ablest Senators, last winter, after deep and profound in
vestigation, stated the same facts in almost the same words,
and expressly declared, " that from the commencement of the
revolution of 1834 to the independence declared by Texas In
1836 — from that period to the admission of Texas into the
Union in 1845, and from '45 to the present hour, no Mexican
document can be found, military or civil — no Mexican officer,
civil or military, has ever been known maintaining that the terri
tory lying between the Nueces and the Rio Grande belonged to
Mexico, by any other title than that which she maintained to
the whole territory between the Sabine and the Rio Grande."
I pause and stand on these two recent authorities, and demand
of Gov. Jones to overturn them or take back the bold and dis
gracing charges made against has own government. Reverdy
Johnson, one of the ablest whigs in Congress, tells you you are
wrong. Mexico herself, the only party interested against us,
tells you you are wrong, and your heart ought to leap with joy
from the Mexican to the American side of the question.
If then the lower Rio Grande, to which only the army was
sent, were the true boundary between the United States (after
annexation) and Mexico, every doubt and shadow of doubt,
about the justice, the constitutionality and necessity of the
Mexican war vanishes at once. The war poficy of the Presi
dent instantly becomes ohe of self-defence, protecting from in
vasion every portion of our wide-spreading (lepublic. Yes,
sirs, after all you have heard, the President, has only acted on
the principles of self-defence. The Mexican army, in the niglit
time, crossed the true boundary, with the view of re-conquering
the whole of Texas, assailed our army and murdered our people
on our own soU, as is now admitted by Mexico herself But
Gov. Jones teUs us, however all this may be, that I told you
in 1844 that there would be no war, and therefore I was a
false prophet on the subject. WeU, sir, who falsified my pro
phecy ? Not Mexico — but you — your party — you as good
as sent word to her that she had given up Texas too easily —
that she had a good title to it, and that if she would assert it,
that Heaven would take sides with her, and that it would be
downright robbery for the United States to take it from her.

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 251
So encouraged she did go to war for it, and if I and my party
were bad prophets, you and your party were worse patriots.
But I charge, (said Gov. Brown,) not only that the immediate
origin of this war (annexation being the remote one) is to be
attributed to the course and conduct of your party, but that
its procrastination, with all the consequent loss of life and
treasure, lies at your door.
Your whig speeches were thrown broadcast throughout Mex
ico ; our army marching from hacienda to hacienda every where
met with them. Your whig leaders were enrolled as honorary
members upon the pages of Mexican societies, and their pub
lic journals proclaimed that no treaty should be made until
their friends should succeed in turning James K. Polk out and
turning themselves into power — then, and not till then, they
said, should a treaty be made and peace restored to the two
countries. Yes, sir, and you speak ofthe blood that has been
shed and the precious lives that have been lost in this war.
Walk about the graveyards of the city of Mexico ; pass by
those on the great National road from Vera Cruz ; pause at
that great one at New Orleans, and if the brave and gallant
dead could rise from their resting places, with uplifted hands,
they would exclaim, " We owe our death to the conduct of
our own countrymen." The baUs that sent many of these brave
defenders of their country to their long homes were wrapped
up in the speeches of distinguished leaders of the whig party.
Sir, there is no disguising, no excusing, no palfiating great and
distressing facts likes these, and it is time ior patriots oi every
age and name and party to enter a solemn protest against
such conduct. The leaders and managers of the whig party
have too long and two often exhibited a fatal proclivity in
every difficulty with a foreign nation to take sides against their
own government — I say against their own government ; I will
not say against their own country.
In our difficulties with France to compel her to pay up in
demnities, which she had solemnly bound herself by treaty to
do, your party took sides against their own government. When
the Indians had murdered men, women, and children on our
southern border, and Gen. Jackson recommended war for their
protection, your party, with a few honorable exceptions, took

252 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
sides against their own government. When, in that vpar, Gen.
Taylor, recommended the use of bloodhounds to hunt up the
Indians in their lairs, you cried " down with him and Mr. Van
Buren, for this wanton, wicked and unchristian warfare ;" but
now this very bloodliound adviser is lauded to the skies as " the
greatest and the best." When we were on the verge pf war
with Great Britain for Oregon, you took sides with England on
the question of title, and forced your own government to a
compromise, which you now say it was base and cowardly in
Polk to have made. When it was proposed to strengthen and
enlarge our own country by the free and voluntary annexation
of Texas, you took sides against your own government, and
contended that it would be downright robbery on Mexico ,\heTe\)y
as good as sending word to Mexico to stand out for it and
Heaven would sustain her in the claim. And when war did
come, and our country was actually invaded and our people
murdered on our own soil, they took sides against their own
government, and, what is still worse, they continue yet so to
take sides, against all the light and evidence which truth and
history, with all their power and effulgence, can shed upon the
subject. History has recorded these high, portentous facts, and
it is with a heart full of sorrow and indignation that I recite
its burning pages.
Gov. Jones prefers another charge against Gen. Cass, to
which I wish now briefly to reply. He warns you against him
as a northern man, whom you cannot trust on the great ques
tions growing out of our pecufiar southern institution. Sir, I
chaUcnge proudly a comparison of candidates in this respect.
You call on your's for his opinions on the Wilmot Proviso.
He shakes his head in awful and ominous silence. When
called on to the north, in one of your speeches, to say how
Gen. Taylor is on that great question, you frankly admit that
you do not know. Others, with better opportunities, declare
that he is against any further extension of slavery, and that he
would not veto the Wilmot Proviso. Caleb B. Smith, mem
ber of Congress, says he is with the north on that subject ; Mr.
Ewing, of Ohio, says he is with the north ; King and Ashman,
members of Congress from Massachusetts, say so ; Coalter,
from New Hampshire, and Trueman Smith, from Connecticut,

ON THE PRESIDENTUL ELECTION. 253
say so ; and hundreds of others assert it with a boldness and
confidence which seems to be founded on actual knowledge.
Now, sir, if Gen. Taylor were right on that subject, would he
snaiie his head at you ; would he put his finger on his lips ;
would he leave his friend Gov. Jones to grope his way here
through the State of Tennessee, unable to say how- his candi
date is on the great question of the age — a question'bn which
the continuance and permanence of this Union may depend ?
When I look upon you, sir, every day, panting and laboring
under this load, I cannot but think of St. Paul when he stood
on Mars' Hill and exclaimed, " Ye men of Athens ! I perceive
that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as 1 passed by
and beheld your devotions , I found . an altar with this inscrip
tion : 'To the Unknown God.' " Yes, sir, 1 see your inscrip
tions every day to the unknown god whom you ignorantly
worship. You pray to him, but he will not answer you ; you
call upon him, but he will not unveil himself to you, on no one
subject, in no one particular, in no form, nor shape, nor inan-
ner. He will not thunder to you from the mountain, nor blaze
before you in a burning bush — all is doubt, and mystery, and
uncertainty. But, sir, how is it on the other side ? Gen. Cass leaving
the strong side comes over to the weak one ; giving up early
and hasty irnpressions, he follows the deep and constitutional
convictions of his mind, and boldly declares that the south is
right on this great question, and that he will rise or fall with
her upon it. What is that the south is needing in this trying
and critical moment ? Not friends in the south, for if the whole
south stood as one man, (Gen. Taylor and all,) still she would
have a majority of forty against her. She, therefore, needs
friends in the north — some, strong man, with strong friends,
who will stand by her. Such a man is Lewis Cass, and the
friends, those who stand by him in this election. With him and
them as her allies, the dark, clouds that now hang over her
may be dispelled, and our country start afresh in a new career
of glory and of greatness.
But with what sort of grace, said Gov. Brown, can our ad
versaries object to the northern residence of Gen. Cass ? Look
to your own ticket for Vice President. Compare it with ours —

254 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEE&HES.
Butler and Fillmore ; both in Congress for years together.
Butler true as steel to the south on every occasion ; Fillmore
recording, on many occasions, the most fatal votes to her safety
and her interest. I do not hesitate this day to declare that
neither Adams, nor Slade, nor Giddings, have ever recorded
stronger votes against you. Out of a multitude, I will give
you one that stamps him indelibly as one of your worst and
greatest enemies. You may vote for him if you choose, but
you shall not do so without knowing that you place in your
Senate Chamber a man that may have to give the casting vote
on your nearest and dearest interests, and who v/ould as surely
give it against you as you place him in the office.
In 1838, Mr. Fillmore, with Mr. Adams and others, voted
against the foil-owl.'! 2' resolution : " Congress, in the exorcise
of its acknowledged powers, has no right to discriminate be
tween the institutions of one portion of the States and another,
with the view of abolishing the one and promoting the other."
Here is a vote, (among many others,) about which there can
be no mistake. He expressly declares, that Congress has the
right to discriminate against your slave property, and that too,
with the view of abolishing it. It is the very essence or marrow
of abolition itself. No sophistry can explain it away — ^no ar
gument can justify or defend it. It stands out in bold and
monstrous relief; it looks every man of the south right in the
face, and bids him with a defiance to vote for Millard Fillmore
at his peril! And peril it you may, but you shall not have it
to say that I did not warn you against the murderous deed.
When this man shall have been elected ; when he shall have
given the casting vote against you in the Senate; wlir.i the
news shall fall upon you like the sound of a fire-bell at night ;
when the fires of fanaticism and of insurrection shall have
united their heUish blaze ; when your hearthstones shaU be
blackened, and your altars stained with the blood of your
own household, say not that Aaron V. Brown was an unfaith
ful sentinel on the watchtowers of liberty.
But I am admonished that my allotted time has nearly ex
pired. I can only appeal to you to pause, and to pause long,
before you call a mere military man — with no experience, with
no opinions yet formed or matured, or if matured, who has not

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 253
and will not make a disclosure of them — to the Presidency of
this ^re at republic. There can be no necessity for so rash and,
until now, so unprecedented an attempt. For more than twenty
years our government, with but a single exception, has been
in democratic hands, and has advanced in all the elements of
national greatness with the most astonishing rapidity. There
can bo 110 necessity to tuin out the old and long tried demo
cratic pilots who have steered the great vessel of State. The
new ones proposed are untried and unpractised — they never
looked on her compass nor touched her helm in all their lives.
1 our yearo ago, wlien the good old ship sailed out, you were
confidently told that she never would return — that she would be
driven upon the rocks, and shoals, and quicksands, andfinally be
" In the deep bo,?:i:Ti of- tho ocean buried."
But, thank God ! yonder she comes, with all her sails set, riding
gallantly into port ! All I ask of you before you make this
great change is, to go down with me and examine the state and
condition of the good old vessel of State. Look at her capa
cious and noble hull — her towering masts, peering upward
toward the clouds — her everlasting timbers, bidding defiance
to the waves and the tempest. Walk about her mighty bul
warks — turn toward her mast-head, and gaze upon the stars
and stripes that have carried your name, your fame, your power,
over all the habitable globe — four more stars than you ever saw
shine there before. But all these relate to the outside, the mere
exterior of the noble vessel : what of her cargo ? It is precious
and priceless. Our commerce? Under the influence of re
venue duties only, it is larger than it ever was before. Our
agriculture? It has fed half the starring nations of Europe.
Our navigation ? Boundless as the oceans of the earth. Our
mechanical arts and sciences ? They have filled the world with
astonishment. But tell us — tell us, what of the Union, the ark
of our political salvation? Safely brought home to you,
brighter and stronger than ever. What of the constitution ?
Brought back, too, sound and unbroken. Our civil and reli
gious liberties, what of them ? Here they are, pure and invio
late as when they were first baptised in the blood of the revo
lution. What patriotic voice is not ready to exclaim, then all
is weU ! all is well I

SPEECH
Of Gov. Aaron F. Brown, on the issues of the Presidential
Canvass, delivered at Columbia, August, 6, 1852;

Fellow Citizens : — If the departed spirits of that noble race
of men who first settled this country were permitted to revisit
the earth, with what astonishment would they behold what is
now transpiring amongst us ! They lived in the days of Jef
ferson and Madison ; they saw thern, heard them, and fought
with them the great battle against federalism in 1798 and 1801.
From their hallowed lips they had received the sacred doctrines
of the Constitution, that every State should be equal, and
every individual protected in life, liberty and property.
With what amazement would they now learn that since their
departure, some strange and undefined power had been disco
vered in our government higher than the Constitution ! — that
in fact abrogates that instrument, with all its compromises and
guarantees I A power that claims the right to demolish nine
hundred millions of southern property at a single blow, and
thus to reduce at once a whole people to beggary and want.
With what further amazement would they behold the fact,
that a party holding such dangerous doctrines, had grown from
a mere speck, a cloud no bigger than a man's hand, now to be
so strong as to lay hold on one of the pohtical parties of the
country, and dictate to it both a creed and a candidate ! I re
peat, both a creed and a candidate ! It is to demonstrate this
great fact, that I am here to-day. To demonstrate it, not to
the whigs, not to the democrats, but to candid and impartial
men of all parties.
That dark power, whose deadly influences I propose to trace,

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, 2B5
is neither whig nor democratic. It has risen up in spite of
them both, and would plant its iron heel on the neck of the one
as soon as of the other. The abolition party is exotic in its ori
gin, and took its rise in the bigotry and fanaticism of the old
world. In the short period of a single generation, it overawed
the British Parliament, and demolished the whole system of
West India slavery. It compelled the provisional government
of France, no later than 1848, to abolish it in her colonies,
giving to her outraged owners only two months for prepara
tion. Denmark and Sweden have followed in the same career.
Nearly one million and a half of slaves have been liberated
against the will of their owners under European agitation.
Sir Robert Peel, the greatest of England's modern statesmen,
looking at these great and speedy results, has expressed the
belief " that the doom of slavery is sealed ; that it cannot long
survive ; that it must, at no remote period, be extinguished."
Such are the signs and warnings of the old world — what are
they in our own country ?
Innumerable societies are scatterred over the States of the
North. The great basis on which they are founded is this :
" We hold slavery to be an evil now, and of course must be
emancipated now. If the thief (say they) be found with stolen
property, he must relinquish it at once. To hold the colored
man in vassalage, must ere long break up the fountains of the
great deep, and unsheath the sword of vengeance, revolution
and death." Such is the fundamental creed and foundation of
the abolition party : universal emancipation, or vengeance, rev
olution and death ! Such is their creed : what has been their
progress ? They have overawed most of the public men of
the North, and cut off the heads of such as Fillmore and Web
ster, who ventured to demur to their unconstitutional demands.
They have entered the legislatures of nearly every northern
State, and tied up the hands of their senators by the most posi
tive instructions. They have forced their way into the halls of
Congress, breaking down the 21st rule, the only barrier that
could be erected by the wise men of the South. They have
broken the churches asunder, because they would not walk
with the slaveholder even in the road to hea.ven. They have
measured arms with the government itself on the fugitive
18

256 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
slave bill, bidding defiance to its marshals, imprisoning the
master who claimed his slave, or closing the scene, as at Chris
tiana, in murder and blood.
It was at a period when the abolitionists had achieved so
many triumphs, and were flushed with so many victories, that
the whig and democratic parties assembled at Baltimore.
The selection of candidates was a matter of no peculiar in
terest to either, so far as it related to the old issues which had
originally divided them. They were considered either as ob
solete, or were permitted to slumber beneath the intense and
all-absorbing question of slavery. Not a whig, nor a demo
cratic delegate was known of, who left the South, but with the
great master-passion of his soul, not to nominate any candi
date who was not true to the rights of the South — true to the
Constitution, and true to the fugitive slave biU founded on the
Constitution. The democratic party knew no better mode of
ascertaining the sentiments of their candidates than to address
letters to them, asking for a full public declaration of their
views. They all declared that they would veto any bill pro
posing a repeal ofthe fugitive slave law. General Pierce was
not a candidate. He had refused to permit his friends, either
in New Hampshire or in the convention, to present his name
in that light. He was not at home when the letter of Captain
Scott was received. He was absent with a sick family, and
never expected his name to be used in that connection. But
he had letters there addressed to his New Hampshire friends,
declaring that " if the compromise measures are not to be sub
stantially and firmly maintained, the plain rights secured by
the Constitution will be trampled in the dust-" The moment
he said the fugitive slave bill was founded on the Constitution,
and secured rights under it, there is no tyro in America who
does not know that, under the democratic creed, that is equiva
lent to a declaration that he would veto its repeal. So that it
may be safely averred, that every body who had been spoken
of as likely to be presented, was there either by letter expressly,
or by necessary and obvious consequence, declaring that they
would veto all attempts at its repeal. With all their candi
dates breathing such noble sentiments, no difficulty could be
experienced in the selection. Cass, Buchanan, Douglass,

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 257
Marcy and others, had their friends who for a long time were
unwilling to give them up. Virginia at last, to end the strife of
friends, not of foes, led off for Franklin Pierce. State after
State followed her example, until he was made the nominee
by general acclamation. Nor was there the sfightest difficulty
about our platform. The public declarations, the known and
recorded sentiments of every candidate, or person spoken of,
made that an easy work. No abolitionists were there, polluting
our councils or resisting our platform. A few that had once
been known as freesoilers, cheerfully abandoned the heresy.
They returned to their democratic allegiance, bringing with
them " fruits meet for repentence," a willingness and determin
ation to stand by the execution of the fugitive slave bill, as
well as all other parts of the compromise. Here is the great
difi'erence on this point between the two conventions — we re
ceived only the penitent, who renounced his transgi'essions ;
whilst they took them as they came, with all their sins bloom
ing upon them, voting against their platform and bidding de
fiance to them in their teeth.
Our platform was read clearly and distinctly by Mr. French,
in my opinion the best reading clerk in America. He paused
at the close of every resolution. The slavery one he read
twice, and twice did the shouts of approval ascend from all
parts ofthe spacious haU. There was no leaving of members,
for the convention, at the moment of its adoption, was almost
crowded to suffocation.
Let us turn now with every degree of fairness to the pro
ceedings of the whig convention. I grant to the whigs of the
south an equal but not a greater devotion to the compromise —
an equal but not a greater determination to maintain the
rights of the south against the dark and demon spirit of fana
ticism. They ought to have. They have as much, I think
more property at stake than we have. They have homes to
be desolated and families whose peace, safety and repose are
as dear to them as ours can be to us. But too intent upon a
mere party triumph, they took no precautions as we did to
purge their convention — to drive the abolitionists from it.
They put no interrogatories to their candidates as we did. Had
they done so Mr. Fillmore would have answered, I will main-

258 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
tain the fugitive slave law as I have done through my admin
istration. Mr. Webster would have answered, I too wiU main
tain it as I have done as one of Mr. Fillmore's cabinet. What
would Gen. Scott have answered? Why, "that I wiU not
answer." Such a response would have turned him and all his
abolition supporters out of the convention. This would have
purified the party and left it standing as of yore on a high
national platform. But suppose Gen. Scott had answered pub
licly that like FiUmore and Webster he too would maintain and
execute the fugitive slave law. Why then Gen. Scott would
have stood in high and honorable rivalry for the nomination,
whilst the abolitionists would have gone out. They would have
said to themselves, "What do we do here ? FiUmore is against
us, Webster is against us, and now Scott, from whom we ex
pected better things, has also come out against us. We must
withdraw, hold a convention of our own and fiash the standard
of Wm. H. Seward in the face of our foes, whig and demo
cratic." I know it is a great outrage both against fact and
probability even to suppose that Gen. Scott would have answer
ed like Fillmore and Webster in favor of maintaining the fugi
tive slave law. He was tried upon that point in another way
equally binding and impressive. Long before the convention
he received a letter from one of his fellow-citizens asking him
to give his opinions publicly in favor of that measure : his
answer was, I will not. A Senator from Tennessee on the sab
bath day went to him and desired him to come out : his answer
was again substantially, I wiU not. He gave this trisyllabic
response to ever body and on aU occassions. Sirs, he might
have better said to Governor Jones, " I cannot come out—
don't you see how I am situated— don't you see that it is
the abolition legislatures that have nominated me— don't
you see that all the abolition papers have my name flying
at their head? Don't you see by the vote even yester
day that the sixty-six friends of Mr. Seward who voted against
the platform would instantiy desert me and leave the conven
tion? Why my dear Governor you are not really up to these
things, I don't want them to go out, I want them to stay in.
If they stay I get the nomination— if they go out I lose it.

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 259
What signifies the purification of the whig party if I lose the
presidency." Sirs, I must not elaborate. I must pass on to the closing
scene of this nomination. For fifty ballots the friends of
Fillmore stood firm, the friends of Webster stood firm, and
the south began to feel some assurance of her safety. The
hope was delusive. The hour was come, when according
to many signs and secret whisperings through the convention,
when enough of Tennessee would desert Mr. Fillmore and go
over to General Scott to secure his nomination. Yes, the
hour had come and the deed was done. Instantly the sixty-
six abolitionists who voted against the platform, who trampled
upon it and scorned it, raised the shout of exultation. Seward
himself issued his circular to them congratulating them " that
in voting for Scott, they had preserved fidelity to him and to
their sacred principles of freedom and toleration." What did
Seward mean in this exulting congratulation ? Why should
they be faithful to Scott ? Because he had been faithful to
them in not coming out publicly against them as Fillmore and
Webster had done. How had they been faithful to their prin
ciples of freedom and toleration ? By voting against the fugi
tive slave bill as put down in the platform. Here is the true
key to unlock the secret connection between the abolition party
and Gen. Scott. He needed their votes to outnumber Mr.
Fillmore and Mr. Webster in the convention, and they needed
his gi-eat name and reputation to drag them upward to the
level of one of the regular national parties ofthe nation. Sirs,
this connection of facts ought to make the blood cm'dle in your
veins. It tells you, I fear, in the language of Sir Robert Peel,
that your doom is sealed !
Do you ask how the nomination and election of Gen. Scott
can seal the doom ofthe south? Hear me silently and thought
fully and I will tell you. Whose candidate would. Millard
Fillmore have been ? The candidate of the southern whigs.
Why ? Because a majority of his friends were such. Whose
candidate would Daniel Webster have been ? Of the northern
whigs. Why? Because a majority of his friends were such.
Whose candidate is Gen. Scott? Ofthe abolitionists and
freesoUers. Why ? Because a majority of his friends were

260 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
abolitionists and freesoilers. Without them he could not have
been the candidate, but with them he is. He had one hun
dred and thirty-one votes, sixty-six of these, being a majority,
voted against the platform even emasculated as it was. It
was to these sixty-six, that Seward addressed the circular let
ter of congratulation, that they had preserved their sacred
principles of freedom and toleration. Thus it is that if there
is truth in records and power in logic, he is the abolitionist
and freesoil candidate.
Now what follows this great fact ? That you have lifted up
and given rank and importance to this dangerous party. In
social life he who marries a woman lifts her up at once to his
own rank and condition. So Gen. Scott having allied himself
to this party, comes up with it leaning on his arm, and demands
its recognition as one of the great and respectable parties of
the country. The South may protest against it. She my protest
ever so solemnly; but amid the war plumes ofthe soldier and the
cunning sophistry of those who have solemnized the unholy
banns, she may be lulled into an acquiescence, which must
prove to her fatal as the sleep of death! It is argued that, not
withstanding all these facts poisoning the very fountain of his
nomination, that Gen. Scott is in fact a friend to the South,
with no dangerous affinities for the freesoilers and abolition
ists. 1 deny it ; every word of it. They have not given him
this nomination without cause. He has for years been bidding
for the Presidency — to the anti-Masons — to the native Ameri
can party against foreigners ; and to no faction and to no
party has he paid court more assiduously than to the aboli
tionists and freesoilers. Look to the great turning point of
this slavery agitation. So long as thefr societies were confined
in their labors to the North, they were harmless. Their travel
ling lecturers and inflammatory publications, could exert but
little infiuence over the nation at large. Hence the determin
ation was formed, to enlarge the sphere of their operations by
gaining admittance in the Halls of Congress. Hear thefr own
opinions of the importance of getting there : " Before slavery
can be abolished there must be a discussion of the whole sub
ject on the fioors of both houses of Congress. All the argu
ments with which abolitionists have flooded the North would

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 261
then be brought forward, to prove the instrinsic iniquity, the
cruelty, the impolicy of slaveholding. A thorough discussion
of this whole subject in the halls of our national legislature,
would be equal to a discussion in the legislature of every slave-
holding State in the Union. The act of abolition being done,
the moral influence would pierce the heart ofthe whole system.
It would pronounce and sign its death warrant. It would be
the solemn verdict of the nation decreeing the annihilation of
this dark abomination. It would write in letters of flashing fire
over the gateway of the national capitol, ' no admittance for
slavery.' The whole system would be thus outlawed and brand
ed with ignominy, consigned to execration and ultimate de
struction." The South saw this great turning point in their fate. They
saw Mr. Adams with all his hatred for the South, step forward
as their champion, and inviting them to come forward with
their petitions. They did come by hundreds and thousands.
Mr. Adams demanded that they should be treated in all re
spects like other petitions — that they should be received
should be printed, should be referred to a committee and re
ported upon and debated. Nothing less than this would satisfy
him. The South insisted that to do all this would be ruinous
to her safety and her property. That these inflammatory
petitions and speeches would be sent all over the slave States,
and' be read by the midnight torch on their plantations, lead
ing to insurrections with all their attendant horrors. For the
sake of peace, for the sake of this Union, we yielded to the re
ception of the petitions — that the mover should state their con
tents, and that then they should be laid on the table, (equiva
lent to a rejection,) without being printed, without reference
and without debate. Thus the parties took their positions.
The struggle was intense. The amount at stake was large,
being no less than nine hundred millions of property and the
safety and repose of every southern family. One northern
man after another deserted us and went over to Mr. Adams.
But there was one northern man who did not and would not
desert us. True as steel and with a heart as big as the con
stitution he stood by us to the last. That man was General
Frankfin Pierce. For that deed alone, the South owes him a

262 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
debt of everlasting gratitude. Day after day, in both houses
of Congress, he stood by us, speaking for us, and voting with
us, against John Quincy Adams, through that arduous strug
gle. Do not read to me old rusty abolition newspapers : you
need not tell me what this or that poorly informed individual
has said against it. I know what I say — for I both saw and
heard him. Senator Henderson, a whig from Mississippi, sat
by him and says that he is the truest man to the south he ever
saw. Besides, sirs, look to the Journals of Congress. I have
all the pages here and will give copies to any body to inspect
them by: They crush — they annihilate all your lying news
papers and your drunken or prejudiced certifiers who say
that Franklin Pierce was unfaithful to the constitution or the
rights of the south. But how was it with Gen. Scott ? He
was in the regular army, a soldier by profession, and need not
have taken sides at all. But ever restless and ambitious he
must step forward into the arena and throvs^ down his sword
and influence at the feet and the service of John Quincy
Adams. He threw them down against the land of his birth,
" his own native land." Open his own life now carried about
by all his advocates and there read his letters contending that
all these petitions should be received and referred and treated
in all respects like all other cases.
This was one of the deeds, the fatal deeds, that attracted
the abolitionists so strongly to him Let me present you to
another. " I am persuaded," says he in one of his letters,
" that it is a high moral obligation of masters and slave-hold
ing States to employ all the means not incompatible with the
safety of both colors to ameliorate slavery even to its exter
mination." How different the sentiment attributed to Pierce
and Avhich is common among all northern men, and frequent
among southern ones, that slavery is asocial and political evil.
A social, not a moral evil — a social one is supposed to affect
society injuriously, but stUl being guaranteed by the constitu
tion must be sustained with fidelity and honor. Not so with
Scott. With him it is a great moral evil — a leprosy on the con
science of the master, which should not only be ameliorated
but actually exterminated from the land. The master must do
it — the State must do it — and nothing must stop them but the

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 263
safety of the two colors. The idea of constitutional right and
guarantee of property never once enters into his calculation.
What is this but the sentiments and almost the very language
of the abolition party ? This is the second cord that bound
them to him.
The third one is, that during the whole discussion and con
troversy about the compromise questions, when parties were
almost engaged in mortal combat and when the Union was
reeling and tottering under the mighty conflict, when Cass, aud
Calhoun, and Buchanan, and Clay, and Webster, and Fillmore,
boldly stept forward to rebuke the fanatics of the north and to
restrain the too much exasperated sons of the south, Winfield
Scott looked calmly on and failed to say one word or to write
one line publicly denouncing their fanatic aggressions — looked
calmly on, when great mobs in our cities were putting all laws
at defiance, imprisoning our southern friends for demanding
their own property ; nay more, when they were literally mur
dered in open day, with the law of Congress in the one hand
and the constitution of their country in the other — looked
calmly on without throwing the influence of his name and his
fame publicly in favor of the fugitive slave law and the rights
of the south under it. Thus it was, that previous to his nomina
tion, Gen. Scott had drawn the abolitionists to him by trip-
pie cords — cords of sympathy and gratitude.
How has he patronized and encouraged them since ? In
his letter to Mr. Archer (the breeches pocket letter of Mr.
Botts,) he said, " In my letter of acceptance I shall give my
views on the compromise in terms at least as strong as those I
read to you the other day." According to Gov. Jones' account
he said he would express his approbation of the measures of
the compromise or die. Well, all this is flourishing boldly
enough. But did he come out in his letter of acceptance at
all? In any terms, strong or weak? Did he utter one word
for or against the compromise ? Not one, not one ! He sim
ply said, " I accept the nomination with the resolutions annex
ed." Gen. Pierce said, " I accept the nomination upon the
platform adopted by the convention, because the principles it
embraces command the approbation of my judgment, and with
which there has been no word or act of my life in conffict."

264

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

Now, why did not Gen. Scott say something like that? For
getting his letter to Archer and his declaration or promise to
Jones, he sends in a cold and non-committal acceptance "with
the resolutions annexed."
And what sort of a platform, I pray you, did their resolu
tions make ? Not that one which Fillmore's friends had pre
pared in caucus — not that one that Webster's friends had
solemnly agreed to ; but that one which the committee, Gov.
Johnston being one of its members, had prepared in lieu of it,
leaving out the very life and soul of the document. The dem
ocratic platform had declared against the agitation of any and
all slavery questions ; so had Fillmore and Webster's. But the
power of the abolition influence emasculated it and reported
simply declaring that the epeciftc questions settled by the com
promise should be acquiesced in : thus leaving all others, the
abolition of slavery in the forts, arsenals and other public es
tablishments of the United States and the transportation of
slaves from one State to another, still to be agitated both in
and out of Congress. Thus is sustained one of my proposi
tion that theyhave dictated a creed to the whig party. What
further assurances has he been pleased to give them since his
nomination ? The letter of Senator Wade, as yet uncontra
dicted, informs us "that he had just had a conversation with
Gen. Scott (in July) in which he declared that he would sooner
cut off his right hand than lend it to the support of slavery,
What ! not lend your right arm to support it when the constitu
tion declares you shall do it ? Not lend your right arm to sup
port it when a dominant majority shall attempt to cleave it
down by repealing the fugitive slave law : or when they shall
pass a law to discharge on habeas corpus, in the most summary
manner, any slave in this country ? Would Gen. Scott not
deign to stretch forth his right hand and by seizing hold on the
veto power, save the constitution from violation and the rights
of the south from destruction ? No he would not. He need
not have so declared to Senator Wade. I care not whether he
ever spoke to that Senator or not. Long ago he proclaimed
the doctrine, that there ought to be no veto arresting the law
when it passed a second time by a majority. Who overheard
of such a veto as that ? Why boys ought to know thatpracti-

ON ,THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 265
cally it was no veto at all. That letter is enough to show the
south her certain doom, if Gen. Scott should be elected. The
north has a majority now of more than forty votes — a majority
that is rapidly augmented by every apportionment. Under
this doctrine nothing is left to stay the march of abolitionists
and freesoilers to universal domination. This is not only the
doctrine of Gen. Scott, but of his friends who support him in
this State. Gov. Jones in one of his published speeches goes
for the abolition of the veto power altogether, whilst General
Haskell is reported in the New York Herald in one of his Tay
lor speeches as saying that " although a slaveholder, if Zachary
Taylor pledged himself to veto the Wilmot proviso, he (Has
kell) would desert his standard."
Here let every southern State and every slaveholder in this
country come to a dead pause for a few moments. Let us look
around us and understand our condition. The opinion of for
eign countries is pressing hard upon us. The opinion of half
the States here at home, is pressing hard upon us — a dead
majority of at least forty in Congress is against us. Novvr what
safety or hope of safety have we, but in the Presidential veto ?
If that be denied to us our property, the property of whigs as
well as democrats, must be swept from us. Gen. Scott maintains
that there should be no veto against a final majority. Gov.
Jones says it ought to be obliterated altogether. Gen, Haskell
would not have it exercised to save us from the Wilmot proviso,
and of course not to prevent a repeal ofthe fugitive slave law.
Thus we are left naked, and exposed to the will ofthe majority,
with no shelter to fly to, no arm to save us, and General Scott
boldly telling us that he would cut off his arm before he would
extend it for our relief!
It is vain to tell me that Gen. Scott has since his nomination
declared his hearty approval of the compromise measures to
many private individuals. Nobody wants private testimonials
on vital questions like these. He may have too many breeches
pocket letters, too many private conversations like the one
with Senator Wade. These private conversations are too well
calculated to make him " all things to all men." No, we want
ed public committals, pubfic declarations, that would have
driven bad and dangerous men away from your convention,

266 -CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
and have relieved the South from all danger and apprehension
as to the candidate of either party.
Nor will it do to say that silence before the election or a little
equivocation since is only a matter of policy in the election, and
that when he is elected he will rise superior to all malign influ
ences. If he be a man he cannot; if an honest man he will
not. When abolitionists shall come to him at the moment when
he may be forming his cabinet, and demand high places under
his administration, how can he, how ought he to refuse them?
They will say, without us you could not have gotten the nomin
ation. Gen. Scott must reply, I know it. They will further
say, without us you could not have been elected ; he must re
ply, I know it. We have therefore breathed into your nostrils
the very breath of your life. Without us you were nothing,
but with us you have become the President. You cannot post
pone our demands in favor of the democrats, for you have
made a clean sweep of them ; nor in favor of Millard Fill
more, for you remember his letter to the convention to go for
Webster, and save the whig party ; nor in favor of Webster,
for between you and him, as between Lazarus and Dives, there
is an impassable gulf. We, therefore, demand it of you, that
you advance us high in patronage and favor. Can Gen. Scott
refuse them ? Mr. Gentry says he will not. Christopher H.
WiUiams says he will not. Stephens, Toombs and CabeU, and
a long list of the best and truest members of the whig party,
all say, that with the nomination of Gen. Scott, the reign of
the whig party will end, and that of Wm. H. Seward and
Horace Greeley will begin.
But I must pass away from this branch ofthe subject. I have
lingered long enough around the poisoned fountain of this
nomination. I assume another ground, equally as fatal tothe
election of Gen. Scott. He is not qualified for the exalted sta
tion. Pie has been a soldier by profession aU his fife ; a bril-.
liantand successful one ; but he has no experience in civil af
fairs. What does he know from study and reflection about
the constitution, laws and treaties, of this country ? Where
has he ever exhibited the slightest attainments in jurisprudence
and civil government ? His friends and electors have been
asked the question more than an hundred times. What do

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, 267
they answer? Why, that he has written a book. Aye, but
what was it about? Military tactics! But he was sent to
Europe. Aye, but what was his errand? To inspect mifitary
fortifications ! But he was ordered to- Charleston by General
Jackson, charged with delicate and important duties. Aye,
but he was to take no step except what related to the immedi
ate defence of the port, without the order of the collector or
District Attorney ! So on the Maine boundary — so every
where. He has never been employed or acquitted himself in
any civil capacity in all his life, without having somebody to
overlook and restrain him.
But I am not content to overturn the vain pretences of his
advocates. I carry the war into their own camp, and here to
day undertake to show affirmitively, that he has no qualifica
tions for civil affairs. He has made his own political record.
He has made it by his letters and addresses. He belonged to
the army, and might have said nothing. But, being vain and
ambitious, he sought notoriety by throwing himself through his
letters before the public eye in moments of high political ex
citement. In what one of these did he not commit some great
blunder, injurious to his own fame and mortifying to his friends?
Take for example his letter on Naturalization in 1841 : He
says he was fired with indignation against foreigners, and sat
down and prepared an address with the view of rallying an
American party against them. That he fully concurred in the
Philadelphia move against foreigners, and was inclined to re
peal the Naturalization laws altogether, and shut them out
forever from the enjoyment of our free institutions. Who
wants to vote for him for that letter? Its folly was so great
that he has been half denying and apologizing for it ever since!
Take now another case. He came out in great fiourish in fa
vor of the celebrated bankrupt bill. But before the General
could get much attention drawn to his letter, the measure had
become odious, and down went the bankrupt bill and General
Scott's letter together ! Let us have another letter. In 1843,
when the great minds of America were discussing the question
about slavery under the constitution, he again thursts for
ward his opinions, and declares in favor of the power of
Congress to abofish slavery in the District of Columbia-^that

268 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
Congress ought to receive, refer and report on abolition peti
tions ! Let us have another one of his letters. At a period
when his whole party was clamoring for a curtailment of exec
utive power and patronage. General Scott comes to the grave
and profound conclusion, that they are all wrong, that the Pres
ident was not far enough removed from the people — that he
ought to be released from such vulgar liabilities, and therefore
should be elected for six years, rather than for four. There is
another egregious folly in General Scott's civil career, which I
am sure you must have anticipated, I mean his annexation of
Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Territory large
enough for thirty or forty new States, composed! of many mil
lions of French and English population, monarchists and abo
litionists, to crush and grind us and our property to powder !
Horror struck at the idea of annexing Texas, that did not hold
one thousand persons in it, except our countrymen andkindred,
accustomed to our laws, and attached to our form of govern
ment ; but yet willing to bring in Canada, crowded with a
population that hated all republics, and scorned our free in
stitutions !
Here then, is afufimap of Gen. Scott's attempts to connect
himself with the civil policy of the country. It is constructed
out of his own materials :
1st. His Naturalization letter, in which he lays the founda
tion for that native American party, from which has emanated
all the persecutions against foreigners ever since.
2d. His letter in favor of the now universally condemned
bankrupt bill.
3rd. His letter sustaining John Quincy Adams in bringing
the subject of abolition into the Congress of the United
States. 4th. His letter maintaining that although Congress could
not interfere with slavery in the States, she could abolish it in
the District of Columbia.
5th. His letter in favor of the annexation of Canada, New
Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
6th. His letter making our government more aristocratic,
by electing the President for six instead of four years.
This map is complete. It delineates every attempt, six in

ON THE PRESIDENTUL ELECTION. 269
all, to connect hiinself at any time with the civil policy of his
country. Every one of them was a blunder, a failure, an abor
tion. Taken one by one, we must disapprove and condemn
them:, taken altogether, they force us tothe conclusion, that
he is not qualified for so high an office. The country is full to
overflowing of men a thousand times better qualified. Every
averag^^ county and city in the Union could furnish a candidate
with higher civil qualifications.
There is no uncharitableness in this expression of opinion.
The chief men of the whig synagogue have gone before me.
Horace Greeley, who next to Seward, is his ablest supporter, is
reported to have said, "that Gen. Scott is a vain, conceited
coxcomb of a man. His brains (all that he has) are in his
epaulettes, and if he should be elected President, he would tear
the whig party to tatters in less than six months." A distin
guished leader in East Tennessee does not hesitate to proclaim,
" that he has vanity enough to damn seven successive whig ad
ministrations." Gen. ZoUicoff'er, of the Republican Banner,
who was one of the three whig delegates who deserted from Fill
more, and went over to Scott, said, wrote and published of and
concerning the aforesaid Winfield Scott, that he had no high
opinion of his " very sound discretion or common sense." What !
destitute of common sense ? If so^ no other sort of sense will
be of any avail. Without common sense as the great basis of
human intellect, all else is useless and even dangerous. The
maniac may have every other sort but common sense, and your
mere man of genius and imagination may be utterly useless
for all the practical purposes of human life. No confidence
in his common sense ! — ^vanity enough to damn seven succes
sive whig administrations ! — all his brains in his epaulettes, and
in six months he would tear the whig party to tatters ! Well, if
these are the opinions of the great high priests of the Scott
party, I know you will pardon me for simply maintaining that
he is not qualified to fill the exalted office and to perform the
complicated and arduous duties of President of the United
States. But I carry this question of qualification far beyond his
want of political knowledge and experience in civil affairs. I
maintain that his education, temper and disposition, disqualify

270

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

him altogether to fill the office. His education has been mili
tary ; he has been in the regular army from his youth up. Mfii-
tary life has been with him a trade — a calling — the main, and
in fact his only pursuit in life . The result is that he is proud and
dictatorial. Impatient under opposition, he is ready to resolve
every thing into a quarrel. Hence it is that his whole life has
been made up of quarrels and complaints, with any body and
against every body. In early life he quarrelled with Macomb
about priority of rank. He quarrelled with the then adminis
tration, and could not be quieted but by the severest reprimand.
He quarrelled with General Gaines, and never ceased his en
mity until the grave closed over the remains of that gallant
old soldier. He quarrelled with General Jackson, and refused
to say, with the frankness of a soldier, whether he was the
author of certain slanders against him. He quarrelled with
De Witt Clinton in the same case, and invited him to mortal
combat when he knew his oath of office forbade its acceptance.
and when he had declined to invite Gen. Jackson to the same
wager of battle for a much greater offence. In the Florida war
he quarrelled with the people of that territory, and denounced
them, according to our recollection, in his order No. 48, as cow
ards and afraid of an Indian behind every bush. In the Mexi
can war, his whole career was marked with fuss, quarrels and
feathers. He quarrelled with Polk for nor, sending him to Mexico, and
when he did send him, he quarreUed with him for that. He
quarrelled with Marcy for not sustaining him in the Quarter
Master's Department, when he had the Quarter Master Gen
eral with him at New Orleans and Vera Cruz with unUmited
authority to do anything and everything he might stand in need
of. He quarreUed with the President for recalling him from
Mexico when it was done at his own written request. He
quarrelled with the Secretary for not allowing him to make pro
motions of his friends in the army over equally meritorious
officers, contrary to the express provisions of the army regu
lations, tie quarrelled with and tried to disgrace Col. Harney,
" the bravest of the brave," for no reason under the sun, ex
cept that he did not like him. He quarrelled with Generals
Worth and Duncan, as gallant and fine officers as ever drew

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 271
the breath of life. I say nothing of Gen. Pillow's case. He
is my kinsman and I pass that over altogether. But speaking
of all the others, I boldly say that he exhibited an overbearing
and tyrannical temper that totally unfits him for high command
in civil life.
But he was not content merely to quarrel with them — "to
show a hasty spark and then be cold again." No, he arrest
ed them, stript them of their command — took away their
swords, hacked and battered in many a hard battle, that he
might wear the crown of laurels on his own brow. He did every
thing to disgrace them in the face of the enemy. Take the
case of Gen. Worth as a sample of the rest. How often had
he headed his division and charged in the midst of carnage and
death up to the cannon's mouth to win a battle, whilst General
Scott was afar off" in perfect safety, looking through his spy
glass, and afterwards wearing the laurels of a victory which
Worth had won for him at the risk of his life ! And yet, after
all this, he hears read and permits to be transmitted to the
United States for publication, the highest praises of himself
and the grossest charges against Gen. Worth, which he him
self was afterwards compelled to abandon. The case of Dun
can, the brave and accomplished Duncan, is another, which
might be adduced for the same illustration of Gen. Scott's
overbearing character. Arrested and unsworded, all they
could do was to appeal to their own government for justice.
They asked a court of inquiry to investigate the whole case,
and when this obvious justice was awarded them. Gen. Scott
even quarrelled with the government for that. He complained
that he, the accuser, should have to go before the same tribunal
with the other officers of his command. I pray you hear the
reply of Secretary Marcy to this strange, this proud and aristo
cratic complaint :
" On what ground of right can you claim to have your case
discriminated from theirs ? It is true that you have assumed
to be their judge and have pronounced them guilty ; and you
complain and repine that the laws of the country do not allow
you, their accuser, to institute a tribunal to register your de
cree. But you are not their rightful judge, although they were
your prisoners. Before that court all stand on the same level
19

272 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
and all have equal rights. Though you may have the self sat
isfying conviction that you are innocent, and they are guihty,
the government could act on no such presumption. By be
coming the accuser you did not place yourself out of the reach
of being accused ; and unless you are clothed with the im
munity of despotic power, and can claim, the benefit of the
maxim " that the king can do no wrong/' I know not why
your conduct, when made the subject of charge, may not be
investigated by a court of enquiry. * * * If your
extraordinary pretensions are to derive any suppoirt from your
distinguished services, you ought to be mindful that the three
accused officers put under arrest by you have like claims for
distinguished services. On the pages of impartial history their
names and gallant deeds must appear with yours, and no
monopofizing claims, nor malignant exclusions will be permit
ted to rob them of their fair share of the glory won by our gal
lant army,, whilst under your command." There can be no
doubt that it was this known incompetency in civil affairs, and
his total disqualification in temper and disposition that prompt
ed Mr. FiUmore, when asked by his friends in the midst of the
ballotting what they should do, to reply, " go for Mr. Webster
and save the whig party" — that induced Mr. Clay on his dying
bed to advise his son when he should be dead and gone, not
to vote for Gen. Scott.
But I leave the chapter of his quarrels with every body and
about everything. With such a man for your President what
could be expected but the blowing up of cabinets — arrests and
court martials by land and by sea — recalls of foreign embas
sadors — quarrels and ruptures with foreign governments and
the d — 1 to pay generaUy !
I now turn to a more pleasing and gratifying duty, the vin
dication of the democratic party — its policj'' — its creed and
its candidate. Its policy adorns every page of American his
tory. Its triumphs have emblazoned yom* fiag in every land
and on every sea. It has carried your name and fame to every
part of the habitable globe. Kings have beheld it and trem
bled. Nations have gazed upon it and rejoiced. But 1 speak
of it now in its more restricted sense as now being practised
and carried out on the recent questions of party controversy-

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 273
At this very moment the whig party is paying a profound hom
age to every one of those disputed subjects. They are carry
ing out in full practice every measure which democracy ha^
established ; making no effort and hardly entertaining a wish
to defeat or disturb them. They administer the government
without a National Bank. They collect their own revenues by
thefr own officers and we hear nothing of those anticipated
evfis of the sub-treasury, which were so confidently predicted.
The tariff of 1S46 is pouring into our coffers the most ample
supplies, and but slight and occasional wishes are expressed
in favor of its alteration. The vast accessions to our terri
tory are giving new impulses and directions to commerce, and
om* people are building up magnificent cities on the shore of
the Pacific.
In relation to our creed as recently set forth in our conven
tion, it has extorted from our enemies their loftiest eulogiums
and silenced the cavils of the most reckless partisans. On the
all absorbing topic of the present canvass it proclaims the
most faithful adherence to the compromise in general, and in
sists on the most rigid execution of the fugitive slave bill in
particular. In other words, the democratic party of the
United States, amid the dangers of the present conflict, stand
immoveably on the Constitution ; calm, firm, and erect, hold
ing that sacred instrument in the one hand and the farewell
address ofthe sainted Washington in the other. There she
stands, and come what may, there she wiU stand, with undy
ing devotion to liberty, the Constitution and the Union. In
taking this noble stand I am proud to know and to aver, that
the democracy of Tennessee stood out in advance of all others.
We were the first to assemble" 'after the passage of the com
promise. We assembled in the southern convention. We
dissented from that body on several points,, and to show our
exact opinions, we presented what was caUed the Tennessee
platform. It was the first Union platform ever erected in
America. Georgia foUowed our example. Then Mississippi
and several other States. In several instances they almost
copied our very words on all the exact sentiments we had
adopted. What were those sentiments ? That although the
compromise did not award to us aU that in our opinion we

274 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
were entitled to, yet we would abide by it with that fidehty
and honor which had always distinguished the south. We
went one step farther. We declared that the north must also
abide by it, and substantially that we would not submit to the
repeal of the fugitive slave bill. This last, the whig party
would not say. The whigs of the adjoining States would say
it, and did say it, but the whigs of Tennessee would not
say it. For saying in our platform that we would not
submit to the repeal, they accused us of being too ultra
and affiliating too much with the fire eaters of the south,
as they were tauntingly called. We replied, that if we
are too ultra for our rights, you are too ultra against
them, and we pointed them day after day to their own
brethren of Georgia — of Alabama and Mississippi, below
whose platform they had immeasurably fallen. The re
tort was too powerful and the reference too obvious. It drove
them to the wall. Gen. Zollicoffer, who wrote the first plat
form, resolved to amend and enlarge it in the midst ofthe can
vass. On the ever memorable Monday the 23d day of June,
1851, the Republican Banner (the fiag-ship of the party)
came out with the declaration, extorted from him by the pres
sure of the canvass, " that if the fugitive slave bill should be
repealed, thus annulling the Constitution, resistance should fol
low by the whole south united." This placed, for the first
time, both parties on the same platform on the slavery ques
tions. Now, did they come to us, or did we go to them ? Let
incontrovertable facts, dates and figures answer the question.
We constructed our platform in November, 1850. We re
affirmed it in February, 1851, and Gen. Zollicofl^er put himself on
it and dragged his party after him not until the June following.
And yet an impudence so unblushing is not wanting to ask
whence this new born zeal for the compromise, and for the fugi
tive slave bill in particular ? After having furnished the facts
and dates, I waste no further time in answering a question
founded on a perversion of facts so wilful, or an ignorance of
them so profound. But the question is sometimes asked in re
lation to another speech, which I will answer. It is asked
whence my new born zeal for the fugitive slave bill ? My an
swer is that my zeal is as old as the Tennessee platform, and I

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, 275
have just shown that that is the oldest upon record — older than
that of any whig creed by many months. That I was the very
author of the first declaration written out officially after the
compromise was passed, that the fugitive slave bill must be
preserved. But how is this, say the whig orators, did you not
refuse in your convention speech to rejoice at the passage of
the compromise? Did you not say that your heart would
sooner break than rejoice? And has dullness become so pro
found, as not to understand, how an unwillingness to rejoice
over the compromise is compatible with a fixed determination
to abide by and maintain it? Did the whigs rejoice ? Did
any body rejoice in the south ? None except a very few at
the first arrival of the news, and whose rejoicings instantly
ceased when they learned from every letter and every circu
lar, that came from whigs and democrats, as well as from the
acts of Congress themselves, that the compromise had been
passed, not because it gave us all that the south was entitled
to, but because it was the best that they could obtain for us.
Among others the eloquent voice of Mr. Clay came booming
to his countrymen that the south had lost all — every thing, but
the fugitive slave bill and her honor. All else was lost. After
that, no man of sense of any party in Tennessee thought of
rejoicing over it. All men and all parties here determined to
acquiesce and abide by it, but none had the heart (who had a
heart) to rejoice over that poor remnant of rights which Mr.
Clay informed us had alone been preserved. Does the farmer
go home rejoicing, when he has lost in court one half of the
lands which had descended to him from his ancestors ? Does
the soldier rejoice when he has been driven and routed from
half the field of battie ? No, his victory must be fuU orbed —
the enemy must have been captured or driven from the field
before he sings the Te Deum of triumph !
Sirs, I begin to take some pains to preserve that convention
speech and some others I have made. When I defivered
them I had not the vanity to suppose there was much in
them, but now that they have become the text book of so
many whig orators, I begin to think more fav,Orably of
them. Their men of genius refer to them to break, if they

276 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
can, their force and power over the public mind. Their
men of dullness turn to them to whet their fiagging intel
lects, and when they can think of nothing else to say,
with feeble articulation they mutter out something about
Governor Brown ! Governor Brown ! Poor fellows ! I can give
them speeches, but I cannot furnish them with brains to
understand them. Perhaps in after times their children
may read them as productions which their fathers had not
the patriotism to approve nor the intellect to refute.
Sirs, this personal vindication of myself lies in exact line
with the objecta I have before me. The platform which I
drew and which the democracy of the State twice sanctioned,
has been accepted and adopted by the democracy of the na
tion. The whig party of the south and the Webster portion
of the north, have done the same tlfing in noble rivalry
with us to preserve the Constitution and the Union. Re
member, I am speaking of that platform which the south
ern whigs, the friends of Fillmore prepared, not that life
less and soulless one which Governor Johnston's committee
reported, shutting the door against the agitation of only
one half of the slavery questions, whilst they throw it wide
open as to all the others. Thus fortified, endorsed and
sustained in my sentiments and opinions on the fugitive
slave bill by the democracy of the State, as well as of the
nation, and by the southern whigs themselves, in the pre
paration of their platform, my shield is impenetrable to
the feeble shaft that strikes it and then faUs harmless at
my feet.
Fellow-citizens, my duty is now done as it relates to the
nomination of Gen. Scott, the malign influences that effected
it, his incompetency in civil affairs, and his unfitness in temper
and disposition to fiU the exalted office. The more pleasing
one remains of inviting your attention to the claims of Gen.
Franklin Pierce to your confidence and support. He is descen
ded from a revolutionary patriot and soldier, whose devotion
to liberty was attested on the heights of Bunker's HiU. Edu
cated in one of the best institutions of the north, he entered
the world ripe in his scholarship. Engaging in the study and

T)N THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 277
then in the practice of the law, he soon reached aU eminence
in his profession which no mediocrity of talents could have at
tained. Thrown early into Congress, he rose rapidly to dis
tinction as one of the most talented and useful silpporters of
Gen. Jackson's administration. Transferred to the Senate, he
exhibited all those high powers of debate that made him the
worthy compeer of the illustrious men who then composed
that body. I know of no man with whom so justly to com
pare him as with James K. Polk. Not much differing in age,
in industry, in habits of study, in perseverance, in power of
debate, in ardent devotion to the principles ofthe Constitution,
and unffinching determination to support them, the resem
blance was striking and imposing. Gen. Jackson, great in his
intuitive knowledge of men, foresaw his eminence. Mr. Cal
houn predicted it, and Mr. Pohc, every day identifled with him
in public labors, expressed the opinion that at some day he
would be President of the United States. Gen. Pierce, how
ever, has never been an office-seeker, and has done nothing to
bring about the realization of these predictions. He volunta
rily resigned the office of Senator. When Mr. Woodbury was
appointed to the Supreme Bench of the United States, the ap
pointment was tendered to him to fill his vacancy, but he de
cfined it. He declined the nomination for Governor of New
Hampshire, when his election would have been certain. Pres
ident Polk invited him into his cabinet as Attorney General of
the United States, which he also declined, writing that he had
resolved never to accept an office which would separate him
from his family, except at the call of his country in time of
war. That time soon arrived. Like his father before him,
he was ever ready to make battle for his country. He volun
teered forthe Mexican service, and when he reported himself
to the President, he tendered to him the commission of Colonel,
and afterwards promoted him to that of Brigadier General. It
is not my purpose to recite the history of his military service in
Mexico. In his march from Vera Cruz to the main army in
the interior, in the battles of Contreras, Churubusco, Molino
del Rey and Chepultepec, the reports of Generals Scott, Pillow
and Worth, bear high and honorable testimony to his gallantry

278

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

and good conduct. StiU the tongue of slander and detraction
has assailed him. The poisoned arrow of defamation had as
well be directed against the courage of the Commander-in-,
Chief as against that of Gen. Pierce. Stationed on the sum-
imt of some distant hill, with his spyglass in his hand, there
was no danger of being thrown from his horse whilst charging
the enemy over the craggy and dangerous pedrigal. Yet no
cormorant appetite for slander ever charged General Scott
with cowardice because he viewed the progress of the battle
from positions exempted from danger. Not so with General
Pierce. There is no such liberality and sense of justice reserved
for him. A Field-Marshal of France could but yesterday be
thrown from his horse and be instantly killed — the gallant
Ridgely could share the same fate — but it was impossible for
the horse of Gen. Pierce to fall ; or if he fell, it was impossible
that its rider should have been much injured ; or if much in
jured, it is incredible that he should the next day have fainted,
in the heat of the action, from the severity of his wounds or
bruises ! The American people understand too well the mo
tives which prompt to such base and infamous attacks to lend
the ear of credulity to the foul insinuation. Gen. Scott himself
stands convicted of falsehood, if Gen. Pierce acted not the
part of a brave and gallant soldier. But 1 mean to lay but ht
tle stress on the military prowess of either. Mere military at
tainments, unaccompanied by qualification in civil affairs, to
me furnish no passport to the Presidency. Gen. Washington
had been a soldier, but with him it had never been a trade, a
calling, a lifetime pursuit, as it has been with General Scott.
With Washington, his generalship sunk into insignificance
when compared with his solid, massy, practical good sense,
and his disinterested and lofty patriotism. Gen. Jackson was
a citizen soldier, with whom arms had been but a mere incident
of his life, not his main pursuit. He had been a judge of our
highest court, a member of Congress and Senator, exhibiting
in every situation civil qualifications of the highest order. So
it is with Gen. Pierce. We refer to the fact of his having
volunteered in the services of his country and to his gallantry
and good conduct in it only to evince his patriotism, whilst we

,0N THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 279
point to his eminence at the bar, in the halls of Congress, in the
Senate of the United States, to attest his high and undoubted
civil qualifications. On the life and death question involved
in this canvass, every day is developing his devotion to the
Constitution, and to our rights under it, which must endear him
forever to his countrymen.
Two years ago, in the very heat of the battle, when blow
after blow, and crash after crash, seemed to announce the
downfall of the republic, John P. Hale, the great leader of
the abofitionists, proclaimed in a public speech that he was
ready to head an army and to march upon the south to put
down slavery. What did Franklin Pierce say to that ? He
sprung forward like the Numidian tiger, and replied, "You shall
first march over my dead body ; for I will head an army to op
pose you !" Noble sentiment ! Heroic declaration L Could
old Marion or Sumpter have beat that? Did Gen. Scott ever
make for you such a speech as that ? Did he ever exhibit
such a sublime devotion to us and to the Constitution ? No ;
for at thatvery moment, he was being nominated by every abo
lition legislature, and his name flying at the mast-head of every
abolition newspaper at the north. Fillmore was trying hard
to breast the storm ; Webster was putting forth all his mighty
power; Pierce was bearding the great lion of the tribe, face to
face ; but Winfield Scott had not one single word to say pub
hcly in your behalf! Nay, worse than that, he threw his
sword, his war plumes, and all his large honors in the scale
against you !
There they are yet, and there they will remain until this tra
gedy shall end. And end it must. I know not when nor how.
^ But when I see so many of my countrymen yet fast asleep in
the arms of party — when I see them slumbering on the brink
of ruin — when a threat to march large armies down upon them
to take away nine hundred millions of their property, can
rouse them up to no preparation — when they hesitate to stand
by those who are ready to throw their dead bodies between
them and. danger, I am obliged to have and 1 do have forebo
dings as to how this tragedy is to end— that it must end as the
creed of abolition declares, in vengeance, revolution and death !

280 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
In the language of Mr. Webster, more eloquent and appropri
ate than any which I can utter, " If that catastrophe shaU
happen let it have no history. Let the horrible narrative never
be written. Let its fate be like the lost book of Livy, which
no human eye shall ever read. Or like the missing Pleiad, of
which no man can ever know more, than that it is lost and lost
forever."

SPEECH
Of Gov. Aaron V. Brown, at the Charleston and Calhoun
Mass Meeting, taken from the Knox ville Plebeian, of October
IQth, 1852.

Gov. A. V. Brown said : In the present canvass the whig
party had no candidate for the Presidency. We deplore the
fact, because with all its faults and all its errors, it is a thou
sand-fold better than that dangerous faction which had lately
outnumbered them in convention, superseded thefr favorite
candidates, and set up one of their own. He did not blame,
he did not reproach them for not having a candidate. He said
he knew how hard they tried to have one— how carefully they
appointed their delegates to the convention, and how cautious
they were, in most cases, to guard by specific instructions
against the very calamity which had befallen them.
It is somewhere said in the Sacred Writings, continued Gov.
Brown, that when the saints of the Lord had assembled to
gether, Satan also appeared amongst them. So it was when
the whig party assembled in Baltimore; the ajDolitionists
of the north also appeared in their midst, and boldly de
manded the nomination of their candidate. That candidate
was Winfield Scott. The whigs proper refused to accept him.
They demanded to know his principles by public avowal. He
refused publicly to avow them. To bring his whig principles
fully and finally to the test, the whigs presented him with their
platform of principles, but his friends rejected it with scorn.
They spit upon it and trampled it beneath their feet. There
upon, the whigs proper of the convention presented Millard

282 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
FiUmore and Daniel Webster as their candidates in opposition
to him.
This, said he, is the first act in the grand drama. He then
enquired of them to tell him, before they had obscured it
by any other consideration, whose candidate was Daniel
Webster ? They would tell him he was the candidate of the
northern whigs. Why ? Because they brought him forward.
Whose candidate was Millard Fillmore? Oi the southern
whigs. Why ? Because they brought him forward. Whose
candidate was General Scott? They must say, of the abo
litionists. Why? Because they brought him forward — would
have nobody else — would divide on nobody else, but stood in
firm, unbroken column for him, "first, last, and all the time."
He then proceeded to the second act in the convention
drama. The balloting was about to commence. Look, said
he, at the parties. There stood Daniel Webster, surrounded
by only twenty-nine of his faithful followers ; all the rest had
been swept away in that terrible storm of fanaticism which has
been sweeping over the States of the north. Close by his side
stood Millard FiUmore, surrounded by the whigs of the south,
whose rights and property they considered he had generously
protected until every northern friend had fled from his stand
ard. There they stood, the only hope and the only candidates
of the whig party proper, either north or south.
But who were they standing on the opposite side, in marshal
array against them ? The black flag of abohtion waving over
them told us too plainly who they were. They were the rep
resentatives of the principles ofWilliam H. Seward, of Horace
Greeley, and Garrison, and of Fred Douglass. They were
those who raised great mobs in the cities of Boston and New
York, in order to prevent the restoration of southern property.
They were those whose hands were yet red with the blood of
southern men, murdered at Christiana in open day, for simply
demanding their own property under the Constitution. They
were those who openly declare in this canvass that the fugitive
slave law shall be repealed, and agitation in Congress and out
of Congress shall never cease, until every slave in America
shall be taken from his lawful master. In the midst of such
social incendiaries as these, they saw the tall and portly form

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 283
of thefr candidate, Winfield Scott ; not such as he was when
proudly standing in the halls of the Montezumas, but like Lu
cifer, shorn of his celestial beauty, standing amid the fallen
spirits of pandemonium.
Such were the candidates, and such the friends who brought
them forward and supported them. Day after day, and ballot
after ballot, left the parties at the close of the week where they
started in the contest. On Monday morning the convention
again assembled. The parties, said he, resumed their posi
tions, and preparations began for the last final struggle. But
hold ! Nine hundred millions of southern property — the peace
and safety of every southern family are at stake ! Hold, until
they ascertain that every southern man is at his post. Call
the friends of Daniel Webster. They were there in true and
loyal devotion to the Constitution. Call the friends of Millard
FUlmore. State after State, said he, answered " Here !" At
last Tennessee was called. Nine out of twelve champions re
sponded, " We are here ready for the charge." But where,
he asked, were the other three ? Call them. Gen. Zollicoffer !
Gen. Zolficoffer ! No answercomes. Gov. Jones ! Gov. Jones I
No response was given. It was strange ! It looked suspi
cious ! Yonder they were, ranged under the same banner with
Seward and Greeley. They had left their nine comrades —
they had deserted Mr. Fillmore — they had disobeyed their in
structions, and all was lost ! One ballot more told the sad
story that Mr. Webster and Mr. Fillmore, the only whig candi
dates before the convention, were defeated ; and the long, loud
shout of the abolitionists proclaimed that their candidate was
nominated. He said, their candidate — he was nobody else's candi
date. For fifty ballots, not one sofitary southern whig, now
remembered, voted for him. All were from the north, and
from those States most violently opposed to the constitutional
rights of the south.
He asked them to tell him if Gen. Scott was brought for
ward by the abofitionists, and for fifty ballottings was supported
by abolitionists alone, how could the going over of three Ten-
nesseeans to that side make him the whig candidate ? As dele
gates, he said, they had no rightto desert Mr. FiUmore. They

284 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
were under special instructions. No discretionary powers had
been given them. If the power of attorney be given to do one
thing and the agent do another, the act is void and of no effect.
To do the thing forbidden is a fraud, vVhich, in every civihzed
country, would set aside the whole transaction. It was a falsi
fication of the record to say they had a general authority, first
to go for Mr. Fillmore, and if they could not get him, then to
go for somebody else. Go read the proceedings of the conven
tion, and they would find no such thing intended. Go behind
the record, and they would find the whole whig press of the
State out for Fillmore, " first, last, and all the time." On the
29th day of May, the Banner proclaimed that " if Gen. Scott
does not write and publish his committal to the finafity of the
compromise, we cannot, and will not support him, though
nominated by the Whig National Convention " The Banner
would not be content with anything he had written and pub
lished before that time, but he must thereafter come out and
publish some committal to the finality of the ccmpronuse.
When those three men deserted Mr. FiUmore, had Gen.. Scott
written and published any such committal ? Gen. Zollicoffer
was one of the men who deserted Fillmore, and now he would
try him by his own words. On Monday morning, when he and
Gov. Jones, and one other, deserted their nine comrades — when
they threw down thefr instructions and went over and took
their seats by the side of the immortal sixty-six, who spit upon
the platform, had Gen. Scott ever written and published any
committal to the finality of the compromise ? It was a grave
question, and he was prepared to prove that he had not. He
would call no democratic witness — no anti-Scott witness. No.
He would call to the stand Scott's file-leader and bosom friend.
Gov. Jones. He had proclaimed it to the world " that he had
tried with all his powers of persuasion to get Gen. Scott to
write a letter to the convention stating his position on political
questions. That he could not help the conviction that his
nomination depended on his writing such a letter. But he had
got it into his head that he ought not, and would not write a
letter, and did not write one." There was the proof positive,
undeniable. Zollicoffer said, " if he will not write and pubhsh
one, we wiU not support him." Gov. Jones says that "he

ON THE PRESIDENTUL ELECTION. 285
would not and did not write one." Yet in the face of this
solemn pledge to his brother whigs of the State-^ — in the face of
this positive testimony of his bosom friend. Gov. Jones — in the
face of the solemn resolution of the other nine delegates never
to desert the standard of Mr. FiUmore,, he went over to the
support of Gen. Scott ! There was no escape from this array
of proof. It fastened down upon those men thefr rank and
wilful disobedience to the whole whig sentiment of the State,
BO strong and so undeniably, that nothing could save them but
to run up the open flag of rebellion against their party in the
State, and to say, " Let Gentry do as he please — let Christo
pher H. WilUams murmur if he dare — let Ephraim H. Foster,
Francis B. Fog, Dr. McNairy, Col. Whiteside and all the rest,
know that they are mere atoms in the party, which we can
blow away at pleasure."
And such indeed is the expedient which these bold and rash
men are now resorting to in this election. The whig party of
the State met and instructed their men. They said to them,
" Go in our name and bring back to us a good whig candi
date fully and expressly committed to the faithful execution of
the fugitive slave bill. Bring Millard Fillmore." Well, they
went. Did they bring Millard Fillmore? No. Did they
bring any body publicly committed to the fugitive slave law ?
No. Did they bring them a whig candidate at aU? No. What,
then, had they done ? They had thrown down their instructions.
They had required no pubfic committal that nine hundred
milfions of property should be protected. They had gone over
and joined their worst and bitterest enemies — enemies to us —
enemies to our property. Enemies who hold that we are so
vile, degraded and dishonest, that they will not admit us to
any social or moral equafity whatever. In short, they had
formed an alliance with the sixty-six abolitionists, who spit
upon their platform of principles. And now they had come
home and were traversing the State from one end to the other,
to cut off the head of any true whig who should dare refuse to
form the same coalition in the election which they did in the
nomination. He had come here to-day to ask the whigs one
grea.t question : " Can they co-operate with their sixty-six men
who constituted the majority of Gen. Scott's friends ?"

286 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
What did southern whigs want ? they wanted the fugitive
slave biU maintained, they wanted a President who, if it should
be repealed by a majority of Congress, thereby overruling the
Constitution, would veto it. They wanted one, who would throw
all his influence in favor of stopping all agitation on this dis
tracting question. They wanted one who would maintain and
uphold the Constitution and thereby preserve our glorious
Union. The sixty-six wanted one of opposite character-
one that would recognize some higher law than the Constitu
tion, and would rather see the Union rent in twain, than sur
render one jot or tittle of their wild and furious fanaticism.
The whigs of Tennessee, those who had not been seduced by
visions of power and office, differed from this majority (sixty-
six) of Gen. Scott's friends, as widely as the poles. How
then was it possible thatthey could coalesce with them in this
election as their three delegates had done in the nomination.
He knew well how this argument was met. No whig orator
had ever denied that the majority of Scott's friends were abo
litionists — ^rank, furious abolitionists. They did not deny it,
but sought to evade the crushing power of facts by saying
that freesoilers aided in the nomination of Gen. Pierce. That
he was brought forward under the auspices of the Van Bu-
rens and the Butlers of New York. He asked them how often
had they read and heard that ? Yet he, then and in their pres
ence, would tell them it was false — every word of it false. He
knew that the friends of the Van Burens (for they were not
there themselves) in the Baltimore Convention, on every ballot
voted for Wm. L. Marcy. They never voted for any body else.
For a long time they voted alone. They were all in the New
York delegation. Virginia brought in Franklin Pierce. True,
those few friends of the Van Burens voted finally for Gen. P.,
to make his nomination as nearly unanimous as possible. But
to say that they manoeuvred for his nomination, and that he
was brought up under their auspices, was a gross libel upon
the real facts as they transpired in the convention. Some barn
burners, by which he meant Van Buren men, did sit in our
convention, but they came there bringing the highest proof of
their repentance and reformation. What was that proof?
Their voting for Marcy, one of the strongest friends of the

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 287
fugitive slave law in the United States — voted for him, after
he had written and published that he would veto any bill passed
by Congress to repeal or impair its efficacy. Mark the differ
ence. Write it on the wall — proclaim it on the house-tops —
let all men read, and hear, and know the difference between
their convention and our convention. Abolitionists were re
ceived in their convention, spitting on their principles and
trampling their platform under their feet. The freesoilers in
our convention, or rather those who had been such, came as
repentant sinners— voting for our platform — ^voting for Marcy,
who had just declared he would veto any bill repealing or af
fecting the fugitive slave law. What more could we ask ?
What more could they have done ?
Gov. Brown said he had now finished this parallel between
the two conventions. He returned to the great question : —
Would the whigs of Tennessee, having failed to get Mr. Web
ster or Mr. Fillmore — the only whig candidates before the con^
vention — now consent to take Gen. Scott as their candidate by
adoption? Will they take him by adoption? * -* * *
Gov. Brown, in continuation of this argument at a subse
quent day in the canvass, in Dresden, maintained that the whig
party, as such, was under no obligation thus to take him. You
ought not, said he, because he ' did not come fairly by the
nomination. The Archer letter contained a promise to come
out in favor of the fugitive slave law, which was never re
deemed ; he did not do so in his letter of acceptance ; he does
not, in any of his many speeches which he is now making in
his western torn-. He seems to be entirely content with the
nomination without looking to that promise at all. He has
doubtless read, and is acting upon, the story of the sailor, who
when compelled to leave his vessel and swim for safety to the
shore, in his extremity began to pray to the Virgin. Among
other things, he promised that if she would only save him this
time, he would burn, in honor of her, a wax candle as big
as his body. His comrade, who was swimming lustily by his
side, remarked, " Thou fool ! where can you ever get a candle
as big as your body?" " Never mind," said he, " let me once
get on shore, and the Virgin may whistle for her candle."
Yes, sirs. Gen. Scott got the nomination, and the whig party
20

288 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
may whistie for the candle. He got it by the double-dealing of
a portion of the convention who were specially instructed by
their constituents to vote for another. They gave only a iiomi-
nal obedience, whUst they were really, from first to last,- in
favor of Gen. Scott. He got it by the sacrifice of the great
doctrine of instruction, without which. Gov. Brown contended,
this government was no better than any other government.
He got it by refusing to come out publicly on the fugitive slave
bill and the compromise generaUy, although an hundred whigs,
J. C. Jones among the number, earnestly entreated him to do so.
The presence of Gov. Seward, and Gen. Scott's sUence, is
ominous of the vast influence which is hereafter to be exer
cised over him. A senator in Congress and one hundred other
whigs may go to him and appeal to him to give his views, and
Mr. Seward has only to go along with them and say, with a
significant nod, " Yes, sir, come out," to seal his lips against
every declaration of his principles. Gen. Scott knew well that
the hundred whigs expected him to come out for the fugitive
slave bill, whilst Gov. Seward required him to come out against
if. In the face of this fact, stated by Gov. Jones, my competi
tor, Judge Brown, on yesterday declared, that so far from hav
ing any influence over him, Gen. Scott would hang the aboli
tionists as high as Haman. Ha ! are you sure of that ? I
think, said he, the danger is, the hanging will be the other way.
I think the abolitionists have rather gotten the rope around the
Judge''s neck, and will be more apt to hang him and Gen. Scott
and all of us together. Now you, said Gov. B., go a great deal
farther than the whig elector for this end of the State ; as far
as he goes is, that when some one told Gen. Scott that it had
been said, that if he was elected Seward would have too much
influence over him, he replied, " Damn Seward." Now even
this last story, I fear, is too much like that of the man who
said he had been up towards Windsor Castle where the king
was residing. " Ah !" said his friend, " what have you been
up there for ?" " Why, to see the king." " Did you see him?"
" Yes, I did." " Did you speak to him ?" " Yes, I cursed him
black and blue !" " What ! did he hear you curse him ?" " 0,
no, he was about a half a mUe off"!" So I think it wUl be when-
ever Gen. Scott shall curse Wm. H. Seward. So here you have

ON^THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 289
it: Judge Brown tells you Scott will hang them, and General
Haskell tells you he will at least damn them. Can he offer to
hang those sixty-six friends of his who stuck to him through
thick and thin, and who spit upon a,nd spurned the whig plat
form ? How can he have the heart to damn even Fred Doug
lass, the free negro, who from first to last (or his representative)
stuck tohim closer than a brother! The whole story reflects
no credit either on the piety or gratitude of your candidate.
Sirs, it was this very silence, and Gov. Seward's power by
his mere presence and look, to insure it, that furnished a pow
erful motive to the abolitionists to select him as their candi
date ; besides, he had spoken out in their favor on many oc
casions; he had spoken out when he declared, with John Q.
Adams, that those petitions ought to be received, and referred,
and reported on in Congress, like all other petitions ; he had
spoken out in his Atkinson letter when he said, " 1 am per
suaded that it is a high moral obligation of masters and slave-
holding States to employ all means not incompatible with the
safety of both colors, to meliorate slavery even to extermina
tion." What a word for abolitionists ! Gen. Scott labelled it
on his person, and every fanatic of the north had only to look
at him and spell ex-ter-mi-na-tion. So much as to what at
tracted the abolitionists to Gen. Scott ; now what was it that
attracted him to them ? I answer, the Presidency. He had
looked around him to count his chances ; he saw the whigs of
the south had selected Mr. Fillmore ; the whigs of the north
had selected Mr. Webster, and the abolitionists alone were
without a candidate ; he wanted their votes, and they wanted
his name and fame to drag them into respectability, and to
give them the advantage of a more favorable position for fu
ture agitation and mischief.
Sirs, I do not pretend to say that Gen Scott is really an abo
fitionist, nor to intimate that hundreds and thousands who sup
port him are such ; but his alliance with them, and his consent
to head and lead them on, is not the less dangerous to the
south nor discreditable to him. I say this to repel the charge
of Judge Brown that the democratic party is disposed to slan
der and traduce Gen. Scott. I repel it, and defy him to the
proof He says that when he had fought all the battles of
Mexico and subdued that nation, that he was arrested, his

290 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
sword taken from him, and he was brought home in chains.
Sirs, where did he learn all this ? In what book ? In what
record ? No, sir, he is behind the times. Gen. Scott was never
arrested — never unsworded. He arrested others — unsworded
them — and did every thing in his power to disgrace them in
the face of the enemy ; but he was never arrested, and was
never put on trial for anything. He was recalled from Mexi
co, but he was recalled at his own request. Hear what the
Seci-etary of War, Mr. Marcy, tells him and you on this sub
ject: " As early as June you begged to be recalled ; you allege
that this application was rebukingly decfined. This is not
saying the exact thing. The reply to your request was, that
it would be decided with exclusive reference to the public good.
When that shall render it proper, in his opinion, to withdraw
you fi'om the present command, his determination to do so will
be made known to you. Judging from the state of things at
the head-quarters of the army in January, he (the President)
concluded that he ought no longer to require of you reluctant
service as Commanding General."
There, said Gov. Brown, is the whole foundation for all
Judge Brown's complaints of slander and persecution. He
begged himself to be recalled ; he was recalled ; and now we
hear that he was arrested, unsworded, brought home a prisoner
in disgrace ! On the score of slanders against our respective
candidates, I am ready to compare notes at any moment. Who
is fabricating them every day against Gen. Pierce ? A com
mittee at Washington made up of the worst enemies the south
ever had. From this great laboratory of falsehood and Kes,
they are sent forth north or south as they may best affect the
public mind. Falsehood, perjury and forgery are doing hourly
their infamous work. The charge of cowardice before the
enemy and in the social circle had its brief career, no doubt
misleading thousands, but now, when the refutation and recan
tation can hardly be expected to overtake the original slander,
they are freely withdrawn. But, sir, detraction is so common
that I will not dwell upon it. My time Is nearly out, and I
wish to make an appeal to my whig brethren in relation to the
coming election. I do not ask them to vote for Gen. Pierce,
although it would not break one single tie that holds you to the

ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. 291
whig party. Gen Scott is not your candidate ; he was not
nominated by you : nay, he beat you down and prevented j'ou
from having one. Still I fear that you will hardly adopt the
nomination of Gen. Pierce. You ought to do it under the
circumstances of the case, but still, 1 will not insist upon that.
I only ask that you will stand off and let us fight this abolition
battle alone. We will fight it successfully — we will save your
property as well as our own. I pray you not to throw j'^our
weight and power against us. We cannot conquer you and
the abolitionists both. You ought not to expect us to do it, and
if you thought the danger as great as we do, you certainly
would not require it. That we do not over-estimate the danger
look to the opinions and actions of your own party. Gentry
and Williams are as wise and careful of your rights as Gov.
Jones and W. T. Haskell — Epriam H. Foster and Francis B.
Fogg, have as much sagacity to see danger as any other men
whatsoever in your party. So have Dr. Shelby, Dr. McNairy,
Mr. Whiteside and others that might be named. If these wise
men of your own household were here to-day addressing you
as I am doing, they would make the same appeal which I now
do. They would say, we are whigs, the oldest in the State, but
this election does not turn upon whiggery and democracy. It
turns upon your right of property in slaves, under the Consti
tution, nine hundred millions in amount; it turns upon the
preservation of that property, and the future peace' and repose
of fifteen States of the Union, and we cannot, and will not
support Gen. Scott. When whig questions shall again arise,
we shall be whigs again, but now we go for the preservation of
the Union and of our rights under the Constitution.

