MIRROR 
 
 OF 
 
 MODERN DEMOCRACY: 
 
 A 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 DEMOCRATIC PAETY, 
 
 FROM ITS ORGANIZATION IN 1825, TO ITS LAST GREAT 
 ACHIEVEMENT, 
 
 THE REBELLION OF 1861. 
 
 TO WHICH IS PREFIXED A SKETCH OF 
 
 THE OLD FEDERAL AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES. 
 
 BY WILLIAM D. JONES. 
 
 pu-ftelt; 
 
 N. C. MILLER, 3 PARK ROW 
 1864. 
 
 
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1SC3, by 
 N . C . MILLER, 
 
 In the Clerk s Office of the District Conrt of the United States, for 
 the Southen) District of New York. 
 
 J. J. KEEP, Printer nnd Stereotyper, 
 43 Centre Street. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 THE design of this work is to expose a mischievous 
 delusion. 
 
 Nearly forty years ago was formed a political party, styled 
 by its projectors and leaders, " The Democratic Party." Un 
 der faithless pledges of reform it came into power, and, with 
 the exception of a few brief intervals, has since had control of 
 the Government. During its rule incalculable, injury has been 
 inflicted upon the country. The currency has been repeatedly 
 deranged ; these derangements having been attended with 
 their natural concomitants, financial embarrassments, commer 
 cial revulsions, and bank suspensions ; the national industry 
 has been several times prostrated, and the general prosperity 
 interrupted ; the constitutional rights of citizens have been 
 infringed ; the faith of treaties has been violated ; free terri 
 tory has been conquered in aggressive wars, consigned to 
 Slavery, and annexed to the Union ; political heresies have 
 been propagated ; and corruption has, to an alarming extent, 
 been introduced into the Government. These are a part of a 
 long succession of evils which has marked the career of this 
 party, and which at length culminated in this Rebellion. All 
 this has been done in the abused name of Democracy, to which 
 this party lays exclusive claim. It was defeated in the con- 
 
 M130114 
 
PBEFACE. 
 
 test of 1860; and after having involved the nation in a most 
 calamitous civil war, it is again making its appeals to the peo 
 ple for a restoration to power. 
 
 To strip from this party the guise under which it has per 
 petrated its evil deeds,, and is endeavoring to regain political 
 ascendency, would he doing the country an invaluable service. 
 And if this effort should aid any considerable number in in 
 vestigating the claims of Modern Democracy, or remove the 
 scales from the eyes of but a few of its blind devotees, the la 
 bor will not be regretted. 
 
 The present is a favorable time for the dissemination of 
 political truth. The faith of many in the infallibility of parties 
 is giving way ; party attachments are relaxing ; and many 
 who have been deterred from investigation by the force 
 of prejudice, are beginning to manifest a disposition for can 
 did inquiry. 
 
 The original design of the writer was simply an exposure of 
 the real character of the Democratic party, and its agency in 
 the present Rebellion. But as it claims paternity in Thomas 
 Jefferson, it was deemed proper to precede the main history by 
 a sketch of the old Federal and Republican parties. And to 
 render the work still more valuable, it has been made to pre 
 sent the leading measures of every administration under the 
 present Constitution. This enlargement of the original plan 
 was in a measure induced by the facility afforded for the 
 performance of the additional labor, by the somewhat freo 
 use of the American Statesman,* granted by its obliging 
 publisher. 
 
 * A work which I will take occasion here gratuitously, and 
 without solicitation, to commend to every American citizen 
 who wishes to procure a complete and impartial political his 
 tory of the United States, at the least possible cost. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The author has not intentionally done injustice to any parly 
 or individual. Nor has he condemned, indiscriminately, the 
 acts of the Democratic party, or impugned the mofives of the 
 mass of its members, or even of a majority of its leaders ; 
 many of whom, doubtless, have supported its most impolitic 
 measures in good faith. But that, on the whole, its rule has 
 been disastrous to the country, he fully believes. 
 
 Nor has this work been written to gratify a vindictive feel 
 ing toward political opponents. It has been prompted solely 
 by a sense of duty arising from the conviction, that the re- 
 establishment of the Democratic party in power, would be a 
 calamity second only to the success of the Rebellion. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 HISTORY OF THE FEDERAL AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 FROM THE FORMATION OF THE CONSTITUTION TO THE CLOSE OF WASHING 
 TON S ADMINISTRATION. 
 
 Origin of the First Parties, 13-17. The Confederation, 14, 15. History of the 
 Constitution, 15-18. Madison proposes a Tariff, 18. Executive Departments 
 organized. 19. Washington s Cabinet,19. Judiciary established, 19. Provision 
 to pay the Public Debt, 19, 20. Whisky Insurrection, 20. Bank established, 
 21. Relations with France and Great Britain, 21-23. Proclamation of Neu 
 trality, 22. Genet, the French Minister, at Charleston, 22 ; at Philadelphia, 
 23 ; recalled, 23. Jay s mission to England, 24 ; his instructions, 24. Brit- 
 ish orders, 22-24. The Jay Treaty, 25-27. Opposed in the House, 26. Op 
 position to Washington, 29. Election of John Adams, 29. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN ADAMS. 
 
 Inauguration of John Adam?, 29. French troubles increase, 29, 30. Negotia 
 tion attempted, 30, 31. Non-intercourse and War measures, 31. Washing 
 ton to command the Army, 31. Alien and Sedition Laws, 31, 33. Virginia 
 and Kentucky Resolutions, 33-35. Dissension in the Federal Party. 35-37. 
 New Mission to France, 35-37. Treaty negotiated, 38 ; ratified, 39. Na 
 turalization and Judiciary Acts altered, 39. Election of Jefferson, 39, 40. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 ADMINISTRATIONS OF JEFFER30N, MADISON AND MONROE. 
 
 Inauguration of Jefferson, 40. Adams appointments reversed ; Duties on 
 Stills, &c.. repealed, 42. Purchase of Louisiana, 42, 43. Territory divided ; 
 Power of Congress over Slavery, 43. " Gunboat System," 43, 44. Commer 
 cial troubles with Great Britain, 44-46. Imprisonment of Seamen, 44, 47. 
 British Orders in Council, and French Decrees, 44, 43. Embargo Act, 45. 
 Letters suppressed by Jefferson, 45. Embargo repealed by Non-intercourso 
 Act, 46. French Decrees repealed, 46, 47. War declared against Great 
 Britain ; opposed by Federalists, 47. British Orders Revoked, 47. Impress- 
 
Vlll CONTENTS. 
 
 mcnt, 47, 43. Ee-clcction of Madison over Clinton ; Peace with Great 
 Britain, 48. New Bank chartered, 48-50. Tariff Act of 1816, 50-52. Mon 
 roe elected ; Federal Party disbanded, 52, 53. Presidential Nominations ; 
 Caucus System unpopular, 53. End of Old Parties, 54. 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 
 
 Inauguration of Adams, 55. Alleged Coalition, 55, 56. Democratic Party 
 formed, 57. Opposition Measures, 57, 58. Panama Mission, 58-61. Con 
 troversy with Georgia, 61-63. Removal of Publishers of Laws, 63. " Coali 
 tion 1 again, 63-65. Tariff of 1828, 65-67. Minimum explained, 65, 66. 
 Chilton s Retrenchment Resolutions, 67-69. Anti-Slavery Petition, 69. 
 Georgia and South Carolina protest against the Tariff, 69, 70. Election of 
 Gen. Jackson, 70. Remark* on the Election ; Causes of Adams Defeat, 
 70-72. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF JACKSON FIRST TERM. 
 
 Inauguration of Jackson ; Hia Cabinet, 73. Jackson s political Principles, 73- 
 75. His Removals and Appointments, 75-77. Ilis Attack upon the U. S. 
 Bank, 77. Reports on the Bnnk in Congress, 78. Internal Improvement 
 Vetoes, 78. Indian Policy, 78-81. The Creeks, 78, 79. Choctaws, 79. 
 Cherokees, 79-81. Imprisonment of Missionaries, 81. Nullification in Georgia 
 and South Carolina contrasted, 81. West India Trade, 81-84. McLane ap 
 pointed Secretary of the Treasury, 84. Rejection of Van Buren as Minister 
 to England ; New York politics vindicated by Marcy, 84-85. Nullification 
 Hayne and Webster, 85, 86. Tariff of 1832, 86. Reduction proposed by 
 Verplanck and McDuffie, 86, 87. South Carolina nullifies ; Jackson s Pro 
 clamation, 87. "Force Bill" passed, 87, 88. Virginia mediates; Clay s 
 Compromise Tariff, 88. South Carolina repeals her Nullification Ordinance, 
 89. Was Jackson a Nullifier ? 89, 90. More Vetoes, 91. Clay s Land Bill 
 vetoed, 91, 92. Bank applies to be re-chartered; Bill vetoed, 92, 93. 
 President censured. 93. Bank Investigation, 93-95. Jackson re-elected. 
 95, 96. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF JACKSON SECOND TERM. 
 
 Removal of the Deposits, 97-99. SUte of the Bank examined, 97-99. Reasons 
 for Removal. 98. Duane refuses, and is removed ; Taney appointed ; Bank 
 vindicated by the Directors, 99. Attempt to break the Bank ; the Effects, 
 100, 101. Removal condemned; Clay s Resolutions, 101. Benton a Ex 
 punging Resolution, 102. Anti-Slavery Societies ; opposed North and South, 
 i03, 104. Anti-Slavery papers excluded from Mails; recommended by tho 
 
CONTERTS. IX 
 
 President, 104, 105. Calhoun s Bill ; Van Burcn s Casting Vote, 105, 
 106. Tendency of Democracy to Slavery, 107. Abolition Petitions ; Calhoun 
 threatens secession, 108. Benton against Abolition Societies, 109. Derange 
 ment of the Currency ; War upon Bank Paper, 109. Specie Circular; In 
 crease of Bank Paper, 110. Besolution and Bill to rescind the Specie Order ; 
 vetoed, 110,111. Michigan and Arkansas admitted, 111-113. Distribution 
 of the surplus Revenue, 113. Independence of Texas Recognized, 113-115. 
 Difficulty with Mexico, 115. Election of Van Buren, 115, 116. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF VAN BUREN. 
 
 Inauguration of Van Buren; his Pledges for Slavery, 117. Severe Money 
 Pressure and Bank Suspension: Extra Session of Congress called, 118. 
 Fourth Installment of the Surplus Revenue withheld; Sub-Treasury and 
 other bills, 119. Democrats abandon the administration ; Origin of the Sub- 
 Treasury, 119, 120. Again recommended, and defeated, 120, 121. Senate 
 Debate on Election Results ; Talhnadge s Speech, Loco-focos, &c., 121-123, 
 Calhoun re-unites with the Democrats ; Specie Circular repealed, 123. An 
 nexation of Texas ; Proposition withdrawn, 124, 125. Atherton s " Gag Re 
 solutions," 125. Case of the Spanish Schooner Amistad, 125-127. New Jer 
 sey contested election in Congress, and Election of Speaker, 127-129. State 
 of the Country ; Election of Harrison and Tyler, 130, 131. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF HARRISON AND TYLER. 
 
 Inauguration of Harrison ; he calls a special Session of Congress ; dies ; Tyler 
 inaugurated, 132. Meeting of Congress ; Sub-Trensury repealed ; Default 
 ers, 133; Tyler vetoes two Bank Bills; Cabinet Officers resign; Distribu 
 tion Act passed ; Annual Message, 133, 134. Tariff Act of 1842 passed, 135, 
 136. West India Trade, 138. Tyler claimed by the South; Anti-Slavery 
 Petitions, 137. Attempt to censure Adams, 138. Giddings presents Peti 
 tions and Resolutions, is censured, resigns, and is re-elected, 139, 140. Texas 
 Question; Treaty rejected ; Benton s Speech, 140 142. Letters of Clay and 
 Van Buren on Annexation of Texas, 143, 144. Nomination of Clay and Polk, 
 145. Northern Democrats abandon their Principles, 145, 146. Effects of the 
 Tariff of 1842, 146, 147. Folk s Letter to Kane on the Tariff, 147, 148. 
 Clay s Southern Letter ; Election of Polk, 148. Annexation of Texas, 148- 
 150. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF POLK. 
 
 Inauguration of Polk ; his Cabinet, 151. Protest of Mexico; Mexican Propo 
 sition to Texas ; Polk orders our Army to Texas; Negotiation with Mexico 
 attempted, 152. Gen. Taylor ordered to the Rio Grande, 152, 153. Hostili- 
 
X CONTENTS. 
 
 ties provoked ; War Mensnre in Congress, 153. Polk asks Money to Noo-oti- 
 ato Pence, 154. Wilmot Proviso, 154, I5b. Calhoun and Benton on the 
 War, 155, 156. Clayton s Expose, 156, 157. Corwin a Course, 157. Cha 
 racter of the War, 157, 158. Oregon Question Trouble with Great Britain, 
 153-160. Benton denies our Claim to 54 deg. 40 min., 160. Question set 
 tled, 160, 161. Tariff of 1846, and its Effects, 161, 162. Sub-Treasury es 
 tablished, 162. Territorial Government of Oregon, 162-164. Attempt to or 
 ganize New Mexico and California, 164. National Nominating Conventions 
 of 1848; Views of Candidates ; Election of Taylor and Fillinore, 164,165. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF TAYLOR AND FILLMORE. 
 
 Inauguration of Taylor; his Cabinet ; Message, 166. Compromise Measures of 
 1850, 167. 168. Death of President Tajlor ; Fillinore succeeds his Cabinet, 
 168. Webster and Filhnore change on the Slavery Question, 168-170. Op 
 position to Taylor; Filhnore s Policy, 170, 171. Seward and Taylor, 171. 
 Defection of Filhnore and his Friends; Silver Gray Party; Fillmore g al 
 leged Pledge to the South, 171, 172. Probable Cause of Opposition to Taylor, 
 172, 173. Nominations of Pierce and Scott; Democratic a:;d Whig Plat 
 forms, 173, 174. Election of Pierce, 174. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF TIERCE. 
 
 Inauguration of Pierce ; his Declarations againet Slavery Agitation, 175. Kan 
 sas-Nebraska Bill repealing Missouri Compromise Non-intervention, 175- 
 177. Chase s Speech, 176. Who are the Agitators? 176. 177. Passage of 
 the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, 177. Opposition to Anti-Slavery Settlers in Kan 
 sas ; Illegal Voting; Territorial Pro-Slavery Laws, 177, 178. Topcka Con 
 stitution ; President s Message, 179. Douglas Report. 179, 180. Grow a 
 Bill for the Admission of Knnsas ; Dunn s Substitute, 180. Republican Party 
 formed, 180. Cincinnati Convention Nominates Buchanan and liieokenridgo ; 
 Platform, 180-182. Republicans nominate Fremont and Dayton; Platform, 
 182. Buchanan elected, 183. Congress meets ; Pierce s hist Message, 183. 
 Grow s Bill to annul Kansas Laws ; Kansas under Gov. Geary, 184. Topeka 
 Legislature broken up ; Territorial Legislature meets, 184. Constitutional 
 Convention authorized ; Gov. Geary resigns, 184, 185. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OP BUCHANAN. 
 
 Inauguration of Buchanan ; Squatter Sovereignty superseded, 186. Drod Scott 
 Decision, 187, 183. Walker appointed Governor of Kansas, 188. Free 
 State Legislature and Congressman elected, 188, 189. Lecompton Swindle; 
 approved by Buchanan, 189, 190. Secretary Stanton removed, and Denver 
 
CONTENTS. XI 
 
 appointed ; Gov. Walker resigns, 190. Popular Votes on Lecompton Consti 
 tution ; Election Frauds ; Escape of Calhoun, 190. Constitution presented to 
 Congress; Bill for Admission reported, 191. Land Grant Proposition reject 
 ed, 191, 192. President s Message, 192. Oregon admitted, 192. Gov. Den 
 ver resigns, and Medary is appointed ; Acts to repeal the " Bogus Laws," 
 and to submit the Question of a new Convention, 192. Bill to abolish Slavery 
 passed; defeated by Gov. Medary, 192. The People vote for the Constitu 
 tional Convention at Wyandot ; Constitution prohibitinz Slavery formed and 
 adopted, 192, 193. President s Message, Dec., 1859 ; Kansas again rejected, 
 193. Homestead Bill, 193-197. Davis Resolutions, 197, 198. Presidential 
 Nominations, Platforms, and Campaign, of 1860, 198-203. Votes for Presi 
 dent, 203. Evidences of long meditated Secession, 203-209. Buchanan s 
 Delinquency ; Cass resigns ; Scott s Advice, 209. Buchanan s last Message, 
 210,211. Remarks on " Sectionalism," 211-214. Fillmore s Albany Speech 
 in 1856, 213. "Sugar Plum" Policy; South Carolina secedes, 214. Cabi 
 net Changes, 214, 215. Trencher} of Gen. Twiggs, 215 Crittenden s Com 
 promise Propositions, 215, 216. The Southern Confederacy, 216. Virginia 
 and the Peace Convention, 216-218. Retirement of Buchanan, 218. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF LINCOLN. 
 
 Inauguration of Lincoln, nnd Address, 219. His Cabinet, 220. Assault on 
 Fort Sumter ; Star of the West ; Call for Troops ; Response, 220, 221. Seceding 
 States ; Traitors and Spies, 221 Congress meets in special Session ; Message, 
 222-224. War .Measures, 224,226. Capture of Mason and Slidell, 225. 
 Meeting of Congress ; Message ; Confiscation, 226. Slavery prohibited ; 
 abolk-hed in District of Columbia, 227. Proclamation of Emancipation, 227. 
 Adams and Patrick Henry s Opinions, 227-229. Meeting of Governors, 229. 
 Congress meets, Dec., 1862 ; Lincoln s Plan of Emancipation, 229, 230. Col 
 ored Soldiers; Western Virginia admitted, 230. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. ^ 
 
 PARTIES CONTRASTED. THE DEMOCRATIC TARTY THE PARTY OF THE RE 
 BELLION. 
 
 Who caused the Rebellion ? 231. Jefferson and others on Slavery, 231-234. 
 Action of Congress on Slavery in Territories, 235. Anti-Slavery Sentiment 
 in the States, 235-237. Republican Party conservative, 237, 238. Anti- 
 Slavery Apostates ; Fillmore in 18-14, 238, 239.. Character of the Democratic 
 Party, 239-241. The Democracy on Protection, 241 ; Subservient to the 
 
 Democratic Party allied to Secession, 245. New York and Albany Secession 
 Meetings; Speeches of Governor Seymour and Thiyer, 2^5-249. Philadel 
 phia Meeting, 249. Fall of Sumter; transient Patriotism, 250. Maine 
 Democracy, 250, 251. Vallandigham, 251. Iho two Seymours ; Connecti- 
 
Xll CONTEXTS. 
 
 cut Sej-mour s Secession Letter, 251, 252. The Democratic Party Embarrasses 
 tho Government, 253. Resolutions of Illinois nnd Indinna Legislatures, 254. 
 Drafting opposed by the Democrats ; Riots in New York, 254, 255. Governor 
 Fe.ymour and the Draft; his Correspondence with Gen. Due, 256, 257. Ex- 
 President Pierce s Secession Letter, 257-259. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Objects of the Democratic Leaders, 260, 261. Ho\r the Enemy of Freedom 
 Sham Democracy is to be vanquished. 261. Overthrow of Slavery essential 
 to Peace ; The Effects of ita Abolition, 262. 
 
DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE FEDERAL AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES. 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 History of Political Parties to the close of Washington s Administration, 
 
 THE date of a party organization has often a controlling 
 influence upon the political conduct of men. They imagine 
 themselves right in politics, because they have adopted 
 the opinions and long followed the lead of certain states 
 men and politicians. There are multitudes who, after all 
 the changes of parties during the last fifty years, boast 
 that they are in the regular line of the great party of 
 which Jefferson was the head and leader. They profess to 
 be the disciples of this great " Apostle of Liberty," while 
 they can not tell what were the principles he taught, or 
 the measures of public policy upon which the first two 
 great parties were divided. 
 
 It is designed, before proceeding to the main object of 
 this work, to present a true sketch of the Federal and 
 Republican parties, which, though brief, will, it is believed, 
 furnish the necessary assistance to those who desire to 
 trace their political pedigree, and to test the claims of 
 Modern Democracy. 
 
 These parties, as is well known, originated in the Con 
 vention that framed the Constitution of the United States. 
 It is known, also, by every reader at all acquainted with 
 our political history, that the States, prior to the Revolu 
 tion, had no political connection ; and that, for the more 
 effective prosecution of the war of independence, a union 
 of the States was formed. In 1777, the year after the 
 
Li 
 
 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Declaration of Independence, Articles of Union were drawn 
 up by the Congress, and submitted to the several States 
 for adoption. They were styled, " Articles of Confedera 
 tion and perpetual Union between the States of New 
 Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, 
 New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Mary 
 land, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and 
 Georgia/ 7 These Articles were to go into effect win n 
 ratified by the Legislatures of all the States. But so slow 
 were some of the States in adopting them, that the last 
 State, (Maryland,) (id not send in her ratification until 
 March, 1781. 
 
 This Union was simply a league, or confederation of inde 
 pendent States. One of the articles expressly declared, 
 "each State retains its sovereignty, freedom,, and inde 
 pendence." The States were equal. Each State was; 
 entitled to any number of delegates in the Congress, not 
 exceeding seven. Votes in that body were taken by 
 States, each State having one vote, which was determined 
 by a majority of its delegates. No State was entitled to a 
 vote unless at least two of its delegates were present ; nor 
 when its delegates were equally divided. 
 
 Although the Confederation was called a Government, it 
 had scarcely one of the essential attributes of a govern 
 ment. It had neither an Executive nor a Judicial depart 
 ment. Its grand defect was its inherent weakness. The 
 power to execute the laws was wholly wanting. There 
 being no national Judiciary, all suits must be tried in 
 State courts. Indeed, the Government did not operate 
 directly upon individuals ; and as no person could be 
 answerable to it, there was no need of national courts. 
 There was a Legislature consisting of a single body of 
 men, called Congress ; but it did not possess the ordinary 
 powers of legislation. As it had not the power to carry its 
 own requisitions into effect, it possessed little more than 
 an advisory power. It belonged to Congress to call upon 
 the States, from time to time, to furnish their respective 
 quotas of men and money to carry on the war ; but it had 
 not the power to compel a State to raise a man or a dol 
 lar for this purpose. It could and did borrow money on its 
 own credit j bnt it had no power to make any effectual 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 15 
 
 provisions for its repayment ; the power of taxation being 
 possessed exclusively by the States. Hence, this govern 
 ment was wholly dependent upon the good will of thirteen 
 independent State Governments. 
 
 Another very important power of which the Confedera 
 tion was destitute, was the power to regulate trade. The 
 necessity of this power was, in fact, the more immediate 
 cause of calling the Convention that framed the Constitu 
 tion. The colonists had for more than a hundred years 
 suffered severely from the acts of the British Parliament 
 designed to secure a monopoly of trade. By the navigation 
 acts of 1651 and lt>63, foreign vessels were not allowed to 
 participate in the carrying trade between Great Britain 
 and other countries. Acts were passed also to secure the 
 sale of her own manufactures. Some of the most necessary 
 articles the colonists were not allowed to manufacture for 
 themselves, under severe penalties. In short, her policy 
 was such as to compel the people of the Colonies to soil to 
 the mother country their raw materials and all other pro 
 ducts which it was for her interest to buy, and to take in 
 exchange her manufactures and whatever else she had to 
 sell. These acts, and the oppressive duties laid from time 
 to time upon the productions of the Colonies, were among 
 the principal grievances which led to the Revolution. 
 
 During the war, intercourse between the two countries 
 was suspended. But when, on the return of peace, com 
 mercial intercourse was resumed, the effects of the British 
 policy began to be again severely felt. The country was 
 tlooded with British goods, and drained of its money to pay 
 for them. Relief might have been obtained by counter 
 vailing duties upon British goods and vessels ; but Con 
 gress had not the power thus to regulate commerce : this 
 po\ver, too, belonged to the States. To be effectual, the 
 duties levied in the different States must be uniform ; but 
 the States were unable to agree upon a uniform system of 
 duties. What was deemed for the interest of one State, 
 might be injurious to others : hence, conflicting regulations 
 were adopted ; the spirit of rivalry and jealousy which led 
 to this retaliatory legislation arose to such a pitch as 
 seriously to threaten the safety of the Union. 
 
 A meeting was at length proposed, to consist of commis- 
 
16 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 sioncrs of the several States, with a view to some satisfac 
 tory arrangement. The meeting was held at Annapolis, 
 in Maryland, in September, 1786. But as only five States 
 were represented, no arrangement was attempted. The 
 commissioners, however, united in recommending a gener 1 
 convention of delegates from all the States, and expressed 
 the opinion that, as there were numerous defects in the 
 Federal Government, the powers of the deputies should bo 
 extended to other objects than those of commerce. The 
 Convention was accordingly called by Congress, to meet at 
 Philadelphia on the 2d Monday of June, 1787. 
 
 Very soon after the Convention was organized, an im 
 portant difference of opinion began to appear. Two plans 
 of government were presented ; one by Edmund Randolph, 
 of Virginia, the other by William Patterson, of New Jersey. 
 A resolution also was offered, declaring, "That a National 
 Government ought to be established, consisting of a 
 supreme Legislative, Judiciary, and Executive." As this 
 resolution proposed a radical change in the system of gov 
 ernment, it met with strong opposition. Delegates were 
 opposed to changing the Confederation of independent, 
 sovereign States to a consolidated National Government. 
 The Convention, they contended, had been called, not to 
 alter the plan of government, but simply to confer upon 
 Congress certain necessary powers which it did not 
 possess. 
 
 To this it was replied, that other alterations had been 
 contemplated that some of the States had expressly sug 
 gested " the establishing of a firm national government," and 
 to make such alterations as should " render the Constitu 
 tion adequate to the exigencies of government and the 
 preservation of the Union." Besides, as no plan that might 
 be adopted by the Convention could be binding until rati 
 fied by their constituents, the Convention might propose 
 any changes which were deemed conducive to the general 
 welfare of the Union. 
 
 The debate upon this resolution became highly animated. 
 Indeed, to such a height wero the feelings of members 
 raised, that the Convention was on the point of being 
 br.oken up. The resolution was at length adopted ; and 
 the plan of a Constitution presented by Mr. Randolph, 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 17 
 
 which, being more in accordance with that contemplated 
 by the resolution, was taken as the basis of action by the 
 Convention. 
 
 Defeated in their opposition to the resolution proposing 
 a change in the plan of government, some members of the 
 minority left the Convention long before its close, and re 
 turned to their homes. Others remained, in the hope, 
 doubtless, of being able to restrain, in some measure, the 
 action of the majority. Hence, the minority, being in favor 
 of preserving the then existing Confederation, or Federal 
 Union, the union of sovereign, independent States on the 
 principle of State equality, were in the Convention called 
 "Federalists;" and the majority, being opposed to a simple 
 Confederation of States, and in favor of a complete Govern 
 ment possessing more of a national character, and more 
 ample powers, were called Anti- Federalists. [See Luther 
 Martin s Report to the Legislature of Maryland, in Elliot s 
 Delates. ] Afterward, while the proposed Constitution was 
 before the people of the States for ratification, its friends, 
 the Anti-Federalists, urged, as a reason for its adoption, 
 that the States could not be held together by the Articles 
 of Confederation ; and that there was no hope of preserv 
 ing the Union, but by the adoption of the Constitution. 
 Hence they then took the name of Federalists, by which 
 name one of the two great political parties was distin 
 guished, until its dissolution after the election of Mr. 
 Monroe. 
 
 In the State Conventions which ratified the Constitution, 
 the same difference of sentiment prevailed. One party 
 favored the granting of ample powers to the General Gov 
 ernment ; the other contended for the rights of the States, 
 apprehensive that too much power was to be surrendered 
 to the Federal Government, which might in time " swallow- 
 up" the State Governments. Such was the jealousy for 
 State rights, that some of the State Conventions, though 
 they ratified the Constitution, recommended to Congress 
 sundry amendments to be proposed to the several States 
 in the way provided by the Constitution. These amend 
 ments were generally in the nature of the bills of rights 
 annexed to our State Constitutions. As the General Gov 
 ernment possesses no powers but such as are granted by 
 
18 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the Constitution, these express guaranties were unncces 
 sary, and were added mainly to prevent misconstruction or 
 abuse of constitutional powers. They are contained in the 
 first ten articles of amendment. 
 
 Among the leading Federalists of that day, were Gen. 
 Washington, James Madison, and John Marshall, of Va. ; 
 Itufus King and John Adams, of Mass. ; Alexander Hamil 
 ton and John Jay, of N. Y. ; Gouverneur Morris, of Pa. ; 
 Charles Pincknoy and Charles C. Pinckney, of S. C ; all of 
 whom, except Marshall, Adams and Jay, had been members 
 of the Convention. [Mr. King subsequently became a citi 
 zen of the State of New York.] 
 
 Notwithstanding the division of sentiment which has 
 been noticed, there were not as yet, nor for many years 
 afterwards, distinct, organized political parties. And 
 General Washington, though acting with the friends of the 
 Constitution in the Convention, was elected President with 
 out opposition. The leading measures of his administra 
 tion, however, met with a strong opposition from those who 
 were opposed to the Federalists. 
 
 The 1st Congress met in New York on the 4th of March, 
 1789 ; but a quorum of both Houses did not attend until 
 the 6th of March. On counting the electoral votes, it ap 
 peared that Gen. Washington was unanimously elected 
 President, and that John Adams was, by the next highest 
 number of votes, elected Vice-President. On the 30th of 
 April, the President took the oatb of office. 
 
 Great public rejoicings had taken place on the adoption 
 of the Constitution by mechanics and manufacturers in 
 sundry places, because Congress had now the power to 
 regulate commerce with foreign nations by protecting du 
 ties. Scarcely had Congress commenced its deliberations, 
 before petitions were received from Baltimore, Charleston, 
 New York, Boston, and other places, for the exercise of 
 this power for the encouragement of domestic manufactures. 
 When the first of these petitions was received, Mr. Madi 
 son had already brought forward the subject of the revenue 
 83 T stem ; and the first act passed by Congress, excepting 
 only the law prescribing the oaths of office, was an act, the 
 objects of which were declared in the preamble to be, " the 
 support of the Government, the discharge of the debts of 
 
n 
 
 EARLY PARTIES. 19 
 
 the United States, and the encouragement and protection of 
 domestic manufactures, by duties on goods, wares, arid 
 merchandises imported." By this act, discriminating duties 
 \vere laid upon both foreign goods and foreign vessels. 
 
 At this session the auxiliary Executive Departments 
 were reorganized and adapted to the new Government. 
 The question arose, whether the concurrence of the Senate 
 was necessary in the removal of officers as in their appoint 
 ment. The opinion of the writers of the Federalist was, 
 that the consent of the Senate \vould be necessary " to dis 
 place as well as to appoint." This construction was sup 
 ported by Mr. Sherman and Mr Gerry, who had been mem 
 bers of the Constitutional Convention, and opposed by Mr. 
 Madison and Mr. Baldwin, who also had been members of 
 the Convention. The latter view prevailed by a vote of 
 34 to 20. 
 
 Mr. Jefferson was appointed Secretary of State ; Mr. 
 Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury ; Gen. Knox of Mass., 
 Secretary of War ; and Edmund Randolph, Attorney- 
 General. 
 
 The Judiciary Department also was established at this 
 session. 
 
 Congress, having adjourned on the 29th of September, 
 to meet again on the 1st Monday of January, 1790, met 
 accordingly. Among the objects recommended by the 
 President, were those of "promoting manufactures," and 
 making " adequate provision for the support of the public 
 credit." The latter was the great measure of the session. 
 The Secretary of the Treasury, having been directed at the 
 preceding session to prepare a plan, reported one ac 
 cordingly. 
 
 The public credit had become so depressed, that Govern 
 ment paper had been sold for one-sixth to one-eighth of its 
 nominal value. Issues of this " Continental money," as it 
 was called, having been made to the amount of nearly 300 
 millions of dollars, it was not an easy task to maintain the 
 honor and retrieve the credit of the nation, and do perfect 
 justice to all the public creditors. 
 
 The Secretary recommended that the foreign debt should 
 be fully paid ; and in respect to the domestic debt, that no 
 discrimination should be made between original holders of 
 
20 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the public securities and present possessors by purchase ; 
 nor between creditors of the Union and those of the States. 
 As the chief part of the debts of the States had been con 
 tracted on account of the Union, the same ought to be as 
 sumed by the Union. And he recommended that the debt 
 be funded. The provision of a permanent fund for its pay 
 ment would establish the public credit, and enable the 
 Government, in any emergency, to procure means to sup 
 ply the public necessity. It would prevent the fluctuation 
 and insecurity of an unfunded debt. The debt properly 
 funded would serve most purposes of money ; and the capi 
 tal thus created " would invigorate all the operations of 
 agriculture, manufactures, and commerce." 
 
 In the measures of finance founded on this Report, orig 
 inated the first regular and systematic opposition to Wash 
 ington s administration. Mr. Madison, who, in convention, 
 and for some time afterward, had been one of those called 
 " Federalists," now joined the opposition. Some were op 
 posed to funding systems generally. But the assumption 
 of the State debts was a special object of denunciation. 
 Such was the opposition to the financial measures gener 
 ally, that resolutions denouncing them were passed by 
 the Legislatures of Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and 
 North Carolina. The plan of the Secretary was in the 
 main adopted. Of the debts of the States, estimated at 
 about $25,000,000, the sum of $21,500,000 was assumed in 
 specific sums from the several States. 
 
 The opposition to these measures was to some extent 
 increased by an act passed at the next session, (1790-1791,) 
 in conformity to a report of the Secretary, recommending 
 an increase of duties on imported wines, spirits, tea and 
 coffee, and a duty on home distilled spirits. The proposed 
 duty on domestic distilled spirits was vehemently opposed, 
 especially by Southern and Western members, the popula 
 tion in that section being to a less extent the consumers of 
 foreign goods. 
 
 It was this tax on domestic spirits which caused what 
 was called the " Whisky insurrection," in Western Penn 
 sylvania. An organized opposition to the law having been 
 formed, Congress passed an act authorizing the President 
 to call out the militia to aid in enforcing the laws. The 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 21 
 
 insurrection having at length assumed an alarming aspect, 
 the President, in the summer of 1794, ordered a military 
 force to be raised of 15,000 men, by which the insurrection 
 was quelled, almost without bloodshed. 
 
 But the most prominent financial measure of the session 
 at which this tax law was enacted, (1790-1791,) was the 
 establishment of a National Bank. This, too, had been 
 recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury, and sup 
 ported by various arguments. The Bank bill was opposed 
 by the same party as that which had opposed other meas 
 ures of the administration. Its leading opponent was Mr. 
 Madison. The bill passed the House, 39 to 20. All who 
 voted against the bill, except one, were from the States of 
 Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and 
 Georgia. All present from the other States, except one 
 from Massachusetts, voted in the affirmative, with two 
 from Maryland, two from North Carolina, and one from 
 South Carolina. The President obtained the written opin 
 ions of the- members of his Cabinet as to the constitution 
 ality of the bill. They were equally divided, Hamilton 
 and Knox affirming its constitutionality, and Jefferson and 
 Randolph being of the contrary opinion. After mature de 
 liberation, the President signed the bill. 
 
 Washington s foreign policy encountered scarcely less 
 opposition than his domestic. The revolution in France, 
 which commenced about the time when our Government 
 under the Constitution was organized, was followed by a 
 general war in Europe. Several European Powers had 
 combined against France ; and the latter had made a for 
 mal declaration of war against Great Britain and Holland. 
 It now became a question, What course should the United 
 States pursue towards the new Government of France ? 
 During our Revolution, an alliance had been formed with 
 that nation, which had rendered us aid in our contest with 
 Great Britain ; and a large portion of the American people 
 were now disposed to reciprocate the favor. 
 
 The President, though sympathizing with France, desired 
 to maintain a neutral position, provided it should be deter 
 mined that such a course was consistent with our treaties 
 with that country. He therefore submitted a series of 
 questions to the Cabinet, then consisting of four members. 
 
22 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 One of these questions was, Shall a proclamation be issued 
 enjoining non-interference by our citizens in the war be 
 tween Great Britain and France ? Another, Shall a minis 
 ter from the French Republic be received ? The members 
 were unanimous in favor of a proclamation of neutrality, 
 and of receiving a Minister. The Secretaries of the Treasury 
 and of War, (Hamilton and Knox,) however, advised the 
 reception of a Minister with a qualification ; it being doubt 
 ful whether the new Government of France had been 
 established by the general consent of the nation. The 
 Secretary of State and Attorney-General, (Jefferson and 
 Randolph,) favored the reception without qualification. 
 The change of Government, they thought, did not absolve 
 us from the obligation of preexisting treaties. In accord 
 ance with this view, the President decided to receive the 
 French Minister. 
 
 The grounds upon which the proclamation of neutrality 
 was justified, were, first, that in the condition of France, as 
 it then was, the United States could not become involved 
 in the war without endangering their own safety ; and 
 secondly, that our obligations held only in case of a defen 
 sive war ; whereas the present war had been commenced 
 by France. These were the opinions of the two Secretaries 
 first mentioned. The other two deemed it unnecessary 
 then to decide this question. The proclamation was issued 
 on the 22d of April, 1793. For this act, unanimously ad 
 vised by the Cabinet, the President was severely censured 
 by his political opponents. It was considered as evidence 
 of hostility towards France. 
 
 The new French Minister had arrived at Charleston on 
 the 8th of April, and commenced enlisting American citi 
 zens and fitting out vessels of war, by which British com 
 merce was annoyed, and a British vessel actually captured 
 in our waters. Yet, in these and other similar unlawful 
 acts, he was sustained by a powerful party and its presses. 
 He was told that the people would sustain him. Tims en 
 couraged, he persisted in his warfare against the Govern 
 ment. A large number of British vessels, some of them 
 within the jurisdiction of the United States, were captured 
 by vessels fitted out by Genet, and acting under his au 
 thority. After a brief stay at Charleston, he proceeded to 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 23 
 
 the seat of Government, (Philadelphia,) where he was 
 received with loud and enthusiastic demonstrations of joy 
 by his numerous friends. Here, too, he undertook to carry 
 on his filibustering scheme, and actually succeeded in 
 fitting* out at least one privateer, and getting; her out to 
 sea, during a brief absence of the President at Mount 
 Vernon. 
 
 The conduct of Genet having at length become intoler 
 able, it was unanimously agreed in Cabinet, that a letter 
 should be sent to the French Government requesting his 
 recall. This highly exasperated him. Even Mr. Jefferson, 
 whom he regarded as a friend, became an object of dis 
 pleasure ; he having, as Genet alleged, used to him two 
 languages, " one official and another confidential." He was 
 soon after recalled. He, however, never returned to France, 
 but remained in this country until the day of his death. 
 
 Although the Cabinet had unanimously agreed to the 
 proclamation of neutrality, many eminent citizens and 
 statesmen were opposed to it, and in favor of joining 
 France. Among them was Mr. Jefferson, who considered 
 our treaty obligations in full force, and who, though he had 
 assented to the proclamation, regarded the question as 
 merely reserved to the meeting of Congress. 
 
 The cause of France had been much weakened in this 
 country by the reprehensible conduct of the French Minis 
 ter, A reaction, however, was soon produced by certain 
 impolitic measures of the British Government. A scarcity 
 of provisions in France had induced the latter to open her 
 ports to neutral commerce. Great Britain, hoping to reduce 
 her enemy by famine, determined to cut off external supplies. 
 British cruisers were instructed to stop all vessels carrying 
 bread-stuffs to any port of France, and to bring them into a 
 convenient port. If they were proved to be neutral property, 
 the cargoes were to be purchased, and the ships released ; 
 or both cargoes and vessels were to be released on their 
 masters giving bonds that the cargoes should be disposed 
 of in the ports of countries at peace with Great Britain/ 
 This measure Great Britain alleged to be justified by the 
 Jaw of nations, which made all provisions contraband and 
 liable to confiscation, when the stopping of these supplies 
 was intended as a means of reducing an enemy to terms of 
 
24 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 peace. It was alleged, too, that the British orders did not 
 go to the extent allowable ; they did not prohibit all kinds 
 of provisions, nor require forfeiture. The American Gov 
 ernment, on the other hand, maintained that both reason 
 and usage had established the right of a neutral nation to 
 carry the products of their industry for exchange to all 
 nations, belligerent or neutral, as usual, without injury or 
 molestation. This measure greatly embarrassed American 
 commerce, and, supcradded to the supposed encouragement 
 of Indian hostilities by the British in Canada, the continued 
 occupation of the Western military posts, and the impress 
 ment of American seamen into the British service, awakened 
 intense resentment in the American people toward Great 
 Britain. 
 
 The British Government did not stop here. Orders more 
 stringent were issued to the commanders of British vessels, 
 under which orders American vessels engaged in the French 
 and West India trade were seized, carried into British ports, 
 and condemned. This new order greatly increased the 
 excitement against Great Britain ; and a war with that 
 country was apprehended. Although this order was sub 
 sequently modified, the excitement was not allayed. All 
 who refused to take the side of France against Great 
 Britain, were represented as -British partisans. Nor did it 
 avail them to urge in justification of their neutrality that 
 France had violated her treaty with us, and that our com 
 merce had been harassed no less by French privateers than 
 by those of Great Britain. 
 
 Resolutions proposing preparations for war and measures 
 of retaliation, were introduced in Congress. Before these 
 propositions were disposed of, the President, desirous to 
 prevent war, concluded to make an effort at negotiation, 
 and nominated to the Senate John Jay as Envoy Extraor 
 dinary to Great Britain. The nomination, after much 
 opposition, was confirmed. As a successful negotiation was 
 quite doubtful, preparations for war were deemed expedient, 
 and the measures previously reported were in part adopted. 
 Among these measures were the requisition for 80,000 
 militia to be ready to march at a moment s warning, and 
 for the levying of additional duties on imports, taxes on 
 carriages, &c. 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 25 
 
 The chief objects of Mr. Jay s mission were, to obtain 
 restitution for spoliations of American commerce, and the 
 fulfillment of the treaty of peace, some of the stipulations 
 of which had not been observed. One of them was the 
 surrender of the Western military posts which were still 
 occupied. These objects secured, a treaty of commerce 
 was to be proposed. 
 
 The charge against the President of being unfriendly to 
 France seems to have been entirely unfounded. Mr. Jay 
 was expressly instructed to say to the British Government, 
 " that the United States would not derogate from their 
 treaties and engagements with France. 7 And to Mr. 
 Monroe, who was soon after appointed our Minister to 
 France, the Secretary of State, Mr. Randolph, said : " The 
 President had been an early friend of the French revolution ; 
 and whatever reasons there may have been to suspend an 
 opinion upon some of its important transactions, yet is he im 
 mutable in his wishes far its accomplishment. * * We have 
 pursued neutrality with faithfulness. We mean to retain 
 the same line of conduct in future ; and to remove all 
 jealousy as to Mr. Jay s mission to London, you may say 
 that he is positively forbidden to weaken the engagements 
 between this country and Franco." 
 
 The treaty was concluded on the 19th of November, 
 1704, and submitted to the Senate in extra session on the 
 8th of June, IT 95. It secured the first of the primary 
 objects of negotiation, namely, indemnity to American mer 
 chants for the illegal capture of their property under British 
 orders. Also the Western posts were to be surrendered, 
 but not until the 1st of June, 179G. 
 
 Of the numerous other provisions of the treaty, some 
 were favorable, others unfavorable. But the terms were 
 the best that could be secured. The Senate ratified the 
 treaty, with the exception of one provision, which related 
 to the West India trade, and recommended the addition of 
 a clause suspending its operation ; leaving for future 
 negotiation this question, with that of the impressment of 
 American seamen and others, upon which the parties had 
 been unable to agree. With this modification the ratifica 
 tion was advised by a vote of 20 to 10 a bare constitu 
 tional majority. 
 
26 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 This act of the Senate produced great excitement It 
 was denounced in public meeting s and in newspapers. 
 The Senators were treated with indignity; and an effigy of 
 Mr. Jay was burned in Boston. Certain causes of delay 
 having occurred, the President did not sign the treaty until 
 the 14th of August, 1795. He became now himself an 
 object of the vengeance of the opposition party. Even 
 his private character was aspersed. He was charged with 
 having appropriated public money for his private use ; and 
 he had violated the Constitution, and ought to be impeached. 
 The friends of the treaty, however, appeared to increase in 
 number, it being deemed unwise to expose the country to 
 a war not required by the national honor. 
 
 The treaty was ratified by the British Government with 
 the suspending clause annexed by the Senate ; and on the 
 1st of March, 1796, the President sent a copy to the House, 
 with the information that it had been proclaimed the law 
 of the land. It now remained for the House to make pro 
 vision for carrying the treaty into effect. To this a deter 
 mined opposition was made. A warm debate arose which 
 involved the Constitutional question, whether the assent of 
 the House was essential to the obligation of the treaty ; 
 and whether the President had a right to negotiate a treaty 
 of commerce. A resolution was moved, calling upon the 
 President for a copy of his instructions to Mr. Jay, and 
 other documents relating to the treaty. This was opposed 
 by the minority, who maintained that a treaty was complete 
 when assented to by the Senate, and signed by the Presi 
 dent. After a long debate, the resolution was adopted, 62 
 to 37. The President declined to comply with the call, and 
 stated at length his reasons. They are worthy of perusal, 
 but the want of room forbids their insertion. 
 
 On a resolution, subsequently offered, declaring it expe 
 dient to carry this treaty into effect, another long debate 
 took place, in which Mr. Madison and Mr. Gallatin opposed 
 the treaty. Among thoso in its favor was Fisher Ames, 
 whose speech is so famed for its eloquence. At its close, 
 calls were made for the question ; but the opposition mem 
 bers, fearing the immediate influence of the speech, post 
 poned the question until the next day, (April 29th,) when 
 it was carried in Committee of the Whole, by the casting 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 27 
 
 vote of the Chairman, (Muhlenburg.) It was then reportej 
 to the House, and passed, 51 to 48. 
 
 But the history of the " Jay treaty" is not yet ended 
 The French Government, on being informed of its ratifica 
 tion by the President, informed Mr. Monroe, our Minister 
 at Paris, that the Directory considered the alliance between 
 the United States and France terminated by the treaty ; 
 that Adet, the French Minister to the United States, would 
 be recalled ; and a special Envoy was to be sent to make 
 the announcement to the American Government. 
 
 Among the many complaints against the United States 
 presented to Mr. Monroe by the French Government, one 
 was, that the United States, in their treaty with Great 
 Britain, had abandoned the principle, that free ships should 
 make free goods, and that naval stores were made contra 
 band. By treaties of the United States with France and 
 Great Britain, French property in American vessels was 
 liable to seizure by British cruisers, while British goods 
 were secure in American vessels. But of this France had 
 no reason to complain. Great Britain had only reserved a 
 right to which she was entitled by the Law of Nations ; 
 by which " the goods of a friend found in the vessels of an 
 enemy are free ; and that the goods of an enemy in tho 
 vessel of a friend are lawful prize." But France, deeming 
 it for her interest, had, in lier treaties with the United 
 States, preferred a different principle, " that free ships 
 should make free goods." 
 
 It was the misfortune of France that she was now suffer 
 ing the unforeseen consequences of her own voluntary act. 
 And she had the less reason to complain, from the fact 
 that she had, in her treatment of the United States, vio 
 lated her own principle. She had, in May, 1793, issued a 
 decree authorizing the capture of an enemy s property in 
 neutral vessels, under which decree about fifty American 
 vessels had been captured and deprived of their cargoes, 
 and a greater number had been detained. 
 
 The French Directory had determined on some retalia 
 tory measures, which had only been delayed, in the hope 
 that the House of Representatives would defeat the treaty 
 with Great Britain by refusing to provide for carrying it 
 into effect. In June, 1796, news of the decision of tho 
 
28 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 House was received at Paris ; and on the 2d of July a 
 decree was issued, that " all neutral or allied powers shall, 
 without delay, be notified, that the flag- of the French Re 
 public will treat neutral vessels, either as to confiscation, as to 
 searches, or capture, in the same manner as they shall suffer the 
 English to treat them." 
 
 Evidently the object of France was to defeat the treaty 
 with Great Britain. Mr. John Quincy Adams, our Minister 
 in Holland, writing to our Government, said he had intima 
 tions of such a purpose. The supposition was strengthened 
 by a treaty made in August, between France and Spain, by 
 which they entered into an alliance offensive and defensive, 
 agreeing to make common cause to insure " safety to the 
 neutral flag ;" in other words, to compel the United States 
 to protect French and Spanish property in American vessels, 
 in contravention of our treaty stipulation with Great Brit 
 ain. Spain also complained of the unequal footing upon 
 which she had been placed by the British treaty, and made 
 this a pretext for not delivering up the posts on the Missis 
 sippi and running the boundary line. Holland, too, then de 
 pendent upon Fi-ance, joined in the complaint. 
 
 Mr. Monroe, on the alleged ground of a want of due 
 promptitude in making to the French Government the ex 
 planations furnished him by the President in justification 
 of tho treaty with Great Britain, was recalled by the Presi 
 dent, and Mr. Charles C. Pinckney, of S. C., appointed in 
 his place, Sept. 9, 1796. Mr. Monroe, an ardent friend of 
 France, had been appointed in 1794, in the place of Mr. 
 Gouverneur Morn s, in deference to his wishes, and at the 
 request of the French Government, because the latter had 
 manifested too little zeal for the French cause. 
 
 Mr. Pinckney arrived at Paris in December ; but he was 
 soon informed that the Directory would " no longer recog 
 nize a Minister from the United States, until after a repa 
 ration of grievances." He remained there until about the 
 last of January, when he received from the French Govern 
 ment a written notice to quit the country. Ho proceeded to 
 Amsterdam to wait for instructions from his Government. 
 
 We have now come to near the close of Washington s 
 administration. Our sketch includes most of the principal 
 measures which characterized his administration, especially 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 29 
 
 those which were subjects of party controversy. The 
 reader will have perceived, that the spirit of party then 
 manifest was much the same as it is at the present day. 
 We see men distinguished for their public services, whose 
 patriotism we scarcely dare question, pursuing party ends 
 by dishonorable means. Probably no public man ever en 
 joyed greater popularity than Washington ; yet no admin 
 istration encountered a more bitter opposition, nor were 
 even the official acts of a statesman or public functionary 
 more violently assailed. Even the forged letters purport 
 ing to have been written by him in 1777, in opposition to 
 the cause of independence and favorable to Great Britain, 
 were republished. But time has vindicated his character ; 
 and his memory will be revered by his countrymen to the- 
 latest generation. 
 
 Gen. Washington was succeeded by John Adams as 
 President. Of the votes of the Presidential electors chosen 
 in November, 1796, Mr. Adams received the highest num 
 ber, 71, and was elected President ; and Mr. Jefferson, 
 having received 68, the next highest number, was elected 
 Vice-President. 
 
30 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 From the Commencement to the Close of the Administration of 
 John Adams. 
 
 ON the 4th of March, 1797, John Adams was inaugurated 
 as President of the United States. The personal popu 
 larity of Gen. Washington had shielded him from the open 
 assaults of the mass of his political opponents. In this re 
 spect Mr. Adams was less fortunate. The measures of his 
 administration, however, met with scarcely greater opposi 
 tion than those of his venerated predecessor. The diffi 
 culties with France had not been settled when he came into 
 office, but were becoming more and more aggravated. 
 And as our controversy with France and Great Britain had 
 become in a great measure a party question, a very peace 
 ful administration was hardly to be expected. 
 
 Our Minister had been virtually expelled from France ; 
 and new license had been given to spoliate on our 
 commerce. A decree had been issued, authorizing the 
 capture of neutral vessels having on board any productions 
 of Great Britain or her possessions. This decree was in 
 direct violation of the rights of neutral nations, and espe 
 cially of the treaty between the United States and France, 
 which provided that " free ships should make free goods." 
 Many of our vessels were captured under this decree and 
 condemned ; and war having become probable, the Presi 
 dent convened Congress in special session, on the 15th of 
 May, 1797. As there were in both Houses majorities in 
 favor of the administration, measures were readily adopted, 
 both for preserving peace and for providing the means of 
 defense. 
 
 Among the acts passed for increasing the revenue, was 
 one for " laying duties on stamped vellum, parchment, and 
 paper." This act, probably from the similarity of its title 
 to the British stamp act of 1765, w r as highly obnoxious to a 
 large portion of the people. 
 
 Attempts at negotiation, however, were to be continued ; 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 31 
 
 ana Charles Cotcsworth Pinckney, Elbridgc Gerry, and 
 John Marshall, were appointed as Envoys Plenipotentiary 
 to the French Republic, Mr. Pinckney being then in Hol 
 land. The Envoys did not receive the usual formal recog 
 nition ; but a mode of correspondence with them, of a most 
 single nature, was adopted, in which the demands of the 
 French Government were made known. Certain passages 
 in President Adams Message to Congress at the extra ses 
 sion must be softened before the Ministers could be 
 received ; a sum of money was required for the pockets of 
 the Directory and Ministers ; and our Government must 
 grant theirs a large loan. Our Ministers being unwilling 
 to concede to these demands, and having no authority to 
 negotiate a loan in any form, they proposed that one of 
 their number should forthwith return home to consult the 
 Government, if the Directory would suspend all further 
 captures of American vessels, and all proceedings on those 
 already captured : but this was refused. 
 
 The American Ministers having objected to the proposi 
 tion of a loan, on the ground that it would amount to a 
 declaration of war on our part against Great Britain, Tal 
 leyrand, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, resorted 
 to artifice to compass his end, but failed. At length, the 
 Directory having intimated a disposition to treat with Mr. 
 Gerry alone, (who had been selected from the party said 
 to be friendly to France,) the other two Envoys returned 
 to the United States. 
 
 On the 21st of June, 1198, the President transmitted to 
 Congress the correspondence between Mr. Gerry and Tal 
 leyrand. In his accompanying Message, he said : " I pre 
 sume that before this time he (Mr. Gerry) has received 
 fresh instructions, (a copy of which accompanies this 
 message,) to consent to no loans ; and therefore the nego 
 tiation may be considered at an end. I, will never send 
 another Minister to France, without assurances that he 
 will be received, respected, and honored, as the repre 
 sentative of a great, free, powerful, and independent 
 nation." 
 
 At the next session, (1791-1798,) further provision was 
 made for the public defense ; and an act was passed to 
 commercial intercourse with France and her de- 
 
32 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 pendencies. Preparations for war having been made, 
 Gen. Washington was appointed by the President and 
 Senate to take command of the army ; and the appoint 
 ment was accepted. 
 
 The publication of the papers relating- to the attempts at 
 negotiation, showing the unceremonious reception of our 
 Ministers, and the degrading terms upon which the Direc 
 tory would treat, placed that Government in an unfavor 
 able light before the American people ; and, notwithstand 
 ing the opposition which the war measures received, the 
 Federal party, instead of losing, seems rather to have 
 gained popularity. The publication of these papers also, it 
 is presumed, aided the passage of the bills for the national 
 defense ; and they had so affected the public mind as to 
 give great anxiety to Mr. Jefferson, who, in a letter to Mr. 
 Madison, urged him to assist with his pen in defending 
 the opposition from the effects of the publication of the 
 v~ dispatches. The policy of the President was also approved 
 i in numerous public meetings ; and but for those two 
 famous acts familiarly known as the " Alien and Sedition 
 laws," the Federal party would perhaps have retained its 
 ascendency. 
 
 The propriety of these laws it is not my purpose to dis 
 cuss. Their nature and object, however, it is proper to 
 state for the information of those who are unacquainted 
 with their provisions and their history. There were in 
 this country thousands of Frenchmen, combined in organ 
 ized associations, and large numbers of British subjects, 
 who were deemed dangerous to the peace of the United 
 States. "With a view to the public safety , was passed the 
 Act, entitled, " An Act concerning Aliens." This Act au 
 thorized the President to order out of the country all aliens 
 whom he should suspect of any treasonable designs against 
 the Government. Any person remaining in the country 
 after the time mentioned for his departure, without a 
 license from the President, was liaMo to imprisonment not 
 exceeding three years, and might never be admitted to be 
 come a citizen. And the President, on satisfactory proof 
 that the residence of such alien was not dangerous, might 
 grant him a license to remain for a time and at a place 
 specified. He m/ght also require a bond with sureties for 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 33 
 
 good behavior. The act, among several other provisions, 
 secured to aliens the right to dispose of their property. It 
 was limited to the term of two 3 T ears from its passage. 
 
 The " Sedition Law" was entitled, "An Act, in addition 
 to an Act, entitled, An Act for the punishment of certain 
 crimes against the United States. " This act provided for 
 punishing conspiracies to oppose any measure or law of the 
 Government, or to hinder any public officer in the perform 
 ance of his duty, or to attempt to procure a riot, or an in 
 surrection. Such offense was punishable by a fine not 
 exceeding $5,000, and imprisonment not less than six 
 months, nor exceeding five years ; and the Court might 
 require sureties for good behavior. The law also provided, 
 that any person convicted of writing, printing, uttering-, or 
 publishing any false, scandalous, or malicious writing, or 
 of aiding to do the same, against the Government, Con 
 gress, or the President, with intent to defame them or to 
 bring them into disrepute, or to stir up sedition, or to ex 
 cite any unlawful opposition to any law of the United 
 States, or to aid or abet any hostile designs of any foreign 
 nation against the people or Government of the United 
 States, should be fined not exceeding $2,000, and im 
 prisoned not exceeding two years. But, contrary to the 
 English law of libel, then a part of the common law of this 
 country, which did riot permit the defendant to justify by 
 proving the truth of the statement charged as libelous, this 
 law admitted such justification, and allowed conviction 
 only when the defendant failed to prove the truth of his 
 statement. This provision, which had then been adopted 
 only in the States of Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Vermont, 
 has since been incorporated into the Constitution or the 
 laws of every State in the Union ; qualified, however, by a 
 provision, that the statement shall have been made from 
 good motives and justifiable ends. The act was to con 
 tinue in force until the 3d of March, 1801. 
 
 These laws, now so generally regarded with disfavor, 
 were, by many great and good men, among whom were 
 Washington and Patrick Henry, considered good and 
 wholesome laws, justified by the state of things. 
 
 These laws were denounced by the leaders of the oppo 
 sition party as infractions of the Constitutional guaranties 
 
34 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 of personal liberty, and freedom of speech and of the press. 
 The Sedition Act, especially, was held up to public oppro 
 brium as the " gag law/ 
 
 To array public sentiment the more effectually against 
 these laws, appeals were made to the Legislatures of the 
 States, soliciting their action upon the subject. Here 
 originated the famed Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 
 of 1798 and 1799, which were for a long time referred to 
 as containing the essence of the old Republican or Demo 
 cratic creed. Resolutions, drawn up by Mr. Jefferson for 
 that purpose, were introduced in the Kentucky Legisla 
 ture, and passed in November, 1798. As these resolutions 
 have been so often cited by the advocates of the Southern 
 doctrine of State Rights, or Nullification, in support of that 
 heresy, they deserve particular attention. They declare, 
 that the Union is a compact between the States, as States ; 
 that, as in other cases of compact between parties having no 
 common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as 
 well of infractions, as of the mode and measure of redress ;" that 
 the Alien and Sedition Laws were " not law, but altogether 
 void, and of no force ;" that, " in cases of an abuse of dele 
 gated powers, the members of the General Government 
 being chosen by the people, any change by the people 
 would be the Constitutional remedy ; but where powers 
 are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification 
 of the act is the right remedy : and that every State has a 
 natural right, in cases not within the compact, to nullify, of 
 their own authority, all assumptions of power by others with 
 in their limits." 
 
 The Virginia Resolutions, drawn up by Mr. Madison, 
 then a member of the Legislature of that State, at the re 
 quest, it is said, of Mr. Jefferson, were adopted the 21st of 
 December, 1798. They declared, that the Constitution was 
 a compact to \vhich the States were parties, granting 
 limited powers ; that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and 
 dangerous exercise of other powers not granted by the com 
 pact, the States hall the right to interpose for arresting the 
 progress of the evils, and for maintaining the rights of the 
 States within their respective limits ; and that the Alien 
 and Sedition Laws were palpable infractions of the Consti 
 tution. They also solicited the concurrence of other States 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 35 
 
 in these declarations, and requested the Governor to trans 
 mit them for this purpose to the several State Executives 
 to be communicated to the several State Legislatures, and 
 to each of the Senators and Eepresentatives of Virginia in 
 Congress. No State, it is believed, responded favorably to 
 the solicitation ; some of the States expressly disapproved 
 the Resolutions. 
 
 At their next sessions, the Legislatures of Virginia and 
 Kentucky, in reply to the answers of the State Legisla 
 tures, reasserted the doctrines of the Resolutions. The 
 Report on the subject by Mr. Madison concluded with a 
 resolution declaring their adherence to the Resolutions of 
 1798, and renewing their protest against the Alien and 
 Sedition Laws as palpable and alarming infractions of the 
 Constitution. The Report and resolution were adopted in 
 February, 1800. On the 25th of June of that year, the 
 Alien Law expired by its own limitation ; the Sedition Act 
 on the 4th of March, 1801. 
 
 The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions involve Consti 
 tutional principles which have been the subject of much 
 discussion. Though once the grand article of the creed of 
 a dominant party, they are now generally repudiated as 
 disorganizing and revolutionary. They will require further 
 notice in a subsequent part of this work. 
 
 But Mr. Adams, before the close of his term of office, 
 found other opposition than that of the Republican party. 
 He had lost the confidence and support of many of his own 
 party. This alienation of his friends had been caused, in 
 a great measure, by his course on the French question. He 
 had declared, as the reader will recollect, that he would 
 " never send another Minister to France, without assur 
 ances that he would be received, respected, and honored, 
 as the representative of a great, free, powerful, and inde 
 pendent nation." Believing that there was not sufficient 
 evidence of a disposition on the part of the French Govern 
 ment to enter upon an honorable negotiation, many of his 
 political friends highly disapproved of his determination to 
 send other Ministers to that country. The principal evi 
 dence upon which the President acted, was, that France, 
 induced, probably, by the war measures which Congress 
 had adopted, had indicated a willingness to relinquish her 
 
36 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 demand as a preliminary to negotiation, and to treat on 
 reasonable terms. Knowing that a majority of his Cabinet, 
 Messrs. Pickering, Wolcott, and M Henry, were opposed 
 to renewing the mission under existing circumstances, the 
 nominations were made to the Senate without consulting 
 his Cabinet or any of his friends. The gentlemen selected 
 for the mission were Oliver Ellsworth, Chief Justice of the 
 United States, Patrick Henry, and William Vans Murray, 
 then Minister Resident in the Netherlands. Mr. Henry, 
 though friendly to the administration, declined the appoint 
 ment from " absolute necessity." William Davie, of N. C., 
 was appointed in his place. 
 
 The willingness, on the part of the Directory, to receive 
 a Minister from our Government, had been communicated 
 to Mr. Murray ; and it was intimated to him that he would 
 be acceptable to the French Government. The name of 
 Mr. Murray alone was accordingly sent to the Senate. 
 The Committee of the Senate to whom the nomination had 
 been referred, being unfriendly to a renewal of the negoti 
 ation without further assurance from the French Govern 
 ment, and having intimated an intention to report against 
 the nomination, the President sent the names of Ellsworth 
 and Henry, who were to be added to the mission. But 
 none of the Ministers were to proceed to France until more 
 direct assurances should be given that they would be duly 
 received. With this understanding, the Senate consented 
 to the appointment. 
 
 The former friends of the President, who had been for 
 some time disaffected towards him, and whom his course 
 had now entirely estranged among whom were Mr. Ham 
 ilton, Gouverneur Morris, and other distinguished and 
 influential men doubted the sincerity of the French Gov 
 ernment ; and they considered it derogatory to the national 
 honor to accept an offer to negotiate, until the decrees 
 against our commerce should be repealed. The principal 
 motive which is supposed to have dictated the course of the 
 President, was his desire to avoid a war which he had 
 reason to believe would have met with the opposition of 
 the party opposed to him, and which, he feared, would be 
 rendered the more unpopular by the large increase of tax 
 ation which it would require. 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 37 
 
 Mr. Murray, pursuant to instructions, informed the 
 French Government that our Ministers waited for positive 
 assurances of a favorable reception, and received an answer 
 from the Directory, through Talleyrand, assuring him that 
 the Envoys would be received and. " should enjoy all the 
 prerogatives which are attached to their official character 
 by the Law of Nations, and that one or more Ministers 
 should be duly authorized to treat with them." 
 
 On the receipt of this assurance, the President, against 
 the wishes of a majority of his Cabinet, ordered the Envoys 
 to prepare for their departure, and directed the Secretary 
 of State to make a draft of instructions to them. But 
 before their departure, intelligence was received of another 
 revolution in France, and a consequent change of the 
 Directory, with a single exception, which rendered it doubt 
 ful whether the Envoys would be received ; and the Cabinet 
 unanimously advised the President to suspend the mission. 
 The President, notwithstanding, ordered the embarkation 
 of the two Envoys, who sailed on the 3d of November, 
 1799. By this act of the. President, the separation between 
 himself and a majority of his Cabinet, and many of his 
 party friends, was rendered complete. 
 
 Congress met in December, 1799. The President in his 
 address alluded to his having received the assurances re 
 quired by the French Government in relation to the recep 
 tion of our Envoys, and of their having proceeded on their 
 mission. The two Houses, in their answers to his speech, 
 expressed their approbation of his course towards France. 
 A majority of the Cabinet officers being no longer his 
 friends, the President, near the close of the session, (May, 
 1800,) requested Mr. Pickering and Mr. M Henry, Secreta 
 ries of State and of War, to resign. The latter complied ; tho 
 former, preferring a dismissal, refused. John Marshall, of 
 Virginia, and Samuel Dexter, of Massachusetts, were ap 
 pointed in their places. 
 
 The Envoys, in consequence of detentions on the way, 
 did not reach Paris until the 2d of March, 1800. Mr. 
 Murray had arrived the day before. They were duly re 
 ceived ; and three Plenipotentiaries were appointed to 
 negotiate with them. 
 
 There was great difficulty in agreeing upon the terms of 
 
38 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 treaty. According to the instructions to our Ministers, the 
 old treaties were not to be renewed. They had been de 
 clared void by Congress, having been dissolved by the 
 aggressions of France upon our commerce. Being so con 
 sidered, our Government had, in the Jay treaty with Great 
 Britain, agreed, that the ships of war and privateers of 
 both parties should be permitted to enter each other s ports 
 with prizes ; and no shelter was to be given in their ports 
 to such as had made prizes upon our citizens or subjects 
 of either of the parties. A revival ef the old treaties 
 would therefore interfere with our engagements with Great 
 Britain. The French Ministers were unwilling to admit 
 the nullity of the old treaty of 1778, as to do so would ex 
 clude French privateers and prizes from the ports of the 
 United States. 
 
 An arrangement seemed for a long time impracticable. 
 Yet a settlement of the difficulties between the two countries 
 was to this country very desirable. There was danger of a 
 war with France. The successes of Bonaparte rendered a 
 general peace in Europe a probable event, which would leave 
 us alone in a contest with that power. We wished to relieve 
 our commerce from further exposure to depredations from the 
 French. And we wished to save a large amount of captured 
 property not yet condemned; there being more than forty 
 ships and cargoes awaiting decision before the French council 
 of prizes. 
 
 A treaty was at length concluded the 30th of September. 
 1800. Its principal provisions were the following : The 
 binding force of the old treaties, and the mutual claims for 
 indemnities, were reserved for future negotiation. All public 
 ships, and all property captured by either party, and not yet 
 condemned, were to be restored. All government and indi 
 vidual debts due were to be paid. The vessels of either party 
 were to enjoy in the ports of the other, equal privileges with 
 those of the most favored nation. The provision of the old 
 treaty, that free ships should make free goods, was retained. 
 And provision was made for the future security of American 
 commerce. The article allowing French privateers and prizes 
 equal privileges with those of the most favored nation, was 
 inserted by the French Ministers, after repeated declarations 
 from our Ministers, that this stipulation could have no effect 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 39 
 
 as against our treaty with Great Britain. Mr. King, our 
 Minister at London, presented this matter to the British 
 Government, and was told that they saw in it no cause of 
 complaint. 
 
 The treaty was laid before the Senate at the next session 
 of Congress, which met this year, (Nov. 17, 1800,) at "Wash 
 ington. The Federal Senators opposed to Mr. Adams and the 
 new mission, disapproved the treaty, because it did not provide 
 for the payment of indemnities, and for the renunciation of 
 the old treaties ; and an article was adopted limiting the term of 
 the convention to eight years, as a substitute for that which 
 referred the question of indemnity and the old treaties to 
 future negotiation. The President, though he considered the 
 alteration as being for the worse, ratified it, and appointed 
 James A. Bayard, of Delaware, as Minister to carry the treaty 
 with the Amendment to France for ratification by that Gov 
 ernment Mr. Bayard declined that appointment; and the 
 Presidential term of Mr. Adams being near to a close, he left 
 the matter to his successor. 
 
 The event showed the mistake of the Senate. When 
 the amended treaty was submitted to Bonaparte, he added 
 a proviso, that the expunging of the article relating to indem 
 nity and old treaties, should be considered as a lelinquish- 
 ment of claims for indemnity. With this amendment, it was 
 ratified by our Government. Thus did France succeed in ob 
 taining what she had proposed to our Ministers a new treaty 
 without indemnities. 
 
 Among the acts passed during Mr. Adams administration, 
 was a naturalization law, by which the term of residence of 
 an alien, in order to become a citizen, was changed from five 
 years to fourteen ; and the time of making the application 
 previous to admission, which was three years, was changed 
 to five years. This act was passed in 1798, the year in which 
 the Alien and Sedition laws were enacted. 
 
 An act was passed near the close of the last session of Con 
 gress under his administration, which gave great dissatisfaction 
 to his opponents. To prevent delays in the administration of 
 justice, caused by the great* extent of the circuits and -districts 
 in which the courts were held, the number of judicial dtstricts, 
 thirteen, composing three circuits, was increased to twenty- 
 three, and the numbers of circuits to six. The objection to 
 
40 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the passage of the act was, that it gave to the President, less 
 than three weeks before the expiration of his term of office, 
 the appointment of a large number of judges, attorneys, and 
 marshals. 
 
 A Presidential election was approaching. The Federal 
 candidates were John Adams and C. C. Pinckney. The 
 Federal opponents of Mr. Adams, preferring Mr. Pinckney 
 for President, endeavored, by secret efforts, to secure him the 
 largest number of electoral votes. This would, by the then 
 existing mode of election, in case the Federal party were still 
 in the majority, make Mr. Pinckney the President. [See 
 Cons., original Article.] Mr. Adams, apprised of their scheme, 
 and supposing the opposition to him had arisen from their 
 partialities for England and his desire to avoid a war with 
 France, stigmatized them as a British faction. Mr. Hamilton 
 was among the most active in this attempt to defeat Mr. 
 Adams. Mr. Adams received all the Federal votes, 65 ; Mr. 
 Pinckney received 6-1, and John Jay 1. Jefferson and Burr, 
 the Republican candidates, received each 73. Neither of the 
 two latter having a majority, the election devolved upon the 
 House of Representatives, voting by States. After a week s 
 unsuccessful balloting, Mr. Jefferson received the votes of 
 eight States; Mr. Burr received the votes of six States; and 
 two States were equally divided. Mr. Jefferson then, on the 
 36th ballot, received the votes of ten States. This result was 
 effected by the casting of blank ballots by three Federal 
 members who preferred Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Burr. 
 
 The design was charged upon the Federalists in the House 
 of standing out and preventing an election, and of passing an 
 act to vest the Executive authority in some high officer of. 
 the Government. But the charge has been disproved. James 
 A. Bayard, member of the House from Delaware, afterwards 
 Senator in Congress, and one of the Commissioners who 
 negotiated the peace with Great Britain, was implicated in 
 the charge. But in a deposition, April 3, 1 806, he denied the 
 charge, and stated the reasons for holding out so long. This 
 deposition was confirmed by George Baer, one of the Federal 
 members from Ataryland, who, in a letter to a friend, in 1830, 
 solemnly declared, that a proposition to prevent an election 
 and to usurp the legislative power was not made ; but they 
 were pledged to each other to elect a President before the 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 41 
 
 close of the session. Mr. Bayard, in his deposition, assigned 
 as a reason for the delay, an attempt, on their part, to obtain 
 from Mr. Jefferson, through his friends, assurances that he 
 would, if elected, sustain the public credit; maintain the naval 
 system; and not remove the subordiuate officers; and that 
 these assurances having been made, the opposition of Vermont, 
 Maryland and Delaware was withdrawn. 
 
42 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 From the Commencement of Mr. Jefferson s Administration to the 
 Close of the Administration of John Quincy Adams. 
 
 THOMAS JEFFERSON was inaugurated on the 4th of March, 
 1801. The* general policy of the Government having been 
 established, few measures of great importance claimed the 
 attention of the new administration. 
 
 Mr. Adams had made a considerable number of appoint 
 ments just before the close of his term of office. Mr. Jeffer 
 son considered this an infringement of his prerogative. 
 The commissions of some of them having not yet been 
 delivered, ho suppressed these commissions, and made new 
 appointments. Great objection was also made to the ap 
 pointments of judges and other officers in conformity with 
 the provisions of the new Judiciary act, which has been 
 noticed. The judges holding their offices during good 
 behavior, they could be removed only by repealing the act, 
 which was accordingly done at the next session of 
 Congress. 
 
 An act was also passed repealing the duty on stills, 
 domestic distilled spirits, refined sugars, licenses to retail 
 ers, sales at auction, carriages, stamped paper, &c. ; also 
 an act to repeal the naturalization law of the preceding 
 administration which had prolonged the term of residence 
 required of aliens previous to their admission as citizens. 
 
 The great measure of Mr. Jefferson s administration, was 
 the purchase of Louisiana. The negotiation was an inter 
 esting one. Our Government had contemplated merely an 
 arrangement by which, for the security and convenience of 
 our commerce, territory on the East side of the Mississippi, 
 including New Orleans, might be ceded to the United 
 States, and the Mississippi made a common boundary, with 
 a common use of its navigation for them and Spain the 
 latter, being supposed to be in possession of Louisiana and 
 the Floridas. It was ascertained, however, that by a secret 
 
EARLY PAETIES. 43 
 
 treaty, Louisiana had been ceded to France. Bonaparte, 
 being in want of money, proposed to our Minister in that 
 country, (R. R. Livingston,) to sell the whole of Louisiana. 
 Although our Minister, (Mr. Monroe having been sent to 
 aid Mr. Livingston,) were not authorized to buy the whole 
 territory ; yet, as no treaty could bind the United States 
 until ratified by our Government, terms for the whole were 
 agreed upon by the parties ; and the treaty was ratified by 
 both Governments. Mr. Jefferson, though he admitted the 
 purchase and annexation to be unauthorized by the Consti 
 tution, thought the acquisition too valuable to be lost, 
 signed the treaty, and proposed an ex post facto amendment 
 of the Constitution to give sanction to the measure ; but it 
 was never attempted. It was, however, argued by some, 
 and is believed by many at the present day, that the power 
 to acquire territory by war, purchase, or treaty, properly 
 and naturally belongs to every independent sovereignty. 
 It was stipulated in the treaty, that the inhabitants of the 
 ceded territory should be incorporated into the Union, and 
 admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of 
 the Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, 
 advantages, and immunities of citizens ; and that, in the 
 mean time, they should be protected in the free enjoyment 
 of their liberty, property, and religion. 
 
 In 1804, the territory was divided ; the South part of it 
 being called Orleans, the residue, the District of Louisiana. 
 The act prohibited the bringing of slaves into the Territory 
 of Orleans from beyond the limits of the United States, or 
 from any of the States such as had been imported since the 
 1st of May, 1798. Thus early was recognized the power 
 of the General Government over Slavery in the Territories 
 of the United States. 
 
 It had been the policy of Mr. Jefferson s predecessors to 
 encourage an effective fortification of our harbors, and tho 
 maintenance of an efficient navy. Mr. Jefferson recom 
 mended a less expensive system of defense, which was 
 adopted, and which came to be called the " gun-bdat sys 
 tem." In 1803, an act was passed, authorizing the Presi 
 dent to procure the building of fifteen small vessels, called 
 gun-boats, for which $50,000 were appropriated. His plan 
 was to build about two hundred and fifty of theso boats, 
 
44 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 twenty-five every year. The aggregate cost was estimated 
 at about one million of dollars. A substitute was also to 
 be provided for the usual expensive fortifications. This 
 plan of defense, however, proved a failure. Before it was 
 completed, Congress refused to make further appropriations 
 for building gun-boats ; and the measure was abandoned. 
 
 During the new war between France and Great Britain, 
 which commenced in 1803, and in which most of the pow 
 ers of Europe became involved, the merchant vessels of 
 the belligerent nations, from their exposure to capture, 
 were withdrawn from the ocean. This gave to the United 
 States and other neutral maritime nations an unusually 
 profitable carrying trade with the belligerent countries, on 
 established principles of national law recognized by Great 
 Britain herself : that the goods of a neutral, consisting of 
 articles not contraband of war, in neutral vessels, employed 
 in a direct trade between a neutral and a belligerent coun 
 try, are protected, except in ports invested or blockaded. 
 A large portion of this trade consisted in carrying goods 
 from colonies of the enemies of Great Britain to their parent 
 countries. Great Britain alleged that this trade was un 
 lawful, on the principle that a trade from a colony to its 
 parent country, not being permitted to other nations in 
 time of peace, can not be made lawful in time of war ; and 
 an order was issued for the capture of our vessels ; and a 
 large number were captured. One object of this measure 
 was to distress Napoleon and his allies. 
 
 The President, January, 1806, laid the subject before 
 Congress ; and he also noticed the impressment of our sea 
 men by Great Britain. It had been her practice and she 
 claimed it as her right to search American vessels in pur 
 suit of British seamen ; and, in so doing, had taken many 
 of our own native citizens, and forcibly impressed them 
 into her service. 
 
 In May, 1806, were issued the celebrated British orders 
 in council, declaring the principal ports on the Western 
 coast of the continent of Europe in a state of blockade. 
 These orders were soon followed, on the part of Xapoleon, 
 by the Berlin decree, (so called from its having been issued 
 by him while in that city on his way northward,) declaring 
 the British Islands in a state of blockade, and prohibiting 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 45 
 
 all commerce with them. It was his purpose to stop all 
 trade between Great Britain and the continent. A more 
 stringent order than the first was then issued by the Brit 
 ish Government, which was followed by the Milan decree 
 of Napoleon. Both Governments carried their restrictive 
 measures to the greatest extremes, to the destruction of 
 American commerce. These blockades were unlawful, not 
 being maintained by adequate force. Hence they were, as 
 they were termed, mere " paper blockades." It was by 
 some supposed to be the object of both parties to drive the 
 Americans from their neutral position. 
 
 The seizure of our ships, cargoes, and men, induced Con 
 gress, in December, 1S07, on recommendation of President 
 Jefferson, to pass the famous Embargo law, which pro 
 hibited American vessels, in order to their safety, from 
 leaving our ports. Perhaps another object of the measure 
 was a preparation for war. 
 
 This controversy had become a party question in this 
 country. The Federalists, from certain facts which had 
 been elicited, suspected that the object of the Embargo was 
 to aid Bonaparte in crippling the commerce of Great Brit 
 ain. France having a comparatively limited foreign com 
 merce, the blow would fall with greater weight upon her 
 enemy, whose foreign trade was very extensive. The sus 
 picion of Mr. Jefferson s subserviency to France was 
 strengthened by certain letters ; one Mr. Armstrong, our 
 Minister in France, to Mr. Madison, our Secretary of State, 
 stating that Napoleon had declared, that " the Americans 
 should be compelled to take the positive character of either 
 allies or enemies." The letter also stated, that several of 
 our ships and cargoes had been confiscated, contrary to 
 previous assurances given. Another of these letters was 
 from Mr. Canning, the British Minister of Foreign Affairs, 
 to Mr. Pinknoy, our Minister in London, giving assurance 
 of a friendly disposition towards this country, and express 
 ing a strong desire " to accommodate the orders in council, 
 as far as was consistent with their object, to the feelings 
 and interests of the American Government and people." 
 These two documents, so different in their character, the 
 President did not see fit to publish ; and their suppression 
 was attributed to the fear that the people, seeing the con- 
 
46 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 trast between them, would disapprove the course of the 
 Government toward the two countries. And since the 
 death of Mr. Jefferson, and the publication of his corres 
 pondence, reference has been made to a letter from him to 
 a friend in 1808, in which he pronounces the condemnation 
 of our vessels taken by the French privateers piracy, which, 
 the Federalists thought, rendered her equally deserving of 
 retaliatory legislation. 
 
 The embargo affected very seriously the shipping of New 
 England ; and the complaints in that quarter were loud 
 and unceasing during its continuance. It was repealed in 
 March, 1809, by the non-intercourse law, which prohibited 
 all intercourse with France and Great Britain ; but pro 
 vided, that, if either nation should so revoke or modify her 
 edicts as that they should cease to violate our neutral com 
 merce, trade with that nation should be renewed. 
 