SPEECH
Onthe Progress ofthe United Stales and on the Slavery Question.
Delivered at Odd Fellows' Hall, (Nashville, Tenn.,) for the
benefit of the Orphan Asylum, by Ex-Gov. A. V. Brown,
in 1850.

It is now just three, quarters of a century since the United
States proclaimed her determination to take her place amongst
the independent nations of the earth. It was a high and bold
resolve, so full of peril that it drew tears from the interpid
patriots who signed the ever memorable declaration. It star
tled the mother country and astonished the other nations of
the old world. It was a contest of youth against matured
and hardened manhood ; of a weak and scattered people
against the most formidable and powerful nation on the globe.
Without money, ^vithout an army, ivith scarcely a single ship
of war on the ocean, without even entire unanimity of senti
ment amongst her own people^ she fearlessly engaged in the
struggle, resolved to be free, or to perish in the attempt.
A cause so just and an example so heroic, could not fail soon
to attract the favor and sympathy of mankind. France, partly
from hereditary hatred to England, but mainly from the ger
minating seeds of her own subsequent revolution, tendered to
the young Republic her auspicious and powerful assistance-
For seven years she maintained the long and dubious contest.
History has faithfully recorded the consummate skill of her

ON THE PROGRESS OP THE UNITED STATES. 293
generals, the heroic valor of her soldiery, and the jpatriotic sac
rifices of her gallant people.
At last, crowned with success, with her liberties firmlj'
established and their acknowledgment extorted from her op-
pre.?sor, she stood forth the wonder of the age, the admiration
of the world !
But whatever of skill or of valor she had exhibited in the
war, was far outshone by the wisdom she displayed in the form
of government which she subsequently devised and adopted.
She summoned her vrise men throughout all her borders to
come up to the great work of devising a system which should
be worthy of the mighty struggle through which she had passed,
and of the gallant people who had nobly sustained it. They
came. Washington came ; Benjamin Franklin came ; old
Roger Sherman came; James Madison came; Rutledgeand
the Pinckneys came ; and many others whose names and
fame have long been identified with her highest glory and re
nown. When the great work of forming her Constitution was
completed, it was transmitted to Congress by George Washing
ton, who had presided' over its formation, accompanied by a
letter, which, like his farewell address, ought to be forever pre
served, and as often referred to for lessons of wisdom and pa
triotic devotion to the Constitution and the Union. I will not
viithhold on the present occasion the following impressive ex
tract : " In all our deliberations we kept steadily in our view
that which appears to us the greatest interest of every true
American, the consolidation of our Union, in which is involved
our prosperity, felicity, safety, perhaps our national existence.
This important consideration, seriously and deeply impressed
on our minds, led each State in convention to be less rigid on
points of inferior magnitude than might have been otherwise
expected ; and thus the Constitution which we now present is
the result of a spirit of amity, and of that mutual deference and
concession, which the peculiarity of our political situation
rendered indispensable. * * * That it may promote the
lasting welfare of that country so dear to us all, and secure her
freedom and happiness, is our most ardent wish."
This noble monument of human wisdom was subsequently
adopted by the States, It became our Constitution, our Union,

294 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
our system of federal government. They are not separate
and distinct things. They are one, indivisible and identical.
Whoever has read the one has read the other. Whoever obeys
one, obeys the other. Whoever dissolves the one, dissolves
the other. As the old articles of confederation formed and
were the Union, so the new Constitution became and is a more
perfect Union. Under it, our country has thus far run a career
of prosperity unparalleled in the history of nations. Triumph
ant in two wars since its adoption, especially brilliant and in
vincible in the last one, she has placed her military renown
above all cavil and beyond the reach of all competition. In
peace, in all the arts and sciences, which bless and adorn such
a condition, she has been no less an object of admiration and
praise. From three millions, her population has grown up to
more than twenty millions. From thirteen original States we
have become a confederacy of thirty republics, and can scarcely
announce the number until another and another are added to
the glittering and gorgeous galaxy. They come from every
part of this wide spread continent; from the lakes ofthe north;
from the shores of the Gulf or the distant regions of California,
glittering with her gold and sparkling with her diamonds. Her
wide spread commerce is seen floating on every sea, penetra
ting every climate and country, and protected by a navy which
has carried her name and her fame to every part ofthe habita
ble globe. Success in agricultural pursuits has crowned with
plenty the labors of her own people, and carried abundance and
joy to the famishing population ofthe old world. In her inter
nal improvements; her canals ; her raifroads ; her telegraphic
lines ; the removal of obstructions from her majestic rivers, ^he
has exhibited the elements of a great and prosperous people.
But above all, she has become " the desire of all nations," in
the freedom of her institutions, the justice and equality of her
laws, and the wisdom and impartiality with ivhich they are ad
ministered. In fine, her past history and progress is a bright
and almost magic picture on which the civilized nations
are now gazing with intense admiration and delight. Most
willingly would I hold that picture up to your gaze ; to your ad
miration ; to your own patriotic pride and just exultation ; but
a sterner and far less agreeable duty lies before me.

ON THE PROGRESS OP THE UNITED STATES. 295
In the midst of this unparalleled progress, when we are but
midway between the morning and high noon of our prosperity,
the gloomy shadows of sectional discontent come stealing over
and around us, deepening and darkening as they come. A dread
eclipse seems to be approaching. Amid the gathering gloom,
the cry is heard, thatthe Constitution, the Union, our confede
rate system is in danger. From the east and the west, from
the north and the south, the messages of State Governors, the
resolutions of State legislatures and the solemn deliberations
of large popular assembfies, confirm the astounding and almost
iA3redible annunciation. Panic stricken and amazed, we turn
with patriotic instinct to the centre of our political system ; to
the city which bears the name of the illustrious father of his coun
try; we turn to it for light, and peace, and safety. But no
light is to be seen gleaming from her council chambers. They
have all been put out. For weeks and months, no speaker ;
no clerks; no sergeant-at-arms ; no chaplain; no organization
for the public good, but perpetual readiness for agitation and
mischief. Nearly all, but not all of those great and good men
who used to be there from the north to perfect, adorn and per
petuate our system of government, have retired from the thea-
fre of action or have been superseded by men whose sole de
light seems to be, day after day, and night after night, amid
the fire and smoke and suffocation of a wild fanaticism, to
deal blow after blow upon the Constitution, until the Union
shall crumble to ruins around them. Let us now pause and
look at the proposed invasions of that heretofore consecrated
instrument. The first one is, that the clause allowing the representation
of three-fifths of the slaves, shall be expunged, obliterated
from the Constitution. It is a clause which had long been de
bated in the convention. At that period slavery existed in
several of the northern as well as the southern States. But in
the spirit of amity and of mutual forbearance and concession,
the difficulty was compromised ; and Massachusetts and Vir
ginia, Connecticut and Georgia walked harmoniously into the
Union, co-equals in every respect, having compromised this
and aU other points of difference, as the basis and principle of
representation. Cannot Massachusetts now consent to do

296 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
what JMassachusetts was content to do then ? Is the Connec
ticut of to-day unwilling to stand to the compact ra1:ified by
the Connecticut of 1787 ? If not, on whose head shall fall the
blame of destroying that compact ? The south cannot afford
voluntarily to submit to a great change like this. She is al
ready in a vast and increasing minority ; her contemplated
exclusion from the territories of the United States would soon
reduce her so low in the scale of insignificance as to sink her
on every invasion of her rights, far below the protection of even
a Presidential veto. When that shall have been done, who
can doubt that the feeble barriers, which are now admitted to
forbid interference with slavery in the States, will all be bro
ken down and the dark spirit of murder and insurrection stalk
mad, riotous and bloody through the land. To ask her volun
tarily to make this change is but an invitation to suicide; to
force it upon her by numerical power is to break and dissolve
the Constitution ; to break and dissolve the Union ; to break
and dissolve the federal government ; no matter which of these
forms of expression may be adopted. In such an act the south
would stand passive, and faithful to tiie original compact; the
north would be active and destructive of it. It may be said
that the Constitution expressly provides for its own amend
ment, and therefore no alteration can be destructive of it.
But let it be remembered that it was to be amended as it was
formed, in the spirit of amity and mutual concession ; not of
hostUe and degrading aggression. To amend by improving
not by destroying those guarantees of Ufe and property, with-'
out which we know it never would have been adopted.
Look next to the abolition of slavery in the District of Col
umbia, in the forts, arsenals, navy-yards, and other pubhc es
tablishments of the United States. What adequate induce
ment can the north have to raise all this clamor for years,
about a little district, ten miles square, (now much less,) and
a few inconsiderable spots and places thinly scattered over the
land, scarcely larger than a mustard seed when compared to
the vast body of the slave-holding region ? Would a micro
scopic concession like this appease a conscience, wounded and
lacerated by the sin of slavery? If abolished in these, it
would be butthe removal of one grain of sand from the beach—

ON THE PROGRESS OP THE UNITED STATES, 297
the withdrawal of but one drop from the vast ocean of alleged
national guilt. But small as it might seem to be, the south
ca;nnot safely submit to abolition even here. How could
JMaryland, how could Virginia submit to it ? When the Dis
trict of Columbia should have become a city of refuge for the
slaves of the surrounding country, what earthly power could
prevent the chivafrous sons of Virginia and Maryland from as
serting their rights and reclaiming their property ? Members
of Congress, who now shudder with horror at reading in some
mefropolitan newspaper, the advertiserrlent of some negro
slave for sale, might then be doomed to witness many a scene
of sfrife, and to behold many a wounded captive borne off in
chains, who, without his officious legislation, would have re
mained contented at home, eating the same kind of food, re
posing through the same hours of the night, and working side
by side with the master through the day, in the same fields,
where both had been reared, in kind and sometimes affectionate
regard for each other.
Look next to another of these aggressions on the rights of
the south, which proposes under the pretext of regulating com
merce among the States, that no slave, for no purpose, and
under no circumstances whatever, shall be carried by his law
ful owner, from one slave-holding State to anothei-. That
where slavery now is, there it shall forever remain, until by its
own increase, it shall outnumber the opposite race, and thus
by the united combination of causes^ — the fears ofthe master,
tiie dinainution in value, and the' exhausted condition of the
soil, the final purposes of fanaticism, whatever they may be,
shall be accomplished. For this extraordinary proposition no
apology can be offered ; for it is established by universal ob
servation, that if you give to slavery but scope and compass,
if you permit it to' be dilated over ample space, it loses much
of that oppression which even a morbid humanity could de
plore. In many regions of the south, 1 hesitate not to declare
that in point of care and anxiety — in point of abundance of
food and raiment — of healthful but humble habitation, the
slave is but fittle distinguished from the master.
Before we further pursue this enumeration of our wrongs
permit me to say, that I do not include the whole north as en-

298 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES,
gaged in this crusade against us. WhUst we fear that we can
exempt no large classes and no large, portions of any party,
1 freely admit many individual exceptions that challenge our
highest admiration and gratitude — men who stand forth among
the brightest ornaments of our age and country.
The last in the series of aggressions to which I shaU call
your attention, is that one commonly called the Wilmot pro
viso, by which Congress is called upon to prohibit every slave
holder from removing with his slaves to the territory lately ac
quired from Mexico — a territory as large as the old thirteen
States originally composing the Union — a territory won by the
common valor, and paid for out of the common treasury of the
nation. Simply to state the proposition is to show its enor
mity. Even the brigand will make honorable divisions of the
spoils among all who went willingly and bore themselves va
liantly in the expedition of rapine and plunder. Will proud
and independent States do less with their compeers in an ex
pedition of honor, and duty, and patriotism ? If disposed to
taunt, I might demand to know if the north, a large portion
of it at least, did go willingly ? Whether she did not denounce
the expedition as wicked and unjust, and the acqusition barren
and worthless ? How then is it that she shall demand the
lion's share of it to herself ? Even after it had been acquired,
many there were ready to abandon it and sm-render it back
to what they were pleased to term a weak and helpless and
innocent people— more willing then to give all to Mexico, than
they now are one-half of it to their own countrymen. And
what has the south ever done 1 o merit such exclusion from the
common soil, the common property of the nation ? Trace her
history — in peace and in war — on every battle-field, and in
every council-chamber, she has been true and faithful to all her
engagements to the north. Observe her more especially in
the contest, by which that very territory was acquired from
which she is now to be excluded. Both of your great com
manders were from the south. Many subordinate generals,
their " kindred thunderbolts in war," were also from the south.
An equal number — nay, a majority of your invincible soldiery
were from the south. Why should they be permitedto gather
laurels from Palo Alto to Buena Vista — from Vera Cruz to the

ON THE PROGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES. 299
Mexican capital, and then, when every province had been sub
dued, and your flag was proudly waving over the halls of the
Montezmas, why should they be required to bow their heads,
and meekly to retfre — excluded — driven out from the country
moistened with their blood, and immortalized by their valor.
Could the north point me to " the book and page" — to the very
clause of the Constitution which would expressly warrant an
exclusion so unequal, and so unjust, I would not yet believe
that a land that bears upon her bosom the proud and lofty
monument of Bunker Hill, would ever perpetrate so foul — so
incomprehensibly monstrous deed. But that book— that page —
that clause can never be shown. It is vain to point us to that
provision of the Constitution which declares that, " Congress
shall have power to dispose of, and make rules and regula
tions respecting the territory or other property belonging to
the United States." Territory means the land — the soil —
which belonged to her. The property which she might have
need to dispose of. To dispose of — to sell her territory or pub
hc lands, rules and regulations might and would become ne
cessary : they must be surveyed. The size and form of her
surveys, the price which should be demanded for them, the lo
cation of the offices where the same shall be disposed of, were
all among the " rules and regulations" contemplated by this
section. It did not speak of political associations or govern
ments under that term. The exclusion of every such con
clusion is to be found in the after declaration " that nothing
in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any
claims ofthe United States, or any particular State." Under
this clause, however, the United States may entirely prevent
the formation of poUtical associations or governments upon
her territory or pubfic lands. She may exclude the settlement
of them altogether. She may choose to resei-ve them for after
times or to hold them as uninhabited barriers, between herself
and some co-terminous nation. If such should not be her policy
she may permit and invite their settiement with a view to politi
cal organization. But because that territory is hers, she may
prescribe the description of persons, whether unnaturafized
foreigners or the citizens of the United States, who may in
habit it. She may discriminate against the former on tbe

300 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
great principles of self-defence against the formation of an
organized government of foreign subjects on her own soil,
within her own boundaries, hostile in sentiment, and danger
ous to her republican form of government. Against and
amongst her own people, she can make no such discrimination,
because neither founded on necessity, consistent with the com
munity of property, nor warranted by that perfect equality of
rights secured to the people of the States by the Constitution.
For the same reason, (the right of property) she may desig
nate the boundaries within which such political associations may
be formed. The land, the soil, the territory is her own, and she
may therefore well determine such a question according to her
own will and pleasure. AU other questions preliminary to
political organization and to subsequent application for ad
mission into the Union, acted on by Congress, must be the
result of strict necessity or of acquiescence on part of the peo
ple for mutual accommodation and convenience; all these ques
tions relate chiefly to mere modes of action and sink into com
parative insignificance in this discussion. But the great prin
ciple of self government inherent in every people, and the
guarded and limited powers granted to the general govern
ment, would clearly indicate to my mind, that whatever Con
gress has done or may hereafter do in reference to introducing
measures preliminary to the organization of territorial govern
ments, she ought never to enter upon direct and immediate leg
islation for them- But my purpose is not here to discuss the
Constitutional questions involved in the present contest be
tween the north, and the south. This is neither the time nor the
occasion. I therefore pass to another, and would solemnly and
earnestly enquire what the north can expect to gain by aUthe^e
high and imperious demands ! Does she expect thereby to
wipe out the stain of what she is pleased to call the national
sin of slavery ? Why slavery has no nationafity ! It is pure
ly a local and sectional institution. Whatever of sin may
be ascribed to it can never attach in any degree to the north,
until we obUterate the States and become one vast consoli
dated government. If it be replied that whUst this is true as
to slavery in the States, yet the territory of the United States
is national and the introduction of slavery there would be a

ON THE PROGRESS OP THE UNITED STATES, 301
national transgression — well, we have agreed to set bounds to
this imputed sin, by the compromise of the Constitution, by the
Missouri compromise, by the Texas compromise. And even
underthese we ask the north to give no affirmative sanction to
the sin or other evils of slavery. All we require of her is to
take no action on the subject. Will not this do them ? It did
the venerable men of the north sixty years ago. It satisfied
them thirty years ago when Missouri came into the Union.
Why not now ? Let them remember too, that whether they
admit slavery upon one foot of our territory or not, cannot af
fect the question of its sinfulness in the slightest degree.
Admit slavery to-morrow into every territory north and south
of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes, and you add not a
single one to the number. Exclude them, and you make thefr
number not a single one the less. The aggregate amount of
sin and of suffering, as you regard it, will therefore remain
the same whether you fail or succeed in this notable scheme of
conscientious purgation.
Let me further enquire of the north, when she has succeed
ed in all her proposed measures, what she expects to accomr
plish for the relief of " the poor enslaved and' down-trodden
sons of Africa ?" You would shake a continent from the cen
tre to its circumference for their relief. You would deal blow
after blow on the Constitution, until you would make the Union
reel and stagger like a falling and dying man, to lighten their
yoke and loosen their chains ; and what, I demand to know, is
likely to be your successs ? Deluded by your perpetual agita
tions, they become gloomy and discontented with their lot.
Suspicion watches every look and refers every action to some
settled purpose of intended insurrection. If outbreaks ensue,
destitute of arms, and ignorant of their use if they had any,
with no concert of action, and no leader to conduct them, they
would soon be dispersed, or shot down in the fields and the
highways like so many wUd beasts of the forest. Thus they
would perish; by famine, by the sword, by the halter ; and
dying, would heap curses on those who had disturbed them in
their former contentment and repose. But let us suppose
that their efforts should be crowned with success so far as to
secure their escape from their further bondage. Where shaU

302 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
they go ? who will receive them ? WiU the north ? Never !
Notified of their approach, the north would meet them on the
border, drive them back, or strew the earth with their dead
bodies. Would the north ever consent to pay for them and
thus secure their final and certain emancipation? Never!
Would she consent to pay even the expenses of their trans
portation to the shores of their native country ? Never ! Would
she even allot to them a home and a resting place on the
banks of the distant Oregon or the plains of the Sacramento ?
No never — especially now, when gold is washed in every river
and sparkles on the summit of every mountain. I again ask,
what is to become of them ? Excited to rebellion but too
weak to conquer ; encouraged to fly and yet find no people,
no country willing to receive them ! Would to God that I
could send my voice to-night into every town and village and
farm house of the north. I would say, let this people alone.
They are now comparatively contented and happy. They
are well clothed, well housed, and well fed. In sickness, the
best physicians are called to their bed sides and in health they
ai'e not compelled to work as hard as the day-laborers of
your own region. You cannot, you do notlcnow how to better
their condition. Let them alone, until God in His mercy to
the master as well as the slave shall point out the way of their
deliverance. If then even the slave is to become loser by your injudi
cious if not officious benevolence, look a little further and see if
you may not become a loser yourselves by it. Look to the fol
lowing estimates of your annual profits growing out of your
connection with the south; estimates founded on the most
reliable, data :*
Freights of Northern shipping on Southern produce, - - $40,186,000
Profits derived on imports at the North on Southern account, 9,000,000
Profits of exchange operations, ---  1,000,000
Profits of Northern manufactures sold at the South, - - - 22,250,000
Profits of western produce descending the Mississippi, - - 10,000,000
Profits of Northern capital employed at the South, .... 6,000,000

188,436,000

*See the January Numher of The Democratic Review for 1850.

ON THE PROGRESS OP THE UNITED STATES. 303
Eighty-eightmillions of profits annually poured into the lap of
the north by its connection with the south ! How much of these
may you not lose, nay, must you not lose by dissolving your
connection with us. With the annexation of Texas, the last
acre of the cotton growing region passed beneath the wing of
the Eagle, and changed for all time to come the destinies of
the southern States.
England, France, and the northern States, have all become
competitors and rivals for her great staple, which in the lan
guage of an able and eloquent writer in one of our periodicals
has been spun into a web that binds the commercial world to
southern interests. The cotton growing experiments in India
have failed, the blundering emancipation policy of England in
her West Indies has failed, and the southern States are now
sole possessors of a staple on which half the manufacturing
and commercial interests of the world depend.
But whilst the south is conscious of the vantage ground
which she occupies, she is neither insensible nor indifferent to
the great interests of the north. She turns not a spindle, she
weaves not a woof, she sails not a ship in which the south does
not feel that she has a just degree of national pride and exul
tation. Her navigation and manufacturing interest can never
become antagonistic to the south. Antagonism must come
from England ; the north a.lready manufactures more than half
a million of our cotton bales ; England the greater portion of
the balance. Her proximity to the place of production ; the
abundance and cheapness of her provisions, and above all her
fraternal and national connection with the south, will enable
her to achieve successive victories over her transatlantic rival,
at which none will more heartily rejoice than her southern
brethren. But that connection must be fraternaL What is the Union
worth, when the spirit of amity and concord has departed from
it ? This agitation of the slavery question is so unfratemal
that the south has never seen the day when she would not
rather have had a foreign enemy thundering on her border>
than to have this slavery question under annual discussion in
Congress. To the north it brought no danger; your families
were safely housed and slumbering in peace and security, far
21

304 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER .SPEECHES.
away from the storm that was howling in the distance. Not
so the south. For the last few years not a fire-bell has been
rung at midnight in our cities, which did not strike a pang to
the heart and make the mother clasp the sleeping infant closer
to her bosom.
I have yet another question to submit to the north on this
great subject, the counterpart of the question of loss which
we have just been considering. What do you expect tO gain
for yourselves by pressing these measures upon the south?
Not political power and ascendency. You have acquired
these already. That was the high stake, for which some of
your ambitious statesmen have been playing for nearly half a
century. I do not say they have had no southern competitors.
But the game has been played out and the south has lost it.
The government is yours ; all its vast patronage is yours ; the
President and all the high offices of State belong to you, when
ever you choose to have them. The south knows that the scep-
fre has departed from her ; nay, that she handed it over to
you herself, when Virginia ceded to you with a noble and pa
triotic generosity her northwestern possessions. Without Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, and I believe a portion of Michigan, where
would be now, and for all time to come, the preponderance of
political power? The sun in one entfre revolution around this
earth, no where shines on a finer region than was freely sur
rendered to you by " the mother of Presidents and of States."
It was the gift of the south to the north. The magnificence of
that gift, if it shall generate no arrogance in the possessor, can
never bring regret to the generous bosom of the muni
ficent donOr. If ambition and power and patronage be no
longer the objects of your pursuit, what can you expect to gain
by further agitations ? Nothing. I repeat nothing but afiena-
ted affections; a violated Constitution; a broken, shattered
Union, and with these the taunts and jeers of exulting mon
archy, and the indignant frowns of the friends of liberty all
over the world. Dream not that the odium of dissolving this
glorious Union, still stretching like the rainbow of hope and of
promise over the continent, shall ever be cast on the States of
the south. That shall be your work, not theirs. The dissolu
tion of the Union is nothing but the destruction of the Consti-

ON THE PROGRESS OP THE UNITED STATES, 305
tution. The destruction ofthe Constitution is completed, when
your measures of aggression are accomplished. The south
loves the Union. She will cling to it to the last, and when one
violation ofthe Constitution after another shall have desfroyed
it, she may well exclaim, " It was not I that did it." When
the great crisis shall come and crash after crash shall announce
the downfall of the republic, the world will be at no loss to
.j^know what barbarian hand struck the fatal blow. Calm, erect,
but sorrowful, the south will be seen standing amid the ruins,
holding to her bosom the farewell address of the sainted Wash
ington, and appealing to Heaven to attest her fidelity to its
sacred injunctions.
In this dark hour of peril and danger, what does it become
the duty of the south to do for the preservation of her rights?
If the humblest of her sons were permitted to advise, he would
say to her, prepare, by all the means that wisdom can devise
and patriotism approve, prepare for the coming tempest. Its
low mutterings are no longer to be heard in the distance. It is
alreadj"^ upon you and its thunders are bursting peal after
peal over your head. Every gale that sweeps to you from the
capital, bears upon its wings the news of renewed agita
tion and increasing excitement. You cannot teU on what day
nor in what hour that glorious flag which waves over the delib
erations of Congress, the proud emblem of our Union and
our power, may be stricken down, in token that fanaticism and
ambition have accomplished their work, and that the days of
the republic have been numbered. What then I what then ?
Go ask the sainted spirit of Washington ; go ask the genius of
Liberty as she stretches her wings to take her everlasting flight
from our country. Not yet, not yet — stay ! stay ! all is not
lost. See! our noble flag again re -appears ! Some bold and
-patriotic hand has lifted up and restored it, and the light of
hope is once more beaming from the dome of our capitol.
Let us never despair of the republic. God never conducted
our fathers through so many frials and dangers ; he never in-
spfred them to build up so great and so excellent a system of
government, to permit their degenerate sons so soon to destroy
it. The north will yet recede ; a voice which she has long
known and so often followed, has already proclaimed that she

306 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
can and ought to recede. When she shall further hear, as hear
she must, that the south can never submit; that come what
may, she never can and never will submit, that her peace, her
safety, her honor, her very existence, all forbid it : when the
north shall moreover remember that all the evils of which she
coiriplains were inherited by us from her and from our British
ancestors, without our consent and against our earnest entrea
ties, she must pause, she must recede. Let us cherish this ,
hope of returning magnanimity and justice. We have seen
the noble vessel of state outride many a storm. Despafr
can only increase her danger in the present one. Let us hope
and cheer her to the last.
" Thou too, sail on, O ship of State
Sail on, O Union strong and great !
Humanity with all its fears.
With all the hopes of future years.
Is hanging breathless on thy fate !
We know what master laid thy keel,
¦What workman wrought thy rihs of steel,
Who made each mast and sail and rope.
What anvils rang, what hammers heat.
In what aforge and what a heat
Were shaped the anchors of thy hope."

SPEECH
Of Ex-Gov. Aaron V. Bi-own, in the Second Session of the
Southern Convention, on the Resolution Reported Saturday,
November I5th, 1850.

Mr. President : — Since our adjournment in June last. Con
gress has acted on all the great and exciting subjects which
had called this convention together. Our business now is,, to ex
amine how far that action has been or ought to be satisfactory
to the south. I have examined the bills, with the strongest
predisposition to be pleased and satisfied with them. I am
proud of my country — proud of her institutions — proud of her
brilliant and triumphant career. I am, therefore, painfully
anxious that nothing should occur to retard her progress or to
obscure her bright and glorious future. But, sir, I have tried
in vain to be convinced that the south has received any
thing like justice at the hands ofthe north. In every effort my
mind stands baffled and rebuked in the vain attempt.
I begin, sir, with the admission of California. I waive all
irregularity in her application — all imputed Executive dicta
tion — all doubts about the citizenship of those who partici
pated in the formation of her constitution. Still I am com
pelled to demand, why was she permitted to come in with all
this boundless extent of country ? It was not necessary to her
people; on the contrary, we know that it was highly inconve
nient to them. Why, then, was it done ? That man must be

808 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
blind who does not see, and know, and feel that it was done
for the sole purpose of excluding the south forever from the
shores of the Pacific. The north had said that she should be
excluded. The Wilmot proviso was the infamous instrument
selected for the purpose. The people of California, forgetting
for the moment how much they stood indebted to southern valor
and southern counsels for their very existence, letthemselves to
the inglorious deed. Congress, by rejecting every proposition to
curtail her enormous boundary, ratified and confirmed it ; and
thus the great work of our exclusion was accompUshed. Re
member, sir, I am not complaining that California was admit
ted as a State : nor am I objecting to any size and boundary
which the wants and necessities of her people might demand.
My precise objection is, that she was let in with an extent of
boundary which she did not need and which she did not expect
or desire to retain, and which, in reality, she is only holding
over against the south, for the future benefit of the freesoil
States of the north. Congress ought to have said, " Take of
the common territory what you need — take largely and freely ;
but you shall not take all." Now, sir, if Congress refused to
say this, with the view of depriving the south of her fair and
just proportion of this common fund, the device, though inge
nious, was nevertheless a flagrant violation of the Constitu
tion. So much as to the admission of California into the Union.
What of Utah and New Mexico, embracing all the balance
of the territory ? They have been organized into territorial
governments, but with no clause repealing any laws or ordi
nances of Mexico abolishing slavery which may be in force in
them. For the want of such a clause, I maintain that they
are as effectually lost to the south as if they had been sunken
by an earthquake. If those laws and ordinances are in force,
then, of course, they are lost. But I maintain that if it be
only doubtful whether they are in force or not, that very doubt
is as fatal to the south as the Wilmot proviso. No southern
man will dare to take his property there untU that doubt is
removed. Congress ought to have removed it. Her own dis
cussions had started it, and the master minds of that body had
fixed and confirmed it. If her object really was to open those

ON THE PASSAGE OF THE COMPROMISE. 309
countries equally and fairly to all the citizens of all the States,
she should have added the foUowing section : " Be it enacted,
that all lav^s and parts of laws passed by Mexico, which may
be in force in said territories in relation to slavery, be, and the
same are hereby repealed." Mr._ President, this short but ex
pressive sentence would have at once calmed the fears and
discontents of the south. The clouds which lowered so darkly
over her horizon would have been dispelled, and the rainbow
of hope and confidence would have shone with renewed bright
ness and glory. But no : the amendment was offered and
voted down, and the south doomed to submit — not to the Con
stitution, but to Mexican laws if they existed, or to stay away,
from a well grounded apprehension that they might exist. Sir,
that was the fatal vote that prostrated the south in those terri
tories. She was the equal of the other States. She had as much
right to enter there with her property as they had with theirs.
But Congress leaves an old Mexican ordinance, or the well
grounded fear of it, to do that which Mexican bayonets
could never do : to drive every southern man away from
the country.
And what are the explanations and apologies for this extra
ordinary vote when given by southern men ? It is first alleged
that these Mexican laws are not in fact in force, and then it is
gravely insisted that you cannot repeal what is not in force! —
that you cannot repeal a nonentity ! In passing a new law, how
often does the legislator find himself in doubt as to how many
of the old laws may be in conffict with it? or, how often does he
doubt of what the opinions of the judges might be on the sub
ject ? and how sure is he in either case, to give certainty and
force to the new enactment, to declare " that all laws and
parts of laws which may be inconsistent with it shall be repeal
ed ?" No man can give dignity or respectability to such a
sophistry, and I dismiss it, in order to notice another. It is said
that such a repeal of the Mexican laws would be equivalent to
the estabfishment of slavery in those territories, which Congress
cannot and ought not have done. What ! to repeal " all laws
and parts of laws" in relation to slavery equivalent to the es
tablishment of it? Directly the reverse — it leaves the whole
country, rasa tabula, a mere blank— with nothing for or against

310 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
slavery. What then ? Wby, it must remain forever unestab-
lished, unless Congress shall interfere and establish it. This
is forbidden by the great doctrine of non-intervention. What
then ? It must remain so unestablished until the territorial
legislatures establish it. The universal opinion has been (at
least until very lately,) that territorial legislatures had no such
power. What, then, becomes of slavery in these territories, the
common property of the States, during the interval ofthe repeal
of the Mexican laws and the time when they form a State Con
stitution, preparatory to admission into the Union ? During all
this time the country is a mere blank, with nothing for or against
its establishment. It is subject to the Constitution of the
United States alone. If that will protect the southern man's
property there, he is content. If it will not, he is content. He
invokes no intervention of Congress, save to set aside the pre
vious intervention of Mexico. When that is done he has an
open field and a fair chance under the Constitution.
But, sir, another argument is made, thatthe doctrine of non
intervention forbade this repeal of the Mexican laws and or
dinances. I pretend to understand something of this doctrine.
I have borne its banner through three hard fought politicial
wars. I have unfurled it in every valley and planted it on
nearly every mountain top of Tennessee. What was that
doctrine ? Non-intervention by anybody and every body —
between the people and their right to settle the question of
slavery when forming their State Constitution. Non-interven
tion by Congress, non-intervention by Mexico, non-interven
tion by any body and every body — that was the Polk, the Cass,
the democratic doctrine, if you please. What an absurdity !
To hold on with a death-grasp to non-intervention by Congress,
and at the same moment to advocate intervention by Mexico !
Intervention by Mexico cleaves your rights to the earth, as
certainly as intervention by Congress. Why all this clamor
against the Wilmot proviso ? Why this bold and daring de
claration that you would resist that at all hazards and to the
last extremity, if, after all, these old Mexican ordinances were
to remain unrepealed, the only things which American valor
could not subdue in Mexico !
Mr. Clay, Gen. Cass, Mr. Webster, and many others whose

ON THE PASSAGE OF THE COMPROMISE, 311
names may well stand in proud association with theirs, long
since told you that these" ordinances were in force. If you
did not mean to open that country to the south, by repealing
them, why did you not surrender at once and say that the
south never could and never ought to get any portion of it ?
Sir, I put the question to this convention, I put it to the good
sense of mankind, whether great Constitutional rights ought
ever to he sacrificed by holding to a mere abridgement of the
doctrine of non-intervention, too narrow and contracted for
their protection ?
Mr. President : In the progress of this dispute about our
territorial possessions, we have lost too much, by not better un
derstanding this doctrine of non-intervention. At our last
session we maintained this doctrine in its fullest, broadest
sense. In ten resolutions we maintained it — maintained it
as to the whole country. But, sir, after exhausting every
argument and making every appeal to our northern brethren
to allow us the full benefit of it, we turned to the contempla
tion of the painful fact, whose bitter realization we have
since experienced — to the fact that there was little or no pro-
babifity that our rights would be fully recognized. Under the
full belief that they would not, we planted ourselves on the
former compromises which had been made in critical periods
of our history. Sir, we were unanimous in favor of the Mis
souri compromise line — not one discordant voice was heard
through the spacious hall of our deliberations. If the Con
gress of the United States had responded favorably to that
voice, all would now have been well with the Republic. Cali
fornia would have been in the Union, but with her southern
boundary on thirty-six degrees, thirty minutes. She would
then have been larger than Virginia, New York, or Pennsyl
vania. The remaining country would have been organized
into territorial governments, without saying a word about
slavery — neither admitting it nor rejecting it ; but with a re
pealing clause of laws which might be in force there abolishing
slavery. Thus the south and the north would have been
thrown on an equal footing, leaving it to the Constitution — not
to Congress — not to the laws of Mexico — to say whether
slaves should be carried there or not. Ah, if this had been

312 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
done, what contentedness and peace would have then pervaded
our once happy country ! Then, indeed, we could have re
joiced and started afresh in the career of national greatness
and glory. But, sir, it was rejected, and the strange story is
now told us, that it was anti-republican! Anti-republican to
abide by the Missouri compromise ! by the Oregon compro
mise ! by the T exas compromise ! Take back the incredible
charge. The last message of James K. Polk to his country
men, just before he went down to the tomb, implored them to
settle this question on the principles of the Missouri compro
mise. Take back the charge that he was no repubhcan.
When Texas was admitted on the compromise fine of thirty-
six degrees thirty minutes, Andrew Jackson was still living,
and his heart rejoiced to see the noble work accomplished.
Take back the charge that Andrew Jackson was no republi
can. Take back the charge against the hundreds, and thou
sands, and tens of thousands, who voted for thirty-six thirty
in voting for her admission into the Union. Take it back, or
stride your shout for Polk and Dallas, and tear down from
your banner the lone star of Texas.
It is sometimes declared to be unconstitutional. It was not
proposed as an ordinary act of Congress but as a compromise
— a compromise of a disputed question of constitutional con
struction. Now, why cannot a disputed construction of the
Constitution be compromised as well as any other ? Every
other question, it seems, can be compromised. Even an om
nibus-full of all sorts of compromises will do. Yet the Mis
souri compromise and the Texas compromise will not do at
all. And why were they unconstitutional ? Because, it is
said, they allowed of the intervention of Congress north of
that line. No, that was not the compromise. The original
demand of the north was, that Congress should intervene and
exclude slavery from the whole country north and south of
thirty-six degrees thirty minutes. Now, the compromise was,
that Congress should forbear that intervention or exclusion of
slavery, and leave a part of it for the south — that part was
south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes : that was the true
nature of all these compromises ! Now, was it unconstitutional
for us to save a part when we were otherwise to lose the whole

ON THE PASSAGE OP THE COMPROMISE, 313
counfry? WeU, now, after all, let us look to results. Con
gress rejected our Missouri compromise, and passed its own
biUs in lieu of it. Which was best for the south ? Ours would
have saved one-third or more — your bills have lost all — every
square acre of it. What equivalent, let me iiow demand, has
the south received under these bills for the loss afld surrender
of these vast possessions? For California, the key that com
mands all the amazing commerce of the Indies ? The fugitive
slave bill ! For Utah and New Mexico ? The fugitive slave
bUl ! What for the loss of nearly two States proposed to be
carved out of Texas ? The fugitive slave bill ! Truly this
fugitive slave bill must be something new and miraculous. No.
It is not new — ^for it is only the act of '93 a little amended and
enlarged ; and the act of '93 was nothing but a meagre com
pliance with an express provision of the Constitution. But,
if not new, surely it must restore vast numbers of fugitive
slaves to their masters, in compensation for the loss of so
much land ! Restoration ! I believe it is rather the other
way. Instead of coming home, I believe they are getting
further off — scampering away in great droves to Canada ! But
to be serious, what a pass has the country come to, when one
half of it has to bribe the other, simply to do its duty under
the Constitution ! The south to give up its half of the coun
tries acquired from Mexico, in order to induce the north to
surrender our fugitives from labor ! What a commentary on
the fraternal, Constitution-abiding spirit of the north ! But,
it seems that after giving up all our interest in the Mexican ter
ritories, even then, they are not willing to surrender our slaves.
They seem determined to take our lands and keep our ne
groes too !
But, I admit these territories have not been lost by the instru
mentality of the WUmot proviso. That was one of her ad
vanced or outer works which the north concl^ed to abandon,
because the south, the whole south, had vowed they should be
carried, at all hazards and to the last extremity. With an adroit
ness which has distinguished all her movements on these slav-
ry questions, she retired from the Wilmot and entrenched her
self behind the Mexican fortress ; and the south either had not
the courage to attack her there, or vainly imagined that she

314 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
had retreated from the field and given up the contest. No, sir,
she has not retreated — there she stood undislodged, and there
she yet stands, sole mistress of every province. California is
hers — Utah is hers — New Mexico is hers : — all the flocks and
herds in their teeming valleys — the gold that glitters in their
rivers — the diamonds that sparkle in their mountains^-must
now be hers, and the poor deluded and defrauded south has
nothing left butthe sad rememberance that this mighty domain
was subdued by the valor of her gallant but now rejected peo
ple. Even the graves of those who died in the conflict are no
longer ours — they have passed over into the possession of those
who felt no sympathy in their fall, and who will never deck
the green sod that now covers them. Pardon me, sir, for so
often referring to our exclusion. I wish that great fact to
stand out in bold relief, like the summit of some lofty mountain
overpeering all others, that the south has been excluded—
driven out from it. The north said she should be, and she has
been, and there is the end of it.
And is it for this that we have been called upon to rejoice!
To kindle bonfires in the streets ! Was it for this that the
booming of cannon has been heard amid the stillness of mid
night ! Sir, let others rejoice if they can ; let them sound the
trumpet and ring the bells ; let them make the hoarse artillery
to speak; but, for my single self, I cannot rejoice. My
heart is too sad and sorrowful. It would break sooner than
rejoice. Mr. President, there is another thing this heart of mine will
never do. It will never grow cold towards those southern
friends who may have felt it their duty to vote for any of those
territorial bills, which I have disapproved. I know too well
their devotion to the Constitution — to the Union — to the south.
They have done what they believed to be best under all the
trying circumstances of the case, and I haU and welcome
them home, with unabated confidence and friendship. Com
pelled to cast their votes amid the fire, and smoke, and suf
focation of a wild fanaticism on the one hand, and the most
vehement threats to dissolve the Union if something was not
done, on the other, what wonder wer» it if all their votes
should not have been cast precisely right, in the emergency

ON THE PASSAGE OF THE COMPROMISE. 315
of the moment ! We are now examining their measures af
ter the smoke of the confiict has dispersed, and as no man knows
what votes he might not have cast, in order to secure the unity
of this great nation, when he believed it was in danger,
so let no man yield himself up to the foul spirit of intoler
ance. Besides, sir, this fatal war on our rights has only just
begun. The enemy has only carried our outposts. They
have drawn a cordon of non-slaveholding States around us
by the late biUs, and are now only waiting for the new appor
tionment to give them an increase of strength, and for the ar
rival of their new levies from California, Utah and New Mexico,
to make a fresh onslought upon us — on the abolition of slavery
in the States — ^in the District of Columbia — in the forts, arse
nals, &c. of the United States — ^the prohibition of the transfer
of slaves from one State to another. When that time shall
come, we shall need that there should be no estrangement
among the men of the south. " Shoulder to shoulder, and with
shield locked on shield," we must then stand or fall together.
Till then let no division of opinion make divisions in friendship.
There is yet another thing this heart of mine will not do.
For nothing in the past, great as have been our wrongs, will
it beat one pulse the less of ardent devotion to the Constitution
and the Union. My motto now is, endurance of the past, re
sistance for the future. The past can be endured. Though
it demand all the forgiveness of the Christian, and all the for
bearance of the patriot, it nevertheless can be endured. The
future, I awfully fear, cannot. When you shall hear that the
most solemn covenants of the Constitution are broken by law
less mobs, and your fellow-citizens imprisoned for demanding
the restoration of thefr property — demanding it too, with the late
fugitive slave bill in the one hand, and the Constitution of the
United States in the other — when you shall see the beacon
fires blazing all along the mountain border of Maryland and
Vfrginia — all along the shores of the Ohio — as signals for the
flight and escape of your property — when military detach
ments shall have to be sent, night after night, to the protec
tion of your homes and your families — when every fire -bell at
night will make the mother clasp her infant closer to her bo
som—how can you endure this, and more than this ? In such

316 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
a future, who then can talk of a Constitution with its violated
covenants, or of a Union with all its shattered fragments strewn
ai'ound us ! The great law of self-defence will then be aU that
is left us. It is the law by which even the reptile resists the
invader. Under that law, whether to be found in the reserved
rights of the States under the Constitution, or in the admitted
right of revolution, I care not — ^under that law of self-preser
vation, the States will have to fall back upon their full original
sovereignty, and provide again " for the enjoyment of life;
liberty, and property." God grant, however, that the daric fu
ture which I have portrayed may never come. On the con
trary, may it come to us crowned with peace and fraternal con
cord ; may it come with the Constitution still unbroken, and
the Union, with adamantine strength, still bespanning the con
tinent, from ocean to ocean, brighter and more glorious than
ever. To such a Union I owe a perfect and perpetual obedi
ence—to such a one I will adhere, and adhere to the last, like
the gallant sailor, when about to be driven from the vessel
which he had long defended, when he had been driven over
the very side of his ship, he seized it with his right hand, when
that had been cut off" he seized it with the left, when that had
been cut off he seized it with his teeth, and so went down with
it to the bottom. Sir, 1 say this of that Union which now is—
of that Union which Washington, and Madison, and Pinckney,
andthe Rutledges gaveus. But to that Union which may be
yet to come — to that Union which would deprive me of my
property, which would beggar my children, which would fire
my dwelling, and spread around me all the horrors of a servile
war — to a Union which would deluge " my own, my native
land" in one vast sea of blood — ^by Heavens, 1 owe it no
allegiance !
Sir, it was upon this great principle that the Tennessee reso
lutions were constructed : That we will abide by the past — by
the late legislation in Congress — ^with that fidelity which has
always distinguished the south. But, at the same time, we
solemnly affirm that our cup is full — we can drink no more.
Will those who propose not to abide by the past, but to strike,
and to strike now, will they hear from me one argument against
this rash and perilous deed? Who are here? Call Mary-

ON THE PASSAGE OP THE COMPROMISE. 317
land. Call North Carolina, call Missouri, call Arkansas, call
Louisiana, call Kentucky. Do they answer ? No, not one
of them. Who, then, are here ? Virginia answers with one
lone solitary voice. Virginia, whose trumpet notes have so
often called the sons of the south together against all and
every encroachment on the rights of the States. Where are
all her mighty men, that they do not come up to the great work
which you propose to do ? Look too, to the falling oflTof that
crowd of patriotic men who thronged these halls even at your
last session ! From Alabama, where is Campbell, and Cole
man, and Davis, and Cooper, and Winston ? From Missis
sippi, where is Mathews, and Boyd, and Sharkey, and Clayton,
and Wilkinson?
Sir, there must be some good reason for all this. Let us
look facts directly in the face, and they will tell us that since
our last meeting great doubts have arisen in the minds of our
southern brethren, as to whether the late legislation of Con
gress has not been such as ought to be satisfactory to the south ;
at least, so satisfactory as to supersede any further action
of this body. Sir, we do know that these doubts do exist.
Look to your own State — look to Mississippi — look to the ac
counts from Louisiana. What do we find ? I pray you an
swer me the question: what do we find? Our own southern
people divided about equally on the subject. Here I pause,
to ask of every man who now surrounds me, is it wise, is it
just, in such a divided and distracted condition of the southern
mind, to venture on so bold a measure ? And is it not a bold
measure to proclaim that the deep foundations Of this govern
ment are to be broken up and a new one to be erected on its
ruins ! Let me tell the gentleman from Vfrginia (Gen. Gordon)
that when the news shall reach that ancient commonwealth, it
will shake the very walls of her capitol, and the statue of
Washington will tremble on its marble basement. When this
great nation shall be passing through the agonies of dissolu
tion, her dying groans will be heard through half the habitable
world. Her fall, like that of Jerusalem, will be preceded by
signs in the heavens and commotions on the earth ; a sword
will be seen in the sky, a great comet will blaze over her, and
arnues in battle array will be seen amid the clouds. On earth

318 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
you will hear and feel the earthquake tread of a mighty peo
ple, coming up to a larger council than this. UntU we see
this latter sign, at least, let us not proclaim that her end draw-
eth nigh In the spirit of the Tennessee resolutions, let us
rather proclaim : Not yet ! not yet ! — no never shall this re
public end until the sovereign people who created it, in one
one grand united council, shall pronounce its doom.

TENNESSEE RESOLUTIONS.

In Convention, Nov. 13, 1850.
Gen. Pillow, of Tennessee, oflfered the following preamble'
and resolutions, which were read and referred :
Whereas, since the adjournment of this convention, in June
last, bills have been passed into laws by the Congress of the
United States for the admission of California into the Union
as a State, for the settlement and adjustment of the boundaries
of Texas, and for organizing territorial governments for Utah
and New Mexico ; also bills abolishing the slave trade in the
District of Columbia, and for the recovery of fugitives from
labor; with the view of making known our opinions on these
bills, and the steps to be taken by the South upon them, there
fore —
1. Resolved, That although said, hills fall short of that measure of justice
to which the South, in our opinion, is fairly entitled, yet as the same have
become the laws of the land, and lor the purpose of giving the highest proof
of our attachment and devotion to the Union, this convention hereby de
clares its wiUingness to abide by them with that fidelity which has distin
guished the South on all former occasions.
2. Resolved, That this determination to abide by the late legislation of
Congress aforesaid, is predicated on the express condition that the North
shall faithfully carry it out on her part, according to the spirit and true
meaning of the same.
3. Resolved, That this convention does distinctly understand, that accord
ing to the spirit and true meaning of said legislation, it embraces- all the
action which the North proposes to take in relation to slavery, and that in
addition to the subjects expressly provided for in said bills, no attempt will
hereafter be made by the northern people to deprive the South of the repre
sentation secured to her in the Constitution, or to abolish, directly or indi
rectly, slavery in the District of Columbia or in the States, nor to prevent
22

320 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
the transportation of slaves from one slaveholding State to another by their
lawful owners, nor to prevent the admission of any new State on account
of the toleration of slavery in its constitution.
4. Resolved, That in view of the sacrifices to which the southern States
have heretofore submitted, and to which they are further subjected by agree
ing to abide by the bills lately passed by Congress, they have a right to de
mand, and do demand, that all agitations and aggressions on the part of the
North upon the subject of slavery, shall instantly cease ; and that the re
peal of the fugitive slave bill, or any alteration of it which may render it
less efi'pctual in its objects, must of necessity render all further association
as friends and brethren utterly impossible.
5. Resolved, That if the people of the northern States, by voluntary as
sociations or otherwise, shall continue to obstruct and prevent the execution
of the fugitive slave law, thereby depriving southern citizens of their pro
perty and giving encouragement to other slaves to escape from service ; or
if they shall commence a system of agitation with the view and obvious
purpose of abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia or in the
States, or of depriving the South of the representation of three-fifths of
her slaves to which she is now entitled under the constitution ; or of
prohibiting the transportation of slaves from one slave State to another;
or of excluding from the Union any new State on account of the tol
eration of slavery in its Constitution, then this convention earnestly
recommends to the people of the South to resort to the most rigid
system of commercial non-intercourse with all such States, communities,
and cities, as shall be found so offending against their constitutional rights.
For this purpose, we earnestly invite the Legislature of every Southern
State to unite with us in this recommendation ; and that in every State,
and county, and town, and neighborhood, resolutions may be adopted not
to purchase or use, as far as practicable, any article whatever known to
have been produced or manufactured in any such State, community, or city,
or to have been imported into the same' for sale. In further aid of this
object, we earnestly recommend to the southern States, and their people,
to encourage, by all the means in their power, their own mechanics and
manufacturers of every description — to push forward all their railroads and
other internal improvements connectiug them with their best exporting and
importing cities on the Gulf and on the Atlantic. We make these recom
mendations in no spirit of revenge, but as a just and necessary means of
self-defence, to be persisted in only until the rights secured to us by tbe
constitution shall he respected.
6. Resolved, That if, contrary to our understanding of the several bills
aforesaid, the Congress of the United States shall at any time repeal or so
alter or amend the fugitive slave law as to render it less efficacious than it
now is, or if it shall pass any bill abolishing slavery in the District of Co
lumbia, or abolish it directly or indirectly in the States, or if the present basis
of slave representation as secured in the constitution be obliterated, or if the

ON THE PASSAGE OF THE COMPROMISE. 321
transportation of slaves from one slaveholding State to another be prohib
ited, or if slavery in our present territories shall be prohibited — in either of
these events this convention earnestly recommends that the Legislature
of each southern State be forthwith convened, for the purpose of calling a
convention in each State, and that delegates to be appointed in such manner
as shall be determined on by said conventions, may meet at such time and
place as may be agreed on, with full power and authority to do any thing
and every thing which the peace, safety, and honor of the South may
demand.

NOTE.

Wishing to preserve the leading facts in relation to the
Tennessee resolutions, reported by Gen. Pillow to the South
ern Convention, we have enquired and! found them substan
tially as foBovrs :
On Monday, 11th November, 1850, the Tennessee delegates met at Mr.
Southall's office in Nashville. Maj. Wm. H. Polk moved that Gov. Brown
and Mr. Nicholson be appointed to prepare and present resolutions, such as
tliey might deem it proper for the delegation to present to the coffivention.
On Tuesday morning, Gov. Brown and Mr. Nicholson met at the room of
the latter, in the Nashville Inn. Gov. Brown presented a series of resolutions
which he had drawn up, and read them over. Mr. Nicholson desired the
-word " far'' to be stricken from the first resolution, so that it might read, "al
though said bills fall short of that measure of justice," &c., stating that there
were different shades of opinion in the State as to the degree which the bills
fell abort ; and so to harmonize conflicting opinions as far as possible, he moved
to strike out the word " far," to which Gov. Brown assented, and the same
was stricken out accordingly.
On Wednesday, the resolutions were reported by Mr. Nicholson, but read
by Gov. Brown, as tliey were in his handwriting. On motion of Mr. F.
MoGavock, and after some discussion, in which Mr. Claiborne, Maj. Polk, Mr.
Stevenson, Gen. Hardin, Mr. MuLaurin, Mr. Southall and others, took part,
the following words in the first resolution were stricken out, to wit : " and
because the same are presented to us as a compromise and come recom
mended to us by the sanction of so many southern votes.' After some other
slight and' rather verbal amendments, the same were adopted and ordered
to be reported by General Pillow,., there cba'sman. Editors of the Amerkan.

ADDRESS
Of Ex-Gov. Aaron V. Brown, to the public, previous to the
Meeting of the Southern Convention,

We have the pleasure of presenting our readers to-day with an eloquent and
patriotic letter from Ex-Gov. A. V. Brown, on the exciting question ofthe
day. Coming from one whom the Democracy of the State have long de
lighted tn honor, it will exercise an important influence throughout the
State. Though mild and temperate, it is yet a firm and dignified defence of
the motives of the friends of the Southern Convention, and we believe
that it very nearly expresses the views of the advocates of the Conven
tion in this State. We commend it especially to the perusal of pur whig
friends, and of all those who talk of " disunian" as the motive of the
Convention : — Nashville Union. Near Nashville, Afeil 10, 1850.
Mr. E. G. Eastman — Sir : I noticed in one of the whig
papers of your city, during my recent visit to the south, that
in advocating the appointment of delegates to the Nashville
convention and in vindicating the purposes and objects of that
convention, you were charged with acting in advance of the
old and experienced members of your party ; and amongst
such, my name was introduced in a manner calculated to
make the impression that I was not in favor of the conven
tion. I shall be compelled to be again absent from the State
for the next month, and can therefore take no part in any pub
lic discussions which may take place between the present time
and the period (first Monday in May) designated for the ap
pointment of county delegates to attend said convention.
Unwilling to leave tMs rebuke of your course unnoticed, and

324 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
unwilling to be absent during the animated discussions now
going on in relation to said convention, without leaving the
most unmistakable evidence of my opinions behind me, for
the consideration of all persons who may feel any interest in
knowing them, I have concluded to address you this letter.
I know nothing more of the objects and purposes of calhng
said convention, than I have learned through the public press,
detailing the proceedings of State conventions, the resolutions
of State legislatures, and of primary assemblies of the peo
ple who have acted on this subject. All these, with no remem
bered exception, announce the objects and purposes of the
convention to be eminently patriotic and entirely consistent
with the preservation and perpetuity of the Union. Not one
of them avows or intimates the slightest purpose of dissolving
it. In the face of avowed good objects I will not presume had
ones against the men already appointed and who are coming
up to Nashville from the fifteen States of the South, an equal
number from both political parties, and who have given evi
dence of the highest devotion to the Constitution and the
Uniqn. Take, for illustration sake. Chief Justice Sharkey of
Mississippi. He presided over the first convention that was
held, and is, I understand, coming up with Judge Guion, and
other whigs, to the convention. Now, would it be at all right
or proper in me to set aside their distinct and clear annuncia
tion of their motives in coming, and presume against them the
darkest and blackest crime which an American can possibly
commit ? So I might enumerate the names of eminent whigs
from other States, who have led the vanguard of their party at
home, in many a hard fought battle, and who are coming up
to Nashville covered with the scars of party warfare ; wounds
and scars received when some of those who now assail their
motives and their honor, were but pufing infants in their
cradles. Can I do these men, although differing from them
as I do in politics, the crying injustice which some of their own
party editors are doing in this State— of denouncing them, in
advance, against their own express declarations on mere sus
picion, as traitors and disunionists ? I cannot, and will not
perpetrate such an outrage against either the whigs or demo
crats who have been or may be appointed to said convention.

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE. 325
I wUl presume their motives and purposes to be such as they
declare them to be, until they shall assemble, and by some un
patriotic act prove to the contrary. This is the rule of law and
of the public press with regard to every accused felon, the
highwayman and the murderer. The press never denounces
them as such in advance, but presuming their innocence, be
speaks for them a fair and impartial trial.
If it be alleged in extenuation of the crying injustice now
every day being done by the whig press to the eminent whig
delegates that are coming up from the other fourteen Southern
States, that they do not impute such unpatriotic purposes to
Judge Sharkey and the great body of other whigs and demo
crats who have been appointed to the convention — but only to
a portion of them, the " Hotspurs" — the " madcaps" of the
south — the answers to such plea is most evident, that the num
ber of such must be very small, and that wise and prudent men
of both parties ought to be sent there, and to be in full attend
ance, to vote down instantly any and every extreme and unpa
triotic proposition, which such men might offer.
If it be true, as we often hear, that " there are fanatics on
both sides of Mason and Dixon's line," it is only proof of the
greater necessity for the wise and conservative men of both
parties, whigs and democrats, in the face of such formidable
difficulties, to mingle more freely together, and by joint con
sultation save both the Union and the rights of the South
against the united attacks of these alleged fanatics. How
will the whigs of Tennessee feel, when that convention shall
have met and proceeded to business, and when they may see
their pohtical brethren from the other fourteen States, as well
as the democrats, in close and hard struggle against both these
sets of fanatics, and nothing wanted to secure an easy and
triumphant victory over both, but a full delegation from their
party in the State, to assist by their counsel and their votes in
its achievement ? I state the whig argument on this point in
its full force, in order to furnish its refutation, not because I
believe that there is any material portion of the people of any
State, or that a single delegate from any State, whig or demo
crat, will be in favor of dissolving the Union. That any such
result is fikely to grow out of the convention' is refuted by

326 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
every thing that the whig editors of the State have ever heard
or known or read of the American people. I doubt much if
all of them put together ever saw twenty men out of the mil
lions theyhave seen who were hostile to the Union. It is re
futed every time they cast their eyes over the names of the
delegates already appointed from the different States. It is
refuted by their daily intercourse with their neighbors with
whom they transact business and interchange personal and
social civilities, which necessarily imply confidence and esteem.
This they could not do, if they really believed that those who
are favorable to this convention were traitors and disun
ionists. If they belived it, they would shun and avoid every man
they met with —
" As one who sees a serpent in his way
Glistening and basking in the summer ray,
Disorder'd, stops, to shun the danger near,
Then walks with faintness on and looks with fear."
And yet I do not mean to charge these gentlemen with any
disposition wilfully to misrepresent the designs and purposes
of this convention ; far from it ; but I fear that they have not
yet sufficiently waked up to the magnitude of the perils which
now encompass the south, nor made a sufficient effort to throw
themselves out of the habit of taking a party view of almost
every subject which may come up under their review.
I have thus far given you my opinions as to what this con
vention was not called for. I now propose to trouble you with
a few observations as to what was expected to be accom
plished by it.
For years the north has been attempting to interfere with
the rights of the south in relation to our slave property. The
attempts were weak at first, but grew stronger ever session of
Congress, untU from the presentation of petitions, they advance
to the introduction of bills, embracing the Wilmot proviso, the
abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, and in aU the
public establishments of the United States, and to the prohibi
tion of the transfer of slaves by their rightful owners from one
slave State to another. These measures were actually pend
ing before Congress in some shape or other and under fierce

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN < PEOPLE, 327
and daily discussion in that body. The Wilmot proviso had
actually passed one House, and the success of all of them
every day becoming more and more problematical. In this
condition of things, the south became seriously impressed with
the danger of her condition.
The unconstitutionality of most of these measures, the ine
quality and injustice of all of them, occupied much of her atten
tion, and the probable consequences of their passage through
Congress on h«r peace and safety, produced the most thrilling
and anxious solicitude. In this condition of things, one public
journal would express one sentiment as to what it was proper
to be done, whilst another would suggest altogether a different
mode of warding off" the threatened and suspended blow. So
of the public men of the south, in Congress, in State legisla
tures, before assemblies of the people ; some were too hot under
these assaults on our rights, others too tame and submissive;
amid this confusion of sentiments many wise and good men of
the south, both whigs and democrats, equally involved in the
injurious consequences of the proposed legislation against our
rights, for the double purpose of making a firm, united appeal
to our northren brethren to forbear these invasions and also of
giving moderation and harmony of action amongst the people
of the south in their opposition to these measures, resolve on
calling the convention. The north had called many conven
tions, more or less large, in order to give force and energy, and
harmony amongst her own people in favor of such legislation.
The south could see no good reason why she should not also
meet in convention to devise the best means oi preventing or
defeating such legislation. But there is a striking difference
between the two parties.
The north has only to get a united vote of her own members
in favor of these measures and they become the laws ofthe land,
whilst the south has not only to get a united vote of her mem
bers against them but must make such united, firm and rational
appeal to the justice and magnanimity of the north as may
prevent this unanimity in her vote. It was mainly to make this
appeal, in no degrading spirit of truckling submission, nor yet
in the tone of blustering bravado, that the approaching conven
tion was called. If held before the passage of these obnoxious

328 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
laws, the convention can take up each bill by itself and set
forth faithfully how it would operate on the peace, safety and
prosperity of the south. A powerful document like this, pre
pared with ability, moderation and firmness, would be every
where read and could not fail to work a most happy influence.
When the whigs of the north should hear from the whigs of the
south through such a document how ruinously these measures
would operate on them, their families and property ; when the
democrats of the north should hear the same thing from their
brethren of the south, it was sincerely hoped that they would
forbear all further meddling with our rights and leave the Con
stitution and the Union precisely as it was bequeathed to us by
the fathers of the republic.
I know well how readily the opinion may be entertained and
advanced that there is no likelihood that such an appeal would
bring the north to an abandonment of their purpose. Still it
can do the south no possible harm to make the experiment — to
exhaust the whole stock of reason and argument in the praise
worthy endeavor. . We may be too sanguine of the result, but
surely there can be no reason for branding us as traitors and
disunionists for making a fruitless eflbrt to prevent, by reason
and argument, what these opponents ofthe convention declare
they will resent, by flying to arms after the proposed laws shall
have been passed. Look to all they said and wrote through
the last summer and winter, and see how uniformly they de
clare that if these laws shall be actually passed and carried into
execution, they would then resist at every hazard andto the last
extremity. This convention proposes to say something or do
somethingbefore it comes to this"last extremity ,"and is therefore
hallowed and sanctified by a greater devotion to the peace, con
stitution and Union ofthe country than their own proposition.
If any portion of the south, not believing in the efficacy of this
mode of trying to avert the calamity, should stand by unassis-
ting in the movement, it might not be so strange ; but for them
to turn upon us and denounce us an hundred times oftener and
with epithets infinitely more abusive and disgracing than those
of our oppressors, is more astounding than anything heretofore
exhibited in the history of party warfare.
The argument is often used against the convention, that in

add:ress to the southern people. 329
afi probability before the first Monday in June all the slavery
questions now agitating Congress will be amicably compromised
and settled. Well, if Ihey are the convention need not meet,
or meeting will gladly confirm such compromise if thought
proper, and sincerely rejoice in the renewal of those amicable
relations which have heretofore carried the nation to so high a
degree of greatness and prosperity. But if not then settled,
some scheme or plan of settlement may be pending, on which
it may be of the highest consequence that such a convention
should give a wise and prudent expression of opinion. Or the
convention might itself present a scheme and plan not yet of
fered, which would give peace and repose to a now agitated
and distracted country. What may not a heart beating high
with attachment to the country, to the Constitution and the
Union hope for from the united wisdom and patriotism of both
of the great parties of the south, in the great crisis which will
then have arrived ? To turn the noble efforts now making to
give to the south all the benefits of that united wisdom and
patriotism, into the narrow and contracted channel of party,
is madness — is death to her dearest rights and interests. Those
who have sanctioned and advocated this convention cannot
and will not recede. A great and difficult work lies before
them. A work in which the whigs of the south have as deep
an interest as those of the opposite party. If they will not
unite and help us, we will do the best we can by ourselves.
The same calamities which await us must fall on them. But
if, insensible ofthe danger, they do not cheerfully come to our
aid, we shall nevertheless rejoice to secure them by the same
acts and deeds by which we secure ourselves and families.
But whilst we are trying every plan and doing every thing
which we suppose may be calculated to save the south, we have
a right, a just and reasonable right, to ask them to cast no
imputation on our motives — to deal out no more denunciations
against us as traitors and disunionists, until the convention
shall have furnished, by its acts, some evidence of the fact.
We disclaim every such purpose. We disclaim it for the dem
ocratic party ; we disclaim it for the hundreds and thousands
of the whig party who are co-operating nobly with us; and
when that convention shall assemble, the wisdom, calmness and

330 congressional and other speeches.
patriotism of its deliberations and resolves, in my opinion, will
be the proudest vindication of its devotion to our country, its
Constitution and the Union.
Very respectfuUy, your most obedient servant,
AARON V. BROWN.

LETTER
Of Ex-Gov. Aaron V, Brown, on the late Southern Convention,
in June, 1850.

To THE Editor of the Nashville Union :
Sir — It was my intention to have addressed you this letter
after the rise of the late Southern Convention, in order to give
my fellow-citizens of the Tennessee delegation, for whom I ac
ted in part, on one of the most important consmittees of that
body, (and most of whom retired early in the session,) some
connected and condensed account of its final action. Unavoid
able delay in its preparation had almost induced an abandon
ment of the idea, when the appearance of Mr. Nicholson's
letter, my coUeague on the committee, remitted my mind back
to its original purpose. The language accidently used by Mr.
Nicholson in the early paragraphs of bis letter too nearly con
veys the idea that the minority report and the views and posi
tions taken in it were personal entirely to himself, which
makes it both necessary and proper for me here to remark, that
it was signed not only by Mr. Nicholson, but by myself and
one of the delegates from each ofthe States of Alabama, Flor
ida and Arkansas, and contained of course the views of all of
us. It grew out of the discussions which had taken place in
the committee room, in which I maintained, that we were not
charged with the performance of that duty — that I doubted
much both the necessity and propriety of the convention sen
ding out an address at all. That our resolutions and their
preambles stood in need of no address — no commentary, ta
elucidate and explain them. That the series of resolution*

832 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
constituted the very acts and doings of the convention, which
we had prepared with great care and thoughtfulness, and on
which I thought the convention might proudly stand and chal
lenge the scrutiny and criticism " of genius, of talents and of
time." But if we sent forth a long address — a mere speech-
argument — commentary or whatever else it might be called,
the enemies of the convention, instead of attacking the resolu
tions themselves, would recoil from such a bomb-proof battery
as we had erected, and turn aside to assault outer works of mi
nor importance, and indeed in my judgment of no importance
at all. We have already witnesed much of what I then anti
cipated in my argument before the committee. What have we
yet heard said, or seen written against the resolutions of the
convention ? Almost nothing at all, whilst the hostile presses
of the country, or many of them, are making points of petty
criticism not on the resolutions, which are the real actings and
doings of the convention, but on the speech — the mere com
mentary on the resolutions. How much more inteUigent and
statesman-like would it be, to let slight errors and mistakes in
the commentary alone, unless they could find them also exist
ing in the original text. But my views against sending out
any address at all, were not embraced by a majority of the
committee, and when they were in the act of agreeing on the
address as reported, I announced to the committee that no re
course was left to those who could not concur in the address
but a minority report, which they would present in the morn-!
ing, but in no spirit of irritated temper and with no view of
disturbing the future harmony of the convention. The pre
sentation of it next morning by Mr. Nicholson, took no member
by surprise, nor was it considered by any one, I befieve, in any
other light, than as a prudent and proper mode of putting the
members who signed it "right upon the record ."As the objections
taken to that part of the address, which related to the report of
the Committee of Thirteen in the Senate, were general, 1 think
proper here to specify the most important ones which presented
themselves to my mind. I considered that many of the ex
pressions, and indeed the general tone of that part of the ad
dress might be taken as an unkind rebuke of the members of
that committee. I had no heart to rebulce them myself. I had

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE. 333
approved the persevering exertions of that senator who was so
instrumental in its creation. I had approved the selection of
distinguished men who had served upon it. I had waited with
anxiety for the day which should usher the result of their la
bors before the country. At last their report was presented,
not such as I had hoped it would be — not such as without
amendments I could approve and sanction — but yet so infin
itely superior to the northern measures, which it was intended
to supersede, and so susceptible by a few amendments of being
made acceptable to the south, that I did hail it as a measure
which when perfected would give peace and repose to the
country. Under these circumstances I could not consent to
administer the slightest rebuke to the members of the com
mittee, nor to censure in such unqualified terms the proposi
tions which they had submitted.
The presentation of our minority report, had the effect of
instantly attracting the attention of members to those parts of
the address objected to, which resulted in a general and almost
spontaneous agreement to amend on the motion of Gen. Pil
low, by striking out many ofthe most objectionable expressions
in that part of the address. Still, with even this purgation, I
could not consent to vote for it, (the address) until it was so
amended as to show expressly on its face that there were many
members not yet satisfied with it. So amended, I was willing
and did vote for it — ^because whilst it gave others the oppor
tunity to speak out whatever opinions they entertained against
the report of the Committee of Thirteen in the Senate, it ef
fectually protected me against all responsibility for them. I
had yet another reason higher and stronger than all for finally
voting for the address. It had been amended in one great and
essential particular — more important in my humble judgment
than all the other amendments put together. That is to be
found in the last one of Gen. PUlow's amendments. All the
others had been prepared by him, and I was appealed to, to
know if they would reconcile me to vote for the address. I ad
vanced to the table, wrote it down, and then declared "with that
inserted I was ready to vote for the address." The General
adopted it into his series — the committee with slight variation
approved and reported it, and the convention adopted it. This

334 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
amendment in substance declared, that while the convention
regarded the Missouri Compromise as an extreme concession,
they did not mean to demand it as an ultimatum, but that the
south would acquiesce in any other adjustment which secured
to her substantially the same rights and privileges. I hailed
this amendment with the greatest pleasure, because it clearfy
indicated no wish to supersede the patriotic labors of the com
mittee of the Senate as far as they had gone, but that the con
vention was perfectly willing to see it perfected by amend
ments, which would make it equivalent to the Missouri Compro
mise, in the advantages secured to the south. For myself, it
would be among the last of my wishes to see that bill super
seded and voted down, even if tbe Missouri Compromise, in ite
very words, were substituted in its stead. I had much rather
see that or its equivalent inserted as an amendment to the pres
ent bill — so that its identity might be preserved, reflecting hght
and honor upon the names of its distinguished authors. They
are entitled to it, and I know nor feel enough of party rancor
in reference to any of them, to withhold the meed of merited
praise. The Missouri Compromise, as the standard or measure of
concession to which the south might submit without dishonor,
was no new doctrine with me. I had seen the beneficial results
of that compromise in the admission of Arkansas and Florida,
two slave holding States, without any serious opposition by
the north. I had seen the same line extended through the
territory of Texas when annexed to the United States with
the happiest influence on the country. Under the light of such
experience, in my messages to the General Assembly and in
all my popular addresses to the people of Tennessee in three
arduous canvasses — at all times and on all occasions, I have
advocated the line thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north lati
tude as a just and reasonable line of partition. But 1 am free
to declare that I have never seen the day or the hour when 1
would have conceded more than this or have fallen below
that measure of concession. The despotism of numbers may
muster aU her forces — fanaticism may kindle all her fires, the
fairest fields of the south may be desolated, before I wiU con
sent to add dishonor and degradation to the other wrongs of

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE. 335
the south. But I do nOt mean to deal in any trifling play of
words, when I advocate and assent to the Missouri compro
mise. I do not demand it in hec verba. I look rather to the
true nature and substance of things, and whenever the south
shall be tendered an adjustment which shall be equivalent to
that compromise, I for one shall not hesitate to advise its ac
ceptance. Having stated that I was in favor of the present
bill, with amendments, I will proceed frankly to state what
amendments, in my opinion, would make it equivalent to the
Missouri Compromise, and therefore acceptable.
In the first place, I would remove every shadow of doubt from
that part of the bill which relates to fixing the future bounda
ries of Texas, by expressly declaring that the territory pro
posed to be ceded to the United States, should be slave terri
tory in her hands precisely as it now is in the hands of Texas.
To such an explanation none could object, except only suchas
were resolved not to abide by the express terms and conditions
of annexation. This would leave the Missouri line of thirty-
six thirty established as far west as the Rio Grande.
In relation to California, I would admit her into the Union
with the brief but expressive proviso, that her southern boun
dary should be thirty-six thirty to the Pacific Ocean; I would
waive the irregularity of her application — all imputed execu
tive dictation — all doubts of the citizenship of those who par
ticipated in the formation of her constitution. 1 would do
more than this — I would admit her as a State larger than
Pennsylvania — than New York — than Virginia, but I would
not consent to give her the whole Pacific coast to herself —
South California does not and never did desire it. Her people
have often and solemnly protested against it. Besides, we
have many reasons to befieve that the people of California, an
ticipating objections to her enormous boundaries, have au
thorized her representatives to accept any alteration that may
be made, and instantly to take their seats in the haUs of Con
gress. If, however, this be not so, the delay of a few months
cannot be very prejudicial to her; and if it were, she may well
deserve it, for attempting — by making such unreasonable claim
of boundary — to influence a great political and local question
of the Union, when she was not yet a member of it.
23

336 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
This curtailment of the boundary of California would make
it necessary to create a territorial government for South Cah-
fornia. This, and the two others provided in the bill, disposes
of the whole country acquired from Mexico. Now what shall
be applied to it? The north answers, the Wilmot proviso, ex
cluding slavery from every part of it. The convention replies
that to this she never will submit, but further says in the spirit
of compromise and " in consideration of what is due to the sta
bility of our institutions " she will concede to its application as
far as to latitude thirty-six thirty, as she had done on two for
mer occasions, or she will concede to any equivalent compro
mise. Now the Committee of Thirteen, in the high and deli
cate character of mediators betvveen the contending parties,
reject the Wilmot proviso altogether, and present the Clayton
compromise substantially as the basis of settlement. What
was the Clayton compromise? Simply that Congress should
organize territorial governments for the country acquired from
Mexico, neither admitting nor excluding the introduction of
slavery into any portion of it; leaving slavery to spread itself
over all and every part of it, if it could do so consistently with
the Mexican laws abolishing slavery. Whether these laws did
or did not abolish it, or if they did, whether they were still in
force, were questions underthe Clayton compromise left to the
decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. And so
they are by the present bill, and my opinion has been pro
claimed to the people of Tennessee in more than fifty public
addresses, declaring that all such Mexican laws stood repealed
the moment that country passed "beneath the wing of the
eagle." Whether the Clayton compromise be equal to the
Missouri one, depends entirely upon the correctness of this
opinion. Fortunately, however, the convention decided this question
for itself, and demonstrated, I think conclusively, that there is
now no law whatever in the territories acquired, excluding
slavery from them, and that of consequence the Clayton com
promise (substantially that of the bill now pending before
Congress) is an ample equivalent to the Missouri Compromise.
The following are its resolutions directly on the point ;
19. Resolved, That the whole legislative power of the United States gov-

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE. 337
ernment is derived from the Constitution and delegated to Congress, and can
not be increased or diminished but by an amendment of the Constitution.
20. Resolved, That the acquisition of territory by the United States, wheth
er occupied or vacant, either by purchase, conquest or treaty, adds nothing
to the legislative power of Congress, as granted and limited in the Constitu
tion. 21. Resolved, That the adoption of a foreign law existing at the time in
territory purchased, ceded or granted, is the exercise of legislative power,
and cannot be done unless the law is of such a character as might rightfully
be enacted by Congress under the Constitution, without reference to its pre-
existence as a foreign law.
22. Resolved, That the alleged principle of the law of nations recognizing,
to some extent, the perpetuity of foreign laws in existence within a territory
at the time of its acquisition by purchase, conquest or treaty, cannot, under
our Constitution and form of government, go to the extent of continuing in
force, in such territory, any law that could not be directly enacted by Con
gress, by virtue of the powers of legislation delegated to it by the Constitu
tion. 23. Resolved, That no power of doing any act or thing by any of the de
partments of our government, can be based upon the principles of any for
eign law, or of the laws of nations, beyond what exists in such department
under the Constitution of the United States, without reference to such for
eign law or the laws of nations.
24. Resolved, That slavery exists in the United States, independent of the
Constitution; that it is recognized by the Constitution in a three- fold aspect :
first, as property ; second, as a domestic relation of service or labor under
the law of a State ; and lastly, as a basis of political power. And viewed
in any or all of these lights, Congress has no power under the Constitution
to create or destroy it anywhere ; nor can such power be derived from for
eign laws, conquest, cession, treaty, or the laws of nations, nor from any
other source but an amendment of the Constitution itself.
If it be asked, if these were our views, after indicating them
as we did by our minority report, why we did not press them in
argument before the convention and reject the address, the
ready answer is to be found in the fact that we were in a minor
ity — a minority ascertained to be too small to give promise of
success in full convention. Situated as we were, all we could
accomplish after the convention had declared for the Missouri
Compromise, was to prevail on them fiirther to declare thatthey
would acquiesce in any other adjustment equally favorable. —
This being done, we conceived that the bill pending before
Congress did not stand necessarily suspended or condemned
by the convention, but was still open and susceptible of im-