 In August, 1810, Mr. Madison being President, our 
 Minister in Paris was informed, that the Berlin and Milan 
 decrees were revoked, and would cease to have effect after 
 the 1st of November following ; stating as a reason for the 
 revocation, that our Congress had retraced its steps, and 
 had engaged to oppose Great Britain, which had refused to 
 acknowledge the rights of neutrals ; and stating, also, as 
 a condition of the repeal of the decrees, that "the English 
 shall revoke their orders in council, and renounce the new 
 principles of blockade which they have wished to establish ; 
 or that the United States shall cause their rights to be re 
 spected by the English." Considering this as sufficient 
 evidence of the repeal of the decrees, the President, by 
 proclamation, declared the restrictions imposed by the act 
 of May to be removed as against France ; and Congress 
 passed an act declaring them in force against Great 
 Britain. 
 
 The British Government did not consider this conditional 
 repeal such as to justify the repeal of the orders in council. 
 A long correspondence between our Government and that 
 of Great Britain ensued, for which the reader is referred to 
 our larger histories. 
 
 There being so much doubt *as to the revocation of the 
 French decrees, Mr. Smith, Secretary of State, prepared a 
 letter to the French Minister at Washington, in which, 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 47 
 
 among a long list of questions, he inquired whether the de 
 crees had been revoked ; or whether he could give any 
 assurance in relation to their revocation or modification. 
 But the President interdicted the sending of the letter. 
 
 War was declared the 18th of June, 1812. The vote in 
 the Senate was 19 to 13 ; in the House, 19 to 49. Of those 
 who voted against the war, 15 were Republicans. Before 
 the adjournment, the Federal members of the House, with 
 the exception of 2, joined in an address to their constitu 
 ents, in which they reviewed the controversy between the 
 three Governments, with the view of showing the impro 
 priety and injustice of declaring war, and of making a dis 
 tinction between France and Great Britain. On the latter 
 point, they say : "If honor demands a war with England, 
 what opiate lulls that honor to sleep over the wrongs done 
 us by France ? On land, robberies, seizures, imprisonments 
 by French authority ; at sea, pillage, sinkings, burnings 
 under French orders. These are notorious. Are they un- 
 felt because they* are French ? Is any alleviation to be 
 found in the correspondence and humiliations of the present 
 Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States at the French 
 court ? In his communications to our Government, as 
 before the public, where is the cause for selecting Franco 
 as the friend of our country, and England the enemy ?" 
 
 Nearly the whole of the Federal party was opposed to 
 the declaration of war ; but many gave it their support as 
 a measure of the Government. Among the men of distinc 
 tion of this latter class, was John Adams. 
 
 A few days after the declaration, a copy of the decree of 
 Napoleon, dated April 28, 1811, was received, repealing 
 the Berlin and Milan decrees. The British Minister soon 
 took his departure, bearing a letter proposing to the Brit 
 ish Government a suspension of hostilities with a view to 
 an adjustment. Among the conditions of the proposed 
 armistice, one was, that the impressment of our seamen 
 should be discontinued. But before the British Minister, 
 (Mr. Foster,) reached home, our Government was informed 
 that t/ie orders in council had been revoked, the revocation to 
 take effect the 1st of August next. The only remaining 
 grievance then to be redressed by war, was that of im 
 pressment a grievance, however, of great magnitude 
 
48 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 The number onseamW impressed, though never actually 
 ascertained, must havo been great. More than 6,000 cases 
 were recorded in the State Department ; but probably a 
 much greater number were impressed. No arrangement 
 for a suspension of hostilities being practicable, the war 
 was prosecuted by both parties. 
 
 In November, \812, Mr. Madison was rcelected Presi 
 dent. He was knjwn to have been reluctant to engage in 
 a war ; and his nomination had been delayed, as the war 
 party were unwilling to support him, unless he should de 
 termine to favor me war. Notwithstanding his nomina 
 tion, DC Witt Clmton, a more zealous friend of the war, 
 was nominated ly the Republican members of the New 
 York Legislated The Federalists, having made no nom 
 ination, supported Mr. Clinton, who received 89 electoral 
 votes, and Mr. Ijtadison 128. 
 
 Brief, and nocessarily imperfect, as is this sketch of the 
 controversy ich terminated in the war of 1812, more 
 space has been given to it than was intended. But as our 
 difficulties with Great Britain and France were so long a 
 subject of contention between the two political parties, it 
 was deemed proper to give the reader an intelligible view 
 of the question. 
 
 The war continued until February, 1815. Commission- 
 crs had been appointed by both Governments, who met at 
 Ghent, in Belgium, and concluded a treaty of peace in 
 1814, which was received at Washington in Feb 
 ruary following, ratified by the British Government. After 
 the news of the abdication of Napoleon had been received, 
 new instructions were sent to our Commissioners, authoriz 
 ing them, if peace could not otherwise be had, to waive 
 the question of impressment, and leave it for future nego 
 tiation. So this question remained unsettled. The treaty 
 was ratified the 17th of February, 1815. 
 
 Among the measures of Mr. Madison s administration 
 which deserve notice, is the incorporation of the second 
 Bank of the United States. The establishment of the first, 
 in 1791, was a part of the financial policy of Mr. Hamilton, 
 and was opposed by Mr. Madison and other opponents of 
 Washington s administration. 
 
 In 1810, the year before the expiration of the charter, 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 49 
 
 application was made for its renewal ; and a favorable re 
 port was made by Mr. Gallatin, Secretary of the Treasury, 
 but at too late a period of the session to be actett upon. 
 The application was renewed the next year ; and t a bill 
 was introduced into each House ; but both bills were lost ; 
 that of the House having been indefinitely postponed, 65 to 
 64 ; and that of the Senate having had its enacting clause 
 struck out by the casting vote of the Vice-President, 
 George Clinton, on the ground of its supposed unconstitu 
 tionally. Among the prominent Republicans who sup 
 ported it, were Mr. Crawford and Mr. Giles Mr. Clay 
 opposed it. 
 
 At the session of 1814-1515, Secretary Dallas reported a 
 plan of a Bank. It was supported mainly by Republicans. 
 It was opposed, however, by some Republicans, among 
 whom was Mr. Calhoun, who proposed a counter project, 
 which allowed the Government no control in the direction 
 of the Bank, nor a right to demand loans from it. The 
 Federalists supporting this plan, it was carried by a large 
 majority. Secretary Dallas having, at the request of the 
 House, given his opinion as to the effect of Mr. Calhoun s 
 project, the bill, on the question being taken on its third 
 reading, was lost, 45 to lOt ; the Federalists now voting 
 against it. A bill on Mr. Dallas plan was then introduced 
 in the Senate, and passed. The vote in the House stood, 
 81 in its favor, and 80 against it, without the vote of the 
 Speaker, who, after giving his reasons for opposing the 
 bill, voted against it, producing a tie ; and then declared 
 the bill to be lost. A reconsideration was carried, and a 
 compromise bill was reported and adopted, but was vetoed 
 by the President, not because he considered it unconstitu 
 tional ; its constitutionality " having been recognized by 
 the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches of the 
 Government, accompanied by the concurrence of the gen 
 eral will of the nation ;" but because it did not appear to 
 him to be calculated to answer the purposes for which it 
 was desired. 
 
 Still another bill, on the principles of Mr. Dallas plan, 
 was originated in the Senate, and passed that body, but 
 was indefinitely postponed in the House, by a majority 
 of one vote. 
 
50 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 The next year, 1816, a bank bill was passed, and ap 
 proved by the President. Mr. Clay, who, with many other 
 leading statesmen, had changed his views since 1811, now 
 a member of the House, and its Speaker, made an able 
 speech in its favor. It was believed that a Bank was 
 necessary to restore a healthy currency, and to facilitate 
 the financial operations of the Government. It passed the 
 House, 80 to 71. Its capital was $35,000,000 ; one-fifth to 
 be subscribed by the Government, and one-fifth to be paid 
 in specie. It was entitled to the deposit of the public 
 moneys, and was required to disburse them in any part of 
 the Union without charge to the Government. It was also 
 to pay $1,500,000 as a bonus for its charter. Of the 
 twenty-five directors, five were to be appointed by the 
 President and Senate. The deposits were removable by 
 the Secretary of the Treasury for sufficient reasons, to be 
 laid before Congress. 
 
 At the same session, (1816,) was passed a new tariff 
 act. The European wars, which had existed during most 
 of the time since the organization of our Government, had 
 furnished a good market for agricultural products, with 
 which our people had been enabled to procure supplies of 
 manufactured goods. Hence, high duties for the encourage 
 ment of manufactures were comparatively unnecessary. 
 The interruption of our trade with Great Britain during our 
 war with that country, and the double duties on imported 
 goods imposed at the commencement of the war, which 
 were to continue until its close, and for a year thereafter, 
 had given an impetus to home manufactures. But on the 
 return of peace, large importations of foreign goods were 
 again made, to the injury of our manufactures ; and as the 
 double duties were about to cease, and as the foreign mar 
 ket for our bread-stuffs would also cease, or be greatly 
 diminished, in consequence of the return of those compos 
 ing the vast armies of Europe to their usual employments 
 in home production, it now became necessary to adapt our 
 tariff of duties to a state of peace. Provision must be 
 made to pay the public debt ; and the war had shown the 
 importance of being independent of foreign nations for 
 necessaries. 
 
 Accordingly, Mr. Madison, in his Message, recommended 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 51 
 
 a " tariff on manufactures," and urged it for the purposes, 
 both of revenue, and of making us " safe against compe 
 titions from abroad." A tariff of duties on imports was 
 reported to Congress by Secretary Dallas, and, with sorno 
 modifications, became a law. Mr. Calhoun was one of its 
 most zealous advocates. It was supported by Mr. Clay 
 also, and opposed by Mr. Webster. The bill passed the 
 House, 88 to 54 ; the Senate, 15 to 11. 
 
 A protective tariff was not at this time, nor was it for 
 many years after, a party question. It was supported and 
 opposed according to its supposed effects upon the leading 
 industrial interests of the States respectively. Nor was its 
 constitutionality to any great extent, if at all, disputed. 
 The tariff of 1816, was voted for by a majority of the mem 
 bers of the House from the New England States, whero 
 manufactures had made considerable progress. From the 
 agricultural States, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, 
 &c., the vote was nearly unanimous in its favor, protection 
 to manufactures being deemed equally favorable to the 
 agricultural interest. Its strongest opposition was from 
 the planting States, though it was proportionably less than 
 later tariffs have received from those States. 
 
 From the protection afforded by this tariff, manufactures 
 of several kinds were greatly promoted, of which the prin 
 cipal was that of coarse cotton cloths. In the main, how 
 ever, it proved inadequate ; arid the prosperity of the 
 country was for a long time retarded. Foreign goods were 
 imported in large quantities ; and the country was drained 
 of its money to pay for them, our agricultural products, 
 especially bread-stuffs, being, to any considerable extent, 
 no longer wanted in exchange ; the industry of the country 
 was prostrated ; and general distress prevailed. Several 
 attempts were made in Congress to revise the tariff, but 
 without success, until 1824. A bill passed the House in 
 1820, 91 to 78 ; but it was defeated in the Senate, 22 to 21. 
 Of the votes in the House from the New England States, 
 18 were for, and 17 against the bill. New York, New 
 Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, were unanimous in 
 favor of it, except 1 in Penn. The Southern States proper, 
 or planting States, were nearly unanimous against it. The 
 Western States, with Louisiana, were unanimous in its fa 
 vor. Kentucky, in favor of it, 5 ; against it, 3. 
 
52 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 In 1824, after a most arduous effort, a bill for a general 
 revision of the tariff was passed. On this bill, Mr. Clay 
 was opposed by Mr. Webster, both being then members of 
 the House. The bill was passed to a third reading, 105 to 
 102. The votes of the several States were as follows : 
 
 Maine: Yea, 1 ; nays, 6. New Ilanipsh ire : Yea, 1; nays, 5. Mas 
 sachusetts: Yea, 1 ; nays, 11. Rhode Island : Yeas. 2. Connecticut: 
 Yeas, 6 ; nay, 1. Vermont : Yeas, 6. New York: Yeas, 26; nays, 8. 
 New Jersey : Yeas, 6. Pennsylvania : Yeas, 24 ; nay, 1. Delaware : 
 Yea, 1. Maryland : Yeas, 3; nays, 6. Virginia: Yea, 1; nays, 21. 
 North Carolina: Yeas, 13. South Carolina : Nays, 9. Georgia: Nays, 
 7. Kentucky: Yeas, 11. Tennessee: Yeas, 2 ; nays, 7. Ohio : Yeas, 
 14. Indiana: Yeas, 2. Illinois: Yea, 1. Louisiana: Nays, 3. Mis 
 sissippi: Nay, 1. Alabama: Nays, 3. Missouri: Yea, 1. 
 
 From this record of votes, it appears, that Maine, New 
 Hampshire, and Massachusetts, which were fishing and 
 navigating States, were almost unanimous against the 
 tariff. Khode Island and Connecticut, manufacturing 
 States, were in favor of it, one from the latter excepted. 
 Also the grain producing States, Vermont, New York, New 
 Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, 
 Illinois, and Missouri, were nearly three to one in favor of 
 protection, from its supposed benefit to agriculture. The 
 planting States generally, having an unfailing market 
 abroad for their great staples, were united with the ship- 
 ing and fishing States against the tariff. By this act, 
 
 astern capital was directed more to manufactures ; and 
 since that time, the Eastern and Southern States have taken 
 opposite sides on this question. 
 
 In the Senate, the vote was 25 to 21, as follows : 
 
 Maine: Yeas, 2. New Hampshire : Yea, 1 ; nay, 1. Massachusetts: 
 Nays, 2. Ehode Island : Yeas, 2. Connecticut: Yeas, 2. Vermont: 
 Yeas, 2. New York : Yea, 1 ; nay, 1. New Jersey : Yeas, 2. Penn 
 sylvania: Yeas, 2. Delaware: Nays, 2. Maryland: Nay, 1. Vir 
 ginia: Nays, 2. North Carolina: Nays, 2. South Carolina: Nays, 2. 
 Georgia : Nays, 2. Kentucky : Yeas, 2. Tennessee : Yeas, 2. Ohio : 
 Yeas, 2. Indiana: Yeas, 2. Illinois: Yea, 1. Louisiana: Nays, 2. 
 Mississippi ; Nays, 2. Alabama : Yeas, 2. Missouri : Yeas, 2. 
 
 By the restoration of peace, the asperity of party feeling 
 was greatly mitigated. Many of the Federalists no longer 
 kept up their opposition to the administration. Mr. Mon- 
 
EARLY PARTIES. 53 
 
 roe was elected in 1816, against a feeble opposition ; 183 
 Eepublican electors being chosen, and 34 Federal. The 
 latter gave their votes for Rufus King. After this elec 
 tion, a large number of Federalists, conceiving an organ 
 ized opposition to the Republican party no longer necessary 
 or expedient, publicly disclaimed any further connection 
 with the Federal party, which, before the next Presi 
 dential election, ceased to have an organized existence. 
 Mr. Monroe was reflected in 1820, without opposition, no 
 Federal candidate having been nominated. And as party 
 generally implies the opposition of a part of the community 
 to another part, it is questionable whether even the Repub 
 lican, perhaps neither party can properly be said to have 
 had existence at that time.. 
 
 It had been the practice, from the time of the nomination 
 of Mr. Jefferson, of the Republican members of Congress 
 to meet in caucus while in attendance at the last session 
 before each Presidential election, to nominate candidates. 
 This mode- of nomination had become so unpopular, that 
 out of the 216 Republican members, only 68 attended the 
 meeting ; of whom 64 voted tor William H. Crawford ; 2 
 for John Quincy Adams ; 1 for Andrew Jackson ; and 1 
 for Nathaniel Macon. Albert Gallatin received 57 votes as 
 candidate for Vice-President. Mr. Crawford and Mr, Gal 
 latin were declared nominated. 
 
 The great body of the Republican electors did not con 
 sider themselves bound by this nomination. The Republi 
 cans in the Legislatures of the New England States, 
 recommended Mr. Adams ; and the friends of Gen. Jack 
 son and Mr. Clay respectively, in the Western States, 
 nominated them also. Thus four candidates, all acknowl 
 edged Republicans, were before the people for their suff 
 rages. Of the Presidential electors chosen in November, 
 99 gave their votes for Gen. Jackson ; 84 for Mr. Adams ; 
 41 for Mr. Crawford ; and 37 for Mr. Clay. There being 
 no choice by the electors, the election devolved upon the 
 House of Representatives, where the votes are given by 
 States. Mr. Adams received the votes of 13 States ; 
 Gen. Jackson of 7 ; and Mr. Crawford of 4 States. Mr. 
 Adams having the votes of a majority of the States, was 
 elected. 
 
54 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 From the foregoing sketch of old parties, it would seem 
 difficult to trace the existence of either to a later period. 
 Attempts have been made, however, to identify modern 
 parties with the old ones. Democrats have founded their 
 claim to popular favor in their pretension to be in the 
 regular line of descent from Jefferson ; and have been 
 \vont, for party effect, to stigmatize their opponents as 
 Federalists. And among the opponents of the Democratic 
 party are some who have undertaken to establish their 
 connection with the old Republican party, through the 
 National Republican party which supported John Quincy 
 Adams, in 1828, and the late Whig party. In the charac 
 ter and creeds of different parties the most dissimilar, 
 there are some points of coincidence. This, however, is 
 insufficient to determine the paternity of any party. 
 
 But what if the line of succession were thus conclu 
 sively established ? No man or party is infallible or im 
 mutable. Great as was the popularity of Mr. Jefferson 
 and his administration, there were in them some things to 
 be condemned as well as some to be approved. For his 
 advocacy of the equal and inalienable rights of men ; his 
 endeavors to guard the constitutional rights of the people ; 
 and many of the measures of his administration, he is en 
 titled to the gratitude of his countrymen, and is worthy of 
 imitation. On the other hand, his secret opposition to 
 Washington ; his encouragement of Genet in fitting out 
 privateers in our ports ; his patronage, by money and 
 personal influence, bestowed upon presses established to 
 calumniate Washington and his administration ; his 
 charging him with being leagued with conspirators against 
 our Government, whose design was to substitute for it 
 one formed after the British model ; his nullifying senti 
 ments declared in the Kentucky Resolutions ; and some of 
 bis measures of public policy, few candid men, at the pres 
 ent day, will presume to defend. Why, then, should men 
 be so anxious about the pedigree of their parties ? The 
 validity of the claims of a party to the public confidence 
 and support should be determined, not by the antiquity of 
 its organization, nor by its numerical strength ; but by the 
 soundness of its principles and the expediency of its 
 measures. 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 55 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Administration of John Quincy Adams. 
 
 JOHN QUINCY ADAMS was inducted into the Presidential 
 office on the 4th of March, 1825. Familiar with public 
 affairs, having spent the whole previous period of his man 
 hood in the public business ; a Republican, who had sup 
 ported Mr. Jefferson from the time of the Embargo, and his 
 successors, Madison and Monroe ; immediately succeeding 
 the latter, with whose views, except those on the Constitu 
 tional power to make internal improvements, (of which 
 Mr. Monroe had some doubts,) and to the continuance of 
 whose general policy he had pledged himself in his Inau 
 gural Address ; it was natural to presume that his admin 
 istration would -be peaceful and prosperous. But scarcely 
 had he been seated in office not a measure of public policy 
 having been enacted before he found himself in the midst 
 of a powerful opposition. The chief cause of this early 
 opposition was his appointment of Mr. Clay as Secretary 
 of State. 
 
 At the time of the election, Mr. Clay was a member of 
 the House of Representatives. As the election of Presi 
 dent was to be made from the three candidates having the 
 three highest numbers of electoral votes,. (Mr. Clay not 
 being one of them,) he must participate in the election. 
 Possessing great influence, especially with the Western 
 members, whose votes he could probably control, deep 
 anxiety was felt as to which of the candidates, Adams or 
 Jackson, he would vote for. It was rumored that Mr. Clay 
 
56 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 and other Western members were to vote for Mr. Adams, 
 who, in consideration of their support, was to appoint Mr. 
 Clay Secretary of State. The election of the former and 
 the appointment of the latter were considered as evidence 
 of the alleged " bargain." The dissatisfaction among the 
 friends of the defeated candidates, especially those of Gen. 
 Jackson, was very great ; and the charge of " corrupt 
 coalition" was rung throughout the Union. And it must bo 
 confessed, that the verification of the rumored appoint 
 ment ; Mr. Clay s non- compliance with the request of the 
 Legislature of Kentucky to vote for Gen. Jackson ; and 
 certain other circumstances, gave ground for the belief that 
 the election of Mr. Adams and the appointment of Mr. 
 Clay, were the result of a previous agreement. But the 
 united testimony of all the Western members implicated ; 
 letters from Gen. La Fayette, (then on a visit to this coun 
 try,) Mr. Benton, and others, to all of whom Mr. Clay had 
 stated his intention, should an election by the llouse of 
 Representatives become necessary, to vote for Mr. Adams ; 
 the confessions of others who had given countenance to 
 the charge ; and two solemn denials by Mr. Adams him 
 self, publicly made since the close of his Presidental term, 
 in one of \vhich he said : " Before you, my fellow-citizens, 
 in the presence of our country and of Heaven, I pronounce 
 that charge totally unfounded ;" all these are deemed suffi 
 cient to justify the verdict of acquittal which has been 
 rendered by the public judgment. 
 
 But, although the charge of corruption has been dis 
 proved, the appointment of Mr. Clay after the charge had 
 been made, is one of the numerous indiscretions committed 
 by Mr. Adams during his long public life. It confirmed 
 the suspicion of the alledged bargain, and strengthened 
 tho opposition early formed to effect his overthrow. 
 
 The determined purpose of the opponents of Mr. Adams, 
 and the nature of the means to be employed for its accom 
 plishment, may be inferred from a declaration of Richard 
 M. Johnson, of Kentucky, made in the presence of Mr. 
 Seaton, one of the Editors of the National Intelligencer, as 
 Mr. Seaton alleged, that " Mr. Adams administration shall 
 come down, though pure as the angels at the right hand 
 of the throne of God." Col. Johnson, in reply, gave to this 
 
r- 
 j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 57 
 
 statement no direct and total denial, but disclaimed having 1 
 used so strong and exceptionable language as that ascribed 
 to him, in expressing his opposition to the new administra 
 tion. Mr. Seaton, however, reiterated, substantially, his 
 former statement ; and his high moral and social standing 
 leaves little doubt of its correctness. 
 
 An opposition party was soon formed by the union of 
 the friends of the defeated candidates. Although Gen. 
 Jackson had been peculiarly obnoxious to the friends of 
 Mr. Crawford, having been denounced in the most bitter 
 terms, as a " Federalist," whose " doctrines were food and 
 raiment for the Federalists and no-party men," as a " Dic 
 tator" in temper and spirit, arid fit only to bo the chief 
 ruler in an arbitrary government ; yet, the parties having 
 a common object, a union was readily formed. Mr. Cal- 
 houn, who had just been elected Vice-President, having 
 many friends, these also joined the opposition. The great 
 object to " overthrow the administration" is thus alluded 
 to in a certain letter published in the opposition papers : 
 "To the friends of Jackson and Crawford, those of Mr. 
 Calhoun are added ; and the union forms such a force of 
 numbers, talents, and influence, that it seems improbable 
 that this can be effectively met by Mr. Adams and Mr. 
 Clay and their friends, aided by their united experience, 
 ability, patronage, and official advantages, great as they 
 are. Men are so very sincere in their dislikes, that the 
 most opposite natures will coalesce to diminish the power 
 of an object of a higher common aversion, and will sur 
 render the strongest personal competition to unite for 
 mutual safety." 
 
 To effect the " chief end" of this combination, every act 
 or measure of the administration which could, by misrepre 
 sentation or distortion, be turned to the advantage of the 
 opposition, was seized upon for this purpose. Several im 
 portant measures suggested in Mr. Adams first animal 
 Message, were made to give way to numerous propositions 
 for " retrenchment and reform," which were introduced for 
 political effect. 
 
 Mr. Benton, who seems to have acted a prominent part 
 in these early assaults upon the administration, introduced 
 a proposition to amend the Constitution ; the object of 
 
58 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 which was to secure the election of President in all cases 
 by the people. He proposed another amendment, making 
 membors of Congress ineligible to any civil office under 
 the General Government during the Presidential term in 
 which they are to serve. Mr. Clay and a few other mem 
 bers having received appointments from Mr. Adams, the 
 amendment was designed to take from the President the 
 power to appoint to office members of Congress upon 
 who^e votes he might be dependent for his election. Mr. 
 BCIKOII also reported on the expediency of reducing the 
 patronage of the Executive, and presented six bills for that 
 purpose. One of them was " a bill to regulate the laws of 
 the United States, and of public advertisements." The 
 withdrawing of the patronage of the printing of the laws 
 from a few of the newspapers opposed to the administra 
 tion, and bestowing it upon others that supported it, ex 
 plain the object of this last report. 
 
 One of the subjects alluded to in his first annual Mes 
 sage, (December, 1825,) was the "Panama Mission/ A 
 Congress of Commissioners from the Spanish American 
 Republics of Colombia, Peru, Chili, Buenos Ayres, and 
 Mexico, was to assemble at Panama, to deliberate upon ob 
 jects of common interest, and, as some supposed, for the 
 purpose of providing for a successful resistance to Spain, 
 and for giving security to their independence. Our Gov 
 ernment had been invited to be also represented in the 
 Congress ; and the invitation had been accepte-d. On the 
 2( . r !i of December, the President nominated to the Senate 
 Richard C. Anderson, of Kentucky, and John Sergeant, of 
 Pennsylvania, as Commissioners, and William B. Rochester, 
 of New York, as Secretary of the Mission, and again dis 
 claimed, as in his annual Message, the intention either "to 
 contract alliances, or to engage in any undertaking or pro 
 ject of hostility to any other nation." He believed the 
 meeting would afford a favorable occasion for establishing 
 a more liberal as well as a more stable commercial inter 
 course than had been enjoyed, and principles which should 
 govern their conduct as belligerents and neutrals in time 
 of war. It might also be advisable to settle the question, 
 whether the security of Republican institutions did not re 
 quire the parties to prevent any European power from estab- 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION". 59 
 
 lishing a colony within the borders of the parties a prin 
 ciple announced by Mr. Adams predecessor, and generally 
 denominated the " Monroe doctrine." 
 
 To some readers an explanation may be here necessary. 
 An alliance of European monarchies had been formed to 
 check the progress of liberty. And it was believed that 
 their designs were not restricted to Europe, but that they 
 meditated interference between Spain and her revolted 
 provinces in America. The establishing of a colony on this 
 side of the Atlantic by any European power being regarded 
 as dangerous to our own peace and happiness, Mr. Monroe 
 promulgated the declaration, that " any attempt of the 
 Allied Powers to extend their system to any portion of this 
 hemisphere, would be considered as dangerous to our 
 peace and safety," and would be opposed. This principle 
 is at present recognized by most of our eminent statesmen. 
 It is, -however, the opinion of some, that the declaration of 
 Mr. Monroe was riot intended to establish a principle for all 
 future time. One object of Mr. Monroe was, to prevent the 
 occupation of Cuba by any other European Power ; an 
 event then not altogether improbable which might en 
 danger the safety of the United States. 
 
 The Committees of the Senate having been appointed 
 by Mr. Calhoun, the Vice-President, as President of that 
 body, arid a majority of the Committee on Foreign Eela- 
 tions, to whom the subject was referred, being opposed to 
 the mission, reported against it. The resolution, declaring 
 it inexpedient to send Ministers to the Congress, was, how 
 ever, negatived, 24 to 19 ; and the nominations were 
 confirmed. 
 
 In the House, whose concurrence was necessary in an 
 act appropriating the money for carrying the mission, into 
 effect, a favorable report was made, and, after much dis 
 cussion, the money was appropriated. 
 
 The debate in the Senate was much protracted by the 
 discussion of the Slavery question which had been intro 
 duced. There might be colored delegates in the Congress. 
 To associate with them would be a tacit admission of their 
 political equality. This might have an unfavorable effect 
 upon the " peculiar institution." Cuba might be invaded 
 by the South American States, the slaves emancipated, and a 
 
60 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 colored Republic established. A conquest of the island by 
 England or Franco was preferable to the erection of such a 
 Republic so near our Slave States. The latter would be, in 
 effect, a direct interference with Slavery in the South. The 
 President had said to Europe that we could not ailow Cuba 
 and Porto Rico to be transferred to any European Power ; 
 the same must be said to the Spanish American States. 
 We could not allow their principle of universal emancipa 
 tion to be called into activity where its contagion in our 
 neighborhood would be dangerous to our quiet and safety. 
 The safety of the Southern portion of our Union must not 
 be sacrificed to a passion for diplomacy. 
 
 So soon do we see this self-styled, misnamed Democratic 
 party identifying itself with Slavery, of which it has since 
 been its main defense and support. Better, in the view of 
 these men, that Cuba should remain a Monarchical depend 
 ency, with the mass of its people groaning under a tyranny 
 worse than monarchs exercise, than that, by their deliver 
 ance, the Slave Power should be in the least endangered. 
 There was but a slight probability that Slavery would be 
 at all affected by the contemplated meeting. Slight as it 
 was, however, it was sufficient to alarm these Southern 
 Democrats, who were sustained by the votes of their 
 Northern allies, with whom the " putting down of the 
 administration," right or wrong, had become a paramount 
 object. 
 
 The United States were not represented in the Congress. 
 Mr. Anderson, one of the Commissioners, then our Minister 
 to Colombia, died on his way to Panama ; and the pro 
 tractcd debates in both Houses of Congress, prevented the 
 attendance of Mr. Sergeant. The Congress met on the 22d 
 of June, and, having closed its session there on the 15th of 
 July, adjourned to meet again in February, at Tacubaya, 
 near the city of Mexico, to give opportunity for the States 
 not represented at Panama, to join in the treat} r of league 
 and perpetual friendship which had been concluded at Pa 
 nama. Mr. Poinsett, our Minister to Mexico, was appoint 
 ed Commissioner in the place of Mr. Anderson ; and Mr. 
 Sergeant, with Mr. Rochester, departed for Tacubaya in 
 November. But, owing to. some internal commotions in 
 Rome of the Republics, the Congress did riot assemble. 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 61 
 
 So the Mission failed. Though well intended, and per 
 haps wise and proper if the Congress had been fully at 
 tended, it was by the opponents of Mr. Adams turned to the 
 disadvantage of his administration. 
 
 In the early part of Mr. Adams administration, a contro 
 versy arose between the General Government and the State 
 of Georgia, in which the latter took initiatory steps toward 
 nullification. A treaty was made in February, 1825, be 
 tween the United States arid Gen. M Intosh, a chief of the 
 Creek Indians, and a few other chiefs of the nation, who 
 ceded to the United States their lands in Georgia, for which 
 they were to take lands West of the Mississippi, to which 
 they were to remove in September, 1826. The treaty hav 
 ing been made without the consent of the representatives 
 of the nation, it gave great dissatisfaction. Having made 
 considerable progress in civilization and agriculture, they 
 were averse to any further sales, and had enacted the 
 punishment of death against any chief who should sanction 
 such a measure. Accordingly M Intosh and one or two 
 others were executed for their unauthorized and fraudulent 
 transaction. 
 
 The Indians were unwilling to leave their lands ; and 
 the attempt of the agents of the State to survey the terri 
 tory was resisted by the Creeks. The President ordered 
 the survey to be abandoned until the time prescribed for 
 their removal ; and Gen. Gaines was sent to quell disturb 
 ances, if any should arise, and by force, if necessary. This 
 exasperated Gov. Troup, who said it was his duty to ex 
 ecute the law of the State which authorized the survey and 
 appropriation of the lands ; and repeated his determination 
 to proceed in the survey, " cost what it will ;" adding, 
 " The Government of Georgia will not retire from the 
 position it occupies to gratify the agent of the hostile In 
 dians ; nor will it do so, I trust, because it knows that, in 
 consequence of disobedience to an unlawful mandate, it 
 may soon be recorded, that Georgia was. " 
 
 Soon after, he was informed by the War Department, 
 that if Georgia " should undertake the project of surveying 
 the lands before the time specified for removal, it would be 
 wholly upon its own responsibility." To which the Gov 
 ernor replied, that if the General Government intended to 
 
62 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 interpose its power to prevent the survey, "the President 
 may rest content that the Government of Georgia cares for 
 no responsibilities in the exercise of its right, but those 
 which belong to conscience and to God, who, thanks to 
 Him, is equally our God, as the God of the United States." 
 
 But there was another objection to the proceedings of 
 Georgia. The sovereignty of the soil was ceded to the 
 United States ; therefore Georgia could not lawfully bar 
 gain with the chiefs for the right of survey without the 
 assent of the United States. Nor could the Government 
 itself grant the right until the time for the removal, as it 
 was bound to protect the Indians " against the encroach 
 ments, hostilities, and impositions of the whites and all 
 others." And Gen. Gaines was informed by the Secretary 
 of War, (Mr. Barbour,) that if the Governor should persist 
 in his purpose, " it will present one of the most unfortunate 
 events which have yet occurred in our history." The inso 
 lence of the Governor is seen in a letter to the President, 
 in which he said : "You stand on the insulated eminence, 
 an almost solitary advocate for making and breaking 
 treaties." On being informed, however, of the President s 
 intention to prevent intrusions upon the Indian territory, 
 and to refer the treaty to Congress, the Governor concluded 
 to defer the execution of his purpose. 
 
 In April, 1826. a new treaty was made and ratified by 
 the Government, by which nearly all the land of the Indians 
 in Georgia was obtained. Gov. Troup, dissatisfied with 
 the treaty, ordered the surveys to commence the 1st of 
 September, 1826. Being apprised of the President s de 
 termination to employ force in executing the laws, the 
 Governor declared his purpose to resist, and said measures 
 for resistance were in progress. On the same day, he 
 ordered officers to liberate surveyors that had been or 
 might be arrested by the General Government ; and the 
 military were ordered to be in readiness to repel any in 
 vasion of the territory of the State. He concluded, how 
 ever, not to persist in his determination to oppose the 
 General Government by force, having learned that it was 
 the President s intention to negotiate with the Indians for 
 the remaining strip of land not ceded ; which was effected 
 about the first of January, 1828. 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 63 
 
 With respect to a reference of the subject to the Supreme 
 Court which had been suggested, the Governor said : " It 
 will be for the Government of Georgia ultimately to sub 
 mit, or not, to the decision of that tribunal." He did not 
 consider the Supreme Court the constitutional arbiter in 
 controversies involving rights of sovereignty between a 
 State and the United States. 
 
 Mr. Monroe had recommended an attempt to effect the 
 removal of the Indian tribes beyond the Mississippi ; and 
 for this purpose Secretary Barbour, in February, 1826, 
 transmitted to Congress a bill. But no definitive action 
 was taken upon it. 
 
 Bent on the one great object, the " overthrow of the ad 
 ministration/ the opposition left unemployed no means 
 which could be devised for this purpose. A resolution was 
 offered, calling upon the Secretary of State for a list of the 
 newspapers in which the laws were directed to be pub 
 lished since he came into office, designating the changes 
 which had been made, and the reasons for each change. It 
 was alleged that he had made changes from personal and 
 political motives. To employ eighty-two presses in the 
 service of the administration was alarming to the liberties 
 of the people. 
 
 On the other hand, the right to call upon a public officer 
 for the reasons of his acts was denied. Such a call was be 
 lieved to be without precedent. Out of the eighty or more 
 presses in which the laws had been published, only sixteen 
 had been changed some from geographical considerations ; 
 and in four instances, the persons displaced and those ap 
 pointed were of the same political party. The resolution 
 was debated at great length ; but no definitive action was 
 had upon it. The course pursued by the next administra 
 tion in respect to appointments, will soon appear. 
 
 Before the excitement caused by the alleged " coalition" 
 of Messrs. Adams and Clay had subsided, a new impulse 
 was given to it by a direct charge made by Gen. Jackson 
 himself, occasioned on this wise : An anonymous letter ap 
 peared in the Fayetteville (N. C.) Observer, stating that 
 the writer had been told at the Hermitage, by Gen. Jack 
 son, " that Mr. Clay s friends made a proposition to his 
 friends, that if they would promise, for him, not to put Mr. 
 
64 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Adams into the seat of Secretary of State, Clay and his 
 friends would, in one hour, make him, Jackson, the Presi 
 dent. He indignantly rejected the proposition." It soon 
 became known, that Garter Beverly, of Wheeling, Va., was 
 the author of the letter. His veracity being impeached, he 
 requested of Gen. Jackson a confirmation of the statements 
 in his published letter. The General, in his answer, said 
 he had been called on, in January, 1825, by a member of 
 Congress, who said, that he had been informed by the 
 friends of Mr. Clay, that the friends of Mr. Adams had made 
 overtures to them, saying, if Mr. Clay and his friends would 
 unite in aid of the election of Mr. Adams, Mr. Clay should 
 be Secretary of State. And he was of opinion it was right 
 to fight such intriguers with their own weapons, &c., &c. 
 
 Mr. Clay, in a letter to the public, challenged Gen. Jack 
 son to the proof. The General replied in an address to the 
 public, and named James Buchanan as the member of Con 
 gress alluded to. Mr. Buchanan, in a public letter, through 
 the Lancaster Journal, disclaimed having come to Gen. 
 Jackson as an agent for any one. He says : " I called on 
 Gen. Jackson solely as his friend, upon my individual re 
 sponsibility. Until I saw Gen. Jackson s letter to Mr. Bev 
 erly, and at the same time was informed by a letter from the 
 Editor of the U. S. Telegraph, that I was the person to whom 
 he alluded, the conception never once entered my mind that 
 he believed me to have been the agent of Mr. Clay, or of 
 his friends, or that I had intended to propose to him terms 
 of any kind for them, or that he could have supposed me 
 capable of expressing the opinion, that it was right to 
 fight them with their own weapons. " Mr. Buchanan then 
 suggests how Gen. Jackson may have been led into the 
 mistake. 
 
 Here, then, is presented a question of veracity between 
 the General and Mr. Buchanan, as the former would not 
 confess to a " mistake." Many readers will recollect the 
 publication, in 1856, of what purported to be an original 
 letter from Gen, Jackson to Mr. Polk, in which he advised 
 him not to appoint Mr. B. to a seat in his Cabinet, for the 
 reason that he was a deceitful man, or unworthy of confi 
 dence, and referred to the denial above mentioned, say 
 ing : " He did propose to fight them with their own weap- 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 65 
 
 ons." The reader will form his own opinion as to which of 
 the two gentlemen is the more worthy of credence. 
 
 In 1828, the tariff was again modified. The protection 
 afforded by the act of 1824, was generally satisfactory. A 
 means, however, had been devised of evading in a measure 
 the intentions of the act. Woolen goods were subject to 
 an ad valorem duty of 33 J per cent, on the price at the place 
 whence imported. False invoices of these goods were 
 made out at prices below their actual value, and the duties 
 paid accordingly. By this means, the treasury was de 
 frauded of a part of the revenue, and the manufacturer of a 
 part of the protection to which he was entitled. To remedy 
 this evil, and a few others, a bill was introduced in 182 1, 
 usually called the "woolens bill," and was passed by the 
 House, 106 to 95, but defeated in the Senate by the casting 
 vote of Vice-president Calhoun, to the great dissatisfaction 
 of the manufacturers. Public meetings were held in some 
 States, and a National Contention, composed of delegates 
 from 13 States, met at Harrisburg, Pa., to consult on meas 
 ures to promote the interests of agriculture and manufac 
 tures : and at the next session of Congress, (1827-1828,) 
 numerous petitions were received praying for relief. An 
 act was passed, increasing the duties on iron and some 
 other articles ; changing the duties on others from ad 
 valorem to specific duties, laying those upon woolens accord 
 ing to the minimum principle.* 
 
 * To some readers, perhaps, this term may need an explanation. 
 Minimum signifies the least quantity or value assignable in a given 
 case. By the act of 1824, woolen cloths costing in the foreign mar 
 ket over 33} cents the square yard, were charged with a duty of 
 33) per cent. But as many were imported with invoices at prices 
 one-fourth or one-third less than those really charged, this act pro 
 vided that all woolen cloths costing abroad under 33^ cents, must 
 be charged with a specific duty of 14 cents a yard. Costing over 
 33^ cents, and under 50, they must be deemed to have cost 50, and 
 charged 40 per cent, duty ; that is, 50 cents is the least value upon 
 which the duty was to be charged. Costing over 50 cents, and not 
 exceeding $1, they must be considered as having cost $1, and be 
 charged accordingly ; one dollar being the minimum, or least price 
 upon which the duty was to be estimated. The next minimum was 
 $2,50, and the next and last $4. The benefit of this principle is 
 
66 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 By the act of 1824, many articles previously charged 
 with ad valorem duties, were made subject to specific du 
 ties ; and by the act of 1828, the duties on an additional 
 number of articles were altered from ad valorem to specific, 
 as by specific duties, and duties by the minimum rule, 
 (which are in effect the same as specific duties,) the intend 
 ed measure of duties is secured. 
 
 This tariff was, on the whole, probably, the highest that 
 had ever been enacted. Among its most prominent sup 
 porters were Silas Wright, Barnard, Martin Hoffman, Mar- 
 tindale, and Strong, of N. Y. ; Mallory, of Vt. ; Bates, of 
 Mass. ; Ingersoll, of Conn. ; Buchanan, Forward, and Ing- 
 ham, of Pa. ; Vinton and Wright, of Ohio. Among its 
 opponents were Anderson and Sprague, of Maine ; Cam- 
 breleng, of N. Y. ; Alexander, Gilmer, and Randolph, of 
 Va. ; Hamilton and M Duffie, of S. C. ; Wickliffe, of Ky. ; 
 Wilde, of Ga. It passed the House, 105 to 94, as 
 follows : 
 
 Maine : Nays, 7. New Hampshire : Yeas, 4 ; nays, 2. Massachusetts : 
 Yeas, 2; nays, 11. Rhode Island; Yea. 1; nay, 1. Connecticut: 
 Yeas, 4 ; nays, 2. Vermont : Yeas, 5. New York: Yeas. 27 ; nays, G. 
 New Jersey : Yeas, 5. Pwnsylvania : Yeas, 23. Delaware : Yea, 1. Mary 
 land : Yea, 1 ; nays, 5. Virginia : Yeas, 3 ; nays, 15. North Carolina: 
 Nays, 13. South Carolina : Nays, 9. Georgia: Nays, 7. Kentucky: 
 Yeas, 12. Tennessee: Nays, 9. OAw : Yeas, 13. Indiana : Yeas, 3. 
 Illinois : Yea, 1. Louisiana : Nays, 3. Mississippi : Nay, 1. Alabama :, 
 Nays, 3. Missouri : Nay, 1. 
 
 The bill, somewhat amended, passed the Senate, 26 to 21, 
 as follows : 
 
 Maine: Nays, 2. New Hampshire : Nay, 1. Massachusetts: Yea, 1, 
 (Webster;) nay, 1, (Silsbee.) Mode Island: Yea, 1 ; nay, 1. Con 
 necticut: Yeas, 2. Vermont: Yeas, 2. New York: Yeas, 2, (Sanford 
 
 readily seen. For instance : If an importer should present an invoice 
 of cloth at 50 cents a yard which is worth 75 cents, the fraud would 
 be readily discovered, and the article would be deemed to have cost 
 $1, and charged accordingly. This would compel the foreign manu 
 facturer to make all goods costing over 50 cents, intended for our 
 market, worth, as near as possible, 1, and not exceeding that price. 
 And so of the other minima. $2,50 and $4. The duties on woolens 
 were, after the first year, to be increased 5 per cent. 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 67 
 
 and Van Buren.) New Jersey: Yeas, 2. Pennsylvania: Yeas, 2* 
 
 Delaware : Yeas, 2. Maryland : Nays, 2. Virginia : Nays, 2. North 
 
 Carolina : Nays, 2. /So^A Carolina : Nays, 2. Georgia : Nays, 2. 
 
 Kentucky : Yeas, 2. Tennessee : Yea, ] ; nay, 1. 0/o : Yeas, 2. 
 
 Louisiana: Yea, 1 ; nay, 1. Indiana: Yeas, 2. Illinois: Yea, 2. 
 
 Mississippi: Nays, 2. Alabama: Nays, 2. Missouri: Yeas, 2, (Benton 
 and Barton.) 
 
 The indignation of the South excited by the passage of 
 this act, was not allayed until after the enactment of the 
 Compromise act of 1833. 
 
 One year remained of Mr. Adams Presidential term ; 
 and, lest the load of unprincipled opposition under which it 
 was staggering should prove insufficient to crush it, anoth 
 er attempt was made to effect the object. 
 
 In January, 1828, Mr. Chilton, of Kentucky, moved re 
 solutions declaring the expediency of the speedy discharge 
 of the public debt, and, in order to effect it, the necessity 
 of a general system of retrenchment, the discontinuance of 
 needless offices, the reduction of salaries ; arid instructing 
 the Committee of Ways and Means to report such means of 
 retrenchment as might be deemed necessary. The friends 
 of the administration, although aware that the resolutions 
 had been introduced for party effect, yet, concurring in the 
 measure proposed, and believing that the Government had 
 been economically administered, made no serious opposition 
 to their reference. 
 
 Among the list of alleged abuses, the navy list was 
 said to be crowded ; cadets had I eeri educated at West 
 Point who were out of employment ; a fifth auditor had 
 been appointed for a time which had expired, and his serv 
 ices were no longer necessary ; too many clerks were em 
 ployed ; the contingent fund had been improperly used ; 
 many salaries might be reduced ; arid the reduction should 
 begin with the compensation and mileage of members of 
 Congress ; and there was an unnecessary expenditure for 
 printed documents. 
 
 Opposition members were not unanimous upon all points. 
 Messrs. Buchanan, Randolph, and M Duffie, although they 
 believed in the necessity of reform, did not think the pres 
 ent a favorable time, nor the manner proposed a proper 
 one. Mr. Buchanan said also that the duties of the fifth 
 auditor had been doubled, and the office was necessary. 
 
68 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Several members of the opposition also opposed a reduction 
 of their compensation. Mr. M Duffie said, he would say 
 nothing that would have a bearing upon the administration 
 one way or another. The question was not what the Gov 
 ernment had done ; that was past ; but this was a practi 
 cal resolution which had reference to future reforms. 
 Whether there were abuses or not whether the Panama 
 Mission was expedient or not, was not now before the 
 House ; it was at an end ; why was it brought up here, and 
 at this time ? As bearing upon the administration, these 
 things had no business here. In reference to the public 
 debt, and the mode of its discharge, he said, all the means 
 which the country possessed of paying it were, by existing 
 laws, to be applied to that object ; and no resolution would 
 either hasten or retard its payment. 
 
 The President was censured by some for his having re 
 garded with office members of Congress who had aided in his 
 election, and accused of having claimed for the General 
 Government powers unauthorized by the Constitution, and 
 incompatible with the rights of the States and the liberties 
 of the people. Having, by a lawless construction, extended 
 the powers of the Government, he had threatened a 
 sovereign State (Georgia) with the military force of the 
 nation. 
 
 Members on the other side were willing to institute the 
 inquiry. The President had himself, in 1826, and again in 
 1827, recommended " the most vigilant economy and all 
 honorable expedients, for the total discharge of the public 
 debt." No new offices had been created by this adminis 
 tration ; nor had any salaries been raised except that of the 
 Postmaster-General, whose business had been largely in 
 creased. The $10,000,000 annually reserved as a sinking 
 fund must inevitably pay the debt ; and the present admin 
 istration had paid, not only the ten millions annually, but a 
 part of the deficiencies of the preceding administration. 
 The Academy at West Point was also defended against the 
 attack of opposition members, Mr. Buchanan assisting in 
 the defense. The Panama Mission had received the sanc 
 tion of both Houses, and been approved by the nation. 
 What would not have been said against the administration 
 if the invitation to attend the meeting had not been ac- 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 69 
 
 ccpted ? The administration was not responsible for the 
 failure of the meeting. The charge that the West India 
 trade had been lost by the administration, was also replied 
 to. [This will receive proper notice in our sketch of Gen. 
 Jackson s administration.] Numerous other charges were 
 preferred and replied to ; but for want of room, they must 
 be passed over without notice. 
 
 The resolutions were referred to a Select Committee ; but 
 probably because the object of their mover and supporters 
 had been attained, no bill to carry them into effect was 
 ever reported. 
 
 At this session, (1821-1828,) a petition from citizens of 
 the District of Columbia was presented to Congress for the 
 prospective abolition of slavery in the District, and for the 
 repeal of those laws which authorized the selling of sup 
 posed runaways for their prison fees or maintenance. The 
 petitioners declared slavery among them to be " an evil of 
 serious magnitude, which greatly impaired the prosperity 
 and happiness of the District, and to cast the reproach of 
 inconsistency upon the free institutions established among 
 us." They represented the domestic slave trade there as 
 " scarcely less disgraceful, and even more demoralizing in 
 its influence," than the foreign slave trade which is de 
 clared piracy, and punishable with death. " Husbands and 
 wives are separated ; children are taken from their parents 
 without regard to the ties of nature, and the most endear 
 ing bonds of affection are broken forever." A stronger an 
 ti-slavery document has not, in later times, been presented 
 to Congress. It did not, however, meet with a favorable 
 reception. 
 
 At the next session, (1828-1829,) the last under the ad 
 ministration of Mr. Adams, protests against the tariff act 
 of the preceding session from the Legislatures of Georgia 
 and South Carolina, were presented to the Senate. The act 
 was entitled, " An act in alteration of the several acts im 
 posing duties on imports." The Georgia protest pro 
 nounced it " deceptive in its title, fraudulent in its pretexts, 
 oppressive in its exactions, partial and unjust in its opera 
 tions, unconstitutional in its well known objects, ruinous to 
 commerce and agriculture to secure a hateful monopoly 
 to a combination of importunate manufacturers." The pro- 
 
70 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 testers, in temper and language similar to that in which 
 the General Government was addressed in the Indian case, 
 " demanded the repeal of the act," and asked that this ex 
 pression of the opinion of the State of Georgia might " bo 
 carefully preserved among the archives of the Senate." 
 The protest savored strongly of nullification. It was pre 
 sented by Mr. Berrien. In the course of his remarks, he 
 adverted to the efficiency with which the Government had 
 sustained itself during so many trials, and expressed the 
 opinion, that it was yet to undergo a more fearful trial in 
 questions affecting our internal peace; an event which, he 
 hoped, might be far off. Little, however, could he have 
 expected such a trial as that through which it is now pass 
 ing ! Little, too, did he think that, before his death, he 
 would himself become the advocate, as he really did, of a 
 protective tariff. 
 
 The protest of South Carolina was presented by Mr. 
 Smith, a Senator from that State. It assigned at length 
 the reasons for protesting against the system of protecting 
 duties, pronouncing it " unconstitutional, oppressive, and 
 unjust ;" and, lest opparent acquiescence in the system 
 should be drawn into precedent, the Legislature, in the 
 name of the commonwealth, claim to enter their protest on 
 the journals of the Senate. 
 
 The Presidential election had taken place, with the ex 
 pected result, the election of Gen. Jackson, who had 
 received 178 electoral votes, and Mr. Adams 83. Mr. 
 Calhoun was ree lected Vice-President against Richard 
 Rush. 
 
 The more the causes of Mr. Adams defeat are considered, 
 the less strange does it appear. Gen. Jackson having, in 
 1824, received a greater number of the electoral votes than 
 Mr. Adams, the election of the latter by the House was by 
 many considered a violation of the Democratic principle ; 
 and he was called the " minority President." True, this 
 argument was not entitled to any weight, but it turned 
 many into the support of his competitor. Let us consider 
 this argument. In the first place, a plurality of electoral 
 votes does not prove a majority of the popular vote. There 
 were, in 1824, four candidates ; and it is impossible to say 
 what would have been the popular vote if Mr. Crawford and 
 
j. Q. ADAMS ADMINISTRATION. 71 
 
 Mr. Clay had not been candidates. It was well known 
 that the friends of Mr. Crawford, in some of the Northern 
 States, especially in New York, decidedly preferred Mr. 
 Adams to Gen. Jackson. But the electors were chosen in 
 that State by the Legislature. The Albany Argus, the 
 potent organ of the Crawford party, most bitterly denounc 
 ed Gen. Jackson, pronouncing him the least fit of all the 
 candidates for President, and branding him with the op- 
 probious epithet of " Federal." Sometimes, too, a large 
 State chooses Presidental electors by a bare majority of its 
 voters, while a small State elects its few electors by a ma- 
 rority of many thousands. Not having the statistics at 
 hand, I cannot say how far this was the case in 1824. But 
 I have before me a history of parties in which I find the 
 follwing statements, founded, it is presumed, on correct 
 date : 
 
 Mr. Adams had the greatest number of popular votes at 
 the polls. Gen Jackson did not receive a plurality in 
 North Carolina ; and it was by a coalition with the friends 
 of Crawford that he received the electoral vote of that 
 State. Mr. Crawford, on the plurality principle, was enti 
 tled to the credit of the 15 electoral votes, which, in the 
 electoral college were cast for Gen. Jackson. This reduc 
 tion would have left him 84, the number cast for Mr. 
 Adams. New York, on the same principle, would have 
 given Mr. Adams 36 electoral votes instead of the 26 he 
 received in the Legislature, by which the electors were 
 then chosen. These 10 additional votes would have made 
 his aggregate 94 against the General s 81. In the New 
 England States, his popular majorities greatly exceeded 
 those in the eight States whose electors voted for the Gen 
 eral. In the electoral colleges of the Slave States, more 
 over, which voted for Gen. Jackson, the votes cast for 
 slaves, not by them, and which may be termed popular, 
 though constitutional, were of course, included. These 
 subtracted from the canvass, the relative strength of Mr. 
 Adams is further augmented ; so that he was the choice, 
 as well of a large plurality of the voters, as of a majority 
 of the States. 
 
 But it should be deemed sufficient that he was elected in 
 a manner prescribed in the Constitution. The framers did 
 
72 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 not think proper to require an election to be made by a 
 majority of an aggregate popular vote cast directly for can 
 didates ; but preferred an election through the intervention 
 of electors ; and provided for an election by the House of 
 Representatives by States, in case no election should be 
 made by the electoral colleges. The people have approved 
 this mode by the adoption of the Constitution. The elec 
 tion of Mr. Adams was, therefore, in accordance with the will 
 of the people, and no violation of the Democratic principle. 
 
 The charge of corruption, too, in the election of Mr. 
 Adams, had a powerful influence against his reelection. It 
 had, indeed, been disproved to the satisfaction of candid 
 and intelligent men ; but the evidence had been carefully 
 concealed from the readers of Democratic papers. In not a 
 single paper of that party, have I ever seen one of the nu 
 merous facts exculpating the gentlemen charged. And it 
 may be stated as a trait in the character of the Democratic 
 presses generally, that they never correct injurious or 
 slanderous statements. There are doubtless exceptions ; 
 but it is believed they are few. Respecting the case in 
 question, it may probably be said in truth, that not one 
 Democrat in ten of those to whom the charge had become 
 familiar by repetition, has to this day read or heard any 
 part of the evidence by which it was so triumphantly 
 refuted. 
 
 Several other causes, not mentioned, contributed to the 
 success of Gen. Jackson ; not the least powerful of which 
 was the prestege of military fame. The simple fact of his 
 having the well-earned title of the " Hero of New Orleans," 
 was sufficient to counterbalance, in the estimation of many 
 minds, the most important qualifications of his competitor. 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 73 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Administration of Andrew Jackson. First Term. 
 
 ANDREW JACKSON was inaugurated President of the United 
 States oc the 4th of March, 1829. His promises in his In. 
 augural Address were numerous and proper. He should 
 regard the limitations of the Executive power ; respect the 
 rights of the States ; observe strict economy to facilitate 
 the payment of the public debt ; show equal favor to agri 
 culture, commerce and manufactures ; commend idternal 
 improvement, so far as it could be promoted constitution 
 ally ; and, omong other things, would observe toward the 
 .Indian tribes within our limits, a just and liberal policy. 
 And he mentioned as one of his prominent duties, " the. task 
 of reform ; which will require, particularly, the correction 
 of those abuses that have brought the General Government 
 into conflict with the freedom of elections, and the counter 
 action of those causes which have disturbed the rightful 
 course of appointment, and have placed or continued power 
 in unfaithful or incompetent hands." 
 
 The reader who does not understand the nature of the 
 "reform" here alluded to, or " abuses" committed by his 
 predecessor which needed " correction," will soon find an 
 explanation in the manner and extent of the exercise of the 
 appointing power by the new President. 
 
 The persons selected for Cabinet officers, were, Martin 
 Van Buren, of N. Y., Secretary of State ; Samuel D. Ing- 
 ham, of Pa., Secretary of the Treasury ; John H. Eaton, of 
 Tenn., Secretary of War ; John Branch, of N. C., Secretary 
 of the Navy ; John M. Berrien, of Ga., Attorney-General ; 
 and Wm. T. Barry, of Ky., Postmaster-General. Until this 
 time, the Postmaster-General was not a Cabinet officer. 
 John M Lean, of Ohio, the incumbent of that office, was ap 
 pointed an associate Justice of the Supreme Court. 
 
 To enable us to judge of the consistency, if not the pro- 
 
74 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 priety, of the President s conduct, it is necessary to know 
 what were his " antecedents." Although he had never at 
 tained great distinction as a civilian, his sentiments on 
 many political subjects had been publicly expressed. On 
 the questions of the tariff and internal improvements, ho 
 was among those who were strongly committed in their 
 favor. In 1823, he was in the Senate of the United States, 
 advocating the highest protective duties, while Mr. Clay 
 was in the House engaged so assiduously in pressing 
 through that body the protective tariff of that year. It was 
 then that Gen. Jackson wrote his notable letter to Dr. Cole- 
 man, in favor of what was called the " American system ;" 
 and to which he had committed himself anew just before 
 his election. The people of Indiana and other Western 
 States, were in favor of the protective system and internal 
 improvements ; but as Gen. Jackson had been adopted as 
 a candidate by the people of the Southern States, who were 
 so strongly opposed to these measures, the Senate of Indi 
 ana, in January, 1828, requested the Governor to address 
 to Gen. Jackson a letter, " inviting him to state explicitly 
 whether he favors that construction of the Constitution 
 which authorizes Congress to appropriate money for mak 
 ing internal improvements in the several States ; and 
 whether he is in favor of a system of protective duties ; 
 and whether, if he is elected President, he will, in his pub 
 lic capacity, recommend, foster, and support the American 
 system." 
 
 In his answer, the General reasserts his principles as de 
 clared in the Coleman letter to which he referred Gov. Ray, 
 sending him a copy, and to which the reader also is re 
 ferred. The letter is an epitome of the great arguments by 
 which the system is maintained, and is worth} of perusal 
 by every American citizen. The want of space alone for 
 bids its insertion here. [For the letter, see American 
 Statesman, pp. 402, 403.] On this question, his views 
 were the same as those of Mr. Adams. 
 
 But there were other principles than those of* political 
 economy to which Gen. Jackson was committed, or which 
 he had avowed. In his correspondence with Mr. Monroe, 
 after the election of the latter had been ascertained, he re 
 commended the appointment of men to o&ce without refer- 
 
75 
 
 encc to their party attachments. In other words, he was 
 opposed to proscription for opinion s sake. 
 
 Mr. Adams having appointed to office several members 
 of Congress who had voted for him as President, Gen. 
 Jackson, in an address to the Tennessee Legislature, in 
 October, 1825, said, in reference to such appointments, that 
 he was in favor of a provision in the Constitution rendering 
 any member of Congress ineligible to office under the Gen 
 eral Government during the term for which he was elected, 
 and for two years thereafter. One of the reasons for such 
 prohibition was, that " members, instead of being liable to 
 be withdrawn from legislating upon the great interests of 
 the nation, through prospects of Executive patronage, 
 would be more liberally confided in by their constituents ; 
 while their vigilance would be less interrupted by party 
 feelings and party excitements." And he adds, " if import 
 ant offices continue to devolve on the Representatives in Congress, 
 . . . corruption will become the order of the day" 
 
 Before his election, Gen. Jackson had also declared him 
 self opposed to the eligibility of a President to the office 
 for the next term. The object of this restriction was to 
 remove all inducement to use the power of patronage in his 
 hands to secure a reelection. 
 
 How nearly the practice of the President corresponded to 
 his previously avowed principles, is well known by those 
 who are familiar with the politics of those times. His " no- 
 party" principle was immediately illustrated in his ap 
 pointments ; in which he adopted a new rule of action, not 
 practiced by any of his predecessors. They had, as was 
 proper, selected for members of the Cabinet, as their poli 
 tical advisers, and as assistants, men who would cooperate 
 with them in executing the laws and in carrying out the 
 general policy of the administration. Gen. Jackson did 
 the same. But immediately after the appointment of his 
 Cabinet, he commenced the removal of incumbents, a con 
 siderable number of whose places were filled before the 
 Senate adjourned, (the 17th of March.) During the recess 
 of the Senate, district marshals and attorneys ; surveyors, 
 inspectors, and collectors of ports ; naval officers ; apprais 
 ers of goods ; receivers of public rnonej S ; auditors, con 
 trollers, and clerks in the Executive Departments, were 
 
76 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 displaced, and political adherents appointed in their places. 
 And of Postmasters, nearly five hundred were removed 
 during the first year of the administration. 
 
 This general removal of political opponents, though 
 severely reprehended and condemned by the opposition 
 party, and referred to as inconsistent with his professed 
 sentiments before his election, was to some no matter of 
 surprise. It had been announced before his election, that 
 he would, if elected, " reward his friends and punish his 
 enemies/ Clerks who had held places during successive 
 administrations and changes of parties since the time of 
 Washington, and at a period of life too late to engage in 
 new pursuits, were dismissed to make place for others who, 
 according to the rule, were entitled to " rewards" for party 
 services. The seat of Government swarmed with hungry 
 partisans claiming a share of the crumbs of Executive pat 
 ronage. Thus early had the public a practical exposition 
 of the promised " reform" the " correction of those abuses 
 that had brought the General Government into conflict with 
 the freedom of elections." Here was the beginning of the 
 " reward and punishment" system, which has probably dono 
 more to corrupt the Government, than all other influences 
 combined. Had Mr. Adams adopted this means to 
 strengthen his party, it is not improbable, he might have 
 secured a reelection. He had made only two removals, both 
 for cause, during his whole Presidential term. Jefferson, 
 after the Government had been, during its entire previous 
 existence, in the hands of his opponents, removed only 
 thirty-nine, in eight years ; and no other President removed 
 more than ten, of whom some were for cause. 
 
 Some, to relieve the President from the charge of corrup 
 tion, have ascribed this contradiction of a professed princi 
 ple to a certain extraneous influence. The removal system 
 had long prevailed in the State from which he had selected 
 his Secretary of State, who had for many years directed 
 the politics of his State. That an "oily" tactician of a 
 long and successful experience, should obtain a controlling 
 influence over a confiding, unsuspecting chief, is not 
 strange ; or that, as was believed, lie had become " a pow 
 er behind the throne greater than the throne itself." 
 
 From the horror expressed by Gen. Jackson and his 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 7t 
 
 friends at the appointment, by Mr. Adams, of a few mem 
 bers of Congress to office, which had led Congress to call 
 for a list of such appointments " since the foundation of the 
 Government/ 7 for the alleged object of enabling Congress 
 to remove an evil said to exist and to be growing, one 
 would suppose this practice would have been scrupulously 
 avoided. But the list transmitted showed, that Mr. Adams 
 had, in thirteen months, to the time of the report, appointed 
 five members of Congress. Gen. Jackson, during the first 
 three months of his term, appointed twelve, and during his 
 administration, about double the number of such appoint 
 ments made by any of his predecessors, of whom Mr. Mon 
 roe had made the highest number, thirty-five. Yet, while 
 pursuing practices so contrary to his professions T he recom 
 mended in his first annual Message, an amendment of the 
 Constitution, bringing the election of President directly to 
 the people, prohibiting the appointment of members of 
 Congress, and restricting the service of the President to 
 one term of four or six years. But, objectionable as he 
 seemed to think a reelection to be, he had not been long in 
 office before he consented to be again a candidate. 
 
 Among the subjects noticed in this Message was that of 
 the rechartering of the Bank of the United States. He 
 said, its Constitutionality and its expediency were both 
 questioned, and it had failed in the great end of establish 
 ing a uniform and sound currency. And he suggested in 
 its stead one founded upon the credit of the Government 
 and its revenues which should " avoid all constitutional 
 difficulties, and secure all the advantages expected from 
 the present Bank/ 7 This attack upon the Bank took the 
 country by surprise. The reasons for agitating the subject 
 of its recharter six years before the expiration of its present 
 charter, a period extending two years beyond the close of 
 his official term, and during which three new Congresses must 
 be elected, were for a time incomprehensible to the people. 
 The constitutionality of the Bank, as Mr. Madison supposed 
 when he signed the bill establishing it, had been settled 
 by the decision of the Supreme Court, and by the acqui 
 escence of the people in that decision for a considerable 
 period ; nor were the people aware of its failure to create 
 a uniform and sound currency, as its notes were current in 
 all parts of the country. 
 
78 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 The subject was referred, in the House, to the Committee 
 of Ways and Means, Mr. M Duffie, of S. 0., Chairman, who, 
 with a majority of the Committee, were political friends 
 of the President. The Committee, in their Report, pro 
 nounced the Bank constitutional and expedient, and disap 
 proved the President s project of a new Bank. They con 
 troverted his statement that the Bank had " failed to estab 
 lish a uniform and sound currency." 
 
 In the Senate, the Committee on Finance, Mr. Smith, of 
 Md., Chairman, a majority being friends of the administra 
 tion, made a report on " the expediency of establishing a 
 uniform currency, 7 which maintained that a sound and uni 
 form currency existed, furnished by the Bank of the 
 United States ; and they declared the President s scheme 
 " impracticable." 
 
 At the same session, a bill to authorize the General 
 Government to subscribe to the stock of the Maysville and 
 Lexington Turnpike Road in Kentucky, was vetoed by the 
 President. A similar bill in relation to the Washington 
 Turnpike Company, was also negatived by the President. 
 Two other bills for internal improvements, one of them ap 
 propriating money for light-houses, improving harbors, 
 directing surveys, &c., were retained until the next session, 
 when in his annual Message, he gave his objections to the 
 bills, and to the system of internal improvements. How 
 far these ve toes were consistent with his pledge to Gov 
 ernor Ray and the Legislature of Indiana before his elec 
 tion, let the reader judge. A bill was passed, however, 
 providing for the improvement of harbors, and clearing 
 certain rivers, having passed the House, 136 to 53 ; arid 
 the Senate, 28 to 6 ; and another providing for surveys, 
 &c. ; both of which were approved by the President. The 
 application of the veto to so many bills displeased many of 
 the President s friends. 
 
 Gen. Jackson had in his Inaugural promised " to observe 
 toward the Indian tribes a just and liberal policy." His 
 sense of justice and liberality toward these tribes, a few 
 facts will suffice to illustrate. 
 
 The resolute purpose of Mr. Adams to protect the Creeks 
 in the peaceable possession of their lands had provoked the 
 bitter resentment of the Government and people of Georgia, 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. t9 
 
 Having had intimations "before the election, that Gen. Jack 
 son would favor their claims to the right of soil and of 
 jurisdiction over it, they lost no time in attempting to gain 
 possession. A law was passed by the Legislature of Geor 
 gia extending over the Cherokee country the laws of the 
 State. The Indians memorialized Congress for protection. 
 The Attorney-General, Mr. Berrien, taken from that State 
 to a seat in the Cabinet, was applied to for his opinion, 
 which was unfavorable to the claims of the Indians, conced 
 ing to them merely the right of occupancy, the fee of the soil 
 being in the State. It was the purpose of the President to 
 effect the removal of the Indians West of the Mississippi ; 
 and a bill was reported for this purpose in each House. 
 The debate on the Senate bill was a long and an able one. 
 The bill passed to a third reading by a^vote of 28 to 19. 
 It passed the House, 103 to 97. This bill did nof in words 
 compel the removal of the Indians. The change of policy 
 consisted in conceding to the States the right of soil, and 
 in subjecting the Indians to the government of the States. 
 It was presumed, that, if reduced to the alternative of sub 
 mitting to the laws of Georgia and Alabama, or of exchang 
 ing their lands, they would choose the latter. 
 
 In the course of the debates on the bill, the policy of the 
 Government toward the Indians by former administrations, 
 from that of Washington down, and all the treaties made 
 from time to time, were referred to, to prove the claim of 
 the Indians to the ownership of the lands ; and it is cer 
 tainly difficult to see how, from the facts presented, both 
 Houses could sanction the new policy. 
 
 A treaty was made with the Choctaws, who ceded their 
 lands, and agreed to remove beyond the Mississippi within 
 three years. Those choosing to remain as citizens of 
 Georgia, were to have reservations of land for their use, 
 and after residing upon them for five years, were to possess 
 them in fee. They were to be governed in their Western 
 residence by laws of their own, which, however, must not 
 be inconsistent with those of the United States. 
 
 The Cherokees, unwilling to emigrate, soon found them 
 selves under the operation of the laws of Georgia ; and, 
 having failed in their appeals to the Government for pro 
 tection, they took measures to have their case submitted to 
 
80 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the Supreme Court. Their counsel, Mr. Wirt, proposed to 
 Gov. Gilmer, of Georgia, the making of a case, by consent, 
 before that Court ; but the Governor declined. 
 
 George Tassels, an Indian, having committed a homicide 
 in resisting the execution of the laws of Georgia, was tried, 
 convicted of murder, and sentenced to be hanged. Before 
 the day fixed for his execution, the State of Georgia, pur 
 suant to a writ of error obtained from the Supreme Court 
 of the United States, was cited to appear, and show cause 
 why judgment against Tassels should not be corrected. 
 The Legislature declared the interference of the Chief-Jus 
 tice in the administration of the criminal laws of Georgia a 
 flagrant violation of her rights ; enjoined all State officers 
 to disregard all such mandates of the Court ; required the 
 Governor to resisPby force all invasions upon the admin 
 istration of the laws ; and ordered the execution of Tas 
 sels, which was done. 
 
 The act of Georgia nullifying the government and laws 
 of the Indians and enforcing the laws of the State within 
 the territory, made it a misdemeanor for white men to re 
 side within the limits of the Cherokee nation without 
 license from the Governor or his agent, and without having 
 taken an oath to support the Constitution and laws of the 
 State. Under this act, Rev. Mr. Worcester, a missionary, 
 and five others, were arrested. A writ of habeas corpus was 
 issued. Their discharge was demanded by their counsel, 
 on the ground that the act under which they had been ap 
 prehended was contrary to the Constitution of the United 
 States, and the Constitution of Georgia. The judge main 
 tained the constitutionality of the law. But as Mr. Wor 
 cester and one of the others were missionaries, and one of 
 them (Mr. W.) was a postmaster ; as they were there by 
 consent of the General Government for the purpose of 
 civilizing and Christianizing the Indians ; and as they 
 were Government agents for the disbursement of the pub 
 lic moneys for that purpose ; he discharged them under 
 the State law which excepted all agents of the General 
 Government from its provisions. The other four persons 
 were bound over for trial. 
 
 Mr. Worcester was soon after removed from the office of 
 postmaster, with the view, as was supposed, to make way 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 81 
 
 for his arrest. This supposition proved true. Ten persons 
 were indicted, convicted, and sentenced to four years imprison 
 ment ! Only Mr. Worcester and Dr. Butler were impris 
 oned ; the others having 1 been pardoned on giving" assur 
 ance that they would not again violate the laws. Mr. 
 Worcester applied to the Supreme Court for relief. The 
 Court pronounced the laws of Georgia unconstitutional, and 
 ordered Worcester s discharge. The mandate of the Court 
 was disregarded, the missionaries kept in prison, without 
 hope of liberation before another session of the Court, the 
 next year. They therefore discontinued their suit ; and 
 were discharged by the Governor. About three years 
 thereafter, a treaty was concluded providing for the re 
 moval of the Cherokees. 
 
 The proclamation of President Jackson against the 
 South Carolina nullifiers was issued before the Indian diffi 
 culties were ended. This raised for a time the hopes of 
 the Cherokees. The President having declared the su 
 premacy of the Constitution and laws of the United States 
 over those of State authority, and having acknowledged 
 the Supreme Court to be the proper tribunal to decide upon 
 the constitutionality of the laws, they hoped he would ulti 
 mately enforce the treaties and the laws made for their 
 protection. But their hopes were vain. What was consti 
 tutional on one side of the dividing line between the States 
 was unconstitutional on the other ! In other words, 
 nullification on one side was wrong, and on the other 
 right. 
 
 Among the party questions during the administrations 
 of Adams and Jackson, was that of the West India Trade. 
 No preceding administration had been able to secure a 
 trade with the British West India Islands on terms satis 
 factory to our Government. Acts of Parliament were 
 passed soon after Mr. Adams came into office, again open 
 ing certain colonial ports upon new terms and conditions ; 
 but they provided that these ports should be closed against 
 any nation that should not accept these terms. Mr. Adams 
 did not accept them for reasons which he assigned. The 
 acts had not been officially communicated ; and they were 
 so obscure that they had been differently con-strued by 
 British officers in different colonies ; and as Great Britain 
 
82 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 had promised to resume negotiation, it was better to await 
 the result of that negotiation. An arrangement by treaty 
 was preferable, because its terms could not be avoided but 
 by mutual agreement ; whereas an act of Parliament could 
 be altered or repealed whenever the interests of Great Brit 
 ain should require a change of policy. 
 
 Mr. Gallutiii was sent to England to negotiate ; but be 
 fore his credentials had been presented, an order in council 
 was issued cutting off all negotiation, and prohibiting all 
 intercourse with her West India Colonies. In pursuance 
 of acts of 1818 and 1820, our ports were declared closed 
 against British vessels from any place in any British terri 
 tory to which our vessels were not admitted. By a treaty 
 concluded at London, in August, 1827, a reciprocal trade 
 was established between the United States and the terri 
 tories of Great Britain in Europe for ten years from 1828 ; 
 but the exclusion of our vessels from her Colonies was con 
 tinued. Our produce, however, still found a market in the 
 British West India Islands by way of the Danish, Swedish, 
 and other neutral islands ; to which it was carried in 
 American vessels ; and thence it was reshippcd to the Brit 
 ish Islands. Hence our navigation was not very sensibly 
 affected. The Canadians complained that the arrangement 
 had not secured to them the advantage of supplying the 
 West India Islands ; and the extra cost of this indirect 
 trade fell upon British consumers. 
 
 The new administration having charged its predecessor 
 with the loss of the West India trade, it was to be expected 
 that a strenuous effort would be made to regain it. Mr. 
 McLane, the new Minister to England, was directed to re 
 present to the British Government, that the American peo 
 ple, in changing the administration, had testified their dis 
 approval of the acts of the late administration, and that the 
 claims set up by them which had caused the interruption of 
 the trade, would not be urged : that is, what had been in 
 judiciously asked as a right, we were now willing to receive 
 as a 600?i ; and the present administration should not be 
 held responsible for the acts of their predecessors. 
 
 An arrangement was in due time effected. It was at 
 once announced, with great exultation, by the administra 
 tion presses, as an achievement which had baflled the 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 83 
 
 diplomacy of our Government for forty years. The re 
 covery, " by the honest, high-minded, straight-forward ad 
 ministration of Andrew Jackson," of an unrestricted com 
 merce, temporarily enjoyed under the act of Parliament, of 
 July, 1825, but " unwillingly and criminally thrown away 
 by the blundering negotiation 1 of Mr. Adams, was hailed 
 as an important achievement. The opposition declared not 
 only that the trade had not been lost, but that nothing had 
 leen gained by the new arrangement ; and that our navigation 
 which had enjoyed the carrying* trade, would le diminished 
 by the British shipping, for which loss no equivalent would 
 be received. 
 
 The arrangement secured to our vessels and cargoes the 
 right to enter the ports of her West India and other British 
 Colonies, on equal terms with her own coming from the 
 United States. But the benefits of- this anticipated "re 
 ciprocal trade" had scarcely begun to be realized, when, by 
 an act of Parliament, produce coining into the British West 
 India ports directly from the United States, was subjected 
 to exorbitant duties, but was admitted into the Canadian 
 provinces, and thence shipped to the British West India 
 Islands in British vessels, free of duty, to the exclusion of Amer 
 ican shipping. The flour, also, manufactured in Canada from 
 American wheat, was considered as having changed its 
 character, and was admitted free into England, as cckniil 
 produce. The duty on a barrel of flour from the United 
 States into the British West India Colonies, was 6s., or 
 $1 33 ; but from the Canadas no duty was charged. Lum 
 ber was charged at $7 per 1000 feet ; but from the British 
 North American Colonies it was free. To evade the 
 duties, British vessels conveyed our produce to Canadian 
 ports, and thence, as British produce, to the islands, free 
 of duty. 
 
 No wonder that the British papers rejoiced at the bene 
 fits derived from " the arrangement." One said: "Jona 
 than, after all, will not find the great boon so good a thing 
 as he expected, under the existing restrictions." Another 
 said : " We only allow their vessels to bring to our ports 
 the produce and manufactures of the United States : they 
 make their ports free to our commerce in every sense of 
 the word." 
 
84 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 As was predicted by the opposition, our tunnage was 
 greatly diminished, and the British increased. So inju 
 riously did this policy affect the lumber trade of Maine 
 with the West Indies, in which a vast amount of shipping 
 had been previously employed, that Congress was petitioned 
 for relief. The adverse effects of this boasted " arrange 
 ment" w^re, as far as possible, concealed. The adminis 
 tration presses were silent in respect to its practical work 
 ings ; they rather continued to claim credit for the measure. 
 Even Mr. Benton, in his " Thirty Years View/ after its 
 disastrous effects had been so severely felt, lauds it in 
 terms no less eulogistic than those in which it was first 
 announced. Thousands of the old friends of Gen. Jackson, 
 still speak of this measure as one that reflects the highest 
 honor upon his administration. 
 
 In the summer of 1831, Mr. McLane was appointed Sec 
 retary of the Treasury in President Jackson s new Cabinet, 
 and Mr. Van Buren was appointed to take his place as 
 Minister at London. The appointment was made during 
 the recess of the Senate, and the nomination was made to 
 that body at the next session. The nomination, after an 
 excited debate of several days, was rejected by the casting 
 vote of Vice-President Calhoun. The principal objection 
 made to the nomination, was the character of his instruc 
 tions to Mr. McLane respecting the West India negotiation, 
 by which he had humbled us in the eyes of foreign nations. 
 He had instructed our Minister to press upon a foreign 
 Government the misconduct of one part of the American 
 family in the relations of our Government with that foreign 
 power, and the more amiable and kind feelings of another 
 division of it. Mr. Clay was opposed to the nomination 
 also because the nominee had, as he believed, introduced 
 the odious system of proscription into the General Govern 
 ment ; the system practiced in the gentleman s own State 
 by the party of which he was the reputed head. It was a 
 detestable system, putting up officers and honors to a 
 scramble to be decided at every Presidential election. 
 
 Mr. Marcy, among others, replied, defending the instruc 
 tions, and censuring the conduct of the previous adminis 
 tration, by which the colonial trade was lost. lie also 
 vindicated the politics of New York. They (the politicians) 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 85 
 
 saw nothing wrong in the rule, that " to the victor belong 
 the spoils of the enemy." The rejection was effected by 
 the united votes of the opposition Senators, and those who, 
 in the quarrel between the President and Mr. Calhoun, had 
 attached themselves to the fortunes of the latter. Mr. Van 
 Buren being suspected of some agency in the disruption of 
 the Cabinet, and, as a political rival, an object of jealousy 
 to Mr. Calhoun, and withal a favorite of the President, their 
 hatred to him was not less intense than that which they 
 entertained toward his chief. However justly Mr. Van 
 Buren may have incurred the censure of the Senate and of 
 the American people, his rejection, by the reaction in pub 
 lic sentiment, which it produced, was one of the most 
 effective means of his promotion. 
 
 The Democratic party have been charged with holding 
 to the Southern doctrine of State Rights, or Nullification. 
 In the great debate in the Senate, in 1830, on Foot s reso 
 lutions relative to the public lands, in which the powers of 
 the General Government and the State Governments, and 
 the nature of the Union, became a prominent topic of dis 
 cussion, the views of Democratic Senators appear to have 
 coincided very nearly with those of Mr. Haync. It is be 
 lieved, that, of all the administration Senators who partici 
 pated in the debate, only one, (Mr. Livingston, of Louisi 
 ana,,) took the ground of Mr. Webster. Mr. Hayne main 
 tained that the Constitution was a compact between the 
 States, as States; and that there was no higher authority 
 than that of a State, as a party to the compact, to judge of 
 infractions of the Constitution ; and that a State had the 
 right to nullify any law of Congress which it should deem 
 unconstitutional. This right was claimed on the authority 
 of the Kentucky Resolutions drawn up by Mr. Jefferson. 
 [See page 33.] And it is well recollected that the lead 
 ing administration presses pronounced the speech of Mr. 
 Hayne unanswerable an " able, sound, democratic argu 
 ment," for which the Democrats of the nation "owed him 
 a debt of gratitude." And it was, for a time, at least, 
 highly applauded by leading men of that party in all parts 
 of the Union. Mr. Benton, Mr. Woodbury, Mr. Grundy, 
 Mr. Rowan, and others took the side of Hayne, though all 
 did not assert the right of violent resistance. Mr. Rowan 
 
86 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 pronounced the idea that the Supreme Court had the power 
 to decide the question of the constitutionality of a law, a fal 
 lacy. These doctrines, he said, had been inferred from the 
 tenor of the first message of Mr. Adams to Congress. Now, 
 the explicit avowal of them by the honorable Senator (Mr. 
 Webster) removed all doubt, as to the political faith of Mr. 
 Adams. His most distinguished apostle had avowed it. 
 " The tuo parties," said Mr, R., " are now clearly distinguish 
 able by their opposite political tenets ; the one headed by 
 our illustrious chief magistrate, who is the advocate of the 
 rights of the States ; the other party is now headed by the 
 Senator from Massachusetts." He expressly declared the 
 right of a State to resist a law of Congress by force. 
 