338 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
provement until it should become a satisfactory equivalent. —
Then, and not till then, did we withdraw from the unequal con
test about the address, and permit it to go with the declaration
on its face, that we were not satisfied with a portion of it.
Judging from the published debates in Congress, I doubt
much whether the amendment I have indicated will be adopted,
or indeed whether the bill will be passed at all. I rejoice,
therefore, that the convention has declared for the Missouri line
as a definite and specific compromise, in which the south wiUbe
willing to acquiesce. This is precise and unmistakable, and
will constitute, 1 trust, a great common rallying point, where all
the friends of the south can meet with that perfect unanimity
of sentiment which characterized the convention in adopting
it. In taking the vote upon it, no discordant note was heard
throughout the spacious hall of her deliberations. The north
will never see in its adoption the slightest evidence of a craven
spirit of pusillanimity ; she may rather discover in the una
nimity of that vote the most solemn determination never to
fall below her former concessions in any important or material
particular. In convention I spoke for no State, no district, but
only for those who were in favor of being represented there,
and who kindly appointed me and others for that purpose. —
But here I speak for myself, when I say that rather than see
her fall materially below her former concessions — the Missouri
— the Texas — the Clayton — the present compromise, when
amended as I have stated it should be, I would advise her to
resort to every sort of municipal regulation within the powers
of the States — to quarantine regulations of the most annoy
ing character — to every species of embarrassment to her trade
and commerce. I would have every southern legislature earn
estly to recommend to every merchant, trader, and factor, to for
bear the purchase and traffic in a single commodity of north
ern manufacture ; and to every farmer, and planter, and day-
laborer of the south, forthwith to give up the purchase and use
of any and every article of northern fabric — to give bounties
and premiums for the establishment of factories of every sort
and description throughout the southern States — to expend
their last dollar in the construction of railroads, turnpikes and
canals from every region of the interior to the best exporting

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE, 339
and importing cities on the Atlantic and the Gulf. I know
well how ineffectual such modes of retaliation would prove in
times of apathy and unconcern ; but when the proposed meas
ures shall have been passed — when the Missouri Compromise,
or its equivalent, shall have been rejected, and any harder or
more oppressive terms shall be attempted to be enforced on
the south, few men can tell the potency — the mighty power —
which a well directed system of commercial non-intercourse
with the northean exert in times of high and general excite
ment. There is no need of total suspension of that inter
course ; a total aversion to the purchase or use of any of her
manufactures, to effect our object : 25 or 30 per cent, annually
of her profits from southern intercourse and consumption, will
waken up the whole commercial north to the disaster to them
selves which further continuance of aggression must produce.
Nor would all this be done in a wanton spirit of retaliation and
revenge. Retaliation it would indeed be ; but it would be re-
tahation in self defence — defence of ourselves — our property
— our families — our homes ! A retaliation sanctioned and ap
proved by the great law of nature and of God, and never to be
discontinued until it induced a change in the oppression of our
adversaries. Entertaining the opinions which I do of the va
rious means of retaliation, with a view to induce the north to
do us justice, I never expect to advise her to any schemes of
disunion — of cecession — of nullification. The Union is my
property — my inherited property — which I regard of great
value. I never mean to permit the north to take it from me,
nor to induce me by its aggressions to throw it away. I will
contend for that property as soon and as long as for any other.
There are many cases where the misconduct of partners might
jqstify dissolution ; but even the injured partner, for various
reasons, might well decline breaking up the concern, whilst he
would choose not to submit, but to resent — to retaliate upon
his offending co-partner until he should be more than willing to
cease his unprofitable warfare on his rights.
It is too late now to insist that the Missouri Compromise is
unconstitutional and cannot be voted for in the present con
test. The whole system of northern interference with slavery
is unconstitutional, and surely we may be allowed in self-de-

340 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
fence to arrest it at any point or degree of latitude we may be
able. If we cannot save all, let us preserve as much of our
rights as we may be able to do. Besides this, the convention
places her concession to the line of thirty-six thirty, expressly
on the ground of compromise — the compromise of a contested
construction ofthe Constitution. Now what is there in the na
ture of the case to prevent such a question from becoming the
proper subject of a compromise? The Constitution itself was
the creature of compromise. Why may not a proper construc
tion of certain clauses of it become so? To the resolutions of
annexation in 1844-5, the clause was inserted excluding slavery
north of thirty-six thirty, and yet the friends of annexation
found no difficulties in afterwards giving them their support.—
Why was this ? Doubtless because they considered that the
construction of the constitution on this subject had been com
promised by their predecessors in the halls of Congress more
than twenty years before, and no one felt constrained by his in
dividual opinions (if it were a new question) to open afresh the
bleeding wounds of his country. That compromise of consti
tutional construction extended to thirty-six thirty, and there
fore as a precedent carries us no further. All beyond that is
without warrant, without precedent, and utterly subversive of
all equality among the States. Remember I am talking not
about ordinary legislative or even judicial precedents. I am
speaking of solemn compacts or covenants between large sec
tions of the nation, in times of great exigency, when the Re
public is in danger, and which are therefore more to be rever
enced and observed than precedents of an ordinary character.
I consider the compromise tariff, the Missouri, and Texas, and
the present one, if adopted, to be all of that description, andto
impose higher obligations for their observance. In confirma
tion of these views, let me remind you of the full response to
them in the last message of the lamented Polk :
" Considering the several States and the citizens of the several States
as equals, and entitled to equal rights under the Constitution, if this were
an original question, it might well be insisted on that the principle of non
interference is the true doctrine, and that Congress could not, in the ab
sence of any express grant of power, interfere with their relative rights.—
Upon a great emergency, however, and under menacing dangers to the
Union, the Missouri Compromise line in respect to slavery was adopted.—

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE. 341
The same line was extended further west in the acquisition of Texas. Af
ter an acquiescence of nearly thirty years in the principle of Compromise
recognized and established by these acts, and to avoid the danger to the Un
ion which might follow if it were now disregarded, I have heretofore ex
pressed the opinion that that line of compromise should be extended on the
parallel of thirty-six thirty from the western boundary of Texas, where it
now terminates, to the Pacific ocean. This is the middle ground of com
promise, upon which the different sections nf the Union may meet, as they
have heretofore met. If this be done, it is confidently believed a large ma
jority of the people of every section of the country, however widely their
abstract opinions on the subject of slavery may differ, would cheerfully and
patriotically acquiesce in it, and peace and harmony would again fill our
borders. " The restriction north of the line was yielded to in the case of Missouri
and Texas upon a principle of compromise, made necessary for the sake of
preserving the harmony, and possibly the existence of the Union.
" It was upon these considerations that at the close of your last session,
I gave my sanction to the principle of the Missouri Compromise line, by
approving and signing the bill to establish " the territorial government of
Oregon." From a sincere desire to preserve the harmony of the Union,
and in deference of the acts of my predecessors, I felt constrained to yield
my acquiescence to the extent to which they had gone in compromising this
delicate and dangerous question. But if Congress shall now reverse the
decision by which the Missouri Compromise was effected, and shall pro
pose to extend the restriction over the whole territory, south as well as
north of the parallel of thirty-six thirty, it will cease to be a compromise)
and must be regarded as an original question."
To the Missouri Compromise I know it has been objected
that it conflicts with the doctrine of non-intervention ; that it
is intervention on one side of the line and non-intervention on
the other. Well, and suppose it is, can the south be blamed
for that? Has, she ever abandoned that doctrine? Mr. Nich
olson tells us truly that " she has stood upon it and fought for
it for years." She fought for it in 1820, when Missouri was
admitted, but could not stand; but was compelled to fall back
on non-intervention south of thirty-six thirty. She fought for
it in 1844-5, on the admission of Texas, but again could not
stand, and fell back on thirty- six thirty. What shall she do
now, when she is sorely pressed a third time ? — when the north
is contending for the total exclusion of slavery from every acre
of land acquired from Mexico and from every port and harbor
of the Pacific? — now, when her zeal has been thrice heated
from the burning fires of fanaticism and her insolence grown

342 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
more arrogant, from a consciousness that she has the power of
numbers to sustain it? Now what was it becoming and proper
for the south to have done ? Still to demand the doctrine of
non-intervention? WeU, she did. Look to her first ten reso
lutions and see if she did not. She knew that it would be re
fused to her — on every former occasion it had been refused to
her. What then ? She knew — she felt, that the force and
power of the two great precedents of Missouri and Texas
would be brought to bear upon her, and therefore she frankly
avows her willingness to abide by those precedents, and to be
content on the spirit of compromise, and " because she con
siders it due to the stability of our institutions," to estabfish
non-intervention only soutli of thirty-six thirty. The voice of
the convention is, on this point, the faithful echo of that of the
late President, as we have just shown, and the sentiments of
both the living and the dead are now blended in perfect har
mony for the settlement of these great questions.
And what a commentary is all this on the violent assaults
and charges made on it before the convention assembled. —
With some, its purposes were dark and treasonable ; whilst
others, more charitable, attributed to it only extreme factious
and partisan designs. During its deliberations, every body
present and absent seemed to be looking out for some terrible,
if not horrible explosion, or at least for some extreme and
ultra demonstration, dangerous to the Union and to the coun
try. Well, when it is all over — when they have met, resolved
and gone home again, what have they done ? Instead of some
dreadful plot of disunion — of nullification — of secession—
they have, at the worst, declared in favor of the Missouri Com
promise, of which Mr. Clay himself was the putative author,
and certainly its most eloquent and powerful advocate; a
compromise, re-affirmed by all those wise and good men who
lent a sanction to the annexation of Texas — a compromise,
which it was the last public and solemn advice of President
Polk should be adopted on this very occasion. This, 1 repeat,
is the very worst they have done. And they did not even de
clare that this should be the only thing with which they Would
be content — no ultimatum — no extreme proposition — but a
further and final declaration that they would acquiesce in any

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE. 343
other adjustment which might give equal advantages to the
south. With all these facts now faithfully recorded, has not the con
vention a right to ask for its deliberations a fair and impartial
consideration ? Is it fair and impartial for any man or any
party in the south to review it as a hostile assemblage of ene
mies, whose virtues they would be slow to discover, and reluc
tant to admit, or whose errors, if any, they would be sure to
exaggerate ? Is it fair or impartial to overlook or to suppress
aU public approval of the great truths set forth in the twenty-
seven or twenty-eight resolutions of that body, and with mi
croscopic vision pick and cull from the address (which is al
ways on such occasions scrutinized with less care) all the real
or imaginary imperfections which it may contain? The reso
lutions of every such assemblage are the real text — authoritive
and binding on its members — whilst the address is the mere
speech sent out on the occasion — a sort of commentary of less
authority, and indeed of such little authority, that it is often
directed to be prepared by some individual or committee, after
the adjournment has taken place. But these actings and
doings of the convention are those of your friends, not your
enemies. Leave then the work of suspicious and prejudiced
review to your adversaries in the north. They will do it suffi
ciently, no doubt. In Tennessee especially, how ought this
whole subject to be treated and considered ? It was made a
party question most unfortunately during the last winter, when,
as any body can now see, it ought not to have been. Shall it
continue so to be? If it shall be so treated here, and in some
others of the interested States, no eye hath seen, no mind yet
contemplated the fearful destiny which awaits the south —
aU classes — all parties of the south — one as much as the
other ; and when the fearful time shall come to which I now
but faintly allude ; when northern purposes owing to our dis
sension shall be fully accomplished ; when nine hundred mil
hons of your slave property shall be taken from you; when nine
hundred millions more shall be lost by you in the depreciation
of your lands ; when a mortal struggle shall be going on
amongst you for the extinction of one race or the other, (for
the north is drawing a cordon around you,) then we or our

344 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
children on whom these calamities may fall, will look back and
curse the hour, the infatuated hour, that ever made this a
party question. In Tennessee, I say again, then, no public
press ought to make it one. Every man that patronises any
newspaper evidently disposed to do so, ought to go direct to
its editor and require him to forbear ; should demand it of him,
especially as due to the safety of his property, to the peace and
security of his family.
The whig party of the State owes it to itself to review its
former course upon this great and vital question. They now
stand greatly separated from their friends in other States,
many of whom they saw here, mingling their counsels freely
with those of the other party, in a common cause and a com
mon danger. What was the result ? They saw Judge Sharkey
and others from different States, they saw the Tennessee demo
cratic delegates through Mr. Nicholson and myself, advising
a more conservative and conciliatory course then many, nay a
majority were disposed to pursue. They applauded and ap
proved, but did not and would not come to our assistance.
How then can they be justified in complaining that anything
went wrong in the convention ; that the resolutions were
wrong ; that the address was wrong. It does not lie in their
mouths to say it, so long as they stood aloof and would not
come into convention to help us to make them better. But
when the next convention shall again convene, as I greatly
fear it may have to do, 1 sincerely hope that they wiUbe there;
both parties in full attendance ; to help by their joint counsels
andjoint wisdom to save the south, the Constitution and the
Union. The great work is now begun. There is too much
probabihty that the present bUl presented by the Committee of
Thirteen being amended and passed through the Senate, will be,
rejected in the House, and that the House biU, admitting Cali"-
fornia but composing and settling no other of the slavery quea--
tions, wiU pass that body and be rejected in the Senate. Thus
Congress will have adjourned, having rejected both the Missouri
Compromise and the present bill. If this should be so then surely
all men of all parties will be wUling to unite in that great
work, at a crisis so imminent as will then exist. If not, then

ADDRESS TO THE SOUTHERN PEOPLE. 345
all is lost ; all of greatness or of glory which the south ever
dreamed of in her future destiny.
But I must close this letter ; my object has been to explain
the position assumed by Mr. Nicholson and myself in the min
ority report, in favor of the present bUl pending before Con
gress, with amendments. A position assumed by us under a
full conviction, that such were the sentiments of a majority of
those whom we represented. Also to vindicate and sustain
the action of the convention in the series of twenty-odd reso
lutions which they adopted. How far I may have succeeded
you and the pubfic must judge. Very respectfully,
AARON V. BROWN.

ADDRESS
Of Ex-Gov. Aaron V. Brown, to the Law Class of the Univer
sity, at Lebanon, February I5th, 1853.

Gentlemen : — I salute you as candidates for admission into
one of our most learned and attractive professions : one that
in every civUized age, has exerted the greatest influence on
society, furnishing to human liberty some of her ablest cham
pions, and to religion many of her most eminent votaries. It
has stamped its peculiar image so distinctly on nearly every
country in Europe, that the bar, without any great hyperbole,
may be almost denominated the nation. In England especially,
no sovereign ever has been, or will be able to exempt himself,
in any great degree, from dependence on this profession.
From it must be selected his Lord Chancellors, the equity and
common law Judges of his superior courts, his ecclesiastical
and colonial Judges, and a long traiin of other judical func
tionaries. From it also have come her most eminent states
men and orators, who have immortalized her Parliaments, and
made British diplomacy the most successful in the world.
The influence and triumphs of the legal profession have
been scarcely less signal in our country. In the old Congress
that framed the Constitution, and in the State conventions that
ratified it, the men of this profession stood out in advance,
overpeering all others in extent and variety of learning, and iii
that bold and thrilling eloquence which the occasion so much
demanded. If the mind flashes over a few briUiant names as
exceptions to these remarks, because they are exceptions,
they but confirm the well merited compfimentto the founders

ADDRESS TO LAW STUDENTS, 347
of the Republic. It has furnished every President of the
United States except two. Generals Washington and Taylor.
It has supplied a majority of every Cabinet, and a long line
of Attorneys General. So it has done all the Judges of the
United States, as well as of the respective States.
Such, gentlemen, is the profession, and such its honors
and emoluments, which you are proposing to enter. Its prizes
are large and captivating. Ambition itself could not ask that
they should be more so. But they are not to be won as in a
lottery, by mere chance. If they were, they would scarcely
be worth the winning. If they were, dolts might be Lord
Chancellors, and blockheads fill the places of a Marshall, a
Kent, or a Story. There must be no chances reckoned on in
the case. They must be the certain rewards of patience, in
dustry, perseverance, and above aU, of a high resolve of the
mind, to be content with no mediocrity of attainment. Who
would be contented with mere mediocrity ? To throng the
courts without a brief, a fee, or a client, and above all, not to
deserve one ! By you, who have the good fortune to enjoy the
advantages of an institution like this, the very word mediocrity
should be scorned. Nothing less than a proficiency which
would qualify you for any office or station in life, should satisfy
your lofty aspirations. Some of you may have to plead in the
courts where the full, clear and persuasive eloquence of a
Grundy still holds its magic spells over the hearts of his
hearers ; or where the fervid genius and profound learning of
a Haywood, or the close and rigid logic of Crabb and William
L. Brown, would rebuke that indolence which would fall below
the master spirits of the law of an age just gone by. I allude
to them because they are now no more, and because the voice
of eulogy cannot be mistaken for that of adulation. In this
age you must not, you dare not fall below such high standards.
It is the age of progress — of improvement in every science,
in every art, in every profession. He who stands still, or idly
lingers on the way, will find the tide sweeping by him
leaving him " high and dry," on the shore of neglect and
disappointment. It is this very progress which has founded
the present institution; which has drawn to it our most eriii-

^"^^ CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
nent scholars and jurists, and opened up to you and for you
advantages nowhere surpassed in our country.
In former times, even the men whose names I have called up
for your just emulation, enjoyed no such facilities as are
now daily spread before you. In some crowded office, and
under the guidance of some preceptor in fuU practice, aiid
therefore obliged to be neglected — with access to fewer
books than are now sometimes referred to in a single case—
they groped their way through the intricate mazes of early
study. But with stout hearts and noble resolves they struggled
on, until in spite of every obstacle, they attained an eminence
worthy of all imitation. Contrast your present condition with
theirs. In a quiet and secluded village, already remarkable
for the literary and moral habits of its population, with pro
fessors distinguished for their ability, and unencumbered hy
other engagements to distract and divert their attention, and
with access to vast stores of legal knowledge, you have the
means which enable you to walk forth from this institution
the compeers, the proud rivals ofthe graduates from any other
institution in America.
I take it for granted that you stand in need of no persua
sion to induce you to profit by the favorable means here af
forded. I suppose you to have come here for that very pur-
posei and not because you did not know very well where else
to go, or what else to do, than to while away a session or two
at the law school at Lebanon ! I feel that I have before me
to-day no such genteel idler, in whose soul the fires of genius
and ambition have been extinguished so early in his career.
The indolent lounger, with his volatUe and frivolous mind, has
no business with this profession. He had better turn aside at
once to the lighter pursuits and employments of the day. He
who undertakes to master this first and noblest of human
sciences, must bring to the great work the fixed and unaltera
ble determination to be emphatically and truly a student of tk
law. He must not count on merely skimming over it, com
prehending a few only of its general principles, and acquiring
some slight familiarity with its details in practice. No, he must
dive into its hidden depths — ^penetrate deep into its secret arca
na, and bring up the pure and sparkfing water from the very
bottom of the weU of knowledge.

ADDRESS TO LAW STUDENTS, 349
The entrance or start upon a hard and intricate study like
this, is both irksome and discouraging. But the rich rewards
that lie before you and beckon you onward, should rouse you up
to vigorous and incessant effort. What other profession is there
less intricate and difficult which can yield you an equal or larger
amount of remuneration ? What one will advance you to
higher stations of honor and profit ? What one can open to
you a wider field of benevolence and usefulness, inscribing your
name high upon the scroll of fame as one of the great benefac
tors of mankind ? But the start is not so difficult as it at first
appears. He who gazes on the lofty mountain peering up before
him, can scarcely believe that he can ever scale and pass its
towering summit. But he approaches it by degrees. One
lesser elevation after another is overcome, until at last he finds
himself at the top, breathing its pure atmosphere, and won
dering by what easy gradations he had attained it.
In the study of the law, there is generaUy too great a desire
to hurry through with it, and make an advent as soon as pos
sible into the arena of its practice. Precipitancy has often
proven fatal to sensitive and ingenuous minds. A few blunders
in practice, or a mortifying failure in the argument of some
important case, rashly engaged in, maybe followed by chagrin
and disappointment which may never be overcome. No per
suasion of friends, no counsel of the wise and experienced,
can restore him to confidence in himself^ and he abandons in
mortification a profession which, with less eagerness, he might
have honored and adorned. How much better for him not to
have laid aside his elementary books so soon, nor to have hur
ried so hastily into the court in order to make a premature dis
play in harranguing a jury. He should have remained con
tented in the reth-ement of study, " biding his time," until
ripe in his full course of preparation, he could have realized
his own expectations and those of his waiting and admiring
friends. ThatfuU course of preparation will admit of no pre
cipitancy with impunity. It takes too wide a range. It em
braces law in its widest and most comprehensive sense. The
laws of God — of nature — of nations — of independent States ;
under the latter, the common law — the statute law — constitu
tional law— the commercial law — ^the law of real estate — of

350

CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.

descents— the criminal law. In fine, it embraces all laws,
human and divine, and challenges the profound study of years
to understand and expound them. Beside the subjects of dhect
and intense study, there are others, collateral or incidental to
them, that must by no means be neglected.
The law student should make himself well acquainted with
history, ancient and modern. It is there that he must learn
the origin of those laws which are the daily subjects of his
meditation — .the occasions which called them forth, and their
beneficial or injurious tendencies after their enactment. It
should not be studied, however, as a mere chronology of past
events. In what year some battle was fought, or at what pre
cise period an illustrious Prince was called to the throne, can
be of but little importance compared with the great principles
by which he advanced his people to prosperity and happi
ness, or sunk them still lower in the scale of despotisni. It
should be read in order to trace out the rise and progress of
our most important institutions — the advances of mankind at
different periods of the world, in education, in the sciences, in
the arts, both useful and ornamental. The study of history is
eminently important to the student of law in our own country.
Our form of government, and the institutions which it estab
lishes, have been so recently founded, that no statesman, no
judge, no lawyer, no man of education should be deficient in
their history. He should especially be familiar with our revo
lutionary history ; with the discussions and events that led to
the first confederation of the colonies ; with the debates on
the formation of the Federal Constitution, and its subsequent
adoption by the States ; with the debates in Congress on ihe
leading topics since that period. All these illustrate the true
nature of our government, and can scarcely faU to inspire us
with the warmest sentiments of admiration and devotion to it.
It is upon such studies as these, that we have to rely much
for the arrest of that spirit of change and innovation which is
one of the characteristics of the present period of our national
existence. We are no enemy to real improvement in every
thing : in law, in jurisprudence, and in government. But we
should advance with caution, and nothing but the surest con
victions should tempt us to leave the beaten track of our an-

ADDRESS TO LAW STUDENTS. 351
cestors. The founders of the republic attempted to raise bar
riers against this fondness for change, by the adoption of con
stitutions so difficult of amendment and alteration, that such
could seldom be effected without a general concurrence of
pubhc sentiment. How long these barriers will prove sufficient,
it is impossible to tell. The close observer can distinctly see
that reverence for constitutional law is fast diminishing, and
every pretext for its evasion is eagerly adopted. The device
of enlarging and expanding that instrument by the doctrine of
constructive powers, has proved successful on several import
ant occasions, and the insidious avowal, now too distinctly an
nounced to be overlooked or disregarded, that there is a law
above and higher than the Constitution, threatens to abrogate
it altogether. These two doctrines, whilst they differ in the
mode of getting clear of constitutional restraints, yet agree in
their results. Great liberality of construction, it is well known,
will give to it much of that elasticity which the disorganizing
spirit of the age seems imperiously to demand. It would then
admit of nearly every thing which a licentious and dominant
majority might demand. Still, cases may arise and have arisen,.
where latitudinarian doctrines would prove inadequate to
the purposes designed ; for there are some things so plainly
incorporated, such as " the protection of life, fiberty and pro
perty," that no sophistry can evade them. It is then that the
higher law — that new invention of the age, interposes, in order
to complete the fatal work of constitutional evasion and dese
cration. Under this doctrine, if it should practically and finaUy
prevail, the whole structure ofthe American government must
inevitably perish. The sentiment now often and publicly in
voked, that, in a free government like ours organic or consti
tutional laws are inconsistent with the rights of majorities, who
ought to have the power to pass all laws whatever, will then
supersede all constitutions. The rapid growth and dangerous
progress of this latter sentiment, may be seen in the pubfic
odium now heaped upon that clause of the Constitution which
erects the veto power as the only barrier against invasions
npon the rights of the minority. So great is that odium that
many demand its total obliteration from the Constitution ; whUst
others are content with its practical annihilation by withhold-
24

352 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
ing its exercise, even to prevent the most obvious violation of
that sacred instrument. ¦ I advert to this alarming state of
things, not in reference to the prevailing confiicts of parties,
but to impress it on your minds to read thoroughly the consti
tutional history of your country, so that you may form a just
and enlightened opinion upon them. You will find in your
researches, that the school in which was taught the doctrine of
a close and rigid construction ofthe Constitution, was founded in
that part of the country that then swayed the sceptre. It was
taught, against all the blandishments of power, exhibiting the
rare example of a triumphant majority seeking to erect bulwarks
around the citadel of the Constitution to protect it against
their own invasions. They looked forward to the time when
the repubfic would probably extend from ocean to ocean : when
instead of thirteen, some thirty or forty States might compose
it. They knew not what great and diversified interests might
conflict with each other ; and when the one or the other pre
vailed, they knew not what consuming fires of revenge and
hatred might be generated in the confiict. But this they knew,
that the Con stitution that had been framed, if honestly con
fined to the powers conferred, would do as well for many, as
for a few States : for States reposing on the shores of the
Pacific, as well as those that stretched along the Atlantic ; and
that if the Constitution secured all alike in the enjoyment of
life, liberty and property, no conffict of interests, no diversity
of climate could retard them in the march of greatness and
glory. The sceptre of power, however, has now passed over
to another region. Its transfer to the North should bring no
regret, if the new hands that are now to wield it will recog
nise the doctrine of a strict adherence to the plain letter and
obvious meaning of the Constitution. But unfortunately they
exhibit few signs of doing so, but promulgate with daring bold
ness that there should be no veto against the vote of a ma
jority of Congress, and no Constitution when in conflict with
the higher law of the consciences of those who hold absti-act
opinions in opposition to its provisions.
But, gentlemen, the acquisition of. a thorough knowledge of
the law is scarcely more important than an easy, graceful and
pleasing manner of communicating it to others. You will

ADDRESS TO LAW STUDENTS. 353
have spent years almost in vain, if you have neglected the art
of speaking. I do not mean that mouthing faculty that can
barely communicate an idea, but that noble faculty which at
once arrests the attention and wins the favor of your hearers.
To speak well you must think well ; you must comprehend
clearly the great points of your case, and concentrate the
highest powers of your mind upon them. What you compre
hend clearly, you wUl be apt to express well; and what you
feel strongly yourself, you will most probably urge with power
and eloquence on others. The finished orator at the bar, in
the pulpit, in the senate chamber, or the lecture room, must
be master of logic and rhetoric. Logic is the science, rhetoric
the pleasing manner or style, and eloquence the matter of
speaking. The two former are therefore auxiliary to the last,
and the three combined have exalted man above all other at
tainments and achievements in life.
By eloquence we do not mean mere words or sentences of
fine language void of solid sense ; a magnificent display of
gestures and apostrophes without point or meaning ; but that
eloquence which we recommend to your unceasing study is
founded on thought, on sentiment, expressed with the terseness
of logic, the grace of rhetoric, and which kindles up and then
controls all the hidden fires and passions of our nature. How
to acquire this highest, I had almost said this more than human
art, I know not, but by reading often and studying closely the
orations of its great masters. I disclaim all mere imitations
of either the dead or the living. If there be eloquence in you,
nature will bring it out in some form or manner that will be
your own. Still, by consulting the great masters we are assisted
in attaining to that standard which Cicero has laid down, " to
speak to the purpose — to speak clearly and distinctly — to
speak gracefully." The selection of models, not to make but
to improve your style, should be left to your own peculiar taste
and judgments. And why should you not have models for this
purpose ? The painter as well as the sculptor has his. The
architect has his. Why then may not the orator go to Greece
and Rome, to England and France, or to America, for models
which have filled the world with admiration ? Demosthenes
and Cicero among the ancients were so eloquent, that they

354 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
have inspired eloquence in all who describe them. In England,,
Burke, Chatham, Fox, Sheridan and Lord Brougham ; in Ire
land, Curran, Grattan, Emmet ; in the United States, Patrick
Henry, John Randolph, Richard Henry Lee, William Wirt,
John C. Calhoun, Daniel Webster, Felix Grundy, and Henry
Clay, are all admitted models of the highest order. I speak
not of the pulpit models, whose fame bas justly filled the civil
ized world, but whose theme so little resembles yours as not
to be equally useful in their study. But I must be permitted
to recommend to you those models from whom the pulpit ora
tors have drawn all their inspiration — the models ofthe Bible.
Study these — the Prophets — the Apostles — our Saviour's great
sermon on the mount. To say nothing of their moral effect,
they will be found to improve, enlarge, andto exalt your foren
sic efforts. But remember, after all your study under the best
models, the great secret of being eloquent is to feel yourself,
deeply and sincerely, what you wish to impress on others. To
reach the heart yx>ur language must flow from the heart. That
must dissolve first, or your language will fall cold and power
less on your hearers. Hence it is that the truly great orator
must preserve his moral sensibilities pure and uncontaminated.
He must love truth. He must honor virtue. He must hate
vice and all its deformities. He must sympathise truly and
deeply with the weak and the oppressed. He must loath des
potism and tyranny in every form and shape in which they have
ever oppressed mankind. In short, to be great he must be
eloquent, and to be eloquent he must be good. With such
elements of character, he will speak as an oracle and a pro
phet. Like a strong man he will pull down the pillars of pre
judice, and his utterance will be like the stone hurled from an
engine. To the sentiments and will of such a man all hearts
are surrendered in profound obedience and homage.
To cultivate an art so essential to the profession you have
selected — an art so ethereal, so God-like — should challenge
your highest assiduity. No difficulties should appal, no indo
lence retard you. Demosthenes was no orator by nature.
Cicero studied long and hard under the best masters. Chat
ham practiced all his life before his mirror. Lord Brougham
rehearsed a single oration for six weeks before he delivered it.

At»DRESS TO L.iW STUDENTS. 355
Whitefield, and Wesley, and many others, had to pass the
same laborious pilgrimage, and richly were they rewarded by
a deathless name, an immortality of honor.
Gentlemen, my work would be but half accomplished, were
1 to leave you with thtese observations on the mere study of
your profession. Much, therefore, remains to be submitted to
you in relation to its pursuit and practice. When you shall
have acquired the requisite amount of learning, and passed
that ordeal which attests it, you will enter upon the great the
atre of the world to act a noble part, I hope, in the grand
drama of life. It will be to you an important and critical mo
ment in your existence. Your friends are now looking with
solicitude upon you whilst engaged in the prosecution of your
studies. They will watch with intense interest your advent
into the world. You will have to guard in some degree against
their anxiety to precipitate you into the arena in cases not
suited to display, or on occasions not well calculated to enable
you to realize their expectations.
Before you begin, you must selectyour residence, your home.
In doing this, you will sometimes be controlled by circumstan
ces, so obvious and proper, that they need not be here alluded
to. But, as a general rule, I would say, strike for the capital !
for some great commercial city, or some densely populated re
gion, of wealth, intelligence and trade. In other words, go
where there is something to do. Fear no obstacle. Cower to
no dread of competition. If there be great lawyers already
there, they will furnish you with high standards of rivalry and
emulation. If they seem too numerous, remember that the
demands of political life and the high honors of the bench will
be constantly thinning them out. Besides these, bear it in
mind that successful practice brings opulence, which is sure to
be followed by that desire of ease which will make room for
fresh candidates for fortune and for fame. Success in a loca
tion so selected is the more desirable, because it will become
yom- permanent residence for life. You will not then be com
pelled to move from the village in which you started, because
you have outgrown its business and population. It is one of
the great laws of genius and ambition to seek for situations

356 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
commensurate with their conscious power of usefulness and
display. Having selected your place of residence, your next step will
be to procure you an office. This will be your sanctum sancto
rum, at least one room of it, where no genteel idler is to be ad
mitted to while away an indolent hour, or to kill time at an
innocent game of cards or back-gammon, and, least of all, to
take a " gentlemanly spree" in term time or out of term time.
Into that consecrated place let none enter save yourself, your
books and your clients. Receive your friends cordially in
some other room, and when the demands of social life are sat
isfied, withdraw to your place of study, with no apprehension
that either the wise or the good will ever be dissatisfied with
your devotion to business. The time spent at lawyers' offices,
frequently, in idle and unprofitable discourse and amusement,
if devoted to earnest and indefatigable research, would be suf
ficient to make even the dullest of our attorneys proficients in
one of the noblest sciences in the world.
Your residence chosen and your office selected, you should
betray no over anxiety to begin. Wait until a proper cause
and occasion shall demand it. Having made j^our arrange
ments for a lifetime, and having a living consciousness within
you that you possess the high elements necessary to ensure
success, you can afford to wait until some case of insulted
virtue or down-trodden poverty, shall demand your services. —
At such a call, walk forth in the majesty of your profession,
and deal the blows of a young giant upon the bead of insolence
and oppression. Catch the inspiration to do so from the
strong sense of virtue and justice which is in your own heart,
following the example of Patrick Henry and many others un
der similar circumstances. I repeat, catch the inspiration from
your own bosom; cultivate habitually the love of virtue, of
right, of justice, of all the moral and religious duties. Scorn
what is ignoble and vicious — detest fraud and hypocrisy-
loathe oppression and tyranny in every form and shape you
may meet with them, and denounce them with words that will
burn and blast them. All this will be especially necessary, if
you ever become effective and eloquent advocates. There is
no branch of the profession so important as what is commonly

ADDRESS TO LAW STUDENTS. 357
called the criminal practice. It places the life and liberty of
your fellow creatures in a good degree into your keeping. In
capital cases, the responsibility is immense. The vital spark
is committed to your hands, to preserve it alive or extinguish it
forever One argument omitted, it is lost — one bold, fervid,
eloquent appeal, and it is saved. To make such an appeal,
the advocate must feel what he says ; it must come from him
with a heart heaving, and a lip quivering with genuine emo
tion; no sickly, morbid sentimentality will serve the great occa
sion. He must fully realize the prisoner's sad and helpless
condition. The sweetness of human life — the value of the
immortal soul that may be lost and ruined by being ushered
prematurely into another world, with all its sins green and
blooming upon it. Thoughts and sentiments like these, caught
from the Book of God, that great fountain of knowledge of
what pertains to the immortality and grandeur of the human
soul, may enable him to rescue his victim from the deadly
grasp of his pursuers. There is no prouder triumph, no
sweeter pleasure than is enjoyed by the successful advocate
in capital cases. He feels that he has baffled the malice of
enemies; that he has snatched his client sometimes from the
very jaws of perjury; that he has overcome the unconscious
prejudices of both judge and jury; that by the magic power
of eloquence he has converted the infuriated cry of the multi
tude for his crucifixion into a long and exulting shout at his
deliverance. The natural ardor of youth will induce you to desire a large
or full practice at the very beginning of your career. Such
success would probably prove the grave of all high future emi
nence. Immersed in cases, many of them of no great impor
tance, either as it relates to theamount involved or the com
pensation to be received, you would necessarily be deprived of
the opportunity still farther to prosecute your studies, and to
dive yet deeper into the profound mysteries of the law. More
especially should not this fullness of practice be sought by un
dervaluing yourselves in the acceptance of fees below the
usual standard of compensation. You must ever remember
that you have not repaired to the precincts of tbe court for the
mere purpose of making money — of growing rich upon the er-

358 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
rors and vices of mankind. In so ignoble an aim sheer ava
rice could have pointed out to you many avenues more likely to
ensure your success.
To a genteel competency, even to affiuence, you will be en
titled; but let it be an agreeable incident, not the chief object
of your toils and labors. The diffusion of knowledge, the ele
vation of the moral and intellectual standard of society, will
be far more ennobling to you than the acquisition of sordid
gain. It is difficult, perhaps impossible, to estimate the vast
amount of useful knowledge disseminated by a good lawyer in
the course of a long practice. His contributions to the judge
on the bench will be felt and acknowledged by him in almost
every trial. They will be seen in the profound attention of
juries, and in their rendition of verdicts responsive to the intel
ligent and able argument he has submitted. The thousands
who throng the courts from day to day, and who hang with
eager attention on his speeches, return to their homes with
minds improved, with sentiments of reverence and respect for
the laws and institutions of their country enlarged, and with
unbounded admiration for the advocate who has thus inspired
them with fresh incentives to virtue and patriotism. To such
a man the church looks when her altars are invaded. The
State calls upon him when some great constitutional subject is
to be expounded. Whatever individual in the city, the field,
or the workshop, shall find his rights invaded or his liberty as
sailed, hastens to him for redress, and hails with confidence
and joy the alacrity with which he espouses his cause. Such a
man cannot remain a very long time in the practice. The
flood-tide of public admiration will bear him upwards to the.
bench, to the senate chamber, or to be some high minister of
State, enlarging the circle of his influence, and from a more
commanding eminence, shedding the light of his devotion to
learning, to justice and good morals farther and wider around
him. Gentlemen, we indulge the pleasing hope that each one of
you is emulous of the fame of such a lawyer as we have just
described. We suppose you to have overcome all the obsta
cles of preparatory study — that you have been fortunate in
the selection of your place of residence, and that clients begin

ADDRESS TO LAW STUDENTS. 359
to come freely if they do not throng about your office. Still
we should be unkind and negligent of our duty on this occa
sion if we did not warn you that your trials and difficulties are
not yet ended: a new class of difficulties, not at all resembling
those we have heretofore considered. They result from the
new associations which you must form on entering into the
crowded temple of justice. Associations with those clients
whose causes you have espoused — with the witnesses on both
sides who are to testify in them — with the judge who is to pre
side over them — with the opposite counsel whose duty it will be
to baffle you if he can at every turn, and drive you and your
cause if possible, with mortification and much cost, out of
court. How delicate, how various, how responsible these new
relations ! Were we to venture one general counsel, to be ap
plied to this whole class thus grouped together, without enter
ing on details, we would simply advise, that with every body
— clients, witnesses, judges and adversary counsel — on all
occasions, in consultation, on trial, during periods of defeat
and disaster as well as of success and triumph, resolve to be
the gentleman; to speak like one — to act like one — ^to feel like
one. If native instinct does not prompt you to do so, let your
high and polished education, and the proud inspirations of
your profession, hold you up to the lofty elevation of the true
gentleman. The true gentleman never passes a deliberate in
sult, and never submits to one. He bxhibits no insolence to
inferiors, and never allows it from either equals or superiors.
He never will exult over a prostrate enemy, nor in hours of
defeat and disaster, which must some time come to all practi
tioners, allow himself to become peevish and insulting to those
whose good fortune it may have been to succeed over him.
Apply this general counsel in the first instance to your inter
course with your own clients. They have paid a most agreea
ble, perhaps the highest, compliment by selecting you as their
advocate. Let then no clumsiness of narrative, no repetition
of immaterial circumstances, no tediousness of detail in the
historyof their wrongs, induce you to grow impatient or un
civil. Had they the same powers of perspicuous condensation
which it has cost you many years to acquire, they might not
have stood in need of your services. Nor should you betray

360 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES,
or feel irritation when, in the pendency of a cause, your anx
ious and excited client shall too frequently enquire when it will
be tried, or whether witnesses who have importuned him for
the privilege may stay away till the morrow, or shall trouble
you with the gossip of the streets about the probable result of
the Irial. In all such cases, the true gentleman listens with
patience, answers with brevity, but kindness, and then passes
on to his business ; sympathizing with the anxiety of his cli
ent, who, whilst he annoys, yet honors and respects him.
There is, however, a single case which challenges from the
counsel no such mildness and forbearance. When in the origi
nal consultation, or in some subsequent disclosure, the chent
shall avow that he Anow* that justice is noton his side, but that
he is seeking an advantage which accident has laid in his
way, in order to gratify some hateful passion of his nature;
the pure-minded and virtuous advocate should spurn him from
his presence, and withdraw from a cause rendered infamous
by his own disclosures. We place upon record a case some
what analagous to the counsel we have here given. An emi
nent lawyer, the late Judge Kelly, had been employed in a suit
of slander, then pending in one of our courts. On the day of
trial, his client met him in the street as he was passing to the
court room, and remarked to him, that it was not so much to
argue the main merits of his cause, that he had employed him,
as it was to abuse and vilify the opposite party ; " And so," re
plied the indignant counsel, "you mistook me for a blackguard,
and I take you for a knave, and abandon you and yom' cause
together." Let us next apply this general, I might say this universal
rule, to j'our examination and comments upon the testimony of
witnesses. Forthe time being, they are, in a great degree, in
your power. They are in some sort your prisoners, and there
fore, upon the great law of honor, they are entitled to your for
bearance, if not your protection. Wantonly to assaU them, is
cowardice. You have a right, and it is your duty, to subject
them to the most searching enquiry — one which, by its close
ness, would imply a high degree of suspicion. If, however,
you detect no lui-King or misleading partiality — no faint foot
prints of perjured knavery — having passed the ordeal of your

ADDRESS TO LAW STUDENTS. 301
genius and talents, the witness is fairly entitled to your liberal
and generous comments. You should cast no ungenerous
sneers at him because he happens to be a witness on the oppo
site side. You may be wounding a sensibility as tender and
dehcate as your own, and inflicting a stain upon a character
dear to him as life, and on a family whose head and represen
tative he is, which no time can obliterate. If, however, the
witness comes before the court under suspicious circumstan
ces, and manifests little or no reverence for the high sanctions
under which he is testifying — if he fairly subjects himself to
the imputation of having given false testimony, then hold him
up to the scorn and detestation of all mankind. Let no words
of burning denunciation be left unuttered, which might prove
a warning to others.
That you should always act the part of a polished and fin
ished gentleman with your brethren of the profession, is so
clear a duty that it need scarcely be mentioned. That you
should do so with your adversary during the progress of a
cause, is of the highest importance. Never take offence at
what he may say or do, unless you are well satisfied that it was
intended. He feels bound to exhibit much zeal in behalf of,
and in some sort to identify himself with, his client. So do
you; and whilst both shall do so within the bounds of profes
sional courtesy, no offence ought to be taken by either. But
it is a great law of the profession, that each attorney shall be
left to fix for himself that degree of identity, and his adversary
is never allowed to exceed it by attempting to attach to him
any odium that may have fallen on his cause in the progress of
the trial. Such an attempt, for its intrinsic injustice, would
place you beyond the pale of professional honor, and ought to
strike your name from the time-honored and unsullied roll, on
which stand recorded the most illustrious names of ancient
and of modern time.
But there is no one to whom uniform deference and respect
should be so perpetually manifested as to the court. The
Judge is the representative of that noble science which you
venerate and honor. The ermine which adorns him should
admonish you never to forget what is due to his exalted station
and office. Approach him without presumptuous familiarity

362 CONGRESSIONAL AND OTHER SPEECHES.
on the one hand, or servile humiliation on the other. Your
own self-respect would forbid the latter, whilst the former
might call down upon you the most painful and mortifying re
pulse. In all your addresses to him be brief, lucid and to the
point. Do not, with a dogged pertinacity, travel over ground
which others have gone over before you ; and above all, do not
deluge the court with principles, and cases, and authorities
which no one has been known to deny for the last half a cen
tury ! Act towards him on the fair and reasonable presump
tion that he has at least some tolerable knowledge of the law,
and, therefore, it cannot be necessary to torture him with such
f.equent recurrence to the mere rudiments of the profession.
Pass over all these. March directly up to the strong points of
the case. Seize upon them — grapple with them — illustrate
them by great principles — fortify them by authorities, and thus
bear your client and his cause triumphantlj' through the com-t.
And now, gentlemen, I have concluded all that my leisure
aUowed me to prepare, and all indeed that it seemed to me
the occasion demanded. I have only to add, yonder is the
Temple! Her gates are wide open to receive you. A long line
of great and good men have passed in before you. The light
of their footsteps will guide you to her altars. These learned
professors who have instructed you so carefully, this throng of
admiring friends, and above all, your own high resolves, in
vite you to enter in and receive, as I hope each of you may do,
her highest honors and her richest rewards.

PART III.
MESSAGES, REPORTS, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS.

INAUGURAL ADDRESS

Of Hon, A. V. Brown, delivered on the \5th October, 1845, on
his Instalment as Governor of Tennessee.

Gentlemen of the Senate
and House of Representatives :
In presenting myself before you on the present occasion, I
feel verj' deeply impressed by the solemnities which we have
just witnessed. The transitions of power from one dynasty to
another in the old world have rarely been effected without rev
olution and bloodshed. There, the triumph of the one party
is too often the destruction of the other, leaving the great
masses of the people but little benefited by the change of do
minion. In our own free and happy form of government it is
wholly different. Here, the great popular principle is recog
nized in its full force, " that all power is inherent in the peo
ple, and all free governments are founded on their authority
and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness." It is a
remarkable fact, that this was the first great truth uttered by
the illustrious men who framed the Constitution of Tennessee.
It seems to have been uppermost in their minds, and to have
burst forth in advance of all their noble and patriotic senti
ments. It is under the infiuence of this cardinal principle that we
have just witnessed the surrender of all the executive power

366 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
and authority of the State by my distinguished predecessor ; a
surrender so peaceably and promptly made that it must consti
tute one of the highest eulogiums on our representative form
of government. But in presenting myself before you and this
large assembly, for the purpose of assuming the high olBce
from which he has just retired, I must be permitted to express
my deep and abiding gratitude to those by whom it has been
bestowed. To a station so exalted and responsible I should
never have aspired, but for the unanimous call of my fellow-
citizens in convention assembled. Most earnestly did I desire
the nomination of some other individual more able to vindicate
and sustain the great principles involved in the recent elec
tion. Not that I then was or ever could be insensible to tbe
high honor of presiding over such a noble and gallant State as
Tennessee. She is the land of my youth, the home of my
manhood. 1 have traversed her in all her borders; and I feel
to-day a proud consciousness that I love her, not more for her
physical grandeur, her lofty mountains, her deep majestic riv
ers, her wide luxuriant valleys, than for the moral excellence of
her brave, and hardy, and industrious people. To preside over
such a State, and to contribute any thing valuable to the pros
perity of such a people, ought to kindle up the fires of a virtu
ous ambition in the bosom of any man living. But, gentle
men, whilst I freely admit the full influence of an emotion like
this, I trust you will allow me to declare the most unfeigned
distrust of my abilities to discharge the duties of the high of-,
fice which I am about to assume. Fidelity and zeal in the dis
charge of those duties, and the most anxious and earnest de
sire to advance the welfare and happiness of every individual
member of our beloved Commonwealth, without reference to
the party to which he may belong, must be the only pledge
which 1 can offer my countrymen for this distinguished mark
of their preference and confidence.
The duties to which I allude are embraced in the compre
hensive but solemn oath which you wiU presently cause to be
administered, faithfully " to support the Constitution of this
State and of the United States." In general terms, to support
these, is to support aU the high principles of rational liberty
and representative government — the liberty of speech— the

INAUGURAL ADDRESS. 367
freedom of the press — the rights of conscience, of property
and reputation — the purity of our elections, and the impficit
obedience of the representative to thewiU of his constituents.
It is not, however, in relation to these great cardinal principles
of government that the practical difficulty of the American
statesman may be expected to arise. • The oath which you are
about to administer to support not only the Constitution of the
State of Tennessee, but of the United States, imposes a double
aUegiance, challenging my most unreserved obedience to both
governments. It is the danger of collision between them that
constitutes the precise point of difficulty and embarrassment.
In anticipation of the bare possibility of such an event, it be
comes my duty to declare the principles on which I should feel
bound to act — to declare them here in your presence — ^to de
clare them now, at the very beginning of my administration,
and at the very moment when I contract the obligation of this
double aUegiance.
Rightly understood and fairly construed, I hold collisions be
tween Federal and State Governments to be utterly impossi
ble. The wise men who framed the former, seem to have stu
diously and incessantly guarded against such an event. They
knew weU that in the pohtical as well as in the physical worldj
where equal powers meet, a fearful and dreadful pause must
ensue. They therefore weighed and considered with profound
anxiety every line and word inserted into our Federal Consti
tution. In the States to which this instrument was submitted
for adoption, the most distinguished statesmen and jurists em
ployed all their talents and learning in an animated and fear
less discussion of its provisions. The result of all this car6
and patriotic labor, was to throw additional safeguards around
the sovereignty of the States, by declaring that " the powers
not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor pro
hibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respect
ively, or to the people."
This amendment should have rendered every thing easy and
harmonious in the operations of our political system. It should
have estabhshed it as a maxim in the creed of every American
statesman, never to claim for the Federal Government any
power which was not expressly granted in the Constitution, or
25

363

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

which did not necessarily or properly belong to the execution
of an express power. It was for the establishment of this
great rule of construction, that Jefferson and Madison, andthe
Virginia Resolutions of 1798, so earnestly contended.
But unfortunately for the country, another school of politi
cians rose up co-eval with the Constitution, insisting on an ad
ditional class of implied powers, with no limitation but the
wild discretion of Congress, and guided by no object but the
vague and indefinite notion of " the general welfare."
It bas been this difference of opinion as to the mode of con
struing the Federal Constitution, that has laid the foundation
of all the party struggles of this country. The estabfishment
of a United States Bank, the enactment of a Protective Tariff^
without regard to revenue, the distribution of the proceeds of
the sales of the public lands, the assumption of the debts of
the States, the suppression Of the liberty of speech, under the
pretext of preserving the freedom and purity of our elections,
have all depended on a latitudinous construction of the Fed
eral Constitution. The present occasion will by no means al
low of an extensive reference to any of these subjects; but
the questions of a Bank and the Tariff" enter so deeply into
the political discussions of the day, that I may be pardoned
for submitting a few observations on them.
In relation to the Bank, the great fact that no power for its
creation is to be found in express terms in the Constitution, has
often been adverted to. But another fact, scarcely less impor
tant, has been strangely neglected. That fact is, that the
journals of the convention show clearly that such a power waa
often asked for and as often refused, in every form in which it
could be presented. There is a potency in this recorded fact,
second only to the silence of the Constitution, which ought to
have long since overthrown all the feeble implications so much
relied on by the advocates of such an institution. Beside this,
a power so vast and mighty as this is, should never have been
left to mere implication at all. It should have stood out in
advance of all others, and have been rendered undoubted by
its boldness and conspicuity.
It was but a poor evasion of the constitutional objection to
have located the bank in the District of Columbia. If Con-

INAUGURAL ADDRESS. 369
gress has the power of exclusive jurisdiction over that Dis-
b'ict, it must be /or it as well as in it — local in its objects, and
territorial in its action.
To seize on a power granted for such limited and special pur
poses, and expand it over a mighty continent, is a shameless
perversion, a fraudulent usurpation — far more wicked than the
boldest interpolation of that instrument could be. The pre
tence so often relied on, that a bank was necessary and proper,
(and therefore constitutional,) as the fiscal agent of the gov
ernment, is fully exposed by the fact that the bank never was
charged with the collection or disbursement of the revenue at
all. The most that could ever have been said of its fiscal
agency would have been that it was charged with the simple
custody of the funds during the brief period between their col
lection and disbursement. I repeat, therefore, what I have be
fore said in another place, that this alleged fiscal necessity is
a false pretence, for the experiment has now been made and
the fact tested, that the government has, and can collect, keep
and disburse its own revenues, without the aid of any bank
whatever — an experiment which Washington adopted by
signing the act of 1792, which Mr. Jefferson subsequently re
commended and declared to be entirely practicable.
But I forbear any further observations on the subject of a
bank. I have referred to it only for the purpose of illustrating
my opinions more fully as to the mode of construing one ofthe
constitutions which I am presently to swear that I will faith
fully support. I say nothing of the expediency — nothing of its
dangerous and corrupting tendencies — nothing of that full and
ample refutation, which time and experience have given to
the argument, that exchanges could not be regulated, nor a
sound, uniform currency be given to the country, without such
an institution. AU these topics belong not to the occasion, nor
is their discussion necessary in order to make known my opin
ions to my fellow-citizens of the State.
In relation to the Tariff", I have always maintained that ita
rates were too high, its discriminations unjust, and that it
ought to be modified and greatly reduced. The agricultural
States havesuffiered much already, and nothing but the warmly
cherished hope that it wiU soon be repealed or greatly modified.

370

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

has subdued the murmurs of the consuming classes. I am
fuUy aware of the arguments usually employed to prove that
the people, so far from being injured, are really benefited by
the high duties of the Tariff; but I know not which most to
condemn — the impudence which could fabricate, or the credu
lity which could be imposed upon by them. Strong as this lan
guage may seem, I nevertheless entbrtain no hostility to the
manufactures of the United States. I cherish for the valuable
and important ones the very highest regard, and would cheer
fully give to all any advantage incidental to the collection of
our national revenue. I look forward with confidence to the
next Congress of the United States to make such modificar
tions and alterations in the present Tariff, as will make the
system impartial and honest. That dissatisfaction which is
now felt with its provisions in many quarters will then be sup
pressed, and those deep feelings of attachment which are cher
ished by nearly our whole population, in favor of the perpetua
tion of our blessed Union, will then acquire renewed energy
and strength.
Passing now, gentlemen, from those subjects on which the
Federal and State governments have heretofore conflictfed —
and which lay too directly in my way to be omitted — I desire
to submit a few oiiservations in relation to our State govern
ment in p9.rticular. The condition of our affairs at home,
challenges our most anxious attention. Our legislatures have
yet much work to do to enable the people to enjoy aU the bles
sings which a wise use of our free institutions can certainly se
cure. The preservation of our public credit stands out amongst
the foremost of all our duties. Every liability, whether pru
dently or imprudently contracted, should be met with most
scrupulous punctuality. In individul Ufe many apologies may
be urged for the want of this virtue which can find no parallel
in the public engagements of a great and prosperous State like
ours. To meet these liabilities with ease and without proba
ble inconvenience to the people, I shaU, in some future com
munication to you, invite your attention to the estabfishment
of a sinking fund adequate to the liquidation of our outstand
ing fiabilities at the respective periods when they may fall due.
The bank of the State has heretofore been much relied on, by

INAUGURAL ADDRESS. 371
the profitable operations of its concerns to meet these liabili
ties. However this may be, it cannot be amiss, in my opinion,
to bring to its aid all the other means, short of additional tax
ation, which the State may have at its disposal. Amongst
these, none can be more commendable than the most rigid
economy in the administration of the government of the State.
Economy in your own expenditures — in the length or dura
tion of your session — in the execution of the necessary public
printing — and, in fact, in all the subjects of expenditures which
are immediately connected with your legislative deliberations.
Economy also in the executive and judicial departments, car
ried to the utmost extent compatible with the administration of
justice and a faithful execution of the laws of the land. It
wUl be a part of my duty under the Constitution, " to take care
that the laws be faithfully executed," and I can assure you that
no portion of my duty will be more agreeable than that which
shall be performed in sustaining the public credit unimpaired
at home and abroad, and in carrying out any system of en
lightened and just economy which your wisdom may advise.
For many years the true friends of our liberal institutions
have earnestly desired the establishment in our State of a wise
and efficient system of public instruction. As friends to reli
gion and pure morals, they cannot repress the hope thatthe day
is not far distant when every individual within our borders shall
be capable of reading and understanding the Holy Scriptures,
of transacting his own business, and, if necessary, of instruct
ing his own offspring in the rudiments of learning. I rejoice
that a salutary feeling like this now seems to pervade our
whole population, reaching every hamlet within the limits of
our fertile and extensive territory. The patient and meritori
ous schoolmaster must now go abroad through the land on
his errand of labor and love, dissipating the darkness in which
so many minds are enveloped. It is on the education of the
great mass of the people that our hopes of preserving and per
petuating our liberties must be founded. The knowledge to
understand is as essential as the spirit to defend our republi
can institutions. With a continual and rapid increase of our
numbers, what else can be expected but anarchy and misrule,
unless we provide that science and literature shall maintain

372 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
their ascendency over all the sons and daughters of freedom,
who are through future time to control the destinies of the re
public ! In the enlargement and improvement of our present
partial system of education, I here offer freely, and with all my
heart, my humble and unceasing co-operation.
The present seems to be a suitable occasion to offer you my
congratulations on the recent annexation of the republic of
Texas to the United States. It ha^ been accomplished by no
invasion on the rights of Mexico, and in a manner which can
give no just cause of offence to any other nation. It has been
effected not by the sword, but a simple covenant or contract
between coterminous nations, speaking the same language,
accustomed to the same political institutions, and whose com
mon object was more effectually to secure to themselves all the
blessings of civil and religious liberty. It ought to be regarded
by the friends of freedom every-where but as another triumph
of rational liberty and representative government over the de
grading despotisms of the old world.
All the forebodings of evil to our country, as likely to occur
from the consummation of the deed, have been signally disap
pointed. As yet we can discover no sign of the displeasure of
Heaven in consequence of it. The earth is still putting forth
its verdure, and blessing the husbandman with the rich abun
dance of its fruits, whilst peace, and health, and general pros
perity are everywhere smiling upon a great and prosperous
people. Our bright and glorious Union, too, whose shattered
and broken fragments were everywhere to have met the eye
of the heart-stricken patriot, still bespans the continent,
stretching, like the rainbow of hope and of promise, from the
great inland seas of the North to the Gulf of Mexico in the
South. The incredible prophesy, that a convention was to be
held in this beautiful city, in order to accomplish the work of
national destruction, has failed of its fulfillment, and the illus
trious citizen who was to have presided over the guilty assem
bly has gone down to the grave with his last prayer trembling
on his lips for the Union and his country.
With the acquisition of Texas and the successful mainten
ance of our title to Oregon, the United States will present a
spectacle of territorial grandeur and magnificence unequaled

INAUGURAL ADDRESS. 373
in the world. In those who have charge of our negotiations
in relation to the latter country, I have unbounded confidence ;
and I believe they would not retain more of it, if they could,
than we are fairly entitled to. I am equally certain they will
never surrender one square acre of it to the unjust demand of
any nation on the earth. Far distant as it may now seem to
be, every revolving j'car will increase its importance to the
hundred millions of freemen, who, at no distant day, will in
habit our continent. In the orderof Providence, America may
become the last asylum of liberty to the human family. Here
then let us rear her loftiest temple. Let us lay its foundations
deep and wide for the millions who in after ages may worship
at her altars.
I turn now from the contemplation of our wonderful and in
creasing magnificence, in order to remind you of a great and
sad calamity which has befallen our common country ^ince
you were last assembled on an occasion like this. But a few
months have passed away since you in particular, and the peo
ple of the United States generally, were called upon to mourn
the departure from our midst of our most illustrious citizen. —
The immortal spirit of Andrew Jackson, the patriot, the sol
dier and the statesman, has passed from time to eternity — de
voted, until he breathed his last breath, to the best interests of
his country, which he had defended with heroic fortitude and
courage, and served with a zeal more fervid with increasing
years, he finished the great work which a wise Providence had
chosen him to perform, and accomplished his destiny. Cling
ing to the faith and the hope which sustain the Christian whilst
he is " passing through the dark vaUey of the shadow of death,"
he died at peace with the world, leaving behind him a bright
and enduring example, worthy the imitation of future genera
tions. Hereafter, the song of the poet will be heard in praise
of his memory — the pen of the historian wiU chronicle the
deeds which he achieved, whilst the painter and the engraver
wiU transmit his image to admiring miUions.
Let Tennessee, his own adopted State — Tennessee, whose
armies he has so often covered with glory — Tennessee, whom
he honored, and loved, and served so long and so faithfully —
Tennessee, beneath whose green and hallowed sod his mortal

374

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

remains have been deposited — ^let Tennessee rear him a mon
ument lasting as time — let it be planted in or near one of her
most beautiful cities, on the bank of the noblest river in the
world, where the millions who will pass for ages and ages to
come, may pause and gaze upon it with wonder and admira
tion.

MESSAGE
Of Gov. Aaron V, Brown, Delivered to the General Assembly
Nov, 7th, 1845.

Gentlemen of the Senate
and House of Representatives :
In the 11th section of the 3rd article of the Constitution, it
is made the duty of the Executive, from time to time, " to give
the General Assembly information of the state of the govern
ment and recommend to their consideration such measures as
he shall judge expedient." The performance ofthe duty by
my predecessor at the commencement of your pressent session,
seems not, in the former practice of the State, to supersede the
necessity of a similar communication from me. Whilst it was
the evident poficy of those who engrafted this provision into
the Constitution to establish the utmost freedom in the inter
change of opinion, it wisely left the legislature at full liberty
finally to adopt or reject the recommendations ofthe Executive
This fact greatly diminishes the responsibility of the present
communication, made at a period so early in my administra
tion, as to furnish ample apology for any errors which it may
be found to contain. It has often been found in the history of
all popular governments, that every party succeeding to power
is too anxious to signalize its triumph by some bold and novel
policy calculated to attract attention, but not always to ad
vance the permanent interests and welfare of the people.
Human government, whether of families or communities,

376 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
should, however, in my opinion, be in few things more distin
guished than in its uniformity and stability. It is not within
the competency of government to efiect such great and sudden,
and at the same time, salutary improvements in the condition
of the people, as many vainly imagine. These are the pro
ducts of time and experience, aided by all the lights which the
history of cur race can shed upon the science of jurisprudence.
Guided by these lights in the legislation of our own beloved
commonwealth, I would especially recommend to you to pass
no lavFs in the rash spirit of adventure, and to overtm-n no set
tled policy of the State but on fuU and mature conviction of
its propriety.
One of the subjects of settled policy in the State I consider
to be, the almost entire abolition of the punishment of death.
It is one which I have long advocated under the most solemn
convictions of its propriety, and should witness, with infinite
pain, any attempt to recede from the enlightened humanity of
the age. The gradual amelioration of the criminal code of
Tennessee, effected as it has been, through slow degrees for
many years, has added another proof to those drawn from other
countries in favor of the abolition of capital punishment.
Instead of weakening it has evidently increased the actual
strength of the government, by drawing around it the rational
approbation of society, and by the explosion of those ancient
barbarities, which are now justly regarded with the deepest
abhorence. Nor has this relaxation tended in the slighest der
gree to the increase of crimes. The long continued confine
ments ofthe prison house and the degradation of becoming the
humble vassals ofthe turnkey that nightly locks them in their
solitary cell, has done more in deterring from the commission
of crimes than the fear of death, which men always behold in;
distant obscurity. In all cases authorized by law and justified
by their circumstances, 1 shall, with the greatest pleasure, com^
mute the punishment from death to imprisonment for life in
the penitentiary. Closely connected with this subject is the
condition and management of our State prison. Of these, it
is probable you are already informed by the report of those
having charge of the institution, if not by the personal inspec
tion of one of your committees. I have heard much complaint

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 377
of the unusual mortality of its unfortunate inmates, within the
last year or two. If this be owing to its location or the too
crowded condition of its convicts, I know well with what readi
ness you will apply every corrective in your power. The idea
is a most revolting one, of holding our State prisoners in con
finement under circumstances fatal to their lives. Even as
to those whose punishment is inflicted for the highest offences,
it would be but the mockery of humanity to have saved them
from the speedy execution of the halter, only to subject them
to the more tedious but fatal visitation of the fever. If the
remedy for this unusual mortality is to be sought for in the en
largement of the present institution, so as to obviate the effects
of its too crowded population, I respectfully submit, whether
it would not be better to lay the foundation for the establish
ment of a new institution of the kind in the Eastern portion of
the State. When that was done, the two institutions could
occassionally relieve each other of any superabundance ; keep
ing each with only such a number as would be consistent with
the preservation of health, and the profitable employment of
their labor. Such an institution suitably located in East Ten
nessee, it is believed, could furnish employment for its convicts
in iron, marble, &c., which would not bring its products so
much in competition with the ordinary mechanical labor of the
country as the present one is understood to do. It is confidently
asserted by many, that a small appropriation for the building
of the walls and erecting some of the cells, for immediate use,
would be all that is necessarv. After that, by a transfer of a
reasonable portion of the present convicts to that point, with
the aid of newly arriving accessions to their number, the
whole internal structure of the establishment could be com
pleted without much further expense on the part of the State.
All these suggestions, vidll, however, have to be postponed to
the now almost universally received opinion that the labor of
all the convicts, and the available means of the present
institution, will have to be applied for some years to come
to the erection of the State Capitol. To the valuable re
port lately made to the commissioners appointed to super
intend the erection of that building, by the Secretary of
State, I beg leave to refer you, for much useful information.

378 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
which it would have been difficult otherwise to have procured.
The erection of the State Capitol, I am happy to learn, is in
fine progress, under the superintendence of an accomplished
architect, whose correct taste and sound judgment was singu
larly displayed in the plan which he furnished. It is on a large
and commodious scale, well worthy, not only for the present,
but future population of a great and noble State like Tennes
see. Whether it was not on a scale too magnificent for the
present resources of the State, is now, perhaps, too late to en
quire. It has been adopted by the board of commissioners ap
pointed at the last session, approved of by my predecessor,
and is now in the course of due execution. Beside the aid
which can be derived from the labor and means of the peni
tentiary, I recommend such additional appropriation, for the
purchase of materials, &c., as will keep the work in reasona
ble progress, without, however, producing any serious embar
rassment to the Treasury. It is certainly better to take more
time for its completion, than to involve the State in taxation by
a too liberal application of its funds.
I most earnestly recommend to your favorable regard the
Lunatic Asylum, and the institutions established by law for the
benefit of the blind and the deaf and dumb. All these were
established for the most benevolent and charitable purposes,
and appeal directly to the noblest sympathies of the heart for
their advancement and promotion. Man, endowed with rea
son, stands forth the proudest and noblest work of God's crea
tion, but deprived of that faculty, he sinks down into utter
helplessness, the pitiable object of commiseration and charity.
To provide for the recovery of many and the safety and com
fort of all who are so fatally and deeply affiicted, becomes the
first duty of every Christian community. Nearly in the same
condition are all those, who, though possessing this noblest
faculty of our species, are yet deprived of some of those great
avenues of instruction which so essentially contribute to adorn
and perfect it. I have several times lately enjoyed the pleasure
of being present at the exercises of one of these institutions,
(for the blind,) when I found myself unable to decide whether
most to admire the wonderful proficiency of the pupils, the
: .kill and persevreance of the preceptor, or the zeal and enlight-

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 379
ened fiberality of many distinguished persons of both sexes in
advancing the best interests of the establishment.
On a recent occasion I seized on the opportunity to advert
to the now almost universal sentiment in the State in favor of
the estabfishment of an enlightened and liberal system of pub
hc instruction. Not such a one as will pander to the light and
dazzling literature of the age, but such as will impart useful
ness and sofid value to our industrious and hardy people.
There can be no necessity for here remarking on the value and
importance of such a system if it can be established. We
have one already too partial in its operation, and too deficient
in its organization, because too contracted in its means to ac-
compfishthe above objects. How shall these means be enlarged
so as to meet the sanguine expectations and desires of the
pubfic mind? The Executive communication of the present
session informs us that " there are more than two hundred and
fifty thousand children in the State between the ages of six and
twenty-one years, whilst there are only one hundred thousand
dollars to be appropriated to common schools." This gives
us only forty cents per annum for the education of each child
of the State within those ages. If you strike off" fifty thousand
of this number, for those who would not take its benefits, even
if the system were established, it would then leave you only
fifty cents per head, per annum. The suggestion has often
been made that to supply this palpable deficiency of funds,
the distribution of the proceeds ofthe sales ofthe public lands
e£ the United States should take place. Estimating these pro
ceeds at two millions per annum, and that Tennessee would
be entitled to one-twentieth part of the same, one-half of which
could, under the Constitution, be appropriated to education, it
would only give us fifty thousand dollars per annum, or twenty-
five cents to each child to be educated : making in all, with
both funds combined, the sum of seventy-five cents for each
one per annum. Now it must be evident that this sum is
totally insufficient for the purpose of establishing a general
and comprehensive common school system in the State, and I
am free to acknowledge that I know of no means of materially
increasing it at the present time, but by taxation on the people.
PubUo sentiment, I believe, has never yet been pronounced on

380 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
this aspect of the case. AU the popular demonstrations in
favor of common schools have been made on the supposition
that the funds requisite for their establishment were to be de
rived from some other source, and not by taxation on them
selves. Under this decided conviction, I cannot recommend
the increase of our present fund by a further resort to taxation,
but must leave the subject, with such additional remarks upon
it, as you will find in another part of this message. The plans
and suggestions there made, if they postponed the further en
largement of our present system at this time, may (although
at a period more distant than could be desired,) ultimately
furnish a fund adequate in a good degree to the wants of the
country. In relation to our system of internal improvements, I do not
know that it is necessary for me to trouble you with many ob
servations. The able report of the chairman of the commit
tee appointed to settle with the different turnpike companies,
is already before you, and contains much which should attract
your attention, and to commend the zeal, industry and ability
of that committee. Beneficial as the present improvements
have been, there are others which claim an equal, if not a
greater degree of public favor and patronage. To say noth
ing of the improvement of the navigation of several of our
rivers, by means of what are generally termed locks and dams,
the extension of the South Carolina and Georgia railroad from
Chattanooga to Nashville is every day attracting more and
more of public attention. However important I consider the
latter project, I can by no means recommend the issue of any
further State bonds or securities for its execution. To the
granting of liberal and wisely guarded charters to individual
companies, I think' there can be no good objection. It is high
ly probable that the stocks would be taken by individuals, and
^hereby several of our most important streams would be great
ly Denefited, and the road under consideration be extended to
Nashville, passing through a considerable portion of the State,
and bringing with it almost incalculable advantages to the
country. A connection between the south and the west can
no where be more easily and beneficially effected. The pro
ject of connecting them by a road passing through the north-

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE, 381
ern portions of Alabama and Mississippi, by no means super
sedes the propriety of the proposed road from Chattanooga,
or near there, to NashvUle. I should regret much to witness,
in the slightest degree, a spirit of rivalship between the two
projects. Both are important in the highest degree, and both
are fairly within the range and compass of execution, by indi
vidual capital and enterprise. The distance between Charles
ton and NashviUe is about 560 miles. The greater part of the
road is now completed, and it wiU be but a very short time be
fore the cars will be regularly passing from Chattanooga to
the first named city. From Chattanooga to Nashville is about
130 miles, over a surface remarkably favorable to the making
of such a road. The practicabifity of its construction, at a
cost of about two millions of dollars, is now almost universally
conceded. A very large portion of the labor of construction
could be performed by farmers and other persons on the route,
who possess no mechanical skill, thereby greatly diminishing
the actual outlay of money in its completion. The increased
value of property at the two termini of the road in our State,
and for many miles on either side of it, would be very consid
erable, whilst the increase of agricultural productions, suita
ble for southern consumption, would be almost incalculable.
The occasion wiU not aUow of even the briefest enumera
tion of the advantages of the proposed road to the people of
the eastern and middle portions of the State, nor of the con
siderations rendering it highly probable that it would be a prof
itable investment of capital to the stockholders. I must con
tent myself, therefore, with an earnest recommendation that a
most liberal and judicious charter be granted to individuals
for its construction.
In the discharge of the duties imposed upon me, the neces
sity of recommending such measures as will secure the pubfic
credit, and at the same time avoid the imposition of heavy
burdens on the people, has pressed with peculiar force upon my
mind. I am gratified to know that in reference to the impor
tance of making ample and certain provisions to meet all our
liabiUties as a State, there is but one sentiment amongst our
constituents. They do not stop to enquire into the wisdom of
the original measures out of which their indebtedness has

382 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
grown, but knowing the existence of the obligation, they ex
pect their representatives to devise the most effectual and the
least oppressive means in their power to maintain, unimpaired,
the high credit which their State has ever enjoyed. With an
anxious desire that their reasonable expectations on this sub
ject may not be disappointed, I wiU proceed to lay before you
the result of my deliberations.
The entire indebtedness of the State may be stated at about
three miUions of doUars — the interest required annually to be
paid upon it is about two hundred thousand dollars. To de
vise the ways and means of paying this debt as it shall fall due.
and its interest as it accrues annually, presents the important
problems which we are now called on to solve. Of this in
debtedness, the bonds of the State, to the amount of $500,000,i
issued to raise the means of paying for stock to that amount
in the Union Bank, constitutes a part. As the State still owns
this stock, considerably increased by the re-investment of our
surplus profits therein, and as the Union Bank has heretofore
paid punctually the interest on these bonds, I shall confine my
attention to the remainder of the debt, which is made up as
follows :
Bonds issued for capital of Bank of Tennessee, ¦fl, 000,000
Internal Improvement Bonds at 5^ per cent., 263,160
Internal Improvement Bonds at 5 per cent., 1 ,579,500

Total 12,842,660
The amount of indebtedness for which it is incumbent op.
the Legislature to make provision is $2,842,666, bearing an,
annual interest of $152,790. This debt will become due ai
different periods, covering a space of thirty years, before the
whole become payable. To meet these liabilities as they shall
respectively be payable, no adequate provision has yet been
made by law. In my judgment, a proper regard for the credit
of the State requires at your hands Legislative action on the
subject. It is ascertained that a Sinking Fund of $35,000
annually applied can be so managed as to be amply sufficient
to meet our whole indebtedness as it becomes due. This esti
mate, however, is made upon the supposition that the Bank

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 383
ot Tennessee will continue to be relied on as the means of pro
viding for the payment of the accruing interests on the debt.
It becomes necessary, therefore, that I should call your at
tention to the present condition and the probable future opera
tions of this institution, together with such suggestions in
reference to its re-organization as will make it more available.
By reference to the late Report ofthe President and Directors
of the Bank of Tennessee the capital of the institution is
found to be $3,200,598. It is made up as foUows :
State Bonds for Bank Capital, $1,000,000
School Fund, 847,389
Surplus Revenue, 1,353,209

Total $3,200,598
From the same report it is ascertained that during the last
two years the net profits of the Bank have been annually
$168,305. By the laws nowinforce, the Bank is required to dis
tribute annually to Common Schools and Academies $118,000
this amount added to the interest on the Internal Improve
ment bonds and the bonds issued to raise capital for the
Bank, making, as before stated, $152,790, constitutes the bur
dens imposed on the institution. By the existing laws the
Bank is expected and required to pay out of her annual profits
the sum of $270,709, when it is now demonstrated that her
annual profits amount to only $168,305. I trust that this im
portant fact will not fail to impress itself forcibly on the minds
of the members of the General Assembly. The necessity for
prompt and efficient action to avoid the consequences threat
ened by this State of things cannot be overlooked or disre
garded by the patriotic representatives of the people.
In looking for the causes which have lead to this state of
things, the fact cannot escape observation, that whilst the
Bank has made within the last two years, less than six per
cent, nett proflts on its capital, the amount required to be dis
tributed to Common Schools and Academies is about fourteen
per cent, on the amount of the School Fund in the Bank.
The Bank has the use of $847,389 belonging to the School
Fund, and by its use makes a clear profit of about $50,000 —
26

384 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
yet by law she is compelled annually to distribute for purposes
of education $118,000. If the law were so amended as to re
quire the institution to distribute annually the amount of profits
actually made by the use of the School Fund, the annual
deficit of the Bank hereafter would be about $34,000 instead
of about $100,000 under existing laws.
I am aware that there is a strong aversion in the minds of
some to any interference with the distribution now provided for
purposes of education. This aversion is felt more sensibly by
none than by myself, and if I saw any possible escape from it
without a resort to a heavy increase of the public taxes, I should
allow my feelings to control and dissuade me from the recom
mendation. But it has become a question no longer debatable
that we cannot continue to make an annual distribution of
$118,000 to schools and academies upon any scheme of man
aging our financial affairs which has yet been suggested. If
it be determined that the bank shall be put into liquidation by
vesting the school fund in State bonds, the amouut for annual
distribution cannot then exceed $50,000. The question resolves
itself into this : if the distribution to schools and academies is
continued at the present sum the Bank must unavoidably be
come crippled, its capital consumed, the School Fund itself, in
all probability, be greatly diminished, and the credit of the
State entirely ruined. If the bank is wound up, the school
fund will be invested in State bonds bearing five per cent.
interest and will therefore only yield about $50,000 annually.
But if the actual profits made by the bank on the school fund
are distributed, so much of the burden will be lifted from
that institution, that the way will be open for its prosperous
continuance. As reluctant as I am to make any recom
mendation which would seem to conflict with the prospect of
an extension of our common school system, I feel coerced
underthe weight of the consideration to which I have EkUuded,
to invite to these suggestions your caxeful and favorable con
sideration. It will be observed that if the suggestions already made
should meet your approbation, the profits of the bank, as at
present organized, will fall short by the sum of $35,000 in meet
ing the UabiUties imposed upon it. It becomes important, then.