 Did Mr. Rowan speak " by authority" when he claimed 
 Gen. Jackson as a supporter of the doctrines then and 
 there advocated by the leading Democratic Senators ? Of 
 this there may be on the public records no positive evi 
 dence. But his sanction of the nullification, by Georgia, of 
 the treaties of the United States, and of the decision of the 
 Supreme Court, affords strong presumptive evidence, that, up 
 to the time of South Carolina nullification, of which his 
 enemy, Mr. Calhoun, was the principal author, he favored 
 the Southern doctrine, as defended in this debate. And 
 bad not actual resistance to the laws been determined on 
 by that State, it is not improbable that these doctrines, now 
 BO generally odious, would have continued, to this day, a 
 part of the Democratic creed. 
 
 At the session of 1831-1832, a new tariff act was passed, 
 by which the duties on some articles, as iron, coarse wool 
 ens, &c., were materially reduced ; though, on the whole, 
 it was not less satisfactory to the friends of protection than 
 the act of 1828. In South Carolina, the " Union" party 
 considered it as a concession, while the " States rights" 
 party regarded it as no less objectionable than former acts. 
 It passed the House, 132 to 65 ; the Senate, 32 to 1G. This 
 was the act which provoked the hostility of South Caro 
 lina.- Two propositions made at the same session for a 
 large reduction of duties to meet the views of Southern 
 members, were rejected ; one of which had been reported 
 by Mr. Verplanck, who represented the interests of the im 
 porters of the city of New York,, who were opposed to 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 87 
 
 restrictions upon trade ; the other by Mr. M Duffie, which 
 required a gradual reduction to a uniform duty of 12| per 
 cent, on all goods imported after the 30th of June, 1834. 
 
 In October following, (1832,) the time to prepare for 
 forcible resistance to the law, so long threatened, arrived. 
 The Governor of South Carolina convened the Legislature, 
 which authorized the calling of a Convention " to consider 
 the character and extent of the usurpations of the General 
 Government." The Convention assembled in November, 
 and adopted an ordinance declaring the tariff act null and 
 void, and forbidding the authorities of cither the General 
 or State Government to enforce the payment of duties with 
 in that State. Any act of Congress to authorize the em 
 ployment offeree against the State was declared void, and 
 would not be submitted to ; and from the time of its pas 
 sage, the State would consider herself absolved from fur 
 ther obligations to the Union, and proceed to organize a 
 separate government. The ordinance was to take effect 
 the 1st of February, 1833. 
 
 On the llth of December was issued the famous Procla 
 mation of President Jackson against nullification. The 
 views which it expresses of the nature of the Union, the 
 supremacy of the laws of the United States, and the prero 
 gative of the Supreme Court in respect to determining the 
 validity of the laws of Congress, were similar to those ex 
 pressed by Mr. Webster and Mr. Livingston in the Senate ; 
 which induced the belief that the proclamation was written 
 by the latter, who was now Secretary of State. It very 
 ably opposed the doctrine of secession, and defended the 
 right of the General Government to punish those who 
 should attempt, by force of arms, to destroy it ; and he ad 
 monished the Carolinians not to incur the penalty of the 
 laws. 
 
 The Legislature of South Carolina passed laws to give 
 effect to the ordinance. Arms and ammunition were 
 ordered to be purchased : and all needful preparation was 
 made to resist the enforcement of the laws of Congress for 
 the collection of the revenue. A bill was reported in Con 
 gress, empowering the President to employ the land and 
 naval forces of the Union, to enforce the collection of the 
 revenue in case of resistance. The bill was passed in the 
 
88 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Senate the 20th of February, 32 to 1. Mr. Tyler alone 
 voted in the negative, other Senators opposed to tho bill 
 having withdrawn. It passed the Uouse on the 1st of 
 March, 148 to 48. 
 
 To prevent apprehended collision, the State of Virginia 
 had assumed the office of mediator, and appointed a com 
 missioner, (Benjamin Watkins Leigh,) to expostulate with 
 the Government of South Carolina for the preservation of 
 peace. The nullifying acts were to go into effect the 1st 
 of February ; but on being informed of the intention of 
 Virginia to interpose, and before the arrival of Mr. Leigh, 
 the operation of the laws was suspended until after the ad 
 journment of Congress. Another cause contributed to this 
 result. Mr. Verplanck had again introduced a bill similar 
 to that of the preceding session, proposing a sudden reduc 
 tion of duties, within two years, to a uniform rate of 20 
 per cent. ; and there was, for a time, some hope of its 
 passage, which would have pacified the rebellious State. 
 
 But while this bill was pending, and its passage having 
 become quite improbable at this session, Mr. Clay, on the 
 12th of February, 1833, introduced his compromise tariff 
 bill, which had in view two objects : one, to prevent the 
 destruction of the tariff policy ; the other, to avert civil 
 war, and restore peace to the country. This bill, before 
 it passed the Senate, was adopted in the House, in lieu of 
 Mr. Verplanck s bill, and passed, (Feb. 26,) 118 to 84. It 
 passed the Senate, 29 to 16. It was opposed by Mr. Web 
 ster and others because it gave up the principle of protec 
 tion, and was insufficient to sustain the manufacturing in 
 terest. It was urged by Mr. Clay in reply, that, although 
 Mr. Verplanck s could not pass at the present session, there 
 was reason to fear that an attempt in the next Congress to 
 destroy protection would be successful ; and it would be 
 better to extend the period of gradual reduction to the 30th 
 of June, 1842, than to intrust the adjustment of the tariff 
 to the incoming Congress. The act provided, that in all 
 cases in which the duties exceeded 20 per cent, was to be 
 gradually deducted, thus : one-tenth of all over and above 
 20 per cent., after the 31st of December, 1835 ; another 
 tenth after the end of each of the years, 1837 and 
 1839 ; and of the remainder, one-half after the end of the 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION 89 
 
 year 1841 ; and the rernaindei after the 30th of June, 
 1842. 
 
 On the llth of March, 1833, the nullifying ordinance of 
 South Carolina was repealed. 
 
 With many it has been a question, whether, in 1830, 
 President Jackson really held to the opinions ascribed to 
 him by his nullifying friends. It is by some supposed that 
 he did, and that the. practical working of the scheme con 
 vinced him of his error, and led him to abjure the heresy. 
 An extract from a debate in the House on the " Force Bill," 
 may assist in solving this question. 
 
 In the course of this debate, the consistency of the Presi 
 dent on the doctrine of State Sovereignty was called in 
 question. Mr. Daniel, of Ky., alluded to the controversy 
 between Georgia and the General Government in regard to 
 the claims of the Cherokees, whose case had been carried 
 by appeal from the Courts of Georgia to the Supreme Court 
 of the United States. Mr. D. said it was well known that 
 the President was in favor of the repeal of the 25th section 
 of the Judiciary Act, which authorized the right of appeal 
 from the Superior Courts of the States to the Supreme 
 Court of the United States ; and this, said Mr. D., address 
 ing the Chair, you, yourself, well know. [Mr. Polk, of 
 Tennessee, then occupied the Chair in the absence of 
 Speaker Stevenson.] All the members from Tennessee, he 
 believed, with one or two exceptions, voted for the repeal 
 of this section. But there were many more corroborative 
 proofs of the President s opinions on this subject. A dis 
 tinguished Senator (Mr. Grundy) from the President s own 
 State, expressed the following opinion in 1830, in the de 
 bate on Foot s resolution : " If the State possesses the 
 power to act as I have shown, the necessary consequence 
 is, that the act of Congress must cease to operate in the 
 State, and Congress must acquiesce by abandoning the 
 power, or obtain an express grant from the great source 
 from which all its powers are drawn. The General Gov 
 ernment have no right to use force. It would be a glaring 
 absurdity to suppose that the State had the right to judge 
 of the constitutionality of an act of the General Govern 
 ment, and at the same time to say that Congress had the 
 right to enforce submission to the act." The doctrines ad- 
 
90 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 vocated by Air. Uayne, said Mr. D., had at that time met 
 with the approbation of the President, as expressed in di 
 rect terms in a letter from him to Mr. Hayne. The terms 
 \vcre to the effect, that the speech contained an exposition 
 of the true principles of republicanism, and that it should 
 be bound up and placed in his library along with the works 
 of Thomas Jefferson. 
 
 Mr. Bell, of Term., here rose and inquired of Mr. Daniel, 
 whether he had a personal knowledge of the President s ap 
 proval of these principles, and of his commendation of Mr. 
 Hayne s speech. 
 
 Before Mr. Daniel could reply, Mr. Carson, of N. C., rose 
 with much earnestness, and said : " I, from my personal 
 knowledge, can declare that such is the fact. The 
 President expressed to me his approbation of that speech, 
 in person." 
 
 Mr. Daniel proceeded, and said, what he knew of the 
 President s opinions on this subject was from documents 
 emanating from his own pen, and from the various state 
 ments of gentlemen whose veracity could not be impeached, 
 independent of a host of corroborating circumstances. 
 These nullifying doctrines had thus received the sanction 
 of the member from Tennessee, (Mr. Grundy) who had just 
 advocated the " Force Bill" in the Senate. They were ap 
 proved by the President himself, until, in the downward 
 path of his administration, he had thought fit to abandon 
 every principle which had brought him into power : econ 
 omy, retrenchment, State rights all that had formed 
 the watchword of the party all had vanished into 
 thin air. 
 
 Add to this testimony the fact before stated, that the 
 leading Democratic papers of the country, among which 
 was the Albany Argus, the acknowledged exponent of the 
 principles of its party, commended in unqualified terms, the 
 speech of Mr. Hayne for its " able, sound, democratic argu 
 ment," and there is no room to doubt, that President Jack 
 son, the head of the party, with the great body of its mem 
 bers, who were wont to boast of their adherence to the 
 Jeffersonian republican principles of 1798, were in favor of 
 the doctrine of Nullification. We may, however, congratu 
 late the country, that he was compelled, by the force of 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 91 
 
 circumstances, to change bis position. His commanding 
 influence might otherwise have popularized this disorganiz 
 ing, revolutionary doctrine, and confirmed the Southern, 
 construction of the Constitution. For the decided stand he 
 took against the nullifiers of 1832, he deserves high praise. 
 Had a similar determination to enforce the laws been mani 
 fested by the late Executive in the incipient istage of the 
 present Rebellion, it would have been promptly quelled ; 
 and the immense sacrifice of life and treasure which it 
 will have occasioned, might have been avoided. 
 
 At the session of 1831-1832, a bill making appropriations 
 for certain internal improvements for the year 1832. passed 
 both Houses ; and, notwithstanding his previously ex 
 pressed objections to a system of internal improvement, the 
 President approved the bill. It contained about fifty ob 
 jects of appropriation, some of them of less importance 
 than those which he had before negatived, and appropri 
 ated sums exceeding, in the aggregate, $1,200,000. Another 
 bill, making appropriations for the improvement of harbors 
 and rivers, passed the House 95 to 68, and was ordered en 
 grossed in the Senate, 25 to 16. This bill, though quite as 
 national in its character as the other, did not receive the 
 President s signature. Though he received it three days 
 before the adjournment of Congress, he retained it until 
 Congress had adjourned, and thus prevented further action 
 upon it. One or two other bills during this session re 
 ceived his veto. The frequent use of this power by Gen. 
 Jackson obtained for him the significant title of "Veto 
 President." 
 
 The subject of the Public Lands, which had frequently 
 engaged the attention of Congress, was again agitated at 
 this session, (1832.) A bill was reported by Mr. Clay. 
 The revenue from duties on imports being sufficient for or 
 dinary purposes, he proposed a distribution of the proceeds 
 of the sales of public lands among the States for a limited 
 time, subject to be resumed by the Government in case of 
 war. To the five per cent, now reserved from the proceeds, 
 ten per cent. was. to be added for making internal improve 
 ments in the new States. This was intended to allay the 
 complaints of the people of those States, that the public 
 lands were exempt from taxation for five years from the 
 
92 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 time of sale. The residue of the fund derived from sales 
 was to be divided among all the States in proportion to 
 their federal population, to be applied to purposes of edu 
 cation, internal improvements, or colonization, at the 
 pleasure of each State. The time limited for distribution 
 was five years. 
 
 A counter report was made by another Committee, pro 
 posing to reduce the price of fresh lands to one dollar per 
 acre, and of those which had been in market five years to 
 fifty cents per acre ; and proposing to allow to the new 
 States fifteen instead of ten cents in addition to the present 
 five per cent. Mr. Clay s bill, however, was adopted, 28 to 
 16. It was sent to the House, where it was virtually re 
 jected by postponing its consideration to the first Monday 
 of December next. Tfie bill was renewed at the next ses 
 sion, and with some amendments passed the Senate, 24 to 
 20 ; the House, 96 to 40. The bill was received by the 
 President the day before the close of the session, but was 
 not returned by him until the next session which was 
 virtually another veto. Having in his first Annual Mes 
 sage, (December, 1829,) recommended the distribution of 
 the surplus revenue among the several States, as the most 
 proper mode of disposing of it, a disapproval of the mea 
 sure was to many quite unexpected, and was imputed to 
 other reasons than those given in the Message accompany 
 ing the returned bill. 
 
 The unexpected attack on the Bank of the United States 
 in the President s first Message, has been noticed. The ulti 
 mate destruction of this Institution against such odds as 
 he had to encounter at the commencement of the contest, 
 is one of the strange events which mark our political 
 history. 
 
 The stockholders of the Bank applied at this session for 
 a renewal of its charter. Among the reasons stated for so 
 early an application, they said : " Unless the question is 
 decided by the present Congress, no definitive action can 
 be expected until within two years of the expiration of the 
 charter ; a period before which, in the opinion of your me 
 morialists, it is highly expedient, not merely in reference 
 to the institution itself, but to the interests of the nation, 
 that the determination of Congress should be known." 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 93 
 
 The memorial was referred, in the Senate, to a Select 
 Committee ; in the House, to the Committee of Ways and 
 Means. The Chairmen, Mr. Dallas, in the Senate, and Mr. 
 McDuffie, in the House, were both Democrats. The bill 
 reported by Mr. Dallas was the one adopted in both Houses. 
 It passed the Senate, 28 to 20 ; the House, 107 to 85 ; but 
 it was vetoed by the President ; for which act he was 
 severely censured by some of his political friends, as well 
 as nearly all his opponents. He assigned various reasons 
 for the veto ; but the} 7 failed to satisfy the friends of the 
 Bank. The opinions of the Supreme Court, he contended, 
 ought not to control the coordinate authorities. " The 
 Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself 
 be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each 
 public officer swears that he will support it os he under 
 stands it, and not as it is understood by others." And he 
 said the President was independent of b0th Congress and 
 the Judges. 
 
 Nowhere was the President more severely censured for 
 the veto than in Pennsylvania, where he had enjoyed great 
 popularity. At a meeting in Philadelphia, it was declared, 
 that his rejection of the Bank bill, his assaults on the prin 
 ciple of protection to American industry, upon the Supreme 
 Court, and upon the independence of Congress, had 
 " severed the ties by which the people of Pennsylvania had 
 been connected with him " and they declared that, " the 
 reelection of a President whose official path had been 
 strewed with violated pledges, would be a national 
 calamity." 
 
 In the House of Kepresentatives, a Committee was ap 
 pointed to inspect the books and examine into the proceed 
 ings of the Bank. Numerous acts of misconduct had been 
 alleged against the Bank as furnishing ground for the in 
 quiry. The majority of the Committee reported six cases 
 of alleged wrong doing, -which were designed to show 
 that the Bank had violated its charter. But the Commit 
 tee would not express their opinion as to their force. Al 
 legations were also made of corrupt management, designed 
 to show that the Bank was no longer entitled to public 
 confidence. A counter report was made by the minority, 
 in which the allegations of the majority were met arid 
 
94 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 severally disposed of. A third report was made by John 
 Quincy Adams alone, \vho had joined with ,his two col 
 leagues of the minority, McDuffie and Watmough, in the 
 second report above mentioned. This report of Mr. Adams 
 discloses the cause of the first attack upon the Bank. 
 The facts reported by Mr. A., though published among the 
 public documents, are known to but a small portion of the 
 American people. He says : " They are not noticed in the 
 report of the Chairman, but in the opinion of the sub 
 scriber, are more deserving of the attention of Congress 
 and of the nation, than any other papers commented upon 
 in the report." 
 
 It appeared that Isaac Hill, editor of a Democratic paper 
 in Concord, N. H., and chief director of the party in that 
 State, who had recently been appointed a Controller of the 
 Treasury at Washington, had, in June, 1829, three months 
 after the Inauguration of Gen. Jackson, sent to his friends 
 in Philadelphia two petitions, to one of which he had ob 
 tained the names of about sixty members of the New Hamp 
 shire Legislature, and which his friends were to present to 
 the President and Directors of the Bank, asking for a 
 change in the Board of Directors in the branch at Ports 
 mouth. Several Jackson men were named in the petition 
 for directors. 
 
 Soon after, the Secretary of War wrote to Mr. Mason, 
 President of the branch at Portsmouth, directing the books, 
 papers, and funds of the Pension Agency to be delivered to 
 a Mr. Pickering, of Concord, for the benefit, as is evident, 
 of a smo.ll bank, of which Mr. Hill was the president before 
 his removal to Washington. Mr. Mason objected to this 
 order, as contrary to law. The charter made it the duty 
 of the Bank to disburse the public moneys for the Govern 
 ment ; and for this purpose the pension funds were placed 
 in its branches ; and Mr. Mason denied the legality of the 
 order and his own right to surrender the funds and papers 
 as required. 
 
 On\he llth of July, 1829, Mr. Ingham, Secretary of the 
 Treasury, transmitted to Mr. Biddle, President of the Bank, 
 a confidential letter from Mr. Woodbury, of N. H., contain 
 ing a complaint against the President of the branch at 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 95 
 
 Portsmouth, and charging .that the influence of the Bank 
 was used " with a view to political effect." He said also 
 that the people desired Mr. Mason s removal, many of whom 
 had requested him (Mr. W.) to ask his (Mr. Ingham s) in 
 fluence, at the mother Bank, in producing a change. He 
 said, further, that similar complaints had come from Ken- 
 tuck} , Louisiana, arid other places. 
 
 In a letter to Mr. Biddle, Mr. Woodbury said that the 
 charges against Mr. Mason " originated exclusively with 
 his political friends." This statement Mr. Biddle thought 
 irreconcilable with that of the same person in his letter to 
 Mr. Ingham, that the Bank was managed " with a view to 
 political effect." An examination was instituted ; and Mr. 
 Biddle went to New Hampshire for that purpose. After a 
 thorough investigation, the Board found that the accusa 
 tions were groundless ; that the most zealous of Mr. 
 Mason s enemies did not venture to assert that he had 
 ever, on any occasion, been influenced by political feelings ; 
 and that what had been represented as public opinion, 
 was nothing more than the personal hostility of a few 
 individuals. Mr. Mason was therefore immediately re- 
 elected. 
 
 In view of these facts, who can doubt, that it was the 
 object of leading Democrats to get control of the Bank, 
 with a view," either "to political effect," or to their 
 pecuniary advantage ; and, failing in this, they invoked 
 the aid of the President, whose popularity they well 
 knew how to appreciate, in demolishing an institution 
 which they. ^ld not make subservient to their selfish 
 ends ? 
 
 The defeat of the Bank bill by the veto of the President 
 took place a few months before the Presidential election 
 of 1832. The Bank question^being one of the principal 
 issues between the parties, thdfcveto gave increased ac 
 tivity to the canvass. Mr, 01 ^T the candidate of the Na 
 tional Republican party, was ayfevoted friend of the Bank ; 
 and a large portion of the Democrats, especially in Penn 
 sylvania, being in favor of its recharter, the friends of 
 Mr. Clay hoped the veto would inure materially to his 
 advantage. It is probable, however, that Gen. Jackson 
 
96 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 lost not a single electoral vote in consequence of his re- 
 jection of the Bank bill. He received of the electoral 
 votes 219, and Mr. Clay 49. South Carolina gave her 1 
 votes to John Floyd, of Va. ; and the 7 votes of Vermont 
 were given to William Wirt, the candidate of the Anti- 
 Masonic party. 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION 97 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Administration of Andrew Jackson. Second Term. 
 
 PRESIDENT JACKSON entered upon his second term on the 
 4th of March, 1833. Considering his reelection as a de 
 cision of the people against the Bank, he was encouraged 
 to continue his hostility to the institution. Arid the next 
 measure to be executed was the removal of the public moneys 
 from the Bank of the Untied States. Of this the public were 
 apprised by his last annual Message (Dec., 1832) before 
 his second Inauguration ; from which it appeared that 
 "measures had already been taken by the Secretary of the 
 Treasury to enable him to judge whether the public de 
 posits in this institution were entirely safe." As this fact 
 must be established in order to justify their removal, and 
 as the power of the Secretary might prove inadequate to 
 this object, the President recommended the subject to the 
 attention of Congress. An inquiry into the transactions of 
 the Bank and its branches, he said, was " called for by tho 
 credit which was given throughout the country to many 
 serious charges impeaching its character, which, if true, 
 might justly excite the apprehension, that it was no longer 
 a safe depository of the money of the people." 
 
 The measure taken by Secretary McLane to ascertain 
 the safety of the deposits, was the appointment of Henry 
 Toland to make the investigation, who reported to the Sec 
 retary the 4th of December, the day of the date of the Mes 
 sage, that the liabilities of the Bank amounted to $37,296, 
 590 ; and the fund to meet them, $79,593,870 ; showing 
 an excess of $42,296,920. As all liabilities must be first 
 paid in case of insolvency or dissolution, he considered the 
 security of the public money unquestionable. Nor was 
 there any doubt of the solvency of the Bank. 
 
 In the House, the subject was referred to the Committee 
 of Ways and Means, who, after due inquiry, reported that 
 the resources of the Bank were upwards of $43,000,000 
 
98 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 beyond its liabilities. The report concluded with a reso 
 lution, " That the Government deposits may, in the opinion 
 of the House, be safely continued in the Bank of the United 
 States." The resolution was adopted, 109 to 46. 
 
 The act declared that the deposits should be made in the 
 Bank and its branches, " unless the Secretary of the Trea 
 sury should at any time otherwise order and direct, in 
 which case he should immediately lay before Congress, if 
 in session, and if not, immediately after the commencement 
 of the next session, the reason of such order and direction." 
 Disappointed in the result of the investigation, he deter 
 mined on the removal of the deposits without the reason 
 that they were unsafe, and appointed Moses Kendall to con 
 fer with State Banks in relation to future deposits and dis 
 tribution of the public revenue. He read to his Cabinet 
 (September 18,) a manifesto, giving reasons for removing 
 the deposits, among which were : the Bank was of a dan 
 gerous tendency ; it had paid for printing and circulating 
 articles to influence public sentiment ; he desired to 
 evince his gratitude to the people by carrying their decision 
 into effect ; they having, by electing him, decided against 
 the recharteriug of the Bank, &c., &c. 
 
 William J. Duane, was now Secretary of the Treasury, 
 having been appointed in May, in the place of Mr. McLano, 
 who had been transferred to the head of the State Depart 
 ment in the place of Mr. Livingston, appointed Minister to 
 France. Mr. Duane was directed to remove the deposits ; 
 but he declined to obey the direction. lie assigned as rea 
 sons for refusing to carry the direction into effect, that the 
 change, without necessity, was a breach of faith ; that the 
 measure appeared vindictive and arbitrary ; that, if the 
 Bank had abused its powers, the Judiciary, and, in the last 
 resort, the Representatives of the people were able and 
 willing to punish ; that the latter had pronounced the de 
 posits safe ; that it was hazardous to place them in the 
 local banks, which were not, on an average, able to pay in 
 specie o;ie dollar in six of their paper in circulation ; that 
 it would place in the hands of a Secretary, dependent for 
 office on the Executive will, a power to favor or punish 
 those banks, and make them political machines ; that he 
 believed the efforts to hasten the removal of the deposits 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 90 
 
 had originated in schemes to promote selfish and factious 
 purposes : and that persons and presses in the confidence 
 and pay of the administration, had attempted to intimidate 
 and constrain the Secretary to execute an act in direct op 
 position to his own solemn convictions. 
 
 This long list of reasons, all of them of more or less 
 weight, one would suppose, would have deterred the Presi 
 dent from the execution of his arbitrary purpose. But the 
 Secretary s refusal was followed by his removal, and the 
 appointment of Roger B. Taney, then Attorncy-Ge oral, in 
 his place. Mr. Taney immediately directed the removal of 
 the deposits to the State Banks selected as the fiscal agents 
 of the Government. This act caused great excitement, and 
 was condemned by many of the President s political friends, 
 in all parts ot the country. Persons and presses that had 
 been among his most zealous supporters, expressed their 
 decided disapproval of this arbitrary exercise of power ; and 
 not a few withdrew from him their support. 
 
 A Committee appointed by the Directors of the Bank, 
 made a long and elaborate report, designed as a full vindi* 
 cation of the course of the Directors, and as a refutation of 
 the charges brought against it. They alluded to the efforts 
 made in the summer of 18*29 to remove Mr. Mason and the 
 public funds from the branch at Portsmouth in order to 
 satisfy Isaac Hill, who requested a change because "the 
 friends of Gen. Jackson had but too much reason to com 
 plain of the management of the branch at Portsmou h," 
 manifesting thus early " a combined effort to render t ie in 
 stitution subservient to party purposes." Hence it became 
 necessary to come to some immediate and distinct under 
 standing of its rights and duties. They also gave extracts 
 from the correspondence between Mr. Biddle and the Trea 
 sury Department, (alluded to in preceding pages,) which, 
 they said, * icvealed the whole secret of the hostility to the 
 Bank of those who, finding it impossible to bend it to their 
 purposes, had resolved to break it." The Bank hud been 
 charged with paying, from the funds deposited, for publi 
 cations containing "invectives against the officer? of the 
 Government/ and designed "to operate on elections and 
 secure a renewal of its charter." In reply the report says, 
 that the power actually given to the President of the B ink 
 
100 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 to expend its funds, which he had exercised, and which 
 would continue to be exercised, was for the defense of tho 
 Bank against the calumnies with which, for four years, the 
 institution had been pursued. 
 
 In the change which was made in depositing the public 
 funds, no money was transferred from the Bank to tho 
 State banks. Future deposits were made in the latter ; 
 and the money was drawn from the former only as it was 
 wanted by the Government. The change took place the 
 1st of October, 1833. The spite of the official enemies of the 
 Bank was now exhibited in an attempt to " break" it by 
 unexpected and sudden drafts. Mr. Kendall, the Govern 
 ment agent, in a letter to a New York editor, a few days 
 after the removal of the deposits, spoke of the effects of a 
 sudden withdrawal of the public moneys, (then nearly ten 
 millions,) from the Bank, and added : " Yes,sir, tliis boast 
 ing giant is but a reptile beneath the feet of the Secretary 
 of the Treasury, which he can crush at will. It exists by 
 his forbearance, and will, for the next forty days ; and 
 great forbearance will it require to save it from 
 destruction." 
 
 Accordingly, a few weeks after the utterance of this 
 threat, the Bank Avas surprised by the presentation of a 
 number of large drafts : one of $100 r 060 at the branch in 
 Baltimore ; two others, one of $100,000, and another of 
 $500,000, at the Bank in Philadelphia ; and three others, of 
 $500,000 each, had been drawn upon the branch in New 
 York. These drafts were all in favor of the State Banks in 
 these places selected to receive the deposits. It had been 
 the practice of the Treasury to transmit to the Bank a 
 weekly statement of drafts to be made upon it ; but these 
 large sums were drawn for without the usual previous 
 notice. 
 
 The effects of this unprincipled war upon the Bank tho 
 rapid withdrawal of the deposits, and the known attempt 
 to " crush" the institution compelled, as a measure of 
 safety, a curtailment of its loans ; and a severe money pres 
 sure BOOU followed. Bills of State Banks depreciated in value 
 on account of the scarcity of money ; and these banks too 
 were compelled to reduce their discounts. Public meet 
 ings were held, and memorials to Congress were prepared, 
 
, - m 
 
 JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 101 
 
 praying for the return of the deposits to the Bank. The 
 price of public stocks declined from 10 to 30 per cent. ; in 
 terest rose to ruinous rates ; laborers were discharged ; 
 and the price of real estate greatly declined. All this the 
 opponents of the Bank attributed to the panic produced by 
 the Bank and its friends for political purposes, or with a 
 view to the renewal of its charter. 
 
 The intensity of the excitement increased. Meetings 
 were called irrespective of party, and the removal of the 
 deposits unanimosuly condemned. The Legislatures of 
 several States did the same. The House of Delegates of 
 Virginia pronounced the removal of the federal revenue 
 from the Bank, where Congress had required it to be de 
 posited, "an unauthorized assumption and dangerous exer 
 cise of Executive power." The Legislatures of some States, 
 however, approved the course of the President. 
 
 The hew Congress met in December, 1833. Mr. Calhoun 
 and his friends now acting with the opposition, the admin 
 istration party in the Senate was in the minority. The 
 subject of the deposits occupied much of the time of this 
 session. Memorials and remonstrances were received ; 
 and the question of the return of the deposits, and the 
 course of the Bank, were long the subjects of debate. 
 
 In the Senate, two resolutions were offered by Mr. Clay : 
 the first declaring, that in the proceedings of the President 
 in relation to the public revenue, he had assume-d power 
 not conferred by the Constitution and laws ; the second, 
 that the reason assigned by the Secretary for the removal 
 of the deposits were unsatisfactory and insufficient. The 
 first was adopted, 26 to 20 ; the second, 28 to 18. The 
 President soon after sent to the Senate a Message, protesting 
 against this act of the Senate, as being, in substance, an 
 impeachment of him contrary to the form prescribed by the 
 Constitution, and requesting that the Message and protest 
 be entered on the journals of the Senate ; but the Senate 
 refused to receive the paper. 
 
 Several reports and counter-reports, in relation to the 
 bank and the removal of the deposits, were made during this 
 session ; but it is impossible to give them place. Although 
 not devoid of interest, they do not essentially affect the 
 general aspect of the question. 
 
 
4 
 
 102 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Mr. Benton, at the time of the adoption of Mr. Clay s re 
 solution, (March, 1834,) pronouncing the President s pro 
 ceedings in relation to the deposits to be in derogation of 
 the Constitution and laws, gave notice that he would from 
 time to time move that the resolution be expunged. He 
 accordingly made such motion at the next session, (1834- 
 1835.) But after some discussion, it was laid upon the 
 table, 27 to 20. Unfaltering in his purpose, he repeated tho 
 motion at each successive session until 1837, when he was 
 successful. The motion was opposed by Messrs. Calhoun, 
 Webster, and Clay. The two first named Senators main 
 tained, that, as the Constitution requires the Senate to keep 
 a journal of its proceedings, the expunging of any part of 
 it, would be a violation of the Constitution. " A record ex 
 punged" said Mr. Webster, " is not a record which is kept, 
 any more than a record destroyed is a record which is pre 
 served. The part expunged is no longer a part of the re 
 cord ; it has no longer a legal existence. It can not be 
 certified as a part of the proceedings of the Senate for any 
 proof or evidence." He protested that they had no right 
 to deprive him of the personal constitutional right of hav 
 ing his yea and nay recorded and preserved on the journal. 
 They might as well erase the yeas and nays on all other 
 questions as on this. Some Senators had been instructed 
 by their State Legislatures to vote for expunging. Mr. 
 Calhoun and Mr. Webster both believed these instructions 
 had been obtained " by dictation from the White House ; ; 
 that they had their origin in promptings from Washington ; 
 and had been brought about by the influence of the Execu 
 tive branch of this Government." The vote was taken near 
 midnight : Yeas, 24 ; Nays, 19 ; absent, 4. The Secretary 
 of the Senate then drew a square of broad black lines 
 around the resolution of the 28th of March, 1834, and wrote 
 across it, " Expunged by order of the Senate, this 16th day 
 ofjJariuary, 1837." 
 
 "We now come to a subject which has been productive of 
 a more intense excitement, a more protracted and bitter 
 controversy, and which has more deeply affected the inter 
 ests of the nation, than any other political question 
 that has ever divided the American people the question 
 of SLAVERY. 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 103 
 
 In 1833 was formed the American Anti-Slavery Society. 
 Its object was, by fair and candid discussion, to produce a 
 strong and general anti-slavery sentiment at the North, the 
 moral influence of which, it was hoped, would be felt at 
 the South ; and to convince slaveholders that Slavery was 
 a moral and political evil, and that both duty and the mu 
 tual interests of the slave and the master required its im 
 mediate abolition. Neither the parent Society nor any of 
 its auxiliaries originally, or for several years afterwards, 
 contemplated or suggested a political organization to pro 
 mote the object of these associations. 
 
 Anti-Slavery Societies were soon formed throughout the 
 Northern States. The South became alarmed. Attempts 
 were made to suppress anti-slavery societies and their pub 
 lications. The " Emancipator," published in the city of 
 New York, was indicted by a grand jury in Alabama ; and 
 a requisition by Gov. Gayle was made upon Gov. Marcy of 
 the Slate of New York for the surrender of the publisher, 
 R. J. Williams, as a "fugitive from justice," to be tried as 
 an offender against the laws of Alabama concerning 
 Slavery. The requisition was, of course, disregarded. In 
 Louisiana a reward of $50,000 was offered for the delivery 
 of Arthur Tappan, a prominent, abolitionist in the city of 
 New York ; and rewards were offered for several other 
 persons. And the Legislature of Mississippi offered a re 
 ward of $5,000 for any person who should be convicted of 
 having circulated the " Liberator or any other seditious 
 paper within that State. Public meetings were held, at 
 which Abolitionists were denounced ; and fears were ex 
 pressed of a dissolution of the Union. 
 
 The South had then, as it has had ever since, hosts of 
 hympathizers in the North, who promptly responded to the 
 sentiments expressed in Southern meetings. In many of 
 the principal Northern cities, meetings were held which 
 were attended by the most prominent citizens. The strong 
 est sympathy was expressed for the slaveholders, and the 
 Abolitionists were stigmatized as " disturbers of the public 
 peace," and as " disloyal to the Union." Southern papers 
 expressed great satisfaction at this declaration of Northern 
 sentiment. They " hailed this plighted faith to arrest, by 
 all constitutional and legal means, the movements of these 
 
104 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 incendiaries," and hoped the pledge would be redeemed by 
 legislative enactments, without which all else would be 
 little more than "a sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal." 
 " Up to the mark the North must come, if it would restore 
 tranquillity and preserve the Union." Another complained 
 that the Albany meeting did not " recommend putting 
 down, by the strong arm of the law, discussions which [it 
 declared] were at war with every moral duty and every 
 suggestion of humanity." Surely, that which is declared 
 so pernicious can and ought to be made legally punishable. 
 It is works and not words we want. A meeting in South 
 Carolina declared, tho.t if the South should have " to choose 
 either union without liberty, or disunion with liberty and 
 property, be assured they will not hesitate which to take, 
 and will make the choice promptly, unitedly, and fear 
 lessly." And it was unanimously resolved, that "should 
 the non-slaveholding States omit or refuse, at the ensuing 
 meeting of their respective Legislatures, to put a final stop 
 to the proceedings of their Abolition Societies, by efficient 
 penal laws, it will then become the solemn duty of the whole 
 South, in order to protect themselves arid secure their rights 
 and property against the unconstitutional combination of 
 the non-slaveholding States, and the murderous designs of 
 their Abolitionists, to withdraw from the Union." 
 
 It was proposed " to withhold the profits of Southern com 
 merce from those engaged, either actively, or by coun 
 tenance, in propagating the designs of fanaticism." 
 " Through the purse is the surest road to the understand 
 ings of men." 
 
 The aid of the General Government was invoked in the 
 war against free speech and a free press. The Postmaster- 
 General was requested to prevent the transmission by 
 mail, of Anti-Slavery papers and documents. Mr. Ken 
 dall, in answer, said " it was not in his power, by any law 
 ful regulation, to obviate the evil." But regarding the 
 transmission of papers " tending to promote discontent, 
 sedition, and a servile war, from one state to another, as a 
 violation of the spirit if not the letter of the federal com 
 pact, which would justify, on the part of the injured States, 
 any measure necessary to effect their exclusion," he sug 
 gested that their only means of relief at present was " in 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 105 
 
 responsibilities voluntarily assumed by postmasters." Ho 
 hoped Congress would, at the next session, put a stop to 
 the evil, and pledged his exertions to promote the adoption 
 of a measure for that purpose. 
 
 The reader will be naturally disposed to inquire whether 
 the President concurred in the suggestions and advice of 
 his Postmaster-General. He was indeed noted for " taking 
 responsibilities ;" but that the head of a party professing 
 the strongest repugnance to "loose construction," who, in 
 accordance with his rule of " strict construction," had ve 
 toed measures similar to those sanctioned by his early pre 
 decessors, should justify or connive at so palpable " a 
 violation" not only " of the spirit" but of " the letter" of the 
 Constitution, would be incredible, had we not good evi 
 dence of the fact. In his next annual Message, December, 
 1835, he said : " I must also invite your attention to the 
 painful excitement produced in the South by attempts to 
 circulate, through the mails, inflammatory appeals ad 
 dressed to the passions of the slaves, in prints and in 
 various sorts of publications, calculated to stimulate them 
 to insurrection, and to produce all the horrors of a servile 
 war." And he suggested the passage of a law to " pro 
 hibit, under severe penalties, the circulation, in the South 
 ern States, through the mail, of incendiary publications, 
 intended to instigate the slaves to insurrection." 
 
 If the President, in the extracts above quoted, meant to 
 convey the ideas which the language seems clearly to ex 
 press, it is difficult to say which is the more to be con 
 demned, the untruthful ness of the one, or the recommenda 
 tion contained in the other. That " inflammatory appeals" 
 had been addressed to slaves, or that any attempts had 
 been made to get any Anti-Slavery publications, whatever, 
 into their hands, he had no good reason to believe. Nothing 
 of an " incendiary" character had then, nor has since, 
 emanated from the Anti-Slavery press ; and it is quite cer 
 tain that a paper of any kind could not reach slaves 
 " through the mails." By the " incendiary publications" 
 the prohibition of which lie recommended, ho evidently 
 meant the ordinary Anti-Slavery papers and documents, 
 such as his Postmaster-General suggested the suppression 
 of by his deputy postmasters in the Southern Slates, in 
 
106 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the Southern States, on "responsibilities voluntarily as 
 sumed." A more flagrant violation of the constitutional 
 right of freedom of speech and of the press, can hardly be 
 imagined than was proposed in the bill introduced in the 
 Senate in pursuance of the recommendation. There are 
 doubtless many of his admirers of that day still living, who 
 regarded with favor the provisions of that bill, who are now 
 horror-stricken by the summary suppression of papers 
 which are endeavoring to cripple the Government in its 
 efforts to quell the Rebellion. 
 
 The bill alluded to was reported by Mr. Calhoun, Chair 
 man of a Select Committee, to whom this part of the Mes 
 sage had been referred. It prohibited postmasters from 
 knowingly putting into the mail any printed or written 
 paper or pictorial representation relating to Slavery, ad 
 dressed to any person in a State in which their circulation 
 was forbidden ; and it prohibited postmasters in such State 
 from delivering such papers to any person not authorized 
 by the laws of the State to receive them. And the post 
 masters of the offices where such papers were deposited, 
 were required to give notice of the same, from time to 
 time ; and if the papers were not, within one month, with 
 drawn by the person depositing them, they were to be burnt 
 or otherwise destroyed. 
 
 Mr. Calhoun, in his report, reiterated h s long-cherished 
 doctrine of State Sovereignty. He claimed for a State the 
 right to defend itself against internal dangers, and denied 
 the right of the General Government to assisc a State, even 
 in cuse of domestic violence, except on application of the 
 authorities of the State itself. It belonged to the States 
 whose institutions were in danger, and not to Congress, as 
 the Message supposed, to determine what papers were in 
 cendiary ; and each State was bound to prevent its citizens 
 from disturbing the peace or endangering the security of 
 other States ; and the latter, if disturbed or endangered, 
 had a light to demand of the former the adoption of meas 
 ures for their protection. And if it should neglect its duty, 
 the States whose peace was assailed might resort to means 
 to protect themselves, as if they were separate and inde 
 pendent communities. 
 
 Here we have a sample of the seed sown thirty 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 107 
 
 years ago, the bitter fruits of which we are now 
 reaping. 
 