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 385
to inquire whether the institution can be so re-organizpd as to
increase its profits to an extent to cover this deficiency. After
mature reflection, I am fully satisfied that an increase of profits
amounting to $35,000 annuUy, or more, can be secured by such
alterations in the number and locations of the branches, and
such a change in its system of doing business as will enable
its directors to conduct it upon legitimate banking principles.
When the bank was created, our leading object was to afford
relief to an embarrassed people by furnishing loans on accom
modation paper. That object was attained, and at the present
the great purpose in coatinuing the bank is to make profits to
pay the interest on our debt and avoid a resort to burdensome
taxation. Reason and experience combined, prove that the
business of banking cannot be conducted safely or profitably
upon the principle of dealing mainly in accommodation notes,
renewable upon small calls. If the question of creating the
bank were now to be settled, the popular voice would at once
reject the proposition ; but in the present attitude of the ques
tion I am constrained to express the opinion that the wisest
course that can be devised would be to give to the directory of
the principal bank the power to take steps for the gradual dis
continuance of all such branches as are found to be unprofita
ble, and to transfer their capital to some three or four points
where commercial advantages hold out certain prospects of
affording better profits. This recommendation I am aware,
may encounter strenuous opposition, but under the solemn
obfigations imposed upon me, and under the most thorough
convictions as to the necessity of the course indicated, I can
not withhold the expression of a strong hope that I shall have
your final co-operation in the suggestions. If the course indi
cated shall be adopted by you, I have every reason to believe
that the increased profits of the bank would enable it in a very
short time to increase the annual distribution to the cause of
education, and give assurance that the common school system
coidd be permanently maintained.
In the suggestions which I have already made, it has been
my object to devise the means of securing the payment ofthe
interest on our State debt without any resort to the treasury.
If upon investigation of the operation of the revenue laws, as

386 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
they now stand, it shall be found that any considerable aid
can be derived from that source, it will enable you to increase
by so much the annual distribution to schools beyond the actual
profits made on the school fund. If it shall be found that by
a system of rigid but just economy in the public expenditures,
and by the use of any surplus in the treasury derivable
from taxes, you can not only distribute to the school the
profits on the school fund, but also the profits on one
half of the surplus revenue on deposit with the State,
every thing demanded at your hands by the strictest prin
ciples of justice and equity in behalf of education will have
been achieved. But my convictions are so strong that I
cannot refrain from again remarking that no resort to the
treasury for aid can weaken the force of the high considera
tions which demand a re-organization of the Bank according
to the principles I have suggested.
When you shall have made ample provision for the payment
of the interest on the State debt, your duties will be but im
perfectly discharged until you also provide a sinking fund for
the liquidation of the debt itself I have already remarked
that a sinking fund of $35,000 can be so managed as to pay
off" our entire debt by the time it becomes due. I am gratified
to learn that through the valuable and efficient labors of the
commissioners appointed by the last legislature to settle with
the Internal Improvement Companies, the means have been
made available, with a small annual appropriation from the
Treasury, to effect this most desirable object. If provision
shall be made setting apart the dividends derivable from our
road stocks, together with an amount from the treasury, mak
ing a permanent annual fund of $35,000, and it be made the
duty of the President of the Bank or some other officer to vest
the same annually in State Bonds, and if to this sum be added
each year any surplus profits of the bank, after paying its fia
bilities, it wiU be found that when our State debt faUs due, it
would have been liquidated and our bonds cancelled with
out any further resort to taxation. Our whole interest in
internal improvement companies, amounting to over one mil
lion seven hundred thousand dollars, together with the surplus
revenue on deposit, amounting to over $1,353,000, can be

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE, 387
added to the school fund, making in all a school fund nearly
fom- millions of dollars. In view of a result so ardently desired
by every patriotic citizen, I cannot too strongly urge upon
your consideration the adoption of all necessary means for its
eff"ectuation. AARON V. BROWN.
Executive Office, Nov. 7, 1845.

PROCLAMATION
Of Gov. Brown, raising the three first Regiments of Tennessee
Volunteers for the Mexican War, May, 1846.

Whereas, I have received the following communication from
the Department of War at Washington :
WAR DEPARTMENT, )
Washington, May 16, 1846. \
Sir : 1 have the honor to enclose a copy of an act of Congress, entitled
" An act providing for the prosecution of the existing war between the Uni
ted States and the republic of Mexico," which authorizes the President to
accept the services of volunteers.
It will be perceived that all the officers, with volunteers, taken into the
service of the United States under this act, are to be appointed and com
missioned, or such as have been appointed and commissioned in accordance
with the laws of the State from whence they are taken, and that the vol
unteers received into the service of the United States, are to have the or
ganization of the army of the United States. For this exact organization,
80 far as relates to companies and regiments, please see the memorandum
appended to the law herewith, to both of which particular attention is re
quested ; but, under the discretion allowed him, the President has decided
that the number of privates in all volunteer companies shall be limited to
eighty. On the part of the President, I have to request your Excellency to cause
to be organized, at the earliest practicable period, the following corps of
volunteers :
One regiment of cavalry, or mounted men, and two regiments of infan
try, or riflemen.
Your Excellency is requested to designate, and to communicate promptly
to this Department, some convenient place of rendezvous for moving to
wards Mexico, for the several companies, as fast as they shall be organized,
where they will be further organized into regiments.

PROCLAMATION FOR VOLUNTEERS. 389
The several corps will be inspected and mustered into the service of the
United States, as far as practicable, by an officer or officers of the United
States Army. When this cannot be done, you are requested to designate
the inspecting and mustering officer, who will in every case be instructed
to receive no man under the rank of commissioned officers, who is in years
apparently over forty-five or under eighteen, or who is not in physical
strength and vigor; nor the horse of any volunteer not apparently sound and
effective, with the necessary horse equipments or furniture.
It is respectfully suggested that public notice of these requirements of
law, may prevent much disappointment to the zealous and patriotic citizens
of your State, multitudes of whom the President cannot doubt will be eager
to volunteer.
Should there be any difficulty or considerable delay in obtaining the
amount and description of the force proposed to be received from your
State, you will give the earliest notice of these to this Department, that
proper steps may be taken to receive them from other sections of the coun
try. Memphis is suggested as the place of rendezvous for the mounted regi
ment, and Nashville for the regiments of infantry or rifle.
Very respectfully, your ob't serv't, W. L. MARCY, Sec'y of War.
His Ex'cy A. V. Beowtn, Gov. of Tenn.
In compliance with the communication aforesaid, I have
caused the requisition therein made to be apportioned amongst
the military divisions of this State in the following manner :
To the first division, (East Tennessee,) seven companies, four
of which to be infantry or riflemen, and three to be cavalry or
mounted men.
To the second division, eight companies, six of infantry or
riflemen, and two of cavalry or mounted men.
To the third division, nine companies, six of infantry or rifle
men, and three of cavalry or mounted men.
To the fourth division, (Western District,) six companies,
four of infantry or riflemen, and two of cavalry or mounted
men. An infantry company, according to the directions ofthe Sec
retary of War, accompanying said requisition, will consist of
one captain, one first lieutenant, one second lieutenant, four
sergeants, four corporals, two musicians, and not more than
eighty privates — the minimum is not mentioned by him, but
I will add, NOT less than sixty-four rank and file. A company
of cavalry or mounted men will consist of one captain, one first
lieutenant, one second lieutenant, four sergeants, four corpo-

390 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
rals, two buglers, one farrier and blacksmith, and not more
than eighty privates, and not less than sixty-four rank and
file. The Major Generals commanding said Divisions are hereby
required to furnish the quota of volunteer companies above
specified, and according to the organization aforesaid.
In raising said volunteer companies, the Major Generals will
duly observe the 44th section of the militia laws of this State,
passed in the year 1840, which is in the following words, viz:
" Be it enacted, that each volunteer company which shaU re
ceive the arms of the State, shall be held in readiness and sub
ject to the FIRST call for service of the State or of the United
States." Under this act all volunteer companies which have received
the arms of the State since the passage of said act, and which
have not returned the same to the State, and continued their
existence until the receipt of the requisition aforesaid, viz :
the22ddayof May, 1846, will, on application, be entitled to
priority. Next to these, all old companies which have been re
vived, and new ones which have been formed since the date of
order No. 1 , issued by R. B. Turner, Adjutant General of the
State, viz : since the 13th instant, and up to the date of this
proclamation, and which have been reported to me or to the
Adjutant General, (including all cases in which reports may
have been started by mail or private conveyance, whether the
same have yet come to hand or not,) shall be entitled to pri
ority over companies formed since the date of this proclama
tion. If a greater number of companies formed between the peri
ods aforesaid shall tender themselves to any of the Major Gen
erals, than will fill up the requisition on their divisions, it shall
be the duty of such Major General forthwith to determine
fairly by ballot, which shall be received, (holding separate bal-
lotings for infantry and cavalry,) and notify such companies,
as soon as possible, in their respective neighborhoods; and
said companies, on learning such acceptance, shall take up
their march in time to reach the place of rendezvous as here
inafter stated. And where a sufficient number of the two last
described class of companies shall not be presented, any vol-

PROCLAMATION FOR VOLUNTEERS. 391
unteer company, formed since the date of this proclamation
aforesaid, viz : the 24th instant, may be received, unless so
many of such companies shall apply as shall make it neces
sary to resort to a ballot, in order to determine between them.
In no case is it expected that any volunteer company shall
leave its neighborhood until it shall have received notice of its
acceptance or successful ballot, and thereupon it will be ex
pected to repair to the place of rendezvous hereafter men
tioned. All volunteer companies in the first division, (East Tennes
see,) will report themselves as soon as possible after seeing this
proclamation, to Major General Brazelton, at Knox ville, who
is hereby requested to make that place his head quarters, for
the purpose of giving greater dispatch to the service. When
he shall have waited ten days from the receipt of this procla
mation for volunteer companies to tender their services, he
shall make his acceptance, or determine by ballot, (when too
many companies are presented,) and notify by express, when
necessary, the companies accepted, and order the cavalry com
panies to repair forthwith to the general rendezvous at Mem
phis. All infantry companies to be ordered by the most ap
proved route tothe same place, unless he shall find it practica
ble and expedient to cause them to be transported on the Ten
nessee river from any point thereof to Memphis as aforesaid ;
and he is hereby directed and authorized to make all suitable
andreasonable contracts for such mode of transportation, and
to appoint an agent to act as Quarter Master and Commissary
for the purchase of supplies, and to draw on any disbursing
officer of the United States sent to this State, or on the Exec
utive Department of this State. If, after the expiration of
fifteen days from the receipt of this proclamation, he shall not
be able to furnish the number of companies required from his
division, he wUl report the deficiency to the Executive, that the
same maybe received from some other division of the State.
Volunteer companies from the second division, will make
return and report forthwith after this date to Major General
Campbell, who is requested to make his head quarters at Nash
viUe, for the gi-eater convenience of the companies of his di-

392 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
vision, who will accept their services in the manner and on the
principles specified in a former part of this proclamation.
Those of the third division, will report to Major General
Bradley, at Franklin, who will liKewise give due attention to
this order in the manner pointed out. All letters announcing
the existence and formation of companies tendering their ser
vices, in the event of a requisition, which have been received
by me, or the Adjutant General of the State, will be handed
over to the Major General of the proper division, in order to
enable him to give to the companies, in whose behalf they
were written, the full benefit of their patriotism and zeal.
Volunteer companies from the fourth division, (Western Dis
trict,) will report themselves to Major General Hays, at Jabk-
son, who will accept of their services by the rules and on the
principles herein stated, and notify by express, when neces
sary, such companies; and on receiving such notice, all the
companies (infantry and cavalry) will march to Memphis, the
place of their rendezvous and further organization, on the 15th
June. Any deficiency which may occur in raising the required
number of companies from his division, the Major General
will report to the Executive, that the same may be received
from some other portion of the State.
The seven infantry companies frOm the second and third
divisions, (Middle Tennessee,) will be expected to be at Nash
vUle by the Sth of June, where suitable and proper arrange
ments will be made for their transportation to Memphis, the
place of general rendezvous, onthe 15th of June, where the
whole force will be further organized into regiments as pre
scribed by the laws of the State. The cavalry compa,nies, from
eveiy part of the State, will proceed by land to Memphis.
Gen. Levin H. Coe, Inspector General of the State, is hereby
instructed, unless superseded in that duty by some officer
charged with the same by the United States, to select a suita
ble encampment in or near Memphis, and cause an adequate
supply of rations and supplies to be engaged for the subsist
ence of said troops whilst at that place, and employ suitable
assistants for that purpose.
Volunteer companies, after theyhave been accepted by the
Major Generals, will be at liberty to arm themselves with

PROCLAMATION FOR VOLUNTEERS. 393
"Hall's rifies," or muskets, or other arms, at the depots in the
several divisions of the State, either in whole or in part, so as
to go to the field with arms in as good condition as possible,
and the keepers of the public arms are hereby directed to de
liver such arms to the Captain of any accepted compaky, taking
his receipt for the same.
All companies from the second and third divisions will be
mustered into the service of the United States at Nashville,
and afi others at Memphis.
The East Tennessee troops wUl arrive at Memphis as soon
after the said 15th of June as practicable.
The Executive has witnessed, with the proudest satisfaction,
the zeal and alacrity with which the citizens of Tennessee have
ralfied to the standard of the country. He has endeavored to
give all parts of the State an equal chance to engage in- the
service, and has gone into all the above details, in order to save
time and to give the utmost possible expedition to the depar
ture of the troops. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand,
and caused the great seal of the State to be affixed,
^n this the 24th day of May, 1846.
AARON V. BROWN.
By the Governor,
Jno. S. Young, Sec'y of State.

ADDRESS

Of Gov. Brown, transferring the third Regiment of Volunteers
to the United States.

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, )
Nashville, June 3, 1846. \
To CoL. Wm. B. Campbell:
Sir : The first regiment of the Tennessee Infantry Volun
teers, which you have the honor to command, being now fully
organized and mustered into the service of the United States,
in pursuance of a requisition made on me by the Secretary of
War, dated 16th May, 1846, you wiU proceed with it, by means
of the steamboats chartered for that purpose, to the city of
New Orleans as speedily as practicable, and report yourself to
Major General Edmund Pendleton Gaines, for further orders.
In surrendering the State authority, and passing you over,
during the term of your service, to that of the United States,
I cannot permit the opportunity thereby afforded to pass by,
without submitting a few observations to you and the brave and
gallant men under your command. You have been called on
at a moment of great emergency to engage in the service of
the country. The requisition on me arrived by one mail ; mine
Ml you was sent forth by the next. In the short space of one
week you nobly responded to my call, and are now here from
the different portions of a widely extended country with a
promptitude and alacrity which has never been surpassed in
the volunteer service of the country. It would have been im
possible to have given greater celerity to the movement, with-

ADDRESS TO VOLUNTEERS. 395
out having taken the requisition from a few of our principal
towns and nearest counties of the State, without giving the
balance of it any opportunity to participate in the glorious
privUege of defending the country. This I could not consent
to do ; and in order to give all parts of the State over which I
preside an equal opportunity, I caused the requisition to be ap
portioned among the different military divisions established by
law. But such has been the patriotic ardor of my countrymen,
that at least five times as many companies offered themselves
as it would take to fill up the requisition. I could not take all,
for reasons hereafter mentioned, and I therefore directed the
four Major Generals of the State to select, according to the
rules laid down, the companies to be received from their res
pective divisions. It would have been . impossible for me to
have made the selection with propriety amongst companies
formed aU over the State, with which the Major Generals may
well be presumed to have much better acquaintance than any
body else. I directed them to receive the old armed compa
nies under the fortieth section of the militia laws of the State,
and wherever there was a conffict between other companies
described, to decide the same fairly by ballot. I know of no
mode more equitable than that. The Major Generals of the
second and third divisions have reported to me that they have
selected you (the twelve companies now present) as the fortu
nate ones on whom the glorious privilege of defending the
rights and honor of the country has finally devolved.
Others, no doubt, may feel some disappointment and morti
fication, that they, too, cannot share with you at this time in
the toils, and dangers, and honors of the present campaign. —
Many have petitioned and entreated me to take them also into
the public service. Most heartily would I have consented to
do so, if it had been in my power. But the requisition was ex
pressly limited to three regiments, and no more. Besides this,
the Secretary of War, after learning that Gen. Gaines had
called for a much larger requisition, and when he knew every
thing known to us, as to Gen. Taylor's condition, expressly and
promptly required me not to comply with it. Moreover, after
the requisition was made, authorizing companies to contain as
many as eighty privates, the Secretary of War desired that

896 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
they should be reduced so as not to exceed sixty-four privates,
thereby considerably diminishing the number of the first call.
Under these circumstances, I felt constrained to decline ac
cepting more than would fill the requisition. The requisition
from which all my authority is derived, was against it. The
letter of the Secretary of War, commanding me not to comply
with the larger requisition of Gen. Gaines, was against it. —
His letter to reduce the size of the companies, if not too faj
advanced in organization, was against it, — and nothing in fa
vor of it, but the patriotic eagerness of my countrymen to re
pel the insolent invader of our soil.
The letter of Gen. Gaines was one of advice, in anticipation
of a call, and not a requisition at all. If considered as man
datory, it was void for want of authority. If (as it declares in
express terms) it is regarded as advisory only, it turns out that
I acted precisely in accordance with the wishes of the general
government, in not complying with it. And more than all,
suppose I had yielded to the enthusiasm of the moment, and
instead of two thousand or three thousand men, I had sent five
thousand or six thousand, what assurance have we that any
more than the requisition would have been received ? None,
whatsoever; and we might have been doomed to see or hear of
hundreds and thousands of our fellow-citizens rejected in New
Orleans, without provisions, and many without money, to grope
their way back to Tennessee, cursing the folly of her Gov
ernor, in having disobeyed all the orders and admonitions of
the constituted authorities of the general government.
And now. Sir, having explained to you and the regiment un
der your command, and to our fellow-citizens at large, the
principles on which you have been selected rather than others,
to bear the time-honored standard of Tennessee to the field of
battle and of glory, I have only to say. Go, gaUant sons of
gaUant fathers, go and join with others of your countrymen, in
driving back, if not already done, the insolent invader of our
country, and if need be, to carry home the war into the very
heart of his territory. Go, under that beautiful banner, which
innocence, virtue, and beauty have presented to you. Never
permit it — and I know you will not — never permit it to be low
ered in the face of the enemy, whilst your regiment has one

ADDRESS TO VOLUNTEERS. 397
soldier left to hold it proudly floating to the breeze. Go, and
may a kind Providence attend you, and bring you back in
health and safety, the pride of an admiring and grateful
country. AARON V. BROWN,
Governor and Commander in Chief.

MESSAGE
Of Gov. A. V. Brown, to the General Assembly of the State of
Tennessee, October Gth, 1847.

Gentlemen of the Senate
and of the House of Representatives :
Assembled as you now are, as the representatives of the
people, you cannot fail to observe in the circumstances which
surround you, increased cause of gratitude and reverence to
that Supreme Being who presides over the destinies of nations.
The two past years have been signalized by unnumbered
blessings and benefits. The labor of the husbandman has
been crowned with abundance, whilst fair and remunerating
prices have been received for the rich productions of his fields .
Our commerce has been greatly increased, and our domesti«
industry, of every variety, has flourished in the most remarka
ble degree. Tranquility and good order have been main
tained, and the supremacy of our laws acknowledged through
out all our borders.
In the full enjoyment of these blessings, to which may be
added that of almost uninterrupted good health, the people of
Tennessee have been steadily advancing in knowledge, in vir
tue, and indeed in all the elements of national greatness. It
must be a pleasing duty to serve such a people, and a delight
ful task to add any thing valuable to the legislation of such a
noble State.

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 399
When the reports of the various branches or departments of
the State government shall have been made to you, I doubt not
that you will find that all the duties of them have been per
formed with a promptitude and fidelity in perfect harmony with
the other pleasing circumstances under which you have as
sembled. The benevolent institutions of the State, (the Lunatic Asy
lum, and those for the education of the Blind and the Deaf
and Dumb,) will be found to have realized, in a good degree,
the expectations of the public. They will, however, continue
to appeal to the noblest sympathies of our nature for still fur
ther advancement and promotion.
The sale of the Lunatic Asylum audits location in the coun
try, for reasons which will be communicated in another form,
has not been effected ; and I recommend a reconsideration and
amendment of the law directing its sale. During the past two
years, I have many reasons to believe, that the institution,has
been well and faithfully managed, especially the female de
partment of it, which has been superintended by a lady of
singular energy, skill and ability for such a station.
From the Penitentiary, I anticipate a very satisfactory report
to you. The convicts generally have been in the enjoyment of
good health, and have manifested no spirit of rebellion or dis
obedience. The keeper, his deputy, and the other officers,
having great skill and experience in such matters, seem to have
blended the stern rigor of discipline with all the kindness and
humanity which such a situation will admit of. The greater
portion of the efficient labor of the convicts has been directed
to the building of the State Capitol, under the law directing it
so to be done. A most beautiful edifice is slowly rising up,
hkely to attract the admiration of the country, and to outstrip
in magnitude, convenience, durability and elegance, the capi
tol of any other State in the Union.
I have no reason to recommend any change in this policy,
nor any material ones in the details of the law on this subject.
There is no subject upon which I desire to hold communion
with you more freely than on that of Education.
Our Universities and Colleges are, in the general, meeting
the just expectations of their friends. Some new ones have
37

400

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

been recently established in the State, founded chiefly, if not
entirely, on the enlightened liberality of individuals, which
promise soon to rival their older predecessors in the diffusion
of a sound and wholesome intelligence among the people. —
Among these, it may not be considered invidious to mention
the one at Lebanon, whose rising reputation gives fine prom
ise of its future usefulness to the State.
Our county academies may also be said, in the general, to
be doing well. But besides all these, we must have a full and
complete system of common or primary schools, dispensing
their benefits to all those whose means do not enable them to
send off their children to distant seminaries of learning.
No system can be compared to this latter description of
schools. They secure to the great mass of society an educa
tion, if not highly finished and polished, yet commensurate with
the everyday wants and necessities of the people. We should
never relax our exertions on this subject until we could send
the gratifying intelligence abroad, that not one native born son
or daughter of Tennessee could be found who could not read
the Scripture of Divine Revelation, and likewise the laws and
Constitution of the country. How such a blessed and happy
result is to be attained, is a question constantly addressing it
self to the friends of education throughout the land. That
legislature which shall be able to answer it in the estabfish
ment of such a system, with adequate funds to support it, will
have well entitled themselves to the gratitude of the present,
and the blessings of future generations.
For the reasons formerly given by me to your immediate
predecessors, I cannot recommend a present resort to taxation,
until by some unequivocal expression of public sentiment, it
is made manifest that such a measure would be cheerfully ac
quiesced in. How far it might answer a valuable purpose, to
authorize such counties, whose population might be wiUing to
do so, to levy and collect a school fund, for their own county
purposes, to be applied in the same manner as the other school
funds furnished by the State, and the propriety of such a law
is respectfully submitted, both as to its constitutionafity and
expediency, to your consideration. Such legislation should be
carefully guarded, both as to its amount and application.

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 401
If but a few counties should set the example of self-taxa
tion for so noble an object, the beneficial effects resulting from
it might open the way to its imitation by other counties, until
public sentiment, although slowly and cautiously developed,
might demand the measure as one of great policy, eminently
calculated to improve the minds and elevate the morals of the
whole community.
If, however, the wisdom of your honorable bodies should find
insurmountable objections to this limited and experimental
mode of eliciting an expression of public opinion, I know of
no better plan than to husband the resources of the State Bank ;
and by establishing a sinking fund of adequate amount, finally
absorb our outstanding liabilities and leave the whole capital
and funds of that institution, amounting to several millions of
doUars, as a permanent endowment of common schools. Tax
ation is therefore the immediate and direct mode of establish
ing the system. Through the agency of the bank is the 'more
remote and contingent one; andthe wisdom of the legislature
must decide between them, or devise a better one than either.
With a mind fondly lingering over this subject, and unwil
ling to leave it, I beg permission to trouble you with another
suggestion in aid of those already made.
We have no " Superintendent of Public Instruction." The
examples of other States, and the very nature and importance
of the subject, would seem to rebuke the omission. Even if
such an officer were of temporary appointment, with no power
over the funds, he might be of great advantage in rousing up
and directing the sleeping energies of the people. He should
be a man eminent for his attainments in science, and for his de
votion to the moral and intellectual welfare of the rising gen
eration. He should commune freely with the learned and the
pious of the land. He should visit every county in the State.
He should organize county committees of such zealous and pa
triotic citizens, as might agree to visit the school districts of
their respective counties, and by suitable appeals and lectures,
impart new vigor and energy to the present system. He should
excite the acting school commissioners of each county to re
newed exertions in raising and increasing the present school
fund by voluntary individual subscription. In short, such a

402 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
man, by traversing the State, addressing his fellow-citizens at
suitable times and places, and finally reporting to the legisla
ture a full account of his labors, and the result of his best opin
ions, might well render a service to the cause of education,
which would outweigh a thousand-fold the $1500 or $2000
which might be paid him. It cannot be necessary in this com
munication to elaborate the duties and advantages of such an
officer, and I suggest his creation, because I earnestly desire
you to do everything — I had almost said anything — for the ad
vancement of so great and so good a cause.
The laudable anxiety exhibited by your predecessors to fos
ter and encourage internal improvements in the State, gives
assurance that that subject will engage much of your attention.
Through the agency of the committee (members of the legis
lature) appointed by the legislature in 1843, and that of the
commissioners appointed at the last session, settlements have
been made with the several internal improvement companies,
by which all the difficulties in the intercourse between the
State and the companies have been obviated. The solvent
and insolvent companies have been ascertained. With the
former, nothing remains to be done, but to receive the divi
dends due the State, semi-annually, on the first of January and
July ; whilst from the latter, nothing is to be expected. I there
fore regard the continuance of a special agent, as a mere col
lector of the State's dividends, as an unnecessary expense, as
the duty could be performed by the cashier of the Bank of
Tennessee, or by the Treasurer of the State. The officers
from all the companies from which the State will receive divi
dends, reside in, or so near Nashville, that the payments could
be so made without trouble or difficulty. The cashier or trea
surer, however, should be required to file statements with the
comptroller, exhibiting the receipts or disbursements of the ¦
roads, together with the duplicate receipts of the cashier or
treasurer for the inspection and approval of the internal im-.
provement board. The duty of coUecting dividends duringthe
last year has been performed by the Secretary of State, together
with the other duties pertaining to his appointment as commis
sioner, which have now ceased, for which he was aUowed five
hundred dollars as an addition to his salary, the continuance

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 403
of which I look upon as an unnecessai-y expense, as the mere
collection of dividends can be performed by the treasurer or
cashier of the bank without additional compensation.
The completion of the Georgia railroad to Chattanooga, an
event now soon to be expected, will constitute a new and im
portant era in the commercial and agricultural history in the
eastern portion of our State. It unlocKs the door, which for
so many years has been closed against the profitable exchange
of her mineral and agricultural productions with the other
States which surround her. If nothing more were done, her
people might well exult in such a vast improvement in their
condition. But the Hiwassee railroad, extending, as it will,
the benefits of this improvement to a much higher point on the
Tennessee at Knoxville, makes the completion of the whole
line a matter of intense, and almost vital interest, to the whole
of that large and interesting portion of the State. We hav«
now good reason to expect the completion of this latter por
tion of the road. The company has been newly organized ;
its old liabilities have been, to a considerable extent, dis
charged, and the present excellent directory have exhibited a
laudable determination to push forward the work with vigor
and earnestness.
From Knoxville, if a well built McAdamised road, extend
ing in the proper direction to the Virginia line, could be con
structed, and the principal obstructions in the Tennessee river
could be removed to the flourishing village of liingsport. East
Tennessee, reposing amid her lofty mountains, would be sur
passed by no portion of our State in the abundant means of
wealth and general prosperity.
If these grand projects cannot be carried on successfully by
individual capital and enterprise, it will devolve upon you to
determine whether any and how much assistance can be furn
ished by the State. The objects are of sufficient importance
to engage in their behalf as full a share of State encouragement
as her present liabilities and means would render prudent, and
to this extent I earnestly recommend the subject to your atten
tion. In Middle Tennessee we are every day receiving the richest
rewards from many of the improvements already made. —

404 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS,
The eye strikes at once on the map and traces out the many
great roads stretching across the State, and centering at Nash
viUe, a convenient point of the navigation ofthe Cumberland.
So too, it glances along another road striking from Columbia,
situated in the very heart of this middle region, and terminat
ing on the Tennessee in its northern sweep through the State.
Further north is to be seen a flue road coming in from Ken
tucky, terminating at Clarksville, and destined to contribute
largely to the prosperity of a beautiful town now rapidly im
proving and bidding fair to become one of the most important
commercial places in the State. Still the most superficial ob
server cannot fail to perceive the immense advantages to be
derived by an extension of the Georgia road from Chattanooga
to Nashville — advantages not to Chattanooga or Nashville
alone, nor to the counties through which it would pass, but to
almost every county in the middle portion of the State.
This truth is every day becoming more manifest, in the in
creased anxiety every where displayed in favor of its con
struction. The corporation of Nashville has been authorized
by the popular vote of the city, to subscribe for half a mifiion
of the stock, and many individuals of acknowledged sagacity
and shrewdness in all that relates to the profitable investment
of their funds, are known of, who intend to embark freely in
the enterprise. In connection however with this work, the im
provement ot the Cumberland ought not to be lost sight of
A charter to individuals for this purpose was granted at the
last session of the General Assembly, singularly defective in
some of its provisions. I earnestly recommend its supervision
and amendment in such a manner as to insure the speedy re
moval of those obstructions, so detrimental to the commerce
and trade of the middle portion of the State. When the Chat
tanooga and Nashville railroads shall have been completed^
and the obstructions in the Cumberland, the Elk, the Duck and
the Caney Fork, shall have been removed, it would be difficult
to find any region in the world possessing more advantages
than Middle Tennessee. With a soil remarkable for its fertili
ty — a climate happily exempt from the sickness of the south,
and the intense protracted cold ofthe north — a population pro
verbial for its industry, sobriety and enterprise — with an easy

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 405
accessibility by her roads and rivers to the markets of New Or
leans and through her proposed railroad to those of Charleston
and Savannah, she may well challenge comparison with the
most favored regions of the Union.
The Western District of our State is happily situated, in re
ference to natural facilities, for carrying off her agricultural
productions. Lying nearly in a square, she is surrounded on
three sides by two of the noblest rivers in tbe world, while the
Hatchee, the Forked Deer, and the Obion, all navigable for
small boats, penetrate into many of her richest and most pop
ulous counties. A project has however been started in the
south proposing to extend to her fui'ther facilities by the con
struction of a railroad from Mobile to the Mississippi, near
the mouth of the Ohio.
The engineer, Mr. Lewis Troost, son of the accomplished
Geologist of the State, gives the foUowing description of the
route and the surface of the country over which it is proposed
it should pass: —
" Commencing at the city of Mobile, the route projected is in nearly a
north direction, diverging slightly to the west, on the comparatively level
lands dividing the waters of the Mississppi from those of the Tombigbee and
Tennessee rivers, through the south-western portion of Alabama, the east
ern and north-eastern of Mississippi, the Western District of Tennessee,
and the south-west corner of Kentucky to the Mississippi river, at or near
the junction of the Ohio. At this point it is suggested to cross the Mis
sissippi river by a steam ferry ; similar to that over the Susquehanna on the
line of railroad between Philadelphia and Baltimore, andto extend the road
on the west bank of the Mississippi to the city of St. Louis.
" The distance from Mobile to the junction of the Mississippi and Ohio
rivers on this line, would be about four hundred and forty miles, and from
the mouth of the Ohio to the city of St. Louis, about one hundred and fifty
miles, making the total distance from the city of St. Louis to the city of
Mobile, equal to about five hundred and ninety miles.
"A glance at the map of the States through which this route is pro
jected, will indicate that from Mobile to the mouth of the Ohio, there is not
a river or stream of any magnitude to cross, and that on the west bank of
the Mississippi river up to the city of St. Louis, there is only one river, the
Maramec, to overcome.
" In the present communication it is proposed to say nothing of that part
of the route between the city of St. Louis and the mouth of the Ohio.
There can be no doubt that as soon as a continuous line of railway exists
from the waters of the Gulf of Mexico to the Mississippi, at the junction

406

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

of the Ohio, the citizens of St. Louis, anxious to partake of the advan
tages of railroad communication, will be ready to meet it with a railroad
from their city to the west bank of the Mississippi.
" St. Louis is the great depot of the vast productions of the Upper Mis.
issippi and Missouri. She receives and distributes supplies for an immense
extent of territory, exceedingly fertile in the production of articles which
must be transported to markets other than those afforded at home. Her
navigation to these markets is at all times dangerous, interrupted frequently
by the shifting of channels and the accumulation of snags, and for weeks
in the winter season entirely closed by ice. Her interests will, at no dis
tant period, even if they do not now, point out the necessity of having con
stant intercourse with the south, uninterrupted by low water, by ice, or by
the numerous dangers of river navigation.
" For eighty or one hundred miles, the country north of Mobile, through
which the railroad will pass, is described to be a comparatively level sandy
region, very favorable for railroad making, and covered with yellow pine of
matchless height andstraitness, affording timber of excellent quality in suf
ficient quantities to construct the road in its progress through it.
" Thence through Mississippi, and Tennessee, and Kentucky, where the
line will run, the natural surface of the soil is said to offer no obstacles to
obtain a strait route of easy grades, without heavy excavations or embank
ments. The character of the grading will be of the easiest description,
there being no rock to encounter except at the northern termination of the
route, near the Tennessee and Ohio fivers. Through the eastern part of
Mississippi the route will pass over prairies from five to ten miles wide, and
from twenty to thirty miles long. From surveys made for railroads through
the western district of Tennessee, the natural level ofthe countiy is repre
sented to offer so many desirable routes in this respect, that the chief diffi
culty will, perhaps, be in selecting the most favorable. Parrallel to the
Mississippi and Tennessee rivers are two ridges of highlands, on either of
which the road might be located to advantage.
" The main line can be made to form a junction with the Tennessee river
at or near Savannah, or at Perryville, which is in the vicinity of extensive
beds of iron ore. At either place it would intercept the trade of the vallies
on both sides of the Tennessee river, which now has to perform a tedious
voyage around by the Tennessee, Ohio, and Mississippi rivers, of from four
to five hundred miles before it arrives at the same parallel of latitude as the
point of departure. From either Perryville or Savannah, at the great el
bow formed by the Tennessee river, a branch might be made to Nashville,
avoiding altogether the Cumberland Mountains, which present many ob
stacles of a serious kind to any other approach to Nashville from the sea
ports on the South Atlantic coasts. This branch to Nashville will form a
link of the great (ihain of railroads now being projected to connect the
Eastern and Middle with the Southern States, by running a line of railroads
to the south and east of the Ohio river, and of which the Baltimore and
Ohio railroad is the commencement. By the proposed route, Nashville can

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 407
have a much more direct and expeditious communication, with a better sea
port for her purposes, and by far, over a more favorable route than by the
route she is now seeking to establish, via Chattanooga. That this branch
to Nashville, considered as a part of a line which must be formed at no dis
tant day to connect the Northern, Eastern, Middle and Southern States
together, is of great importance, there can be no question, when it is con
sidered that it will run through some of the richest agricultural portions of
the Union.
" Through the Western District of Tennessee are inexhaustible beds of
marl, cropping out at the surface. This valuable material for agricultural
purposes will form a great article of transport.
" There is no route for a railroad in the Union to compare with this. —
Here is a main continuous line of 440 miles in length, running, without
crossing navigable rivers or mountains, through the richest portions of three
of the most productive States, where they are, in a great measure, deprived
of all kinds of communication, terminating at one end at a desirable sea
port, and at the other where it can command the trade and travel of eight
States andthe western territories, with latteral branches extending by short
distances into the richest and most varied agricultural and mineral regions,
which, although passing through different State governments, will be gov
erned throughout by the same laws, subject to the same institutions, and
will be under the same management and responsibility."
If this Mobile project be too vast for early ol eventual exe
cution, the sagacity of those who have charge of it, will not
fail to discover how much better it would be to make the
northern terminus on the Tennessee river, where it makes its
great bend through the State, than to permit it to fail altogether.
This would reduce its magnitude to a size entirely practicable,
and be to the city of Mobile scarcely less profitable. To that
point at or below the town of Waterloo, the Tennessee is easily
navigable at all seasons of the year by most of the steamboats
that ply on our western waters. Such a terminus would there
fore be perfectly accessible to all the commerce of the Cum
berland, the Ohio, the Mississippi, and Missouri, which might
seek an outlet through the Bay of Mobile. Much of the West
ern District would still be deeply interested in its success, and
the State would doubtless aid and encourage the project pre
sented in either form, by all the means which could at any
time be fairly and justly appropriated to its advancement.
The present period, however, is much more favorable to the
execution of internal improvements by the enterprise and capi
tal of individuals, than by the direct appropriations of the

408 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
States. There are but few of them who have not, on former
occasions, either for banking or improvement purposes, con
tracted as large a public debt, as they now have any ability to
meet. This is certainly so with regard to the State of Ten
nessee. So far, she has been entirely able to save herself from
the reproach of having failed to meet her liabilities. A pro
per sense of pride, justice and honor, should restrain her from
now creating against herself any new liabilities which she may
have no means of meeting, even for the accomplishment of the
most inviting project of prospective usefulness. On the other
hand, the people, unlike the States, are less involved in debt at
this time, than at any recent period. They have been blessed
generally with good crops for several years, which have com
manded remunerating prices. Other pursuits are understood
also to have been eminently successful, so that all classes of
the community have more ability than usual to patronise and
encourage all safe and profitable projects that may be pre
sented. It is to this individual ability, and to the well known sagacity
of our people, prompting them readily to engage in all safe and
profitable investments, that we ought mainly to look, at least,
for the present, for the further extension of our system of Inter
nal Improvements.
It the discharge of the various duties which devolve upon
you, none will require more earnest investigation and patient
deliberation, than those connected with the important interests
which the people have in the successful management of the
Bank of Tennessee. You cannot exercise too much care in
looking into its present condition and its past management,
with the view of discovering any defects that may exist in its
present organization, and of devising the best measures for
increasing its usefulness and prosperity. When it went into
operation it was regarded by many as an experiment which
would inevitably terminate disastrously at an early day. The
absence of the grand conservative principle of individual in
terests was the alleged capital defect in its organization, on
which these predictions were based of its early failure. To
this suggestion it was answered, that the combination of the
interests of Internal Improvements and Education with Bank-

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 409
ing, would furnish a substitute for individual interest equally
efficacious in securing a faithful and successful administration
of its affairs. The experiment has now been on trial for nine
years, a period sufficiently long to enable you to form a re
liable opinion as to the probable success or failure of the ex
periment. In a cheerful investigation into its past operations and its
present condition, shall satisfy you that it has failed to accom
plish in a reasonable degree the important objects of its crea
tion, and that it is destined unavoidably to end in ruin and dis
aster, it would become your imperious duty to avert the threat
ened blow by an immediate provision for the gradual settle
ment and liquidation of its affairs. If, on the contrary, such
an investigation shall produce the conviction, that the experi
ment has proved reasonably successful, and that the public
interest would be promoted by its continuance, the duty of
exerting the most possible vigilance in guarding it against
future mismanagement and misfortunes, will devolve upon you.
Without assuming to pass sentence on the wisdom of estab
lishing the Bank at all, or of uniting in one system the inter
est of banking, internal improvement and education, I have
no hesitation in announcing to you that my investigations into
its past transactions and its present condition, have disclosed
to my mind no satisfactory reasons for recommending its dis
continuance and abandonment. So far as the Bank was
designed to furnish a sound and safe circulating medium, it
must be admitted that it has been thus far successful. Its in
fluence in mitigating the pressure ofthe pecuniary embarrass
ment which prevailed during the several years of its existence
has been universally acknowledged.
The friends of education have abundant cause to be well
pleased with its promptness and fidelity in the fulfilment of
its obligations to Common Schools and Academies, whilst the
present high credit enjoyed by our State securities fully attest
its successful management of that branch of our financial
affairs which have devolved upon it. Within the last nine
years the bank has paid an aggregate sum of more than two
millions of dollars, which has been appropriated by the State
in diffusing the benefits of education and in the payment of the

410 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
accruing interest on her debt. Within the same period the
nett profits of the institution have fallen but little, short of two
miUions of dollars, showing an annual average profit of two
hundred and sixty thousand dollars, an amount equal to nearly
eight per cent, on its actual capital. ^
These results would seem to go very far towards proving that
the experiment has been successful, and must have a strong
tendency to dissipate the fears of those who have looked to its
failure as inevitable — unless it shall be found upon investiga
tion, that the losses sustained have been unreasonably large.
In the examination of this point, it will become material to
ascertain at what period of time the largest portion of the
losses have occurred, and if it shall be found, as it is belived to
be true, that they occurred at an early period, and before cer
tain important amendments were made to the charter, and that
very little has been lost since that time, it will rather furnish
a reason for an increased diligence in seeking for other defects,
than for the total abandonment and annihilation of the system.
The main ground on which it has been unsuccessful in accom
plishing the objects of its creation, is furnished by the fact that
its annual profits are not sufficient to meet the annual pay
ments required to be made. This objection should have but
little weight, if the burdens impossed upon it are unreasona
bly great, and that this is the case, will admit of no doubt,
when it is recollected that the payments required to be made
annually amount to about two hundred and seventy thousand
dollars — an amount equal to more than nine per cent, on its
actual capital.
In coming to the conclusion that the Bank ought not to be
discontinued and wound up under existing circumstances,
(whatever my opinions about banks of paper issue may be,)
I have not failed to be duly impressed by the unavoidable
pressure in our monetery affairs, which would be produced by
the withdrawal of so large a portion of our circulating medium,
as is now furnished by it, and by the collection of so large an
amount of debts as are due to it. This pressure might be
greatly mitigated, but could not be entirely avoided by adopt
ing a liberal policy in the gradual liquidation of its affairs ;
nor have I overlooked the difficulties and embarrassments

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 411
which would be encountered in providing the means of meet
ing the liabilities impossed upon the Bank during the time
required for its liquidation.
Influenced by these considerations, I cannot recommend the
discontinuance of the Bank, but instead thereof, your atten
tion is most earnestly invited to the investigation of such meas
ures as shall promise to increase its profits, and render them
sufficient to meet its liabilities. In view of the fact that for
several years past the profits made at most of its Branches
have been greater than those made at the principal Bank in
proportion to the capital respectively employed by them, I sub
mit to you whether the three branches now in a state of pro
cess of liquidation, may not be advantageously restored. In
making this suggestion it is proper for me to remark that it is
founded on information not possessed at the former session of
the General Assembly, and is not intended as a condemnation
of the act by which these branches were discontinued — that
act might well be justified under the impressions which pre-
vaUed at the time of its passage.
It is now believed, however, that the progress made in settling
their affairs will show that these impressions were materially
erroneous, and that the losses sustained ought not to prejudice the
claims of those interested to the restoration of these branches —
being fully satisfied from a careful view ofthe character ofthe
population interested, the anxiety which exist amongst them for
additional banking facilities, (whilst the present form of the
banking system continues,) and the increasing commercial in
terest at each of the places, I am constrained to recommend
to you that these branches be restored. In connection with
this subject I feel it also my duty to call your attention to the
claims of the city of Memphis to an increase of its banking
facUities. The rapid growth of this flourishing city, based on
its proper commercial interests and advantages, would indicate
it as one of the most eligible points in the State for profitable
banking, and under this conviction, if you determine in favor
of the continuance of the principal Bank, I recommend the
estabfishment of a Branch or Agency of the Bank of Tennes
see at Memphis, with such capital as can be advantageously
furnished by the institution. But I cannot indulge the hope

412 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
that the adoption of these suggestions would enable the Bank
to increase its profits to such an extent as would meet afi of
its liabilities — the necessity would therefore still exist for an
investigation of the best means of diminishing the present fia
bilities of the Bank. These liabilities at present amount to
about two hundred and seventy thousand dollars annually
whilst the annual average profits, heretofore, have been about
two hundred and sixteen thousand dollars.
By an act passed in 1844, the Treasury is required to make
up the deficiency unavoidably occurring on account of the ina
bility of the Bank to make profits sufficient to meet the liabUi-
ties chargeable upon it. I submit to you whether a sinking
fund could not be set apart by the treasury, without any in
crease of taxation, to be annually vested in the purchase of
State Bonds at their current value, as a means of gradually
reducing the liabilities of the Bank to a sum that would not
exceed the amount of its profits. This suggestion wUl receive
additional weight from the consideration, that under existing
circumstances, the deficiency maybe permanent, and therefore
constitute a permanent drain upon the treasury. It is believed
that a sinking fund of one hundred thousand dollars, furnished
by the treasury for five years, would so far reduce the State
debt, and consequently the liabilities of the bank, as would en
able the institution after that time to meet all burdens imposed
upon it.
It gives me great pleasure to express to you the belief, that
the bank has been faithfully and satisfactorily managed during
the last two years.
The report of the President and Directors will contain all
the information necessary to enable you to understand its
present condition, and to devise the proper measures for ren
dering it more useful and profitable in the future, whilst it will
exhibit a very large increase of the profits during the last two
years. Since the last session of the General Assembly, a war has
been declared to exist between the United States and the re
public of Mexico. The circumstances which led to this decla
ration were such as to extort it from the Congress ofthe United
States by an almost unanimous vote — abolitionary fanaticism

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 413
alone stood out against it. Every representative from Tennes
see, of both political parties, voted for it. Ten mUlions of
money, and authority to call into the public service fifty thou
sand volunteers, for the purpose of prosecuting the war to a
safe and honorable peace, were voted by Congress and placed
into the hands of the President. Under this act, a requisition
was made on this State on the 16th of May, 1846, for one regi
ment of cavalry or mounted men, and two regiments of infan
try or rifiemen.
On the receipt of this requisition, I issued my proclamation,
dated 24th May, 1846, apportioning the call equally and fairly
among the three grand divisions of the State. It was nobly
responded to. Instead of three thousand, about thirty thou
sand rushed forward with eager anxiety to engage in the ser
vice of their country. The call was met so promptly, that the
troops assembled in advance of any officer of the United States,
either to muster them into service, or to make those usual ad
vances of money so necessary to troops suddenly called on to
leave their home on so long and distant an expedition. To
remedy this circumstance, I appointed suitable officers to in
spect and muster them into service in their respective quarters
of the State, rather than subject them to the uncertainty of be
ing rejected after they had gone to a distant place of rendez
vous. To make' a suitable advance of money to each officer and
soldier, to defray all the expenses incident to their encamp
ment at Knoxville, Nashville and Memphis, and also subsist
the East Tennessee troops in their march to the latter city, re
quired the negotiation of large sums of money.
The Union and Planters' Banks, with a patriotism which
cannot be too highly extolled, promptly stepped forward and
proposed to lend any sum of money, not exceeding one hun
dred thousand doUars each, which might be demanded by the
occasion. Without any law authorizing me to borrow money
for this or any other purpose, but unwilling to submit to any
delay, I took the responsibility of negotiating with the Union
Bank for some sixty or seventy thousand dollars, which were
applied to the above objects of expenditure. So soon, however,
as our troops were gone, and the state of my official business

414 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
would allow of it, I repaired to Washington City, whilst every
item of expenditure was fresh in my recollection and those of
my officers, and presented my accounts for settlement; and I
am happy to say they were promptly but thoroughly examined,
and allowed by the proper department, with perhaps the single
exception of interest, for which no existing law of Congress
was supposed to provide, but which, I doubt not, will be here
after adjusted satisfactorily to the bank. It is with pleasure,
therefore, that I inform you that in going beyond the law, and
assuming the responsibility of raising this sum of money as
the Chief Magistrate of the State, no debt was incurred by
which the State can be in any wise injured.
The advances that made this unauthorized negotiation ne
cessary, were indispensable to the comfort of the troops.
Volunteers suddenly called on to leave their homes on such a
campaign, could not well afford to equip themselves out of
their own private means, and to support themselves in their
respective encampments until the arrival of the officers of the
United States, who had no idea of so prompt and early a move
ment, for such had been unknown before in the volunteer ser
vice of the United States ; nor could the East Tennessee volun
teers, suddenly called on to march four or five hundred miles
to Memphis, be expected to be prepared with ready means of
their own to bear their expenses.
But whilst I took on myself as the Executive of the State to
make this negotiation, 1 endeavored to consult the most rigid
economy, and to make only such accounts as the United States
would recognize as just, and to appoint only such officers as
they would think to be absolutely necessary. Under this view
of a just and proper economy, 1 left the troops (except those of
East Tennessee, on account of their distance) to subsist them
selves on their travel from their respective neighboihoods to the
places of rendezvous, precisely as is done by the laws and reg
ulations of the United States. But I established encamp
ments at KnoxviUe, Nashville and Memphis, for the reception
of them as fast as they should arrive, where they were attended
to by one or two suitable officers, and suppfied with the same
rations as are allowed by the United States to their own troops.
These arrangements, I am happy to befieve, proved entirely

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 415
satisfactory, not only to the United States, but to the troops
themselves, with perhaps a solitary exception, which, as it
relates to my Executive action in carrying out the requisition
on this State, is here submitted for your consideration.
On the 6th of June, 1846, 1 received the following commu
nication, recently found, after diligent search, and which I had
supposed might have been thrown aside, as not important to
be preserved : " Camp Brown, June 5th , 1846.'
" To the Hon. A. V. Beowk, Governor, &c.
" Dear Sir : On to-morrow evening I will have the honor of leading
ninety-four of the gallant sons of Giles County to an encampment on
Brown's Creek. By the request of the company I have the honor to ask
of you the favor of selecting us a proper and judicious place of encamp
ment, where we can have water and rest on Sunday. We have camp equip
age and a wagon, and will be prepared to take care of ourselves in soldiers'
Style. We expect to be ready to be mustered into service on Monday
morning. " I have the honor to be, very respectfully,
" Your obedient servant and friend,
(Signed) " MILTON A. HAYNES,
" Captain Giles County Mounted Riflemen."
This communication was not addressed to me as" a private
individual — it was addressed to me as Governor of the State,
and delivered to me at my office as such. It spoke nothing of
one night, but several nights, and the greater part at least of
the two days.
It made no allusion to going at all to the encampment. It
asked no privilege of encamping on my grounds, nor did it in
the slightest degree, in form or manner, call up the question
of my individual hospitality. It avowed the intention to en
camp on Brown's Creek, a smaU stream of excellent water
directly on the road, which had borne that name from the ear
hest settlement of the country, and on which I had no lots or
grounds at all. Regarding it, therefore, as an application to
me as the Executive of the State, for the selection of a public
and additional encampment to the one already at NashviUe,
I returned the following answer, in accordance with the advice
of the Adjutant General of the State and of my own sense of
duty and propriety.
38

416 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS. " Nashville, June 6th, 1846.
" I have no opportunity to procure an encampment in the neighborhood
you mention, and no officer to send to attend you. My encampment at
Nashville is at the Race Track, where some of the troops are yet encamp
ed, where you and company can have provisions and horse feed provided.
" In haste, yours, &c.
(Signed) AARON V. BROWN."
This reply was predicated on the idea, that to furnish, as I
had done, the three encampments at Knoxville, at Nashville,
and at Memphis, with suitable officers to attend them,
was all that a just sense of economy and the practice in all
such cases, both in and out of the State, would allow of;
besides, I was by no means confident that the United States
would settle the accounts made at two separate encampments
so near Nashville.
No other volunteer company had received any such special
accommodation, and I desired to mete out the same measure
of justice to all. To avoid all difficulties and complaints, and
to enable the company to reach a better and more comforta
ble encampment than it was possible to furnish at Brown's
Creek, I threw open the doors of my general encampment and
invited them, by a march of an hour long, to partake, with
their brother soldiers, of its ample supplies and accomodations.
I lay these precise facts before you, that they may go upon
the permanent records of the country, repelling, as they do,
every idea of Executive inhospitality to these brave and gal
lant men.
To my Quartermaster General, G. W. Rowles, and to Major
General Brazelton, and to Inspector General Coe, and Major
General Hays, I am under, and the volunteer service of the
State is under, many obligations for the promptitude, skill,
and energy with which they conducted the operations in the
respective divisions of the State.
In the transactions of the middle portion of the State, I can
not withhold from Major General Bradley, and Adjutant Gen
eral Turner, equal expressions of gratitude for the services
which they rendered.
Early in the month of June, the three regiments, (two only
fully organized) were handed over to the United States. They

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 417
were the flower and chivalry of the State. The sons of those
worthy sires who, under Jackson, Carroll and Coffee, in former
days, had shed so much lustre around the name of Tennessee.
Would these, their descendants, prove themselves worthy of
such illustrious ancestors ?
1 did not doubt it — no one doubted it — they went forth in a
just cause. Not one of them felt that it was an unjust one,
or they would not have gone. They went forth, and on every
battle-field, at Monterey, at Vera Cruz, at Cerro Gordo, they
performed deeds of heroic valor, worthy of Tennessee in the
proudest days of her glory. But it was not on the battle-field
alone, that your regiments bore your banner so high and so
proudly. In the toilsome march, beneath the burning sun, in
the pestilential encampment, everywhere, and under all cir
cumstances, your volunteers well sustained the honor of the
State. In behalf of our whole people, I i-ecommend the strong
est expression of public gratitude and admiration for their he
roic services, and that a full register of the names of every
soldier of the three regiments be made out and safely deposited
in the new capitol, when completed, that posterity may know
who they were that contributed so largely to the honor and
glory of the Commonwealth. Let the State contribute largely
to the erection of some lofty monument to the memory of those
who fell, either in battle or by disease, in the prosecution of a
war, which could not have been avoided without a sacrifice of
national honor, dignity, and character.'
Butthe patriotic devotion of our fellow-citizens has been
tested by another requisition, recently made for two more
Regiments of Infantry from the State. It is with no common
degree of pride that I announce the pleasing fact to you, that
notwithstanding the many appeals made to the people of the
State, through a portion of the public press, and the debates
and discussions of the past summer, against the justice, pro
priety and necessity of the Mexican war, the chivalrous sons
of Tennessee have responded to the call with a noble enthusiasm.
Five companies were called for by my proclamations from
each Ma-jor General's division in the State, thereby giving, as
on the former occasion, a fair and equal chance to the citizens
of every portion of the State.

418 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
Many more companies reported themselves than could be
selected to fill the requisition, whilst many others were known
of who were in a forward state of completion, when the time
arrived for making selections. It cannot, I hope, be consid
ered invidious to mention, that East Tennessee was peculiarly
chivalrous on the occasion, having furnished not only the five
companies called for, but tendered ten other companies besides,
composed of her brave and hardy sons. The officers of the
United States having learned, by experience, something ofthe
promptitude and celerity with which the citizen soldiers of Ten
nessee always rush to the standard of their country, have
promptly repaired to the State to aid in carrying out the move
ment, exempting the Executive from much ofthe labor and
responsibility of a former occasion. The volunteers are now
on their way to their respective encampments at Nashville and
Memphis, where they will be regularly organized into Regi
ments, and pass over to the command and service ofthe United
States. If the war continues, the whole community cannot but
feel the deepest interest in the future destination and fortunes
of these brave and gallant men.
The career of their predecessors in this war has been so dis
tinguished — for their patience under fatigue, for their ready
obedience to the command of their officers, for their undaunted
courage in the face of the enemy — that it would be difficult to
emulate their bright and glorious example. But I hazard
nothing when I assure you that these regiments will go forth
nerved to new energies by that high example, and firmly resolv
ed, living or djdng, to add new lustre to the name and char
acter of Tennessee.
But at the moment when I am writing down these proud and
pleasing assurances, the news may be brought to us that a
treaty has been made, terminating the war between the two
nations. I should hail with rapture and delight the bright and
beautiful Goddess of Peace, at whose shrine the American peo
ple have always delighted to worship. Her return would be
more welcome, because she will doubtless bring with her aU
that was ever demanded — " indemnity for the past, security
for the future." This was aU that the Administration at Wash
ington — the President, and his friends in Congress and through-

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE, 419
out the Union — all that the Commanding General in his Pro
clamation in the earliest stages of the war ever demanded.
The territory she is expected to bring will be stained with no
blood unjustly shed, in the proud and lustful spirit of conquest.
She will bring it as the only indemnity Mexico can offer against
the expenses we have incurred in the prosecution of a war,
which Mexico herself was the first to proclaim, and first to
commence. A war originating in Mexico's unjust attempt to
reconquer a territory which had been, under all the forms of
our Constitution, made one of the States ofthe Union ; a war
which she wantonly and wickedly provoked by an invasion of
that part of Texas lying east of the Lower Rio Grande, to
which our title extended (whatever might be said of the Upper
Rio Grande) without a shadow of a doubt. But I cannot shut
my eyes to the great fact, that there are many persons, of this
State and elsewhere, who, in anticipation of a result such as
we are now considering, have labored hard to convince the
people that, if indemnity in land against the expenses of this
war, and for the purpose of paying the millions that are due
to our citizens, shouldbe wiUingly offered by Mexico, such an
indemnity should be scorned and rejected. Whether the infatu
ation of party will persist in such doctrine, remains to be seen.
But I most earnestly recommend to this General Assembly,
never to adjourn until you have instructed your Senators and
requested your Representatives not to vote against a treaty of
peace, or refuse the necessary appropriation to carry it into
effect, only because it may contain a cession of territory to the
United States. Indemnity against the war, I hold to be clearly
right — Mexico herself, I doubt not, will so consider it. Shall
the United States reject the indemnity because it may be in
land, and not in money ? She has not the latter to pay, and
the former constitutes her only remaining resource. It will,
therefore, be indemnity in land or nothing. / repeat, in land or
nothing. What wise or sensible man, in the management of
his private affairs, would reject a payment in land when his
debtor had no other resource left, with which to satisfy his de
mand ? The plea that our country is large enough already,
takes no account of the future miUions of freemen who are to
nhabit it. The natural increase of our own population — the

420 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS,
amazing emigration to the United States from the starving
and oppressed nations of the old World — the genius, industrj',
and enterprise of the Anglo-Saxon race — all unite in demand
ing that our country should be extended from ocean to ocean —
widened out in all her borders, whenever it can be done con
sistently with the dictates of national honor and justice. Such
an opportunity will now be offered freely to us, and perhaps
for the last time in the history of our country.
The pretext that any new accession of territory, may en
danger the perpetuation of our glorious Union, is only a shal
low device for alarming the timid and deceiving the ignorant.
The same cry was raised when Louisiana, extending from
the Gulf to the Northern Lakes, was acquired — the same when
Missouri was admitted — when Florida was purchased — when
Texas, neither conquered nor purchased, walked into our Union
by sovereign compact and agreement. The Union dissolved ! !
dissolved by the growth and enlargement of our free and happy
Republic!! No. It grows stronger and stronger by it; the
very elements of perpetuation being increased in the exact
proportion of its contemplated magnitude. The spirit of mod
ern abolitionism, if it existed at all in the early days of the
Republic, stood rebuked by the Constitution. It stood equally
rebuked in the Missouri compromise, Avhich was but a virtual
continuation of that of the Constitution. So it will be in the
extension of the same line on latitude thirty-six thirty, through
the newly acquired territory of California. What a beauti
ful harmony in our national action would then be exhibited !
Our revolutionary fathers inadjusting the proportion of the
f.'ee and slaveholding States, substantially fixed it on latitude
thirty-six thirty. The next generation (for the Revolution
ary one had nearly departed,) then extended that line through
the newly acquired territory from France, and now it is pro
posed (and to this I give my assent, and earnestly recommend
that you give yours) to extend this line still westward, through
the territory which may be ceded to us by Mexico, to the shores
of the Pacific. This being done, the great strife and conten
tion about slavery, we may hope, will be settled and ended
forever. Then no " Wilmot proviso" will break upon our
repose, like a fire-bell by night. The line of separation wifi be

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE. 421
fixed. All men would understand it and conform to it, in the
formation of States. Nor need the conscientious and sincere
friend of the black race, (for there are many such) be in the
slighest degree apprehensive that slavery, though permitted to
exist south of that line, would ever be, in fact, established in any
one of the States of California. The character of the coun
try — the nature of its resources — the insecurity of such pro
perty on many accounts, would deter any slaveholder from
taking that description of property with him. The question
about slavery, therefore, loses much, if not all, its practical im
portance in relation to the territory now to be acquired from
Mexico, as has been truly said by one of our greatest states
men, and said, too, at a most auspicious moment for the peace
and harmony of our country. The Union, therefore, I hold to
be in no danger from any new accession of territory. I believe
that, under the Providence of God, it is destined to last and
endure forever, stretching, like the beautiful rainbow of Hope
and of Promise, until it bespans this whole continent.
A vacancy has occurred in the Supreme Court by the resig
nation of Judge Reese, now on file, to take effect from the first
day of the present month, which places it in the power of the
General Assembly to fill it, without the intervention of the Exe
cutive. Another vacancy occurred in the 4th Judical Circuit,
by the death of Judge Cannon, which was temporarily filled by
George W. Rowles, Esq. Vacancies in the 4th, Sth, and 10th
Solicitorial Districts have been filled by the appointment of Mr.
Joseph E. Pickitt, of Carthage ; Mr. J. P. Campbell, of Columbia;
and Mr. T. P. Scurlock, of Jackson, whose commissions will
expire with the close of the present Legislature. Mr. Nelson,
Register of the Mountain District, having resigned, the vacancy
was filled by the appointment of Mr. J. H. Minnis, and subse .
quently, on his resignation, by the appointment of Mr. J. F.
Brown, of Sparta.
It will also be your duty to elect a Senator to Congress, to
supply the place of the Hon. Spencer Jarnagin, whose term of
service expired on the 4th of March last. I need not antici
pate, by a single remark, the care with which you will select
some individual, eminent for his ability and patriotism, to fill

422

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

this exalted station, at a crisis so important, to the honor and
welfare of the nation. ,
I have now presented to your consideration all the subjects
which I desire to present before you, and close this communica
tion with the sincere and confident hope that your delibera
tions may be distinguished for their harmony, and may result
in the advancement of the best interests and welfare ofthe
State. I have the honor to be.
Your obedient servant,
AARON V. BROWN.
Executive Office, October, 1847.

VALEDICTORY ADDRESS
Of Ex-Gov. Aaron V. Brown, delivered October, 1847.

Gentlemen of the Senate
and of the House of Representatives :
I present myself before you to-day, that 1 may lay down, in
your presence, all the power and authority appertaining to the
Executive office of the State — to lay them down at the feet of
the Constitution, that you may presently confer them, in due
form, on my honorable successor. Such has been the declared
will of my fellow-citizens, and to their decision I bow, without
murmur or regret.
In the two years, during which I have filled the exalted office
from which I am now retiring, events of the greatest magni
tude have been crowding upon us. The annexation of Texas,
although commencing before^ has been consummated, adding
an empire to the republic; an empire, large as modern France,
with a soil rich as that of Egypt, and a climate soft and deli
cious as that of enchanting Italy. The settlement of the Ore
gon question confirmed our title to another empire, larger than
the first, and extended the now undisputed boundaries of the
republic to the shores of the Pacific. When these two great
events are contemplated together, what an amazing spectacle
of territorial grandeur does our country at this day exhibit ! I
At first we had but thirteen States, stretching in narrow, but
dazzUng brightness, all along the shores of the Atlantic. In a
few years, our population scaled the eastern mountains —

424

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

poured itself into the great valley of the Mississippi, felling
its ancient and unbroken forest, building up towns and cities,
rearing halls of science, and temples of religion, until what in
the old world would have required a long succession of ages
for its accomplishment, is here presented a"s the magic work of
a single generation.
But, in addition to all this, what do we now behold? Yet
another empire, large as Texas and Oregon both put together,
subdued by our arms, subjected by the law of nations to our
military government, and destined, as I believe, and hope, ere
long, to constitute an integral portion of our great republic.
Wonderful nation ! I Stretching from ocean to ocean, and
from the Gulf of Mexico to the great inland Seas of the north ! !
Millions yet unborn, the sons and daughters of freedom, who
are hereafter to inhabit this continent, will bless and honor the
memories of those illustrious statesmen and patriots who have
made or confirmed these amazing accessions to our country.
But it is not the physical grandeur of our country alone,
which should challenge our patriotic emotions. After a long
period of profound peace, when her old and renowned warriors,
who used to adorn her camps and her history, had all been
"gathered to their fathers," she has raised and set forth anew
race of heroes, whose gallant deeds at Monterey, at Buena
Vista, at Vera Cruz, at Cerro Gordo, and at the late great bat
tles before the City of Mexico, have filled America with joy,
and the world with admiration.
Nor yet is it her amazing expansion, nor the heroic deeds of
her warriors, that should challenge our highest degree of patri
otic ardor. No, it is not these, great and dazzling as they
may be, — it is from our sacred Constitution, securing to us our
civil and religious liberties, and from our glorious Union, pro
tecting us in their enjoyment against all foreign enemies, that
the patriot should draw his deepest and holiest emotions. By
these he should be chiefly inspired, humbly to supplicate that
they might last and endure forever —
" Till wrapt in flames the realms of ether glow,
And Heaven's last thunder shakes the world below."
Turning from this bright and animating picture of national

VALEDICTORY ADDRESS. 425
greatness, let us look to the no less cheering and happy con
dition of our own beloved and honored Tennessee.
You and I (turning to the Governor elect) have lately tra
versed her in all her borders ; we have scaled her eastern moun
tains; we have penetrated her rich, luxuriant valleys ; we have
reposed on the banks of that mighty river which marks her
western boundary; everywhere we have seen a contented,
happy, and patriotic people — a people exempt from debt — their
industry crowned with abundance — their institutions of learn
ing crowded with the votaries of science ; whilst religion is
ministering to them her consolations in all her consecrated
temples. Such are the people, and such their condition at the
moment when you are called to preside over their destinies. I
congratulate my feUow-citizens that such is their condition, in
despite of all the prophetic annunciations of approaching ruin.
The ocean and the lakes have become no vast solitudes. The
husbandman has not been driven from his home by the stench
of the rotting productions of his farm. The industrious manu
facturer has not been doomed to abandon his loom and his
work-shop for the already too much crowded pursuits of agri
culture. No. Thanks to a kind and overruling Providence.
Thanks to the industry, sobriety, and enterprise of our people.
Thanks to the wisdom and patriotism of our rulers, however
much they have been reviled and persecuted.
Thanks to all these, that prosperity, like an angel, is still
hovering and smiling over our State and nation.
I should have rejoiced, gentlemen, if, on my retiring from of
fice, I could have congratulated you and my fellow-citizens at
large on the return of peace.
That beautiful goddess is yet standing on the confines of
Mexico, holding out the olive branch to our deluded and obsti
nate enemy. Our victorious arms have wrested from her city
after city, and province after province, until our star-spangled
banner is this day proudly waving over the balls of the Monte
zumas. But let it be ever recorded, let all Christendom know,
that not a gun has been fired, not a city has been taken, not a
province has been invaded, without our baving first tendered to
her the terms of a just and honorable peace. "These terms
were indemnity for the past and security for the future" — in-

426 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS,
demnity for the millions due to our citizens — indemnity for the
millions which we have expended in the prosecution of a war
which she was the first to declare, and the first to commence —
security against any further invasion of territory,. which has
been made a part of our Union under all the forms of the
Constitution, and to which she has no shadow of right, by the
solemn declaration of every civilized nation in the world.
This indemnity and security we will have. She may fly from
her capital io her mountains, but our victorious eagles will pur
sue her to their loftiest summit, and the thunder of our cannon
will extort it from her.
With the return of peace with Mexico, with no cause of fu
ture irritation with any foreign nation, with all the elements
essential to national greatness, what prophetic spirit can an
ticipate the future growth and progress of our nation — all that
the heart can desire — all that the imagination can conceive of
— lies before us. How brilfiant, how animating the prospect !
If we are true to ourselves, true to the Constitution, true to our
bright and glorious Union, earth has no happiness. Heaven has
no blessings, which may not belong to the people of the United
States. But, gentlemen, pleasing and delightful as are these medita
tions, I must not and will not forget that the chief honors and
ceremonies of this occasion are intended for another, I there
fore conclude, by tendering, to you all, thp homage of my pro
found respect.

REMARKS

Of Mr. A. V. Brown in the Senate of Tennessee, on presenting
the Resolutions proposing to give the Election of President
directly to the People, on Thursday, Oct, 18, 1827.

Mr. Brown laid on the table of the Senate the following Reso
lutions and remarks :
Resolved, By the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, That the
Constitution of the United States should be so amended, as to give the elec-
tion of President and Vice President directly and conclusively to the peo
ple, preserving the present relative weight of the several States in the
election. Resolved, That many of the measures of the present administration of
the general government are injurious to the interests, and dangerous to the
hberties of the country.
Resolved, That the surest remedy for these evils, now in the power of the
people, is the election of Andrew Jackson to the Chief Magistracy of the
Union. The mode of appointing the President, as now prescribed by
the Federal Constitution, has been the source of so much in
convenience, and is the subject of such general discontent,
that a sufficient reason for recommending its amendment need
not be sought in the experimental nature of the instrument it
self The evils inherent in the last election, and the anxieties
connected with the next, give it a claim to public deliberation,
which none but the selfish and the servile can disregard. It
cannot be fairly denied, that the choice of our Chief Magis
trate was intended to spring from the free and unobstructed
judgment of the people ; and it must be admitted, that in the

428 ELECTION OF PRESIDENT BY THE PEOPLE.
late election, which vvas conducted according to the forms of
the Constitution, that intention was disappointed. A charter
the letter of which conflicts with its spirit, the details of which
counteract its principles, is certainly defective. On the occa
sion alluded to, the candidate who, in the primary election, ob
tained the highest number of votes, and at the moment of final
competition bore incontestible evidence of being the choice of a
majority of the American people — evidence which subsequent
popular decisions have confirmed, was superceded by a combi
nation, that triumphed only because the competition was trans
ferred to a small pre-existing body of electors, of which one
party to the combination was an influential member.
The crisis was calculated to awaken the worst designs of
selfish ambition ; and if the motives of men are to be deter
mined by their actions, seems to have had its sinister opportu
nities fully employed. According to Mr. Adams' declarations
in his book on the fisheries, as well as to recollections and con
victions resulting from the public observation of public men,
political hostility and personal estrangement had for several
years, and on momentous subjects, separated himself and Mr.
Clay. No approach to union, no inclination for amity, Was
manifested by either, until it was ascertained that as long as
they obeyed the principles and supported the opinions which
had formed their respective pretensions and produced their
avowed opposition, the power at which they grasped was not
to be gained — that continued disunion would frustrate, and
that instant combination would gratify their mutual ambition.
Then, and not till then, long cherished distrust was mutually
forgotten, oft expressed opinions were practically renounced,
and adverse principles openly abandoned. Each became the
artificer of that man's promotion whose depression, up to the
moment, had been a chief object of his exertions. The high
est amount of executive power was divided, and the closest
fraternity of political fortune was established between them.
What is enormous, need not be exaggerated ; what is flagrant,
requires no demonstration. Mr. Adams desired the office of
President — he went into the combination without it, and came
out with it. Mr. Clay desired that of Secretary of State — he
went into the combination without it, and came out with it.

, MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS. 429
Of this transaction, the simplest history is the best analysis.
Where a change of political principles, or even of private es
timation, is the immediate cause of personal gain reciprocally
to the agent and the object of the change, impurity of motive
is necessarily concluded. Whoever expects otherwise, must
expect the laws of reasoning, imprinted by the Deity on the
human mind, to be altered. It is equally certain, that a daring
ingratitude is displayed by the citizen who insults the majesty
of the people with the very power which their generous confi
dence had placed in his hands. To believe, when proof is in
sufficient, is not greater folly than to doubt when it is convinc
ing; and where circumstantial evidence is conclusive, positive
testimony, which is always liable to a corrective collation with
circumstances, is rather curious than valuable. It was butthe
other day that an atrocious murder in the enlightened State of
New York was detected and punished upon circumstantial evi
dence; and surely a process of reasoning which will sanction
the destruction of one man's life, is rigorous enough to deter
mine the conduct of another. Those who demand stronger
evidence of an improper understanding between Mr. Adams
and Mr. Clay than that afforded by their combination itself,
must be prepared to contend that it is not in the nature of
things for circumstances to evince guilt, and must be disposed
to suspend their judgments until the parties confess their
crimes. It ought, however, to be remembered that all our
knowledge of motives and character, every decision we form
respecting mental occurrences, is drawn from the considera
tion of circumstances, and that it is out of the ordinary course
of things for the confession of the accused to precede the sen
tence of the proper tribunal.
The members of this Assembly, therefore, in protesting
against the election of Mr. Adams as impure and anti-repub-
fican, are sensible of no precipitancy of judgment, or too great
a license of language. Unwilling to assert what is doubtful,
they are determined to speak what is true ; nor do they deem it
necessary to fortify their protest by the numerous collateral
proofs to be derived either from the contradictions contained in
the studied vindication of the Secretary of State ; from the
confessions of his friend, his colleague and his champion ; or

430 ELECTION OF PRESIDENT BY THE PEOPLE.
from the pertinent and concurring reminiscences of respecta
ble witnesses. The object of these resolutions being remedial,
not vindictive, it remains, after exemplifying the actual dan
ger of the present plan, to show the probable advantage of the
amendment proposed. In the first place, by giving the elec
tion directly and conclusively to the people, we should conform
to the fundamental principles of our government, which was
departed from in the formation of the Constitution, from ap
prehensions, which experience, as far as it has gone, proves
not to have been well founded. Another benefit will be, that
the dependence of the Governor on the governed, so desirable
in a republic, will be thus effectually secured. A consideration
of equal moment, both as it regards the theory and practice
of our government, is to be found in the fact, that an election
placed entirely in the hands of the people, must result in the
expression of their choice. This will exclude the formidable
evils of previous cabals, concomitant corruption, and subse
quent resentments. The people will be satisfied with their own
work, and at succeeding elections, will deliberately confirm or
prudently correct their former preference. Nor is it probable
that thereby purity of elections would be obtained at the ex
pense of public tranquillity. The turbulence apprehended by
the framers of the Constitution, is less likely to be excited by
the process of a fair and open election, than by the conten
tions sure to arise, under the present narrow system between
parties inclining to practice, and parties endeavoring to defeat
corruption. Besides, the people of the United States are fur
ther advanced in the knowledge of self-government than they
were when the Constitution was adopted ; more capable of
forming a prudent choice, and of avoiding those convulsions
to which a less informed community might be exposed by the
immediate exercise of a right so important. The division of
the Union into States, and the consequent modification of the
elective process, will have a tendency to limit, within mode
rate bounds, the effect of any agitating impulse; and it should
never be forgotten, that when any faculty of government is
susceptible of salutary exertion by the people, to lodge it with
a body of trustees, for their benefit, is an odious and pernicious
departure from the cardinal principles of free government.

ELECTION OE PRESIDENT BY THE PEOPLE. 431
These are some of the reasons which may be assigned in
favor of the first resolution.
As experience proves that the present system has a ten
dency to destroy the purity of elections, it also shows that a
bad administration is Ukely to spring from, and re-produce an
impure election. When a President gets into power with so
small an " approach to unanimity" as to be indebted for his of
fice to the rewarded support and obvious tergiversations of his
most inimical competitor, the motive which reduced him to this
abasement will naturally prompt him to administer the govern
ment, not with a view to the public welfare, but with an eye. to
his own popularity. Hence those branches of policy whi^h
time has sanctioned, and the fruits of which, though nutritious
and substantial, are neither captivating by novelty nor daz
zling by splendor, will be neglected for visionary and ambitious
schemes, devised to amuse the imagination of the public, and
to reflect on their authors the credit of superior patriotism, in
vention and sagacity. With the delusive machinery will be
combined the influence of Executive patronage, which, in
most countries, is mighty, and, even in our own, is powerful.
This great engine will be perverted from its rightful use to the
purchase of praise for the Executive, and aspersions of its ad
versaries ; and should eminent services and virtue render any
citizen a dangerous competitor for the Presidency, slanders
proportioned to his merit will be fabricated by interest and im
posed on credulity. Such is the natural history of power un
justly acquired in a free country. Since the last election, ac
cordingly, the attention of the general government, averted
from the salutary relations, which, for a series of years, had
secured for us the enjoyment of a productive commerce, has
been devoted to the formation of chimerical and intrusive alli
ances, the avowed object of which was an outrage upon the
spirit and independence ofthe nations whose religion and laws
it was proposed to subject to our kind control and supercilious
care. The mischief of this ambassadorial crusade, of this
egregious departure from that modesty and reserve (the dic
tates of dignity and prudence) which had exalted us in the fam
ily of civilized nations, promises to equal the absurdity of its
conception. Besides the unnecessary and enormous amount
29

432 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
of public money expended, and the ridicule and censure of
foreign nations to which this strange embassy has exposed us
it will be well for our country if it involves us in no other and
greater calamities.
To suit his thebry to his practice, the President claims al
most boundless authority for the Executive; ejects the Senate
from all participation in the institution of embassies and the
commissioning of envoys ; compares the influence of the con
stituent on the representative to the effect of paralysis on the
human body. In the true spirit of arbitrary condescension, he
displays to the nation fantastical projects of benefaction and
improvement, befitting the gracious king of star-gazing sub
jects, rather than the responsible agent of free people. Nor
is the profusion with which public money is expended, and the
mismanagement of the government abroad, greater than its
profligacy at home. The chief member of the cabinet, whose
duties require his greatest sagacity and most intense apphca
tion, annually deserts his department, and displays himself as
an itinerant Rhetor at electioneering feasts, exceeding some of
his colleagues in this official degradation only as far as he ex
ceeds them in ability. In the days of Washington and Jeffer
son, it was not- in this manner that the great officers of State were
employed.; neither Hamilton nor Madison was seen traversing
various States at seasons of election, to rise before carousing
multitudes, and to pour forth praises on the President in office,
whilst the flood-gates of defamation were opened against his
expected competitor. Those great men never dealt in bois
terous harangues, unbecoming the gravity of statesmen; in
banquet bravadoes, consistent neither with decency or cour
age ; nor in bold assertions, bearing no comparison with facts.
One was devotedly engaged in the definition of our rights at
home, and in the expansion and security of our interests
abroad, now violated and neglected ; the other was sedulously
employed in the creation of a system of economy and credit,
now impaired and abandoned; whilst both had exerted their
mighty intellects in the formation of that bond of national
union, which it is the earnest and ardent desire of this General
Assembly to maintain and perpetuate. They have made this
brief, but, in their opinion, impartial reference to the conduct of

ELECTION OF PRESIDENT BY THE PEOPLE. 433
the present administration, in support of their second resolu
tion. In regard to the third resolution, it will be sufficient to say,
that the acknowledged popularity, the established fame, and
well tried patriotism of Andrew Jackson, designate him as the
candidate most capable of, and most deserving, a successful
competition with Mr. Adams. Here he has been known, from
the dawn of manhood — through the vicissitudes of life and for
tune — in peace and in war — and we speak the sentiments of
our constituents, as well as our own, when we declare that the
fire of youth never impelled him beyond the bounds of honor,
and that the coldness of age has not made him deaf to the
voice of patriotism. As a man, he has always enjoyed our pe
culiar esteem; and as a public agent, our highest confidence.
The force and fitness of his intellect we have never found infe
rior to the grandeur of his character or the lustre of his fame.
Conspicuous forthe charities of private life, and alone doubt
ful of his public abilities, he has seldom left its sacred retreats
without earning renown for himself and glory for his country.
But the retreats of private life are no longer sacred. . This be
loved citizen, this genuine republican; venerable for his age, il
lustrious for his services, and still more illustrious for his in
flexible patriotism, has seen not only his conduct distorted by
slander, and his glory tarnished by calumny, but the partner
of his bosom traduced and exposed for the sport of the idle
and the malice of the infamous. That couch which has been
so often forsaken, that others might sleep in safety and peace
— that breast that has so often braved danger, that others
might not even feel its alarms, which felt a stain on the honor
of the country like a stab into its own vitals, has been invaded
and cruelly outraged. That some of the members of the
present administration ofthe Federal Government are account
able for the slander and persecution of Gen. Jackson and his
wife, is reluctantly, though solemnly, asserted. No moral dis
tinction can be drawn between the act of hiring a man to com
mit a crime and that of rewarding him after he has committed
it; and it is notorious that the prostituted miscreants who in
vent and circulate these slanders, are the continued objects of
ministerial favor, patronage and pay^iired with the money

434 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
of the very people whose willing gratitude and just admira
tion are the real causes of this defamation and rancor. This
foul injustice not only aggravates the demerit of its procurers,
but should endear to his country the hero who sustains it. As
citizens of Tennessee, we feel it our especial duty to denounce
it, and to proclaim our proud, our fervent, and our increased
attachment to the candidate and the cause of the people.