 When the question was taken on the engrossment of the 
 bill, there was a tie, 18 to 18. The Vice-President, (Mr. 
 Van Buren,) having temporarily left the chair, returned, 
 and gave the casting vote in the affirmative. Of the Sena 
 tors from the Free States, Messrs. Buchanan, Tallmadge, 
 and Wright, voted in the affirmative. Those from Slave 
 States who voted in the negative, were Messrs. Benton, 
 Clay, arid Kent, of Maryland. 
 
 It is but just to say, that Mr. Van Buren s casting vote, 
 and the several votes of Mr. Wright, are not conclusive 
 evidence of their having desired the passage of the bill. 
 Mr. Calhouri, as Mr. Benton says, " had made the rejection 
 of the bill a test of alliance with Northern Abolitionists, 
 and a cause for a secession of the Southern States ; and if 
 the bill had been rejected by Mr. Van Bureri s vote, the 
 whole responsibility of its loss would have been thrown 
 upon him and the North, and the South inflamed against 
 those States and himself the more so, as Mr. White, of 
 Tennessee, the opposing Democratic candidate for the 
 Presidency, gave his votes for the bill. [Mr. White was 
 supported by a branch of the party opposed to Mr. Van 
 Buren, the regular nominee.] The several successive tie 
 votes have been ascribed to the intention of placing Mr. 
 Van Buren in this position. With this intent, some voted 
 for the bill, and others absented themselves, knowing that 
 on the final vote it would not pass. This supposition ap 
 pears probable from the full vote given on the question of 
 its passage : ayes, 19 ; noes, 25 ; only four absent ; Mr. 
 Buchanan, Mr. Tallmadge, and Mr. Wright, again voting 
 in the affirmative ; and seven from the Slave States, in the 
 negative. The votes of Mr. Van Buren and others, though 
 given for the reason stated, cannot be justified upon that 
 ground. 
 
 Although this bill received but little support from North 
 ern Senators, there was at this time a strong tendency to 
 ward a union of the interests of the Democracy and those 
 of Slavery. This union was soon after consummated. 
 There were for many years exhibitions of considerable 
 strength in the Southern portion of the Whig party ; but 
 
108 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 where Whig measures came into conflict with the interests 
 of Slavery, the latter were, with many of the Southern 
 Whigs, the controlling consideration. This gave the De 
 mocrats an advantage which has contributed largely to 
 the predominance which they have, for most of the time, 
 since maintained. 
 
 Petitions for the abolition of Slavery and the Slave Trade 
 in the District of Columbia continued to be presented to 
 Congress ; and the excitement was increased by the man 
 ner in which they were treated. On the Sth of February, 
 1836, a resolution was adopted, to refer all petitions on this 
 subject to a select Committee. On the 18th of May, Mr. 
 Pinckney, from this Committee, reported three resolutions ; 
 the first denying the power of Congress over Slavery in the 
 States ; the second declaring that Congress ought not to 
 interfere with it in the District of Columbia ; the third re 
 quiring all petitions and papers relating to the subject to 
 be at once laid upon the table, without being printed or 
 referred, and without any further action upon them. On 
 the 25th of May, the vote was taken on the first resolution 
 under the pressure of the previous question. Mr. Adams 
 said, if the House would allow him five minutes, lie would 
 prove the resolution to be false. The resolution was adopted, 
 with only eight dissenting voices. The next day the 
 second was adopted, 132 to 45 ; the third, 117 to G8. 
 
 In the Senate, a petition from the Society of the " Friends" 
 in the State of Pennsylvania at tho Cain quarterly meeting, 
 was presented by Mr. Buchanan, who said he was in favor 
 of giving the memorial a respectful reception ; but he 
 wished to put the question at rest. He therefore moved 
 that the petition be read, and rejected. The question on 
 receiving was decided in the affirmative, 36 to 10 ; the lat 
 ter votes all from Southern Senators. The whole subject, 
 including the rejection of the petition, was agreed to 34 to 
 G. The noes were from Davis and Webster, of Mass., 
 Prentiss, of Vt., Knight, of R. I., and Southard, of N. J. 
 
 Mr. Calhoun had objected to the reception of this and all 
 such communications, and considered it the duty of Congress 
 to refuse a hearing to all petitions relating to negro 
 Slavery. He again held up the terror of secession to a\vc 
 the Senate into respect for the wishes of the South. 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 109 
 
 Mr. Bcnton wished the adoption of the most effectual 
 method of putting down Abolition Societies. It was time 
 that the practice of sending such petitions to Congress was 
 discontinued and the South quieted. But to quiet the 
 South, the North must be quieted. The South would not 
 be at ease until Abolitionism was put down in the North ; 
 and Senators from the non-slaveholding States should lead 
 in the matter. 
 
 ^ Other Senators participated in the debate, in which the 
 right of petition, and the power of Congress over Slavery 
 in the District of Columbia and the Territories were 
 thoroughly discussed. 
 
 Among the notable occurrences during President Jack 
 son s administration, was a generul derangement of the cur 
 rency The Bank war was riot confined in its objects to the 
 destruction of that institution. The President s hatred to 
 paper money was scarcely less than his hatred to the 
 " monster" Bank. We have briefly noticed the effect upon 
 the currency of the contraction of the Bank s circulation, 
 caused by his attempts to " crush the reptile." The Bank 
 had satisfactorily performed the offices contemplated by its 
 authors, (Mr. Madison and the Republican Congress of 
 1816,) one of which offices was that of a " regulator" of the 
 currency. A United States Bank note, though payable only 
 at the Bank or branch whence it was issued, was current 
 in any part of the United States, and was generally re 
 garded as equivalent to specie. Hence, the most careful 
 and prudent winding up of its affairs must, to some extent, 
 have produced an unfavorable effect upon the currency. It 
 had also held^a salutary check upon the State Banks, which 
 was about to cease. 
 
 It was resolved to substitute for the " bank rags" now 
 used as a circulating medium, the "hard money." The re 
 ceipt, by Government officers, of bank notes of a denomina 
 tion less than five dollars, had been prohibited after the 
 30th of September, 1835. And an order was issued from 
 the Treasury Department, dated 22d February, 1836. for 
 bidding their payment to any public officer or creditor ; and, 
 unless otherwise prescribed by law, no such notes of a de 
 nomination less than ten dollars were to be received or 
 paid after the 4th of July next. And the Deposit Banks 
 
110 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 were required, in payments not exceeding 1 $500, to pay one- 
 fifth in gold coin, if preferred by the creditor. They were 
 requested not to issue, after the 4th of July, notes less than 
 five dollars, nor after the 3d of March, 1837, notes less 
 than ten dollars. The alledgcd object of this regulation 
 was, " to render the currency of the country more safe, 
 sou rid, and uniform." 
 
 On the llth of July, 1836, was issued another order, 
 thereafter generally designated the " specie circular, 1 
 which produced great sensation. In anticipation of the 
 " winding up" of the Bank of the United States, notwith 
 standing the efforts of the Government to check the issue 
 of paper money, an immense increase of the number of 
 State Banks took place. For the thirty-five millions of 
 bank capital withdrawn from use by the expiration of the 
 National Bank, many times that amount of State bank 
 capital was created. And it is worthy of note, that the 
 greatest increase was in Democratic States, where the poli 
 ticians echoed most loudly the President s denunciations of 
 paper money. The facility of obtaining bank accommoda 
 tions had encouraged speculations to an unprecedented 
 extent, especially in landed property. The receipts from 
 sales of public lands, were, in 1834, $4,857,000 ; in 1830, 
 they had risen to $24,877,179. This order was designed 
 to prevent a monopoly of the lands by speculators, and to 
 check the accumulation of this doubtful paper monej 7 into 
 the Treasury. In cases of sales, except to actual settlers, 
 or residents of the State, and in quantities not exceeding 
 320 acres, payment for lands sold after the 15th of August, 
 was to be made in specie ; and after the 15th of December, 
 in gold and silver, without exception. Tin s order was 
 issued under an existing law, which authorize! the Secre 
 tary to receive or reject bank paper at his discretion. 
 This circular was issued only one week after the adjourn 
 ment of Congress. It had been withheld, as Mr. Ben ton 
 says, to avoid any interference of Congress, a majority of 
 both Houses being known to be opposed to the measure. A 
 majority of the Cabinet also were opposed to it. 
 
 A general revulsion soon followed the issuing of this 
 Treasury circular. And at the next session of Congress, a 
 joint resolution was early introduced by Mr. Ewing " to 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. Ill 
 
 rescind the Treasury order of July llth, 1 836." In the de 
 bate on this resolution, the causes of the pecuniary distress 
 and the objects of the order were discussed. One object, 
 Mr. E. said, was to save the Deposit Banks from failure, 
 by collecting specie in the land-offices to be distributed 
 among these banks to enable them to pay over the money 
 to the States. 
 
 Mr. Benton charged the " panic" to the Bank and its 
 friends, who wished to get a renewal of its charter as a 
 remedy for the evils they had themselves created. He said 
 there was no safety for the federal revenue but in the total 
 exclusion of local paper from every branch of the revenue- 
 customs, lands, and post-office. 
 
 Mr. Oittenden said the operation of the order had been 
 to derange the currency, and give it a direction inverse to 
 the course of business. Our great commercial cities were 
 the natural repositories where money centered and settled. 
 It was more valuable there than in the interior. Any in 
 telligent business man in the West would rather have 
 money paid him in New York than at his own door. Hence, 
 forcing the specie against the natural course of business 
 from East to West, was beneficial to none, injurious to all. 
 He admitted that the Deposit Banks had been strengthened 
 by the order, as had been asserted by Mr. Benton ; but it 
 was at the expense of all other banks in the country. 
 
 The resolution was referred to the Committee on Public 
 Lands, who reported a, bill providing that the Government 
 should receive the paper of specie paying banks, which 
 should thereafter issue no notes of small denominations. 
 But the bill was so amended as merely to rescind the Trea 
 sury order, and was so passed, 41 to 5. In the House it 
 was ordered to a third reading by a vote of 143 to 59, and 
 passed by a large majority. It was sent to the President, 
 who returned it to the Senate with his VETO. 
 
 In June, 1836, Michigan and Arkansas were admitted 
 into the Union. The people of both Territories had taken 
 measures preparatory to admission as States, without pre 
 vious action of Congress ; and copies of their Constitutions 
 accompanied their application for admission. In the case 
 of Arkansas, whose application was first made, the Attorney 
 General, Mr. Butler, to whom the question had been sub- 
 
112 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 mitted, gave it as his opinion, that measures to subvert 
 the Territorial Government, and to establish a new one 
 without the consent of Congress, would be unlawful. This 
 opinion, however, was disregarded by majorities in both 
 Houses. In the Senate, the vote on the admission of Mich 
 igan was 23 to 8, many of the Senators having left their 
 seats. The vote previously given on a motion to recom 
 mit the bill, was considered as nearly a test vote on the 
 admission, which was 28 to 19. Two days after, (April 4,) 
 the Arkansas bill passed the Senate, 31 to G. The two 
 Senators from Vermont, Swift and Prentiss, objected be 
 cause the State Constitution permitted Slavery, and pro 
 hibited its abolition by the State Legislature. 
 
 In the House also objections were made for the same 
 reason. Mr. Gushing, of Massachusetts, condemned the 
 clause prohibiting emancipation without the consent of the 
 owners of the slaves, " as anti-republican, as wrong on 
 general principles of civil polity, and as unjust to the in 
 habitants of the non-slaveholding States." The Legislature 
 could not emancipate, even if it should be ready to indem 
 nify the owners. It was "to foreclose, in advance, the 
 progress of civilization and of liberty forever." He con 
 cluded with a severe reply to a threat of Mr. Wise, that, if, 
 contrary to the terms of the Missouri Compromise, the 
 North should impose restrictions upon slave property at the 
 South, the latter would be impelled " to introduce Slavery 
 into the heart of the North." 
 
 Mr. Adams was content to receive Arkansas as one of 
 the slaveholding States ; but he was unwilling that Con- 
 grces should assent to an article in her Constitution 
 withholding from the Legislature the power of giving free 
 dom to the slave. 
 
 The bill for admission was passed with the objectionable 
 clause. It was ordered to the third reading, 143 to 50 ; 
 and the Michigan bill, 153 to 45. A few members in each 
 House, it is believed, voted in the negative on both bills on 
 account of the informality of the application and the Slavery 
 provision. A very cogent reason for pressing the passage 
 of these bills, by Democratic Senators, against these ob 
 jections, but which reason was of course not expressed in 
 debate, was believed to be, that the admission of these 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 113 
 
 States at this session would secure to Mr. Van Buren, at 
 the approaching- election, six additional electoral votes. 
 And it is quite probable, that the people of Arkansas pur 
 posely availed themselves of this circumstance to incorpo 
 rate into their Constitution this obnoxious provision, pre 
 suming there would be in their three electoral votes an 
 argument sufficiently potent to overcome an objection which 
 had been successfully urged against a similar provision in 
 the Constitution of Missouri in 1821. 
 
 A favorite measure of Mr. Clay was the distribution of 
 the proceeds of the sales of the Public Lands among the 
 States ; but his efforts to procure the passage of a law for 
 this purpose had not succeeded. The public debt having 
 been paid, and the receipts from land sales having been for 
 a few years unusually large, the surplus revenue had accu 
 mulated in the Treasury to the amount of many millions of 
 dollars. At the session of 1835-1836, Mr. Clay again in 
 troduced a distribution bill which passed the Senate, 
 25 to 20 ; but in the House it was laid on the table, 
 114 to 85. 
 
 A new and successful plan, however, was devised. A 
 bill had been introduced into the Senate further to regulate 
 the deposits of the public money, which was so amended as 
 to provide for the distribution of the surplus public revenue 
 among the States. As constitutional objections to distri 
 bution were known to be entertained by some, the- money, 
 instead of being; distributed among, was to be deposited with, 
 the States, and to be returned at the call of Congress, if it 
 should at any time be needed by the General Government. 
 All the surplus money in the Treasury on the 1st of Janu 
 ary, 1837, reserving five millions, was to be thus deposited 
 with the States in proportion to their respective represen 
 tations in the Senate and IJouse of Representatives. The 
 sum to be distributed was about thirty millions. A few 
 States considering the words "deposited with" a mere 
 evasion, refused for some years to receive their shares of 
 the money. No part of it has yet been called for, nor is it 
 likely to lie. It has been loaned by the States, and the 
 income is appropriated 1o educational and other State 
 purposes. 
 
 The recognition of the independence of Texas was pro- 
 
114 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 posed at this session. Independence had been declared in 
 March, 1836 ; and after the victory of the Tcxans at San 
 Jaciuto in May, petitions for recognition were received by 
 Congress from different sections of the country. These 
 petitions were in the Senate referred to the Committee on 
 Foreign Relations. There was no material opposition to 
 the prayer of the petitioners ; but Senators recommended 
 caution. Texas should first have a government de facto. 
 Mr. Calhoun advocated not only immediate recognition, but 
 immediate admission into the Union, and assigned as " pow 
 erful reasons," the peace and security of the Slave State?, 
 and the benefits to the navigating and manufacturing in 
 terests of the North and East. Mr. Niles, of Conn., said 
 we should regard our national faith with Mexico. A hasty 
 acknowledgment might expose our Government to a 
 suspicion of having encouraged our citizens in volunteer 
 ing to aid the Texans. And this suspicion would be greatly 
 strengthened by annexation. 
 
 The memorials were referred ; and on the 18th of June 
 the Committee reported in favor of acknowledging the in 
 dependence of Texas " whenever satisfactory information 
 should be received that it had in successful operation a 
 civil government capable of performing the duties and ful 
 filling the obligations of an independent power." The reso 
 lution was adopted unanimously : Yeas, 39. 
 
 At the next session, December, 1836, President Jack 
 son, in a special message, advised Congress not to recog 
 nize the independence of Texas, until there should be no 
 longer any danger of her being subjected, as had been our 
 policy in the cases of Mexico and the South American 
 States. The Texans had resolved, if recognized, to seek 
 admission into the Union ; arid a too early movement might 
 subject us to the imputation of seeking to establish the 
 claims of our neighbors to a territory with a view to its 
 acquisition by ourselves. The Senate, however, on the 
 1st of March, 1837, adopted a resolution declaring the ac 
 knowledgment expedient and proper, 23 to 19. In the 
 House, a similar resolution was laid upon the table, 98 to 
 86. The object contemplated, however, was afterward at 
 tained, by an amendment of the appropriation bill, provid 
 ing a " salary and outfit of a diplomatic agent to be sent 
 
JACKSON S ADMINISTRATION. 115 
 
 to the Government of Texas, whenever the President 
 should receive satisfactory evidence that Texas was an in 
 dependent power, and that it was expedient to appoint such 
 a Minister." The amendment was adopted, 171 to 76. 
 
 President Jackson closed his official term with an unset 
 tled difficulty with Mexico on his hands. Since the con 
 clusion of a treaty of amity and commerce with that country 
 in 1831, our flag had been insulted, and injuries had been 
 committed upon the persons and property of our citizens ; 
 and our demands for satisfaction had not been complied 
 with. On the 7th of February, 1837, he sent to Congress a 
 special message, in which he stated that these injuries, " in 
 dependent of recent insults to the Government and people 
 by the late extraordinary Mexican Minister,* (who had sud 
 denly taken his departure,) " would justify, in the eyes of 
 all nations, immediate war." But " considering the present 
 embarrassed condition of that country, we should act with 
 wisdom and moderation, by giving to Mexico one more op 
 portunity to atone for the past, before we take redress into 
 our own hands." And he recommended an act authorizing 
 reprisals, and asked the use of the naval force if she should 
 refuse compliance with another demand. 
 
 The Message was referred in both Houses ; but neither 
 Committee reported in favor of the act asked for ; but both 
 reported in favor of another demand. Such an act, they 
 said, would violate the treaty with Mexico, which provided, 
 that " neither of the contracting parties will order or au 
 thorize any acts of reprisal, nor declare war against the 
 other, on complaint of injuries or damages, until the party 
 considering itself offended shall first have presented to the 
 other a statement of such injuries or damages, verified by 
 competent proofs, and demanded justice and satisfaction, 
 and the same shall have been refused or unreasonably 
 delayed." 
 
 A National Democratic Convention was held in Baltimore 
 as early as May, 1835. Gen. Jackson was well known to 
 be in favor of Mr. Van Buren as his successor ; and as the 
 Convention was composed exclusively of the friends of Gen, 
 Jackson, the nomination was unanimous. Richard M. 
 Johnson, of Ky., was nominated for Vice-President, having 
 received 178 votes to 87 for Win. C. Rives, of Va. No 
 
116 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 other candidates were nominated by a National Convention. 
 Gen. Harrison was nominated by Whig- Conventions in 
 some of the States, and by the Anti-Masonic State Conven 
 tion at Harrisburg, Pa., Francis Granger, of N. Y., was 
 nominated at most or all of these Conventions for Vice- 
 Fiesident. Several other candidates were nominated by 
 their particular friends. Of the electors chosen in Novem 
 ber, 170 voted for Mr. Van Buron ; 78 for Wrn. H. Harrison ; 
 26 for Hugh L. White ; 14 for Daniel Webster ; and 11 for 
 Willie P. Mangum. Of the votes for Vice-President, R. M. 
 Johnson received 144 ; Francis Granger, 77 ; John Tyler, 
 47 ; Wm. Smith, 23. The votes were said to have been 
 purposely scattered, in the hope of so weakening Mr. Van 
 Buren, as to bring the election into the House of 
 Representatives. 
 
VAN BUREN S ADMINISTRATION. 117 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Administration of Martin Van Buren. 
 
 MR. VAN BUREN was inaugurated on the 4th of March, 
 1837. Being first in the confidence of his predecessor, 
 and having been one of his principal advisers, he was 
 almost universally supposed to be committed to his policy. 
 The extreme caution of Mr. Van Buren against the expres 
 sion of his opinions on public measures, the epithet, " non 
 committal," was pretty generally applied to him. It had 
 been the policy of Mr. Calhoun, for years before the elec 
 tion, to compel his rivals to " show their hand" on the 
 Slavery question, on which the South felt so very sensitive. 
 Such, especially, had been the case on . the subject of the 
 recognition of the independence of Texas, and her annexa 
 tion to the United States, and also on the questions of pro 
 hibiting the transmission of Anti-Slavery papers through 
 the mail, and the abolition of Slavery in the District of 
 Columbia. And Mr. Van Buren had, in answer to questions 
 propounded to him before the election, declared, that, if 
 elected, he " must go into the Presidential Chair the inflex 
 ible and uncompromising opponent of every attempt, on the 
 part of Congress, to abolish Slavery in the District of Col 
 umbia, against the wishes of the slaveholding States ; and 
 also with a determination equally decided to resist the 
 slightest interference with it in the States where it exists." 
 And he declared, in his Inaugural address, that " no bill 
 conflicting with these views can ever receive my constitu 
 tional sanction." Mr. Van Buren was generally spoken of 
 as " the Northern man with Southern principles." The 
 declarations above quoted served to confirm his title to this 
 designation. Besides their evidence of his servility to the 
 Slave Power, they were objectionable in principle, as an im 
 proper interference, on the part of an Executive, with free 
 dom of legislation. The diminished Democratic majorities 
 
118 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 in tlic Northern States at the late election, made it appa 
 rent that, to be reflected, he must strengthen himself at the 
 South. These early pledges of favor to the Slave interest 
 were thus accounted for. 
 
 The- country was suffering under the pressure caused by 
 the issuing of the specie circular, and other acts of war 
 upon the currency the result of a policy which he was con 
 sidered as pledged to continue. In May, a general bank 
 explosion occurred. Specie payments were suspended 
 throughout the country, caused, in great part, by the diver 
 sion of specie to the West, and in part by the large loans 
 made by the banks having on deposit the surplus revenue, 
 with the expectation that it would remain with them until 
 it was wanted by the Government ; but it had been unex 
 pectedly demanded for distribution among the States. 
 
 Speculation was suddenly arrested ; the inflated prices 
 of property, especially of real estate, were diminished to the 
 smallest point ; and the ideal fortunes which had been 
 made, perhaps in a single " operation," vanished. Mercan 
 tile failures in the commercial cities were, in number and 
 amount, unprecedented. The revulsion was complete. The 
 President was requested to rescind the specie circular, and 
 to call an extra meeting of Congress. A proclamation was 
 issued for convening Congress on the first Monday in 
 September. 
 
 The suspension, probably, more than all other causes, in 
 duced the President to make the call. By the laws regu 
 lating the deposits, the federal officers were prohibited from, 
 receiving or paying out the notes of any but specie-paying 
 banks. And the Deposit Banks, too, had suspended. 
 Hence, no collection or disbursements of public moneys 
 could be made but in violation of law. 
 
 Congress met on the 4th of September. The President 
 suggested the entire disuse of banks as fiscal agents of the 
 Government ; and recommended the collection, safe-keep 
 ing, and disbursement of the public money by officers of the 
 Government, and the use of specie alone in its fiscal opera 
 tions. The sales of the public lauds having fallen off nearly 
 three-fourths during the year, and the revenue from duties 
 on imports having been diminished nearly one-half, while 
 the appropriations had been increased, he recommended 
 
VAN BUREN S ADMINISTRATION". 119 
 
 that the fourth and last installment of the surplus revenue 
 to be deposited with the States, be withheld for the use of 
 the Government. 
 
 Mr. Wright, of N. Y., of the Committee on Finance, re 
 ported a bill in conformity with the President s suggestions. 
 It required the officers receiving the moneys to give bonds 
 for their safe-keeping. The same bill was reported to the 
 House of Representatives. It was to establish the independ 
 ent treasury, more frequently called the " sub-treasury." 
 
 Five other bills, designed to give temporary relief to the 
 Government, were reported to the Senate : (1.) A. bill to 
 postpone the payment of the fourth installment of the de 
 posits with the States. This bill, after an interesting de 
 bate, passed the Senate, 28 to It. Thus the last install 
 ment, ($9,367,200,) was withheld, and has never been 
 deposited with the States. (2.) A bill to authorize the 
 issue of Treasury notes. Mr. Clay, in the course of his re 
 marks on this bill, said : " The Government will not receive 
 the paper of the country, and is about to create a paper of 
 its own, which the country is expected to receive ! And 
 thus, all the promises which have been made to us of the 
 flowing of gold and silver all over the country, these pro 
 mises of a better currency result in the issue of ten millions 
 of paper money 1" [Ten millions was the amount author 
 ized.] (3.) A bill extending the time for the payment of 
 merchants bonds, [for duties.] (4.) A bill for adjusting 
 the remaining claims on Deposit Banks. (5.) A bill to au 
 thorize merchandise to be deposited in public stores. All 
 these bills passed both Houses and became laws. The de 
 posit of the fourth installment was postponed until the 1st 
 of January, 1839. But, as has been stated, it has never 
 reached the Treasuries of the States. The three install 
 ments which had been deposited, amounted to about twenty- 
 eight millions. 
 
 The Sub-Treasury bill reported by Mr. Wright was 
 amended, on motion of Mr. Calhoun, so as to require the 
 eventual payment of all Government dues in specie. This 
 amendment was adopted, 24 to 23. Several Democratic 
 Senators and Representatives took ground agaiast the ad 
 ministration on its financial policy, and left the party. 
 Among them was Senator N. P. Tallmadge, of N. Y 
 
120 DEMOCRATIC MIRBOR. 
 
 Speaking in opposition to the bill, he deprecated this war- 
 fare against the whole credit system of the country. He 
 maintained that if the Government itself had not entered 
 into measures destructive of public confidence, this crisis 
 would not have occurred. 
 
 In the House, also, were a number who had separated 
 from their Democratic friends on financial questions, and 
 who united with the Whigs. They were called " Conserva 
 tives." By this defection from the party, the Sub-Treasury 
 scheme was defeated. The bill was laid on the table, 120 
 to 107. 
 
 Some readers may not know the origin of this financial 
 plan. In February, 1835, a bill passed the Senate to regu 
 late the deposits of the public money. In the House, Mr. 
 Gordon, of Va., who was opposed to the Bank of the United 
 States as unconstitutional, and to all banks as depositories 
 of the public moneys, moved an amendment, similar to one 
 offered by him to a bill at the preceding session. Mr. Gor 
 don had been a Jackson man ; but disapproving the Presi 
 dent s interference with the public revenues, he had, since 
 the removal of the deposits, voted on this and kindred ques 
 tions with the opposition. His- amendment was rejected : 
 Ayes, 33 ; noes, 161. Some Whigs, (among whom was 
 Mr. Adams,) being opposed to the President s " pet bank 7 
 system, together with some Democrats, voted for Mr. Gor 
 don s proposition, which provided for the appointment of 
 agents of the Treasurer of the United States, to keep and 
 disburse the revenue, giving bonds for the faithful execution 
 of their office. It was loudly denounced by the Democrats, 
 as a ridiculous, odious Whig measure. Yet this same 
 measure was two years later advocated by them as the 
 panacea for the all-pervading financial disease which afflict 
 ed the country. 
 
 Two days after the defeat of the Sub-Treasury bill, 
 Congress adjourned (October 16) to the 1st Monday in. 
 December. 
 
 At the next session, the first regular session of Congress 
 under Mr. Van Bureu, (December, 1837,) the President 
 again recommended the establishment of the Independent 
 Treasury. A bill was introduced, proposing the gradual 
 collection of revenues in specie. After an able discussion 
 
VAN BUREN S ADMINISTRATION. 121 
 
 by Messrs. Wright, Benton, and other Senators in its favor, 
 and Messrs. Clay, Webster, Rives, and White in opposition, 
 Mr. Rives offered a substitute, requiring 1 the payment of 
 the revenue in coin and the notes of specie paying banks 
 issuing large bills only. 
 
 Messrs. Grundy, of Tenn., Buchanan, of Fa., and Wall, 
 of N. J., all Democrats, were instructed by their respective 
 State Legislatures to vote against the bill. The two first 
 declared their intention to obey, the last declared his inten 
 tion to disregard instructions. 
 
 The bill was amended by striking out the " specie clause," 
 and further, on motion of Mr. Webster, by prohibiting the 
 Secretary of the Treasury from issuing any general order 
 making any discrimination as to the funds or medium in 
 which debts to the United States should be paid. Thus 
 amended, the bill passed the Senate, 27 to 25. In the 
 House, the bill of the Senate was reported the next day, 
 (March 27th,) and laid on the table, 106 to 98. 
 
 Mr. Hubbard, of N. H., had, in the debate in the Senate 
 on this bill, read from that part of the President s Message 
 which ascribed the unexpected results of the late State 
 elections (of 1837) to hank influence ; and had undertaken 
 to explain the result in New York. [This State had given 
 large Whig majorities. Out of 128 members of the As 
 sembly, 101 opponents of the administration were elected. 
 Great changes had also taken place in other States.] 
 
 Mr. Tallmadge, of N. Y., a " conservative, defended the 
 people against the President s charge. He ascribed the re 
 sults to the principles of the President and his party, taken 
 from the creed of the " Loco-foco" faction which originated 
 in the city of New York, in 1829. [The " faction" here re 
 ferred to, were dissenters to the proceedings of a meeting 
 of a Democratic nominating committee in Tammany Hall. 
 The committee having abruptly extinguished the gas, it 
 was re- lighted by loco-foco matches ; whence the name of 
 Loco-focos.] This faction, said Mr. T., was turned out of 
 Tammany Hall in the pure days of the Democratic Repub 
 lican party, and held meetings in the open air, whenever it 
 was necessary to take measures to reduce, the price of flour, or 
 to carry out any other great principle of political economy 1 
 [Allusion was made to a mob in the city of New York, in 
 
122 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 February, 1837, at a time of high prices. The notice of 
 the meeting, which was to be held in the Park, declared, 
 that " high prices must come down ! Its object was "to 
 inquire into the cause of the present distress, and to devise 
 a suitable remedy." About 5,000 persons assembled ; and 
 after some inflammatory speeches, a large body of them 
 proceeded to some flour stores, and destroyed wheat and 
 flour, with other property, to the amount of $10,000.] After 
 their principles had received the countenance of the admin- 
 is tration, they returned to the wigwam, displaced the ancient 
 sachems, and there they now illustrate their ideas of free 
 dom of speech and free discussion, by the forcible interrup 
 tion of the assemblages of orderly citizens who happen to 
 entertain opinions on matters of public policy contrary to 
 their own. They are now the leaders of the party, and the 
 prominent candidates for executive favor. The leading 
 features of their creed, said Mr. T., was the destruction of 
 the whole banking system of the country, the repeal of 
 chatters, and the abrogation of vested rights. And this 
 was understood by the people to be the policy of the ad 
 ministration. 
 
 In reply to the thrust at State Banks for suspending spe 
 cie payments, and the act of the Legislature of New York 
 authorizing suspension, Mr. T. said, by the law of that 
 State, (the old Safety-fund law,) a bank failing to redeem 
 its notes for ten days, its doors were enjoined to be closed, 
 and a receiver wag appointed to collect its dues and pay 
 its dobts. The people owed the banks about $70,000,000. 
 The collection of this amount would have caused general 
 disticss and ruin. Tiie Legislature being in session, a law 
 was passed, almost unanimously, to suspend for a year the 
 forfeiture of the charters which had been incurred by their 
 failing to redeem. This act had been denounced by public 
 meetings in New York by the friends of the administration ; 
 and this denunciation had been reiterated by the Govern 
 ment organ here. 
 
 Mr. T. referred to the President s having recommended 
 " a uniform law concerning bankruptcies of corporations 
 and other bankers," as a measure "fully authorized by the 
 Constitution." The effect of such a law would have been, 
 that every bank in the Union would have been handed over 
 
VAN BUREN S ADMINISTRATION. 123 
 
 to commissioners, and its concerns closed up ; for all had 
 suspended : and the result would have been ruin from one 
 extremity of the Union to the other. Fortunately, Congress 
 did not adopt the recommendation. Mr. T. alluded to the 
 fact that, in 1826, Mr. Van Buren had, on that floor, in a 
 discussion of a bankrupt bill, opposed its application to- 
 banking 1 incorporations, " as an odious exercise of power 
 riot granted by the Constitution ;" but in 1837, as Presi 
 dent, he proposes such a law and pronounces it constitu 
 tional. The people foresaw what would have been the 
 effects of the proposed bankrupt law, and of the Sub-Trea 
 sury scheme. They saw by the official organ, after the lat 
 ter had been defeated at the extra session, that it was to 
 be again forced upon Congress. The people also saw that 
 some of their representatives here, pursuing the straight 
 forward track of principle, refusing to turn about at the 
 word of command, and opposing the measure which the 
 whole party, with Gen. Jackson at their head, opposed in 
 1831, arid which the official organ then pronounced "dis 
 organizing and revolutionary," were for this adherence to 
 principle, denounced and proscribed by this same official 
 organ of the administration. They saw established at the 
 seat of Government, by the discipline of party, a despotism, 
 the most perfect on earth the despotism of opinion ! These 
 Mr. T. regarded as the causes of the results of the late 
 elections. 
 
 Mr. Calhoun, who had, since the removal of the deposits, 
 or during most of the period of the " war upon the currency," 
 cooperated with the Whigs, again united with the admin 
 istration, and advocated the Sub-Treasury project as a plan 
 for separating the Government from all banks. 
 
 A joint resolution virtually repealing the specie circular 
 of July, 1836, was passed, May 31, 1838, by large majori 
 ties in both Houses, and became a law. By this act, all 
 payments to the Government might be made either in spe 
 cie, treasury notes, or the bills of specie paying banks. 
 By acts of April and June, 1836, however, no bank notes 
 for less than $20, nor those of any bank issuing notes or 
 bills for less than $5, were to be received. 
 
 The recognition of the independence of Texas at the pre 
 ceding session, 1830-1837 and the intimation of an at- 
 
 I 
 
124 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 tempt to effect her annexation to the United States, was 
 followed by numerous remonstrances, at the present ses 
 sion, against annexation. Resolutions to the same effect 
 were passed by the Legislatures of some States, and by 
 others resolutions in favor of the measure. 
 
 In the Senate, Mr. Preston, of S. C., on the 4th of Janu 
 ary, 1 838, offered a resolution in favor of the " rannexa- 
 tion" of Texas to the territory of the United States, " with 
 the consent of that State previously had, and whenever it 
 can be effected consistently with the faith and treaty stipu 
 lations of the United States." Mr. Preston supported his 
 resolution by a long and able speech. 
 
 In the House, Mr. Adams, who had presented a large 
 number of memorials against annexation, moved that these 
 and all others, be referred to a Select Committee. Mr. 
 Howard, of Md. f having moved their reference to the Com 
 mittee on Foreign Affairs, 
 
 Mr. Adams said he and his colleagues viewed this ques 
 tion as one which involved the integrity of the Union a 
 question of the most deep, abiding, arid vital interest to 
 the whole American nation. " For," said he, " in the face 
 of this House, in the face of Heaven, I avow it as my 
 solemn belief, that the annexation of an independent power 
 to this Government, would, ipso facto, be a dissolution of 
 this Union. And is this a subject for the peculiar investi 
 gation of your Committee on Foreign Affairs ?" Mr. A. 
 said the question involved was, whether a foreign nation, 
 acknowledged as such in a most unprecedented and extra 
 ordinary manner, by this Government, a nation " damned 
 to everlasting fame" by the reinstitution of that detestable 
 system, Slavery, after it had once been abolished within its 
 borders, should be admitted into the Union with a nation of 
 freemen. " For, sir, that name, thank God, is still ours ! 
 And is such a question as this to be referred to a Committee 
 on Foreign Affairs ?" 
 
 Mr. A. continued his speech at considerable length, con 
 demning the conduct of the last and the present adminis 
 trations in relation to the affairs of Texas ; declaring that 
 the nation to be annexed had its origin in violence and 
 fraud ; that the territory of the Republic of Mexico had 
 been itvadcd by the Executive of this Government ; and 
 
VAN BUREN S . ADMINISTRATION. 125 
 
 that conspirators had come here and concerted plans of 
 operations with members of our own Government ! And 
 yet we had heard the bold and unblushing pretense that 
 the people of Texas were struggling- for freedom, and that 
 the wrongs inflicted upon them by Mexico had driven them 
 into insurrection, and had forced them to fight for liberty 1 
 Mr. Adarns then referred to certain facts to prove the real 
 origin of the insurrection. The motions of reference were 
 laid on the table, on the motion of Mr. Wise, 127 to 68. In 
 October it was officially announced, that, since the propo 
 sition submitted by Texas for admission into the Union had 
 been declined, the Texan Minister had communicated the 
 formal and absolute withdrawal of the proposition. 
 
 At the next session, (1838-1839,) the famous "gag reso 
 lutions" offered by Mr. Atherton, of N. H., were adopted by 
 the House. One of them required, that every petition, me 
 morial, or paper relating in any way to Slavery, should, on 
 presentation, without further action thereon, be laid on the 
 table without being debated, printed or referred. It was 
 passed, 127 to 78. The introduction of resolutions virtually 
 denying the constitutional right of petition, by a Democrat, 
 and passed almost exclusively by the votes of Democratic 
 members, together with numerous other votes on questions 
 involving the interests of Slavery, proves the union between 
 it and Democracy to have been at this time fully formed ; 
 or, that Democracy and Slavery were equally expressive of 
 the real character of the party misnamed " Democratic" a 
 character which it still maintains. 
 
 A singular affair occurred in 1839 and 1840, which de 
 serves notice. In August, 1839, a Spanish schooner, named 
 L Amistad, lying near the coast of Connecticut, was cap 
 tured by Lieut. Gedney, of the brig Washington. The ves 
 sel was bound from Havana to Port Principe with fifty-four 
 blacks and two passengers on board. The latter were 
 owners of the vessel and cargo, and claimed the blacks as 
 their slaves. Four nights after they were out, the blacks 
 rose and murdered the captain and three of the crew ; then 
 took possession of the vessel with the intention of return 
 ing to Africa. The two passengers were saved to navigate 
 the vessel. But instead of steering for Africa, they navi 
 gated in a different directio-n when they could do so without 
 
126 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 detection. The slaves had been purchased at Havana soon 
 after their arrival from Africa. Cingues, the leader of the 
 revolt, and thirty-eight others, were committed for trial. A 
 demand was soon after made upon our Government by the 
 acting Spanish Minister in this country, for the surrender 
 of the L Arnistad, cargo, and alleged slaves, to the Spanish 
 authorities. 
 
 The contest between the opposing counsel of the parties, 
 the issuing of several writs of habeas corpus, &c., &c., 
 must be passed over. [See American Statesman, pp. 
 723-726.] 
 
 In January, 1840, the decision of Judge Judson, of the 
 District Court of the United States for Connecticut, was 
 given. The blacks who murdered the Captain and others 
 on board the schooner, were set free. The schooner having 
 been proved to have been taken on the " high seas," the 
 jurisdiction of the Court was established. The libel of 
 Gedney and others had been properly filed, and the seizers 
 were entitled to salvage. Ruiz and Montez had established 
 no title to the Africans, who, it was presumed, had been 
 imported from Africa in violation of the laws of Spain. 
 The demand of restoration made by the Spanish Minister 
 that the question might be tried in Cuba, was refused, as 
 by Spanish laws the negroes could not be enslaved ; and 
 therefore they could not properly be demanded for trial. 
 One of them, a Creole, and legally a slave, and wishing to 
 be returned to Havana, a restoration would be decreed 
 under the treaty of 1795. These Africans were to bo de 
 livered to the President, under the act of 1819, to be trans 
 ported to Africa. 
 
 An appeal was. taken to the Circuit Court of the United 
 States, Judge Thompson presiding, who affirmed the decree 
 of the District Court. And the Government of the United 
 States, at the instance of the Spanish Minister, directed an 
 appeal to be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States. 
 That Court affirmed the judgment of the District Court in 
 every respect as to sending the negroes back to Africa : 
 they were diccharged as free men. 
 
 The course of Mr. Van Buren in this affair was, by many, 
 deemed highly censurable. His lending to the Spanish 
 Minister the name of the Government, after the two adjudi* 
 
VAX BUREN S ADMINISTRATION. 127 
 
 cations in the lower Courts, to perfect an appeal to the 
 Supreme Court, for the benefit of the Spanish claimants, 
 who were guilty of a gross outrage upon humanity, was re 
 garded as bad statesmanship, and not justified by any re 
 cognized principle of comity between friendly nations. 
 And the disposition manifested by him to effect the delivery 
 of the captives to the Spanish authorities at Cuba, to be 
 dealt with according to the laws of Spain, which would 
 have exposed their freedom to imminent peril, evinced a 
 reprehensible indifference to the claims of humanity 
 
 The 26th Congress signalized itself by a most disgrace 
 ful act. As parties in the House were known to be nearly 
 equal, great anxiety was felt on both sides in relation to 
 the election of Speaker. Congress assembled on the 2d of 
 December, 1839, on which day every member, except one, 
 was present. The gains of the Whigs had given them 
 hope of a small majority, provided the contested seats, of 
 which there were not less than six, should be awarded to 
 the Whig claimants, all of whom had certificates of 
 election. 
 
 At twelve o clock, the Clerk of the last House, Hugh A. 
 Garland, in conformity with the former practice, com 
 menced calling the roll of the members elect. Having 
 called the members from the New England States and the 
 State of New York, and one of the members, Mr. Randolph, 
 from New Jersey, he paused, and proposed to pass over the 
 names of the five members whose right to seats was to be 
 contested, until members of the remaining States should 
 have been called. A stormy debate of several days en 
 sued. Opposition members contended that, according to 
 custom, the claimants having regular certificates of elec 
 tion, should be admitted to seats until a formal investiga 
 tion could be had. 
 
 Mr. Halsted, of N. J., demanded that his name be called, 
 and he read that section of the law of his State which 
 makes the Governor s certificate the evidence of election, 
 which, he insisted, the Clerk was bound to receive as prima 
 facie evidence of his right to sit there. Various motions 
 were made ; but the Clerk refused to entertain them. Hav 
 ing been again directed to begin the call, he again at 
 tempted to pass over the State of New Jersey. 
 
128 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Mr. Adams now arose amid great confusion, and inter 
 rupted the Clerk ; and order was restored. " It was not 
 my intention," said he, " to take any part in these extra 
 ordinary proceedings. I had hoped that this House would 
 succeed in organizing itself ; that a Speaker and Clerk 
 would be elected, arid that the ordinary business of legisla 
 tion would be allowed to commence. This is not the time 
 nor place to discuss the merits of the conflicting claimants 
 for scats from New Jersey ; that subject belongs to the 
 House of Representatives, which, by the Constitution, is 
 made the ultimate arbiter of the qualifications of its mem 
 bers. But what a spectacle do we here present ? We de 
 grade and disgrace ourselves, our constituents, and the 
 country. We do not, can not organize ; and why ? Be 
 cause the Clerk of this House ; the mere Clerk, whom we 
 create, whom we employ, and whose existence depends on 
 our will, usurps the throne, and sets us, the representatives, 
 the vicegerents of the whole American people, at defiance, 
 and holds us in contempt. And what is this Clerk of yours ? 
 Is he to control the destinies of sixteen millions of free 
 men ? Is he to suspend, by his mere negative, the func 
 tions of government, and put an end to this Congress ? He 
 refuses to call the roll. It is in your power to compel him 
 to call it if he will not do it voluntarily. [Here he was in 
 terrupted with a statement that the Clerk would resign, 
 rather than to call New Jersey.] Well, then, let him re 
 sign ; and we may possibly discover some way by which 
 we may get along without the aid of his powerful talent, 
 learning, and genius. If we can not organize in any other 
 way, if this Clerk of } r ours will not consent to our discharg 
 ing the trusts confided to us by our constituents, then let 
 us imitate the example of Virginia in the House of Bur 
 gesses, which, when Dinwiddie ordered it to disperse re 
 fused to obey the insulting mandate." 
 
 He then moved that the Clerk proceed with the calling 
 of the roll, who again refused to ontertain the motion. 
 Several members inquired how the question should be put. 
 Mr. A. replied that he intended to put it himself. Mr. Rhett, 
 of S. C., then moved that Mr. Adams be appointed tempo 
 rary Chairman. Mr. R. himself put the question, which 
 was carried ; and Mr. Adams took the chair. Having 
 
VAN BUREN S ADMINISTRATION. 129 
 
 decided that of the members from the State of New Jersey 
 only those who held commissions in conformity with the 
 laws of the State were entitled to vote, Mr. Vanderpoel, 
 of N. Y., appealed from the decision of the Chair ; and after 
 a debate of several days, the decision was negatived, (De 
 cember 10th,) 114 to 108. The next day Mr. Naylor and 
 Mr. Ingersoll, of Pa., were both denied the right to vote. 
 
 Passing over several days proceedings, we come to the 
 election of Speaker, on the 14th of December. The vote 
 was taken viva, voce, Mr. Adams 7 name having been called, 
 he answered : " Reserving all my rights of objecting here 
 after to this election as unconstitutional and illegal, I vote 
 for John Bdir Other Whig members also voted under pro 
 test. John W Jones, of Va., received the Democratic 
 votes, 113 ; Mr. Bell, 102 ; scattering 20. Five more bal 
 lots were taken on that day. On the 16th, the balloting 
 was resumed ; and five more ballots were taken ; when 
 R. M. T. Hunter, of Va., was, on the llth ballot, elected 
 Speaker, having received 119 votes ; and Mr. Jones, 55. 
 Mr. Hunter had been a Jackson man, but now acted with 
 the Whigs, but was in favor of the Sub-Treasury. A Clerk 
 was chosen on the 21st ; and on the 24th, the President s 
 Message was delivered. 
 
 The Committee on elections reported on the 5th of March 
 in favor of the five administration members. Representa 
 tives were then elected in New Jersey by general ticket. 
 Further proceedings were had in relation to this subject, 
 extending to the 16th of July. 
 
 It is questionable whether the history of legislation in 
 this country furnishes many instances of proceedings so 
 dishonorable and unprincipled as those sketched in the 
 preceding pages. Every member who voted against the 
 admission of those who presented legal certificates of elec 
 tion, knew that he acted in violation of a rule established 
 by long usage, and sanctioned by reason and common 
 sense. But it was resolved to force upon the people that 
 darling financial scheme which had been twice rejected 
 the sub-treasury ; and without the votes of these contest 
 ing Democrats, another defeat was anticipated. Having; 
 secured a majority, the Independent Treasury was estab 
 lished at the same session. 
 
130 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 A Presidential election was at hand. Gen. Win. H. 
 Harrison hud been nominated by a Whig National Conven 
 tion at Harrisburg, in December, 1839 ; and John Tyler for 
 Vice-President. 
 
 The Democratic Convention, which met at Baltimore in 
 May, 1840, had nominated Mr. Van Burcn for reelection. 
 No candidate for Vice-President was nominated by the 
 Convention. 
 
 The Abolitionists, who had hitherto voted according to 
 their former party attachments, now had candidates of their 
 own James G. Birney for President ; and Francis J. La- 
 moyne for Vice-President. 
 
 The canvass of 1840 was unusually spirited. The 
 general depression in money and business affairs, ascribed 
 to the interference of the Government with the currency, 
 continued in full force. The Bank of the United States 
 had been destroyed ; and, notwithstanding its capital con 
 tinued to be employed under a charter from the State of 
 Pennsylvania, State bank capital had been tripled or 
 quadrupled. The paper of some of these banks was greatly 
 depreciated ; that of others had become worthless. In 
 Mississippi, there was, in 1830, besides the branch of the 
 United States Bank, but one chartered bank, with a capi 
 tal of less than one million of dollars ; in 1838, the 
 chartered bank capital of that State had reached upward 
 of sixty millicns. The excessive issue of bank paper had 
 been followed by its natural result, the suspension of 
 specie payments, which still continued in some States, 
 especially the Western and South-Western. And where 
 specie payments had been resumed, banks were obliged to 
 restrict their issues. 
 
 The prevailing public distress was attributable in great 
 part, to the operation of the Compromise Tariff of 1833, 
 which had now almost reached its lowest rates of duties ; 
 and for the want of adequate protection, many branches 
 of manufactures had either greatly declined or been 
 abandoned ; and vast numbers of laborers had been 
 thrown out of employment. These and other causes 
 had wrought a great change in the popular mind. Many, 
 believing a change of administration could not be for tho 
 worse, were disposed to try the experiment. 
 
VAN BUP.EN J 6 ADMINISTRATION. 131 
 
 The Whig candidates, Harrison and Tyler, received of 
 the electoral votes 234. Mr. Van Buren received 60 ; and 
 Richard M. Johnson, for Vice-President, received 48. 
 
132 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Administration of Presidents Harrison and Tyler. 
 
 GEK. HARRISON was inaugurated as President on the 4th 
 of March, 1841. 
 
 His Inaugural Address was a long one, and embraced 
 many topics. It was, he said, a defect of the Constitution 
 that it does not prohibit the reelection of a President. This 
 defect might be corrected by his refusing to serve a second 
 term. Being, by fair construction, no part of the Legisla 
 tive power, he ought to use the veto sparingly. His power 
 " as the sole distributor of all the patronage of the Govern 
 ment," and his assumption of the power to control the pub 
 lic finances, were dangerous. He rejected the idea of an 
 exclusive metallic currency. He deprecated the agitation 
 of the question of Slavery. And among other things, ho 
 expressed " a profound reverence for the Christian religion, 
 and a thorough conviction that sound morals, religious 
 liberty, and a just sense of religious responsibility, are 
 essentially connected with all true and lasting happiness." 
 
 The state of the currency and the finances being such as 
 seemed to require immediate attention, he issued a procla 
 mation on the 17th of March, convening Congress on the 
 last Monday (31st) of May. He was soon taken ill, and 
 within eight days, died on the 4th of April, at the Execu 
 tive mansion in the city of Washington. By virtue of a 
 provision of the Constitution to that effect, John Tyler be 
 came the President of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Tyler s Inaugural was short. In regard to foreign na 
 ticns, his policy would be both to render and demand justice. 
 He pledged himself to " a complete separation between the 
 sword and the purse." He would not remove faithful and 
 honest officers, except for giving their official influences to 
 the purposes of party. He would observe a rigid economy 
 
TYLER S ADMINISTRATION. 133 .. 
 
 in public expenditures. War between the Government and 
 the currency should cease. He retained in office the mem 
 bers of the Cabinet appointed by Gen. Harrison. 
 
 Congress met in special session on the 31st of May, 1841. 
 The principal subjects of the Message were those of the 
 revenue, and of a fiscal agent capable of adding increased 
 facilities in its collection and disbursement. The Treasury 
 was deficient eleven and a half millions for the year. But 
 in providing for the wants of the Treasury, he advised not 
 to alter the compromise tariff act of 1833. The employ 
 ment of State Banks as fiscal agents had been abandoned ; 
 but he expressed no opinion as to the benefits of a National 
 Bank. The Sub-Treasury had been plainly condemned. 
 
 John White, a Whig member from Kentucky, was elected 
 Speaker of the House by 121 votes, to 84 for John W. 
 Jones, of Va. There was in the Senate also a Whig 
 majority. 
 
 A bill was passed repealing the Sub-Treasuiy. It passed 
 the Senate, 29 to 18 ; the House, 134 to 87. It contained 
 a provision making it a felony for an officer charged with 
 the safe-keeping and disbursement of the revenue, to use 
 or to loan it. This section was designed to prevent defal 
 cations, of which there were so many, and which amounted 
 to so large a sum, during the preceding administration. 
 [The number of defaulters was said to be about forty ; and 
 the sum about two millions.] 
 
 The Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Ewing, recommended 
 the establishment of a Bank. The President having signi 
 fied to some friends a desire that the Secretary should be 
 called on for a plan, a call was made by both Houses, and 
 a plan was reported. To avoid constitutional objections, 
 it was to be incorporated in the District of Columbia, with 
 power to establish branches only with the assent of the 
 States. 
 
 In the Senate, a bill was reported by Mr. Clay. It 
 passed that body, 26 to 23 ; the House, 128 to 97. It was 
 vetoed by the President. A new bill was prepared with a 
 view to make it acceptable to the President ; a deputation 
 having been sent to learn what kind of a bill he would 
 sanction. It was reported in the House, and passed, 125 
 to 94. It passed the Senate, 27 to 22. This bill also was 
 
434 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 negatived. Having been formed with special reference to 
 his wishes, and after a consultation with him by a majority 
 of the Cabinet, a second veto was received with great sur 
 prise. Two days after, (Sept. 11,) all the Cabinet officers, 
 except Mr. Webster, (Secretary of State,) sent in their re 
 signations. Although the disrespect shown to the resign 
 ing Secretaries may have justified their course ; yet con 
 sidered as a matter of expediency, it is believed by many 
 to have been ill-judged ; as the rupture seriously damaged 
 the party, and was perhaps the cause of its prostration. 
 
 The extra session having been called to consider the 
 finances and the currency, Congress adjourned immediately 
 after the Bank question had been determined. Several im 
 portant laws, however, had been previously passed ; one of 
 which was a bankrupt law, rendered necessary, as was 
 supposed, by the numerous failures produced by the late 
 revulsion in the business of the country. 
 
 An act was also passed to distribute among the States 
 the proceeds of the sales of public lands ; a measure which 
 had for many years been attempted without success. As 
 the distribution might render an increase of duties neces 
 sary, the opponents of a high tariff insisted on the insertion 
 of a condition, that if Congress should increase the duties 
 on imports, distribution was to be suspended, until the 
 cause of the suspension should cease. 
 
 A bill was also passed, authorizing a loan of twelve 
 millions of dollars, to supply the deficiency in the 
 Treasury. 
 
 The President, in his Annual Message at the second 
 (first regular) session of the 27th Congress, (December 7, 
 1841,) presented another plan of fiscal agency which, he 
 said, was free from constitutional objections, would furnish 
 a sound paper medium, and facilitate the regulating of ex 
 changes, lie also called attention to the Tariff. Congress 
 might, in laying duties for revenue, discriminate in favor 
 of articles tor the purpose of encouraging their manufac 
 ture. But the duties should not be so augmented as to 
 annul the land proceeds distribution act cf the extra session. 
 
 Several schemes of finance were brought forward, among 
 them a plan for a " National Exchequer ;" but none of them 
 was adopted. 
 
TYLER S ADMINISTRATION. 135 
 
 A tariff act, however, was, after a tedious contest, passed 
 near the close of a very protracted session, (August 27th, 
 1842.) Protection had been a Democratic measure, especi 
 ally had it been the policy of the Democrats of the North. 
 It had also been, until after Gen. Jackson s election, a fa 
 vorite measure of his, as has been already observed, and 
 as appears from his votes in the Senate, his celebrated let 
 ter to Dr. Coleman, his letter to Governor Ray of Indiana, 
 and some of his earlier Annual Messages. But, as in the 
 case of the Slavery question, the fortunes of the party 
 seemed to demand a union with the South upon this ques 
 tion also ; and the protective policy, which had, more than 
 any other measure, contributed to our national prosperity, 
 was almost entirely abandoned by the Democrats, except a 
 portion of those of the State of Pennsylvania. In fact, 
 protection had become a leading and distinct party issue. 
 
 Two bills were reported in the House ; one by the Com 
 mittee on Manufactures, Mr. Saltonstall, of Mass., Chair 
 man ; the other at a later period of the session, by Mr. 
 Fillmore, from the Committee of Ways and Means, being a 
 bill accompanying the report of the Secretary of the Trea 
 sury, (Mr. Forward.) The latter was adopted as the basis 
 of action by the House. This was considered as more par 
 ticularly a revenue bill. 
 
 The last reduction of duties under the Compromise Act 
 of 1833, it will be recollected, was to take place after the 
 30th of June, that is, on the 1st of July, 1842. And the 
 first distribution of land proceeds under the act of the pre 
 ceding session was also to be made the 1st of July. As 
 there was no prospect of the passage of the tariff bill be 
 fore the time of the reduction of duties, a bill had been 
 reported, and was taken up the 10th of June, to extend the 
 time for the distribution to the 1st of August, with a 
 proviso, that nothing therein contained should suspend the 
 operation of the distribution law, which suspension, it will 
 also be recollected, was to take place whenever the duties 
 should be raised. This temporary bill was passed by the 
 House, 116 to 103 ; by the Senate, 24 to 19. It was sent 
 to the President, and returned with his veto. This veto 
 caused great rejoicing by Southern members. One of them, 
 (Mr. Holmes, of S. C.,) said it had rescued the country 
 
136 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 from impending civil war. The veto message was then 
 discussed in the House for several days, when (July 4th,) 
 the question was taken upon the passage of the bill, not 
 withstanding the veto : Ayes, 114 ; noes, 91 ; absent, 31. 
 Rejected ; two-thirds not voting in the affirmative. 
 
 The next day, the House again took up the tariff or rev 
 enue bill, which passed the House, July IGth, 116 to 112. 
 It provided to continue the distribution of the proceeds of 
 the land sales, notwithstanding the increase of duties. It 
 passed the Senate, August 5th, 25 to 23 ; a party vote. 
 In the House, only one Democrat, Mr. Parmenter, of Mass., 
 voted for the bill. Against it were 16 Whigs, all but one 
 from Southern States. In the Senate, the votes in its 
 favor were all from Whigs ; against it were three Whigs, 
 all Southern. This bill also was returned by the Presi 
 dent with a i-do. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Adams, the Message was referred to a 
 committee of thirteen, who made a report, written by Mr. 
 A., reviewing the condition of the country, the action of 
 Congress, the frequent application of the veto, and the rea 
 sons assigned. It animadverted very severely upon the 
 acts of the President, charging him with having usurped 
 the whole power of legislation. The report concluded with 
 a resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution, 
 requiring, instead of two-thirds, a majority of the whole 
 number of members of each House to pass a bill against 
 the President s objections. It was signed by ten of the 
 Committee. 
 
 Constrained by the necessity of increasing the revenue, 
 a bill, the same as the former, with the distribution clause 
 struck out, and so modified as to admit free of duty tea 
 imported in American vessels from beyond the Cape of 
 Good Hope, and coffee, was a few days after passed by the 
 House, 105 to 103. It was sent to the Senate, where it 
 received some amendments, (in which the House afterward 
 concurred,) and was passed, (August 27th,) 24 to 23 ; be 
 ing saved by Mr. Wright s voting with the Whigs. Proba 
 bly Mr. W. did not wish to incur the responsibility of 
 defeating a measure for revenue. He assigned also as a 
 reason, that " this measure would root out tne germ of dis 
 tribution." The bill was approved by the President. 
 
TYLER S ADMINISTRATION. 137 
 
 A separate bill was then passed, repealing the proviso 
 of the distribution act, so as to allow the distribution not 
 withstanding the increase of duties ; but the bill was 
 retained in the hands of the President, and thus defeated. 
 
 The disastrous effects of Gen. Jackson s boasted " ar 
 rangement " for a direct trade with the British West 
 India Islands, has been mentioned, [page 81-4.] Memorials 
 from the State of Maine, praying for relief, were presented 
 at this session, (1841-1842.) Maine had had ten thousand 
 tons of shipping employed in the trade with the British 
 North American Colonies alone. But since the treaty she 
 had been driven out entirely, while the shipping of the 
 Colonies had increased four-fold ; and they had a direct 
 and unembarrassed trade with this country. One petition 
 declared that the opening of our ports to Great Britain 
 had been obtained by fraud. She had promised reciprocity, 
 but she would not grant it. The petitioners prayed that 
 the effect of the President s proclamation in 1830, making 
 our ports free to Great Britain, be done away, and that 
 the navigation acts of 1818, 1820, and 1828, be revived. 
 The petitions were received, but no action was taken upon 
 the subject. 
 
 The President s connection with the party which elected 
 him seems to have been dissolved ; and the South again 
 claimed him as their own. Said Mr. Rhett, of S. C., " He 
 is a Virginian a name never coupled with dishonor. He 
 is now at the head of the Government, and being in favor 
 of the institutions of the South, he may rest assured of an 
 earnest and substantial support." 
 
 The rush of Anti-Slavery petitions to Congress was un 
 abated. Most of them were presented by Mr. Adams and 
 Mr. Giddings. The views of Mr. Adams on the subject of 
 abolishing Slavery in the District of Columbia were for a 
 long time misapprehended. He was not an Abolitionist, 
 in the popular sense of the word. He zealously and faith 
 fully defended the right of petition and free speech, which 
 the slaveholders and their Northern Democratic allies in 
 Congress refused ; but he was not in favor of abolition 
 without the consent of, or compensation to, the owners of 
 slaves. In this he differed from Mr. Giddings, who was an 
 unconditional Abolitionist, being in favor of immediate 
 
138 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 emancipation in the District of Columbia and other United 
 States territory, by Congress, and in the States, by their 
 respective legislatures. 
 
 Mr. Adams, at this session, presented a petition from 
 forty-six citizens of Haverhill, Mass., for a peaceable dis 
 solution of the Union, which he moved to a Select Commit 
 tee, with instructions to report an answer showing reasons 
 \vhy the prayer should not be granted. This excited the 
 indignation of Southern members. Mr. Gilmer, of Va., 
 oflV i-ed a resolution declaring, that, in presenting a petition 
 for tue dissolution of the Union, Mr. Adams had incurred 
 the censure of the House. Mr. Marshall, of Ky., offered 
 as a substitute two resolutions, one charging him with an 
 offense involving, in its consequences, the crime of high 
 treason ; the other declaring him deserving of expulsion ; 
 but, as an act of grace and mercy, they would only inflict 
 upon him " their severest censure, for the maintenance of 
 their own purity and dignity." 
 
 This brought on a debate which continued about two 
 weeks. Messrs. Marshall, Wise, and Adams, were for 
 several days the chief participators. Mr. Underwood, of 
 Ky., Mr. Botts, of Va., and Mr. Arnold, of Tenn., defended 
 M:i Adams, and opposed the resolutions. Mr. Saltonstall, 
 of Mass., gave a history of the rise and progress of the 
 idea of dissolving the Union, beginning with the various 
 threats from the Southern portion of tlio Union from those 
 opposed to a tariff, from the nullification party, &c. He 
 was surprised and distressed at such a petition fVom his 
 own native town ; but eloquently defended Mr. Adams 
 from the charges of Mr. Wisj. 
 
 Mr. Adams occupied the floor most oHhc time during sev 
 eral of the last days of the debate, in his defense ; in which 
 he fully confirmed his title to the name of the "old man 
 eloquent." He was unsparing in his denunciations of the 
 Slave Power for its opposition to liberty of speech and of 
 the press, and the right of petition, &c. He gavo the nul- 
 lifiers a scathing rebuke for seeking to punish him for pre 
 senting a petition from forty-five of his constituents, whose 
 views on the subject involved accorded with their own. 
 His assailants having become tired of the discussion, the 
 subject was, on motion, laid on the table, 10t> to 93 ; and 
 the reception of the petition was refused, 40 to 106. 
 
TILER S ADMINISTRATION. 139 
 
 Mr. Giddings presented a similar petition from upwards 
 of eighty of his constituents, and moved its reference in 
 the same manner as Mr. Adams had moved his. The recep 
 tion was refused : Ayes, 24 ; .noes, 116. 
 
 Mr. Giddings also submitted a series of resolutions in 
 relation to the case of the brig Creole, which, in October, 
 1841, left Richmond for New Orleans with a cargo of 
 tobacco and slaves, about 135 in number, who rose upon 
 the crew, killed a man on board, named Hewell, part 
 owner of the negroes, and severely wounded the captain 
 and two of the crew. Having obtained command of the 
 vessel, they directed her to be taken into the port of Nas 
 sau, in the British island of New Providence. Nineteen 
 of the negroes were there imprisoned by the local authori 
 ties, on a charge of mutiny and murder. Their surrender 
 to the American Consul to be sent to the United States for 
 trial, was refused until the advice of the English Govern 
 ment could be had. A correspondence between Mr. Web 
 ster, Secretary of State, and Lord Pahnerston took place. 
 The British Government maintained, that there was no 
 international law by which we could claim, or they give 
 up, the men who had taken possession of the Creole ; and 
 orders were given for their liberation. 
 
 On the 21st of March, 1842, Mr. Giddings submitted a 
 series of resolutions, declaring that jurisdiction over 
 Slavery belonged to the States ; that the States had sur 
 rendered to the Federal Government jurisdiction over 
 commerce and navigation upon the high seas ; that 
 Slavery, being an abridgment of the natural rights of 
 man, can exist only by force of positive, municipal law, and is 
 necessarily confined to the territorial jurisdiction of the 
 power creating it ; that when the brig Creole left the ter 
 ritorial jurisdiction of Virginia, the slave laws of that 
 State ceased to have jurisdiction over the persons on 
 board, who became amenable only to the laws of the 
 United States, and who, on resuming their natural rights 
 of personal liberty, violated no law of the United States ; 
 and that all attempts to reensiave the said persons, or to 
 exert our influence in favor of the coastwise slave trade, 
 was subversive of the rights, and injurious to the feelings 
 arid interests of the Free States, unauthorized by the Con 
 stitution, and incompatible with our national honor. 
 
140 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Mr. Bolts, of Va., offered a resolution declaring the con- 
 duel of Mr. Giddings deserving of the condemnation of the 
 people and the House. After an exciting debate of several 
 days, and without affording him an opportunity of defense, 
 the resolution of censure was passed, 125 to G9. Mr. Gid- 
 dings then resigned, returned home, was reglected by a 
 majority of about 3,500 votes, and returned to his seat in 
 the House on the 5th of May. I 
 
 The annexation of Texas, which furnishes a conspicuous 
 chapter in our political history, was clearly a Democratic 
 measure, showing conclusively the identification of Dem 
 ocracy with Slavery, and the design to give strength and 
 security to this " peculiar institution." 
 
 About the year 1834, commenced a rapid emigration 
 from the South-Western States to Texas, then a province 
 of Mexico. Although slavery had been abolished by Mex 
 ico soon after she had consummated her independence, 
 these emigrants took with them their slaves as well as their 
 rifles. From this fact, and from certain declarations of 
 Southerners, it was evident that at least one object of 
 these adventurers was the reestaUishment of Slavery in 
 Texas. In aid of the revolution, troops were enlisted in 
 several of the States of the Union. In 1835, she declared 
 her independence ; and in 183ii, the revolution was com 
 plctcd by the battle of San Jacinto, in which the Mexican 
 Dictator, Santa Anna, was captured, who, while a prisoner, 
 and under restraint, agreed to a peace on the basis of the 
 independence of Texas ; a bargain which he had no power, 
 and probably no desire to carry into effect, after his liber 
 ation. The hasty recognition of the independence of Texas 
 by our Government, contrary to the advice of President 
 Jackson, her application for admission into the Union, and 
 her withdrawal of the application, have been noticed. 
 
 The South, however, had not abandoned the purpose of 
 annexation. It was openly declared in Southern State 
 Legislatures, and by Southern members of Congress, to be 
 their object, by this measure, to give protection to Slavery, 
 which would be furnished by " an equipoise of influence in 
 the halls of Congress." Said Mr. Wise, a confidential friend 
 of President Tyler, on the floor of Congress : " Let one 
 more Northern State be admitted, and the equilibrium is 
 
TYLER S ADMINISTRATION. 141 
 
 gone gone forever. Let the South stop at the Sabine, (the 
 Eastern boundary of Texas.) while the North may spread 
 unchecked beyond the Rocky Mountains, and the Southern 
 scale must kicJt the learn." 
 
 President Tyler, in his Annual Message, December, 1813, 
 suggested a forcible interposition to put an end to the war 
 between Texas and Mexico. Arid Texas was again making 
 movements towards annexation. At the same time a 
 secret negotiation was going on between the two Govern 
 ments for this purpose. Mr. Upshur, Secretary of State, 
 having been killed by the explosion of the gun " Peace 
 maker," on board the United States ship Princeton, he was 
 immediately succeeded by Mr. Calhoun, who concluded the 
 treaty of annexation with the Texan commissioners, Van 
 Zandt and Henderson, on the 12th of April, 1844. The 
 treaty was hastened by the apprehension that Great 
 Britain was about to enter into a negotiation with the 
 opponents of Slavery in Texas, which contemplated its 
 abolition in Texas. There was, however, no foundation 
 for such apprehension. Mr. Everett, our Minister in Lon 
 don, having been written to on the subject, answered, that 
 he had been told by Lord Aberdeen, that " the suggestion 
 that England had made, or intended to make, the abolition 
 of Slavery the condition of any treaty arrangement with 
 Texas, was wholly without foundation." It was believed 
 that the information which had given a new impulse to 
 the annexation movement, had been manufactured for the 
 occasion. 
 
 On taking the question on the ratification of the treaty, 
 (June 8th,) a majority of two-thirds being necessary, only 
 16 Senators voted in the affirmative, and 25 in the nega 
 tive. Messrs. Buchanan and Sturgeon, of Pa., Breese, of 
 111., and Woodbury, of N. II., all Democrats, voted for the 
 treaty. Of the Democrats from Free States who voted 
 against the treaty, were, Messrs. Fairrield, of Maine ; 
 Atherton, of N. H. ; Niles, of Con. ; Wright, of N. Y. ; 
 Allen and Tappan, of Ohio ; and Mr. Benton, of Mo., a 
 Slave State. Some of the latter, however, perhaps most 
 or all of them, were not opposed to annexation, considered 
 as an abstract question. But they feared, as the result, a 
 war with Mexico. Texas claiming disputed territory, our 
 
142 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Government would, if Texas should be received, be com 
 pelled to defend the .claim against Mexico. Annexation 
 was also held, by some of our statesmen, to be unconsti 
 tutional. 
 
 Mr. Benton spoke on three successive daj-s against the 
 treaty, and in support of his resolutions, which declared : 
 
 1st. That the ratification of the treaty would be the adop 
 tion of the war with Mexico. 2d. That the treaty-making 
 power does not extend to the power of making war, and that 
 the President and Senate have no right to make war, either 
 by declaration or adoption. 3d. That Texas ought to be 
 reunited to the American Union, as soon as it can be done 
 with the consent of a majority of the people of the United 
 States and of Texas, and when Mexico shall cither consent 
 to the same, or acknowledge the independence of Texas, 
 or cease to prosecute the war against her on a scale cqm- 
 mensurate with the conquest of the country. 
 
 Mr. Benton contended that the treaty proposed to annex 
 much more territory than originally belonged to Texas ; 
 and therefore the proposition for the " rednne.ration of 
 Teras" was a fraud in words. It was not pretended, even 
 by those who used that word, that the province of Texas, 
 when it was ceded in 1819 to Spain, extended further than 
 the boundaries included between the Sabine and the Rio 
 del Norte, and the Gulf of Mexico and the Red River ; 
 whilst the Republic of Texas, as defined in the treaty, 
 included the whole extent of the Rio del Norte, and 
 embraced portions of the department of New Mexico wirh 
 its capital, being many hundreds of miles of a neighbor s 
 dominion, with whom we had treaties of friendship and 
 commerce a territory where no Texan force had ever 
 penetrated, and including towns and villages and custom 
 houses now in the peaceable possession of Mexico. 
 
 After the treaty was rejected, Mr. Benton brought in a 
 bill which authorized and advised the President to open 
 negotiations with Mexico and Texas for adjusting bound 
 aries, and annexing Texas to the United States. 
 
 The President s scheme of annexation by treaty having 
 failed, he appealed to the House of Representatives, in a 
 Message, inviting their attention to the subject, urging, as 
 a reason, that annexation would be endangered if some 
 
143 
 
 thing were not done at once. He preferred annexation by 
 treaty ; but if Congress should see fit to adopt some other 
 plan, he would yield his prompt cooperation. The Message 
 was communicated at too late a day to be acted upon at 
 this session. And a Presidential election was to take 
 place before the next session, which closed with the official 
 term of Mr. Tyler. 
 
 Public sentiment had designated Mr. Van Buren and 
 Mr. Clay as rival candidates for the Presidency. The 
 Whig Convention was to meet at Baltimore on the 1st of 
 May, 1844 ; the Democratic on the 27th, at the same 
 place. Both of these gentlemen had been requested to 
 express their opinions on the question of the annexation 
 of Texas ; and both complied with the request, in letters 
 of great length. 
 
 Mr. Clay said : " If, without the loss of national charac 
 ter, without the .hazard of foreign war, with the general 
 concurrence of the nation, without an} danger to the integ 
 rity of the Union, and without giving an unreasonable 
 price for Texas, the question of annexation were presented, 
 it would appear in quite a different light from that in 
 which, I apprehend, it is now to be regarded." He said 
 the revolt had been greatly aided by citizens of the United 
 States, in a manner and to an extent which brought upon 
 us the reproach of an impartial world ; and we ought not 
 to give occasion for the imputation of having instigated 
 or aided the revolution with a view to territorial aggran 
 dizement. He would not involve the country in a war for 
 the acquisition of Texas. He discountenanced the motive 
 of acquiring territory to strengthen one part of the Union 
 against another. 
 
 The letter, of course, was not entirely satisfactory to 
 ultra slaveholding Wings, because it did not sufficiently 
 favor their interests ; nor did it fully express the views of 
 Northern Whigs, because it did not in terms deprecate tho 
 extension of Slavery. Yet the latter, because he was op 
 posed to it for other though less weighty reasons, rendered 
 him generally acceptable to his party in the North. 
 
 Mr. Van Buren, in his letter, discusses the subject of an 
 nexation at great length. He had, as Secretary of State, 
 by direction of President Jackson, instructed our Minister 
 
144 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 at Mexico to open a negotiation with the Mexican Govern 
 ment for the purchase of the greater part of the then pro 
 vince of Texas. Gen. Jackson s administration had thus 
 renewed an attempt to accomplish the samo object which 
 had been made by its predecessor. Mr. Adams, however, 
 had, in 1827, proposed an acquisition of territory as far 
 West as the Rio del Norte, the extreme Western boundary 
 of Texas ; whilst the cession asked for by President 
 Jackson extended only as far as the desert or grand prairie, 
 which lies East of the river Nueces. Both authorized 
 agreements for smaller portions of territory ; and the pay 
 ments were modified accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Van Buren discussed the constitutional power to 
 annex Texas. Congress only has the power to admit new 
 States; hence Texas, if annexed by treaty, must be ac 
 quired as a Territory. In this way only, if at all, could it 
 be done constitutionally. The acquisition by treaty, 
 palpable as its unconstitutionality had been deemed, had 
 the sanction of precedent in the purchase of Louisiana. 
 Desirable as the acquisition was, yet, being wholly at 
 variance with the spirit of our treaty of amity and com 
 merce with Mexico, and implying a disposition to espouse 
 the quarrel of Texas with Mexico, he could not favor an 
 nexation under existing circumstances. Said he : " We 
 shall act under the eye of an intelligent, observing world." 
 And in reference to the probabilities of provoking a war 
 with Mexico by the measure, he said : " Could we hope to 
 stand justified in the eyes of mankind for entering into it ; 
 more especially if its commencement is to be preceded by 
 the appropriation to our own use of territory, the sover 
 eignty of which is in dispute between two nations, one of 
 which we are to join in the struggle ?" We were liable, 
 said Mr. Van B., to be misled by the fact, that most of the 
 Texans were onco our fellow-citizens, and had still their 
 relatives and friends amongst us. Yet, he says : " Nothing 
 is either more true or more extensively known, than that 
 Texas was wrested from Mexico, and h:r independence, established, 
 through the instrumentality of citizens of the United States" 
 
 This letter was unpalatable to the South ; and move 
 ments were soon made in many places to prevent his 
 nomination. In some of the Northern States, the " Dem- 
 
TYLER S ADMINISTRATION. 145 
 
 ocracy n protested against these Southern movements to 
 defeat Mr. Van Buren. But protests were unavailing ; and 
 he had himself, for the harmony of the party, authorized 
 the withdrawal of his name, if it should become necessary. 
 
 Mr. Clay was nominated without a ballot by acclama 
 tion. Mr. Frelinghuysen was, on the third ballot, nomina 
 ted for Vice-Preside nt. 
 
 Jn the Democratic Convention, Mr. Van Buren received 
 a clear majority on the first ballot ; having 146 votes ; 
 Mr. Cass, 83 ; K. M. Johnson, 24 ; Mr. Calhoun, 6 ; arid t 
 for others. Two-thirds were necessary to nominate. On 
 the eighth ballot, Mr. Van Buren received 101 ; Mr. Cass, 
 114 ; James K. Polk, 44. Mr. Van Buren s name having 
 been withdrawn, on the next ballot the vote was unanimous 
 for Mr. Polk. Probably to ease New York, Silas Wright, 
 Senator in Congress from that State, then at Washington, 
 was nominated for Vice-President, of which- Mr. W. was 
 informed by telegraph. Declining the nomination, George 
 M. Dallas, of Pennsylvania, was nominated. 
 
 Although a considerable portion of the Democratic party 
 had been opposed to the annexation of Texas, and had 
 concurred with their leader, Mr. Van Buren, in the views 
 expressed in his anti-Texas letter ; yet, in conformity with 
 an established rule for which that party is rioted, they sup 
 ported Mr. Polk with their wonted zeal. The questions at 
 issue between the parties were : a protective tariff, annex 
 ation, and the Oregon question. [For the information of 
 some readers, it may be necessary to state, that there was 
 a dispute between our Government and that of Great 
 Britain, as to the true boundary line between their terri 
 torial possessions on the Pacific ; the latter claiming South 
 to the 49th degree of North latitude ; and ours as far 
 North as 54 degrees and 40 minutes. And the Democratic 
 Convention had, in one of their resolutions, adopted at 
 Baltimore, declared that they would insist on having " the 
 whole of Oregon, or none." Whereas our Government had 
 previously proposed the 49th degree as a boundary.] 
 
 Not only were Northern Democrats ready to make full 
 concession to the South on the question of extending 
 Slavery ; they were equally ready to surrender the pro- 
 tectivo policy. To those who were ignorant (if such there 
 
146 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 were) of the [seven] principles of that party, (the five 
 loaves and two fishes,) it would have seemed strange to 
 see men statesmen who had grown grey during a long 
 advocacy of the protection of home industry, now on the 
 rostrum defending the Southern theory of leaving Ameri 
 can labor subject to foreign legislation. The Middle and 
 Western States, which had been nearly unanimous in 
 favor of the protective principle, had, since Gen. Jackson s 
 second election, gradually abandoned it ; and their leading 
 men were now using the same arguments which John 0. 
 Calhoun and his adherents had for many years employed 
 against a policy to which the country was mainly indebted 
 for its prosperity. 
 
 We have noticed the general and protracted distress 
 under the operation of President Jackson s currency meas 
 ures and the non-protecting tariff act of 183o, which 
 reached its lowest point in 1842. And we have mentioned 
 the passage of the act of 1842, designed both for revenue 
 and protection. It had been urged against its passage, 
 that it would fail as a revenue measure, because the in 
 creased duties would so diminish importations, as to pro 
 duce less revenue than the low duties were yielding ; and 
 that the high duties would be oppressive to the people, 
 especially the poorer classes, who would be compelled to 
 pay higher prices for the necessaries of life. 
 
 But these predictions had signally failed, as they had 
 always failed before. The Secretary of the Treasury had 
 estimated the wants of the Treasury at 26 or 27 millions, 
 and had prepared this bill with that view. Under the last 
 year of the compromise act previous to the operation of 
 the act of 1842, the revenue from imports was only about 
 one-half that amount ; whereas, during the first three 
 years after the time of its having gone fully into effect, the 
 average receipts were $26,808,097, being almost the pre 
 cise sum estimated I And even before it went into effect, 
 preparations for manufacturing, for mining, and other 
 branches of industry, began to revive. Dismissed work 
 men in all the agricultural and manufacturing portions of 
 the country again found remunerative employment. Let 
 any one refer to the papers of that day, and he will sec 
 how remarkably the industry of the country was revived. 
 
TYLER S ADMINISTRATION. 147 
 
 Importations, instead of having fallen off as had been pre 
 dicted, maintained about the average of former years, be 
 cause the people again had the means of purchasing. And 
 as to prices, they had, within the first year after the act 
 went into effect, fallen much below those which the " poor 
 laborer " had paid when half the time out of employ, or 
 receiving half as high a price for his labor. I have before 
 me a list, prepared by merchants of the city of Richmond, 
 Va., of the prices of staple goods in that city for the years 
 1841 and 1843, the year before and the year after the {fas- 
 sage of the act of 1842, showing a reduction of from 10 to 
 more than 30 per cent. Imports of specie were also largely 
 increased, and the rates of interest greatly reduced. In 
 the face of all these and other facts, Democratic speakers 
 at every meeting declaimed loudly against this " oppres 
 sive " tariff, and thus doped multitudes of their hearers, 
 who, at the ensuing election, voted for a President and 
 members of Congress, by whom this policy which had so 
 signally benefitted the country, was overthrown, and a 
 system established which eventually resulted in the 
 "crash "of 1857 a result similar to that produced by 
 every other non-protecting tariff. 
 