REPLY OF MR. BROWN,
In Support of the Resolutions on a preceding page.

Mr. Speaker : Until the last remarks feU from the gentle
man from Knox, I did not intend to have said anything in
support of these resolutions. Even now I do not intend to
discuss their merits. They contain, as I conceive, within them
selves, sufficient arguments for their adoption. An intimation,
however, has been made, that they were introduced to catch
the gentleman who last addressed this House. Why should
I wish to catch him, or throw any impediments whatever in
his way? (Mr. W. here explained and Mr. B. proceeded.)
My purposes in introducing these resolutions are infinitely
above men ; they relate to great and fundamental principles in
the administration of this government. When they were in
troduced oh yesterday, they were clearly and distinctly read in
hearing of all the members of this House. They have been on
your table the usual period for examination and reflection :
yet gentlemen allege that they have been taken by surprise !
Taken by surprise as to the incidents attending the last Presi
dential election ? They have been known to the nation more
than three years. Taken by surprise as to the alarming mea
sures of those now in power ? They have been discussed over
and over again, during two sessions of Congress. Taken by
surprise as to the desperate and degrading means now em
ployed to secure another "reign of terror" over this republic?
Those means have been used pubficly, in the high places of

436 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
the earth, and it is strange, indeed, if they have escaped the
most superficial observer.
With some degree of emphasis it has been asked, why the
Legislature of Tennessee should take up the subject? 1 an
swer, because Tennessee, like the other States of the Union,
has suffered by the shamefulincidents alluded to in these reso
lutions. I answer further, that the State of Tennessee is
under pecufiar obligations to enter her solemn protest against
the combinations here complained of, because she first pre
sented Gen. Jackson to the nation as a candidate forthe Presi
dency. It was not of his seeking ; it was done without the
slightest procurement or interference on his part. Is not Ten
nessee, then, at least excusable, when she complains of the un
holy combinations which defeated him ; of the vile calumnies
by which it is hoped that he can be again defeated ? It was,
however, stated by the gentleman from Knox, that one mem
ber of the House of Representatives from Knox County, at
the session when General Jackson was first nominated for the
Presidency, had been heard to declare, that he was nominated
only to make a diversion in favor of Mr. Adams to the preju
dice of Mr. Crawford. If it was intended that that was the mo
tive of the particular member alluded to, I have nothing to
say. But if it were intended to make even the slightest inti
mation, that such was the motive of the General Assembly
which then nominated General Jackson, I utterly deny it. I
was then a member, and have a right to speak thus expUcitly
of events in which I was an actor. The Legislature of Ten
nessee, in submitting his name to the nation, was influenced
by no motive of hostility either to Mr. Adams or Mr. Craw
ford, but by a sense of gratitude for his public services, and just
admiration of those great and eminent qualifications which it
believed fitted him for the office. Besides all this, it seems to
me, that it is proper for this General Assembly thus to express
its opinions, on another account. The reputation of that dis
tinguished individual is now public property. His fame is
identified with the nation. Every public assembly, therefore,
can well be justified in defending him against the assaults of
defamation and malice. Several gentlemen have attempted
to rouse the conscientious scruples of this Plouse, by assuming

IN SUPPORT OF RESOLUTIONS. 437
the position, that all we do on this floor is under the sanction
of an oath, and as the facts alluded to in these resolutions are
not personally known or legally proved to them, they cannot
vote for them. These gentlemen seem to know everything on
one side of this subject, and nothing on the other. They
know all the good actions of Mr. Clay — his eloquence in sup
port of the war — his negotiations at Ghent — his timely interfer
ence to save the nation from disunion on the Missouri question.
But unfortunately, they know nothing of his hostility to Mr.
Adams previous to the last election — nothing of his sudden
reconciliation — nothing of his traversing the country at sea
sons of election and making electioneering speeches ! In the
same way, they know all about Mr. Adams^of his writing
against Thomas Paine — of his desertion of his old party in
1807 — of his hypocrisy from that period up to his election; all
this and more they know of Mr. Adams when contrasted with Mr.
Crawford. But, alas, when contrasted with General Jackson
they pretend to know nothing at all about him ! They even
talk of sending for witnesses, issuing subpoenas — as though
nothing but Court-House evidence will induce them to say any
thing against either Clay or Adams. Mr. Speaker, I am not
disposed to be quite so technical. The facts alluded to, and
collected in these resolutions, compose a part of the history of
our country ; I am sorry to say, of the most disgraceful part of
that history. In acting upon them I do not consider myself as
swearing to their correctness ; but, sir, I do consider myself as
swearing to my belief of their correctness, and to the conclu
sions drawn from them. In this spirit and with this understand
ing of my obligation, I introduced them, and still give them
my cordial support. But, sir, I did not then, nor do I now, ex
pect some others 'to give their sanction. To have done so,
would have argued the most profound ignorance of the politi
cal occurrences ofthe times. I will not, however, arraign the
motives of those who may differ from me, but leave them to
themselves, their country and their God. Whilst pursuing this
course towards them, they ought to have shown equal mag
nanimity and charity to us. Why charge us with man-idolatry ?
Why charge us with imitating the Hartford Convention ? Is it
worse in us toidoUze Jackson now, than for them once to have

438

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

idolized Crawford, and now to idolize Clay or Adams ? As to
the Hartford Convention, what resemblance can be found in
the proceedings of this House to the treasonable deliberations
of that assembly ? Is it treasonable, in their opinion, to de
nounce the measures of this mad and profligate administration?
to protest against the alarming usurpations of the second
Adams, as the old Republicans did against those of the first?
Surely that eye must be evil that can discover the slightest re
semblance. Another whimsical suggestion was made by the gentleman
from Knox — that in adopting these resolutions, we should be
taking sides with Great Britain in the Colonial trade question ; ,
and that they would seriously embarrass Mr. Gallatin in his
negotiations at St. James'. This I consider a very foreign, a
very far-fetched notion. Is there a word in those resolutions
about the Colonial trade? It is true, that they contain a con
demnation of many of the measures of the administration.
But if this be taldng sides with England, if this be embarrass
ing to Mr. Gallatin, that mischief has been done long ago.
The debates in Congress, the political essays of the day, the
numerous and popular decisions made all over the nation,
long ago told to England and to the vs^orld, to Mr. Gallatin and
every Blinister we have, had abroad, that Mr. Adams' mea
sures were obnoxious to the American people. The same
gentleman calls for proof of the dangerous tendency of the
Panama mission; says that he was not in the country when
that subject was discussed in Congress, and therefore would
like to hear something about it on this floor. He even demands
the treaty by, which these "intrusive alliances" have been
formed ! Mr. Speaker, those; resolutions only speak of in
tended or contemplated alliances ; for who did not know that
no treaty had been made? Who did not know that our Min
isters and their Secretary, after groping about in the Southern
Seas, spending for nought thirty or forty thousand dollars of
the people's money, returned in disgrace to the United States,
and reported that they could not even find the contemplated Con
gress. It is not now attempted to vindicate that mission on
any of the grounds assumed by the President in either of his
messages, or by any of his friends on the floor of Congress,

IN SUPPORT OF RESOLUTIONS. 439
but an effort has been made by the gentleman from Knox, to
redeem the President and his Secretary from the contempt and
ridicule to which it has exposed them, by conjectural surmises
as to the designs of Bolivar.
He supposed the Panama Congress to have been gotten up
by that quand am Washington of the South, to aid him in an
ambitious project of reducing the South American States to
his imperial sceptre. ThatMr. Adams and Mr. Clay, apprised
by secret agents oi this intention, instituted this mission, to
warn those States of impending danger. Was anything like
this suggested by Mr. Adams to the Senate, when sitting with
closed doors, in profound secrecy and confldence? No, sir;
nothing like it. I therefore consider it only as an after
thought — the last hopeless apology for those in power — which
will no more justify the measure, than the purposes at first
avowed. If that Congress was to have been used as the mere
instrument of Bolivar's elevation to the imperial crown, what
business had we to be represented there ? If our ministers
opposed such designs, we should of course be involved in the
feuds and controversies ofthe respective parties, and if Bolivar
succeeded, he would then be found at the head of all the con
federated States of South America, a bitter and implacable
enemy to the United States. Will the folly of this mission be
less, by alleging that it never was intended for our ministers to
unite in their deliberations, but only to act as counsellors or
advisers, and, in some sort, as spies on their proceedings ?
Thirty or forty thousand dollars are then to be thrown away,
only to give warning of designs, no doubt better understood by
them than by our own government ! An imposing mission,
fitted out in full national splendor, only to supply two idle
danglers, or lobby members, to Bofivar's Congress !
Both of the gentlemen who oppose these resolutions, call
themselves Republicans of the old Jefferson school. I admire
their creed. It is drawn from a pure and unadulterated foun
tain of political knowledge, and I deny that any one principle
taught in that school, is opposed to these resolutions. What
are some of the leading measures of the Jeffersonian creed ?
" That the people is the source of all power and the fountain of
afi honor." That they have a right to exact obedience to their

440 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
will from all their public functionaries. That a government
instituted for their " peace, safety, and happiness;" should be
administered in simplicity, economy and purity. Are not thesC
principles regarded and inculcated in these resolutions? The
first one proposes to give the election of President directly and
conclusively to the people : The second condemns measures,
which set their wishes at open defiance, and prostrate some of
their dearest rights and privileges : The third proposes as a
remedy for these evils, the election of an individual, distin
guished for his qualifications, his public services, and, above
all, for his devoted attachment to the constitutional and inhe
rent rights of the people. If gentlemen were reaUy w^hat they
profess to be, it seems to me, that they would not be found in
the opposition to this measure. The great patriarch of repub
licanism sanctioned the principles when alive, and seemed to
call, with a solemn voice, almost from the tomb, on his foUow-
ers, to rally around the man " who had filled the measure of
his country's honor." The Republican party must unite, if it is
ever restored to power. They must unite like a band of bro
thers, as in the dark period of '98, or the sceptre has departed
from Judah forever. One gentleman was unkind enough,
tauntingly to remind us, that vi;e had been fired upon and scat
tered like birds. I know it. The nation knows and feels it.
Why did he not tell you, that it was that very Kentucky sports
man, mentioned in these resolutions, who had fired upon and
scattered the republican party ? Why will not that gentleman,
seeing that " he is one of us," give his assistance in collecting
the scattered forces of the republican phalanx, and retrieving
the misfortune which the hypocrisy of the President in 1807,
and the desertion of his Secretary in 1824, has brought on our
party ? This is the great object of the friends of those resolu
tions. They wish to make an appeal to the great body of the
people, to rise up and vindicate their own rights ; to teach the
self-willed politicians of the day, that they shall not set at
naught their instructions, with impunity. In short, to fight
over, in the persons of Jackson and the younger Adams, the
same battle that was fought between the elder Adams and Mr.
Jefferson. The struggle is obliged to come on, and none should
either expect or desire to be neutrals in it. It is not enough for

IN SUPPORT OF RESOLUTIONS. 441
gentlemen to cry out, we used to be for Crawford ! They must
present stronger evidence than this that they are the disciples of
Jefferson. W/iom are they for now ? The question reminds me
of a remark submitted by the gentleman from Bedford which
I feel bound to notice : That many men in this State, not
having merit of their own to rise upon, make ardent profes
sions of attachment to Jackson, which they do not feel. This
is no doubt true of some of the friends not only of Jackson, but
of Clay and Adams. But, sir, is this worse than for men,
whilst canvassing before the people, to pretend to be for Jack
son, and thereby get into office, and then turn round and do
him all the injury in their power ? Or in other words, is it
worse than to sail under the Jackson flag in the presence of
the people, and so soon as they get out of their sight, display
the broad pendant of Adams and Clay ? The gentleman
disclaimed " all allusions " to me in his remarks. I assure him
with equal sincerity, that I make the same disclaimer as to
him. AUow me now, sir, in conclusion, to observe that I did not
rise to discuss the merits of these resolutions, nor the accom
panying remarks. They are left to vindicate themselves ; but
in the course of the debate, some positions were assumed and
suggestions made, which I felt it my duty thus briefly to notice.

AN ADDRESS
Of the Giles County Van Buren Committees, to the Voters of
Tennessee.

Fellow- Citizens: In pursuance of our appointment, and in
discharge of the duties it enjoins, the undersigned beg leave
to address you on the absorbing topic of the Presidential elec
tion. We are fully apprised of the great solicitude which the
people of Tennessee now feel in that event. We remember
well, for we participated with you in the feefing, how warmly
you exulted on two former occasions, in the election of your
most illustrious citizen to that high office. We remember, too,
how eagerly the citizens of Tennessee caught at the very first
suggestion, that they might furnish a successor in the person
of Judge White, and know well how reluctantly they will part
with the expectation of being able to do so, whilst a single ray
of hope is left to brighten and illumine the prospect — all this
was perfectly natural, and might well be expected of a gen
erous and confiding people, grateful for long continued and
faithful public services.
Experience has, however, long since taught us, that our first
impressions are not always the best ones ; and that in a gov
ernment like ours, it is often dangerous to follow the sugges
tions of local partialities. When, in 1824, the ancient Com
monwealth of Virginia, with incautious attachment to her
Southern favorite, cast her vote against Gen. Jackson, little did
she think of the years of bitterness and sorrow she would have

AN ADDRESS, 443
to pass through, in order to retrieve the error. When, in the
same election, the State of Kentucky bestowed her suffrage
on her own favorite and talented citizen, when there was no
rational hope of his success, little did she suspect that she was
bringing shame and defeat on the great republican cause,
whose principles she had always sustained with such gallant
devotion ! Believing, as we do, that if Tennessee errs in the
coining election, it will be on the same ground; and being so
lemnly convinced that such error must be followed by the same
bitter consequences, we feel disposed to appeal to our fellow-
citizens to review their first impressions, and to examine, with
care, the various topics fairly involved in the approaching elec
tion. We propose to discuss those topics on the present occa^
sion — temperately, but freely — to assume no fact which we do
not believe to be true, and to draw no conclusions not fairly
warranted by those facts. We propose to reason, not to abuse ;
to argue, not to upbraid. We should despise to wear the lau
rels of invective, when temperate and fair argument could not
achieve the victory. In Tennessee, at the present moment)
there is peculiar difficulty in observing the proper courtesies of
debate. In our public addresses, in our newspaper communi
cations, and even in our ordinary conversational arguments,
there is evidently wanting that mutual concession and forbear
ance, which leave the social relations of life uninjured, how
ever vehement the debate, or however wide the difference of
opinion. This defect does not arise from any irritability of
temper, so much as from the great unanimity of sentiment that
has heretofore prevailed amongst us, in relation to Presiden
tial elections. All, or nearly all, of us have been heretofore
in favor of our present Chief Magistrate — of the man and his
measures. Lentil now, we have undergone no discipline in the
school of controversy, where, if we prove truant to its stern and
rigid rules, we can expect nothing but friendships severed, and
the kindest associations pf life sundered forever.
There are but two candidates who seem to occupy much of
the attention of the people of Tennessee in the present elec
tion, and both claim to be members of the Republican party.
The friends of Mr. Van Buren claim for him greater accepta-
bUity, and the earhest designation by that party as its candi-

444 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
date, and deprecate a division in its ranks as dangerous to its
success. The friends of Judge White object to the mode of
his designation, and insist that all caucus nominations, being
unauthorized by the laws of the land, or by the Constitution,
are inconsistent with the freedom of elections, and dangerous
to the liberties of the country. This we believe to be a fair
statement of the original issue between the parties, whatever
form more recent events may have given to the controversy.
It will be a matter of surprise to the future historian, to find
how much of this controversy was made to turn on the mode, or
manner, by which their respective claims have been brought
before the public by their friends. The right man ought always
to be elected, hov/ever wronghiB nomination. No imprudence
of himself or friends, either in the time or manner of bringing
him forward, ought ever to defeat the election of a candidate
whose claims were superior to those of his competitor. But as
to the mode of nomination, but little difference is perceivable.
Both were nominated by a caucus ; Judge White by a legisla
tive caucus, Mr. Van Buren by a national one. Both were
equally self-constituted, and both therefore equally irresponsi
ble. The members of the Alabama Legislature did not pre
tend to represent their constituents in their conditional nomi
nation of Judge White ; and if they had, it would have been
notorious to the whole world, that they were never delegated
for that purpose. They could only presume to announce their
own opinions, and what they supposed the opinions of the
people of Alabama to be; and, therefore, their nomination did
furnish some evidence of public sentiment in Alabama, in rela
tion to the Presidency. So would the declaration of the four
or five hundred persons, whether rendered as delegates or as
individuals, who assembled at Baltimore, furnish like pre
sumption of the state of public sentiment in the United States.
Neither could nor was intended to be final nor binding on the
people ; both were intended only to be introductory and persua
sive; neither was valid, unless ultmately confirmed by the
people. Whilst Judge White is compelled to date his designation, as
a candidate, from the period of his Alabama nomination, aU
candid and well informed persons must admit that Mr. Van

AN ADDRESS. 445
Buren had been designated as the candidate intended tob e
run by the Republican party, long before the Baltimore nomi
nation. The opposition saw it whilst he was a member of
Gen. Jackson's cabinet. They saw it when they rejected his
nomination as minister to England. They saw it in the over
whelming vote by which the party elected him to the second
office of the government. It was so declared in the public
journals of the day, and was perceivable from the debates on
the fioor of Congress. No one man in America was taken by
surprise, for all men anticipated that he would be run by the
party. On the other hand, no one can pretend that there was
the slightest anticipation, either by friends or enemies, that
Judge White would be brought forward.
The proceedings by Alabama were like " a clap of thunder
in a clear sky," with no previous glare of the lightning to an
nounce its approach. As to priority of designation, it is, there
fore, fair to say, Mr. Van Buren has the advantage of Judge
White. As to the mode of presentation, if Judge White rely on
primary assemblies of the people, Mr. Van Buren, before and
since his nomination at Baltimore, can outnumber him in that
way. If he rely on legislative nominations, Mr. Van Buren
has an equal, if not a greater number in his favor. If he rely
on the caucus of the " immortal eleven," Mr. Van Buren can
cast off all the objectionable votes given in the Baltimore Con
vention, and still hold up that nomination, all be-ruchered, as it
may be, as an hundred fold better than that of Bell, Crockett
& Co. We believe the plain truth of this part of the subject
is, that whilst some common enemy of the party was expected to
take the field against Mr. Van Buren, the whole party, to a man.
Judge White and all his friends, were resolved to stand undi
vided and unflinching in his favor. Then no one of the Repub
lican party denied to Mr. Van Buren the possession of abilities
of a very high order. Who, then, complained of his tergiversa
tions and inconsistencies as a politician ? Who branded him
then, with the odious epithet of Abolitionist, alhougth every
one knew what his course had been on the Missouri question ?
Who of all his associates in politics, (Judge White amongst the
rest.) did not acknowledge with gratitude, the unwavering sup
port given by him and his friends, to Gen. Jackson's adminis-

446 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
tration — not in the days of sunshine and prosperity, but in the
darkest and most gloomy- period of its existence. In that
celebrated panic session, when all the elements of opposition
lashed into fury by three of the most eloquent and talented men
in America, if not in the world, seemed ready to sweep away
Jackson and the Republican party, of which he was the head
and Tepresentative. During that session, in our opinion the
most critical ever witnessed in the history of this country, afi
of us must remember how firm and undaunted Mr. Van Buren
stood by the side of the President, " resolved to sink or swim,
to live or die," with the man who had filled the measure of his
country's honor. It was during that session when Virginia,
that Old Dominion, the mother of so many Presidents, deluded
for a moment, turned coldly away from him — Pennsylvania,
too, that key-stone of the arch — the second if not the first to
bring him forward for the Presidency, terrified by the threats of
the United States Bank, began to tremble and give him up. If
at that critical moment, the Empire State had not stood by him
and sustained him, with a constancy and firmness that aston
ished and delighted every republican bosom at the time, afi
must have been lost — Jackson and his party and his measures
must all have perished in one common grave. Now, all this
constancy and devotion presented Mr. Van Buren as a con
spicuous and shining object before the eyes of the Jackson
party, no respectable portion of which ever dreamed of not
supporting him against an opposition candidate.
Such was the unanimity of the Republican party in his favor,
that the distinguished leaders of the opposition, whose claims
had always been looked to for the same office, stood for a long
time baffled and discomfitted in their hopes of a successful
competition. In this state of irresolution among the op
position, it began to be suspected by some,, that probably no
candidate at all would be brought out by them, and in that
event, there was no necessity for all this unanimity in favor of
Mr. Van Buren. Here was the starting point of aU Judge
White's aspirations. It was here, on the e.rpress supposition
that no opposition candidate was likely to be presented, that ihe
friends of Judge White began to suggest that he was weU
quafified for the office of Chief Magistrate. The suggestion

AN ADDRESS. . 447
was followed up by some popular meetings in different coun
ties of this State, and finally ended in the conditional nomina
tion by the Alabama Legislature, and the annunciation by the
eleven members of Congress, that the Judge would be a
candidate. Now, we appeal to the recollection of every one,
whether in all those popular assemblies it was not well under
stood, that his pretensions were urged mainly on the improba
bility of an opposition candidate. The face of the Alabama
proceedings shows that fact in that State, and we appeal to
the documents published by the eleven members of Congress
to show, that these very members themselves proceeded in the
same idea, and themselves anticipated the probability of a
mistake on that point, and declare, that in such an event they
owe it to consistency and to the safety of the party with which
they had always acted, not to persist in urging Judge White's
pretensions. From the first moment of his being mentioned
as a candidate, many of the wise and experienced members of
the Republican party protested against it as hazardous and
impolitic ; they depicted the danger of disunion, and insisted
that the fact of having started two candidates would invite
an opposition candidate to the field. Such, however, were the
confident predictions to the contrary in Tennessee, that Judge
White was warmly taken up and pressed through many public
meetings with almost undivided enthusiasm. In the mean-
time.the opposition, with a vigilance that never slumbers, and
a sagacity that never fails to improve every opportunity, lay
back, concealing their own purposes, whilst the whole band of
them, NuUifiers, Bankmen, Federalists a,nd all, united in
chanting the praises of Judge White, until his friends were
truly astonished at his sudden ajo/xzrenf strength and popularity.
Not looking beyond the surface and appearance of things, nor
suspecting any sinister designs. Judge White, in an unlucky
moment — unlucky for his own fame and unlucky for the interest
and safety of the Republican party — gave his assent, and sur
rendered his name as a candidate for the Presidency.
The sagacious of all parties knew well how to account for
this sudden inflation of popularity, whilst others, either less
observant or blinded by local or personal attachments, really
entertained the opinion, from the unexpected developments in
30

448 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
his favor, that he was highly acceptable to the Republican
party, and even more so than Mr. Van Buren. Until now no
party caucus or conventional designation had been concluded
on in favor of Mr. Van Buren. Until now one continued and
unbroken line of circumstances had marked him out as the
favored and intended candidate of the party. But when aU
this began to be questioned, and some of the party, particularly
in Tennessee, began to claim for Judge White an equal, if not
a greater acceptability for the party, then, and not till then,
was it deemed generally to be either necessary or proper,
(though some might have proposed it before,) to hold any party
consultation on the subject. It waa about the time to which
we allude, that General Jackson thought proper to advise such
a consultation. Of that advice — of the time and manner of
giving it — and of the foul and crying injustice which has been
attempted to be inflicted on him for having given it, we intend
hereafter to speak. We advert to it now, only to give date to
the historical narrative, which we are attempting to furnish.
Againfet this party consultation, the friends of Judge White
protested with perpetual and vehement outcry. An adequate
motive for doing so, may be found in the fact, that in a consul
tation to determine which of two party candidates should be
run, none but the sincere and known friends of the party
would be admitted. Now, it would be easy to foresee what the
fate of Judge White's pretensions would be in any consultation
in which the voice of the NuUifiers, Bankmen, and Federalists
was not to be heard. We venture the assertion, that, exclude the
enemies of this administration from having a voice, in the matter,
and Judge White cannot now and never could have gotten a
nomination by a majority of its friends in any State of the
Union — Tennessee only excepted. That he has many valu
able and intelligent supporters here and elsewhere, that have
always and still adhere to the administration, is most true, but
that they constitute anything like a creditable approximation
toward a majority in any State in the Union, with the excep
tion aforesaid, is utterly denied. Hence the evident policy of
rejecting all general consultations with the party — of going
into no arrangement which did not let in and receive such of
his new friends as did not belong to the ranks of the adminis-

AN ADDRESS. 449
tration. This policy was adopted, has been persisted in, and
will never be departed from by Judge White and his friends.
He and they know that, if left to the determination of the
Jackson or Republican party, to determine either by State
nominations or by a National Convention, which shall be run
as their candidate, Judge White has not now, nor ever had, the
least chance of being selected for the purpose. It is, therefore,
evident that Judge White, though he may be in his own person
a Republican, and we have always so esteemed him, yet we
boldly aver that he is not the candidate of the Republican
party, but is, on the contrary, running directly against the
wishes of that party, and, of course, is relying on the aid of its
enemies for his election. We have always admitted that Ten
nessee was to be excepted out of this view of the subject. She
from the first, and most probably up to the present moment, is
in favor of Judge White, and yet Tennessee is a Republican
State. To Judge White she is and long has been greatly at
tached. To the Rep'ublican party, too, she has been devoted
ever since she had an existence. The principles of that party
as advocated by Jefferson, was the glory of her youth, and the
same principles as carried out and practiced by Jackson, have
become the very life-blood of her existence ! We speak of a
State in which we have long resided, and of a people whom we
have long known, when we say that, although Tennessee may
linger awhile in reluctant surrender of one of her favorite citi
zens, yet when the final struggle shall come on, she will let go
her hold upon men, and cling to her principles, with a death
grasp that will make her and them one and indivisible forever!
True, a few months may disclose the refutation of a now
pleasing prophecy ; still we cannot give up the hope, that when
Tennessee shall look out beyond her borders — when she shall
cast her eyes over the combined armies of the opposition —
when she shall see in that army the legions of Nullification,
Federalism, the mercenary Hessians of the Bank, and the
resuscitated forces of the American System, all in close but
unnatural array against the Republican party, she will not, she
cannot, draw the sword nor lift the battle-axe in such unholy
combination against herself, her principles, and her honor!
Those desperate leaders, who would plant the White banner

450 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
beside the black cockade of Federalism, and who would mingle
its emblematic folds with the single starred colors of Nullifica
tion, will then find that the people of Tennessee cannot be
induced to follow that standard into such strange and abomi
nable associations.
If it be inquired, what are those principles to which Tennes
see is likely to adhere with so much unyielding tenacity, we
answer that they are the principles of the Republican party.
Those principles which have given it its distinctive character
for nearly forty years, through a succession of administrations
from 1801, unbroken, save only in that of the younger Adams,
for that whole period; principles which the wisest and best of
our statesmen have ever deemed of the highest importance to
the welfare and prosperity of the country. To enumerate
them here, would imply too great a want of information on the
part of those whom we address, and to attempt to vindicate
their correctness, would seem like superadding to the labors of
Madison and Jefferson, and a long list of other patriots, whose
names are embalmed in the most cherished remembrance of
their countrymen. Granting, however, the importance and
correctness of these principles, it is sometimes asked, how are
they endangered in the present election ? We answer, by the
division of the party which always sustained them. Since the
great civil revolution of 1801, that party has never been beaten
but once, and that was effected only by division. In 1824, the
Republican party presented three competing candidates forthe
Presidency, in the persons of Mr. Crawford, Mr. Clay, and
General Jackson, whilst the Federal party presented but one,
in the person of Mr. Adams. True, Mr. Adams was regarded
at the time, by many, as a Republican, also, but the entire
unanimity with which the whole Federal party was supporting
him, soon dissipated all ideas of that kind, and the subsequent
events of his administration clearly showed, that he was em
phatically the candidate of the Federal party. No concert of
action — no harmony of feeling — no adjustment of pretensions
took place between the three Republican candidates, and the
consequence was, that the Federal one was elected. The Re
publicans felt the shock from one end of the continent to the
other. Virginia deplored that momentary infatuation, that

AN ADDRESS. 451
made her cling to her Southern favorite, long after she had
despaired of his success. Other States deeply lamented the
same error, and instantly resolved that, as division had lost the
sceptre, so harmony and concert of action should regain it.
Accordingly, in the next election, the Republican party concen
trated its whole strength upon General Jackson, and drove the
fiying and broken columns of Federalism before it in every
direction. N^ow, when Mr. Van Buren and Judge White were
first proclaimed as candidates, both claiming to be Republi
cans, was there no propriety in warning the party not to be
divided? Was there nothing in the experience of the past
which might induce the wise and prudent to advise a consulta
tion amongst friends, in order to bring about an adjustment of
their pretensions ? The ranks of the Federal party, always
strong in talents of the highest order, had lately been rein
forced by the NuUifiers, whose leader possessed more lofty
genius and consummate tact than any other man probably in
America, and whose subalterns, taking them rank and file,
constituted the very flower and chivalry of southern talent.
Add to these the acquisition of Mr. Clay, the first orator ofthe
age, with a strong influence of western friends, who had long
paid homage to his eloquence, and you present the Federal
party, at the close ofthe Panic session, formidable in numbers,
powerful in talent, and, through the United States Bank, in
exhaustible in resources. In the face of an enemy so huge
and vast, what lover of his country can lay his hand on his
heart and conscientiously blame General Jackson for warning
his countrymen against the danger of disunion in the Repub
lican party ? He was the head of that party — he was its
representative, and, like a faithful sentinel, gave the alarm !
For this, he has been denounced by a vile herd of editors as a
Dictator and Tyrant, and by his own representative in Congress
as an Elective Monarch !
Let us now inquire whether all these apprehensions of dan^
ger from division have not been confirmed by subsequent
events. We affirm, thatthe number, the position of the candi
dates, and the avowed and open and frequent declarations of
their friends, place the Repubhcan -party, even new, in imminent
hazard and danger. Should Judge White succ eed in carrying

452 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
off any respectable portion of the party, and that portion should
be disposed to throw itself into the common stock with Mr. Web
ster and General Harrison, the result becomes intensely dan
gerous. The two last have always stood ready for amalgama
tion at any moment. Identity of Federal sentiments produces
a mutual sympathy, which would render such amalgamation
both easy and natural. As to Judge White, it is now clearly
proved by the permitted amalgamation of the Harrison and
White ticket in Virginia, that however coyly he would have
submitted to the caresses of the opposition at first, he is now
considered by his friends as ready to yield himself up, soul and
body, to the prostituted embraces of all sorts of associations, in
order to defeat the election of Mr. Van Buren. No one ofthe
candidates, Mr. Webster, General Harrison, or Judge White,
ever expected, or now expects, to be elected by the people.
Their only reliance is on the House of Representatives. If
Judge White were to receive eveiy vote, in every State in the
Union" where he has a ticket running, he could not be elected.
It is evident, therefore, and his friends do not deny it, that he is
running, not for an election by the people, but by the House.
Now, it has long been a favorite principle of the Republican
party, never to let such an election go before Congress. The
contest between Mr. Jefferson and Burr, and the later defeat of
Gen. Jackson before that body, had clearly shown the danger
of sending it there. Not the least doubt can exist, that if
Judge White were not now a candidate, Mr. Van Buren would
be elected by the College of Electors. Here, then, is one of
the bitter fruits of this division of the party. It is thereby
compelled to give up an election by the People, and, forced by
Judge Wliite, to receive a President, whoever he may be, from
the foul and filthy combinations of the House of Representa
tives. The Republican party, at this very moment, is deeply
regretting the sacrifice of this very principle in her creed, and
it adds not a little to her affliction, that the sacrifice is induced
by one of her own formerly cherished and honored members !
Although even there she expects that Mr. Van Buren will proba
bly be elected, yet she feels confident that the country cannot
accept him from the hands of the House, with the same confi
dent assurance of untarnished purity as if he had never gone
there.

AN ADDRESS. 453
We desire the people of Tennessee to pause and look this
one fact steadily in the face, that, if it were not for the division
made by Judge White, Mr. Van Buren would certainly be
elected by the people over Gen. Harrison and Mr. Webster;
that, in consequence of this division, all the attempts at an
election next faU, will probably turn out a mere idle formality,
an empty show — bringing no results except to show the people
how impotent they are, and how easily Judge White, with the
co-operation of Mr. Webster and Gen. Harrison, has divisted
them of their rights, and transferred them to the trained and
hackneyed politicians of Congress. All this is now known to
and admitted by Judge White and his friends, and yet he shows
no disposition to heal the breach he has made, by withdrawing
from the contest as Judge M'Lead did, and thereby restore to
the people their just authority and influence in the election.
But if Judge White will persist in this co-operation with the
two Federal candidates, to throw the election into the House
of Representatives, where no sound-hearted Democrat ever
desired to see it, it becomes you solemnly to consider whether
you will continue to adhere to him under such circumstances.
In sustaining him thus far, you have done all that State pride
or personal attachment required at your hands. To go for him
and with him further, is to sacrifice one of the oldest and best
established principles of the Republican party. Those who
called him out, did not require or expect you to go further.
They themselves have declared that he ought to be dropped,
whenever the safety of the party, or its principles, would be
endangered by continuing to run him. Under this pledge and
assurance given by " the eleven," every man in the State has
a right now, before further mischief is done, to require and de
mand it of them to withdraw Judge White from this combina
tion with the Federal candidates. Instead, however, of with
drawing him, and so redeeming their solemn pledges, the most
distinguished one of them is now traversing the State, in order
to convince you that it is well enough for this party to be
divided — that it has become corrupt — that its head and leader
has made this Republic an Elective Monarchy, and it is, there
fore, high time to effect its overthrow and destruction !
This bold charge of corruption against the administration of

454 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS,
Andrew Jackson, has not even the merit of novelty to sustain
it. It is the old charge made by David Crockett at the close of
nearly every session of Congress in which he served, as an
excuse for having voted with and sustained the opposition.
But, in our opinion, it has as little truth as novelty. General
Jackson has chani^ed ! Why, then, is it that every Bank man,
and every Federalist, and every NuUifier, and every American
System man in America, is still against him as much as ever ?
Can it be possible that Andrew Jackson can have become false
to his party, false to his principles, and false to his country,
and yet not have conciliated a single one of the various parties
and interests leagued against him ? No, fellow-citizens, the
charge is false, and is only made to an insulted community, in
order to cover the disgrace of their own defection.
We know the earnestness with which these modern seceders
from the Republican ranks, insist on the total obliteration of all
party distinction ; their arguments on this point are based on
the insulting idea, that there was nothing important or sincere
in the mighty struggle which has been going on for nearly
half a century between the tvvo great political parties of this
country. Nearly every old Federal doctrine has been revived,
and others, more modern, but not less dangerous, have been
contended for, during the last seven years of Jackson's admin
istration. But the people of Tennessee have, however, united
with their Republican brethren of other States, in sustaining
the venerable representative of the Republican party in his
noble resistance against all these abominable heresies. How
is it then, that at the close of his administration, when all these
antagonist principles stand out in open array, proudly boast
ing that they will prevail and triumph against his successor,
how is it we ask, that these "no party" leaders can call upon
you, at such a crisis, to abolish all party distinctions, to dis
miss all your forces, to disband the vetern legions of Demo
cracy and tamely surrender yourselves, without even terms of
capitulation, into, the hands of your enemies ! We warn you
not to confide in such advisers. They proclaim " peace among
parties," when they know there can be no honorable peace.
They exhort you to disband and unarm, only that you may be
an easy victim to Federal domination and misrule. They give

AN ADDRESS. 455
you insidious counsel, that would betray you into the hands of
an enemy, who would delight to carry you in chains to the foot
of tiie Bank, or to lead you, in triumphant mockery, through
the camps of Nullification and Federalism, the degraded cap
tives of your own credulity and folly. These enemies, against
whose machinations we warn j^ou, know well that General
Jackson has not changed, and that Martin Van Buren stands
bound, by repeated and public pledges, to carry out the mea
sures and principles of his administration. These pledges they
know he will redeem, and in that redemption they see their
own discomfiture and ruin. On the other hand, they have seen
repeated symptoms not to say proofs of Judge White's defection
from Gen. Jackson and his administration, which encourage
them in the belief, that in him they would not find so stern and
inflexible an opponent as in Mr. Van Buren. Nay, more, the
recent course of Judge White has excited high expectations,
that from the obligations they may lay him under by their sup
port, and from the hatred now excited between him and Gen.
Jackson, they may presently claim him as common properly of
all their different factions — obedient to their will and subject
to their direction. We would not have you to understand that
we believe all these degraded expectations would ever be re
alized — for although we are opposed to his election, we cannot
believe that he would ever become such a puppet in the hands
of any set of wire-workers whatsoever. Still we do believe,
that when he shall know and feel that he is indebted to these
factions for his elevation, and without their continued aid he
could not sustain himself in his new office, that the fear of dis
grace, added to a sense of obligation, would exert a most un
happy influence over him. To suppose otherwise, is at open
war with the known principles of human nature, and would
exalt Judge White too high above the ordinary standard of
human excellence.
We now wish to call your attention to the President's dicta
tion. This is the watch-word ofthe White party in Tennessee.
It is found in every conversation, and in every written essay,
onthe Presidential election. It is now used by the managers
of the Tennessee press, to rouse the prejudices of a brave and
jealous people, ever ready to resent the slightest encroachments

458 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
on their rights and privileges. Propose to such a people to
appoint over them a Roman Dictator, clothed with absolute
authority, and you rouse into action every indignant feefing of
their nature. Or tell such a people, that some great man of
the nation has issued his commands or has sent forth his orders
exacting obedience to his mandates, and you fill them at once
with the deepest indignation. All this is well known to the
managers aforesaid, and hence it is, that the cry of dictation
has been raised, and vociferated from one end of the State to
the other, against our heretofore respected and venerated
Chief Magistrate. These adroit managers hope to excite the
people to such a height of jealous indignation, as to draw off
their attention from the investigation ofthe truth of the charges
which they have preferred against the President, and thus,
amidst a storm of calumny and detraction, silence the admo
nitions of one of the best and purest patriots that ever lived.
If the people of Tennessee are jealous of encroachments on
their rights, they are equally intelligent to detect the shallow
artifices by which it is attempted to divert the noble and hon
orable frailties of their nature to the subserviency of party
purposes. We invite them, therefore, to suspend any momentary indig
nation into which the frequency and boldness of these charges
may have thrown them, and temperately inquire whether it be
true, that General Jackson is now attempting, or has ever at
tempted, to play the dictator over you. " To dictate," means
to declare or deliver to another witJi authority. " Dictation " is
the act of so declaring and delivering with authority, and is
very nearly the same in its import as the word command. Ad
vice, counsel, admonition, are all totally distinct from dictation.
The advice oi a friend we may disapprove, the counsel of a
parent we may reject, tho admonition of the wise and great we
may disregard ; still we never speak of these as dictators, or as
persons who intend or desire to enfore obedienceto their sugges
tions. We continue to honor and respect them for their good
intentions and kind feelings, but never look upon them as ene
mies on whom we should heap epithets of reproach and con
demnation. Now, in the fight of these definitions, we invite the people

AN ADDRESS. 457
of Tennessee to go back in regular review to the various acts
charged against Gen. Jackson as amounting to dictation. The
first allegation against him, is the celebrated letter to the
Rev. Mr. James Gwin. This letter was written about the time
when the greatest apprehensions existed of danger to the Re
publican cause by division in its ranks. The wise and experi
enced and virtuous of the Republican party deprecated the
idea of the Republicans starting two candidates for the Presi
dency. They greatly feared that, by doing so, the sceptre
would depart from their hands and be given over to the com
mon enemies of their principles, the NuUifiers, Bankmen and
Federahsts. Up to this period. General Jackson had never
interfered. He had never spoken one solitary word against
Judge White, as far as the public v/as apprised. But one, if
not more, of the NashviUe papers commenced a series of pub-
fications, in which they attempted to prove that Gen, Jackson
was in favor of Judge White; that from their early associations
and agreement of opinions, he must of necessity be so. After
urging this view of the subject, they supposed the contrary,
and then argued, in a very reprehensible style, that the people
of Tennessee would never submit to the dictation of General
Jackson. Let it be remembered, that this charge of dictation
was made before General Jackson had said one single word on
the subject, and was predicated on the bare supposition that he
might not be in favor of Judge White. So soon as these arti
cles met the eye ofthe President, he was satisfied that he ought
to interpose and prevent the impression that he was in favor
of either of the candidates, or rather, that he was not more in
favor of one than the other. That he ought to interpose to
prevent the impression that he was in favor of dividing the
party which had so gallantly supported him, by bringing for
ward two candidates, to the evident danger of defeating both
of them. With this view he wrote the Gwin letter. Now, the
question is, was that a letter of dictation? We deny that it
was; the friends of Judge White assert that it was. This,
then, is the issue. Let it be determined by the letter itself.
We suppose it to be in the recoUection of the reader, and chal
lenge the pointing out of a single clause that looks like dicta
tion. He complains of the course pursued by those papers,

458 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
and denies that they have any authority for saying that he was
for or against either of them. It then avows, that he is in
favor of that one, whoever it might be, who could concentrate
on himself the greatest strength of the Republican party ; and
for the purpose of ascertaining who that was, he recommended
a consultation through the instrumentality of a Convention,
whose representatives should come, in the much abused and
often ridiculed expression, " fresh from the people." We write
from recollection of the contents of that letter, and aver that
no part or clause of it can be made out stronger than the mere
advice and counsel of General Jackson to his political friends,
and not a dictation of his will and pleasure, to deprive them of
their just rights of voting as they pleased. Gen. Jackson, as
the head and representative of the Republican party, may well
be supposed to entertain the liveliest solicitude for its success
and preservation. Believing that he saw danger to it by divi
sion, and that the course pursued by these NashviUe newspapers
was making him instrumental in creating and increasing that
danger, he wrote the letter of counsel or advice to one of his old
neighbors and fellow-soldiers in his wars. Now, for doing this
he has been denounced from that day to this, by all the presses
and warm advocates of Judge White, as a dictator ! Is it dic
tation to give one's advice ? If so, our friends, our parents, who
warn us against impending dangers, are our enemies, and, in
stead of our thanks, ought to receive our maledictions. True,
General Jackson might be accused of giving bad advice, or
even of being intrusive in giving it at all, but that is not the
question. It is not whether he gave good or bad advice, or
gave it with good or bad manners, but whether Gen. Jackson
has dictated to the people of Tennessee — whether he committed
encroachments on the rights and privileges of the people when
they are approaching the ballot-box ? We might refer to the
history of his whole life for a refutation of such a charge. He
who has devoted himself so long to the service of his country,
who has so often risked his life and bared his bosom in defence
of the peoples' rights, could hardly desire now to turn round,
and, with unhallowed violence, take them away ! It is impos
sible that it can be so. General Jackson, whatever may be his
anxiety about the next election, we feel confident, would not

AN ADDRESS, 459
deprive the poorest and the most ragged man in the State, of
the right of voting as he pleased, to secure the election of any
man on earth ! We still return to the Gwin letter. We hold
the calumniators who preferred the charge of dictation, and
the designing who have so often repeated it, to that very docu
ment, and demand to know why they have attempted to excite
the people of Tennessee to distrust and disaffection against
the best friend they ever had, on such false and baseless a
foundation. Why have they tortured his correspondence into
so strange and unnatural a meaning? Why have they, when
he was far distant, busily engaged in administering the gov
ernment, in precise accordance with the wishes of the people,
taken the advantage of him, and loaded him with epithets
which he never deserved, and perverted a letter, written in the
spirit oipaternal counsel, into one of tyrannical diction. When the
excitement of tbi^ election is over, the people of Tennessee,
ever true to him who was ever true to them, will turn and de
mand a terrible settlement of accounts with all those who have
thus traduced him and endeavored to impose upon tliem.
We will now consider the Gwin letter as one of advice and
counsel, and see if, the Pesident be justly blameable for having
written it.
In the first place, these newspaper editors at Nashville, had
no right to appropriate Gen. Jackson's name to Judge White,
or any other candidate. They had no light to make the public
believe that Gen. Jackson was in favor of running two candi
dates on the Republican ticket. Such an impression was false
in fact, and placed Gen. Jackson in a very inconsistent attitude
before the nation. These editors knew this, but supposed
that as Gen. Jackson was a great way off, and was filling the
highest office of the government, that either he would not see
them, or seeing, would not reply to their publications, ventured
to make the false impression in Tennessee, that Gen. Jackson
was in favor of running Judge White. It was, in short, an in
solent attempt to dictate to Gen. Jackson, much stronger than
any he has made to dictate to the people of Tennessee. Gen.
Jackson had, therefore, a clear right to deny the assertions and
false statements, as he regarded them, of these editors. When
doing so, it was very natural and proper for him to state for

460 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
himself what his true position on the subject really was. What
was that position ? That he was in favor of whatever candi
date was most acceptible to the party which had supported
him and his measures. If that one proved to be Hugh L.
White, then he was for him ; if it proved to be Mr. Van Buren
then he was for him ; his great object being, not to divide and
thereby endanger the Republican cause, for which he had been
toiling and laboring for so many years.
But in writing that letter, he is said to have departed from
the example of Mr. Jefferson. Mr. Jefferson has set us no
example under similar circumstances. When Mr. Madison
was about to be brought forward, Mr. Monroe was also spoken
of-^they were both equally his neighbors and personal
friends — they were both undoubted Republicans. There could,
therefore, be no great principles involved— both would ad
minister the government On principles perfectly satisfactory
to Mr. Jefferson — hence he might well determine to pre
serve a strict neutrality. But who can believe that if Mr.
Jefferson had seen the Republican cause in iminent danger;
who can believe that if he had heard the war-dogs of Federal
ism howling around the still and quiet camps of the RepubU
cans, that he would not instantly have raised the alarm ? Every
village and homestead in the nation would have heard his ap
peal, and, like Jackson, he would have exhorted his country
men to union and harmony of action!
Another act has been complained of as an unwarrantable
interference with the elective franchise. We mean the frank
ing of the Globe, a newspaper printed at the city of Washing
ton, to the members of the last Legislature of Tennessee. These
newspapers contained the speeches of Mr. Benton on his cele
brated "Expunging Resolutions." The practice of franking (or
sending free of postage) is allowed to the President, and other
officers of government, and to members of Congress, by the
laws of the land. It applies to letters, newspapers, and other
documents, without restriction as to what they may contain.
Mr. Benton's resolutions related to a point in Gen. Jackson's
public conduct, of the greatest delicacy to himself now, and of
the highest importance to his future fame. The most factious
and corrupt Senate that ever sat in America, had branded him

AN ADDRESS. 401
on its journals as a violator of the Constitution of his country.
He had protested against this act of unjust condemnation, but
that protest had been insultingly disallowed. Having no other
akernative left for his vindication, he laid that protest before
the people, and appealed to them, as the true source of power
and final arbiter of all disputes between their public agents.
Was it not, therefore, his right to lay before the representa
tives of the people, all public speeches and documents calcu
lated to explain and vindicate his conduct in relation to the
removal ofthe pubhc deposites? He stood unjustly condemned
by the Senate — he was earnestly desiring that that sentence
should be reversed, by instructions given by the State Legis
latures to their Senators in Congress. He was, therefore, per
fectly justifiable in sending out, under his frank, every speech
or document calculated to shed light on his conduct. The right
of defence you aUov/ to your worst offenders; why then shall
it not be given to one of the greatest benefactors of the age ?.
But, it is said that such documents and speeches were calculated
to injure Judge White in the same proportion as they might
benefit Gen. Jackson. Let this be granted, and then we de
mand to know why Gen. Jackson shall be denied the benefit of
his appeal to the people, because Judge White was opposing
that appeal, and was unwilling to have this foul reproach ex
punged from the journals, where it ought never to have been
placed. Gen. Jackson had made that appeal, and Mr. Benton
had notified the country that he would never cease his efforts
to wipe out the stigma, long before Judge White became a can
didate for the Presidency, or any of his friends dreamed that
such high destiny awaited him. If he chose afterward to op
pose that appeal, and to join in with the defamers of the Presi
dent in holding the unjust stigma to the record, ought he to
expect Gen. Jackson to give over his exertions and to abandon
his defence, only because it brought into question the cause and
conduct of Judge White?
We do not intend to discuss the expunging question, we mean
only to vindicate the President from the charge of intending
to injure Judge White, by abusing his franking privileges. He
¦was strictly engaged in his own defence, in the vindication of his
own character, and had set outand determined on that vindi-

462

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

cation long before Judge White was interested in the subject.
Another, and the last charge we shall notice, is that which
relates to the conduct of the President during his late visit to
Tennessee. During that visit he has been abused and misre
presented in the most wanton and shameful manner. He de
clared that private business of importance had brought him home
to Tennessee — to that home which in his absence had been con
sumed by the devouring flames — -to that home, where laid in
terred his once loved and much calumniated companion — to
that home, where his own grave had been opened, with strict
injunction that no matter in what land he might breathe his
last, that here, beneath the sod of Tennessee, so often protected
by his valor, and identified with him in so many of the illustrious
and glorious achievements of his life, his mortal remains should
be deposited. But to such a home, so endeared, and to such a
State, so honored, he is not permitted to come without his mo
tives and purposes being slandered and misrepresented ! We
cannot take time to enumerate all that h^s been said. Suffice
it to say, that it is charged upon him, in passing through some
of the congressional districts, he spoke unfavorably of their
representatives in Congress. We have no doubt that he did,
and have as little doubt that he ought to have done so. Shall
members of Congress, on the floor of debate, or amongst their
constituents denounce Andrew Jackson as a tyrant and dicta
tor — as an elective monarch and a conspirator against public
liberty, and then complain that Andrew Jackson has the spirit
and the nerve to fling back the tide of reproach upon them
selves? No man at all acquainted with his character ever ex
pected the contrary. But it is said that on certain occasions he
has denounced Judge White ! And has not Judge White as
often denounced Gen. Jackson ? If the latter ever said of the
former, that he was leagued with the Federalists, has not Judge
Wliite insinuated that Jackson was a wolf in sheep's clothing
and a conspirator against the liberty of the people? We do
not pretend to adjust the account nor strike the balance on the
score of hard words, between these distinguished individuals, for
we have not the information enabfing us to be precise as to what
they have said, or which resorted first to the use of opprobrious
epithets. But we assure you, feUow-citizens, from what we have

AN ADDRESS. 4(13
beard and from what we know of the equally irascible temper of
both, that honors are very likely to be easy on that score. '
We submit no apology to the community, for this frequency
of reference to Gen. Jackson-r-to his principles and measures,
and to the gross and frequent injustice that has been done to
him by the various factions now composing the opposition to
his administration. The last victory of Democracy was
achieved in his person, and the Republican party stood united
and concentrated on him when Judge White, Gen. Harrison,
and Mr. Webster took the field as Presidential candidates.
No one of them, nor all combined, have any chance of suc
cess, but by effecting divisions and schisms in our ranks. This
can never be done so effectually as by destroying the great
and deserved popularity of Gen. Jackson with the Repubhcan
party. That being accompUshed, his measures and principles
of policy fall with him, and With their overthrow, Mr. Van
Buren's must follow of course. Hence it is, that in every at
tack the opposition have closely identified Gen. Jackson
with Mr. Van Buren, and thus rendered the defence of the one
essentially the vindication of the other.
We now wish to bring this address to a close. In mak
ing this appeal, we have nothing to accomplish but what
we sincerely believe is equally desired by a vast number ofthe
friends of Judge White, tow it : the preservation of the sound
principles of our government. We are solemnly convinced,
that such preservation requires us forthwith to give up the sup
port of Judge White, and to unite with our Republican brethren
of other States in the support of Mr. Van Buren, and thereby
enable the people to make choice of the next President, instead
of the House of Representatives. In this, we know a large
portion of our fellow-citizens may differ from us in opinion.
We, therefore, earnestly desire your attention to another view
of the Presidential subject, which we believe you ought to
take. If you are determined to cast the vote of Tennessee to
Judge White, and to risk the consequences which we have at
tempted to portray, what course do you intend to take when,
after all your exertions, he may have to be surrendered ? If
no election is made by the people, and the candidates shall go
before the House, and if Judge White (being one of them) shall
31

464 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
be unable to succeed, who, then, shall be supported by the
members of Congress from this State ? A majority of them, it
is known, will vote for Judge White ; but, he being dropped,
who will they support afterward? You have made known to
them your wishes as to Judge White, but as yet you have told
them nothing of your second choice. We think we hazard
nothing, when we say, that it is now as certain that Mr. Van
Buren is the second choice of Tennessee, as it has ever been
that Judge White was her first choice ; and yet we have the
most awful forebodings that, in the contest between Mr. Van
Buren and Gen. Harrison, or Mr. Webster, that a majority of
our present members of Congress would vote for either of the
two latter against Mr. Van Buren. We, therefore, most ear
nestly appeal to the friends of Judge White, to make known
their wishes on this point to our Representatives in Congress-
Convene in the same manner, and make known to them your
second in the same manner as you did your first choice. We
implore you not to slight nor neglect our admonitions on this
point. We do believe that, in all probability, the next election
is destined to be decided by the House. When it shall have
gone there, after a few ballotings, it will be found necessary to
drop Judge White ; and, when that is done, we do greatly fear
that the vote of Tennessee may be made to turn the scale in
favor of one or the other of the Federal candidates. The mo
ment that is done, what must be the remorse of Tennessee for
having given up her power and her rights to a few members of
Congress, to barter away her principles, and plunge her into
associations which, in her heart, she detests and abhors. To
' avoid such evils, our first advice is, not to let this election go to
the House at all — not to place the destiny of a great and
brave people into the hands of your members of Congress — to
keep that destiny, under the providence of God, in your own
hands, by electing that one of the Republican candidates who
can, in the first instance, with your assistance, be elected by the
people'. This is the voice of reason and safety, echoed back by
the soundest Republican maxims. But, if you will not do this^
our second advice is, that you make known to your Represen
tatives that, however warmly they sustain Judge White, both in
and out of the House, yet when the hom- shaU come that their

AN ADDRESS. 465
attachment can no longer be serviceable to him, that they must
instantly fiy to the support of the other Republican candidate,
and in no event vote for a Federal one. By pursuing such a
course, if you do not gain the credit of following the dictates
of the highest wisdom, you at least avoid the perpetration of
the greatest folly and mischief to your country.
We intend to commit no trespass on your patience, in pro-
nofincing an eulogium on Martin Van Buren. Our opinions of
him have been frequently stated throughout this address on the
great questions now involved in the politics of this country.
His private life is above reproach, and his public career is
written on the proudest pages of our Republican history. He
received the vote of Hugh Lawson White as Secretary of State,
as Minister to England, and as Vice President of this great Re
public. Slander has often assailed, but truth and honor have
ever sustained him in the most trying conflicts through which
his devotion to the Democracy of the country ever required
him to pass. Throughout this whole contest, bitter and severe
as it has been, he has borne himself with a dignity and equa
nimity of temper, which must ever command the admiration of
the intelligent and liberal of all parties.
Pulaski Committee. Robert A. Hewitt,
A. V. Brown, Henry W. Williams.
A. Flournoy Cornersville Committee.
Thos. P. Adams, Simeon Marsh,
W. F. Mason, John B. Rodgers,
James Paine, William James, Sr.,
G. A. Gloover , R. W. Robinson,
W. R. Brown, Joseph Nance,
James Buford, Woodson Walker,
Jesse Abeenathy, Henry Wineow.
Thomas Martin, Elkton Committee.
Wm. C. Flournoy. jj. B. Harny,
Campbellsville Committee. Jj^q. A. Austin
Lewis Parker, D. H. Abernathy,
Samuel Faries, L. G. Upshaw,
James P. Deanes, Joseph Goode.

LETTER OF AARON V. BROWN,
To his Constituents of the Tenth Congressional District of the
State of Tennessee, September, 1842.

Gentlemen : Never, in the course of many years of public
life, have I so much desired to return to the bosom of a gen
erous and noble-hearted constituency, to see you face to face,
and to commune freely with you on the present state of our
public affairs. But 1 find that I can have no such high gratifi
cation. Those who now rule the destinies of this country, seem
to have resolved that the sovereign remedy for existing evils is
perpetual legislation — so neafly perpetual, that they do not
leave, between one session and another, sufficient time to the
Representative (if he attend at all to his private concerns) to
return to his district, and inhale fresh inspirations of wisdom
and virtue from his constituency. The perplexing question is
often asked, what the people of this country have gained by
the Whig triumphs of 1840 ? Whatever of difficulty the domi
nant party may find in answering this question, one thing is
certain, that they have kept Congress so long in session, that
every one of them who are members of it, have been able
to draw from the public treasury at the rate of eight dol
lars per day for every day since the 4th of March, 1841. This
certainly is something to them, whatever it may be to the people.
Never, in the annals of any country, so far as legislation was
concerned, did a party have so full and so fair a chance to
accomplish some great and striking advancement of the public

A LETTER. 467
good. They came into power on the 4th of March, 1841,
flushed with victory, and proudly boasting of an immense ma
jority in both branches of the National Legislature. They
elected their own presiding officers — appointed their own com
mittees. They decreed in caucus what particular subjects
should be acted on, and what should be excluded. They estab
lished their own rules, breaking down all the ancient safeguards
of legislation. They suppressed everything fike freedom of
debate, by placing the infamous gag on their opponents,
thereby silencing all opposition to their proceedings. In fine,
they did what they pleased, when they pleased, and as they
pleased. 1 do not mean at this point to discuss the measures oi
the called session : that belongs to another part of my letter.
I am now dealing with narrative, not with commentary.
During the early portion of their career, all was peace and
harmony in their party. I mean all that met, or was intended
" to meet the public eye," was such. At length, however, the
foul demon of discord appeared amongst their ranks. I say
appeared, for I do not doubt he had always been there. How
could any man doubt it ? Their unnatural combinations, their
strange and contemptible devices, and all the vile and corrupt
ing means by which they achieved their victory, clearly show
that they were " possessed of a demon" from the beginning.
In overthrowing the sub-treasury, and undoing, in hot and
inconsiderate haste, many things which had been done by
Jackson and Van Buren, all were perfectly united. Mr. Clay
in the Senate, and Mr. Adams in the House, actuated by all
the feelings of revenge which frequent discomfiture could in
spire, led on in this inglorious work of destruction. But when
they came to buUd up for themselves and their party those
institutions and measures which were to be substituted for those
which they had destroyed, all became discord and confusion.
Mr. Clay wanted a bank for individual speculation. President
Tyler would have none which was not purely national and
pubfic in its functions, and strictly guarded against local dis
counts. The former looking more to the interest of his parti
sans, the latter to that of the nation, their differences became
irreconcilable. The consequence was, the two vetoes on both
the bank bUls. The President stood on his conscience and the

468

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

Constitution ; Mr. Clay on his bank ; whilst the cabinet, (ex
cept Mr. Webster,) thinking, no doubt, that it was all nonsense
to be talking about conscience and the Constitution at such a
party crisis as that, suddenly threw up their commissions, and
retired fi-om the public service. At this trying period in. their
history, some few of the Whig party conducted themselves with
a show of reasonable moderation. They seemed to have some
respect forthe sacred obligations ofthe President's oath ; and
however much they differed with him in opinion, in his construc
tion of the Constitution, they could not censure that regard for
moral obligation which the President had so fully evinced on the
occasion. But the Clay portion of the party scoffed at all tjiis,
as hypocritical and idle. They denounced him as a traitor; the
vile wretch at the other end of the avenue ; the perjured miscre
ant ; besides many other terms of wanton and unmerited re
proach. The great dictator to his party, and the would-have-
been dictator to John Tyler, raved and roared like a lion deprived
of his prey. In his rage and fury, he seized on the great con
servative power ofthe Constitutton, and vainly endeavored to
tear it out from that consecrated instrument. I say vainly en
deavored, although this war on the veto power is not yet termi
nated : it is yet raging ; and we have witnessed, at the present
session, the strange and appalling spectacle of Mr. Clay, in the
Senate, endeavoring to pull down this, the noblest pillar in the
Constitution ; whilst Mr. Adams, in the House, was taking the
most effectual means to overthrow the whole Constitution and
the Union together.
Such was the actual condition of the Whig party at the
close of the ever-memorable called session of 1841. I speak
not yet oi their measures — their tendency to prostrate all the
best interests of the country- — nor of the highly censurable,
not to say flagitious, means by which they were carried through
Congress. I have another time and place for all this. My
purpose is next to call your attention to the extraordinary con
dition of parties at the commencement of the present ses
sion of Congress — the regular one under the Constitution.
Warned by their failure to do anything valuable or useful to
the country at the preceding session, and alarmed at the indig
nant murmurs of the peopfe, the Clay portion of the Whig

A LETTER. 469
party, at the very earliest moment, declared that they would
no longer be responsible for the management of public affairs.
The President, they said, had separated himself from them.;
and, as he had set up to have both a conscience and a judgment
of Ids own, upon him should rest the responsibility of admin
istering the government. Now, it was known that, although
the President was a Whig — that every member of his cabinet
was a Whig — and that he had a brave and gallant little band
of Whig friends in the House — yet it was evidently impossible
for him to meet this new responsibility, without a new organi
zation of at least the House of Representatives. Did the Clay
Whigs give the Tyler Whigs (as they should have done) the
ability and means of meeting this responsibility, thus suddenly
thrown upon them ? As a member of the Democratic party —
belonging to neither, but determined to go with either, as far
as I could consistently with my principles, in advancing the
welfare of the country — I do not hesitate to say that they did
not From time immemorial it has been customary to give the
Administration in being, the Speaker and the standing com
mittees of the House, in order to give it a fair opportunity to
bring forward and fully present its measures to the nation-r-a
practice no less sanctioned by the principles of liberality and
justice, than by immemorial usage. The President had vetoed,
and, pro tanlo, had rejected Mr. Clay's views and projects in
relation to banks and the currency — the great questions of the
times — on which, as it was alleged, all the relief of the people
from pecuniary embarrassment depended. In consequence of
which, his quondam friends were now declaring that all respon-.
sibility should be on him, and not on them. Was it, then,
anything but fair that he should have a full opportunity to pre
sent his own views and projects on these and other all-important
subjects ? But how did the case stand at the beginning, and
throughout the whole period of this nine months' session ?
How was it with the Speaker? When elected, he was, but
now he is no friend of the Administration ; but the warm and
bosom friend of its greatest enemy. Yet he would not resign ;
he would not generously relax his grasp on that high office,
which the party, in the days of its unity, had conferred upon
him. No ; he held to it with aU the tenacity which hostility to

470 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
the Executive, or devotion to the Dictator, could inspire.
What a vantage ground it proved to be, when he came to the
appointment of Mr. Adams, and others like him, (if he can
have likenesses,) on the special committee on the veto message
of the President on the tariff bill ! I speak all this in no spirit
of unkindness to the Speaker, but with that impartiality which
belongs to the history of this extraordinary session.
But how was it with the committees, far more important than
the Speaker ? How was it with the chairman of the Ways and
Means, [Mr. Fillmore,] always regarded, here and everywhere,
as the organ and confidential friend of the Administration?
Would /«e resign ? No ; not he. He had acquired a coTHWiani
over the business of the House, over the treasury, and over the
very salaries of the President and all in authority under him,
which he would never relinquish. How was it with the Com
mittee on Foreign Affairs? Would that chairman, [Mr.
Adams] resign? No. The Georgia petition (which he pre
sented himself) asking him to resign, for being monomaniacal
on the subject of slavery — which, in the case of the Cre
ole and others, might come before him — could not move him.
The unwillingness of three — nay, of six — honorable gentlemen
to serve under him, could not move him. Even after the pre
sentation by him of a petition for the dissolution of this great
and glorious Union, there was no power of the House (out of
his own party) which could have moved him. There he re
mained, holding the command ofthe foreign poficy of this gov
ernment, a bitter and confirmed enemy to the Administration,
and an immense debtor to the Dictator for the highest station
which he ever filled. I could not look upon all this without re
membering what I had said of these two (then and now) dis
tinguished individuals, fifteen j^ears ago, in the Legislature of
Tennessee: "Mr. Adams desired the office of President: he
went into the combination without it, and came out with it.
Mr. Clay desired the office of Secretary of State : he went into
the combination without it, and came out with it."
I will mention but one other committee of the House, whose
chairman [Mr. Stanly] is remarkable for his violent opposition
to the President. This is the committee over which our most
distinguished generals — coming up from the battle-fields of the

A LETTER, 471
Revolution, or of the second war for independence — have
usuaUy presided. Would any of these have been proud to
continue to be the sword bearer to a President, after they had
denounced him as weak, corrupt, and infamous ?
But I mean to dwell no longer on this descriptio personcB oi
the officials of the Clay party in the House of Representa
tives. I have said enough to show you that the sword, the
purse, and the foreign policy of this country, have all been
taken away from the President, and given up to his enemies.
And yet they came forward and said that he must be respon
sible for everything, and tliey responsible for nothing !
During all the period of discord and the final disruption of
the Whig party, the Democrats remained quiet and dispas
sionate spectators. They regarded it, throughout, as a sort of
family quarrel, with which it were alike indelicate and impru
dent to interfere. They had differed with the President in opi
nion on almost every leading measure of his recommendation
or final adoption — his veto message on the bank bills only ex
cepted. They had looked upon these as noble acts of self-
devotion and patriotism, which might well challenge the grati
tude and admiration of the country. When, at the late ses
sion, we found ourselves constrained to bestow the like com
mendations on him for his veto on the tariff billy we were
openly denounced as having seduced the President, and formed
a corrupt bargain and coalition with him — a charge preferred
without proof, and against proof. My colleague of the David
son district, on that occaiion, ventured far out into the unex
plored regions of unfounded accusation ; but took good care to
secure his safe return, behind the ignoble protection ofthe pre
vious question. That gentleman should have been amongst
the last men in Congress to have repeated a charge which, he
must have known, bad its origin only in the chagrin and pas
sion which prompted its utterance. He was long enough a
member of the old Jackson and Van Buren Democratic party
to know that it never stooped "to bargain, corruption, and in
trigue," for the accompfishment of any of its high and patriotic
purposes. Those are the weapons of his new aUies, (Clay and
Adams,) to whose standard he has fled, and whose cause he is
now seeking to advance with so much ardor and zeal. If pledged

472 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
(as I believe he was) to demand the previous question, he
should have forborne to make such an attack on the Democracy
of the House, when he knew that he intended to give them no
opportunity to repel and defend. The previous question has
been the fortress to which that gentleman and his party friends
have often fied for shelter and protection. Witness the recent
case of the President's protest, when they held fast their vic
tim, giving to the most fierce and savage of their party a full
opportunity to lacerate and tear his flesh ; and then, when the
hour of retribution arrived, bore off the executioner to that
great Whig city of refuge — the previous question.
But it is probably time that I should leave this running nar
rative. 1 have intended it as a general outline of party move
ments, essential tothe proper understanding of those obnoxious
and ruinous measures which the Whig party have passed, or
attempted to pass, since their advent to power. What have
been the measures of the whig party ?
I do not mean to give you any long, prosing enumeration of
them, nor of the arguments for and against them. Nor do I mean
to make any classification of them, as to the called or regular
sessions. I consider both sessions in the same light — ^both as
exhibiting the most wretched disregard of the most solemn
promises made to the people anterior to their election. Amongst
others, the promise of relief was the most prominent. JMr.
Clay did not hesitate to proclaim, that the mere fact of the
election of Gen. Harrison would raise the price of property in
every portion of the Union. Mr. Crittenden [his then col
league, and now successor in the Senate,] declared that, in his
opinion, it would add one hundred millions of dollars of capital
to the country. All the Whig electors, and other itinerant
orators of 1840, expressed similar opinions, and uttered the
same false and deceitful prophecy. It deceived hundreds and
thousands in that election. When reminded of all this at the
called session, the evasive reply was," True; but we cannot
do everything at once. Wait but another year, and you will
see the glorious realization of all our promises." WeU, the
country has waited, until thousands, who expected relief from
them, have become hopeless bankrupts. Property of every

A LETTER. 473
description has gone down. Produce — cotton, rice, tobacco,
wheat, and, indeed, everything — has fallen to a price not re
membered by our oldest inhabitants. What was but a fieeting
shadow of adversity in 1840, has now settled down into the
dark midnight of ruin, and almost of despair. And what are
we told now ? Why, " Take the benefit ofthe bankrupt law."
"Swear off all your debts." And then "foreswear Captain
Tyler and the veto power of the Constitution forever." In all
the gravity which this distressing subject is calculated to in
spire, may we not now ask — may not the people throughout
all this broad land now ask — " Is this the entertainment to
which we were invited ? "
Of this bankrupt law, (the only measure of relief to which
the Whigs can point,) I have but little to say. It was a favorite
measure of Mr. Clay, not among the subjects mentioned in the
President's message, but was forced on the list of subjects to be
acted on, by the overshadowing influence of that individual.
It passed by a vote of 111 to 105 — every Democrat in the
House, except 3, and every one in the Senate, except 4, voting
against it, and disputing every inch of the ground. Every
Whig member from Tennessee voted for it, except Mr. Wm.
B. Campbell and Mr. Gentry. Mr. Milton Brown flushed his
maiden sword in debate upon it. General Caruthers threw
round it all the stately blandishments of his approbation. The
three gentlemen from East Tennessee gave a clear and hearty
affirmative to the call of the clerk, evincing the delight which
the opportunity to give such a vote had evidently inspired.
iTou may judge, then, fellow-citizens, my surprise, on seeing it
often stated in the public press of Tennessee, that not a single
distinguished Whig in the State was in favor of the bankrupt
bUl. All these gentlemen are quite distinguished, as they de
serve to be, and can hardly be flattered by such an unjust party
pretermission. But the object, no doubt, was to screen another
" distinguished citizen " of the State from the imputation of
being in favor ofthe bankrupt law, inferred from his inveterate
sUence when interrogated on the subject ; and for this purpose,
Messrs. Caruthers, Brown, J. L. WUliams, C. H. Williams, Jef
ferson Campbell, and last, though not least, in the way of dis
tinction, Thomas D. Arnold, were to be aU rapped over tlm
knuckles for his benefit.

474 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
The next subject of their legislation which I wish briefly to
notice, is — ¦
THE BILL FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE PUBLIC
LANDS.
I have never been able to learn from them whether this was
one of their measures of relief to tlie people, or not. They have
found it very hard to show how it can be a relief to a man from
pecuniary embarrassment, to take his own money out one of his
pockets, and put it into another — taking a part of the money
as commission for performing the operation. Now, if you
Would give him more of somebody else^s money, you might talk
to him about the additional help and relief it might be in the
payment of his debts ; but to shift his own money from one
pocket to another, and then tell him how much better off he
has become than he was before, is a sort of charlatanism easiy
exposed. The people of this country have two sets of treasu
ries — the National and State. These must both be kept sup
plied — the one for general or national purposes, the other to
meet their local demands. Now, it is evident that, in times of
scarcity, when both are insufficient to meet the proper calls on
them, it can be no relief to take out of one and put in the other;
because you must instantly turn round and fill up the vacancy
which your false and deceptive financiering had created. Nor
have 1 ever met with one Whig so shrewd as to be able to avoid
the just application of that homely aphorism, that it is always
wrong " to rob Peter to pay Paul" — to rob the General Govern
ment to pay the States. But this case of distribution is much
worse than that. It is robbing Peter to pay Peter, and then
insulting him by the assurance that you have made him much
richer by the operation. But I vvill not enlarge on this, because
I have always believed that the main design and purpose of
giving away this fund was to have a plausible excuse for the
passage of a higher and more oppressive tariff for the protec
tion of Northern manufacturers. A few Southern Whigs com
muning with them in their midnight caucuses, and thereby
learning more of their ultimate designs, positively refused to go
for the bill, until there was an express provision for its repeal
whenever the rate of duties should be raised above twenty
per cent — that being the rate of the compromise act of 1833.

A LETTER. 475
Here commenced a system of legislation that can never reflect
credit on the Congress or party which enacted the distribution
and the bankrupt laws. If the tendencies of both laws were
injurious, the mode and circumstances of the passage were
flagitious. The latter bUl was rejected on one day, by nearly
a dozen votes. On the night of that same day a caucus was
held, in which the importance of that bill, in a party point of
view, and the dependence of the distribution bill upon it, were
explained and insisted on. The result was, that next morning
the vote of rejection was reconsidered, and the vote passed by
a majority nearly as large as the one by which it was rejected
onthe day before. Some dodged, others got sick, whilst several
reversed their recorded votes of the preceding day. The distri
bution law, in the meantime, had been hanging in the Senate
in a state of suspended animation. The vote rejecting the
bankrupt bill was considered as having sealed its fate; and
the whole party, in a wretched state of despondence, were pre
paring to break up the session, and go home, having failed
in every great measure which they had attempted, But mark
the sudden change ! The moment the news of the next morn
ing arrived in the Senate chamber, that the bankrupt bill had
been reconsidered, and passed, the countenance of the great
Dictator and his friends brightened up ; the distribution bill
was reanimated and passed — even then by the smallest possi
ble majority. How sincerely should it be wished that the eye
of a virtuous and enlightened posterity should never rest upon
the page that records the incidents of this transaction.
I wish next to call your attention to a measure, or rather a
system of measures, for borrowing money. You have seldom
been able to look over the public newspapers, without finding
something about THE LOAN bill,
or, in plainer language, the bill to increase the national debt,
by borrowing more money. The frequency of such bills, the
low condition of our finances, and the difficulty of negotiating
for money on the national credit, must have attracted much of
your attention. That our treasury is in an exhausted and al
most bankrupt condition, is not to be denied ; and that it must
continue so, in a great degree, for some time, if this party is

476 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
to be continued in power, I think is equally manifest. What
sort of a treasury would satisfy their enormous appropriations,
or meet the increased and accumulating extravagance of their
expenditures ?
In 1840 they saw Mr. Van Buren expending $22,389,356, and
pronounced such extravagance alone to be sufficient for his
instant expulsion from office. They contrasted this sum with
that which they said was the amount of Mr. Adams's adminis
tration, and cried " Down with them for such reckless extrava
gance. " Yet, strange to tell, the very first year that they came
in, they actually expended $26,300,000 — four miUions and odd
more than Mr. Van Buren had expended. They do not pro
pose, for any future year, to expend less than twenty-six or
twenty-seven millions of dollars. All the great oracles have
said it, and published it to the nation. Clay, Evans, Adams,
Fillmore, Saltonstall — all agree that no less than twenty-six
or twenty-seven millions of dollars will do for them. What a
commentary on their professions of economy and retrenchment
made before the election. I have watched them closely, to dis
cover by what new devices they mean to endeavor hereafter to
impose on you, on this subject of retrenchment and reform.
They mean to point you to one or two clerks ; to as many
little orphan pages about the hall; and to one old man, his
horse and cart, that they turned out of office ; but nearly all of
whom, 1 believe, they afterwards turned back again. They
will call your attention also to the contingent expenses struck
out of the general appropriation bill — amounting in all to a very
considerable sum of money. But I pray of you to demand of
them to show the separate bill for the same contingent expenses
subsequently reported and passed — swelling and increasing the
amount far beyond what it was before — inserting new clerks
on high salaries, and rendered so extravagant that the very
gentleman [Mr. Gentry] who moved in the matter, and whose
motion was extravag-antly eulogised in the Whig papers of
Tennessee, repudiated the biU altogether, and denounced the
outrageous extravagance ofthe committee (Whig, of course) who
had reported it. You must remember,also, what great parade
was made over the supposed discovery that three or four clerks
had been employed without the regular sanction of law. But

A LETTER. 477
their supposed discovery soon turned out to be no discovery
at all. Every one of them had been lawfully appointed and paid
annually in the proper appropriation bills. But it was con-
.tended that, although that might make them /aio/w/, yet it would
be abetter practice to have them appointed by a separate law
disconnected with the appropriation bill. This, of course,
presented a mere matter of expediency, and dissipated into
thinnest air the attempt to criminate preceding Congi-esses who
thought proper to appoint them by a different mode of legisla
tion. There is another device which you may look out to be
played off upon you, as an excuse for spending annually upwards
of four millions more than was expended under Mr. Van Buren's
administration. They have already attempted to do this, even
here ; and, though baffled and refuted by the reports of their
own Secretary, and the lucid speeches of Messrs. Woodbury,
Benton, Atherton, Calhoun, and others, they will, no doubt,
attempt to do it again. Thepretenceis,that a good deal of this
money, (the twenty millions authorized to be loaned) and the
large expenses estimated for the four years of their administra
tion, is needed to pay off a large public debt inherited by
them from Mr. Van Buren's administration. So much had
been said and insinuated, from time to time, on the subject,
that, on the 23d of September last, the Senate adopted a reso
lution calling on the Secretary of the Treasury to report the
amount of the public debt on the 3d of March, 1841, the day
when Mr. Van Buren went out, and General Harrison went
into office. That account, taken from the records of their own
Secretary, shows the debt (which they say they inherited
from Mr. Van Buren) to have been only $5,607,361 54. This
document is numbered forty-one on the files of the Senate.
Whenever you shall hear this inherited deit presented as an
excuse for these vast expenditures now going on, and in further
contemplation, put an end to all mystification on the subject by
requiring the production of this document. It was intended to
settle this question, and does settle it forever.
APPORTIONMENT BILL  ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSE.
I am compelled to pass over altogether many subjects of
recent legislation, justly deserving the most pointed rebuke j
such, among others, are the bUl apportioning representation

478 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
among the States, and the bill regulating proceedings in case of
contested elections. The first act contains a dangerous inva
sion on the rights of the States, which I resisted at every
stage of its progress, whilst there was any hope of getting
clear of the obnoxious provision, mandatory to the so\(^ereign
States of the Union. The Democratic party resisted that pro
vision, from the time it was offered, and sought every oppor
tunity afterwards to strike it from the bill ; most of them,
indeed, finally voted against the bill altogether, rather than
submit to it. Others, believing that it was their bounden duty to
make an apportionment under the Constitution, and that, if it
were not done it might threaten a consequence little short of
the dissolution of the government, felt themselves bound to
yield to the unrelenting power of the majority. Upon their
heads be the responsibility of forcing this provision into a bill
which they knew was obliged to be passed in some form or other.
At no distant day will they feel the full force of that responsi
bility in the returning surges of popular indignation. The
second bill contained provisions in relation to the organiza
tion of the House at the commencement of each session,
and conferring powers on the Clerk to determine who should
be regarded and qualified as the lawful members of the body;
utterly inconsistent with that clear, and, until now, never
invaded provision of the Constitution, which declares that
'' each House ^hall be the judge of the elections, qualifications,
and returns of its own members." It was evidently a strata
gem to save something from the wreck of their falling fortunes.
They knew at the time the law requiring elections to be held
by districts was passed, that some States had elected their
members already, or would do so before the news would reach
them of the passage of the act. They knew, also, that some
States were so attached, from ancient usage, to the general
ticket system, that they would most probably not conform to
the law ; and then, as the Clerk who would have to officiate as
high priest for the party at the opening of the next Congress,
would be a Whig, they hoped, by these means, to get some
party advantage, which might save them, at least for a time,
from total and utter discomfiture. Vain hope ! delusive expec
tation ! No breach ,of the Constitution — no invasion of the

A LETTER. 479
rights of the States — no high priest to cheat for you after the
election, can save you from the deep condemnation of the people
at the election. The only remaining measure ofthe late session
which the limits of this letter will allow me to mention, is
THE TARIFF.
The Bank was the favorite measure with the Southern Whigs :
the tariff with the Northern ones. The first had been lost by
the veto of the called session ; and the second was involved in
much difficulty by two solemn compromises, limiting its amount
totwenty per cent. The first compromise was in 1833, in order
to prevent civil war, and a probable dissolution of the Union.
The North had enjoyed the benefit of it, on their part, ever since ;
and now the time was coming (30th June, 1842)when the South
was to begin to enjoy it on her part. It has often been ques
tioned whether the North would continue to adhere to this
solemn compact or not, when it began to be her interest to
violate it. Hence the candidates for the Presidency in 1840
were often questioned on the subject, because the South could
not afford to vote for any man for that high office who would
withhold from it her part of the bargain, after the North, for
nearly ten years, had been pocketing millions upon millions
under it. The Southern Whigs obtained the solemn promise
of General Harrison that he never would consent to set aside
or violate the compromise act of 1633. In his Zanesville letter
he said :
" I am for supporting the compromise act, and never will agree to its bein."
altered or repealed."
In reply to a letter from Mr. Berrien. of Georgia, he said :
"Good faith, and tht; peace and harmony of the Union, do, in iny opinion,
require that the compromise of the tariff, known as Mr. Clay's bill, should bo
carried out according to its spirit aud intention."
Well, these letters were published ; and many of the States,
opposed to any other tariff than the compromise, voted for
Harrison and Tyler — the latter of whom every one knew to be
so much of an anti-tariff man as to have been even a nuUifler
in the days of that doctrine. But Harrison was dead at the
time of the called session, and the time was rapidly approach
ing when the fidelity of the North would be brought to the
teat. It was, therefore, highly important to the South to get
32

480 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
some renewed pledge from those who were still professing to
be the Harrison party, and to reverence and honor his princi
ples. An opportunity occurred on the passage of the distri
bution bill. It was said often in argument in relation to that
bUl, that, if the land money was given away, Congess would be
obliged to raise the duties abovetwenty per cent., in violation of
the compromise, in order to have money enough to carry on
the government. This rousedup Southern Senators to demand
a renewal of the Harrison pledge, never to violate the terms of
the compromise. Without this renewed pledge, they declared
that they could not and would not vote for the distribution.
Thereupon, the Whig party in the Senate did give the pledge, hy
introducing the proviso, that if, at any time, the duties shouldbe
raised above twenty per cent., the land distribution s/jomW cease.
They sent it to the House of Reprelentatives, where the Whig
party of that body signed, scaled, and ratified the same pledge.
The good faith of the North to the observance ofthe compro
mise having been thus more than doubly secured — secured
by the pledge oi Mr. C/ay, that no honorable man deserving the
name of an American statesman, would ever propose its viola
tion — secured by the pledge of General Harrison, that he would
never consent to set it aside — secured now, in 1841, by the
pledge of the Whig party in both Houses of Congress, that they
did not intend its violation, and that, if they ever did, they would
instantly surrender the further distribution of the land fund.
With such assurances as these, the land bill received the sanc
tion and signature of the President. Now, under all these
solemn covenants, compacts, compromises, or whatever else
you may choose to call them, made in old and recent times by
the leaders of the party, and by the party itself, what ought to
have been done by them in relation to the tariff at the present
session ? \fj^ They ought to have enacted only a few obvious
provisions in relation to the mode of ascertaining the home val
uation, and of carrying into effect the compromise act of 1833.
This, and the correction of some errors of the last session in
regard to the list of free articles, are, in my opinion, aU that
honor, justice and good faith allowed them to have done. This
could have been done in a few weeks, at farthest ; half of this
everlasting session could have been saved, and all the parts of

A LETTER. 481
our country, now excited and agitated by this dangerous and
delicate question, could have been reposing in confidence and
affection under the equal and benign protection of the Consti
tution. It may seem to you strange that this " consummation
devoutly to be wished " for, was not attained. But you must
remember that it has been the poficy of the dominant party not
to bring forward their measures separately, but to link and
fasten them together, so that, by a combination of various in
terests, all should be dragged through together. The journals
show that no one of the great measures of either session ever
commanded the majority of the two Houses of Congress. Not
one of them. Neither distribution, the bank, the tariff, nor the
bankrupt law, ever had a majority ofthe two Houses ; and yet
afi of them were gotten through. I have just shown you how
the bankrupt bill dragged through Ihe distribution bUI, and how
the latter, by increasing the wants of the treasury, dragged
through the tariff. AU these measures were declared by the
Dictator to constitute a system, and should be judged of and
acted on as a system, and not on their individual and separate
merits or demerits. Hence it became the interest of all to sup
port each, and of each to support all. But the President, by
his veto, had put the bank interest out of the concern, and there
remained, to trade upon at this session, only the two remaining
measures — distribution and the tariff. I have just mentioned
the embarrassing pledge which both of these interests had given
at the preceding session. According to that pledge, if the tariff"
went up above twenty per cent., distribution must eease. If
it did not go up above twenty per cent., the manufacturers in
sisted thatthey would be ruined. In the meantime, it was known
that the President would not sanction both. What, then, was
to be done ? The party was in extremis — its agony immense.
If the walls of their secret council chamber could speak, what a
tale would they tell of this ill-judging and ill-doing party I
Well, their resolution was taken — to make one more bold and
united charge, and drive the President, if possible, from his
position — compel him to sanction both distribution and a higher
tariff than the compronuse. " What though he remind us that
the compromise was the work of Mr. Clay ? what if he shall
'teU us of General Harrison's and his own pledges of 1840 >

482

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMEN .

what if he show us the page of our own recorded pledge ofthe
last session? — we have no alternative." The bill is accord
ingly prepared — distribution and protection are linked together.
What sort of protection ? The highest, having reference to the
rates established, the present prices of most articles, and the
general circumstances of the times, which was ever passed in
this country. 1 have no time to show you its enormous rates
now on sugar, iron, salt, domestics, woollens, on everything. I
have done that on another occasion. The Democrats did all
they could ; they stood on the compromise ; they advanced
even farther, in the later progress of the measure, They
brought forward a proposition (Senator Sevier's) advancing
five per cent, on the compromise act, and allowing home valu
ation and cash duties beside — equal to at least thirty per cent.
But it was all in vain ; their own bill, and nothing but their
own bill, they were determined to have.
They passed it by a vote of 105 to 103; and, had all the
members been present, it would have been an exact tie, and
dependent on the vote of the Speaker. That vote would have
been undoubtedly given in favor of the bill. This would have
presented the question, whether the Whigs would have had a
bill by virtue of the one-man power. They complain griev
ously that they lose a bill by such an odious power, and surely
they would refuse to receive one from such a source.
The bill was so enormous and unjust in its rate of duties,
that, although it was one of high party interest, every one
of my Whig colleagues from Middle and West Tennessee (ex
cept Mr. Gentry) voted against it. The veto of the President,
however, although it defeated the very bill which they them
selves had voted to defeat, they did not and would not support.
Such was their exasperation against Mr. Tyler for doing pre
cisely what they had done, (withholding his approbation,) that
when the bill was again put on its passage, as required by the
Constitution, not one of them would vote against it, as they had
done before. I suppose they concluded, that, as they could not
consistently vote for the bill, and as a vote against it might
seem too much like agreeing with the President, they concluded
not to vote at all ! On the passage of the McKennan bill,
(without distribution,) the Democratic members of the State

A LETTER. 483
had the gratification of recording their votes with those of every
Whig Representative from it (except Mr. Joseph L. Williams)
(gainst the bill. It was, indeed, a most gratifying concurrence
of opinion, indicating that there would be, at all events, not
more than one man from the whole State to sustain this odious
and oppressive measure. But our satisfaction was of brief du
ration. When the bill returned from the Senate, a motion was
made to lay it, with all its amendments, on the table. If this
motion succeeded, the bill would be defeated, and the country
rescued from all the evils which it was calculated to inflict, at
least on the agricultural States. It was the last final test vote
on the subject. But our Whig friends, with only two excep
tions, voted against laying il on the table. These exceptions
were Mr. Gentry and Mr. C. H.Williams, wdio were, no doubt,
unavoidably absent, and, therefore, did not vote at all. Even
the burly and intractable Arnold, who had been with us in
every contest, (after he lost his land, and got so mad with
President Tyler for his veto,) now deserted us in the last dying
struggle against the bill, and went back and joined again with
our oppressors ! How strong are the triple cords that bind us
to our party ! I return from digression, to pursue further the
history and progress of this measure.
On the 9th of August the President returned the bill with his
objections. The message was one of the best he had ever
sent to Congress. Lucid in style, and cogent in argument, it
marched directly on its object. It breathed no complaint that
a second experiment had been made to drive ^him from his
known opinions, nor uttered the slightest rebuke for this breach
of the plighted faith of the party which had originally secured
his signature to the distribution bill. But he was met in no cor
respondent spirit of forbearance and moderation. What was
never done before, was perpetrated on this occasion. A special
committee, composed of the President's bitterest enemies —
Adams, Bolts, Granger, and others — was appointed, to whom
the message and the bill were referred. The report of Mr.
Adams was all that might be expected from the vast but poi
soned well of learning (not knowledge) of that passionate and
irritable old man. It abounded in whatever dislike to the Pre
sident, hereditary hatred to the Democracy of the country, and

484 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
an ardent desire to pay off his old debt to Mr. Clay, could in
spire. It went far beyond the proper subject referred to the
committee, and was evidently intended as a sort of apologetic
address to the American people, for all the errors and short
comings of the Whig party. Without taking time to examine
this address, let me recite the extraordinary and exciting inci
dents in relation to the tariff, subsequent to the veto. The
Clay portion of the party seemed roused to the very highest
pitch of rage and fury. They declared for instant adjourn
ment. When reminded that one of their own bills (Mr. Bar
nard's) for remedying real or supposed defects in the coUection
of the revenue, ought to be acted on, they indignantly refused
to go into committee upon it. When admonished that all the
duties now were being paid under protest, and that if the
courts should determine that no duties at all were collectable,
the consequence might be the stoppage of the very wheels of
government, — the reply was. Let them stop, and on John
Tyler be the responsibility. The speech of Mr. Adams, his
report, and the vote of the Whig party all indicated a fixed
and determined purpose to abandon the halls of Congress
forthwith, and leave the government to whatever fate might
befall it.
Even the midnight caucus drill had lost its magic potency.
The eloquence of Marshall, (who was understood to be the first
to insist .that the bill should be passed without distribution,) the
earnest and touching appeals of the manufacturers, could pro
duce no effect on the maddened and infuriated cohorts of the
Dictator. The caucus broke up with the understanding that
they could agree upon nothing on the subject, as a party; but
that any member of it might bring forward such proposition
as he thought proper, and that each one should vote for or
against it, without any party responsibility. In this state of
things, Mr. McKennan, a Whig of Pennsylvania, (a convert I
believe to the arguments of Mr. Marshall,) came forward with
the bill which had been vetoed — leaving out the twenty-seventh
section in relation to distribution. In his speech, he avowed his
determination, and that of most of his Whig friends, to support
this bill, and no other. He said they would scorn to receive one
at the hands of the Democrats ; that it was useless for them to

A LETTER. 485
move in the matter at all. Up to the very hour when the bill
was passed, it was understood that the particular friends of Mr.
Clay were still determined to go against the bill, and that they
held the power to defeat it. This presented a most trying crisis.
That something should be done in relation to the collection of
the revenue, was admitted by all. The Democratic party, gen
erally, were perfectly content with the rate of duties of the
compromise ; but as serious doubts were entertained by many
whether some new law was not necessary to regulate the mode
of collecting them, they were anxious that such doubt should
be removed. They had often tried to remove it, but the Whig
party had always prevented them. Now they were told that
it was useless for them to propose anything, for the Whigs
would scorn to receive it at their hands. What a strange con
dition was here. The Democrats can do nothing, because
opposed by the whole Whig party en masse. The Northern
manufacturing Whig party can do nothing, because they pro
pose a tariff too high for Democratic acceptance ; and, because
it omits distribution, the friends of Mr. Clay will give it no
support, but insist on instant adjournment, and abandonment
of the government to its fate. I but describe to you the actual
and embarrassing condition of affairs at one of the most critical
periods of our history. It was under such circumstances i a
these that the Democrats of Pennsylvania, and a portion from
New York, resolved to throw themselves into the breach be-
tWeen the discordant Whig factions, and save the government
from that ruin and destruction which they verily believed' might
be the consequence of the madness and desperate course of
the Clay faction. The same state of things was found to exist
in the other House, when four Democratic Senators, from simi
lar motives, pursued the same course. Whilst I cannot assent
to their reasoning, nor approve of their vote, I feel constrained
to admit the purity and patriotism of their motives. When,
however, it was discovered that the bill would probably be
passed without their aid, these "furiosi " of the Whig party
began to think what sort of record they were making up for
themselves and their friend "Harry of the West," in reference
to the campaign of 1844. The very thought that this desertion
and abandonment of the manufacturing interest might be re-

486

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

membered in the next Presidential canvass, seemed to operate
like a charm upon them. One by one, slow, reluctant, and
solemn, they came forward — Botts, Stanly, Thompson of Indi
ana, and many others — to give in their adhesion to the bill; but
all solemnly declaring that they would never surrender to
Captain Tyler — never, never, not they ! In the Senate, the
same reluctant capitulation. Mr. Crittenden exclaimed " that
he looked upon this as the proudest victory the Whig party had
ever achieved ; they had conquered (not Capt. Tyler, but) them
selves." Never did that Senator utter a sounder truth than
that. In the hectic glow of pretended triumph, he pronounced
the appropriate epitaph of his own party,
" The Whigs have conquered themselves.'"
They have accomplished their own destruction, by the folly and
wickedness of their measures. The distribution bill broke
down our national credit, and brought it so low that their party
can scarcely borrow a dollar, even at enormous interest, either
in this country or in Europe. How could they expect to borrow
money, when, with no means of repayment, they were giving
away every dollar which they were to receive from the sale of
our vast public domain ? Who would lend money, either to an
individual or government, who was giving away with one hand
whilst he was borrowing with the other?
But whilst the distribution law destroyed our national credit,
the bankrupt law destroyed all remaining confidence between
man and man, and thereby increased the heart-rending suffer
ings of the people in their pecuniary affairs. What foreign
creditor could feel easy and indulgent to his American debtor,
when the next packet might bring the news that he "had
taken the benefit of the act," and that his debt was lost forever?
What Eastern merchants would be indulgent to the Western
ones? And how could the last be indulgent to their numerous
customers — farmers, mechanics and laborers ? Each is afraid
to wait, lest some one else shall get the start of him, and ex
haust his property; and that when he calls for his pay, he may
find that the debtor"has nothing more than the law allows." Nor
will the operation of this new tariff fail greatly to increase the
burdens and distresses of the people. It is impossible for it to
fail to do so. How can a people, already oppressed with debts,

A LETTER, 487
laU to be injured by being required to pay higher taxes — higher
for his salt, his iron, his sugar, his blankets ; in fact, higher for
everything he either eats, drinks, wears, or uses ? Everyman
of plain, common understanding, must see, in the enormous
rates imposed by this law, deep, and, I fear, lasting injury to
the communitj'' at large ; — not to the manufacturers, not to the
capitalists, of course: these will fatten and grow rich upon it;
but the farmer, the planter, the mechanic, and laborer must
suffer under its cruel and unjust exactions. To show you its
operation since its passage, I subjoin the following from the
New York Journal of Commerce:
" The tariif, though a great relief from the dangers of no law, is yet ope
rating very severely upon merchants engaged in the foreign trade. A
friend of ours who happened to be yesterday in the store of an iniporter,
seeing a row of packages of dry goods which appeared to have been recently
imported, inquired of the merchant as to the operation of the tariff. The
duty of the iirst package, said the merchant, is ninety per cent, on the cost ;
on the second, one hundred per cent.; on the third four hundred per cent.;
on the fourth, fifty per cent.; and the fifth, two hundred per cent.; on the
sixth, sixty per cent.; and on the rest fifty to seventy-five per cent. The
duties, it will be remembered, are levied from the day of the signing of
the act, upon goods which were ordered with the expectation of paying
twenty per cent. Such duties, payable in cash, of course put an end to
trade. The package which paid a duty of four hundred per cent., was fancy
cotton handkerchiefs, with a thread of silk around them to heighten the
color, which made them subject to the specific duty on silk by the pound.
It is greatly to be regretted that Congress, after so long a session, should
have come to so unsatisfactory a result. We hope, however, that, at the
next session, Congress will modify the extravagant features of the bill, and
bring it into a shape which will give to all kinds of business the fundamental
basis of prosperity — permanence and steadiness."
I know well how the leaders intend to escape from the odium
which these measures must bring upon them. They are now
engaged in raising a hue-and-cry against President Tyler, in
order to draw away public attention from their own evil deeds,
and fix the blame on some other than themselves. It was ever
the custom of that party to do so. Who would have believed
that in 1840, when they were making their false accusations of
corruption against Mr. Van Buren's administration, they were
paying out thousands to bribe men to vote against him in the
elections ? The disclosures of Stevens and Glentworth, and
others, have since come to light, and have astonished the na-

488 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
tion. No man now, of any party, has the least doubt of the
substantial truth of these disclosures, and hundreds and thou
sands have left their party in consequence of them. Since
that election, too, the old United States Bank has rotted down
upon its foundations, filling the land with the stench of its putri
dity and corruption. A committee appointed by the stock
holders to save something, if possible, for them from the wreck,
have reported that more than half a million of dollars are un
accounted for, and that the vouchers for that amount have
been suppressed or destroyed. No man doubts but these
vouchers, if produced, would have shed much light on the
bribery and fraud of the last election. Again : who would have
believed, when the itinerant rhetors of that party were traver.s-
ing the country in 1 840, making the loudest professions of their
devotion to order and law, and all the institutions of our coun
try, that they had formed, and were cherishing a deep design
and settled purpose, in case they were not successful in that
election, to destroy all order, to disregard all laws, and over
turn our institutions by revolutionary violence? At a period
too late for detection, or when their partisans had become mad
dened and infuriated like themselves, these designs of violence
and force were publicly avowed.
In a speech of Senator Preston, at Richmond, Virginia, he
is reported to have said : " If Mr. Van Buren cannot be dis
placed through the ballot-box in November next, I, for one, am
ready to resort to such means, as God and nature have put
within my reach to force a change." Mr. J. C. Graves, in a
speech at Portsmouth, Virginia, is also reported to have .said :
" If it were not for the hope of redress through the ballot-box,
I would here, so help me God, upon this holy altar, take an
oath this night, to take up arms, and march with yoii to Wash
ington, and put down the present dynasty by force." The late
Secretary of War, (Mr. Bell,) in a published letter to the party
committees, to whom he was writing, said : "The appeal is npw
to reason. No feelings but those of patriotism, love of justice,
and equal right, need be invoked as yet: though the day may
come, when a sense of injury and oppression, of indignation
for a country's -institutions dishonored and overthrown, may
call forth deeper passions and awaken different energies. That

A LETTER. 489
day I hope may not come ; but if it should, I shall be ready to
do my duty then, as well as now." Mr. Butler King, of Georgia,
is reported to have uttered sentiments, at a public assembly in
Maryland, which I have not now before me ; but by no means
less violent than those of Senator Preston, Mr. Graves, and
Secretary Bell. Another member of Congress, then and now
quite distinguished in the Whig party, did not hesitate often and
publicly to declare that he went for the peaceful remedy until
November, and, if not successful, he meant to go for arms.* I
do not know that any of these gentlemen have everdenied the
language here attributed to them, and I advert to them as a
portion of the party history of the last Presidential election;
happy if I shall ever be authorized by any of them to correct
any of the statements here imputed to them. I must now al
lude to another foul and wicked plot of recent disclosure.
Mr. Pleasants, editor of the Richmond Whig, in a letter, dated
August 25, 1842, after describing the state of excitement for a
few days after the election of 1840, and the conclusion amongst
the Whigs that Mr. Van Buren had been elected, and in their
opinion, by fraudulent voting, proceeds to state as follows :
" In this state of feelings, three individuals, who happened to be together,
interchanged opinion, found an entire concurrence of sentiment among them
selves, and hastily arranged the heads of a plan for redressing the wrongs of
the country, by securing the person of Mr. Van Buren previous to his inau
guration. Three things were to precede putting it in execution : 1. The
election of Mr. Van Buren. 2. That he could not have been returned with
out the vote of Virginia. 3. Proof, carrying positive and undoubted cer
tainty with it, that his majjrity in Virginia was fraudulent. These
preliminaries ascertained, twenty persons (men who could depend on one
another) were to be admitted into the association, under the pledge of secrecy
and fidelity. Ten of the number were to proceed to Washington in a fast
steamboat, giving out that their object was a jaunt of amusement, to witness
the approaching inauguration. It was imagined that there would be little
difficulty in finding an opportunity in conveying Mr. Van Buren on board
by stratagem or force ; and, this done, the boat was to run with all despatch
for Albemarle Sound, previously agreed upon as the destination. There the
ten were to be met by their associates, and Mr. Van Buren to be escorted by
the whole into the upper districts of North Carolina— -Cornwallis's most
rebellious people in America — and whom we know to be now as staunch
Whigs as their fathers were in 1780. Arrived there, a manifesto was to be
* Mr. Botts.

490

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

published, addressed to the American people, declaring the motives and
objects of the act, and the vicinage assembled and appealed to. Mr. Van
Buren himself was to be treated with the greatest possible respect and
courtesy, compatible with safe custody. The manifesto was to demand a new
election, and the restoration of the rights of the majority. The ne.xt
Northern mail brought confirmation of a great Whig victory, and, of course,
the plan of abduction and all thoughts of it were abandoned. Whether it
would have been executed, if the tvents had fallen out, the antioipaiion of
which le d to its conception, ig beyond my power to know. / believe it would
have been; for, although it was emb'aced in pa^^sion, that pastion was not
likely to cool by witnessing successful frauds in the enjoyment of its spoils."
I have no tirne or inclination to dwell on this nefarious and
wicked purpose ; it is submitted to the calm judgment of a
people, who may sometimes be cajoled and imposed upon, but
cannot be prevailed upon deliberately to sanction that violence
which puts all law and oider and humanity at defiance. Who
does not know that, if this project had been carried out, what
commenced in kidnapping and abduction, would have ended in
the murder of Mr. Van Buren, in order to get rid of his testi
mony against the perpetrators of so foul a deed? And who
can doubt the imminent peril and danger to which John Tyler
is every day and every night exposed, from the same foul and
demoniac spirit? This very letter was written, in order to
show that abduction was not the proper remedy in Mr. Tyler's
case. But when the lawless brigands' of the party shall hear
from Washington that impeachment is impracticable, what
may not be expected from the rejected office-seeker, or the
infuriated political desperado ? The session closed with the
charge of treason and perjury burning on the lips of nearly
every prominent leader of the Clay faction, well calculated to
admonish some half-crazed retainer that "it would be doing
God service" to despatch him with the stiletto or pistol. The
wretch who basely attempted to assassinate General Jackson
on the steps of the capitol, had not half the encouragement to
the perpetration of the bloody deed.
And now, my countrymen, before I close this letter — already
too long — permit me to ask whether you intend any longer to
attach yourselves to a party, led on by political leaders such
as 1 have described? Many of you, I know, joined that party

A LETTER. 491
with great hesitation ; you have continued with them with great
reluctance ; you have never felt entirely satisfied, either with
their measures or proceedings ; but you have, nevertheless,
generally gone along with them, justifying some things, it is
true, but apologizing for the most of what they have been
doing. Who of you that marched in their processions, and
united with them in raising the liberty-poles and the cabins in
1840, had the slightest suspicions that such wicked and bloody
designs were entertained as have since been fully established
upon them? Who, that listened to their speeches, breathing
nothing but devotion to liberty, religion and law, could have
been made to believe that the time was so near at hand when
you might be called on by them to rear the standard of revo
lution? I know the great body of the Whig party never thought,
never dreamed, of such results. But they are now disclosed —
made manifest; and every man who respects order and good
government — -every man who reverences the principles of our '
holy religion — every man who loves his country, her freedom,
her constitution, or her laws, should go no further with them.
They have determined to rule or ruin this country ; to rule
by fraud and bribery at elections, or by force and violence after
them; to ruin by the folly and wickedness of their measures, or
by a new and alarming method discovered and introduced by
them within the last few years. Throughout the turbulent ses
sion of the twenty-sixth Congress, it is known to every member
of it, that often, when unable to carry their point without it, they
would withdraw by common concert, in order to reduce the
House below a quorum; and when a call was ordered, in order
to force their attendance, they would drop back into their seats
and answer their names ; thereby avoiding the responsibility of
such revolutionary movements. For one whole night — from
sunset to sunrise — have we seen this party withdrawing and
returning, marching out, and then marching back again, in
order to weary out and bafile the lawful and constitutional legis
lation of the House. In the Senate, on one occasion, the
author and founder of this new and alarming principle of party
action, in order to defeat the nomination of Judge Daniel of
the Supreme Court, with a lofty (not to say insulting) air, audi
bly bade " good night" to the majority, and marched out of the

492 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
chamber, with all his partisans at his heels ! Look at the con
tagious influence of this example in Ohio. The waters of bit
terness have gushed out from the high places of the nation,
and no one can tell the length and breadth of the poisonous
inundation. What occurred in Tennessee has no analogy.
The case stands widely different in all its principles. If, how
ever, anybody shall suppose that there can be the slightest re
semblance, let it be remembered, that it cannot be unjust that
he who poisons the cup should sometimes be compelled to quaff
its deadly contents.
But I must conclude. Gladly would I have communicated
all these things, and many more, by personal intercourse with
you ; but the indisposition of my family detaining me here for a
while, some little attention to my private affairs, and the near
approach of another session of Congress rendered it impos
sible. Your obedient servant,
AARON V. BROWN.
Washington, September 15, 1842.

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS.

In the House of Representatives,
June, 1844.
Mr. Aaeon V. Beown said that he felt constrained to ask the
indulgence ofthe House whilst he submitted a few observations
personal to himself The near approach of the adjournment
compelled him to take this course as the only method of vindi
cating himself against a certain publication in yesterday's
Globe. He was compelled to speak of it as a newspaper pub
lication, because he could not, under the rules, refer to the de
bates in the other end of the Capitol. He begged leave to read
the foUowing paragraph from that paper :
" The war was expiring. The armistice, and the interposition of great
powers, was bringing it to a close ; and the day was at hand when the re
union of Texas would have come of itself, and with peace and honor, when
this insidious scheme of sudden and secret annexation, and its miserable pre
texts, was fallen upon by our hapless administration. From the moment that
scheme, and its pretexts,^rsi repealed itself to public view, at a public dinner
in Virginia, in the autumn of the last year, I denounced it as an intrigue, got
up for the election and to end in the disgrace of its authors, and in the de
feat, delay, and embarrassment of the measure which it professed to desire.
I particularly made this denunciation to the gentleman [Mr. A. V. Brown]
who had got the letter from General Jackson in February, 1843, and who
seemed to be vicariously charged with some enterprise on my humble self.
It was at the commencement of the present session of Congress ; I
answered him on the spot ; and, as I have no concealments, the gentleman
referred to is at liberty to relate all that I said to him to the whole world."
Now, sir, (said Mr. B.,) I mean to make no reply to any por
tion of that publication but what relates personally to myself
The insinuation as to the " vicarious " character which I
" seemed" to sustain in the conversation aUuded to, is wholly

494 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
destitute of foundation. There is not one word of truth in it,
whatever the impression of that senator [Mr. Benton] may have
been at the time, nor the slightest pretext for it. The conver
sation referred to, was not confidential, nor held at any private
interview between us. We casually fell in company, as mem
bers frequently do, in going to or from the Capitol to their
boarding houses. We were walking on the public pavements,
when the conversation chanced to turn on the subject of annex
ation. He advanced some of the opinions which he has since
avowed in his speeches. The distance of our walk would not
have allowed him to advance them all. He was vehement in
denouncing the motives which had induced the President to
bring forward the subject, and the secret influences which he
believed had prompted him to do so. This latter suspicion,
and the surprise which the general tenor of his remarks ex
cited, (for I had never doubted that he would be warmly for it,)
induced me to refer to my correspondence with General Jackson
on the subject. I made this reference with the hope that, when
he should learn that his great friend (General Jackson) was
so intimately connected with the effort to acquire that fine
country, he would pause and mature the subject well before he
threw himself in opposition to the measure. Sir, up to that
time I had never stopped to consider how the question would
operate on the coming Presidential election ; and my conversa
tion had no reference whatever to its influence that Way. It
could not have had any such reference, for I was then a wartn
and decided friend to Mr. Van Buren's nomination, and had
done much, in my own State and elsewhere, to suppress any
movement calculated to prevent it. This single fact, known to
hundreds, must forever exonerate me from the imputation of
having aided or abetted, vicariously or otherwise, in getting up
and sustaining this Texas movement for any political pur
poses. Whatever part 1 have taken in getting it up, has been very
humble and unimportant ; but 1 am free to make it known to
the world, and to defy any man or all men successfully to im
pugn my motives.
Early in the winter of 1842-'3, 1 became convinced that the
affairs of Texas were coming rapidly to a crisis, and that she

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 495
must find some strong support, or she could not sustain herself
to any advantage among the independent nations ofthe earth.
Hence it naturally occurred to me, that the most favorable
period would shortly arrive for its re-annexation to the United
States. I saw the present administration peculiarly situated.
A President without a party — nay, worse than that, a President
between two great parties, seldom sustained by either, and
often warred upon by both. Under such circumstances, I ap
prehended it might be difficult to prevail on him, however
anxious he might be personally to do so, to enter on any great
measure such as the acquisition of Texas. Infiuenced by these
opinions, in January, 1843, 1 addressed a letter to Gen. Jack
son, adverting to many or all of these circumstances, and ex
pressing the belief that, if his opinions were still in favor of the
measure, as I knew they formerly were, a clear and decided
letter from him might be useful in rousing up or sustaining the
administration in making such a movement. In the spirit of
ardent affection and admiration, I expressed the desire that his
name should be connected with a great achievement like that,
and that it would be the crowning glory of his long and eventful
life. I give the substance and not the words of the letter. 1
was so explicit as to the use I intended to make of his letter in
inciting the administration to make the movement, that I think
I desired him, if he was unwilling for it to be so used, not to
write it. Sir, his reply was received. It was used, and I have
reason to believe that it did much good in encouraging the
President to enter on this great work. It has also been pub
lished to his countrymen ; and I rejoice to see, every day, the
good that it is accomplishing.
And now, Mr. Speaker, what is there in this simple narrative
that should have called down on me the animadversion of any
body, especially of that distinguished Senator with whom I per
fectly agreed as to a Presidential candidate, and for whom I
had ever borne the highest testimony to his patriotism and
talents. He speaks of absolving me of all secrecy, and kindly
informs me that I am at liberty to state all that he said to me
on that occasion. Sir, there was no secrecy, and nothing was
said-by him which he might not well be wiUing that the whole
world should know. But, let me tell you, in that respect, I
33

^^^ MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
stand on as high grounds as he does, and as proudly chaUenge
every insinuation against either my motives or my actions. I
have not arraigned his in any respect, neither ought he to have
arraigned mine.

A CARD.

My attention has been called to Mr. A. V. Brown's statement on the floor
of the House of Rcpri-sentatiw s, in which he disclaims the vicarious char
acter attributed to him in the aflair of General Jackson's let'tr, and the
conversation with myself, and in which he says, "the conversation chanced to
fall on annexation." This is a great mistake. There was no chance about
it. M.-. Brown accosted me conr.ing down the ^teps of the C.ipitol,andI
returned his falut ition with entiie civility ; when he immediately began with,
glad to see me — wanted to see me — and commenced a ta'k upon Texas, as a
thing of premeditation, and the evident cause of his wishing to see me. I,
seeing the Texas movement then as I see it now— a scheme, on the part of
some of it^ movers, to dissolve the Union — on the part of some others, as an
intrigue for the Presidency — and on the part of others, (I only spenk of prime
movers, not the millions who follow,) ss a land speculation and a job in
scrip, — answered ab:uptly and warmly — he may tell what. But I never at
tributed to Mr. Brown any other ag. ncy in the movempnt-than the vicarious
interpellation above referred to ; and, as to his and my Van Burenism being
the same thing, I must beg to be excused. I knew that his would evaporate
when and where it did, and said so to some friends ,- and I knew that mine
would s:and any test. The General Jackson letter always appeared to me to
have been vicariously obtained ; and nothing that Mr. Brown has now said,
impairs, in the slightest degree, that fir,-t belitf. THOMAS H. BENTOK
Senate Chambek, June 13.

House of Representatives,)
June 14, 1844. ]
Mr. Blaie : I have certainly no dispo.?ition to become con
spicuous in any controversy with the Senator from Missouri,
[Mr. Benton.] He took occasion, in the Senate, to indulge in
some reflections on the part I had taken in relation to the an
nexation of Texas, which 1 felt it my duty to reply to on the
floor of the House.
In his card of this morning, he again refers to the conversa
tion between us in walking from the Capitol, and insists that it
was not by chance that the conver.^ation turned on the subject
of Texas, because 1 expressed myself glad to see him, and was
myself the first to give the conversation that direction. If the

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 497
Senator's recollection is clear on these points, I wiU not dispute
them at all with him ; for in those days I was ever glad to see
him — to walk with him, and hear his conversations; and, as I
have felt from the beginning great solicitude on the subject of
Texas, I may have been the first to advert to it. But 1 again
aver, that there was no such premeditation or design on my
part, as he gratuitously attributes to me. But all this is not the
question. Did I seek out that conversation, at the instance of
any other person, and in the way of an " enterprise " on Colonel
Benton ? That is the precise question which I sought to meet
by an unequivocal denial. I adverted to some facts which I
supposed would confirm that denial, and convince Mr. Benton
that he had done me injustice in the suspicion. But he is in
credulous, and 1 am indifferent. He says (after naming the
difierent lights in which he then and still views this Texas
movement) that he answered abruptly and warmly, "he may
tell what." I have already stated that his manner was vehe
ment and denunciatory of the President and those under whose
influences he supposed him to have been acting. But 1 did not
suppose, of course, that any portion of «^/ this was either aimed
at General Jackson for writing his letter, or at me for corres
ponding with him on the subject; but to have been aimed en
tirely at others in the South, who might be supposed to be con
nected with the public dinner in Virginia. But 1 repeat, in
justice to him, that he said nothing, now remembered, which
he either has not since repeated, or might well be willing for
anybody to know.
The Senator is mistaken (if he ever can be mistaken) when he
supposes that I have anywhere said that his and my Van Bu
renism were the same. I only spoke in the positive, never in
the comparative degree. My Van Burenism, I thought, at all
times, was good ; but 1 would have admitted, at any time, if
he desired it, that his was better. Mine evaporated when I
thought my duty to Democracy demanded it. His, 1 hope, has
not lasted any longer than that. Col. Benton closes his card
by saying : " The General Jackson letter always appeared to
me to have been vicariously obtained." I have already stated
the circumstances connected with the correspondence between

498

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

myself and General Jackson, and self-respect will allow me to
make no further allusion to it for Col. Benton's satisfaction.
No man who knows anything of either my personal or politi
cal history, could be made to believe that I either could, or
would, be willing to practice on General Jackson, under any
sort of vicarious agency.
Beside this, it is now nearly eighteen months since that cor
respondence took place. General Jackson has followed it up
by many letters to others. He has seen aU that some of his
best friends (Col. Benton among the number) have said, and
can say, and yet he complains of no vicarious practices upon him.
He can discover no insidious schemes, with all their miserable
pretexts — no indelible stains of national dishonor, in these
efforts to acquire the noblest country upon this continent.
Having embarked in this great work, he is going on bravely
with it. He would have been glad, I know he would, if Col.
Benton could have thought it right to co-operate with him.
But whilst he has never pretended to arraign Colonel Benton's
motives for the course which he has doubtless felt it his duty to
pursue, he and those friends who do co-ioperate with him are
entitled to a like exemption from censure.
Respectfully,
A. V. BROWN.

TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE,
Ani to the Constituents of the Hon. John Quincy Adams in
particular.

The apology for this address is to be found in the speeches
of Mr. Adams at Boston, at Weymouth Landing, and at
Bridgewater, in the State of Massachusetts. In these speeches
he has assailed me with a wantonness and bitterness which can
find no justification in any conduct of mine towards him.
Whether addressing the young men of Boston, chiefiy against
General Jackson, or his constituents at Weymouth Landing
against Mr. Charles J. Ingersoll, or at Bridgewater against
President Polk, he repeats his abuse of me with a frequency
and malignity, altogether discreditable to any man of his age
and station in society. No language which the smallest degree
of self-respect will allow me to use, can even approximate the
grossness of the epithets which he has been pleased to employ
on all the occasions to which I have referred. These speeches
were so carefully prepared, and have been so extensively cir
culated through the public press, that I do not feel willing to
let them pass off as the ravings of an irritable old man, whose
infirmities are rather to be pitied than resented.
Mr. Adams is, indeed, venerable for his years; but he has
not and will not retire from the strife of pubhc affairs. He
remains within the arena, a knight in full armor, clutching his
spear, and assailing, with fiendish malignity, all who come
near him. What right, then, has he to expect infirmities of
senility to protect him from the blows and wounds of the
tournament? But I proceed at once to Mr. Adams's complaints against me.

500

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

This seems to be the publication of General Jackson's letter to
me of February, 1843, in favor of the annexation of Texas.
In his Boston address he sets out the whole letter; but takes
the greatest exception to the following extract from it :
" Soon after my election in 1829, it was made known to me by Mr. Erving,
formerly our Minisler at the Court of Madrid, that, whilst at that court, he
had laid the foundation of a treaty with Spain for the cession of the Flor-
idas, and the settlement ofthe boundary of Louisiana, fixing the western
limit of the latter at Rio Grande, agreeably to the understanding of France;
that he had written home to our government for powers to complete and
sign the negotiation ; but that, instead of receiving such authority, the nego
tiation was taken out of his hands and transferred to Washington, and a
new treaty was there concluded, by which the Sibine, and not the Rio
Grande, was recognized, and established as the boundary of Louisiana. Find
ing that these statements were true, anl that our government did really give
up that important territory, when it was at its option to retain it, I was filled
with astonishment. The right to the territory was obtained from France.
Spain stood ready to acknowledge it to the Rio Grande, and yet the autho
rity asked by our Minister to insert the true boundary was not only withheld,
but in heu of it, a limit was adopted deprivingus of the whole vast country
lying between the two rivers."
Mr. Adams, in commenting on this part of General Jackson's
letter, inquires, "in what language of composure and decency,
can I say to you that there is, in this bitter and venomous
charge, not one single word of truth ; that it is, from beginning
to end, grossly, glaringly, and wilfully false?" What terrible
words ! and what a towering fit of passion seems to come over
him at once I Surely this must be an entirely new and unex
pected charge — one which Mr. Adams had never heard of be
fore, and now hearing, is filled with honest and just indignation !
But ho such thing. It had been made against him as far back
as 1820, and published to the world more than fifteen years be
fore Gen. Jackson's letter was either written or published: not
made against him then by Gen. Jackson, but by that man that
once foisted him into the Presidency against the will of a be
trayed and insulted people — by Mr. Clay, whose election he
was trying to secure by these very speeches. From a letter
written at Washington by Mr. Clay, dated 16th April, 1820, to
a then friend in Kentucky, and published in the United States
Telegraph of August 2d, 1828, 1 make the following extract:

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 501
" There is a rumor in the city which will astonish you, in regard to the
conclu ion of that (the Fbrida) treaty. It bus been asserted by a member
of Congress, a^ coming from high authorify, that prior to the conclusion of
th3 tr.aty, it was known t) Mr. Adanns th)t we could have obtained more
thau was conveyed to us^lhat is, that the Spanish negotiator was allowed
by his in tructions to grant us more, but that le;s was taken, because the
Spani h Minist r declared, if he went up to his instructions, he s' ould be
afraid of some personal i: jury upon his return home. Whi.t will yon in the
west tl ink of the wisdom of that policy which which consants to surrender
an important part of our territory from such a motive ]"
Here is the first charge made against Mr. Adams for surren
dering up Texas in that negotiation. It was made by Mr.
Adams's most especial friend — that friend to whom he stands
solely indebted for the highest office which he ever filled. It
was published in 1828; and Mr. Adams's eyes have doubtless
met it a thousand times. Does he deny it ? Did he get up at
Boston and deny it — at Weymouth Landing, at Bridgewater,
or anywhere else ? No, never, that I have heard of. Did he
give Mr. Clay the lie for uttering it, as he has done General
Jackson ? Mr. Clay was then his Secretary of State, living
daily on his bounty. Did he send for him and say to him.
You have slandered my good name — you have ruined the
inheritance of my children, and you must leave my cabinet
immediately ? No such thing. This new cause of quarrel,
like the old question of veracity, was adjourned over to some
period more propitious to calm investigation.
Mr. Clay, then, was Mr. Adams's first accuser of dereliction
of duty in the negotiation of the Florida treaty. He accuses
him by name — on the authority of a member of Congress, who
is said to have got it from one high in authority. He states in
his letter that it was known to Mr. Adams that we could have
obtained more than was conveyed to us. He was writing on
other subjects, but stepped aside to denounce Mr. Adams for
surrendering an important part of our territory from improper
motives. Contrast the time and circumstances under which General
Jackson alluded to the same dereliction of duty . He was writing
on the re-annexation of Texas; the manner in which it had
been lost lay directly in his way. Mr. Adams's name is not
mentioned, and the whole matter is alluded to with a forbear
ance not to be observed at aU in Mr. Clay's letter.

502 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
I do not pretend to insist that the silence of Mr. Adams, under
the charges of Mr. Clay, was conclusive evidence of his guilt;
but I do maintain that after he has submitted to it uncom
plainingly for so many years, he has no right to affect such
horror at its repetition in a more gentle form by Gen. Jackson,
nor to pour out upon him, nor upon myself, for publishing it,
such a torrent of vulgar epithets and billingsgate abuse. What
ought he to have done ? What would all men have been glad
to see him do on the appearance of General Jackson's letter to
me? He ought, if innocent, to have addressed the public,
stating that Mr. Clay had made this accusation first against
him ; that he perceived that General Jackson had fallen into the
same error ; and then have produced the evidence of his inno
cence. He saw, on the face of General Jackson's letter, that
his information was derived from Mr. Erving, that it was com
municated in writing, and that that writing was in my posses
sion. CaUing on me, he could have inspected Mr. Erving's
communication, and thus ascertained whether General Jackson
or Mr. Erving was to be censured for the accusation. Such a
course would have been obvious enough to anybody but to John
Quincy Adams. Instead of pursuing it, he pretermits his
friend, Mr. Clay, altogether ; pours out all bis malignant fury on
General Jackson, and falsely (not to say meanly) asserts that
Mr. Erving's communications " have been carefully suppressed
from the public, and from any access to them by me." Did he
e er ask either myself or Mr Ingersoll for an inspectionof them ?
Did he request any copy of them, of either Mr. IngersoU or
myself? Plow, then, could he venture to say they had been
suppressed from any access to him ?
But let us take another step in the examination of this sub
ject. Mr. Adams seems especially displeased with me for
a note which I caused to be appended to General Jackson's
letter, which he quotes as follows :
" That this boundary (the Rio del Norte) could have been obtained, was
doubtless the belief of our Minister in Spain ; but the ofier of the Spanish
government was probably the Colorado — certainly a line far west of the
Sabine." Why he should have been so much displeased with this note,
is difficult of explanation. If General Jackson's letter accused
him of too much, this note lessened the amount. It vvas, there-

ANNEXATION OP TEXAS. 503
fore, mitigatory in its purposes and tendency, and bore no marks
indicative of a disposition to assail him. I had requested the
opinions of Gen. Jackson on the subject of our acquiring a fine
and noble country. I wanted these opinions to rouse up and
sustain the administration of Mr. Tyler in making the attempt.
But no part of that purpose was to prejudice Mr. Adams. He
was not in aU my thoughts. It is a little singular, on this part
of the case, that a distinguished Senator of this country should
think my object was to ruin Mr. Van Buren, whilst Mr. Adams is
sure it was to destroy him. Both gentlemen are equally mista
ken. 1 knew General Jackson was writing in the absence of Mr.
Erving's communications, after the lapse of many years ; and
as he had put the communication at my disposal, I was sure that
he would take no exception to any correction of his statements
which an examination of the papers might furnish. I looked
into them sufficiently to be satisfied that General Jackson was
substantially correct in reference to the Erving statements,
with, as I supposed, one solitary exception; that was in his
having used the words Rio Grande, instead of the Colorado,
Whether he had so mistaken the names, was not a matter of
close examination and scrutiny ; it was enough for me that it
seemed somewhat doubtful. I gave the benefit of that doubt to
Mr. Adams, thereby diminishing the amount of country surren
dered, by so much as lay beyond the Colorado. Does this look
as if I had joined in a base conspiracy against an individual°(Mr.
Adams) for as profligate a public purpose as appears on the
pages of history ? His perpetual reiteration of complaint on
this point induces the belief that the true cause of his displea
sure arises from the fact that, by the correction, I cut him off"
from the only quibble on which he expected to defend himself
against either the charges of Mr. Clay or General Jackson.
He knew that he had made a bad treaty, when he might have
made a much better one — that he had surrendered the whole,
when he might have saved at least two-thirds of that noble
country. In other words, that he had taken the Sabine, when he
might certainly have gotten to the Colorado; andhence it offends
him so much that I should have corrected the probable mistake
of General Jackson, in saying the Rio Grande, instead of the Rio
Colorado, thereby cuttinghim off from aU plea and apology for

504 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
thus sacrificing the South, and dismembering his country : For
I now maintain the opinion confidently, that, with the correc
tion of my note published with it, and thereby made a part of
it, so far as it was accusatory of Mr. Adams, the statements
made both by Mr. Clay in 1820, and General Jackson in 1843,
are fully and substantially sustained by the communications of
Mr. Erving and other concurring testimony.
Mr. Adams proves it himself — out of his own mouth; at
least under his own hand and signature ; aye, Mr. Adams
proves his own guilt, in his letter to Mr. Forsyth. He says :
" It is too well knowm, and they (the Spanish government)
will not dare to deny it, that Mr. Onis's last instructions autho
rized him to concede much more than he did ; that those
instructions had been prepared by Mr. Pizarro; that, after the
appointment of Marquis de Casa Yuijo to the ministry, they
were by him submitted to the King's Council, and, with their fufi
sanction, transmitted to Mr. Onis ; that, both in relation to
these grants of land in Florida, and to the western boundary,
the terms which he obtained were far within the limits of his
instructions." Now, here is proof, direct and positive, covering
the substance of the charge against him. It comes from under
his own hand, and seals his lips forever against denying the
charge of Mr. Clay and General Jackson. He says, officially
and expressly, that " both in relation to the grants of lands in
Florida and the loestern boundary, the terms which he (Don
Onis) obtained were far within the limits of his instructions,"
And yet, in the face of this letter, he tells his constituents at
Boston (who ought never to excuse him for the imposture) that
"when, in 1819,1 wrote to Mr. Forsyth that we knew that Mr.
Onis could, without violating his instructions, have conceded
more than he did, it was not in leference to the western boundary,
but to the grants of lands by the Spanish government." What
inveterate obstinacy ! what unblushing falsification of his own
letter ! WeU, I now produce the letter. It says expressly,
" both in the grant of lands and the western boundary ;" whilst in
his speech he declares to his young friends at Boston, '' it was
not in reference to the western boundary." 1 hold up both of
these pictures before the young men of Boston ; and, if they
do not see a direct, positive, and palpable inconsistency, not to

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 505
use a harder term, then 1 shaU conclude they are young indeed !
This covers the very point in controversy. It is the very sub
stance and marrow of both Mr. Clay's and General Jackson's
charge against him. Mr. Clay says : " It was knovm to Mr.
Adams that we could have obtained more than was conveyed
to us ; that is, that the Spanish negotiator was allowed by his
instructions to grant us more," &c.
Well, Mr. Adams, being his own witness, proves that not
only did he know, but thatthe then Spanish Minister knew, and
dare not deny, the same fact. Little, did Mr. Adams think that
he would have himself to dure in 1844, what he said the Span
ish ministry dare not do in 1820.
But I wiil advert to some further admissions of Mr. Adams,
of a most extraordinary character. In his Boston speech, he
tells his young friends that " the powers, however, transmitted
to Mr. Onis, were not at first sufficient to bring the negotiation
to a successful close. They were from time to time enlarged,
until Mr. Hyde de Neuville, the French Minister, told me that
he had seen them, and they were unlimited ; and Onis himself
told me that he could cede all Mexico, but added, I might be
well assured he would not do that."
A little further on, in the same speech, Mr. Adams says :
" Mr. Onis published a pamphlet for his own vindication, (about the Flo
rida treaty,) and to justify himself, took our ground in the controversy, and
insisted that all that he had obtained within the line of the Rio del Norte,
was a cession by the United States to Spain. He did not pretend that his
instructions U)ould have warranted him in conceding more."
Take this statement of Hyde de NeuvUle and of Don Onis,
as furnished by Mr. Adams himself, and who can doubt that
the Spanish government had, at last, though reluctantly, come
up in their instructions to our own claim of boundary to the
Del Norte. De Neuville says he had seenthem, and they were
unlimited. Don Onis declared he could convey all Mexico, if
he chose to do so. Well, in this-^connection, let me now pre
sent you with the statement of James W. Breedlove, Esq.,
formerly Vice Consul at New Orleans forthe Repubfic of Mex
ico. The statement it contains is quite as satisfactory as the
statements relied on by Mr. Adams as to the extent of the
powers given to the Spanish minister :

506 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
" Washington City, April 9, 1844.
" I was the Mexican Vice Consul for a portion of the years 1829, 1830 and
1831. In the course of the latter year, Senor Don Martinez arrived at New
Orleans from Mexico, bringing with him the commission of Mexican Consul,
and instructions from the Mexican government to me, directing the consu
late to be handed over to him. The numerous consultations necessarily
occurring, brought about an intimacy between Don Martinez and myself,
which was continued up to the time that he was appointed Minister from
Mexico to this government. In the course of our free and frequent conver
sations, the subject of the Florida treaty of 1819 was often introduced. In
the course of those conversations, Senor Don Martinez informed me that he
was Secretary of Legation to the Spanish embassy to this government at the
time thatthe ChevaUer Don Louis De Onis was the accredited Minister;
that he enjoyed that Minister's full confidence, and had a full knowledge of
his instructions from the King, their master ; that Don Onis was instructed
to negotiate a treaty which, if necessary and demanded, should fix the Rio
Bravo Del Norte as the western boundary line ; that, in opening the nego
tiation with Mr. Adams, the American negotiator, he claimed the Sabine as
the boundary line, but without any expectation of its being agreed to ; but,
upon finding that it was not very strenuously objected to by Mr. Adams, he
pressed the claim to that line, and succeeded in establishing it in the treaty.
Don Martinez spoke of it exultingly, as having obtained an advantage in the
treaty beyond anything which his government expected ; and the result
was, that it had secured a large and valuable country which had fallen into
the possession of the Republic of Mexico. These conversations were fre
quently held, and were not considered confidential by either of us ; and,
accordingly, I have frequently retailed them in New Orleans, and recently
here. Jas. W. Breedlove."
Here I might rest my defence, and that of General Jackson,
against any imputation made by Mr. Adams. But as he has
in his speeches declared Gen. Jackson's statement to be false —
grossly, glaringly, and wilfully false, and that I knew them to
be so when I published his letter, I must beg to be indulged in
a further examination of the particulars which make up this
wholesale and vulgar denunciation. He says they are false
even in the name of the individual from whom the information
is pretended to be derived. Here he resorts to a contemptible
criticism on the spelling of the name of our then Minister to
Spain. General Jackson writes it Erwin, instead of Erving;
and this is made the foundation of one of his charges of false
hood. But what would he think if 1 were to greet him with the
vulgar epithet of liar and slanderer, by telling him that Mr.

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 507
Aaron Vail Brown never did receive or publish any letter frotti
General Jackson accusatory of him; that it was Mr. Aaron
Venable Brown ? But no matter about that. He proceeds to
deny that Mr. Erving ever did make known to General Jack
son any such facts as his letter asserts that he did. Let it be
borne in mind that General Jackson never did come forward as
the accuser of Mr. Adams of dereliction of duty in negotiating
the Florida treaty ; nor did I ever present anj- letter of his in
that light. He pretended, on the face of his letter, only to give
the information (from memory) which he had received from our
Minister in Spain. If that information was correct, it was then
a question only between Mr. Adams and him. What that in
formation was, has been concealed neither from Mr. Adams
nor the public. All the material and important parts of that
statement appeared during the last spring in the Richmond
Enquirer, with comnients, over the signature of "Randolph of
Roanoke," written by one of the most vigorous writers of the
age. To these I must necessarily refer (for they are too long
for insertion here) all who have a single doubt on the subject
under examination. I must beg permission, however, to insert
the following :
" The next confirmatory testimony I shall ofier, is that of Mr. George W.
Erving (the former Minister to Spain) himself. If I am rightly advised, he
indignantly threw up his commission soon after he was apprized of the terms
of the treaty, and before its ratification by Spain, and was in Washington
about the date of Mr. Clay's letter. In the statement he afterwards drew
up in relation to that treaty, and presented to General Jackson, he places
Mr. Adams in a most unenviable position. From this document, now before
me, I will furnish you from time to time with copious and pungent extracts j
but for the present I have only leisure to quote the following summary,
which seems germane enough to the matter in hand. Commenting on Mr.
Adams's conduct, he says : '
" ' He had a distinct proposal from Pizarro,' (the Spanish Secretary for
Foreign Affairs) ' of a boundary between the Sabine and the Colorado. He
had repeated assurances from the Minister of the United States at Madrid,
of the earnest disposition of the Spanish Minister to conclude a treaty there.
He had abundant proofs of that Minister's sincerity, and finally of his une-
QClVOCAL INTENTION TO AGREE ON THE COLORADO AS A BOUNDARY, ON THE
TERMS PROPOSED BY THE AMERICAN MINISTER.
"With all this before him, Mr. Adams agreed with Onis on the Sabine a
a limit, thus ceding to Spain the whole of the territory in that quarter, which

508 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
she pretended to have any right to possess ; ceding, indeed, every inch of
that territiry that the United States had power to cede — since the territory
as far as the Sabine was actually in possesession of, and made part of the
State of Louisiana.' "
Mr. Adams, in his Boston address, attempts to account for
the strange conduct here attributed to him, by throwing the
blame on Mr. Monroe. He says that if Gen. Jackson had given
an opinion against the western boundary as agreed on in the
treaty, Mr. Monroe would still have persisted in making the
offer. He was earnestly intent on the acquisition of the Flori-
das, and of indemnity for the spoliations, " and was more than
indifferent to any acquisition west of the Sabine." How strange,
how incredible the story ! Indifferent, and more than indiffer
ent, (hostile, we must suppose,) to any acquisition west of
the Sabine ! Why, then, all that tedious and protracted nego
tiation with Spain about it? Why did he not instantly com
mand Mr. Erving to give over further negotiation about the
Colorado and the Rio Del Norte, and close on the Sabine im
mediately? Nay, more ; why did he not tell Mr. Adams, nego
tiating right at his door, to give it up at once, falling back in
his claim on the western boundary of Louisiana? Why, let
me ask, was not this incredible story told in the Ufe-time of Mr.
Monroe ?
Mr. Adams had been accused and severely censured in his
life-time ; yet Mr. Monroe never stepped forward, with the no
ble frankness of his nature, to relieve his persecuted Secretary.
Nay, still more : such a defence becomes totally inadmissible
since the pubfication of Mr. C. J. IngersoU's reply to the re
peated assaults of Mr. Adams. In that reply he inserts a letter
written by xMr. Adams to Mr. George Graham, dated the 2d
June, 1818 — mark the date, how nearly to that of the treaty-
written, too, by the order of Mr. Monroe, in which we find the
following :
" The President wishes you to proceed with all cotivenient speed to that
place, unless, as is not improbable, you should, in the progress of the jour
ney, learn that they have abandoned or beon driven from it. Should they
have removed to Matagorda, or any other place north of the Rio Bravo, and
within the territory claimed by the United States, you will repair thither, with
out, however, exposing yourself to be captured by any Spanish military force.
When arrived, you will, in a suitable manner, make known to the chief or

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 509
leader of the expedition your authority from the government of the United
States, and express the surprise with which the President has seen posses
sion thus taken, without authority from the United States, of a. place within
their territorial limits, and upon which no lawful settlement can be made without
their sanction. You will call upon h'm explicitly to avow under what national
authority they profess to act, and take care that due warning be given to the
whole body that the place is within the United States, who will suffer no per
manent settlement to be made there under any authority other than their own."
On this letter, Mr. Ingersoll justly remarks :
"Thus it appears that in June, 1818, at the very time when the Florida
treaty was in full negofiation, the United States extended, (with all Mr.
Monroe's indifitrence,) not to the Sabine only, where Mr. Adams put a stop
to them — not only to the Colorado, where Mr. Erving thinks it would have
been easy to have settled their limits — nor yet even tothe Bravo, the utter
most claim of northern Texas ; but even north of it, which must have carried
Louisiana far beyond those ancient Santa Fe settlements, of which Colonel
Benton has spoken so emphatically in his recent speeches — Thomas Hart
Bentona, as Mr. Adams, with precision, denominates that gentleman, some
what infected, saith Mr. Adams, with the thirst for Tex-ass, which has be
come an epidemic fever raging to a great extent.
"|Now, the argument of all Mr. Adams's denunciation of General Jack
son, of Mr. Tyler, of Mr. Polk, of Mr. Calhoun, of Governor McDufiie, of
Mr. Brown, of Mr. Erving, and of me, the whole argument of not less than
a volume of print, the result of all his midsummer's night dreams, is that
the United States had no right to Texas beyond the Sabine; that they made
no claim to Texas to the Colorado; thatthey never dreamed of Texas as far
as the Bravo; and that as to the Santa Fe settlement on the north of that
river, it would have been the grossest injustice and absurdity to make any
pretension to them. Mr. Adams has been in the habit, I have understood, of
terming General Jackson a Tennessee barbarian. In his Braintree philip~
pics, the General's double-dealing, imposture, folly, ignorance, profiigacy,.
mendacity — in a word, his villany — in this Texas affair are painted in the
blackest colors. He is called Tiberius Ca;sar, Louis XI of France, Ferdi
nand the Catholic, of Spain; robber, thief, hickory hero, and the like; Me
dusa with a gorgon's head; Ate, hot from hell; Alaric, the pest of nations;
Attila, the scourge of God, are conjured into Adams's jargon, the whole
strain of elaborated allegation, with what he pronounces overwhelming
proofs, that, a3 Texas never did belong to the United States, and never was
claimed by them, it was monstrous injustice to Mexico for General Jackson,
by what Mr. Adams calls his God-defying villany, to rob that country from
Mexico; and it is monstrous traduction of Mr. Adams for General Jackson
to express his astonishment that our government gave it up by the Florida
treaty. General Jackson is expressly compared by Mr. Adams to a horse-
thief for doing so; and setting forth the defence of this horse-thief, as Mr-

510 MISCELLANEOUS DOCOMENTS.
Adams said he heard him make it in Boston, he pronounces it a much better
jastification for stealing the horse than General Jackson has for what Mr.
Adams calls stealing Texas from Mexico. What are we to think, then, of
the statesman, or honest man, or any man, who, after spending a whole
summer, with his unquestionably superior advantages, and the best opportu
nities of making good his case, is thus easily convicted, by the records of his
own department, by a letter under his own signature, every line of which
bears intrinsic evidence of Mr. Monroe's wary patriotism, and of Mr. Adams's
peculiar diplomacyl And what shall we say of that sting at a benefactor
who warmed him in his bosom, when Mr. Adams writes of Mn Monroe that
he was more than indifferent as to Texas — Mr. Monroe, whom Mr. Adams
hides behind, to cover him from the charge? 'Write a letter of instruc
tions,' said President Monroe to Secretary Adams, 'to Geo. Graham, to hasten
forthwith to Texas. Let him make his first stopping-place at Galveston,
far beyond the Sabine; thence let him follow the intruders to Matagorda,
which is at the mouth of the Colorado; if he does not find them there, let him
go to the Bravo; and if there, or at any other place to the north of it within
the territory claimed by the United States, make known that no settlement
can be made there without their sanction, for the place is within, the United
States, who will suffer no settlement other than their own.' Is this the lan
guage of a President who was more than indifferent as to Texas'! Is this
the memory Mr. Adams should sully for want of patriotismi Far beyond San
Antonio, reaching almost to Matamoras and Monterey in the south, to Albu
querque and Santa Fe in the north, Mr. Monroe insisted that neither
Frenchman nor Spaniard, nor Don Onis, the representative of the King of
Spain, nor the Viceroy of Mexico, nor Joseph Bonaparte, should be suffered
to put a foot, nor any other, without authority from our government. Yet
does Mr. Adams not only take high umbrage at any expression of astonish
ment that he should, six months after, haye surrendered all those magnifi
cent regions, but he denounces as worse than a horse-thief the President
who reclaimed them, and lashes as a rascal round the world the individual
who ventures to publish Mr. Erving's argument, that at least as far as the
Colorado, we might, by the Florida treaty, have established our title to Texas,
if not to the Bravo."
There is but one other topic discussed by Mr. Adams in these
various speeches to his constituents, which I desire to notice,
and with that 1 shall close this address. 1 allude to his alle
gation, formerly as well as now made, that the Florida treaty
was shown to General Jackson, and that he approved of it.
Much has been said on this subject by several of the newspa
pers of the day, particularly by the Globe and Kendall's Expo
sitor. There is, in the latter, a review and exposure of all that
Mr. Adams has said on this point, so diiect and lucid that I

ANNEXATION OP TEXAS. 511
submit it to your consideration, with the solitary remarkj that
I have no faith nor confidence in the alleged diary of Mr.
Adams. He did not and would not produce it at the proper
time, when everything he ought to have held dear to him
was at issue. If genuine, it does not sustain him; if a forgery
of subsequent fabrication, it is another melancholy proof that
great attainments are not always accompanied by virtue.
From Kendall's Expositor.
The National Intelligencer, of the 12th instant, contains a long address
of John Quincy Ad,ams, delivered "at a meeting of the Boston Whig Young
Men's Club, on the evening of the 7th instant," defending his own course
in the negotiation of 1819, when Texas was ceded to Spain, and assailing
General Jackson in no measured terms.
On its face this production bears evidence that while the snows which rest
around the temple of this aged man have, in some degree, paralyzed his mental
powers, they have but kindled the fires of his malignant heart into a brighter
flame. The diabolical spirit which breathes through this address, presents
to the imagination a hoary -headed sinner sinking unrepentant into the grave,
already beginning to feel the pangs of " that death which never dies," and
attempting, with impotent rage, to hurl back upon a fortunate rival, whose
success has been his disgrace, and whose glory his shame, a portion of that
fire with which he is already tormented.
"GrossSy, glaringly, wilfully false.'' — Such are the epithets this "arch
angel fallen " bestows upon statements of Andrew Jackson, and attempts
to show it by counter-statements, in themselves " grossly, glaringly, and
wilfully false," capping the climax by proving his own mendacity.
"Af some time more propitious to calm consideration," as Mr. Clay said
when he promised to expose Mr. Adams's conduct at Ghent, we may, if some
one else does not, make a formal reply to this long-studied and most wicked
tissue of petty malignity, false assertion and shameless misrepresentation.
For the present, we shall content ourself -fiith.. proving Mr. Adams a liar by
his own testimony!
On the 7th of May, 1836, while a discussion involving the treaty of 18 19
was going on in the House of Representatives, Mr. Adams is thus reported,
viz: " He mentioned also another fact : the present chief magistrate of the
United States being in the city at the time, Mr. A. was directed to take the
treaty to him and ask his opinion about it, and it was approved of by that
gentleman." On being applied to for information on the subject. President
Jackson said he bad no recoUection of having been consulted,
and thought Mr. Adams must be under some mistake. This
was stated in the Globe. Mr. Adams noticed the statement in
34

512 mSCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
the House, repeating the assertion with minute particulars,
and with his own hand revised the report of his remarks fot
publication. From that revised report we take the following
extract, viz :
"The treaty was signed on the 22d February, 1819, and he presumed it
was in the recollection of many members of the House, that Gen. Jackson
was at that time in this city, as that was the celebrated session during
which his proceedings in the Seminole war were subjects of deliberation in
both Houses of Congress ; and General Jackson was here during the con
sideration of that subject, and was here at the time of the conclusion of the
treaty. " But to come to the precise point. After the treaty had been framed,
and ready to receive the signatures of the contracting parties, but before
there was any obligation upon our part to sign it, by the express direction of
Mr. Monroe, he (Mr. A.) took the treaty, drawn up as it was, to General
Jackson, not as to the military commander of the army of the United States,
but as to a highly distinguished citizen of the United States, whom, being
here at the time, the then President of the United States thought proper to
consult upon a subject of such great importance. He took the treaty to
him at his lodgings, which were in a house at that time kept, he believed
by Mr. Strother. He took and delivered that treaty into the hands of Gen
eral JaCkson, with the particular request from Mr. Monroe, that he would
read it over, and give his opinion upon it. He would state further, that
General Jackson kept the treaty some time, possibly not more than one
day, but he kept it a sufficient time to form a deUberate opinion upon it, and
that he (Mr. A.) called upon him after 'a day or two, and that he returned
the treaty with his approbation of that particular boundary."
The Globe replied to this specific statement, and proved it
false in all its circumstances by the following testimony, viz :
By an official note from Mr. Adams to the Spanish Minister,
dated 13th February, 1819, it was shown tbat a counter-pro
ject for a treaty was that day sent to that Minister.
By an official note from Mr. Adams to the same Minister,
dated 19th of February, 18l9, it was proved that "a copy of
the treaty, as definitively dra,wn up and acceded to by the Pres
ident," was then sent, " several of the modifications proposed
on the part of Mr. de Onis" having been agreed to.
By extracts from the National Intelligencer, dated the 23d
and 25th February, 1819, it was proved that the treaty was
communicated to the Senate on the 22d February, and was
unanimously ratified by that body.
'By an extract from the National Intelfigencer, it was proved

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 513
that General Jackson left Washington on a tour to the North
on the 11th February, 1819.
By extracts from the Baltimore Patriot, Philadelphia Frank
lin Gazette, New York Columbian, and Niles' Register, it was
proved that he arrived in Baltimore on the evening of the 1 1th ;
that he left Baltimore for Philadelphia on the morning of the
14th; that he arrived in Philadelphia on the evening ofthe
15th ; that on the 20th he arrived in New York ; that on the
22d he visited the navy-yard at Brooklyn ; that on the 23d he
was honored with a public dinner inNew York ; and that on the
27th he was expected in Baltimore on his return to Washing
ton, although he had not arrived when Niles' article was
wi-itten. Thus was it established, beyond controversy, that while the
treaty was still passing between the negotiators in projects
and counter-projects. General Jackson left the city, and did
not return until it was agreed upon, reduced to form, signed, sent
to the Senate, and ratified. It was evident, therefore, that Mr.
Adams's story, garnished off" with so many particulars to make
it plausible, was a sheer fabrication. He could never have
shown the treaty to General Jackson at all ; for the General
was not at Washington after it was put in form until it was
ratified. The old man malignant, notwithstanding this exposure, per
sisted in saying that he was substantially correct, referring to
his diary ior proof, but stating that it was not in the city, and
he could not then quote from it.
After eight years silence, he has had the hardihood to pub
hsh extracts from the diary ; and what do they prove? They
prove, as clear as day, his own reckless fabrication and falsehood !
Read them :
" Monday, Feb. 1, 1819. — Called upon, the President, and had a conver
sation with him upon this renewal of negotiation with the Spanish minister.
There are various symptoms that, if we do come to an arrangement, there
will be a large party in the country dissatisfied with our concession from the
Eio del Norte to the Sabine, on the Gulf of Mexico. He desired me to
see and converse with General Jackson on the subject, and to ask confi
dentially his opinion."
" February 2, 1819.— I called on General Jackson, and mentioned in
confidence to him the state of the negotiation with the Spanish minister

514 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
and What we hai offered him for the western boundary, and asked his opinion
of it. He thought the friends of the administration would be satisfied with
it, but that their adversaries would censure it severely, and make occasion
for opposition from it. He thought even that it would bring us again in
collision with the Indians, whom we are removing west of the Mississippi.
But as we had no map at hand, I could not give him a precise idea of the
proposed line, by mere description, and he promised to call at my house to
morrow morning at ten, and look it over upon the map."
Febrtjart 3, 1819. — General Jackson came to my house this morning,
and I showed him the boundary line which has been offered to the Spanish
minister, and that which we propose to offer, upon Melish's inap. He said
there were many individuals who would take exception to our receding so
far f.'om the boundary of the Rio del Norte, which we claim as the Sabine,
and the enemies of the administration would certainly make a handle of it
to assail them ; but the possession of the Floridas was of so great impor
tance to the southern frontier of the United States, and so essential even to
their safety, that the vast majority of the nation would be satisfied with the
western boundary, as we propose, if we obtain the Floridas. He showed
me on the map the operations of the British force during the last war, and
remarked that while the mouths of the Florida rivers should be accessible to
a foreign naval force, there would be no Bscurity for the southern part of the
United States."
Reader, now look back, and see what Mr. Adams asserted in
1836. He said Gen. Jackson was in Washington at the time the
treaty was concluded, which was on the 22d February, 1819.
The extracts from his diary show that he was here on the 1st,
2d and 3d of February.
He asserted that, " by the direction of Mr. Monroe, he took the
treaty, DRAWN UP AS IT WAS, to General Jackson, ^c."
The extracts prove that he took no treaty to General Jackson at
all, and showed him no paper concerning it, except Melish's map !
He asserted, that " he took the treaty to him at his lodgings,
which were in a house at that time kept, he believed, by Mr.
Strother." The extracts prove that he took neither treaty nor
paper to him — not even Melish's map.
He asserted that " he took and delivered that treaty into the
hands of General Jackson." The extracts prove that he neither
took nor delivered any such paper, or any other paper.
He asserted that General Jackson kept the treaty some time —
possibly not more than one day; bat he kept it a sufficient time
to form a deliberate opinion upon it. The extracts show, that

ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 515
he never kept the treaty, not even "possibly " for one day.
He asserted, " he called upon him [General Jackson] after a
day or two. The extracts show that General Jackson called
on Mr. Adams.
He asserted that General Jackson then " returned the treaty."
The extracts prove that he had no treaty to return.
Finally, Mr. Adams brings this tissue of fabrications, shown
to be such by his own evidence, to a close, by asserting that
General Jackson " returned the treaty with his approbation of
that particular boundary." The extracts show, not only that
this assertion is not true, but that it is the reverse of truth.
Reader, look back and read again the extracts from Mr. Ad
ams' diary : Is there a word in them approving the Sabine as
our western boundary? NOT ONE WORD. On the con
trary, he makes General Jackson say, " He thought even that
it would bring us again in collision with the Indians whom we are
renioving west of the Mississippi." This is so worded as to
show that it was part only of an argument used by General
Jackson against that boundary. He thought " even," or he
thought also, showing that some other objection had preceded.
In the last interview. General Jackson is made to discuss the
importance of Florida, and to say that, in case it were obtain
ed, "the VAST MAJORITY OF THE NATION would be
satisfied with the western boundary as we propose." Not a word
as to HIS being satisfied ; not a word showing that he approv
ed, or would ever agree, were he President, to give up Texas
even for Florida. And is there a man living who believes that he
would? These extracts, therefore, show that Mr. Adams was as
wickedly false in the main question, as he was in the artful
web of circumstances, woven out of his own imagination, to
give his assertion point and weight. His diary does not show
that General Jackson approved the Sabine boundary; but as
far as it gives his individual views in that respect at all, shows
that he disapproved it.
There is another circumstance connected with this transac
tion which makes us look upon this man with perfect loathing.
The first extract from his diary shows that he was directed by
President Monroe to ask General Jackson's opinion " CONFI-

516 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
DENTIALLY." The second shows that he did consult him
" IN CONFIDENCE." He was the mere agent of the Presi
dent, bound, by every obligation of honor, to keep in confidence
what was committed to him in confidence. What righthad he
to put on his diary what was committed to him by the Presi
dent in confidence, or received from General Jackson in con
fidence? Making a record of that which ought to have died
with him unless disclosed by the consent of parties, was itself
a breach of confidence, and a betrayal of trust. The man
who keeps a " diary" of confidential communications, or even
of private daUy conversations, is a spy upon society, and a
traitor in heart. He who will pencil down the casual expres
sions of his friends and visitors, and lay them aside, felicitating
himself on the use he may make of them thereafter for his
own benefit or other's injury, is fit only for an assassin, and
should be driven out of society. We would as soon associate
with one whom we knew had a dagger under his cloak, ready
to stab us when he wanted our purse, and could get us. by
the throat, But such a man Mr. Adams has proved himself to
be. Shame to those who once made him President! In his
" Volumes" of Diary he has a store of daggers for all who ever
gave him their confidence or conversation.
But if a man be warranted in transferring to paper the con
fidence reposed in him expressly or implicitly, and thus endan
ger its exposure by his death or other accident, is he at liberty,
years afterwards, without the consent of the parties trusting
him, to make use for it to his own advantage? In this matter,
all Mr. Adams knew of General Jackson's opinions was, ac
cording to his own showing, obtained in confidence. When,
in 1836, he undertook to speak of General Jackson's opinion,
he had obtained the consent of neither the General nor Mr.
Monroe, releasing him from his word of honor, nor had either
of them assaUed him so as to furnish the pretext of self de
fence. If, therefore, Mr. Adams' dairy had contained afi he
said it did, he would, for divulging it under such circumstances,
have been a traitor to every principle of honor held sacred
among men. But what measure of infamy belongs to the man
who notes down vvhat passes in confidence between him and
his friends, and becoming afterwards estranged, makes asser-

ANNEXATION OP TEXAS. 517
tions avowedly upon the faith of this contemporaneous record
which find not the least countenance in its language or its senti
ments? Let mankind give the verdict, and faithful history
record it.
AARON V. BROWN.
Washington, D. C, December 14, 1844.

THE FLORIDA TREATY.
From notes furnished by Gov. A. V. Brown.

To ths Editors of the Richmond Enquirer :
Washington City, February 2, 18^5.
The Florida Treaty — General Jackson and Mr. Adams — The
New York Courier and Enquire) — Samuel S. Governeur,
Charles J. Ingersoll, and A. V. Brown.
Every inteUigent man in the United States is well aware
that the treaty of 1819, which secured the Floridas and lost
us that part of Louisiana known as Texas, was negociated
by John Quincy Adams as Secretary of State, on the part of
our government, and Don Louis de Onis, the envoy of Spain ;
and it is equally known by those who have investigated closely
the correspondence which took place between those two diplo-
n^tic functionaries, on the part of their respective Govern
ments, that Mr. Adams could have secured for the United
States a much better treaty than the one which was negotiated ;
as will be seen by reference to the communication of Mr. Er
ving in 1829. But, Don Onis, who was a man of great diplo
matic powers, saw that Mr. Adams was not very particular as
to boundary, and he took advantage of it, and secured to
Spain, independent of other pecuniary advantages, a territory
of more importance than the one she lost. In the face of these
historical reminiscences, and particularly atthis juncture, when
the lost territory is anxious to re-annex itself to us, to secure

518

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

to her citizens that liberty and independence which had been
guarantied to them by the treaty with France, and who had
been alienated by a blundering piece of diplomacy, which was
inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, so
boldly and beautifully asserted by the Hon. Wm. H. Hammett,
in his speech upon the question of annexation ; the Hon. John
P. Kennedy, in his puny efforts to establish for himself a repu
tation as a statesman and a man of talents, and to shield Mr.
Adams from the imputation of having lost sight of the true
interests of his country in that negotiation ; and being con
trolled by sectional and geographical feelings rather than
those which should belong to a statesman of enlarged views,
reiterated the assertion of Mr. Adams, made up from his cele
brated diary, which had been sleeping silently ever since, that
General Jackson gave his assent to the treaty of Florida before
it was negotiated ; and that it was submitted to him by Mr.
Adams, for an expression of opinion. He said, if the friends of
Gen. Jackson denied this assertion, the evidence was in the pos
session of one of the legal representatives of Mr. Monroe's fam
ily, (Samuel S. Governeur,) in a correspondence between Gen.
Jackson and Mr. Monroe, which established the facts as stated
by Mr. Adams, and recorded in his diary. As a friend of Gen.
Jackson, whose fame is the common property of his country,
I boldly proclaim, that the assertion of Hon. Mr. Kennedy is not
warranted by the facts ; and unless he establishes what he as
serts, even by his volunteer witness, (Samuel S. Governeur,)
who received the lucrative appointment of Postmaster at New
York from General Jackson, in consideration of his connection,
by marriage, with Mr. Monroe, that he, for veracity, will be
placed in the same category with Mr. Adams upon this subject.
Upon the mere ipse dixit of this Don Quixotte, the New York
Enquirer of January 18th, said that General Jackson was in
an "unfortunate dilemma, by denying the assertion of Mr.
Adams, that he approved of the treaty of 1819, at the time of
its adoption." It further stated, " that Messrs. Charles J. In
gersoll, A. V. Brown, and the Globe, had not hesitated to ac
cuse Mr. Adams of forgery, in order to repel his assertion, sus
tained as it was by his diary." These extracts show the New
York Enquirer's own statements, based upon the authority

SJfNEXATION OF 'TEXAS. 519
of Messrs. Adams and Kennedy, of the issue between General
Jackson and Mr. Adams. What is it? That Gen. Jackson
was consulted before the presentation of the treaty to Don
Onis for his signature, and that he approved the Sabine as the
boundary. General Jackson has denied emphaticaUy all re
membrance of the alleged call of Mr. Adams on him, or him
self on Mr. Adams, and also, that he ever received the treaty
or returned it, as stated by Mr. Adams, with his approbation
of that particular boundary. This issue was made many
years ago. In the course of the past year Mr. Adams re
vived it, and General Jackson met it, in his letter of October
22d, 1844, in the following language :
" I say, in advance of the review I shall take of this extra
ordinary production, thus heralded before the public on the
eve of the Presidential election, that the assertion of my hav
ing advised the treaty of 1819, is a barefaced falsehood, with
out the shadow of proof to sustain it." &c.
Now, is it not evident, from this ready and unequivocal deni
al made by General Jackson himself, that the onus 'proiandi fell
upon Mr. Adams ? Why, then, was it necessary for such an
automaton as John P. Kennedy to reiterate it ? The friends
of General Jackson call for the proof now, while he is living,
and Mr. Kennedy, with the aid of his quandam friend, Samuel
S. Governeur, must produce it. They think, that the corres
pondence, alleged to have taken place between General Jack
son and Mr. Monroe, will put the issue between General Jack
son and Mr. Adams forever at rest ; but they may rest assured
that the friends of General Jackson will allow no misstatements
of the issue Mr. Adams has averred, viz : a previous consulta
tion, and a previous approbation of that particular boundary ;
and to the support of this averment. General Jackson and his
friends will doubtless hold Mr. Adams and his friends, in all
their attempts to escape from the " unfortunate dilemma," in
which he has involved himself, and I shall wait for the prom
ised publication of General Jackson's letters. I can readily
imagine how it should be, that Mr. Monroe (long after the sig
nature of the treaty, and when Spain was still hanging out
against its ratification, and when there was considerable oppo
sition to it here at home) writing to General Jackson of all the

520 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
difficulties by which he had been surrounded in its negotiation,
might well receive responses from him approbatory of what he
had done, under all the circumstaces of the case ; but this
would not aid, in the slightest degree, Mr. Adams, in averring
that he had held a personal consultation with General Jackson,
and secured his previous approbation of the treaty before it
was ratified. The points at issue are, that General Jackson
denies positively having been consulted personally by Mr. Ad
ams, in relation to the terms of the treaty ; and that he never
gave his previous approbation to it. Here is the issue, and Mr.
Adams and his friends, with the aid of his diary, must sustain
it, or the world will award to them an unenviable position in
the history of their country. General Jackson has never de
nied having had a correspondence and consultation with Mr.
Monroe, but he denies positively, having had one upon the sub
ject with Mr. Adams. This is the dispute, and Mr. Adams is
bound to prove his assertion, with corroborative testimony to
sustain his diary, which has never been exhibited to the public
gaze. But when did General Jackson ever say or write, that he
was dissatisfied with the Florida treaty ab initio? Who pre
tends that he ever complained of it, or of Mr. Adams' nego
tiation of it, until he received the communication of Mr. Er
ving in 1829? That communication contained a statement
of facts never before known to General Jackson until its re
ception. In his letter of 1843, to Mr. A. V. Brown, he expressly
says — "/ was filled with astonishment .'" At what was he aston
ished ? At the disclosures made to him in the communication
of Mr. Erving? Now, here is the starting point, as far
as Fhave any knowledge ofthe subject, of General Jackson's
opposition to the Florida treaty. Before that, he had learn
ed, no doubt, from Mr. Monroe, the general course of the ne
gotiation, and the difficulties which attended it, and he might
have thought that Mr. Monroe had done all that was in his pow
er to get a favorable treaty, and, therefore, may have expressed
his approbation to him. But how vast the difference in many
cases, between recommending the making of a treaty " before
hand," and " acquiescing" in one after it had been done, and
could not be altered. The case of the late treaty with Great
Britain, in relation to our North-eastern boundary, is an apt

NNEX ATION OF TEXAS. 521
iUustration. How many Senators thought it best to ratify that
treaty after it had been made, who would never have made it
themselves? But after Mr. Erving's statements were made.
General Jackson found that Spain had given express authority
to her Minister to surrender as far as the Colorado, or even
the Rio Del Norte. He saw, in the face of this express author
ity, thatMr. Adams had accepted the Sabine, and he was filled
" with astonishment," to use his own emphatic language, at
such a dereliction of public duty. Now, it settles nothing
between these gentlemen to produce General Jackson's letters
to Mr. Monroe, or any body else, written after the treaty, and
before Mr. Erving's communication. Within these periods, for
aught I know. General Jackson may have approved what had
been done. I have had no communication with him on the
subject, and only judge of this controversy from what I have
seen of it in the public newspapers, and from facts-, concom
itant with the great question upon which it originated.
But if he ever had so approved its consummation, it was for
the want of that information which never was communicated
to the Senate or the public, but which General Jackson, for the
first time, learned from Mr. Erving, our Minister to Spain. It
is now well established by the correspondence printed by the
order of the House of Representatives, that many parts of the
most important communications of Mr. Erving to Mr. Adams
were suppressed by him and never went to the Senate at all. —
Hence, they were never known to the public, and only came to
the knowledge of Gen. Jackson, through Mr. Erving's statement.
I repeat, therefore, that letters from Gen. Jackson, approving
directly or inferentially the Florida treaty, written after the
treaty was made and before the communication of Mr. Erving
to General Jackson in 1829, can prove nothing on the issues
now pending between the parties, nor show anything incon
sistent with the publications of Gen. Jackson on the subject. —
The letter of Mr. Monroe to Gen. Jackson, and his reply, pub
lished in the Globe of the 21st January, does not, in the least
sustain Mr. Adams in his assertion, that General Jackson ap-
proved of the Treaty before its ratification, which is the question
in controversy. This letter is precisely as 1 anticipated, set
tling nothing at all of the controversy between General Jackson

522 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
and Mr. Adams. It does not pretend to speak or allude to any
previous consultation or approbation of the Treaty by General
Jackson. On the contrary, it entirely negatives_^such an idea.
Would Mr. Monroe have gone into all the details appertaining
thereto, in order to explain the circumstances which governed
his action on the Treaty, if General Jackson had been previous
ly consulted and apprised of all the circumstances, as asserted
by Mr. Adams ? Such an idea is preposterous, and he may re
fer in vain to his diary to sustain him in his present position be
fore the country on this subject. Mr. Monroe's letter was
dated long after the Treaty. Spain had failed to ratify it, and
the subject was lying over for the future and farther action of
the Spanish Cortes. In the mean time, many persons, (Mr.
Clay and others, ) were insisting on our taking armed posses
sion of Florida and Texas, without farther waiting on the ac
tion of Spain. Under these circumstances, Mr. Monroe says to
General Jackson. ( among may other things, ) that he had been
decidedly of opinion that we ought to be content with Florida
for the present, and until public opinion in that quarter, ( the
North,) shall be reconciled to any farther change. Why did
Mr. Monroe so express himself to General Jackson, if he had
been consulted by Mr. Adams before the adoption of the
treaty? Every thing in connection with this subject, taken
together, is entirely against Mr. Adams and his diary. Mr.
Monroe also alleged to General Jackson, as another reason,
why we ought to be satisfied, of the then raging of the Missouri
question, and other difficulties by which he was surrounded, to
justify his action and conclusions. Now, General Jackson in
reply to such a letter says: " The view you have taken ofthe
conduct of our Government relative to South America, {not
Spain,) in my opinion has been both just and proper, and will
be approved by nine-tenths of the nation. It is true, it has
been attempted to be wielded by certain demagogues to the
injury ofthe Administration, but, like all other base attempts,
has recoiled on its author, and I am clearly of opinion, that for
the present we ought to be content with the Floridas. " Does
this, in the least, sustain Mr. Adams ? Certainly not, because
Mr. Monroe was particular in enumerating the difficulties by
which he was surrounded to secure General Jackson's approba-

ANNEXATION OP TEXAS. 523
tion, which would, if it had been previously secured by Mr.
Adams before the treaty was ratified, have been an act of
supererogation on the part of Mr. Monroe. The inference to be
drawn from this correspondence is, that General Jackson did
not know any thing of the particulars of the treaty as stated by
Mr. Adams, and that Mr- Monroe's object was to secure his
support, by pointing out the difficulties by which he was sur
rounded, to the treaty which had been negotiated by Mr. Adams
and de Onis. Here, then, is the long threatened disclosure
that was to settle the issue between General Jackson and Mr.
Adams ! This, too, is that new work of fiction, (not Horseshoe
Robinson,) promised by Mr. John P. Kennedy, in his speech on
the Annexation of Texas. If this is all they have to bolster up
their tottering reputations and their anti- Api erican feelings.
General Jackson need say no more — his friends may rest in
ease, and Mr. Adams may continue to gnaw the file of his ma-
fignity to the last. ALGERNON SYDNEY.

SPEECH,
In Committee of the Whole, on the proposition directing the Judi
ciary Committee to report a bill abolishing the Circuit, Chan
cery, and Supreme Courts,

Before commencing his argument, Mr. Brown introduced the
following resolutions, as containing his views of the alterations
which it was expedient and proper to make in the present ju
diciary system, which he moved should be adopted in lieu of
those heretofore under discussion.
"Resolved, That it is expedient to make the following alterations in the
judiciary system of this State, and that the committee on that subject pre
pare and report a bill accordingly.
1st. That a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court should be elected, who,
with the three associate judges thereof, should hold said court at three
places only, to wit : at Knoxville, Nashville and Jackson.
2nd. That the Chancery Court shouldbe abolished, and the causes therein
should be transferred to the Circuit Courts of their appropriate counties.
3rd. That the Circuit Judges should hold three terms of their courts an
nually, with their present jurisdiction, and such other as is hereinafter
transferred to them.
4th. That all jury causes should be transferred from the county to the
circuit courts, except actions of debt and assumpsit, founded on bonds, bills,
promissory notes and liquidated accounts signed by the party to be charged
therewith. Such actions to be commenced as at present, but to be tried by
the justices holding the county court, without a jury and without any de
claration or other pleadings in writing. Judgment to be rendered the first
term with reasonable stay of execution, unless good cause for continuance
be shewn by affidavit. Either party dissatisfied and desiring a jury trial, to
be entitled to an appeal to the circuit court."
The Clerk having read said resolutions at the table, Mr.
Brown proceeded as follows :

ON ABOLISHING COURTS. 525
Mr. Chairman : You will perceive that the three first propo
sitions which I have just submitted, differ from those hereto
fore under discussion, only in this, that they do not contem
plate a removal ofthe present judges from office. The system
— the plan — the frame-work of the courts, is substantially the
same, the removal of the present incumbents constituting the
only material difference between the respective propositions.
This being the case, I shall proceed to the discussion of the
subject, 1 trust, with the same good temper and courtesy, which
have heretofore distinguished this debate. The gentlemen
from Smith and from Rutherford, who opened this discussion,
have set us an example, in this respect, worthy of our imita
tion. They met in the tournament, shivered their lances and
retired, with a gallantry which would have done honor to the
most experienced champions in the proudest days of chivalry.
Other gentlemen have followed on both sides, doing great
justice to the subject and refiecting on themselves and their
constituents the very highest credit. But what are to be the
results— the practical effects of all this debating? Is it likely
to terminate in a mere war of words — in a mere personal
struggle for rhetorical ascendency? I do most sincerely de
sire that it may : but from the moment of its commencement
I have had the most serious forebodings on my mind. Have
you not observed what profound attention has been paid to
this debate — what deep and breathless anxiety pervades all
who have witnessed this discussion? Gentlemen need not
imagine that it is a mere compliment to their powers in de
bate. No, sir, your fellow-citizens have learned that the in
dependence of the judiciary, that main pillar in our political
fabric, is about to be pulled down, and they cannot be insensi
ble to the disastrous consequences. Nor will the effects of
this discussion be confined within these walls; for we are
kindling a spark in this debate, which will hereafter spread,
and brighten, and burn, through every county in the State.
The gentlemen know they can extinguish it now — that they
can extinguish it in a moment, if they choose to do so. If,
however, they will not, let them remember how we warned
them — how we even implored them not to break up the deep
foundations of social order, nor visit on Tennessee the distract
ing scenes of Kentucky.

526 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
Let us examine what necessity there is, granting that they
have constitutionally the power- — what necessity there is for
raising and pressing, with so much zeal, this delicate and per
plexing question. The gentleman from White has been plea
sed to represent, in fervid language, the sufferings of the peo
ple for want of the proposed alterations. He, I think it was,
that represented the country " as bleeding at every pore." The
gentleman from Davidson, though he did not deal in such
bloody metaphor, dipped his pencil in the most gloomy colors,
and presented us a picture of justice " old, and blind, and maim
ed." Now, sir, I propose to throw away all metaphor — that
being too much the language of poetry and romance — and to in
stitute a plain matter of fact enquiry, whether there exists any
adequate necessity for turning all our judges out of office.
I begin with those of the Circuit Courts, and of East Ten
nessee. I ask of the gentlemen on the other side of the moun
tain, what fault do they find of Powell. What has he done to
justify the legislature of his country in rudely dismissing him
from office? On this side we have often heard that he deserved}
higher advancement in the judiciary, and possessed eminent
claims to the political honors of the State.
I will next inquire as to judge Scott. What terrible explo
sion has taken place in his circuit — what popular rage is drag
ging him from the bench where he has so long, and, as I thought,
so usefully presided?
The next in order is judge Keith. With him I have never
had the pleasure of an acquaintance: but for ten years of pub
fic life, I have associated with members of the Legislature and
other persons from his judicial circuit, and I know of no public
officer, who, from information, occupies a more enviable station
in the esteem and confidence and gratitude of his country.
Now, sir, having gotten through with the East Tennessee
judges, I demand to know of their representatives on this floor,
what well-founded complaints can be exhibited against them?
If they tell me none, then I enquire of them how they can re
concile it to reason or justice, to their consciences, to dis
grace those judges by wantonly turning them out of office. It
will be no sufficient apology to them or to the country to say
we intend to remove that disgrace by restoring them to office.

ON ABOLISHING COURTS. 527
The combinations of interest and the resentments of disap
pointed ambition in a new election, may render them liable to
hazards, to which it is cruelty and injustice to expose them.
I will next enquire, whether any necessity exists for this rash
measure, among the judges ofthe Western District. Of judge
Hamilton I have heard no complaint. Of judge Turley 1 never
expect to hear any. He is one of those rare instances of judge-
making in Tennessee, which could hardly be bettered.
Judge Haskell, whatever might have once been the case,
seems lately to have risen in popularity in his circuit. At
all events, it can hardly be necessary to nullify him out of
office, since you are in a fair way to do so in a much more con
stitutional manner. I come now to speak of the judges of
Middle Tennessee, and I begin with judge Kennedy. The his
tory of our lives would show, that we have not always been
friendly, and that we are not now the greatest admirers of each
other; but, sir, were he my greatest enemy, his character as a
man and his reputation as a judge, shall not be tarnished with
my consent by turning him out of office. Next, sir, I will en
quire, who complains of judge Humphreys? I know not, and I
care not ; for turn him out when you may, his place will not be
supplied by an equal. Have complaints been raised against
judge Mitchell? If so, let us take warning from the fact. It
goes to show that the judge which you made in 1829 could not
last until 1831, What assurance then have gentlemen to of
fer, that-this whole tribe af judges which you are proposing to
make, wiU endure until 1833? I have yet to speak of judge
Stewart and judge WUliams, and have left them for the last, be
cause I knew they were most complained of. I believe, sir,
that nine-tenths of aU this noise and clamor against the judges
may be traced to their two circuits. Admit all this complaint
to be weU founded, do not gentlemen perceive how unjust it
would be, to involve the other judges in the same disgrace with
these ? Surely that moral vision must be clouded that coulA
expect the representatives of the other nine judges to commit
an act so unreasonable and so indefensible. I wUl now
ask the gentlemen from WUliams' circuit if we have not al
ready done a great deal to refieve them from the real or sup
posed hardship of their condition. At the last session thou-
35

528 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
sands were spent to rid them of tbe evil by the direct opera
tion of an impeachment. When that failed, a new circuit was
formed to lighten their burdens. Beside all this, in 1827, the
complaints from that quarter induced the Legislature to pass a
law authorizing the appointment of special judges. In doing
this I admit the provisions of the constitution were most prob
ably transcended, but coming from that region of the State,
the gentleman from White should have been the last to re
proach us for the infraction. Sir, I am inclined to believe that
it is because we have done so much, and shewed such a dispo
sition to do every thing asked for, that we are now called upon
to consummate this last and fatal act of constitutional viola
tion. As to judge Stewart, most of us were boys — some on this
floor were scarcely in existence — when he commenced the la
bors ofthe bench, ^his flourishing city in which we are now de
liberating on his overthrow, was then nothing more than an
ordinary village. He penetrated the forest, visited all the new
counties as they were established, and in log court houses which
neither sheltered him from the rain nor protected him from the
cold, administered the law, " without sale, denial or delay."
Patient and persevering, and possessing more learning than many
who outstripped him in the career of judicial promotion, he has
been for twenty-two years the most virtuous, the most unam
bitious, and the most useful of all our circuit judges. I wUl go
further and assert to this committee, that he has rendered more
valuable services to the people of this State than any other
judge of any grade or rank whatever. Your books of reports
may hand down to posterity many names more honored than
his, but the memory of none will be more richly embalmed in
the affections and gratitude of the present generation. And
yet he too is to be swept away by this modern doctrine of judi
cial nullification ! And for what ? Because he has grown old.
Yes, sir, that is true ; but let it be remembered, that he has
grown old in your service. The infirmity of his body has not
impaired a single faculty of his mind. I this day assert that he
knows more law than half his persecutors, and is a better judge
than the best half of those who are getting ready to step into
his slippers. But he is crippled, wjt.hal, and goes upon crutch-

ON ABOLISHING COUBTS. 529
es ! How did he become so ? He has told the simple and af
fecting story in his own memorial now lying on your table. I
was in this city when the news of his unfortunate accident ar
rived ; I witnessed the anxiety of the public mind about his
fate, and let me warn gentlemen how they too rudely pull him
down from the bench: forjudging from what I then saw, his
downfall may excite a tide of popular indignation, deep, power
ful and overwhelming.
I have often thought, that there was something strange and
unaccountable in the cold indifference, and even absolute neg
lect, of the w^orld toward meritorious and useful civil officers.
You decree a triumph to him who captures a city — you crown
with laurels the General who achieves for you a victory, whilst
the judge who builds up and perfects your jurisprudence and
administers justice in its purity to thousands, lives unrespected
and dies uiihonored. For myself it is not so ; for I would to
day rear as proud a fnonument to the memory of a Haywood,
aCrabb, and a Brown, as to that of the bravest hero that expired
on the plains of New Orleans. Holding such sentiments as
these, I should be recreant to honor and to justice, were I to
join in this crusade against the judges. Yet I desire gentle
men, whilst I acquit them of every improper motive, to under
stand distinctly the reasons why I cannot go with them.
1st. Because they do not substantially change the system —
they do not even give it a new dress. It is called, to be sure,
a district court, but what signifies names? It is to be held by
one judge as at present — to be held at the same places — to
have the same jurisdiction, and is, to all intents and purposes,
the old circuit court over again. I regard it as a disguised and
fraudulent bantling, re-christened by the gentleman from Smith,
with the gentlemen from Davidson and from White standing
as its reputed God-fathers !
2nd. I cannot go with them, because I do verily believe we
shall get worsted in the exchange. We have now eight or nine
good judges and only two or three indifferent ones. I had
rather stand as we are, than risk the chances of making mat
ters worse by attempting to mend them.
Mr. Chairman, 1 pass over the proposition in favor of abol
ishing the Chancery Courts. AU the different propositions

530 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
believe contemplate that event. It is demonstrable that they
render no service adequate to the expense. They now stand
as sinecure offices, which ought not to be allowed in a repub
lican country. Such they must continue to be, unless you trans
fer to them all equity jurisdiction from the circuit courts. This
I apprehend the people will not consent to, as they are too few
in number and too sparsely scattered over the country.
Nor do I intend now to discuss at length the proposition to
transfer all jury cases from the county to the circuit court. I
shall ask of this committee hereafter a separate and distinct
consideration of that branch of the subject, when I hope to be
able to show, that such a transfer will be greatly serviceable to
both plaintiffs and defendants, and calculated to lighten the
taxes and diminish the expenses of litigation in every county
in the State.
I proceed therefore to consider the last proposition to abolish
the present Supreme Court and to build up another on its ru
ins. This is your, court of the highest and last resort — the
head and the heart of your judicial system. It is the head, be
cause from it all the subordinate members receive their direc
tion, and the heart, because from it proceeds every principle of
vitality that pervades and strengthens the whole. You may
lop away one member after another, and still the branchless
trunk would live, a mutilated monument of the heedless vio
lence of the times ; but when you have once laid the axe to the
root and prostrated its majestic trunk on the ground, all will
be lost that rendered life secure or made liberty valuable.
Let this committee remember that no substantial alteration
in the system of this court is proposed. Its name, its jurisdic
tion, its emoluments are the same. It is the old Supreme Court
in disguise, with but little to conceal its identity. Gentlemen
have only muttered a few cabalistic words, and the presen
court has disappeared and a new one has risen in its place, with
nothing to distinguish it but a new set of judges ! Is such pre
tended magic consistent with the constitution of the State ? —
The 2nd section of the 5th article declares, the General As
sembly shall by joint ballot of both houses appoint judges of the
several courts of law and equity, who shall hold their respective
offices during good behaviour — not so long as they may remain

ON ABOLISHING COURTS. 531
young — not so long as they may be blessed with eyesight— -not
so long as they may be popular with the Assembly — but for and
during their good behaviour. Sir, I throw no peculiar sanctity
around our judges, I am no advocate for them as individuals.
and would never consent to keep up useless or unnecessary offi
ces for their benefit; but I maintain that sccording to the spirit
and intention of the constitution, we have no right to abolish a
necessary and useful office forthe purpose of getting clear of ob
noxious incumbents. If the Legislature possess this right, then
our judiciary can no longer be regarded as independent. The
judges continue in office, not during their good behaviour, but
during the will and pleasure of the General Assembly. If it
were intended that they should hold their offices by so frail a
tenure as this, why so much caution in providing for their re
moval by impeachment? Why so carefully provide, not that a
majority, but that two thirds ofthe Senate, sitting as a court of
impeachment, should be necessary to conviction? Now all
these safe guards have been erected in vain, if the Legi lature
can, in this summary way, remove the judges at its pleasure.
A precedent for doing so has been drawn from the removal
ofthe midnight judges ofthe elder Adams. There is not the
slightest resemblance between the cases. The Federal party
had changed the system — they had established a separate Su
preme Court to be holden by a distinct set of judges, and to find
employment for their favorites, had required the district courts
to be holden, not by one, but by a plurality of judges. The
Republican party, coming into power the very next day, were of
opinion that the change was an improper and unnecessary one,
and therefore repealed it at once and restored to the country
the former system. They were abolishing useless and unneces
sary offices, and the incumbents necessarily fell with them. Be
sides, sir, if the history of those times were examined, which I
have not done for many years, it would very probably be found,
that no commissions were ever actually delivered, or any oath
of qualification ever administered to those new judges — how
ever this may be, the repeal can be justified on the most cor
rect principles without referring it to the party excitements of
the day. The repeal of the pld district court, in 1809, and the
estabfishment of the present Circuit and Supreme Court system

532 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
is also adduced as a precedent. I will not take up the time of
this committee in showing the total want of resemblance in the
two cases. The whole organization ofthe courts was changed,
and not the slightest inclination manifested to wage a personal
war against the judges. The effect of such a warfare must al
ways be disastrous, and if the doctrines so earnestly advocated
on the other side should finally prevail, then indeed as has been
said, we shaU find ourselves far at sea, without a chart and
without a compass — every wave will carry us further from safe
ty and every breeze of popular commotion, will but hasten our
destruction. Your judges, standing solitary and unsupported,
are obfiged to be overpowered — they have been so in this pre
sent controversy. The cry of their destruction has gone forth,
and to escape their pursuers they have fied to the constitution —
yes, they have fled to that as the city of refuge, and are now
standing and holding to the horns of the altar. I implore gen
tlemen not to pursue them further, nor pollute the sanctuary
by staining it with their blood. But, sir, 1 believe that I am
imploring in vain; I believe that a majority of this house is de
termined to accomplish this work of destruction. They have
seized, like the strong man of old, on the pillars of the constitu
tion, and are determined to pull it down on our heads. If it
must be so, I will not fly for safety, but call on every friend to
the constitution and an independent judiciary, to stand by each
other to the last, and let us be buried in its ruins.

ADDRESS,
Delivered at Pulaski, by A. V. Brown, to his constituenis on his
return fi-om ths ccJled session ofthe Legislature of 1832.

Gentlemen and Fellow Citizens: I am induced to address you
on the present occasion, in order to respond to the frequent en
quiries made as to what course- 1 shall probably pursue in the
next elections. On my return from the Legislature, 1 disover-
ed that so many of my political friends were expecting me to
offer for another station, that I came to the determination not
to be again a candidate for the General Assembly. Having
communicated this fact to a few individuals, I wish now to make
a public declaration of it, in order that all who desire to become
candidates, may have early and fair notice.
In taking leave of you as your representative, I beg leave to
trespass awhile on your patience, in reviewing some ofthe most
prominent subjects connected with my late service. It is most
common for public men to address you on subjects that lie in
prospective — aspiring to win your favor, they attempt to lift
the curtain of futurity, and to please your imaginations with the
brightest visions which genius and fancy in their highest re
velry can possibly create. I have no such splendid prospects,
however, to lay before you — my business now is with the past
— not the future; to lay before your understandings, not your
passions, a true and just account of all my conduct as your
pnblic agent. 1 am the more ready to render that account, from
a deep and thorough conviction, that during no period of my
public life have 1 better sustained your Interest and maintained
your rights, than during the two last sessions of the General
Assembly.

534

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

The public acts of the regular session have now been for
more than twelve months before the public mind, and as far as
I have been able to learn, have given general satisfaction. —
With but few if any exceptions they have been found to be
based on equal and impartial justice, calculated neither to pam
per the rich nor to oppress the poor — intended for the benefit
of all, they confer no party or sectional advantages, but look
forward to the general welfare of the whole State. As to the
special laws of that session, in which the county of Giles was
interested, we presume none can be dissatisfied. At the com
mencement of that session, the county had not a single dollar
in the way of public funds, except what was raised by ordinary
taxation ; at its close, your representatives had obtained for her
between 12 and $15,000. All remember the dissatisfaction
that then prevailed about our Agency Bank. Your representa
tives prevailed on the Legislature to cut off the greater part of
it from the mother Bank, and to make a donation of it to the
county of Giles. Its superintendence was given to all the
Justices of the county, whilst its direct management was given
to Mr. Abernathy, an agent, in whose integrity and capacity for
such business, 1 know you have unbounded confidence. Beside
this, your representatives obtained for you nearly $3000 for the
important purpose of improving your navigable waters. Both
of these sums, making in all about 12 to $15,000, they procured
for you at one session. They made it absolutely yours, putting
it beyond all future chances of being taken from you. When,
let me ask, since 1809, when this county was first organized,
did you ever receive such a donation as this ? Never. And I
will venture the assertion, that when the little prejudices and
the passions of the present times shall have passed away, and
public men shall be judged by what they do, by what they ac
complish for you, and not by the dictates of party animosity,
this one donation alone will hail that session as one of the most
liberal and useful to the county which was ever holden.
With this slight reference to the regular session, I will now
pass to the more recent and important events of the called
session. The uninformed have sometimes complained that this
session should not have been convened at all. They impute it
to some neglect or oversight of the members of the Legislature.

ADDRESS. 535
To these, it is proper to say, that such a session was unavoida
ble, and that no talents, however lofty, and no industry, however
assiduous, could have rendered it unnecessary. The Constitu
tion of the United States requires a new census and a new ap
portionment of representatives every ten years. This law of
Congress, passed in AprU, or May, 1882 ; whereas the Legisla-
lature of this State, having gotten through with all its business,
had adjourned about the middle of December, 1831.
Were we to have continued in session, with nothing to do
all that time, waiting for Congress to pass that law? or were
we to be gifted with the spirit of prophecy, and thereby know
beforehand how many new representatives we would be enti
tled to, and to lay off the districts accordingly? Alas! your
representatives, like their constituents, are but poor prophets,
and can find themselves full of employment in comprehending
the past and providing for the present, without pretending to
lay claim to a prescience of the future !
That law of Congress gave to Tennessee four additional
members of that body, and of course four more electors of
President and Vice President. In these alarming times, when
Congress was engaged on the great questions of the Bank, of
Internal Improvement, the Tariff, etc., were you willing to do
without your full weight in the national councils ? Again, were
you willing in the Presidential election, whilst General Jackson
was struggling in his election against Henry Clay, the anti-
Masons, the United States Bank, and the old Federal party
in the bargain, to take away from him four votes in Tennes
see, to which he was entitled? No, gentlemen — the Governor
knew his own duty and your wishes too well not to convene
the Legislature on such an important occasion. If he had not
done so, he would have been denounced from one end of the
State to the other; and you yourselves would have been
amongst the loudest in his malediction. Liberty is better than
money, and the expense of a called session ought not to weigh
as the dust in the balance, when compared with the perma
nence and safety of our republican institutions.
In his message, the Governor caUed our attention to the lay
ing off' of Congressional districts, according to the new ap
portionment of Congress. This has always been found a

536 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
troublesome and perplexing business. I was in the Legisla
ture ten years. ago, when the present system was formed; I
then witnessed the difficulty of making any arrangement which
would give universal satisfaction, and at the same session took
an early opportunity to explain to the committee, most of whom
had no experience on such subjects, the main source whence
dissatisfaction then arose, and implored them, as far as practi
cable, to avoid such difficulties. I was opposed to long dis
tricts, because they were sure to create a struggle amongst the
counties for the centre- — each anxious to get a favorable posi
tion for itself, would exert every effort to avoid being placed
at either end of the district. Laying down this principle, 1
insisted, wherever it was practicable, to lay off the districts in
a triangle, rather than an oblong. In that form, no county
would be in the centre, and therefore none would have a right
to complain. Applying these rules to this quarter of the State,
I was willing to place Bedford, Warren and Franklin, in one
district; Lincoln, Giles and Maury, in another ; and then to give
three districts to the west, beginning on Lawrence, etc., west.
Contrary, however, to this wish, the committee reported our
district in its present form, I voting against it on account of its
being longitudinal instead of triangular.
In the House, whilst the bill was on its passage, I was still
anxious for Lincoln, Giles and Maury to compose the district
rather than the present, because 1 knew Lincoln would be dis
satisfied at running so far to the west, whilst the smaU coun
ties would be dissatisfied at being connected with the large ones
above. Whilst, however, I was exerting myself to bring about
a district composed of Lincoln, Giles and Maury, the former
made an effort to place herself in the centre, by taking Frank
lin on the east, and Giles on the west. This proposition was
directly at war with the interest of both Franklin and Giles,
because it placed them, though much the smallest counties, on
the outer skirts of the district, whilst it placed Lincoln between
seven hundred or one thousand votes stronger than either
exactly in the centre. 1 regretted this proposition very much,
because it compelled me to give up the idea of Lincoln, Giles
and Maury, which 1 thought would give the least dissatisfac
tion, and in self-defence, to contend for the centre for my own

ADDRESS. 537
county, rather than yield it to Lincoln, in running tfie district
towards the mountains. At this point, therefore, the interest
of Giles and Lincoln was directly at issue ; 1 had tried invaria
bly to avoid bringing their interest in conflict. I believed it
might be avoided by laying off a triangular district, but^ \vhen
that issue was made by Lincoln's asking the centre for herself,
I had no alternative left, but to ask it for you. 1 was your
sworn representative; I had to act for Giles and not for Lin
coln. The struggle was a bold and manly one on both sides ;
victory sometimes being declared on one side and sometimes on
the other. It at last settled down in your favor, leaving Lin
coln no more right to be dissatisfied than Giles would have
been, if victory had been declared on the other side. Had I
been the representative of Lincoln I should most probably
have done as he did, but, being the representative of Giles, my
sworn duty required me to act as I did. Every reason that
made Lincoln desire the centre, made Giles desire it, and every
thing which made Lincoln averse to being at one end of a dis
trict, made Giles averse to the same position. The recoUec
tion, however, that " the race is not always to the swift, nor
the battle to the strong," ought to teach all the counties of
the district not to remember in unkindness a generous rival-
ship, which is past, but to look forward in noble emulation,
which can in future give the highest proof of republican virtue
and patriotic devotion to the interest and glory of our coun
try. Our next duty required is, to provide for the election of elec
tors of President and Vice President. The Governor in his
Message recommended this as a favorable period for the adop
tion of the general ticket system. This recommendation was
published probably in every newspaper in the State, and thou
sands of copies were printed and distributed in every part of
the country ; in the meantime not a single newspaper, not a
single letter, was written to the members that I ever heard of ;
not one public meeting in any county of the State was held in
opposition, and the members of the Legislature might well
say, the general ticket system, as recommended by the Gov
ernor, meets with the general, and, probably, universal appro
bation of the people ; for all have heard it proposed to us, and

538 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
none have opposed it. The general ticket system was there
fore adopted under the implied approbation of nearly every
man in the State, and was adopted by a unanimous vote, I
befieve, with the exception, probably, of one single member.
Yet strange to tell, it is now objected to. Who of my coun
trymen were the first and loudest to make complaints ? They
were the enemies of Jackson and the friends of Adams and
Clay. They made a huge outcry, and many plain upright
men, that were not of their party, but were good friends to
their country, not understanding the subject, and not knowing
the motives of the Adams and Clay men, were deceived and
carried away by their clamor. 1 stand up this day not to apol
ogize for the adoption of this sj'stem, but to justify and defend
it. Go back with me to the dark and trying period of '98, when
the great battle was fought between the Federalists and Re
publicans, in the election between old John Adams and Thom
as Jefferson. What was it that lost the republicans several
votes in the Southern States ? It was not having adopted the
general ticket ; the federalists had been on their guard and
had adopted it, whilst the republicans, not looking into the mat
ter so deeply, were taken by surprise and well nigh ruined by
it. The moment, however, that election was over, the repub
licans in the old States resolved never to have such an advan
tage taken of them again ; and Virginia, and North Carohna,
and other States, instantly adopted the general ticket system.
Many of the new States coming into the Union after this great
struggle did not know so much by experience, and therefore
adopted the district system. On reflection, however, they
changed the plan; and at the time of the last session there was
no State in the Union that voted by districts but Tennessee and
Maryland. Maryland has not changed, because she has always
leaned to the federal side — but Tennessee has always been on
the republican side. She has always been for Jefferson, Mad
ison, Monroe and Jackson ; and therefore it was proper she
should adopt the same system and walk in the same footsteps
with her republican sisters of the Union.
Many of the citizens of this State, however, do not oppose
the adoption of the system, whilst they mainly object to a ticket
having been made and recommended to their consideration.

ADDRESS- 539
Many seem to regard this as an abridgment of their rights,
and speak of it as a dangerous assumption of power. Let it
be remembered, that this change was effected at a caUed ses
sion, when, not more than forty-odd days were to elapse before
the election. The State is more than five hundred mUes in
length and more than one hundred in breadth. The new elec
toral law must be printed at Nashville and carried to the dif
ferent counties of the State, and be re-printed in the other
newspapers of the county towns, and thus sent out to the peo
ple, who will require sometime to form themselves into public
assemblies, and nominate those candidates whom they intend
to support; these nominations must then find their way through
every part of the State, in time to be known every where be
fore the election. Now, how long would it be before the
NashviUe papers would reach East Tennessee, and the law be
re-printed, and the people in that section meet and make their
nominations? Then how long before these nominations
through the papers will be generally known to the people of the
Western District ? Every one must know that all this could not
be done with any certainty, in the common course of things, in
forty-odd days. If not done when the election came on, the
people would all be in confusion. Those in East Tennessee
would not know whom those in the Western District were
voting for on the Jackson ticket, nor those in the Vv'^est be ap
prised of the electors to be run in the East ; and thus the differ
ent parts of the State, though aiming to support the same good
cause, could not act in concert in the election. The very
thing our enemies desired, and by which they hoped they
might have some chance in Tennessee, and accordingly made
out a Clay ticket.
Now, fellow-citizens, it was this very shortness of time ; it was
to avoid this very confusion amongst friends, and to defeat
the hopes and schemes of our enemies, that induced us to
make out and recommend these electors to you. It was not
to abridge your rights, but to enlarge them, by enabling you
to vote for fifteen, instead of one elector, as heretofore. It
was not to dictate and compel your votes, contrary to your
wishes, but only to recommend and give facility and effect to
those votes which we knew you were determined to give to

540 MISCELLANEOUS DOCtMENTS.
Jackson. The Legislature felt like too much was at stake
in the election of that illustrious and venerable man, to run
any hazard of losing the vote of Tennessee for the want of
an electoral ticket. If there had been more time to go upon,
the members would not have thought a moment of doing so.
But, when her enemies were proudly boasting that New York
would abandon him, that South Carolina would not vote for
him, and that even good old Pennsylvania, seduced by the
mammon of unrighteousness, would forget her ancient affec
tion for him, your representatives would have been traitors
to him, to you, and to their country, not to have done all
ill their power to give him the vote of Tennessee, without
even the possibility of a failure. He is a citizen of Ten
nessee ; he is proud of being so ; he has declared that his
brightest glory is identified with her, and that wherever he
may be when Providence shall be pleased to call him from
his earthly labors,' his desires and his commands have already
been given, that his mortal remains shall be laid for repose
in the bosom of her soil. I have looked upon his grave,
already prepared by his own orders, close by the side of her,
whom, when-living, he so much loved, and whom his enemies
so much and so wantonly calumniated. If we have erred, it
has been on the side of safety ; we have pursued the counsel
of the Fathers of the Republic ; we have followed the foot
steps of the ablest and the wisest States of the Union, and let
me assure you, that if your future statesmen shall never follow
worse counsels, nor imitate worse examples, you have nothing
to fear, your freedom will be secure as your mountains, and
your prosperity as abundant as your rivers that roll their
mighty tribute to the ocean.
Both of these last mentioned subjects were brought before
us by executive communication, but when they were disposed
of, the Legislature was not willing to adjourn without bestow^-
ing the most serious attention to the various memorials of
the people, in favor of a State Bank. These memorials set
forth the pecuniary distresses of the country in the most feeling
manner, and referring to the large amount due to the United
States Bank, and to the sudden suspension or contraction of
its accommodations, insisted that the estabfishment of a State

ALDRESS. 541
Bank, presented the only means of extricating the commu
nity from its embarrassments. In order to show their anxiety
on this subject, and to give assistance to the Legislature, they
had in many of the counties elected delegates to meet at
Nashville, for the purpose of consulting and presenting the
subject in the most forcible manner to the General Assembly.
These delegates presented the charter of a Bank on what was
most called "the real estate plan," new in its principles and
complicated in its details. On its third reading in the Senate,
at a late period of the session, it was clearly ascertained that
such a charter could not pass, and thereupon, the bill being
withdrawn for amendment, your representatives, deeply im
pressed with the propriety of having a Bank of some descrip
tion, took all the papers to their room and made out the char
ter which finally passed, and which is now before the public as
a law of the land. In preparing this charter, the Legislature
has used every possible care to avoid the errors heretofore com
mitted on similar subjects. In chartering former Banks, there
was no sufficient safeguard against issuing too much paper for
the specie on hand, nor against injudicious laws to stockhold
ers, predicated on their stock. In the present one, a provision
is inserted, that should the directors violate the charters in
these particulars, they shall be liable in their individual pro
perty, and if that should fail to repair all damages, the stock
holders, in their private estates, to the extent of each one's
stock, are fiable for the balance. This is an important prin
ciple, distinguishing this from all former charters, and pro
tecting the people from the evils heretofore experienced by
broken banks in the State. Tennessee has set the example,
and if other States will follow, we shall hear no more of bank
explosions, of depreciated currency, etc. Nor shall we be so
often assailed with the argument that the people cannot do
without a National Bank. The President, it is true, has ve
toed that Bank ; and in doing So. has covered. himself with the
highest glory ; but unless the different States, when they create
Banks, shall establish them on the most safe and permanent
foundations, there is still great danger that this institution wiU
yet recover from its discomfiture and ride triumphant over the
rights of the States,.

542 MISCELL-iNEOUS DOCUMENTS.
In relation to the Senatorial election, about which my friend
Mr. Field has just spoken, like him I gave my vote to Maj.
Eaton ; not because his respected and talented opponents
might not have deserved such an appointment, but because I
believed that in voting for him I was sustaining the wishes of
a majority of those whom I had the honor to represent. I had
voted for him in two former elections, to the same office, and
no complaint was ever made of my having done so. For ten
years he had served as the Senator of Tennessee. He had
proved himself worthy of the high trust. General Jackson
had taken him from the Senate, as 1 knew, expressly against
Maj. Eaton's repeated objections and remonstrances. In this
situation he had been assailed and persecuted by the enemies
of the administration, and with a bitterness, and, as I think all
must admit, to an extent far beyond what there could have
been any reason or necessity for. Believing him to be a pure
patriot and a sound statesman, 1 felt disposed, by my vote, to
show to the world that Tennessee retained undiminished con
fidence in him, and as was the case with Hill, Van Buren and
others, rebuke the enemies of the administration for assaifing
the President, through his most intimate and confidential friends.
There are other subjects of importance on which, as your
representative, I have had to act ; but the time allotted for ad
dressing you admonishes me not to trespass too long on your
patience. The present is a fearful crisis in your national af
fairs ; but 1 believe I can safely say that our State concerns are,
in the general, in a safe and prosperous condition. If I have
contributed in any degrees to that prosperity, it amply com
pensates me for all the privations of ten or twelve years of
public service. Tennessee has taken decided grounds on the
great question of nullification, now agitated, and expected
shortly to disturb the integrity and union of the States. At
this very moment, the convention of one of the heretofore most
patriotic States of the Union, is in session, and in solemn de
liberation whether or not to oppose one of the public laws of
the general government. None of us can doubt but that they
will attempt to effect that fearful and desperate measure. If
so, and the powers of the State should be brought in open re
sistance against the laws of Congress, the consequences must

ADDRESS. 543
long be deplored by the friends of freedom all over the world.
Tennessee has uniformly protested against the oppressions
of the Protective Tariff system, but she has equally raised her
voice against the rash and unconstitutional measures proposed
by South Carolina ; she abhors oppression, but will never give
up the Union. She will cling to that whilst there is hope in
the world and as long as libertj'^ has a friend upon earth. Let
us, however, indulge a hope, that the State who gave birth to a
Sumpter and a Marion, to the Hugers, Rutledges, and Middle-
tons of the revolution, will not be the first to sever a Union,
reared by the wisdom and cemented by the blood of the noblest
martyrs that ever lived or died in the cause of freedom.
Your members of Congress, as national statesmen, must
take charge of these high concerns. The times demand that
they should be men of known prudence, of acknowledged wis
dom, and unsuspected patriotism. With such men as the'se,
to be co-workers with your venerable President, the Republic
may yet be safe. The clouds that now hover dark and por
tentous over the Union, may be dispelled, and our national ban
ner may yet wave in the breeze, with no star eclipsed and no
stripe erased from its majestic folds.
36

LETTER
To the South Western, or New Orleans Railroad Convention.

I congratulate you and the whole country on the assemblage
of your honorable body. I regard it as a commencement of a
series of measures destined to exert a most salutary influence
on our future destiny. The place selected is the proper one
in all respects, and the time eminently propitious. New
Orleans has so many natural advantages, that she must always
be exempt from much of the suspicion of undue selfishness, to
which many other places might be exposed. With or without
railroads, her majestic river and its mighty tributaries must
always supply her with all the elements of boundless wealth
and yirosperity. What if other cities should occasionally pen
etrate a iew interior valleys, and here and there make a few
encroachments on her former commerce, the impression would
be too slightly felt to impede her onward progress. The insig
nificant loss would be more than compensated by the increased
stimulus which a general railroad system would impart to the
productive energies ofthe country.
But the place is not more favorable than the time is auspi-
cioua. The southern and western mind i« now ripe, thoroughly
ripe, on all the subjects which I suppose will occupy your atten^
tion. These, I expect, wiU be chiefly the devising of a proper
railroad, system for the South and West ; the introduction and
encouragement of a more extensive system of manufacturing
..nto the same region, and the encouragement of importations
into our southern cities, and a direct trade between them and

LETTER ON RAILROAPS, ETC. 545
foreign countries. On all these subjects, I repeat, the pubfic
mind is thoroughly ripe for action.
As to railroads, who that ever made one distant journey by
water, that did not prefer dryland for the next? Wither
without cause for it, the universal passion cf the age has be
come, to desert the water and to fly to the land — not only to fly
to it, but to fly on it, at the rate of forty or sixty miles to the
hour. Even here in Tennessee, we who have been heretofore
a patient and slow-moving people, (except in war times,) have
been so quickened up that nothing but the iron horse and the
telegraph will now do us. We are giving a hearty welcome
to every railroad that approaches our borders— our legislature
is now granting charters to the Louisville and Cincinnati roads
to Nashville, and from that point to the Great Bend of Tennes
see, in a suitable direction, to meet with the New Orleans and
Mobile roads, when extended to that river. We are, in fact,
reaching out our arms in every direction, proffering an affec
tionate embrace to all. To none a more fraternal one than to
our sister cities of the South — Mobile and New Orleans. Let
them come by their own ways to the Tennessee river, a little
above or below where our State-fine crosses it, and where all
obstructions to navigation will be avoided, and we will shake
hands across the stream with a cordiality that shall know no
discrimination. But our legislature is not content with simply
granting charters., and then leaving the projects to finger and
perish, with no other than a mere statutory existence ; she is
proposing for all of our great (or as the technical word now is)
our tidal lines, to advance to the companies her bonds at the
rate of seven thousand or eight thousand dolars per mile, for
the purchase of iron-rails, locomotives, and other fixtures ofthe
roads. There is eveiy probability that such liberal provisions
will be made for them at the present session of that body.
We are, therefore, profoundly in earnest; and Tennessee ten
ders to Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi, a generous rival
ry as to who shall first reach the proposed point on the Ten
nessee river with the roads in question. I need not take time-
to point out the great advantages of such a line of road both
to MobUe and New Orleans. The Vicksburgh, Jackson, Bran
don, and Montgomery road wiU be the first tributary. Ire

545 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
northern Mississippi, I suppose not far from Jacinto, the Mem
phis and Charleston road would cross, which would be the
second ; at Nashville, the Chattanooga will be the third, swol
len as it will be by the junction at the latter place of the
Charleston and Savannah, and of the Virginia and East Ten
nessee roads. A connection between New Orleans and Mobile
with the Ohio at Louisville and Cincinnati, with such tributa
ries as these, must be of the highest importance to the cities at
their respective termini, and to the whole region of country
through which the road would pass.
But it is obvious that a connection between LouisvUle and
Cincinnati, however important, is not the only purpose of these
two southern cities. They see with what steadiness of pur
pose South Carolina and Georgia are 'pushing forward their
road, to some point on the Mississippi, at or near the mouth of
the Ohio. They cannot be insensible to the consequences. If
Charleston is determined to stand at the mouth of the Ohio,
bidding for the amazing commerce of the North-west, New
Orleans and Mobile will be compelled to stand there also, her
rivals and competitors for the noble prize. I speak of com
petition and rivalry, of course, in no sense unworthy of those
enlightened cities. That they may be there in good time to
secure their just and fair proportion of advantages, I respect
fully beg leave to make a few suggestions to both of them.
It is evidently impossible to make the important roads con
templated by them, and which it is essential to each should be
made, without a heavy draft on the resources of both cities, and
on those of the towns and people along the respective routes.
Is it not, therefore, the part of wisdom and just economy in
both, to avoid the construction of parallel and contiguous lines,
such as would be two roads from any point of approximation
in Northern Mississippi to the mouth ofthe Ohio. To avoid
doing so, 1 would suggest that the New Orleans road from
Jackson, Mississippi, to the Great Bend of the Tennessee,
should be so located as to pass the point where the MobUe
road to the mouth of the Ohio crosses the Memphis and Charles
ton road by Tuscumbia. This point, I believe, is near Jacinto,
in Mississippi. Now, from that point to the Tennessee River,
in order to form a connection with the Louisville and Cincin-

LETTER ON RAILROADS, ETC. 547
nati road by Nashville, and from the same point north to the
mouth of the Ohio, a road might, and ought to be constructed
by the united funds of both cities, or of the companies repre
senting them, securing by proper covenants equal rights and
benefits of every sort to both. More especially do 1 consider
this to be important in relation to the road running north to the
Ohio. The distance will not fall much short of one hundred
and seventy -five miles, and the cost of its construction not
much less than three miUions of dollars. Half that amount
is worth saving, and its division would lighten the burden on
both, as well as on the intermediate towns and people who
might be called on to contiibute to its construction. The sug
gestion is made with a full persuasion that the road can be
made by either, but with the strong conviction that the proper
sense of economy, and an enlightened comity of feeling, would
evidently be consulted by a joint contribution to it.
1 drop the subject of railroads, in order to suggest another
on which the South and West are looking for your action with
the highest interest : I mean the encouragement of manufac
tories — manufactories generally, but more especially of our
great southern staple. You will never adjourn, I hope, with
out making the strongest appeals to our capitalists, and espe
cially our planters, to engage in them. The latter can build
the houses necessary with their own hands. Two or three, or
half a dozen, can unite in one establishment. They can select
from their own stock of slaves, the most active and intelligent
ones for operatives, without the necessary advances in money
to white laborers. The cost of machinery, and the expense of
one or two others of practical experience to superintend the
rest, will be nearly the only outlay of actual capital for the
business. I earnestly desire to see one-fourth of southern
slave labor diverted from the production to the manufacture of
cotton. One-fourth of such labor abstracted, would give a
steadiness and elevation of prices to the raw material, which
would better justify its cultivation.
1 have no time to elaborate this view of the subject; I but
hint at it, and indulge the hope, that it wUl be placed in the
hands of one of your ablest committees.
In relation to the encouragement of importations into our

548 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.^
southern cities, and of direct trade between them and foreign
countries, I do not know that I can suggest anything valuable.
When the south shall have completed a well digested system
of internal improvements, connecting the interior with our
southern ports, importations will come of themselves. Ability
to furnish assorted cargoes will soon attract a direct trade to
the full amount of the ability of our southern cities to accom
modate it. This theme, also, opens too wide a field either for
my present time or for the patience of your honorable body.
I therefore close this communication with the most profound
respect and confident expectation, that your deliberations will
result in the lasting benefit of our common country.
Very respectfully,
AARON V. BROWN.
Nashville, Tenn.

REPORT,
In the Legislature of Tennessee in 1831.

The Judiciaiy Committee, to whom was referred "A bUl con
cerning free persons of color, and for other purposes," have
had the same under consideration, and beg leave to present
to the House of Representatives the following Report :
The first section of the bill provides, that it shall not be law
ful for any free person of color, whether born free or emanci
pated under the laws of any other State, to remove him or her
self to this State, to reside therein, under the penalty of being
indicted, and, on conviction, fined in a sum not less than ten
nor more than fifty dollars ; and moreover, to be sentenced to
hard labor in the Penitentiary, for a term not less than one nor
more than two years. Such persons not departing from the
State immediately after their discharge, to be confined in said
Penitentiary a period double the longest term before men
tioned ; but not to be liable for any further pecuniary fine. The
second section provides, that every such free person of color,
who shall have removed to this State within twelve months next
before the passage of this act, shall be required to enter into
bond with two or more good and sufficient freehold securities,
within six months after the passage of this act, conditioned
that they will demean themselves in a peaceable and orderly
manner, and they will do all in their power to maintain
the public peace and quiet under the same penalty as pre
scribed in the first section of the act, with a proviso, ex
cepting free persons of color who are indented servants and
apprentices. The third section prescribes, that any free per-

550 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
sons of color, now in this State, and who have not emigrated tc
it within twelve months before the passage of this act, (as men
tioned in the second section) on complaint made, that such free
persons of color fail to conduct themselves as peaceable and
orderly persons, or attempt to excite a spirit of insubordination
amongst slaves, or other free persons of color, or that they are
generally suspected of such conduct, they may be brought by
warrant before three justices at the court house of the county,
and compelled, if thought guilty, to enter into a bond, payable
to the chairman of the county court conditioned as in the second
section. And if such justices shall believe from the particular
case made out, that the peace and safety of the State requires
it, said bond may be further conditioned, that they shall within
a reasonable time, to be fixed by the justices, depart from the
State. The fourth section provides, that it shall be lawful from and
after the passage of this act, for any court to order, or any
owner or owners of slaves to emancipate them, but on the ex
press condition that they shall be immediately removed from
this State : and if they should return, the bond required to be
given shall be recoverable and they sold as slaves.
The fifth section requires the act to be given in charge by
the judges and the attorney generals at every term, and tlie
latter empowered to require information on oath of all sheriffs,
coroners, constables and other persons, so as to be enabled to
carry this act into effect.
Your Committee regard with the deepest concern those re
cent events in other States, which have rendered prohibitory
legislation like this, indispensably necessary to the repose and
safety of the country. They indulge in no sentiments of hos
tility against this unfortunate portion of their fellow-creatures,
and would most willingly, if in their power, diminish, rather
than add a single drop to their cup of bitterness and affliction.
The necessity for their prohibition on our part, and the incon
veniences to which it exposes them, is one of the evils of that
system of slavery, which the cupidity of other generations
have entailed upon us, and which neither the wisdom nor pa
triotism of modern times has yet been able to remedy. Prior
to the Revolution, no entreaty nor remonstrance could induce

LEGISLATIVE REPORT. 551
the crown of Great Britain to interpose its authority to put a
stop to the slave trade : The royal negative was perpetually
imposed on every effort of the Colonial legislatures to prohibit
a commerce utterly inconsistent with all the suggestions of
justice and humanity. Hence it was that our enemies took
occasion to reproach us in our struggle for independence for
imposing slavery on those who differed with us in complexion ,
whilst we were offering up our vows at the shrine of liberty,
and sacrificing hacatombs on her altars. A proud vindication
of our common country, against such opprobrium, may be read
in the energy and promptness with which that nefarious traffic
in human flesh was abolished, so soon as our National Inde
pendence was secured. The people of the Southern States,
where slavery is still permitted, may also exhibit a vindication
against their accusers, not less triumphant, in the gradual im
provements and humane amendments, which have been ef
fected in their criminal and civil jurisprudence respecting
slaves. In every Southern State, the most decided disposition has
been clearly manifested to ameliorate their condition, as far
as the safety and the most moderate profits of the master will
admit. Experience has, however, clearly shown, that the as
sociation of slaves with free persons of color, has a decided
tendency to increase in them habits of idleness and insubordi
nation; hence, masters are often compelled to resort to rigorous
and coercive measures, bordering closely on cruelty, in order
to obviate the effects of such associations.
The free colored population of Tennessee is already consi
derable, and their exclusion from some States and probable
expulsion from others, must throw upon the State, unless she
resort to the most energetic means of prevention, an alarming
number of the most vicious and profligate, which the insurrec
tionary times can furnish. Many honorable exceptions could
no doubt be made, but in the general, the free colored popula
tion of all the States are the most vicious and dangerous —
deprived of many privileges, which it were unwise as well as
unsafe to bestow on them, whilst they remain amongst us, they
lose most of the ordinary incentives to industry and virtue.
They are excluded from aU equality of association with the

552 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
whites, and very naturally betake themselves to their own color,
intermarrying with slaves and becoming dangerous by encour
aging insubordination and revolt. Disaffected slaves resort to
their habitations in the night, when no vigilence of the master
can prevent them, where they can secretly plot and devise the
means of robbery, murder and insurrection. Several of the
States have already excluded them from coming into their bor
ders, and it is understood that others intend shortly to legislate
with a view to similar prohibition, so that Tennessee may be
regarded as acting defensively only, in thus guarding against a
species of population at once degraded, vicious and dangerous.
Urgent, however, as is the necessity, and manifest as the policy
of such legislation maybe, still it is proper carefully to exam
ine the constitutional power and authority of this General
Assembly to exclude this class of persons from emigrating to
the State. The question seems to have been once raised in
South Carolina, but we have had no access to documents show
ing whether any judicial determination was ever made upon
it. In 1822, a conspiracy was entered into by the slaves of
Charleston, to destroy the city and massacre its inhabitants.
Free persons of color were believed to be the chief instigators
of the measure ; and although it was discovered beforehand
and resulted in the capital punishment of about thirty of the
offenders, it gave rise to new legislation by the Assembly of
that State in the following December. A law was passed pro
viding that if vessels should enter their ports either from ano
ther State or a foreign government, having on board any free
persons of color as part of their crew, such persons of color
were to be seized and confined until the departure of the vessel,
when the Captain was required to take them away and pay
the expenses of their detention. On his neglect, he was lia
ble to two months imprisonment and a fine of one thousand
dollars, and the persons so left were to be sold for slaves. In
the following year, the Marmion, a British vessel, arrived in
the port of Charleston, when four of her crew, being persons
of the description specified in the act, were taken and impri
soned by virtue of its provisions. These proceedings were the
subject of a spirited remonstrance from the British Minister,
and it seems to have been the opinion of the then Attorney

LEGISLATIVE REPORT. 553
General of the United States, that the act was incompatible
both with the Constitution and existing treaties with Great
Britain. See Perkins' Historical Sketches of the U. States,
page 300. South Carolina, however, resisted all applications
for a repeal or modification of the statute, and it is believed
yet to stand unaltered in her statute book. Her Executive and
Legislature seemed alike determined to persevere in the mea
sure, and the Senate passed a resolve "that they have carefully
considered the documents transmitted to them, relating to the
laws regulating the ingress of free persons of color, and can
as yet perceive no departure from the duties or rights of this
State or of the United States in that law." The unconstitu
tionality alluded to by the Attorney General in this case, might
have been founded on existing treaties between the two coun
tries regulating their commerce ; and- the right of the State to
regulate the crews or description of seamen which Great Britain
might employ whilst her vessels were in our ports, would be a
question materially different from the one now under consider
ation. Here the question relates, not to a temporary sojourn,
but a permanent settlement and residence, the acquisition of
citizenship in the State, which it is perfectly competent for each
State to regulate, unless an express provision of the National
Constitution can be adduced, inhibiting the exercise of such
power. The right of the citizen to remove from one State to
another, seems not to be founded on any particular constitu
tional provision. No clause conferring it in express terms is to
be found in the present Constitution or in the Articles of Con
federation which preceded it. It is conceived, therefore, to ex
ist on the single principle of national citizenship. As citizens
of the Union, we should be regarded as everywhere at home,
enjoying all the privileges which such citizenship can confer,
derivative from the general Constitution and laws : Still, howe
ver, as the local sovereignties continued to exist for all domes
tic purposes, and as they would have a right to act on a great
many rights and immunities of their own citizens, with which
the General Government could have no participation, it became
necessary to stipulate for the privileges, which should be en
joyed as State citizens, when convenience or necessity might
induce us to depart from one State and take up our residence

J"-* MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS,
in another. Hence, the first section of the fourth article of the
Constitution has provided "that the citizens of each State shall
be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the several
States." It cannot escape notice, that no definition of the na
ture and rights of citizens, appears in the Constitution. The
descriptive term is used, with a plain indication that its mean
ing is understood by all ; and this indeed is the general char
acter of the whole instrument. Except in one instance it gives
no definitions, but it acts in all parts on qualities and relations
supposed to be already known. SeeRawle on the Constitution,
85, 61. Vv^hat then is the meaning of the term citizen, so often
used in the Constitution ? The President must be a natural born
citizen- — a Senator must have been nine years a citizen — a Re
presentative a citizen seven years, etc. The term, when com
monly used by political writers, means all those who owe alle
giance and receive correspondent protection from the govern
ment, and who have an unqualified right to the enjoyment of all
the rights and privileges of society, except when those rights
are suspended for a time, in consequence of the commission of
crimes. Now, if an unqualified right to the enjoyment of ail
those privileges be the criterion of citizenship, it will be easily
perceived that free persons of color, chiefly, residing in the
Southern States, were not intended to be included as such by
the framers of the Constitution. There are three degrees of
slavery — political, civil and domestic. The first existed in
America before the revolution, the last now exists in relation
to our slaves, whilst civil slavery is the condition of free ne
groes and mulattoes, whose civil incapacities are almost as nu
merous as the civil rights of our free citizens. These civil in-
capacities, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, no
doubt varied in the different States, greater and more.numer-
ou.s in some than in others. Still, in no one State whatever,
did they enjoj' all the privileges of white men : Thej'' vi'ere for-
' bidden from intermarrying with the whites ; they could not pre
side as judges, nor serve as jurors, nor give evidence against
white men. In but few were they entitled to suffrage of any
kind, or capable of filling any office whatever. Now, who can
believe that the framers of the Constitution intended to exalt
persons, subject to so many disabilities in the several States,

LEGISL.VTIVE REPORT. 555
into Presidents, and Senators, and Representatives. Who can
believe, with the slightest knowledge and remembrance of
these times, that the convention intended to sweep away all the
laws of the several States and impose on the citizens thereof,
terms of equality in rights and civil associations, equaUy for
bidden by the difference of color and the confirmed habits of
nearly a whole country? Such a construction of the term
citizen is forbidden by the fact, that for more than fifty years
since the adoption of the Constitution, the same disabilities
have been continued, with such alterations only as the State
Legislatures from time to time have thought proper to make.
The plain and obvious use of the term should therefore, as we
conceive, be confined to the free white population of the United
States, whose rights and liberties were everywhere the same —
subject to no stint or limitation whatsoever. Still, however, it
is not intended, nor necessary to assert, that free persons of
color are in no respect to be considered as citizens of the Gen
eral Government. If carried away into captivity by a foreign
enemy, or illegally impressed on the high seas, the Government
would have a right to demand them. If the scanty rights al
ready secured to them should ever be violated, the judicial
tribunals of the States, as well as those of the national gov
ernment, in a case where it could take jurisdiction, should be
bound to give them relief. All that is meant to be asserted
on this subject is, that they are not meant by, nor included as
citizens, under that clause of the Constitution which secures to
each the rights and immunities of the several States. Besides
what has been heretofore urged, it may be further added, that
the term citizen, in this clause, and many other parts of the
Constitution, seems to be used only in opposition to the word
(dien, and that its only meaning was to prevent the several
States from establishing systems of naturalization for them
selves different from that of the General Government.
In ordinary cases, the slightest doubt of the constitutionality
of our power should withhold our enactments ; but in such a
one as this, where self-preservation is the supreme and para
mount law of nature, nothing short of a direct and manifest
infraction of that sacred instrument should induce us to with
hold that protection and safety so imperiously demanded by

556 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
the indications of the times. "It is as much the duty of the
State to guard against insubordination and insurrection, and
to control and regulate any course which might excite or pro
duce it, as to guard against any other evil, political or physical.
If a generous philanthropy should enquire, where this unfor
tunate race shall find a home when all the States shall have
excluded and driven them out, the American Colonization So
ciety, with the probable co-operation of the government, will
point to Sierra Leone and Liberia, as the future residence of
this devoted people.
Under a review of the whole subject, your committee beg
leave torecommend the passage of the bill, with certain amend
ments to its provisions, to be designated by their Chairman.
AU of which is respectfuUy submitted.
A. V. BROWN, Chairman.

AN ARGUMENT,
Against Capital punishments, reported by order of the Judiciary
Committee, in support of a bill abolishing such punishments as-
to all free persons in the State of Tennessee.

INTRODUCTION.
Vanity itself, however great, could hardly induce us to ex
pect to supersede the labors of Montesquieu, Rush, Beccaria
and many others, against the improper infliction of capital
punishments. We must entirely mistake the foundation of
our own learning, and, in a good degree, the sources of our
own humane and benevolent feelings, were we not to admit to i
the fullest extent, the high claims of those distinguished and
eloquent advocates in the cause of humanity. They have^
however, in writing on many other subjects, condensed their
views and arguments on this one, into the small compass of a
single chapter, without taking time to enlarge, illustrate and
enforce it. This brevity has no doubt arisen from a conviction,
that errors accumulated through so many generations, and
supported by so many passions of the human heart, could
never be overturned. Results, though they have not realized
all the hopes of the benevolent, have, by no means, correspond
ed with their despondence. Next to the general diffusion of
knowledge, and the wide extension of religious principles, th«
enfightened humanity of the age is to be attributed to their
generous exertions. They planted the root of that tree whose
blossom is now so pleasant to look upon, but whose full matu
rity must be expected at some future period .
If, in making this further effort in behalf of the few against

558 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
the many — of the weak and the oppressed against the mighty,
should this argument fail to add anything valuable, we will
not so much regret our want of success in writing, as we will
long deplore the infatuation of society, in continuing to shed
the blood of so many human beings. We do not aim entirely
at originality ; our sole object being to reform society in its
habits of thinking and feefing on this important subject, every
thing we have either read or heard, which is considered valua
ble, will be brought forward and insisted on; hence, it should
be regarded more as a mere compilation, than an original pro
duction. If men were like the trees of the forest, that die and fall and
return to dust again, or, if after death they vanish into eternal
insensibility as though they had never been, we would not
thus earnestly complain of their destruction. The toUs and
perplexities of life would then often make it desirable to return
to that gross element out of which chahce or destiny had form
ed them.
He who would pierce their clay tenement with a dagger, or
destroy it with a pistol, would often perform the highest act of
kindness and love. But their souls are immortal, their spirits
have been despatched by the great father of spirits on a pil
grimage to earth ; their happiness or misery through eternity,
depends on their moral state or condition when leaving the
world. Who ehall say when that pilgrimage shall close ? Shall
poor mortal man, himself a pilgrim, shuddering every moment
of his life at the dreadful accountability which awaits his own
soul, shall he fix the awful period when the spirit of his frail
brother-child of the dust, shall return to him who gave it ? —
Surely He, and He alone, knows best when to recall them, who
sent them forth, and whose high purposes they were intended
to accomplish. The responsibility of extinguishing human
Ufe, is the greatest that can be incurred on this side of eternity.
This responsibility may be parcelled out amongst so many in
dividuals — the Legislators, the judges and jurors ofthe country,
that none may be able to feel and realize its fuU weight ; yet
all should remember that it still continues to exist somewhere ;
and that every drop of human blood, wrongfully shed, wiU con
tinue to cry from the ground fike Abel's, untU Heaven shall

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 569
avenge it. To the law-makers, however, of every govern
ment, this enquiry is chiefly addressed. They constitute the
fountain whence the streams of bitterness and death begin to
flow. All the errors of judges, the ignorance of jurors and
corruptions of witnesses, are, in some sort, chargeable on them,
for attempting to usurp the high prerogative of Heaven, and
then delegating it to such frail and imperfect instruments of
mortality. The enactment of bad laws by the sovereign, is
probably worse than the violation of good ones by the subject;
because the first is supposed to act with deliberation, and with
out any extraordinary inducement to do wrong, whilst the
second is often the victim of some sudden and overwhelming
passion, which it was scarcely possible for his nature to resist.
" Mercy to him that shews it is the rule,
* *******
And he that shews none being ripe in years
And conscious of the outrage he commits,
Shall seek it and not find it in his turn." — [Cowper.

THE ARGUMENT.

THE ORIGIN OF HUMAN LAWS.

The world has been much amused with a variety of inge
nious conjectures about the original condition of mankind : —
whether it was a social, or,Vhat writers have commonly called,
a state of nature. The Poets of antiquity have often alluded
to the latter state, and by their golden, silver and iron ages,
iUustrated their opinions of it. Historians and moralists also,
abandoning their search after facts, have sometimes wandered
far into the regions of imagination, and submitted many wild
suppositions, instead of the sober realities of truth. Among
the writers who have attempted to distinguish^ in the human
character, its original qualities, and to point out the limits be
tween nature and art, some have represented mankind in their
first condition, as possessed of mere animal sensibility, without
any exercise of the faculties that render them superior to the
brutes — without any political union, without any means of
explaining their sentiments, and even without possessing any
of the apprehensions and passions, which the voice and the
37

560 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
gesture are so well fitted to express. Others have made the
state of nature to consist in perpetual wars, kindled by com
petition for dominion and interest, where every individual had
a separate quarrel with his kind, and where the presence of a
fellow creature was a signal for battle.*
From both of these conditions, mankind have been supposed
to have enaerged, and to have formed societies from a great
variety of motives, — their fears, their affections, their interests,
and in fact, their almost every well ascertained motive of ac
tion has been given by some one or other of these writers, as
their inducement for forming a regular system of political
government. Against all these theories, in which imagination has been
substituted for reality, and the provinces of reason and poetry
.strangely confounded, the history of man, as given in the Bible,
should have been considered as conclusive. In that history,
more authentic than all others, he is represented to have been
created in a social state : — "male and female created he them."
The increase and extension of the first society, its manners,
occupations and laws are there given, with a minuteness and
clearness that dissipate at once all the hypothesis of which we
have been speaking. At the period when the blood of Abel
was made to stream around the simple altar of his devotion,
settlements had been extended to the land whence his mur
derer was banished. The decendants of Cain built up cities,
resided in tents, became artificers in brass and in iron, and
handled the harp and the organ.
The first society of all, planted in a place wholly devoted to
the worship of God, needed no human legislation. Its happy
members, two only in number, holding sweet and constant
communication with their divine Creator, knew of no law
necessary to their being, save a single prohibition. It was not
until all the blooms of Paradise had withei-ed, and the flaming
sword of the cherubim had been planted on its gates, that the
restraints of human laws became necessary. Over the first
family the father was the natural protector and law-giver, and
became so for his wife, by the express direction ofthe Almighty,

*Furguson on civ. society.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 561
in the malediction pronounced on Eve, " eris sub potestatem
tui viri." It is hardly probable that the authority of the first
parent continued over his decendants during the long period of
his life, which exceeded nine hundred years, since in that time
the population of the world exceeded several miUions, and was
no doubt scattered over an immense space of country. Did
his authority extend over his own children during that period,
and they in their turn, become the law-givers /or their children ?
Or did it cease on their arrival at maturity, or whenever they
left the domicil of their father ?
Reason would suggest the latter as the proper period for
the termination of parental authority, and it is certain that it
must have been a very slender government which Adam could
hav6 exercised over Cain, after he had been driven to the land
of Nod. In this view ofthe subject, the first societies consist
ed of families, and the first governments were patriarchal.
When, however, a number of families, from the ties of kindred,
from desire of gain, from a sense of individual weakness, or
other motive whatsoever, became associated into one political
compact, all patriarchal authority having terminated, they evi
dently had, and, no doubt, exercised the right of establishing
the principles of their association, restricted only by the para
mount laws of the Deity. These principles might all be deter
mined at once by express stipulation, or be the result of long
continued usage founded on the implied assent of the different
members of society. The same rights attach to every govern
ment or association of men down to the present daJ^ They
extend to the acquisition and protection of property, of repu
tation, of public liberty, and indeed, to all the lawful objects
of political association. The conditions or terms on which
these associations are formed constitute their laws, and consist
in the voluntary sacrifice or surrender of a certain portion of
individual rights for the greater security and enjoyment of the
balance. Every individual would choose to put into the public
stock the smallest portion possible, — as much only as was suf
ficient to engage others to defend it. The aggregate of these,
the smallest portions possible, forms the right of punishing;
all that extend beyond this is abuse, not justice.*
*Beccaria.

562 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
History, and our own experience, clearly show that, no ar
gument, however convincing — no eloquence, however moving,
is sufficient to ensure obedience to either the moral or social
law. This is true of our species in every age and under every
condition, whether dwelling in caves, in tents or in cities.
Hence, the necessity of that branch of public policy usually
called the criminal law. Temporal punishments operating on
the senses of mankind, producing pain of body or anguish of
mind, have been universally resorted to. These punishments
may clearly extend to the privation of all social benefits and
advantages. These, society gave, and can, therefore, take
away. Hence, banishment was a frequent punishment under
the Grecian and Roman governments, as transportation is at
this day by the laws of Great Britain. Can they, however, be
rightfully extended to the destruction of human life — to the
dissolution of that union between soul and body, ordained by
the Almighty, and too mysterious for mortal comprehension ?

THE EXPRESSED OU IMPLIED ASSENT OF INDIVIDUALS.
The right of society .to deprive any of its members of hfe,
is claimed on the ground of his actual or implied assent to that
condition of the social compact at the time of his admission
into it. It must be evident that an actual assent has but rare
ly, if ever, been given. Governments have never been organ
ized at once, with aU their laws, civil and criminal, in full ma
turity. Their origin is commonly hidden in the darkness of
antiquity, where no record can be seen to inform us what were
the ceremonies of their commencement. The American gov
ernments constitute a proud and striking exception, in the time
and manner of their origin ; but in none of these has an actual
assent been given by the citizens to the laws, either civil or
criminal. When or where have they ever been assembled to
give such an assent ?
The right in question must, therefore, chiefiy depend on the
implied assent of individuals— from their continuing in society
.after they have arrived at the age of sound discretion. At such
an age, it were almost impossible that man should leave socie
ty. His social habits which the law has encouraged — his ties
of kindred, which the law has commanded him to regard, even

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 563
his very religion, to which the law has been as an handmaid,
all chain him to the spot of his nativity, and repel him from the
forest or the desert. In such a state of moral duress, will the
lav/ exact even an implied promise to its obedience — obedience
too, even unto death ?
Suppose, however, such an assent given — nay, more : sup
pose an actual assent given, in proper person, by every individ
ual member of a community, that certain crimes should be pun
ished with death ; I ask, have they a right to give such an as
sent, or to enter into such a stipulation? They have no right
to authorize others to do that which they are not authorized to
do themselves. No man ever had a right to take away his
own life ; — it is not his own to take — it is the high and unaliena
ble gift of his Maker ! Who, then, should dare to extinguish
that vital fiame which God has kindled ? Who shall dare im
piously to war against the purposes of Heaven, and with his
hands reeking with his own blood, rush, uncalled for, into the
presence of Deity ? The dagger, the pistol, the poisoned chal
ice, and the halter, have, indeed, achieved many suicidal con
quests, but not until all the high born faculties of their victims
lay prostrate in derangement. If our life ever become a bur
den to us, our crimes and follies have made it so ; and we should
so live, that in deep repentance we might atone for them. No
argument can be necessary at the present day to establish the
proposition, — the command of the Decalogue — " thou shalt not
kill ;" many precepts of our Saviour and his Apostles, and all
the first principles of our nature are opposed to suicide, and
nothing in favor of it but downright insanity. In some coun
tries the laws attempt, even, to punish it as a crime. The body
of him who comes to a voluntary death, is drawn on a hurdle
and pierced with a stake ; his memory is rendered infamous,
his family disgraced, and his estate forfeited.* Since, then,
no individual, whether living alone on some distant island,
or residing in the crowded city of civilized life, has any right
to take away his own life, I ask, how can he delegate that right
to another? How can he hand over the halter to society and
say, here it is, although Ihave no rightto use it myself, yet you
*Voltaire's Commentary.

564 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
are hereby authorized, with it to terminate my existence when
ever you may think proper ? In nature, can the stream ever
rise higher than the fountain ? In law, can the agent have
more authority than the principal ? In reason, can a man give
to others what he has not ; or can he give more than he hath?
It is inexpressibly painful to dwell on such gross absurdities.
The right of society to destroy the image of God on earth,
must, therefore, be sought for from some other quarter than
either the expressed or implied delegation of it, by its indi
vidual members.

THE LAWS OF NATURE.
In deriving this right, a distinguished author has drawn a
distinction between offences against the laws of nature and
those against the laws of society — between crimes mala in se,
and such as are only mala prohibita. The right of punishing
the first, as murder and the like, with death, is, in a mere state
of nature, vested in every individual — whereof, Cain, the first
murderer, was so sensible, that we find him expressing his ap
prehensions that whoever should find him would slay him.*
We have heretofore attempted to show that this state of
mere nature never did exist but in the dreams of poetry. The
savage and uncultivated state has, no doubt, often existed, in
which ttien have lived in the desert, fittle superior, in enjoy
ment, to the lion and the tiger, and much his inferior in
strength and safety. But the natural, as opposed to the so
cial state, never did, and of course the laws of nature, as a
code for the government of men, in that condition, cannot be
referred to without the most evident absurdity. To suppose
men to be out of their natural state, so soon as they begin to
form plans of government, and to invent the useful and orna
mental arts of life, is as irrational as to suppose ants to be
out of their natural state when they store up their hoards for
winter, or bees when they construct combs for their honey. f
There are, however, certain principles attached to our nature,
and inseparable from our being; they are not enrolled on parch
ment, but are engraved on the hearts of all men ; they belong
to them in every condition, in the cave as well as the palace —

* 4 Bl. Com. ch. 1 . t SuU. view of nat.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 565
in the desert as well as the city. If these constitute the laws
of nature, their existence is most cheerfully admitted. The
right of self-defence, common alike to the reptile and the man,
is one of them, by virtue of which, not only individuals, but so
cieties may, in certain cases, be justified in taking away hu
man Ufe. These cases will be hereafter specified, rare in
their occurrence, and always dependant on the fact of total
inability in the government otherwise to protect itself.
The case of the first murderer can hardly be considered an
apt illustration of any other law of nature than that of self-
preservation. Why did Cain feel such apprehensions, that
whoever might find him out would slay him? Not from any
law which had ever been enforced among mankind in a state
of nature or previous to any social connexion, for they had
never lived in such a state, and of course had never been sub
ject to any such law ; not as alleged by an eminent divine,*
because all the inhabitants of the earth were of one family,
and each having the right to kill the murderer of his relative,
for this was the first murder ever committed. Mankind were
taken by surprise and had scarcely legislated in advance
against such a crime. The law, or custom, that the nearest
relative might avenge the death of his kinsman, must have
taken rise much later in the world, after repeated acts of the
same kind had suggested the idea to manldnd. These appre
hensions must have arisen from the terrors of a guilty con
science. He had just looked upon death for the first time ; the
pale and bleeding corpse of his brother was ever before his
imagination, and the terrible denunciations of Heaven were
even then ringing in his ears. No wonder, if in every hand he
expected to find the flaming sword of vengeance ! Nor do
these fears seem to have been entirely groundless. The news
of his horrid, and till now unheard of crime, no doubt flew far
and wide in every direction. The minds of men were filled
with astonishment and alarm. They would hear, too, that this
fugitive and vagabond had been cursed from the earth by the
Almighty himself. In such a state of excitement, to what
might not their fears for their own safety, and a belief thatthey
*Adam Clark.

566 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
would be doing "God service," have prompted them? So the
Lord put a mark on Cain, not for his guilt only, for that, by
establishing his identity and perpetually reminding mankind,
of his crime, would evidently have increased his danger; but
a mark which, besides proving his guilt, would also admonish
the rest of mankind against his destruction. One conclusion,
however, may be fairly drawn from this case, which is certain,
and too important to be overlooked : Whether these apprehen
sions were founded on the laws of nature, as alleged by Black
stone, or on the law of one relation's avenging the death of ano
ther, either is expressly repealed, and sevenfold vengeance de
nounced against all who might attempt to enforce them. If
not founded on either of these laws, but on a spirit of ven
geance or the fears of mankind, they are forbidden to be in
dulged under the same severe penalty.
Why was the punishment annexed to the slaying of Cain to
be sevenfold greater than his, for slaying his brother? No
case could hardly ever equal it in atrocity — none at all events
could ever surpass it in that proportion. May it not have been
done from a knowledge on the part of Deity, that from somfr
principle in our fallen nature, difficult of specification, so
strong would be the inclination to usurp the high prerogative
of deciding on life or death, which he was determined to retain
in his own hands, that nothing less than so great a penalty
would be sufficient to restrain it. If the principle of self-de
fence be that law of nature referred to by Blackstone, it per
fectly accords with the doctrine of this essay, and in deriv
ing the right in question, that able commentator lays down
the following rule : "To shed the blood of our fellow crea
ture is a matter that requires the greatest deliberation and
the fullest conviction of our own authority; for fife is the
immediate gift of God to man, which neither can he resign nor
can it be taken from him, unless by the command or permission
of Him who gave it, either expressly revealed or collected from
the laws of nature or society by clear and indisputable demon
stration."* Plow can the command or permission here spoken
of be collected from the laws of society ? They condemn the

*4B1. Com. ch. 1.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 567
traitor and murderer to death, "clearly and indisputably;" but
do they do so by the command or permission of Deity ? This
can never be learned from human laws, but must be searchedfor
in the paramount code of Divine legislation. Unless the ex
pression be strictly confined to those who attempt to exercise
judicial functions, it evidently impairs a rule which we believe
to be perfect without it.
THE SUPPOSED NECESSITY OF SUCH PUNISHMENT.
Its exercise is often justified by writers, and some, too, of
great eminence, on the score of necessity — "that inexorable
tyrant, which, with an iron sceptre, rules the universe." It is
admitted that society has a right to defend itself against the
lawless encroachments of either its own members or of for
eign enemies; and that if this defence cannot be made effec
tual without taking away the life of the assailant, it may right
fully do so on the great principle, stated in a former chapter,
of self-defence. The same principle is allowed of by the law
to individuals, and is so deeply engraved on the heart of every
man as to be inseparable from his very being. Individuals,
however, in the exercise of it, are subjected to certain rules
and restrictions, without which it would no longer be a shield
to defend them, but a sword of destruction wielded by cruelty
and vengeance. Hence, the rule of law, that the assault must
be such as to threaten the life of the individual, or some great
bodily harm to him, and so made as to leave him no other pos
sible, or at least, probable means of escape. He must betake
himself to flight, he must retreat even to the wall, e'er he is
permitted to shed the blood of his fellow ! All this is required
of him, as avowed by the law, from extreme tenderness to
wards human life.
Apply even these rules, without insisting on others, to soci
ety when she, in her turn, is arraigned for the many victims
whose blood she has shed. She pleads justification and in
sists that allhercapital punishments were inflicted in self-de
fence; that one plotted treason against her, another imbrued
his hands in another's blood, and a third counterfeited or cor
rupted her coin.
These did, indeed, threaten her existence, or at all events,

568

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

some great bodily harm; but had she no other possible, or even
probable means of escaping their meditated mischiefs? I ask
this question again of every civilized nation on earth, had you
no other possible or probable means of defending yourselves
against traitors, murderers and counterfeiters, but by resorting
to the wheel, the halter or the guillotine? Thousands of
these you have launched from time into eternity with all their
sins green and blooming upon them ; — had you no other alter
native? Could you not have banished or transported them to
some distant shore, far from any possibility of their future an
noyance? Or could you not have doomed them to perpetual
slavery, shutting them out, not for a few years, but forever,
from that society, of whose benefits they were indeed unworthy?
Your punishments, then, would have been confined to their
bodies, and you would have allowed to their souls that space and
opportunity for repentance, without which neither the king on
his throne, the judge clothed in ermine, nor the poor wretch
trembling under the gafiows, can ever see the face of God in
peace. In either of these situations (banished or imprisoned
for life,) they would have been, in fact, dead to society, but
alive to the upbraidings of a guilty conscience — the punishment
of God on. man whilst on earth, and the foretaste of that fiery
indignation which, without the deepest repentance, awaits him
in eternity.
Such complaints as these, it is true, would not apply to all
nations, nor to the same nation in every condition. The fam
ily of Noah leaving the ark of their deliverance and descend
ing the mountain that they might find a subsistance in the cul
tivation of the plains, had not the means of banishing or im
prisoning for life any of its members who might prove refrac
tory. The same admission may be extended to the Grecian,
Roman and American colonies, and, in fact, to every nation
in the youthful dawn of its existence. When, however, it has
attained to something like maturity, with a population ade
quate to its protection — with a commerce that secures enough
of national wealth, with, indeed, enough of every thing (save
humanity) which would enable tt to make successful defence
against the lawless and unprincipled — the death of a citizen
can never be necessary but in a single caSe : when, though

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 5G9
deprived of his liberty, he has such power and connexion as
may endanger the security of the nation, when his existence
may produce a dangerous revolution in the estabhshed form of
government; but even then, it can only be necessary when a
nation is on the verge of recovering or losing its liberties, or in
times of absolute anarchy, when the disorders themselves hold
the place of laws. But in a reign of tranquility, in a form of
government approved by the united wishes of the nation, in a
state well fortified from enemies without and supported by
strength within, and opinions, perhaps, more efficacious, where
all power is lodged in the hands of a true sovereign — where
riches can purchase pleasures and not authority, there can be
no necessity for taking the life of a subject.*
This argument of self-defence is sometimes presented in ano
ther aspect. It is said society may take away the lives of its
members, not only to prevent their future depredations, but for
the purpose of deterring others from the commission of like
offences ; as it is said in one of the old books "wf poena adpau-
cos, metus ad omnes perveniat." This proposition can be ad
mitted in this argument only so far as it relates to the mode or
manner of inflicting capital punishments, but not as the foun
dation of a right to do so. In all cases where nations are
justified on the score of self-defence, to inflict the punishment
of death they may direct, as matter of policy, their executions
to be made in public, that the rest of the community may profit
by the example. Suppose, however, that society were to
determine that all accusations, trials and executions touching
human life, should be conducted in profound secrecy — that the
result should never be made known to the world, would the
right in question be imperfect because the punishment of death
was not inflicted before the multitude ? Nations have often
found it necessary, from motives of state poficy, from a threat
ened rescue, from an apprehended tumult, to inflict their pun
ishment in a dungeon. Were all these executions unauthor
ized, were they so many judicial murders, only because the
horrid spectacle was not exhibited to the sympathizing or in
furiated multitude ? *Beccaria.

570 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
The strength of this argument consists in the supposition
that without such punishments crimes would become so fre
quent as to threaten the existence of society. "Was the vast
territory of all the Russias worse regulated under the late
Empress Elizabeth, than her more sanguinary predecessors?
Is it now, under Catharine the second, less civifized, less social,
less secure ? And yet we are assured that neither of these
illustrious princesses have throughout their whole administra
tion inflicted the penalty of death ?"* The punishment of
murder, by death, has been proved to be contrary to the order
and happiness of society, by the experiments of some of the
wisest legislators in Europe. The Empress of Russia, the King
of Sweden, and the Duke of Tuscany, have nearly extirpated
murder from their dominions by converting its punishment into
the means of benefiting society and reforming the criminak
who perpetrate it.f Actual experiments of a total abolition
are not very numerous, but nearly every government in the
civilized world has made partial ones that ought to be satisfac
tory. Is the British government less secure for having reduced
the number of her capital felonies from about two hundred to
twenty or thirty ? What government has been weakened or en
dangered by abolishing the punishment of death for heresy and
for witchcraft? The gradual amelioration ofthe criminal code,
so far from-weakening, has, no doubt, in many countries, in
creased the actual strength of the government, in drawing
around it the rational approbation of the age — by the explo
sion of those ancient barbarities which are now justly regarded
with the deepest abhorrence. Will no punishment short of
death, in the cases which still remain capital, after all the im
provements in criminal jurisprudence, be equally safe for so
ciety, by equally deterring men from the commission of crimes ?
We say an equal effect, because, after thousands of experi
ments, in which death has been inflicted in every variety of
manner, with all the torture and ignominy which the human
mind could invent, it has proven utterly insufficient for that
purpose. Men have been strangled to death — have been burnt
alive at the stake — have been torn asunder by trees fastened to
*4 Bl. Com. ch. I. fRush's Essays.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 571
their limbs — have been devoured by wild beasts— have been
beheaded at the block, and hung up by the neck under the
gafiows, in every age and almost every nation of the earth —
still, treason, and murder, and robbery, and all the long cata
logue of capital offences, are daily committed by men who will
not take warning from these bloody threatenings of the law.
Is it not time, therefore, to try some new remedy — to resort to
some different mode of punishment, more beneficial in its ope
ration on society — more clearly within the pale of its authority
to inflict, and more consonant with the precepts of that benign
religion, which, whilst it declares the sufferer to be a frail child
of the dust, also proclaims him an heir of immortality.

THE RIGHT AS SUPPOSED TO BE FOUNDED ON DIVINE REVELAnON.
Having seen that human fife, from the nature of its gift, can
be taken away only by the command or permission of Him who
gave it, our enquiry is now directed to — whether such com
mand or permission has ever been given. Prior to the deluge
there seems to have been no express law against murder; — no
precept having been delivered on the subject, mankind was
left to that innate horror and consciousness of its improprity,
which, during the period of two thousand years, with only one
or two exceptions, was found sufficient for its prevention.
This is the more remarkable, because, in the latter part of that
period, so great was the depravity and wickedness of man, that
the very windows of Heaven were opened and the foundations
of the great deep were broken up for his destruction. The
murder of Abel is probably the only one recorded from the
creation to the flood. What is said of Lamech is too obscure
to be much relied on.* Some have doubted the correctness of
the translation, and insisted that it should be read interroga
tively ; others have supposed that Lamech had slain a man
in self-defence; and that he delivered this speech to his wives to
quiet fears entertained by them, lest the nearest kinsman might
avenge the deed; whilst St. Jerome indulges a rather silly
conceit, that he had, by accident, in some way or other, taken
away the life of Cain. If, however, it be taken literally, ac-

?Genesis, ch. 4, 23.

572 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
cording to our common translations, it will only prove that two
murders iuistead of one were committed in the antedeluvian
world. The punishment of Cain was the first precedent fur
nished to mankind. It was not pronounced by any human tri
bunal subject to the errors and imperfections of humanity; —
not even by Adam, the natural lawgiver and judge of the
world, who had received the lessons of wisdom from the very
lips of his Creator, and on whose heart all the original impres
sions of his nature were yet bright and distinct. No ! God him
self who made him and threw around him all the incidents of
his being, becomes his judge and executioner. No gibbet is
erected — no rack of torture is prepared for him ; — these are the
inventions of weak and angry men. He is banished from so
ciety — a mark of his crime, and of his destruction being pro
hibited, is placed upon him — he is subjected to the necessity
of labor, and in his conscience is fixed a never dying worm.
This was the judgment of the Most High God, and is, there
fore, exempt from every possibility of error. It was pronounced
on the first offender, and in a case, since then, never surpassed
in deep atrocity.
The first portion of the sacred writings supposed by Sir
William Blackstone to confer this right, is the sixth Noahic
precept — " Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood
be shed, for in the image of God made he man-" Some have
supposed this passage to be prophetic of what mankind would
do on the principle of revenge, and not a command or permis
sion making it lawful to inflict the punishment of death. With
out insisting on this construction, which has the sanction of
several illustrious names, it may be safely asserted that these
precepts delivered to Noah were not intended to be perpetually
binding on the human family ; but were to continue in force
only until the publication of some other code should take place,
more minute in its details and more ample in its provisions.
The former race of mankind, with all their laws and institu
tions had been swept away and destroyed by the waters of
death. The only survivors, whilst standing around the rude
altar, hastily reared in gratitude for their deliverance, received
these seven precepts or laws for their government. They were
few in number — not reduced to writing nor engraven on tables.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 573
and capable of preservation only in the slippery memory of
those who beard them. They were, therefore, temporary in
their nature, and embraced those subjects only which were ab
solutely necessary in their peculiar situation. In tlie designs
and purposes of Providence, it seems to have been of vast im
portance to re-people the earth and re-supply it with those
•various animals which had been so lately destroyed. Such
was its solicitude, if the expression be aUowed, to repair the
universal desolation of the deluge, that every one of these
seven commandments, or precepts, seems to have been given
with that view. "Be ye fruitful — multiply and replenish the
earth," is the first and seventh. "The grant of animal food —
the earth having become less fruitful," is the second and third.
"The prohibition of the blood of animals," is the fourth. "Cru
elty to animals," is probably the meaning of the fifth; and
the sixth is the one now under consideration. This brief
analysis wiU serve to show with what view the expres
sions were introduced — "whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man
shall bis blood be shed." The little family of Noah was a
germ from which all the future nations of the earth were to
vegetate ; every possible care must therefore be taken for its
preservation. The means of setf-defence must be amply ade
quate to its protection, against all attempts to destroy it,
even to retard its progress. For a long time this infant society,
on whose growth and enlargement Divine Providence seems
to have been so intent, would not have been able, by the ban
ishment or imprisonment of the refractdry, to insure its safety.
Hence the right was expressly given, to take away the life of
its members, there being no other probable means of effectua
ting the purposes of Heaven in their preservation.
The exclusive power of Deity, over human life, is said to
have been committed to his creatures, in the law delivered to
Moses amid the fire and the smoke of Mount Sinai. This law
has been correctly divided into the moral, political and judicial.
The first, commonly called the decalogue, or ten command
ments, comprising an interesting and sublime system of moral
government, is universal in its operation, and perpetual in its
obligation. The two latter have never been so considered.
They constitute a civU code for the government ofthe Jews only.

574 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
exclusively confined to them, until they become dispersed over
the world, without a king, without a prince and without a sac
rifice. Their authority commanding the infliction of capital
punishments,^is no more binding on a Christian nation, than the
laws of Media or Persia, or of those various tribes that were
driven from Canaan by the sword of the Lord and of Joshua.
Nor is it conceived, that they are entitled to any weight, even
as examples permitting the destruction of human life, by modern
nations. The Jews have always claimed, and have been well
entitled to, the appellation of a peculiar people. Every thing
connected with them seems to be miraculous. That they, so
stiff-necked and rebellious, should have been selected as God's
chosen people — that the waters of the Red Sea should have
been divided for their escape — that a cloud by day, and a pil
lar of fire by night, should have directed their journeyings, —
tliat their drink should have been made to gush from the sides
of the rock, and their food to rain down from the clouds,— that
their laws should have been written by the hand of God, and
delivered on Horeb to judges and priests raised up and inspir
ed to carry them into execution, — is all a continual succession
of miraculous events, in the providence of God, toward the
Jewish Nation. How strange, then, is the notion, that the po
litical, judicial, or ceremonial laws of such a people should be
incorporated in any system of modern government ! Never
was there before or since, so rebellious a people, and never
were such extraordinary means necessary to keep a nation in
subjection. Even at the time when their leader and deliverer
was receiving these very laws amidst the most sublime and
awful demonstrations at the power and grandeur of a God, this
wayward people set themselves to dancing, in idolatrous VFor-
ship, kround an image of gold ! Hence, many laws were given,
peculiarly adapted to them, but probably not suited to any other
nation in the world. Their Divine Legislator expressly de
clares, " 1 gave them statutes that were not good, and judg
ments whereby they should not live." The law of divorces
and retaliation were evidently of this description, and were
intended as curses, not as blessings on the Jewish Nation.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 575
THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.
As it is the general and almost universal habit of those who
advocate the infliction of capital punishments, to run to the
Mosaic law, it may not be amiss to pursue this part of the sub
ject a little farther. The Jewish government was a Theocracy,
in which the judges, who were to carry the laws into execution,
were but the especial ministers of Heaven raised up and in
spired for that purpose. They were, therefore, perfectly ex
empt from all error and corruption in judgment, and even in
capable of being misled by the perjury, or deceived by the
ignorance of witnesses ; they pronounced the very judgment
in all cases, that God himself, had he presided on earth, would
have pronounced. With judicial tribunals so divinely organ
ized and superintended, a system of laws might well be given
to that nation, which would be altogether unsuitable to a go
vernment purely the work of men's hands, and whose laws
were to be administered by uninspired judges, and often by
very weak and very wicked ones.
If the Mosaic Law, with respect to murder, be obligatory on
Christians, it follows that it is equally obligatory upon them
to punish adultery, blasphemy and other capital crimes, that
are mentioned in the Levitical Law, by death. Nor is this all :
it justifies the extirpation of the Indians, and the enslaving of
the Africans ; for the command to the Jews to destroy the Ca-
naanites, and to make slaves of their heathen neighbors, is as
positive as the command which declares " that he that killeth
a man shall surely be put to death."
Every part of the Levitical Law is full of types of the Mes
siah. May not the punishment of death infiicted by it be in
tended to represent the demerit and consequences of sin, as
the cities of refuge were the offices ofthe Messiah? And may
not the enlargement of murderers who had fled to those cities
of refuge, upon the death of a High Priest, represent the eter
nal abrogation of the law, which inflicted death for murder, by
the meritorious death of the Saviour of the world.*
We are not, however, left to general reasoning like this, to
obviate the force of these Jewish examples. The substance of
*Rush's Essays.
38

576 MISCELLANEOUS DOClfflENTS,
all the different passages which we have heard quoted, is to be
found in the lex talionis. That law declared, " if any mischief
followed, then shalt thou give life for life — eye for eye — tooth
for tooth," &;c. How many human beings have been sacrificed
under the supposed authority of this Law ? Were they all as
sembled, they would outnumber the largest army that folly or
ambition ever mustered into their service I Yet this very law
stands repealed, not only by the general temper and spirit of
the Christian dispensation, but by the express declaration from
the lips of our Saviour himself. In his sermon on the Mount,
he expressly quotes and repeals this very law : " Ye have heard
that it hath been said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,
but 1 say unto you, (I who made the first law and can repeal it
at my pleasure.) / say unto you, that ye resist not evil; but
whoso shall smite thee on the one cheek, turn to him the other
likewise." In the same spirit of meekness and love, he refers
to another Jewish maxim : " Ye have heard that it hath been
said, thou shalt love thy neighbor (or friend) and hate thine
enemy. But I say unto you, love your enemies ; bless them
that curse you; do good to them that hate you; and pray for
them that despitefully use you and persecute you ; that you may
be the children of your Father which is in Heaven; for he
maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth
rain on the just and on the unjust." What pure morality I
What sublime disinterestedness ! This sermon alone furnishes
conclusive internal evidence of the divine legation of Jesus
Christ. A new era had dawned ; a new dispensation had now
opened. The clouds and shadows of the Jewish ceremonies
were all to be dispelled. " Those statutes that were not good,
and those judgments whereby they should not live," were now
to be repealed, and mankind to be instructed how, in mercy
and forgiveness, to resemble their Father which is in Heaven.
He makes his sun to rise .on the evil and the good ; He sendeth
rain on the just and the unjust, in token to mankind that, as
He forgives them, and even returns good for their evil, so, also,
should they learn to forgive one another. " Blessed are the
merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." Let it not be supposed
that this gospel meekness, though inculcated on individuals,
does not embrace societies and governments in its obligation.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 577
These are but so many associations of individuals, and their
moral features must necessarily resemble, and, indeed, be the
very same with those of the members who compose them.
That individuals must practice the pure and sublime prin
ciples of Christianity, whilst the government they compose may
set at nought its precepts, would be an inconsistency too gross
to be insisted on. Nor will it do to say that the forgiveness of
injuries, as here inculcated, is too refined morality for the prac
tical government of either individuals or societies. That is
borrowing the argument of the infidel, without having the
courage to incur the responsibility of avowing his principles.
This doctrine, rightly understood, is not so abstracted and diffi
cult of practice. It calls on individuals and societies to sur
render so much of their natural propensity as prompts them
to theinffiction of vengeance for supposed or real injuries. Is
it unreasonable to require the surrender of such a passion, and
that, too, under an express reservation, " vengeance is mine,
saith the Lord ; I will repay." Still, however, both individuals
and societies are left at liberty to protect and defend themselves
against the lawless and unprincipled, whers passiveness and
acquiescence would only invite to further aggressions. Now
what is the hanging or beheading a man, but taking vengeance
for his crime ? What is it but vengeance to require life for life,
eye for eye, and tooth^for tooth ? When the next of kin was
commissioned for the purpose, it was called expressly, " aveng
ing his kinsman's death I" When the offender made good his
escape to the cities of refuge, were not the gates directed to be
closed against the avengers of blood ? Yet when society seizes
the sword from the hands of the kinsman, pursues after the
criminal, overtakes him and becomes the hangman herself,
she disclaims the appellation, either because it is degrading,
or because she is conscious that vengeance does not belong to
her, " but is mine, saith the Lord." Besides this express and
positive repeal of the law of retaliation, which required life for
life, the conduct and discourses of our Saviour should outweigh
every argument that has been, or can be adduced, in favor of
capital punishment for any crime. When the woman, caught
in adultery, was brought to Him, He evaded inflicting the
bloody sentence of the Jewish law upon her. He forgave the

578 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
crime of murder on the cross ; and after his resurrection, com
manded his disciples to preach the Gospel of forgiveness, first
at Jerusalem, where he well knew his murderers still resided.
These striking facts are recorded for our imitation, and seem
intended to show that the Son of God died, not only to recon
cile God to man, but to reconcile men to each other. There
is another passage in the history of our Saviour's life, which
would, of itself, overset the justice of the punishment of death
for murder, if every other part of the Bible had been silent on
the subject. When two of his disciples, actuated by the spirit
of vindictive legislators, requested permission of him to call
down fire from Heaven, to consume the inhospitable Samaritans,
he answered them, " the Son of nian came not to destroy men's
lives, but to save them." Excellent words ! I wish they com
posed the motto of the arms of every nation on the face of
the earth ; and whilst I can lay my finger on this text of scrip
ture, I will never believe the punishment of death for any crime
is inculcated by the spirit of the gospel.*

THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.
Beside what we have urged in the preceding chapter, it
may be asserted that^, the Christian dispensation, by " bringing
life and immortality to light," abolished the punishment of
death. That the patriarchs and prophets, and from them, some
of the ancient philosophers believed in the immortality of the
human soul, cannot be doubted ; but it was never reduced to so
much certainty, nor so well understood until the Saviour ofthe
world rose triumphantly from the sepulchre. From that mo
ment the soul assumed an importance which well justifies the
exclamation, " what is a man profited if he gain the whole
world and lose his own soul, or what shall he give in exchange
for his soul?" That its happiness or misery through eternity,
depends on its moral state or condition when leaving the world,
is so distinctly asserted in the sacred scriptures, that it is uni
versally admitted in aU religious creeds. All this gives rise to
a very serious question, whether the infliction of capital pun
ishments, may not involve the eternal destruction ofthe soul of

?Rush's Essays.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 579
the unfortunate victim. If permitted to live out his days, re
pentance deep and radical might ensure the forgiveness of
Heaven : but if cut off by the judgment of man and not of
God, with all his sins thick and clustering around him, what
wiU be his eternal destiny ? What would have been that of
Moses for slaying the Egyptian, or of David for murdering
Uriah, had they been arrested, tried and executed before they
repented and obtained forgiveness ? It is a universal law of
religion, that repentance must always precede forgiveness, and
that the latter is indispensable in order to obtain happiness in
a future life. According to this law, their eternal destruction
would have been inevitable. Yet one lived to become a distin
guished instrument, in the hands of Providence, of good to
mankind, and the other to receive the most flattering and en
nobling title ever conferred, " that of being a man after God's
own heart." The thought is certainly a dreadful one, that a
human soul, because it was cut off prematurely by the judg
ment of men, shall be forever miserable, when, with the indul
gence whii^hits Heavenly Father was willing to have given, it
would have been received and even welcomed amongst the
saints and angels in glory. Surely the fate of that bright em
anation, so indestructible in its nature, and so much beyond all
estimation in value, has never been left thus exposed to the
weakness and wickedness of our species !
It will not do to suppose the Almighty to interfere and turn
aside the wrath of man, by pardoning those whom he might
forsee would repent, if permitted to live out their appointed
times : for that would admit the judgment of death to be im
proper, since it requires the special interposition of Providence
to prevent its too horrible consequences. Nor will it do to
say that human tribunals usually allow a few weeks, and even
..¦no 11 ths, to be devoted to repentance. What profane mockery !
as if man should measure out the space of repentance to
man, — putting it down on his frail records of parchment
within what time the gracious streams of mercy shall flow, or
be forever locked up in the bosom of the Redeemer ! Suppose
him, however, within this brief period, by meditation and
prayer, to succeed in that repentance which bringeth forgive
ness, — shall he be forgiven of God, and yet be condemned by

580 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
men? Here, a vile culprit; there, a rejoicing angel I On earth,
suspended under a gallows ; in heaven, seated on a throne of
glory ! To such strange inconsistencies society is often ex
posed. She gives time for repentance, yet no reformation, how
ever complete, and no repentance, though proven by more and
stronger circumstances than those on which he was convicted,
shall rescue him from his fate. — Die he must — though angels
stand ready to conduct his repentant spirit home to paradise,
whilst his unrelenting executioners consign his body to the
grave of infamy. How, in the economy of Heaven, all these
difficulties will be adjusted, we know not ; ". shadows, clouds
and darkness rest upon them." The slightest probability, how
ever, that the soul of the offender may be effected by the judg
ment pronounced against his body, ought instantly to stay the
hand of death, and substitute perpetual confinement for the
guillotine and the halter. This is certainly the voice of safety
echoed back by humanity and religion.
No apology is intended to be offered for the moral cast which
this part of our argument has assumed : it grows out ofthe na
ture of the subject we are investigating, and particularly the
contrast which we are attempting to exhibit between the Jew
ish and Christian dispensations. It is a remarkable fact which
we take occasion to mention before we close this contrast, that
the advocates of capital punishments, whilst catching with ea
gerness every expression of the Mosaic and Levitical law in
their favor, should have entirely overlooked a most important
provision of the latter, that human life was never to be taken
away on the testimony of one witness. " Whoso killeth any
person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of
witnesses : but one witness shall not testify against any person
to cause him to die."* " At the mouth of two witnesses, or
three, witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to
death."! How much innocent — at all events, how much doubt
fully guilty blood, might have been spared, had these exceUent
rules of evidence been observed. Society in anger seized on
the sword of the Jewish law, but t'nrew away its shield.
?Numbers, 36. 30. fDeut. 17. 6.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: 581
THE FALLIBILITY OF ALL EARTHLY TRIBUNALS.
As most great truths are not always believed, il is highly
probable that universal assent will hardly be given to what has
been urged^in a former part of this argument, against the right
to infiict the punishment of death. Admitting, however, for the
present, such a right to exist, beyond the fimitation of self-de
fence, we shall attempt to show that it is inexpedient or im
proper to exercise it.
An argument against the propriety of punishing any crime
with death may be found in the natural frailty of man, and
consequent fallibility of every tribunal in which he presides.
We admit, as exceptions, such as were organized under the
Jewish Theocracy, in which Moses and Joshua, with the inspi
rations of Heaven constantly streaming upon them, pronounced
judgments as much exempted from the possibility of error, as
if they had been pronounced by God himself. We mean such
tribunals as are composed of judges selected from the general
mass of mankind, and who can have no claims to any miracu
lous or supernatural assistance in the discharge of their func
tions. That every government would select men of the best
talents and of the most unimpeachable integrity for its judi
cial department, might be one of those presumptions, which
lUie many others in law, is directly at war with the truth. —
They are often appointed by the sovereign, from an overween
ing partiality, and in more popular governments, from the strug
gles of party, or the arts and intrigues of electioneering dema
gogues. Sometimes, too, the influence of family or kindred,
and even the general rudeness, not to say barbarity of a na
tion, may throw the ermine around them who, in a more enlight
ened age, would scarce deserve to be the executioners of jus
tice. Mistaken parsimony, however, has done more mischief
on this subject, than all other causes beside. Governments
will not pay, and competent men will not serve ; hence, dolts
and blockheads often fill those places, to which the genius of
Mansfield and Eldon, or Marshal and Pendleton, were scarcely
competent ! To the worst, as well as the best of these, is en
trusted the administration of a grand and diversified system of
law, covering the whole space of human degradation, and ex
panding with the endless evolutions of crimes. To commit

582 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
the lives of men to such judges, is downright murder in socie
ty herself. To commit them to the judgment of any one
judge, however highly gifted, in both legal and moral attain
ments, though less atrocious, is nevesrtheless unsafe and impro
per. The responsibility is too great and the consequences of
a mistake too awful to be incurred by any one individual what
ever. During a long and difficult cause, amid all the perplex
ities of nisi prius trials, having to guard against the superior
address of counsel on one side, and perhaps to supply the defi
ciency in skill on the other, he will be almost sure, to fall into
some error, either in the admission or rejection of evidence, or
in the application to it, of the sound principles of law. Such
mistakes as these may result from the slenderness of his attain
ments in his profession, or they may be produced by that defec
tive organization of the human mind, which stamps imperfec
tion as a motto on all human exertions. Equally fatal ones
may arise from some personal bias or habit of the judge. —
These give weight and seriousness to a defence, or detract
from it in exact proportion to such former bias or habit. —
Hence the provocation, which shall extenuate - murder into
manslaughter, or the overt acts that shall constitute treason, in
the practical charge, will be varied according to the constitu
tional courage, and the political connexions of the judge. —
We say the practical charge, because it is easy for a court, by
its manner, to produce any desired effect upon a jury, without
subjecting itself to the liability of correction on exceptions.
The passions and prejudices of the judge, may, in this way be
insidiously communicated to the jury, whilst the unfortunate
victim is rendered utterly incapable of contradicting their
baneful influence. Even in cases where no passions nor pre
judices, nor even former habits have induced the error, there is
often a pride of character which forbids a judge from making
a distinct and fair admission of it upon record, but seeks for
evasions and colorings, which diminish its enormity, and
thereby prevents a reversal. The practitioner wUl remember
many instances in which no solicitation could induce the court
to look steadily in the eye of its own blunders. These and
other objections which will readily suggest themselves to the
reader, constitute strong and conclusive reasons, why the life

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 583
of man should not depend on the uncertain opinion of any one
individual whatever. If, however, the trial must be superin
tended and conducted by one only, let every thing be required
to be put upon record, and that transmitted to the highest judi
cial tribunal ofthe government, for its examination and approv
al. Such tribunals are commonly composed of a plurality of
judges of greater age and experience, and more exempt from
those local excitements and prejudices, which too often influ
ence inferior courts to respond, in their judgments, to the infu
riated shouts of the multitude. If the sentence of death must
be pronounced, let it be by the supreme judicial authority of
the land. Let the warrant for execution be signed by every
individual, so that each may feel the responsibility of the con
demnation. All this should be done, whether an appeal be
prayed to that tribunal or not; because society itself should be
unwilling to inflict death, until every possible precaution had
been used to avoid mistakes, and because a matter of such
high importance should never be left to the ignorance of the
accused, or to the discretion of negligent counsel, either en
gaged by him or assigned by the court.
It is usual to obviate most of these objections, by referring
to the trial by jury, as counteracting these casual defects in
the judges, and, in some degree, remedying even their Avant of
talents and learning. The institution of jury trials would, no
doubt, deserve those high eulogies which have been bestowed
on it, if it were not for its complete dependence onthe will and
opinion of the judge. That rule which requires them to re
ceive and adopt, with implicit obedience, the charges and in
structions of the court in matters of law, leaves them but so
many inefficient instruments to fill up the pageantry of judi
cial despotism. In those countries, where, in a few cases, they
are allowed to be judges of both the law and the evidence, it
very rarely happens that juries fail to adopt those opinions of
the court, which have been clearly expressed and insisted on in
the charge. The description of men usually selected as jurors,
their information, habits and pursuits, render the trial, so far as
they are concerned, merely nominal, and leaves the judge, after
all, substantially, the sole arbiter of life and death. We would
appeal to the experience and observation of the whole pro-

584 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
fession to attest the fact, that in a large majority of cases, both
civil and criminal, a plausible and ingenious judge, of pleasant
manners, with only a moderate share of legal learning, will be
able to extract from a jury whatever verdict he may be pleased
strongly to intimate would be desired. Where, then, is the
boasted safety of jury trials ? When did they ever rescue a
single victim from the grasp of a Jeffries thirsting for blood?
Every page of English history is stained with convictions con
sented to by juries, because desired by judges, who were either
afraid to incur the displeasure of their sovereigns, or, who had
not moral energy enough to resist some popular prejudice of
the times. What else brought Sidney to the scaffold, or con
signed to the grave of infamy so many Irish patriots? Love
of liberty was called treason, and a desire to remedy existing
abuses was construed into rebellion !

THE FALLIBILITY OF HUMAN TRIBUNALS CONTINUED.
Human tribunals are perpetually subject to errors and mis
takes, from the corruption and ignorance of the instruments
which they are obliged to use in conducting their trials. Bold,
unblushing perjury often stalks into the sacred temple of jus
tice, pours its envenomed poison into the ears of the jury, and
marches out again with impunity, sure and exulting in the
blood of its victim ! These demoniac visits are by no means
rare. The experience of judges, the practice ofthe profession,
and the observation of inteUigent jurors, could tell a tale of
horror vv^hich should make society startle at her own execu
tions. Yet they have seen or only suspected one of a thou
sand perjuries which have been committed before them. The
rest have escaped all the probing skill of the advocate, and
could only be attested on earth by those sleeping tenants of
the grave, whom they have sacrificed. They have all, howev
er, been faithfully recorded in heaven's chancery, from which
they shall never be obliterated, but by the deepest and most
hearty repentance.
But if corruption has slain its thousands, ignorance and in
attention may claim a triumph more numerous and equally
inglorious. How often has it occurred, that witnesses, from in
activity of mind — from mere clumsiness of intellect, have fail-

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 585
ed to give a correct account of the transaction which they
were called on to relate ? A look or jesture is often of immense
importance in criminal prosecutions. The tone of voice, wheth
er one of supplication or defiance, we have known decide the
momentous question of fife and death! If, however, these
things are correctly remembered, how often are they incapable
of presenting anything like a fac simile to the jury ? Such are
the practical difficulties on this subject, that a personal ren-
countre, — in the streets — in open day — in presence of many
persons of undoubted credibility — unincumbered by any unu
sual multiplicity of circumstances — will be so variously repre
sented as to excite the surprise of every observer, if they do
not shake his confidence in the credibility of all human evi
dence. By what a frail tenure, then, do we hold our lives !
Our enemy may assail us in the streets ; may prostrate us in
the dust; may hold the uplifted dagger to our breasts, yet those
who look upon the tragedy, misled by their alarm, or too much
excited to refer the rapid incidents of the moment to their pro
per order, strangely represent us as aggressors, and instead of
proving a shield to our innocence, become swords of destruction
against our lives !
^^ Human evidence, to make even a tolerable approximation to
truth, must come from witnesses who, beside veracity, must
possess great faithfulness of memory, accuracy of observation,
and clearness of discrimination. Such individuals are com-
paritively rare in every community, and the proportion which
they bear to the great aggregate of society, exhibits an alarm
ing number of chances against arriving at anything like exact
certainty in judicial investigations. Such certainty need not
be required in question of mere property, but there is no meum
and tuum in taking away the lives of our fellow beings. The
breath which you stifle was breathed into his nostrils by the
living God — the body which you destroy was fashioned after
his divine image — the soul which you dislodge is probably an
emanation of his own native, uncreated, and incomprehensible
essence !
Suppose, however, the witnesses not to have sworn falsely in
any important particular, nor to have fallen into any mistake
or misapprehension of the matter about which they testify,

586 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
still, the chapter of accidents and errors has not closed yet.
How often are jurors, from carelessness or inattention — from
weakness or inactivity of mind, mistaken in many important
details of the evidence ? How often is the charge of the court,
though slowly and distinctly delivered, entirely misunderstood
or forgotten by them in their retirement ? Ask them afterwards
for a verbal report of the trial, and you will be astonished, in
many cases, to hear what a rude mass they make of the evi
dence and senseless jargon of the opinion of the court. And
yet jurors are generally selectee viri; and when called by the
government to hold its own inquests, are dignified with the title
oi"probi etlegales hominis !" Although " prohi et legates," they
are stUl short-sighted and frail instruments of humanity — capa
ble of sleeping in the box—of forgetting what they have heard
in the evidence — of misunderstanding the instructions of the
court — ^^of being led about in their opinions by a few prominent
members of their own body — of, in fact, every thing which ren
ders all human investigations uncertain, and the life of man
extremely precarious when made dependent upon them. These
remarks are general ones, and admit of all those exceptions,
sometimes in favor of the entire pannel, and very often, indeed,
of individual members of it, which a sense of justice would re
quire should be made.
' In all cases, the jury, under the direction of the court, must
ascertain the measure of criminality in the accused. This
seems to depend on the intention, or purpose of the heart with
which an action has been performed, rather than its injurious
effects on society. On the latter principle, the madman who
shoots his prince is equally guilty and worthy of punishment,
as the ambitious noble who assassinates him that he may as
cend his throne. So the first discovery of the process of dis
tilling ardent spirits, and of making gunpowder, should expose
their authors to severities which the ingenuity of mankind has
never yet discovered, because they have done more mischief
than all the traitors, murderers, house-breakers, and shop-lift
ers, that have ever lived. These last were but so many indi
vidual marauders, perplexing, rather than seriously endanger
ing society ; whilst the former, pouring in at every pass their
legions of vices and crimes, have committed greater havoc.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 587
than did those northern hordes, which once desolated Europe.
In many cases, how is it possible to ascertain this intention
or purpose of heart ? It is not visible nor tangible, nor the sub
ject of any of those senses, through which we make our near
est approaches to truth. If recourse be had to the accompa
nying outward actions, every one's experience and observation
will show how far short these will fall of furnishing anything
like certainty as to the inward motives of the njind. It is the
very design of villainy to prevent this accordance, and its high
est success depends on the greatest discrepancy between its se
cret designs and outward actions. Hence, it has never been
pretended, that the outward actions were infallible indicia to
the inward motive, but that such motive can only be inferred or
presumed from them. Now the same motive, it is known, will
often produce adiffierent set of outward actions, and that these,
though alike, will often be the result of different motives. —
Thus the flight of the accused may be from consciousness of
guilt, or from the alarm created by knowing he was in a situa
tion to be suspected; or it may be the outward action, resorted
to by a friend to deceive the public, and, thereby, draw off sus
picion from the real felon. Brutus and Casius, in the assassi
nation of Csesar, performed about the same set of outward ac
tions, yet it was said the one hated the tyranny, the other the
tyrant ; motives widely different in their character — exalting
one to the highest elevation of Roman patriotism, and debas
ing the other to the meanness of envying a greatness which he
could not rival.
Outward and accompanying actions are, therefore, so equiv
ocal, that human tribunals never resort to them, to ascertain
the certainty of the wicked intent ; for that being in the heart
cannot he known by men, but only the different degree oi pro
bability strengthening or weakening the presumption oi such in
tent. The measure of criminality, is, in this way, only a mat
ter of conjecture — of presumption — of probabilitj^^ — in fact a
mere matter of guess-work with the jury, in which they are no
doubt sometimes right and may be often wrong. It will not
do to say that they are oftener right than wrong ; that may be
admitted, and yet the solemn question be asked, whether, if
the life of man shaU be taken away with a bare majority of

588 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
chances, that it may be right to do so? If a bare majority be
not insisted on as sufficient, what shall be the safe and lawful
proportion ? There is a nominal rule of the law which serves
to decorate many of its pages, " that it is better that ninety-
nine guilty persons should escape, than that one innocent man
should suffer." If this rule be not taken as a mere fiourish
and show of humanity, which the law does not feel and will
not pratice on, then it establishes a proportion of chances
against ascertaining the motives of action from the accompa
nying circumstances which will substantially abrogate all cap
ital punishments. For who that knows any thing of human
nature, who that has observed with even a careless eye, the
many devices by which villainy cloaks and conceals its pur
poses and motives, can believe that they are ascertainable by
evidence in ninety-nine out of one hundred cases ? They may
be in a majority, even in a large majority of cases, but to say
they are in so large a proportion, is imposing an excessive tax
on the credulity of mankind.
It is true that this want of certainly applies to every grade
of offence, and might be urged against every degree of crimin
al punishment. The argument predecated on it is intended,
however, to be applied only in favor of human fife, and in
every other case it loses its efficacy ; because society may fine
and imprison its members, she may brand with infamy, or for
ever disfranchise them, on presumptions which their own foUies
or misfortunes have created. These punishments are all con
fined to their short stay and pilgrimage on earth, and whether
rightfully or wrongfully inflicted, is of little consequence in the
view of that endless existence which awaits them after death.
But as she gave not our lives and can never restore them, on
discovering an error in her judgment, and as its consequences
are not confined to the body nor to time, but may run on through
eternity, in the ceaseless agony of the soul, nothing short of
the most absolute certainty of the most depraved and wicked
purpose of heart could justify her in pronouncing thesentence
of death. Such, certainly, never has been, and never can be,
attained on earth by uninspired mortals, and should only be
looked for in heaven, where He sits in judgment, who alone

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 589
" can search the hearts, and try the reins of the children of
men."

SOME OBJECTIONS TO THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT.
It often happens that the declared will of the legislature is
totally different from its real one, at the time of its enactment.
This induces judges to depart from the strict letter of the
statute, and to resort to constructions not always correct, and
often highly prejudicial to the accused. The vague, and some
times unintelligible language employed in the penal statutes,
and the discordant opinions of elementary writers, gave a color
of necessity to this species of judicial legislation. The statute
gave the text, and the judges wrote the commentary in letters
of blood. The English nation have submitted to the legisla
tion of its courts, and seen their fellow Subjects hanged for
constructive felonies, quartered for constructive treasons, and
roasted alive for constructive heresies, with a patience that
would be astonishing even if their written laws had sanctioned
butchery.* In the different States of the American confed
eracy, the enactment of ex post facto laws has been expressly
forbidden by Constitutional prohibitions. Yet the evil we now
complain of is only half remedied, since the first constructive
extension of a penal statute, beyond its letter, is an ex post
facto law, as it regards the offence to which it is applied. —
Thus, what is prohibited in the legislature, is aUowed of in the
courts, and every day submitted to by the American people.
This illegal assumption of legislative powers is referred to, not
so much for the purpose of condemnation under the present
state of things, as to show that the legislature itself, — the high
source of that high law, which is to be the rule of every man's
actions, — is a very imperfect and fallible body. Their laws are
sometimes so obscure that they cannot be understood by the
judges themselves, much less by the plain unlettered yeomanry
of the land.
Who would expect to find, under the name of treason, a
law punishing with death the crime of counterfeiting ! Yet
the coining of silver is, by the English law, dignified with that
appellation, which properly means nothing less than a conspi-
*Livingston's Report.

590 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUSIENTS.
racy against the life or honor of the king, and the safety of
the State ! Under the pompous title, — this nicknamed trea
son, — it obtained an easy passage through Parliament, and
soon afterward a poor servant girl, just turned of fourteen, was
sentenced to be burnt alive. At her master's bidding she hid
some white-washed farthings behind her stays, on which the
jury, yielding, no doubt, to the charge of the court, found her
guilty as an accomplice with her master in the treason. — " Good
God, Sir !" exclaimed an eloquent and hnmane member of Par
liament, " are we taught to execrate the fires of Smithfield, and
are we lighting them now to burn a poor harmless child for
hiding a white washed farthing?"
When a member of a legislative body introduces a new
hanging law, he begins with mentioning some injury or crime,
for which a man is not yet liable to be hanged ; and then pro
poses the gallows as the specific and infallible means of cure
and prevention. But the bill, in progress of time, from care
lessness in dictation, or want of ability in the draftsman, makes
crimes capital that scarce deserve whipping. For instance,
the shop-lifting act was to prevent bankers and silver-smiths,
and other shops, where there are commonly goods of great val
ue, from being robbed ; but it goes so far as to make it death
to lift anything off the counter with intent to steal.
Under this act, one Mary Jones was executed, whose case I
shall just mention: It was at a time, when press-warrants
were issued on the alarm about the Falkland Islands. The
woman's husband was pressed, their gOods seized for some
debts of his, and she with two small children turned into the
streets a-begging. It is a circumstance not to be forgotten,
that she was very young (under nineteen) and remarkably hand
some. She went to a linen draper's shop, took some coarse
linen off the counter and slipped it under her cloak; the shop
man saw her and she laid it down. For this she was hanged.
Her defence was, that she had lived in credit, and wanted for
nothing until a press-gang came and stole her husband from
her ; but since then, she had no bed to lie on ; nothing to give
her children to eat, and they were almost naked; and perhaps
she might have done something wrong, for she hardly knew
what she did. The parish officers testified the truth of this

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 591
story ; but it seems there had been a good deal of shop-lifting
about Ludgate ; an example was thought necessary, and this
woman was hanged for the comfort and satisfaction of shop
keepers in Ludgate street. When brought to receive sentence,
she behaved in such a frantic manner, as proved her mind to
be in a distracted and desponding state, and the child was
sucking at her breast when she set out for Tyburn.
Let us reflect a little on this woman's fate. For what cause
was God's creation robbed of this, its noblest work ? It was
for no injury, but for a mere attempt to clothe her two naked
children, by unlawful means. Compare this with what the
State did, "and with what the law did. The State bereaved the
woman of her husband, and the children of a father who was
all their support. The law deprived the woman of her life, and
the children of their remaining parent, exposing them to every
danger, insult and merciless treatment, that destitute and help
less orphans suffer. Take all the circumstances together, I do
not believe a fouler murder was ever committed against law,
than the murder of this woman by law. Some, perhaps, are
blaming the judges, the jury, and the hangman, but neither
judge, jury, or hangman are to blame ; they are but ministerial
agents ; the true hangman is your member of Parliament ; he
who frames the bloody law, is answerable for all the blood that
is shed under it.*
We have given these two instances as fair samples of that
careless and ambiguous legislation which often leads to results
which humanity and justice must long deplore. Such legisla
tion often wars against the first principles of our nature, and
demands an obedience, under the penalty of death, which it
were worse than the most cruel death to render. Take the law
of accessories after the fact as an illustration. If the father
commit treason, the son must abandon or deliver him up to the
executioner. If the son be guilty of a crime, the stern dic
tates of our law require that his parent — the very mother who
bore him — his sisters and brothers, the companions of his infan
cy, should expel nature from their hearts, and humanity from
their feefings — that they should barbarously discover his re-

^ *Sir William Meredith's speech in Parliament on frequent executions.
39

592 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
treat, or with inhuman apathy abandon him to his fate. The
husband is even required to betray his wife, the mother of his
children ; every tie of nature or affection is to be broken, and
men are required to be faithless, treacherous, unnatural and
cruel, in order to prove that they are good citizens and worthy
members of society 1* Now a Legislature that could have first
required such things from its subjects, should hardly be consid
ered a safe depository of the lives of its people. And when
we reflect how many Parliaments in England, and how many
Legislatures in America, have met and adjourned without an
attempt to eradicate such unnatural principles from the law,
conviction becomes riveted on the mind, that human legisla
tion is so incautious and negligent that it should never extend
to the extinction of human life.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS NOT THE MOST EFFECTUAL IN DETERRING
OTHERS FROM THE COMMISSION OF CRIME.
Criminal jurisprudence, for several ages at least, has been
very far in the rear of public opinion. The use of torture, the
trial by battle, the drowning of witches, and burning of heretics,
was never abolished in England until long after public senti
ment had denounced such cruel spectacles. The Inquisition
struggled hard, and down to our times, succeeded in maintain
ing its fires and its faggots, in despite of the maledictions of
nearly the whole civilized world. The older States ofthe Union
could, no doubt, furnish many examples illustrating the justice
of the remark.
If, however, criminal legislation does not adapt itself imme
diately to the general state of public sentiment, the consequence
is that the various officers of the law become less vigilant in
the detection of offenders, and the ministers of justice resort to
every subtelty and refinement to screen them from a punish
ment disproportioned to their crimes. This may not be true of
all the officers and ministers of the law, especially of judges,
who for many years before their advancement to the bench,
may have been Attorney Generals, or prosecuting counsel for
the State ; but experience and observation have every where
'''Livingston's Report.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 593
shown its correctness as to jurors, who are taken from the gen
eral mass of mankind, and who feel more strongly the prevail
ing current of humanity and mercy.
This is believed to be the true reason, why so many offend
ers, whose punishment, on conviction, would be death, so often
escape. . It is not the money of the accused that bribes, nor
the number and power of his friends that overawe, nor the
skill and eloquence of his counsel that seduce public justice
from her straight and onward course. No ; it is none of these
things. It is the gentle voice of humanity, whispering in the
ears of the jurors, "this man's hfe is not lawfully in your pow
er; take it not away lest Heaven should demand it at your
hands." These appeals to the softer and better parts of our nature
often operate as a virtual repeal of those bloody statutes
whose places are retained in the criminal code long after pub
lic opinion will not allow them to be enforced. Because the
law-making power will not expressly substitute a milder pun
ishment, such repeals result in the entire acquittal of many
offenders, who, though they deserve not to die, ought neverthe
less to be compelled to make severe atonement for their crimes.
Many are thrown back to commit new ravages on society, who
should have been forever shut out from its enjoyments, and
compelled to hard labor, for their own, or their famUy's, or
their country's support. But, by insisting on the security of
the grave, society often loses even the protection of the
prison. Suppose, however, capital convictions, effected without cor
ruption in the witnesses, without mistakes in the jury, and
without errors committed by the court; what effects do they
produce, which do not equally result from perpetual slavery?
A punishment, to be just, should have that degree of severity
only, which is sufficient to deter others. Now, there is no man
who would, on the least reflection, put in competition the total
and perpetual loss of liberty, with the greatest advantage he
could possibly obtain in consequence of a crime. Perpetual
slavery, then, has in it all that is necessary to deter the most
hardened and determined, as much as the punishment of death.
I say it has more. There are many who can look upon death

594 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
with intrepidity and firmness ; some, through fana-ticism, others
through vanity that attends us even to the grave ; others, from
a desperate resolution, either to get rid of their misery or to
cease to live ; but fanaticism and vanity forsake the criminal in
slavery, in chains and fetters, in an iron cage, and despair
seems rather the beginning than the end of their misery. The
mind, by collecting itself and uniting all its force, can, for a
moment, repel assailing grief; but its most vigorous efforts are
insufficient to resist perpetual wretchedness.*
If we look to the executions themselves, what examples do
they give ? The offender dies either hardened or penitent.
We are not to consider what reflections occur to reasonable or
good men, but such impressions as are made on the thought
less, the desperate and the wicked. These men look on the
hardened villain with envy and admiration. All that anima
tion and contempt of death, with which heroes and martyrs
inspire good men, the abandoned villain feels, in seeing a des
perado like himself, meet death with intrepidity. The penitent
criminal, on the other hand, often makes the sober villain think
in this way: himself oppressed with poverty and want, he
sees a man die with that penitence, which promises pardon for
his sins here, and happiness hereafter ; straight, he thinks, that
by robbery, forgery and murder, he can relieve all his wants,
and if he be brought so to justice, the punishment will be short
and trifling, and the reward eternal. When once a villain
turns enthusiast, he is above all law; punishment is his reward,
and death his glory.f
If the hanging of a fellow being produce no good effect on
the profligate and abandoned, what impression does it make on
the minds of the virtuous and orderly part of the community?
From some motive, which it is perhaps impossible to specify or
define, great crowds will always assemble to witness the terri
ble and solemn spectacle. At the appointed hour, the con
demned victim, seated on his coffin, and surrounded by the
swords and spears of the guard, is seen approaching on the
slow-moving car of death : he is carried forward in this condi-
*Sir Wiiiiam Meredith's Speech in Parliament. 1777^
jBeccaria.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. -595
tion, through the immense assembly, until he reaches the scaf
fold. Here, standing on that narrow isthmus, which separates
time from eternity, he makes his last and solemn appeal to the
world ! He either denies his guilt altogether, or extenuates
his crime by referring it to misfortune, or to the vicious exam
ple and education of his youth. He next implores the world to
do justice to his memory — pronounces the forgiveness of his
enemies — drops on his knees in prayer, and calls on all the
holy ministers of God to lift up their last supplication to Heav
en in his behalf I Oh, at that awful moment, who would not
wish, nay, who would not rejoice to see the sword of destruc
tion turned aside, and the angel of mercy overshadowing the
trembling and supplicating victim ! But, no; He must die — -
the last act of devotion must be interrupted — the rude grasp
of the hangman tells " his hour has come."' His suppficating
look implores but a few moments more to fit him forthe dread
ful change ; but it is in vain. He bows his head to the halter,
and, soon hangs a lifeless corpse in the midst of a sympa
thising and sobbing multitude! Let me here ask again, how
so sad and mournful a spectacle as this can ever magnify tfie
law or make it honorable ? Who, in fact, then thinks of the
law but to execrate it, or deplore its hard and barbarous re-
quirments. If the asseverations of his innocence should obtain credence
with the public, or if it should subsequently appear that false
testimony, the passions of the moment, or deceiving appear
ances had effected his conviction, what, then, would not the
judge who tried, the jury who rendered the verdict, and the
whole community, who saw or heard his tragical end, what
would they not all give to have it in their power to restore him
to life ? Instances like these are of frequent occurrence. The
most authentic English records are full of ihem ; many have
occurred in the United States, in which the innocence of the
sufferers has been clearly demonstrated. A few of such cases
do infinitely more harm to the generation in which they occur,
than the example of the other capital executions can compen
sate. They are remembered when all the instances of com
mon cases are forgotten. They go down the stream of tradi
tion. The old, in whose day they occurred, relate them to

596 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
their children and grand children, until all the feelings of na
ture are arrayed against the laws of the country and those
who administered them.
Society, by punishing the higher offences only with death,
has retained it in many of those very cases to which it is the
least appropriate, and, therefore, the least efficacious in prevent
ing them. The traitor is prompted by ambition to overturn
the liberties of his country. Will the fear of death drive the
big passion back into his bosom, or arrest his progress in the
moment of expected triumph ? If so, why did an Arnold go
over to the enemy, or a Burr seek to dismember our Union?
Could the one have been commander in chief of our armies,
and the other the President of the republic — they would not
now "be damned to everlasting fame" as the only recreants, in
half a century, to the cause of liberty in the new world.
Such men cannot submit to the restraints of society. Compel
them to undergo the confinements of a prison ; from the expec
tation of filling the high places of the earth, with Princes and
nobles in attendance, bring them down to the humble vassals
of the turnkey that nightly locks them within their sofitary
cells. Perpetual degradation like this, would do more toward
suppressing their high and vaulting spirits, than the fear of
death, " which men always behold in distant obscurity."
How can the fear of death be efficacious in preventing mur
der by duelling ? Has not the culprit braved death even in
the very act of committing his offence ? Why then expect
him to dread it at the end of a rope, who feared it not at the
mouth of the pistol ! Such modern barbarians risk their lives,
" that they may keep their places in society." Counteract their
vain expectations, by compelling them to take their places out
of society — force them to exchange their pistols for the sledge
hammer, and their small swords for the pegging awl, and you
will have done more towards preserving the lives of our Deca-
turs and Hamiltons, than all the gibbets ever erected in Ameri
ca. There is another crime which the sentiments of mankind
more universally require should be capitally punished than
any other; but even this is prompted by brutal passions which
are proverbially regardless of consequences, and whose repe
tition can be guarded against by amputation, as effectually as

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

597

by caUing in the aid of that universal specific, death. The
surgeon, and not the executioner, is all that society needs in
this case ; but a decent respect to the feelings of those who
have been outraged, and a proper regard to the example on
others, require a perpetual exclusion from the walks of civil
ized life — a subjection to the coarse diet, the hard lodging, and
the incessant labor of imprisonment for life.

THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.
If to reasoning, such as we have resorted to, be added, the
recorded testimony of competent witnesses, whose situation
enables them to make correct observations, but little doubt can
remain as to the inefficacy of capital punishment. In England
a great portion of the eloquence and learning, and all the hu
manity of the age, are at work in an endeavor to restrict the
punishment of death to the more atrocious offences. This
has produced a parliamentary enquiry, in the course of which
the examination of witnesses was taken before a committee
of the House of Commons. We make the following extract
from the testimony of a solicitor who had practiced for more
than twenty years in the criminal courts : " In the course of
my practice, I have found that the punishment of death has no
terror on a common thief — 'indeed, it is much more the sub
ject of ridicule among them than of serious deliberation. The
certain approach of an ignominious death does not seem to
operate upon them; for after the warrant has come down,
I have seen them treat it with levity. I once saw a man for
whom I had been concerned the day before his execution, and,
on offering him condolence, and expressing my concern at his sit
uation, he replied with an air of indifference, ' players at bowls
must expect rubbers ;' — ^and this man I heard say, ' that it was
only a few minutes — a kick and a struggle, and all was over.'
The fate of one set of culprits, in some instances, had no effect,
even on those who were to be next reported for execution :
they play at ball, and pass their jokes as if nothing was^the
matter. I have seen the last separation of persons about to
be executed : there was nothing of solemnity about it, and it
was more like the parting for a country journey than taking
their last fareweU. I mention these things to show what littie

598 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS .
fear common thieves entertain of capital punishments ; and
that, so far from being arrested in their wicked courses, by the
distant possibility of its infliction, they are not even intimidat
ed by its certainty."
The ordinary of Newgate, a witness better quafified than
any other to give information on this subject, being asked—
"have you made any observations as to the effect of the sen
tence of death upon the prisoners ?" answers : " it seems
scarcely to have any effect upon them ; the generality of peo
ple under sentence of death are thinking, or rather doing any
thing than preparing for their latter end." Being interrogated
as to the effects produced on the minds of the people by capi
tal executions, he answers : " I think shock and horror at the
moment, upon the inexperienced and young , but immediately
after the scene is closed, forgetfulness altogether of it, leaving
no impression on the young and inexperienced. The old and
experienced thief says, the chances have gone against the man
who has suflbred, that it is of no consequence, that it was
what was to be expected; making no serious impression upon
the mind. I have had occasion to go into the press-yard with
in an hour and a half after an execution, and I have found
them amusing themselves, playing at ball or marbles, and ap
pearing precisely as if nothing had happened."
Another of these respectable witnesses (a magistrate of the
capital) being asked whether he thought that capital punish
ments had much tendency to deter criminals from the commis
sion of offences, answered : " I do not ; I believe it is well
known to those who are conversant with criminal associations
in this town, that criminals five and act in gangs and confede
racies, and that the execution of one or more of their body, sel
dom has a tendency to dissolve the confederacy, or to deter the
remaining associates from the continuance of their former pur
suits." No coloring is necessary to heighten the effect of these
sketches. Nothing, it appears to us, can more fully prove the
utter inutility of this waste of human life, its utter inefficiency
as a punishment, and its demoralizing operation on the minds
of the people.
In London and Middlesex, for sixteen years, ending in 1818,

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 599
thirty -five persons were convicted of murder, and stabbing with
intent to murder, which is an average of a fraction more than
two in the year. In the city of New Orleans seven persons
suffered forthe same crime in the space of four years, which
is very little less than the same average ; but the population of
New Orleans, during the period, did not amount to more than
about thirty-five thousand, which is, to that of Middlesex and
London, in round numbers, as one to twenty-seven; therefore,
the crime of murder was nearly twenty- seven times as frequent
in proportion to numbers as in London. Almost the same
proportion exists between the whole State, and England and
Wales, in relation to this crime ; nineteen executions having
taken place for murder in the last seven years in Louisiana ;
one hundred and fifty-four during the seven years ending in
1818, in England and Wales. In London and Middlesex,
eight hundred and eighty-five persons were convicted for forgery
and counterfeiting, in seven years, ending in 1818. During an
equal period seven persons were convicted ofthe same offences
in the whole State, which makes the crime eighteen times
more frequent there, in proportion to numbers, than it is here.
Six thousand nine hundred and seventy-four convictions for
larceny took place in the same period in London, and for the
like period in Louisiana, one hundred ; which is near ten to
one more there than here, in proportion to the population. I
well know that the state of society in the two countries— the
degree of temptation — the ease or difficulty of obtaining sub
sistence and other circumstances, as well as the operation of
laws, may produce the difference I have shown; but does it not
raise serious doubts as to the efficacy of capital punishments,
to observe this double effect, that almost the only crime which
we punish in that manner, is more frequent in proportion of
twenty-seven to one, whilst those which are the object of a
milder sanction, are almost in the same ratio less than the
country with which we make the comparison.
The laws of none ofthe States punish highway robbery with
death. Those of the United States affix this punishment to
the robbery of the mail, under the circumstances that gener
ally accompany it. Yet it is believed that this last species of
highway robbery is more frequent than the other — another

600

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS,

proof that the fear of death is not a more powerful preventive
of crime than other punishments.*
The experience of almost every civilized nation ought to
settle this question. Great Britain is said to have reduced the
number of her capital offences from about two hundred to
something like twenty — and no respectable writer which I have
met wiib, has ever pretended that those offences, the punish
ment of which had been ameliorated, had become more fre
quent or alarming to society. If abolishing the punishment of
death in about one hundred and seventy or eighty cases out of
two hundred has not had such an effect, what reason can there
be for believing it Would do so as to the remaining twenty ?
The experiments made in the United States clearly show,
that the number may be greatly reduced below twenty, without
injury to society. Here, the general, if not universal senti
ment prevails, that the punishment of death should be confined
to treason, murder and rape — and in but few of the States is it
extended beyond these offences on the first conviction. In
some States, however, arson, counterfeiting money, kidnapping,
&c., are so punished. We submit it as a general remark,
that the number of offences punished by death, in the United
States, averaging all the States of the Union, would not exceed
one-third of the number punished capitally in England. Why
then should either nation, after running this race of humanity
together, stop short of that goal which alone is worth contend
ing for — universal abrogation of the punishment of death?
Why should either stop in this great work of reformation, when
all the experiments they have made in the smaller offences
give promise of complete and triumphant success ? The ex
ample of other nations, who have made the experiment, invite
them to its completion. In republican Rome, for the long pe
riod of two hundred and fifty years, before her institutions
were swept away by the imperial power, it was not lawful to
put a Roman citizen to death. And the historian has never
asserted that crimes were multiplied by it during that time.
In Russia, the Empress Elizabeth, for twenty years, abolished
the punishment, and her successor, Catharine the Second, under
'''Livingston's Report to the Legislature of Louisiana.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 601
a full persuasion of its being useless, also gave orders to those
who were about to frame a new code of lav/s for her empire,
to abolish it altogether. About the same time (probably a few
years after) that Elizabeth made her experiment in the north,
the Duke of Tuscany renewed it in the south; and after trying
it for twenty years, no doubt watching its effects with the most
vigilant eye, he declares, " that atrocious offences had become
very rare, and the lesser ones greatly diminished." It is said
that, during those twenty years, only five murders were com
mitted within his dominions ; whilst in Rome, whose inhabit
ants have the same manners, principles and religion with those
of Tuscany, the number would amount to many hundreds.
The abolition of death alone as a punishment for murder, pro
duced this difference in the moral character of the two na
tions.*

MR. LIVINGSTON S REFUTATION OF THE USUAL ARGUMENTS URGED
AGAINST ABOLISHme THE PUNISHMENT OF DEATH.
Let us examine those reasons which are usually given on
the affirmative side of this interesting question :
First. There are those who support it by argument drawn
from religion. The divine spirit infused into the great legis
lator of the Jews, from whose code these arguments are drawn,
was never intended to inspire a system of universal jurispru
dence. The theocracy given as a form of government to that
extraordinary people, was not suited to any other; as little was
the system of their penal laws given* on the mysterious moun
tain, promulgated from the bosom of a dark cloud, amid thun
der and lightning ; they were intended to strike terror into the
minds of a perverse and obdurate people ; and as one means
of effecting this, the punishment of death is freely denounced
for a long list of crimes ; but the same authority establishes
the lex talionis and other regulations, which those who quote
this authority would surely not wish to adopt. They forget that
the same Almighty author of that law, at a later period, in
spired one of his prophets with a solemn assurance, and af
firmed it with an awful asservation, — " as I live saith the Lord,
*Rush's Essays.

602

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

I have no pleasure in the death of a sinner, but rather that he
should turn from his wickedness and live." They forget, too,
although they are Christians who use this argument,, that the
divine author of their religion expressly forbids the retaliatory
system, on which the punishment of death for murder is
founded; they forget the mild benevolence of his precepts, the
meekness of his spirit, the philanthropy that breathes in all
his words and directed all his actions ; they loose sight of that
golden rule, which he established, "to do nothing to others,
that we would not desire them to do unto us ;" and certainly
pervert the spirit of his holy and merciful religion, when they
give it as a sanction for sanguinary punishments. Indeed, if
I were inclined to support my opinion by arguments drawn
from religion, the whole New Testament should be my text,
and I could easily deduce from it authority for a system of
reform as opposed to one of extirpation.
Secondly. The practice of all nations, from the remotest
antiquity, is urged in favor of this punishment ; the fact, with
some exceptions, is true; but is the inference just? There are
general errors, and, unfortunately for mankind, but few gen
eral truths, established by practice, in government and legisla
tion. Make this the criterion, and despotism is, by many
thousand degrees, on the scale of antiquity, better than a re
presentative government : the laws of Draco were more an
cient than those of Solon, and consequently better ; and the
practice of torture quite as generally diffused, as that of which ¦
we are now treating. Idolatry in religion, tyranny in govern
ment, capital punishments and inhuman tortures in jurispru
dence, are coeval and co-extensive. Will the advocates of
this punishment admit the force of their argument in favor of
all these abuses ? If they do not, how will they apply it tothe
one for which they argue ?
The long and general usage of any institution gives us the
means of examining its practical advantages or defects ; but
it ought to have no authority as a precedent untU it be proved
that the best laws are the most ancient, and that institutions
for the happiness of the people are the most permanent and
most generally diffused. But this, unfortunately, cannot be
maintained with truth; the melancholy reverse forces convic-

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 603
tion on our minds. Everywhere, with but few exceptions, the
interest of the many has, from the earliest ages, been sacrificed
to the power of the few. Everywhere, penal laws have been
framed to support this power, and those institutions, favorable
to freedom, which have come down to us from biir ancestors,
form no part of any original plan ; but are isolated privileges,
which have been wrested from the grasp of tyranny, or which
have been suffered, from inattention to their importance, to
grow into strength.
Every nation in Europe has, during the last eight or ten
centuries, been involved in a continued state of internal dis
cord or foreign war : Kings and nobles continually struggling
for power, both oppressing the people, and driving them to
desperation and revolt. Different pretenders asserted their
claims to the throne of deposed or assassinated Kings; religious
wars, cruel persecutions, partition of kingdoms, cessions of
provinces, succeeding each other with a complication and ra
pidity that defies the skill and diligence of the historian to
unravel and record. Add to this the ignorance in which the
human mind was involved during the early and middle part of
this period ; the intolerant bigotry, which, from its close connec
tion with government, stifled every improvement in politics, as
well as every reformation in religion, and we shall see a state
of things certainly not favorable for the formation of wise
laws on any subject ; but particularly ill calculated for the es
tablishment of a just or humane criminal code. From such
legislators, acting in such times, what could be expected but
that which we actually find — a mass of laws, unjust, because
made solely with a view to support the temporary views of a
prevailing party ; unwise, obscure, inhuman, inconsistent, be
cause they were the work of ignorance, dictated by interest,
passion and intolerance. But it would scarcely seem prudent
to surrender our reason to authorities thus established, and to
give the force of precedent to any of the incoherent collections
of absurd, cruel and contradictory provisions, which have been
dignified with the name of penal codes, in the jurisprudence
of any nation of Europe, as their laws stood prior to the last
century. No one would surely advise this ; why then select
any part of the mass and recommend it to us, merely because

604 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
it has generally been practiced ? If there is any other reason
for adopting it, let that be urged, and it ought to have its weight ;
but my object here is to show, that from the mode in which the
penal laws of Europe have, until a very late period, been estab
lished, very little respect is due to them merely on account
of their antiquity, or of the extent to which they have pre
vailed. If the criminal jurisprudence of the modern and
middle ages affords us little reason to revere either its human
ity or justice, the ancient world does not give us more. The
despotism of antiquity was like that of modern times, and
such as it will always be; it can have but one character, which
the rare occurrence of a few mild or philosophic monarchs
does not change.
The third and last argument I have heard urged, is nearly
allied to the second ; it is, the danger to be apprehended from
innovation. I confess I always listen to this objection with
some degree of suspicion. That men who owe their rank, their
privileges and emoluments, to abuses and impositions originat
ing in the darkness of antiquity, and consecrated by time, that
such men should preach the danger of innovations I can well
conceive; the wonder is, that they can find others weak and
credulous enough to believe them. But in a country where
these abuses do not exist ; a country whose admirable system
of government is founded wholly on innovation ; where there is
no antiquity to create a false veneration for abuses, and no
apparent interest to perpetuate them; in such a country this
argument will have little force against the strong reasons which
assail it. Let those, however, that honestly entertain this
doubt, reflect that most fortunately for themselves and for their
posterity, they live in an age of' advancement : not an art, not
a science, that has not in our day made rapid progress to
ward perfection. The one of which we now speak has received
and is daily acquiring improvement. How long is it since tor
ture was abolished ? Since judges were made independent ?
Since personal liberty was secured, and religious persecution
forbidden ?, AU these were, in their time, innovations as bold
at least as the one now proposed. The true use of this objec
tion, and there 1 confess it has force, is to prevent any hazard
ous experiment, or the introduction of any change that is not

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 605
strongly recommended by reason. I desire no other test for the
one that is now under discussion, but I respectfully urge, that
it would be unwise to reject it merely because it is untried, if
we are convinced it wiU be beneficial. Should our expecta
tions be disappointed, no extensive evil can be done ; the re
medy is always in our power. Although, an experiment, it is
not an hazardous one, and the only enquiry seems to be,
whether the arguments and facts stated in its favor are suffi
ciently strong to justify us in making it. Indeed, it appears to
me, that the reasoning might, with some propriety, be retorted
against those who use it, by saying, " all punishments are but
experiments to discover what will best prevent crimes ; your
favorite one of death has been fully tried. By your own ac
count, all nations, since the first institution of society, have
practiced it, but yourself must acknowledge, without success.
All we ask then is, that you abandon an experiment which
has for five or six thousand years been progressing under all
the variety of forms which cruel ingenuity could invent, and
which in all ages, under all governments, has been found
wanting. You have been obliged reluctantly to confess that
it is inefficient, and to abandon it in minor offences ; what
charm has it then, which makes you cling to it in those of a
graver cast? You have made your experiment; it was at
tended in its operation with an incalculable waste of human
life ; a deplorable degradation of human intellect ; it was found
often fatal to the innocent, and it very frequently permitted the
guilty to escape. Nor can you complain of any unseasonable
interferference with your plan, that may account for its failure ;
during the centuries that your system has been in operation,
humanity and justice have never interrupted its course ; you
went on in the work of destruction, always seeing an increase
of crime, and always supposing that increased severity was
the only remedy to suppress it ; the mere forfeiture of life was
too mild ; tortures were superadded, which nothing but the in
telligence of a fiend could invent, to prolong its duration and
increase its torments ; yet there was no diminution of crime,
and it never occurred to you, that mildness might accomplish
that which could not be effected by severity." This great
truth revealed itself to philosophers, who imparted it to the

606 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.
people ; the strength of popular opinion at length forced it on
Kings, and the work of reformation, in spite of the cry against
its novelty, began. It has been progressive. Why should it
stop, when every argument, every fact, promises its complete
success ? We could not concur in the early stages of this re
formation ; perhaps the credit may be reserved to us of com
pleting it.* ?Livingston's Ileport to the Legislature of Louisiana.

00873 6457 !?