 In the tariff State of Pennsylvania, a downright swindle 
 was practised upon the friends of protection ;. a large por 
 tion of whom were ignorant of the views of .Mr. Polk on 
 this question. He had, in 1842, when a candidate for Gov 
 ernor in Tennessee, written a letter for publication, ad 
 dressed to the people of that State, in which he said : " I 
 had steadily, during the period I was a -Representative in 
 Congress, been opposed to a protective, policy, as my recorded 
 votes and public speeches prove. Since 1 retired from Con 
 gress, I had held the same opinion. In the present canvass 
 for Governor I had avowed my opposition to the tariff act 
 of the late Whig Congress" the act of 1842. Yet his 
 friends were now, (1844,) circulating a letter through the 
 Democratic papers of Pennsylvania, written by him to 
 Judge Kane, of that State, representing himself as in favor 
 of a reasonable protection to home industry. And to give greater 
 effect to the fraud, the motto inscribed on the party banners 
 in a large portion of the State, was : " Polk, Dallas, and 
 the Tariff of 1842 !" The ticket was voted for by the hon* 
 
148 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 cst but deluded Pennsylvanians ; who gave that State to 
 the Democratic candidate, who, with the help of a Demo 
 cratic Congress, broke down the policy which they had 
 supposed they were supporting by voting for him. Somo 
 Democratic papers even had the effrontery to represent Mr. 
 Clay as being opposed to the protective policy 1 
 
 Some of Mr. Clay s Southern friends were in favor of an- 
 Dexation, and feared his election would jeopard that 
 measure. In his answer to a letter from that section, he 
 said : " Personally I could have no objection to the annex 
 ation of Texas ; but I certainly would be unwilling to see 
 the existing Union dissolved or seriously jeoparded for the 
 sake of acquiring Texas." The Abolitionists, or " third 
 party" men, seized upon the expression, " Personally I could 
 have no objection to annexation," and used it to represent 
 him as favorable to that measure. One-third of the votes 
 given for the Birney electoral ticket, in the State of New 
 York alone, if given for that of the Whigs, would have se 
 cured the election of Mr. Clay. Possibly Texas might have 
 been annexed during the next Presidential term, even had 
 Mr. Clay been elected ; but it is certain that the unpro 
 voked, unnecessary, disgraceful, aggressive war of conquest 
 against Mexico for the benefit of the Slave Power, would not have 
 occurred. 
 
 Of the electors chosen in November, 170 voted for Polk 
 and Dallas ; and 105 for Clay and Frelinghuysen. 
 
 The great measure of the next session of Congress, 
 (1844-1845,) was the annexation of Texas. President 
 Tyler again urged it upon Congress. lie regarded the re- 
 Cent election as the expression of the will of the people in 
 favor of immediate annexation. In the Soriate, Mr. M Duffio 
 introduced resolutions declaring the rejected treaty to be a 
 "fundamental law of union between the United States and 
 Texas, when the authorities of Texas shall agree to tho 
 same." Mr. Ben ton gave notice of a bill " to provide for 
 the annexation of Texas to the United States," similar to 
 that introduced by him at the preceding session. This bill 
 advised negotiation for the adjustment of boundaries. la 
 the House, C. J. Ingcrsoll, from the Committee of Foreign 
 Affairs, reported resolutions for annexation, which, after 
 
H9 
 
 having been amended, were adopted. They provided that 
 questions of boundary that might arise should be laid be 
 fore Congress. The United States were not to become 
 liable for the debts of Texas ; but she was to retain all the 
 public funds, debts, taxes, and dues owing to the Republic ; 
 and all vacant lands. And new States not exceeding four, 
 in addition to the State of Texas, might be formed out of 
 the territory thereof ; the States to be admitted, with or 
 without Slavery, as the people might desire ; but North of 
 36 degrees and 30 minutes, Slavery was to be prohibited. 
 
 The resolutions were finally passed, 120 to 98. Aa 
 classified by Niles, of the 120 who voted in the affirmative, 
 112 were Democrats, 53 from Free, and 59 from Slave 
 States ; the other 8 were Whigs, all from Slave States. 
 Of the 98 who voted in the negative, 28 were Democrats, 
 all from Free States ; and 70 were Whigs, 52 from Free, 
 and 18 from Slave States. 
 
 Another classification was as follows : The number of 
 Democrats voting was 140 ; from Free States, 81 ; from 
 Slave States, 59. Of the 81, 53 were for, and 28 against 
 annexation. The number of Whigs voting was 78 ; 52 
 from Free, and 26 from Slave States. Of the latter, 8 were 
 for, and 18 against the bill. The 59 Democrats from the 
 Slave States, all voted for the bill, and the 52 Whigs from 
 the Free States, all voted against it. 
 
 The resolutions adopted by the House were amended in 
 the Senate, by adding a resolution, leaving it to the dis 
 cretion of the President, either to submit the resolutions as 
 an overture to Texas for admission, or to negotiate a treaty 
 for that purpose. The resolutions were ordered to a third 
 reading, 27 to 25, all the Senators being present. The 
 amendment of the Senate was concurred in by the House, 
 132 to 76. So the triumph of annexation was complete, as it 
 is not probable that either Mr. Tyler or Mr. Polk would have 
 jeoparded the measure by negotiation. It was said, how 
 ever, that Messrs. Benton and Bagby without whoso votes 
 the resolutions would have been lost, voted for them from 
 their confidence that Mr Polk, upon whom it was supposed 
 the choice would devolve, would elect this mode But Mr. 
 Tyler seized upon the last moment of his official exist- 
 
150 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 encc, to exercise, himself, the power conferred by tlic^ 
 resolutions. 
 
 The question of annexation, relieved from all doubt as to 
 its constitutionality, and from all apprehensions of diffi 
 culty with Mexico, would probably have received the votes 
 of nearly all the Democrats in both Houses. 
 
POLK S ADMINISTRATION. 151 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Administration of James K. Polk. 
 
 JAMES K. POLK was inaugurated as President, on the 
 4th of March, 1845. As was naturally expected, the sub 
 jects of Slavery and Annexation found a place in his Ad 
 dress. He deprecated interference with certain " domestic 
 institutions" as an " attempt to disturb or destroy the com 
 promises of the Constitution," which must " lead to the 
 most ruinous and disastrous consequences." He regretted, 
 " that in some sections of our country, misguided persons 
 had indulged in schemes and agitations ; whose object was 
 the destruction of domestic institutions in other sections." 
 These schemes he, as a true Southerner, was pleased to 
 call "moral treason." Respecting the Tariff he said : "Jus 
 tice and sound policy forbid the Federal Government to 
 foster one branch of industry to the detriment of another, 
 or to cherish the interests of one portion to the injury of 
 another portion of our common country." He congratulated 
 the country on the reunion of Texas to the United States. 
 The annexation was " not to be looked upon as the con 
 quest of a nation seeking to extend her dominions by arms 
 and violence, but as the peaceful acquisition of territory 
 once her own." He also reasserted " our title to the coun 
 try of the Oregon to be clear and unquestionable/ " and 
 pledged himself " to maintain, by all constitutional means, 
 the right of the United States to that portion of our 
 territory." 
 
 Mr. Polk chose for his Cabinet : James Buchanan, of Pa., 
 Secretary of State ; Robert J. Walker, of Miss., Secretary 
 of the Treasury ; Wm. L. Marcy, of N. Y., Secretary of 
 War ; George Bancroft, of Mass., Secretary of the Navy ; 
 Cave Johnson, of Tenn., Postmaster-General ; John Y. Ma 
 son, of Va., Attorney-General. 
 
152 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 On the Cth of March, six days after the date of the act 
 of annexation, the Mexican Minister protested against the 
 dismemberment of Texas from Mexican territory, and de 
 clared the purpose of Mexico to enforce her right to recover 
 the territory ; and he gave notice of the termination of his 
 mission, and asked for his passports. On the arrival of the 
 news of annexation at the city of Mexico, diplomatic 
 relations between the two Governments were there also 
 terminated. 
 
 Early in the summer, President Jones, of Texas, laid be 
 fore the Toxan Congress a proposition from the Mexican 
 Government, to acknowledge the independence of Texas, 
 upon three conditions : (1.) Texas not to annex herself or 
 become subject to any other country. (2 ) Limits and 
 other arrangements to be matters of agreement in tho final 
 treaty. (3.) Texas to consent to refer the disputed points 
 with regard to territory arid other matters, to the arbitra 
 tion of umpires. But the proposition was rejected ; and 
 resolutions were adopted accepting the terms of annexation 
 to the United States. This acceptance was, in July, rati 
 fied by the people of Texas in Convention. 
 
 Mexico considered annexation an act of war, and declared 
 her intention to resent the injury, and to resort to arms. 
 At the request of the Congress and the people of Texas, our 
 Government sent an army into that territory to defend it 
 against invasion. The army was ordered to tako position 
 between the Nueccs arid the Del Norte. A strong squad 
 ron was sent to the coast of Mexico, as a precautionary 
 measure. 
 
 Several installments of the Mexican indemnity were due ; 
 arid claims of more than three millions had been recognized 
 by a treaty, which the Mexican Government had not yet 
 ratified. Mexico having consented to renew diplomatic 
 relations, a Minister, (Mr. Slidell, of Louisiana,) was sent 
 with full power to settle all difficulties. His reception, 
 however, was refused, on the ground of the inadequacy of 
 his special power to treat upon the questions which the 
 Mexican Government intended to make the subject of nego 
 tiation. It would recognize him only for the purpose of 
 treating in relation to Texas and the boundary. 
 
 Gen. Taylor, having been with his troops at Corpus 
 
153 
 
 Christi from August to January, ar.d no hostile act having 
 been committed by the Mexicans, was ordered, in January, 
 1846, to the left bank of the Rio Grande, (Rio del Norte,) 
 where he arrived with a company of dragoons, (in advance 
 of the main army,) on the 24th of March. He was met by 
 a deputation of 30 or 40 men, with a message from Gen. 
 Mcjia, a Mexican commander, protesting against the inva 
 sion. On the approach of the fleet of transports, the cus 
 tom-house at Point Isabel, and a few other buildings, were 
 burnt by the Mexican commandant. On the 28th, the army 
 of occupation, consisting of about 3,500 men, arrived. 
 About one month thereafter, hostilities commenced. 
 
 On the llth of May, 1846, the President sent to Congress 
 a Message, announcing a state of war, commenced on the 
 part of Mexico, whose Government, he said, " after a long- 
 continued series of menaces, had at last invaded our terri 
 tory, and shed the blood of our fellow-citizens on our own 
 soil." And he asked Congress to recognizo the existence 
 of the war, and to place in the hands of the Executive the 
 means of prosecuting it. A bill to raise the necessary men 
 and $10,000,000 was immediately reported in the House, 
 and passed, 142 to 14. The next morning it passed the 
 Senate with slight amendments, 40 to 2, and was returned 
 to the House the same evening, which repassed it the next 
 day with the Senate s amendments. It was sent to the 
 President, who signed it, and issued the war Proclamation 
 the same day. 
 
 The Whig members were in a dilemma. They believed 
 the war to be unjust on the part of our Government, having 
 been caused by the dismemberment of a part of the terri 
 tory of Mexico. The President s ordering the army into 
 Mexican territory, was an act of war, tantamount to a de 
 claration of war, which the Constitution devolved upon 
 Congress. Many, however, in accordance with the popular 
 sentiment, that, however unjust a war may be, it must be 
 supported, voted for the btll ; others, because it would ren 
 der a man unpopular to vote against a war. But the most 
 objectionable part of it was the preamble, which declared 
 the war to exist by the act of the. Republic of Mexico. This 
 declaration was positively untrue. Our army was the in 
 vader. It was on Mexican soil that the blood had been shed, 
 
154 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 and not on ours, as the President had declared. Hence, to 
 vote for the bill was to vote for what was believed to be 
 false. In the Senate, a motion was made to strike out the 
 preamble ; but it was lost, 18 to 28. The Democrats were 
 determined to compel the Whigs to indorse the statement 
 of the President, and thus to cover up the iniquity of the 
 project. Some voted under protest, and others refused to 
 vote at all. Thomas Clayton, of Delaware, and John Davis, 
 of Massachusetts, (often called "honest John Davis,") 
 voted in the negative. The members of the House who 
 voted in the negative, were, Messrs. Adams, Ashrnun, Grin- 
 nell, Hudson, and King, of Mass. ; Severance, of Maine ; 
 Cranston, of It. I. ; Culver, of N. Y. ; Strohm, of Pa. ; Gid- 
 dings, Root, Tilden, and Vance, of Ohio. 
 
 On the 4th of August, 1846, the President informed the 
 Senate that he had resolved to propose to open a negotia 
 tion with Mexico, and asked of Congress money to enable 
 him to negotiate a peace. The object for which the money 
 was wanted, was to purchase territory, if it should be 
 deemed expedient. A bill appropriating $2,000,000 for this 
 purpose was introduced into the House of Representatives, 
 and promptly put on its passage, when Mr. Wilinot, of Pa., 
 a Democrat, moved a proviso, which was carried, declaring 
 that in any territory acquired from Mexico, Slavery should 
 never be permitted. The bill, with the proviso, passed the 
 House ; but for want of time, the Senate carne to no con 
 clusion on the subject at this session. 
 
 The proviso was carried in Committee of the Whole, by 
 a vote 83 to C4 ; only 3 members (Democrats) from Frco 
 States, it was said, opposing it. [Individual votes are not 
 recorded in Committee of the Whole.] The bill with the 
 proviso, was engrossed for its third reading, 85 to 80. 
 
 In his Message to Congress in December, 1840, the Presi 
 dent adverted to the wrongs committed by Mexico, and the 
 causes of the war ; declared its justice on our part, our 
 disposition to peace, and our right to annex Texas ; aud 
 again charged Mexico with having invaded our soil as 
 serting the validity of the claim of Texas to the Rio 
 Grande, in opposition to Messrs. Benton, Wright, Adams, 
 and others. 
 
 A bill wo.s again introduced appropriating money, 
 
155 
 
 ($3,000,000,) to aid in negotiating a peace with Mexico. 
 It passed the House with the " Wilmot proviso," 115 to 
 110, after an ineffectual motion of Mr. Douglas to amend 
 by prohibiting Slavery in acquired territory North of 36 
 deg. 30 min. A similar bill passed the Senate, in which 
 body the proviso had been rejected. This bill was sent to 
 the House, the proviso attached in Committee of the Whole, 
 but afterward rejected .in the House, 97 to 102 ; and the 
 bill finally passed without the proviso. 
 
 The debate on this bill in the Senate was deeply inter 
 esting as well as animated. Many Senators participated. 
 The collision between Messrs, Benton and Calhoun might 
 be called "rich," were it not for the iniquity which it 
 disclosed. A glimpse at a few facts is all that can 
 be given. 
 
 Mr. Calhoun said the objects of the war appeared from 
 the President s Message to be threefold : (1.) To repel in 
 vasion ; (2.) To establish the Rio del Norte as the West 
 ern boundary ; (3.) To obtain payment for indemnities due 
 our citizens for claims against Mexico. The President had 
 assumed that war existed, and called upon Congress to re 
 cognize its existence. That blood had been shed on Ameri 
 can soil, he had assumed on the ground that the Rio del 
 Norte was the Western boundary of Texas. And Con 
 gress, in declaring that war had been made by Mexico, had 
 recognized that river as the boundary. Hence, the cross 
 ing of that river by the Mexicans was considered invasion, 
 which was to be repelled. These two, repelling invasion 
 and establishing boundary, were primary objects ; and be 
 ing involved in the war, the object of indemnity, though 
 not a sufficient cause of war in itself, might be made one 
 of the objects for which the war might be prosecuted. 
 
 Mr. Benton charged the war upon Mr. Calhoun. The 
 causes were further back than the march of the army to 
 the Rio Grande. He referred to Mr. C. a approval of the 
 treaty, as a member of Mr. Monroe s Cabinet, by which ter 
 ritory had been given away ; the blame of which had long 
 been unjustly charged upon Mr. Adams, the negotiator of 
 the treaty. He referred also to Mr. C. s acts and corres 
 pondence relating to the independence of Texas, and his 
 purpose to extend Slavery ; and to his inducing Mr. Tyler 
 
156 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 to adopt the course he did, on the last day of his 
 presidency, which measure had precipitated us into 
 the war. 
 
 Mr. B. said : " He now sets up for the character of paci 
 ficator ; with what justice, let the further fact proclaim 
 which I now expose." He said there were, in the summer 
 of 1844, (while Mr. C. was Secretary of State,) three hun 
 dred newspapers in the pay of that department, which 
 spoke its sentiments, and denounced as traitors all who 
 were for peaceable annexation by settling-, at the same 
 time, the boundary line of Texas with Mexico. These pa 
 pers acted under instruction ; in proof of which he read 
 from a letter as follows : 
 
 " As the conductor of a public journal here, he has re 
 quested me to answer it, (your letter,) which request I 
 comply with readily. . . . With regard to the course 
 of your paper, you can take the tone of the administration 
 from the *****. I think, however, and would recom 
 mend, that you would confine yourself to attacks upon 
 Benton, showing that he has allied himself witli the Whigs 
 on the Texas question. Quote Jackson s letter on Texas, 
 where he denounces all those as traitors to the country 
 who oppose the treaty. Apply it to Benton. Proclaim that 
 Benton, by attacking Tyler and his friends, and driving 
 them from the party, is aiding the election of Mr. Cla} ; 
 and charge him with doing this to defeat Mr. Polk, and in 
 sure himself the succession in 1848 ; and claim that full 
 justice be done to the acts and motives of John Tyler by 
 the leaders. Harp upon these things. . . . Look out 
 for my leader of to morrow as an indication, and regard 
 this letter as of the most strict and inviolate confidence of 
 character." 
 
 Mr. Clayton said, that, during the debate on the Oregon 
 question, in February, 1&46, he had learned that our Gov 
 ernment had ordered Gen. Taylor to break up his encamp 
 ment at Corpus Christi, and march to the Rio Grande. The 
 instant he heard it. the public having no means of know 
 ing the fact he was alarmed at the apprehension of a war 
 \vith Mexico ; and he had privately told Mr. Calhoun, that 
 unless he should interpose to arrest the tendency of things 
 arising from that order, we should be plunged into a war. 
 
FOLK S ADMINISTRATION. 151 
 
 At the same time there was danger of a war with Eng 
 land; that he [Mr. Clayton] as. a Whig, could effect 
 nothing ; and unless Mr. Calhoun and his friends should 
 move in the matter, the Whigs would be powerless. The 
 gentleman was at that time devoted to the object of pre 
 venting a war with England. Said Mr. Clayton : " While, 
 the. Houses of Congress remained in ignorance, and those who 
 knew could not move, the President was ordering the army upon 
 the Rio Grande, and taking a sie.p, of which the inevitable conse 
 quence proved to be war. ... At the time war was an 
 nounced, I denounced it as the act of the President. . . . 
 I believe that the war was brought on by this marching- of 
 the army, without any necessity done, too, while Con 
 gress was in session, without one word being communi 
 cated, as to the intention of the President, to cither 
 House." 
 
 The action of Congress upon this subject, gave rise to 
 the question : Is it the duty of the Legislature to provide 
 the means for prosecuting a war made unconstitutionally, 
 or by the exercise of usurped power ? If so, the President 
 might at any time plunge the country into a war, without the 
 coi;82iitor knowledge of Congress, where the Constitution 
 wisely places the power to declare or make war. Another 
 quest on naturally arises : Can the Legislature which pro 
 vides the means avoid the responsibility of the war ? The 
 Legislature and the Executive are designed to hold checks 
 upon each other. Can either, then, be justified in refusing 
 to interpose its constitutional power to arrest or to prevent 
 usurpation by the other ? If not, the people who have to 
 bear the burdens of war, have no security ; and the Gov 
 ernment would be virtually a military despotism. Mr. 
 Corvvin, Senator from Ohio, took ground on this subject, 
 which it is difficult, indeed, to controvert with success. 
 He, almost alone, contended against the popular notion, 
 that because war had been made, " we must fight it out ; ; 
 and that no distinction is to be made between a war 
 secretly brought upon the country by usurped power, 
 and one that is made by the people through their re 
 presentatives. 
 
 In view of all the facts connected with this measure of 
 annexation its objects its inception its incidents, and 
 
158 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the means of its accomplishment what is the judgment 
 which intelligent and candid minds must award to the pro: 
 jectors and abettors of this stupendous scheme of plunder, 
 as Mr. Beriton regarded it ? Well did Mr. Van Buren say : 
 " We shall act under the eye of an intelligent, observing 
 world. . . . Could we hope to stand justified in the 
 eyes of mankind ?" Yet the entire Democratic North, whose 
 fuvorite candidate for the Presidency deprecated the act 
 contemplated, went over in a body to the assistance of 
 those who were bent on the perpetration of the iniquitous 
 measure I This, however, is but one of a long succession 
 of bad measures inflicted upon the country under the magic 
 name of " Democracy." 
 
 Although Mr. Tyler had snatched from his successor the 
 anticipated honor of consummating the annexation scheme, 
 he left on the hands of the latter the management of the 
 other foreign question, the settlement of the conflicting ter 
 ritorial claims of the United States and Great Britain on 
 the Pacific. 
 
 A bill had been introduced in the House at the session of 
 1844-1845, at which the annexation of Texas was effected, 
 to establish a Territorial Government in Oregon. It em 
 braced, under the proposed government, the whole territory 
 West of the Rocky Mountains, and from latitude 42 de 
 grees to 54 deg. and 40 minutes. But as the proposed 
 measure might break up the negotiation then in progress 
 with Great Britain, and lead to war, an amendment was 
 added, providing that the act should not be so construed as 
 to interfere with the rights which British subjects might 
 have under the existing treaty until after twelve months 
 notice should have been given. An amendment excluding 
 Slavery was also adopted. The bill passed the House, 140 
 to 49. A motion to take up the bill was made in the Sen 
 ate on the last day of the session, (March 3, 1845,) but it 
 did not prevail. 
 
 President Polk, in his first Annual Message, December, 
 1845, alluded to the several negotiations under the admin 
 istrations of Mr. Monroe and Mr. Adams, which had result 
 ed in provisions for the joint occupancy of the territory by 
 ^the subjects of the two nations, for the term of ten years 
 from 1818 ; an^l in a renewal of the provision for joint oc- 
 
FOLK S ADMINISTRATION. 159 
 
 cupancy for another term often years from 1828, and until 
 the treaty should be annulled, which could be done by either 
 party by giving the other twelve months previous notice 
 to that effect. 
 
 It had been rumored before the meeting- of Congress, that 
 our Government had offered to treat on the parallel of the 
 49th degree as a boundary. The " Union," the official paper, 
 contradicted the rumor, and said the administration would 
 insist on the "whole of Oregon or none." [It was contended 
 by some that Great Britain had no just claim to any part 
 of the territory.] It said : " When that word goes forth 
 from the constituted authorities of the nation, Our right to 
 Oregon is clear and unquestionable, who doubts that it 
 will go the whole length and breadth of the land, and that 
 it will be hailed as it goes, by the Democratic party, with 
 one unanimous Amen ! And what then ? We answer this, 
 then the Democracy of this country will stand to its word. It 
 will not flinch." It was apprehended that, if the President 
 should recommend the taking possession of all Oregon, and 
 Congress should carry out the recommendation, war would 
 ensue. But to take possession without having given a 
 year s previous notice in order to terminate the joint occu 
 pancy, would be a violation of the treaty. Hence, there 
 were those, among whom was Mr. Adams, who urged the 
 giving of the notice as. a means of hastening a settlement 
 of the controversy. 
 
 After all the gasconade of " stump orators" and the whole 
 Democratic press during the presidential canvass and after 
 the election, the reader will readily judge of the disappoint 
 ment and mortification of the Democrats on being informed 
 by the President in his Message, that he. had offered to divide 
 on the 49tfA degree, without, however, conceding to Great 
 Britain the fiee navigation of the Columbia river. This 
 proposition having been rejected, it had been withdrawn, 
 and our title to the whole territory asserted. He recom 
 mended the giving of notice of the discontinuance of the 
 joint occupancy, and protection to our citizens in Oregon. 
 
 Preparations for war were supposed to be making in 
 England. In Congress several measures were proposed ; 
 one of which was a preparation for war. A bill was re 
 ported for the organization of two regiments of riflemen. 
 
ICO DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Mr. Adams opposed the bill as unnecessary, both because 
 a bill for one regiment was in progress in the Senate, and 
 because he saw "no danger of war at this time." * If there 
 "were such danger, the first measure ought to be a notice to 
 Great Britain that we meant to terminate the joint occu 
 pancy. Yet it was not a joint occupancy. The treaty ac 
 knowledged no occupation of the territory by cither party; 
 it was a mere commercial convention for free navigation. 
 Twelve months after such notice, the right would accrue to 
 us to occupy any part of the territory. He hoped it would 
 be given, and followed by a real occupation of the whole terri 
 tory. [This declaration produced great sensation.] Mr. 
 Adams noticed the contrast between the indifference of the 
 Calhoun party in Congress on the Oregon question, and 
 their zeal the year before for the acquisition of Texas, even 
 at the cost of war. 
 
 After much debate and numerous propositions in both 
 Houses, a joint resolution was adopted, authorizing the 
 President, at his discretion, to give to the British Govern 
 ment the notice required for the abrogation of the conven 
 tion (treat}) of 1827. 
 
 Mr. Benton took ground against Messrs. Cass, Dix, 
 Dickinson, and others, who claimed title to the line of 54 
 40 . He said, "the people had been misled grossly and 
 widely misled ignorantly at first, as we were bound to 
 believe ; des ; gnedly now, as we painfully sec. The fifty- 
 four forty line never existed. The treaty proves it ; yet 
 its existence is still affirmed to mislead the uninformed, 
 and to save the misleaders from the mortification of 
 exposure." 
 
 The resolutions authorizing the notice approved by the 
 President, were sent to England to be delivered in person 
 to Her Majesty Victoria, hi the midst of speculation and 
 apprehension, PEACE was announced ! A conference had 
 taken place between Mr. Buchanan, Secretary of State, and 
 Mr. Pakenhara, which resulted in a treaty concluded the 
 15th of June. Instead of getting ihe whole of degou to 
 " .54 40," we obtained no part of it North of 49, and not all 
 the way quite up to that line. The South had secured 
 their object, the annexation of Texas and the prospective 
 acquisition, from Mexico, of additional territory of indefl- 
 
FOLK S ADMINISTRATION. 161 
 
 nitc extent ; and they were not disposed to favor the ex 
 tension of our territory Northward, and .thus to furnish the 
 North with an " equipoise" to the Slave States which they 
 had in prospect. On the whole, the result maybe regarded 
 as another triumph of the Slave Power, by its agciit, the 
 Democratic party. 
 
 Another important object of this ruling power an object 
 long sought was, in the name of Democracy, attained at 
 this session the destruction of the American Protective 
 System. An attempt had been made for this purpose in 
 1844, but it did not quite succeed. There being now ad 
 ministration majorities in both Houses, there was little 
 hope of saving the Tariff of 1842, whose beneficial effects 
 were felt in all the Free States, and its unfavorable opera 
 tion was felt nowhere. A more arduous struggle between 
 the advocates and opponents of protection, has probably 
 never occurred. 
 
 The reduction of the duties was not the only defect of the 
 act of 1846. On some articles no reduction was made. A 
 material fault of the act was the entire abolition of specific 
 duties, and the adoption, in full, of the ad valorem system. 
 The effects of these two systems have been stated. Not 
 only does the latter encourage fraud in importations ; but 
 also affords a less uniform protection, varying with fluctua 
 tions in prices. For example : A duty of 30 per cent, on a 
 tun of iron costing $50 in England, is $15. But if the price 
 of iron should fall to $40, the duty would be only $12 ; if 
 to $30, the duty would be $9. Hence, if the first duty was 
 merely sufficient for protection, the reduced duty would 
 afford no protection at all. 
 
 Specific duties had been recommended by our leading 
 statesmen ; and they had, from long experience, been found 
 preferable to ad valcrem duties. But as the latter would 
 seriously affect the manufacturing interest, which was 
 almost entirely confined to the North, Democracy, which 
 had become the synonym of Slavery, yielded to the demand 
 for the change, to the damage of the free labor of the 
 North. The Democratic members from Pennsylvania, with 
 one exception, remained true to the protective principle, 
 and one-fourth of those from New York ; and the opposi 
 tion to the bill derived considerable strength from tho 
 Whigs of the Slave States, *> 
 
162 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 The vote in the Senate stood, Yeas, 28 ; Nays, 27. Only 
 one Whig 1 , (Jarnagin, of Tenn., under instructions,) voted 
 for the bill. Of the Democrats who voted against it, were 
 Cameron and Sturgeon, of Pa., and Niles, of Conn. 
 
 In the House, there were, Yeas, 114 : Democrats, 113 ; 
 Whig, 1, (of Alabama.) Nays, 95 : Whigs, 71 ; Demo 
 crats, 18 ; Native Americans, 6. Of the 18 Democrats, 
 there were from New York, 4 ; New Jersey, 2 ; Pennsyl 
 vania, 11 ; Maryland, 1. Native Americana, New York, 
 4 ; Pennsylvania, 2. 
 
 The unfavorable effects of the new tariff were soon felt. 
 Complaints came from different sections. A large number 
 of Woolen and Iron manufactories were very soon adversely 
 affected. Some were suspended ; others discharged a part 
 of their hands ; and others reduced the wages of operatives. 
 Before two years had elapsed there were indications of 
 another revulsion at no distant period. Fortunately, how 
 ever, the discovery of California gold, and the rapid increase 
 of coin, increased the circulating medium of the country, 
 and the means of paying for imported goods ; and thus 
 postponed the apprehended calamity. But importations 
 continued to increase beyond all precedent, until, in 1857, 
 they reached the enormous amount of about $360,000,000 ; 
 being nearly three, times the average amount imported for tht 
 eight or ten years previous to 184f> ; when (1857) the deferred 
 14 crash" at length came ! A more ruinous one, it is be 
 lieved, has never been experienced in this country. 
 
 The President having recommended a Sub Treasury, a 
 bill was reported early in the session by the Committee of 
 Ways and Means, and passed the House, April 2d, 184G, 
 by a vote of 123 to 67. It passed the Senate, August 1st, 
 by a strict party vote, 28 to 24. By this law, all receivers 
 and disbursers of the public revenue, including all postmas 
 ters, were required to collect and pay out specie only. 
 
 At the session of 1847-1848, was established a Govern 
 ment for the territory of Oregon. Mr. Douglas had re 
 ported a bill for this purpose in August, 1846, to which an 
 amendment excluding Slavery had been adopted in Com 
 mittee of the Whole. In the Senate, the bill was read 
 twice, referred, and reported on ; but no further action was 
 taken upon the bill. 
 
FOLK S ADMINISTRATION. 163 
 
 At the next session, Mr. Douglas, December 23, 1846, 
 again reported his bill, which was read twice and commit 
 ted. It was discussed in Committee of the Whole, Janu 
 ary llth, 12th, arid 13th. The next day, the bill was taken 
 out of Committee, when Mr. Burt, of S. C., moved the fol 
 lowing addition (already voted down in Committee) to the 
 clause forbidding Slavery : " Inasmuch as the whole of said 
 Territory lies North of 36 degrees 30 minutes North lati 
 tude, known as the line of the Missouri Compromise. 7 
 
 The object of this evidently was to recognize the Mis 
 souri line, not as limited to territory owned at the time 
 that line was established, but as extending to all that had 
 since been, or thereafter should be, acquired, so as to legal 
 ize Slavery thenceforth South of 36 deg. 30 min. The amend 
 ment was negatived : Yeas, 82 ; nays, 114. From Free 
 States, 5 voted in the minority. No member from a Slave 
 State voted in the majority. The bill then passed, 134 to 
 35 nays all Southern. This bill, like that of the preced 
 ing session, failed to receive the final action of the Seriate. 
 
 At the next session, 1847-1848, Mr. C. B. Smith, of Indi 
 ana, reported to the House a bill to establish a Government 
 for Oregon, which, after postponements and other delays, 
 came out of Committee, August 1st, that provision having 
 been struck out which required the inhabitants of the Ter 
 ritory to be " subject to all the conditions, and restrictions, 
 and prohibitions in the articles of compact contained in the 
 ordinance for the government of the territory North-West 
 of the river Ohio, passed July 13, 1787." [Anti-Slavery 
 restriction.] The House refused to agree to this amend 
 ment : Yeas, 88; Nays, 114. Of those who voted for 
 striking out, 5 were from Free States. The billr was then 
 passed, 128 to 71. This vote was entirely sectional, except 
 ing the vote of Mr. Houston, of Del., who voted in the 
 affirmative. In the Senate, the bill was, on motion of Mr. 
 Douglas, amended so as to extend the Missouri Compromise 
 line to the Pacific Ocean, and engrossed for a third read 
 ing, 33 to 22. It was returned to the House, where the 
 amendment of Mr. Douglas was rejected : Yeas, 82 ; nays, 
 121. From Free States, 3 voted Yea ; otherwise all from 
 Free States Nays ; and all from the Slave States Yeas. The 
 Senate receded from its amendments, and passed the 
 
164 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 bill as it came from the House : Yeas, 29 ; Nays, 25 all 
 from Slave States. 
 
 A bill was reported by Mr. Clayton, in the Senate, fpr 
 the organization of New Mexico and California into Terri 
 tories ; but it was not acted upon at this session. 
 
 At the next session, a bill was introduced into the Senate, 
 December 11, 1848, by Mr. Douglas, for the admission of 
 California as a State, to include all the territory acquired 
 by treaty from Mexico. This bill was silent on the subject 
 of Slavery. Mr. Davis, of Miss., proposed an amend 
 ment to annex New Mexico to Texas. This would have 
 legalized Slavery in that part of the acquired territory. 
 The people of New Mexico had petitioned Congress, re 
 monstrating against being annexed to Texas, and praying 
 to be protected against the introduction of Slavery into 
 their territory. The Senate did not come to a vote on 
 the bill. 
 
 A bill was reported in the House by Mr. Smith, of Indi 
 ana, to establish a Territorial Government for Upper Cali 
 fornia, with the Anti-Slavery proviso, which passed the 
 House, 126 to 87. But the session closed without any ac 
 tion upoij it after its reference. 
 
 The popularity acquired by General Taylor as. a military 
 commander in the war with Mexico, haJ, for two years 
 before the approaching Presidential election, pointed him 
 out to shrewd Whig politicians as an " available" candi 
 date. Having spent nearly the whole period of his man 
 hood in the army, and having never, as was said, cast a 
 vote at an election, he was nwt, of course, a party politi 
 cian. HQ seemed, however, to have a leaning toward the 
 Whig party. Being a Southern man, and the Whig party 
 of the North being strongly committed to the Wilmot 
 proviso, or the non-extension of Slavery, it was doubted 
 whether he could obtain a nomination ; or if nominated, 
 whether he could be elected. In his replies to numerous 
 interrogatories, he uniformly refused to declare himself a 
 Whig, or to bo the exponent of Whig doctrines. Ho 
 would, if elected, be the President of the nation, and not of 
 a party ; and he would make no party pledges. 
 
 The Democratic National Convention met at Baltimore, 
 the 22d of May, 1848. As in former Conventions, the 
 
two-thirds rule was adopted. On the fourth ballot, 
 General Cass received 179 votes ; Lcvi Woodbury, 38 ; 
 James Buchanan, 33 ; and Gen. Worth, 3, Gen. Win. 0. 
 Butler, of Ky., was nominated for Vice- President. 
 
 The Whig- National Convention met at Philadelphia, 
 the 7th of June. On the first ballot, Gen. Taylor received 
 111 votes ; Mr. Clay, 97 ; Mr. Webster, 21 ; Gen. Scott, 
 46 ; John M Lean, 2. After another unsuccessful ballot, 
 further balloting was deferred until the next day, when, 
 on the second ballot of that day, Gen. Taylor received 
 171 votes ; Mr. Clay, 30 ; Gen. Scott, 63 ; Mr. Webster, 
 12. Millard Fillmorc was nominated for Vice-Presi- 
 dent. No resolutions, or platform of principles, was 
 adopted. 
 
 A National Mass Convention was held in the city of 
 Buffalo, on the 9th of August, composed of disaffected 
 Democrats and Whigs, who were designated " free-soil 
 men." Martin Van Buren was nominated for President ; 
 Charles Francis Adams for Vice-President. 
 
 The views of Gen. Cass on the Slavery issue were stated 
 in a letter to A. 0. P. Nicholson, of Tennessee. He had 
 been in favor of the Wilmot Proviso ; but had receded 
 from that position, and was opposed to the exercise of any 
 jurisdiction by Congress over Slavery in the Territories ; 
 but he would leave to the people of any territory the right 
 to regulate it for themselves. 
 
 The views of Gen. Taylor were expressed in a letter to 
 Captain Allison. He was in favor of exercising the veto 
 power only in cases of clear violation of the Constitution, 
 or manifest haste and want of consideration by Congress. 
 In respect to the tariff, the currency, and internal improve 
 ments, the will of the people, as expressed through their 
 representatives, ought to be respected and carried out by 
 the Executive. On Slavery he was silent. 
 
 Of the Presidential electors chosen in November, 163 
 voted for Taylor and Fillrnore ; and 127 for Cass and Butler. 
 
166 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Administration of Zachary Taylor and Millard Filhnore. 
 
 GENERAL ZACHARY TAYLOR \vas inaugurated as President 
 on the 5th of March, 1849. His Address was short, and 
 partook much of the character of his numerous letters 
 written before his election. He selected for his Cabinet 
 officers the following 1 : John M. Clayton, of Delaware, 
 Secretary of State ; Win. M. Meredith, of Pennsylvania, 
 Secretary of the Treasury ; Thomas Ewing, of Ohio, Sec 
 retary of the Interior ; George W. Crawford, of Georgia, 
 Secretary of War ; Wm. B. Preston, of Virginia, Secretary 
 of the Navy ; Jacob Collamer, of Vermont, Postmaster- 
 General ; Keverdy Johnson, of Maryland, Attorne3 r -General. 
 
 Congress assembled December 3, 1849. Three weeks 
 were spent in fruitless attempts to elect a speaker, when, 
 in order to terminate the contest, it was agreed by the 
 parties to elect by a plurality vote. Howell Cobb, of 
 Georgia, was then elected. 
 
 The Message of President Taylor was communicated to 
 Congress the 24th. Ho recommended the revision of the 
 Tariff to augment the revenue, and the adoption of specific 
 duties. The Sub-Treasury, if continued, needed modifica 
 tion. And a loan was recommended to pay the expenses 
 of the war with Mexico. His policy in regard to the new 
 Territories was, that Congress should await the action of 
 the people themselves in forming Constitutions preparatory 
 to the admission of California and New Mexico. This, lie 
 believed, would avoid all causes of uneasiness, and pre 
 serve confidence and good feeling. Congress should 
 abstain from the introduction of those exciting topics of a 
 eectioiral character, which had produced painful apprehen 
 sions in the public mind. [He had reference, probably, to 
 the excitement usually produced by the attempts, in form- 
 
TAYLOR S ADMINISTRATION. 16T 
 
 ing Territorial Governments, to prohibit Slavery. In prin 
 ciple, his plan might be objectionable ; practically, it would, 
 in the particular cases then existing, be less liable to ob 
 jections, as Slavery had been abolished in these Territories 
 by Mexico, and it was not probable that the inhabitants 
 would favor its reestablishment] 
 
 This session was an eventful one being distinguished 
 for one of the moat liberal concessions ever made to the 
 Slave Power. The proceedings in relation to the new ter 
 ritory and Slavery, occupied a large, if not the larger por 
 tion of the session. 
 
 Mr. Clay submitted resolutions, eight in number, propos 
 ing an " arnica), le arrangement" of the whole Slavery 
 controversy. Although they were designed as a compro 
 mise, they -were little else than concession. They were, 
 notwithstanding, unacceptable, as a whole, to the ultra 
 Southerners. in fact, they were opposed by Southern 
 Senators as making no concession to the South as being 
 no compromise at all ! They objected to the admission 
 of California as a State, with a Constitution prohibiting 
 Slavery ; unless, as they had the boldness to say, another 
 new Slave State, could be laid off within the limits of Texas, so 
 as to keep the present equiponderance between the Slave 
 arid Free States ; and further, unless all this were done by 
 way of compromise, and in order to save the Union ! 
 
 Mr. Clay s resolutions were debated for nearly two 
 months ; the President having in the meantime communi 
 cated to Congress a copy of the Constitution of California. 
 Various propositions having been made by Senators, they 
 were referred to a Select Committee of thirteen, (Mr. Clay 
 Chairman,) who made a report embodying them in a single 
 bill, facetiously termed the " Omnibus bill." It was 
 debated, and piirt after part eliminated, until it passed the 
 Senate only as "A bill to provide for the Territorial Gov 
 ernment of Utuh." This dismemberment was called " up 
 setting the Omnibus." Subsequently the other portions of 
 the bill were passed in separate bills. California was ad 
 mitted ; a Territorial Government bill for New Mexico was 
 passed ; and a bill establishing the boundary of ^exas. 
 By this bill a large portion of .New Mexico was annexed to 
 Texas to enlarge the area of Slavery, arid $10,000,000 
 
1G8 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 given to Texas to relinquish her claims to New Mexico ; 
 or as Mr. Benton remarked: "They give 70,000 square 
 miles to Texas, and offer her ten millions to accept it I" 
 Some land, however, of inferior value, was ceded by Texas 
 to the United States. A law to abolish the slave trade in 
 the District of Columbia, and the fugitive slave law, were 
 passed. Of course, no restriction was laid upon Slavery in 
 the Territorial Governments of Utah and New Mexico. 
 The Texas boundary bill and the New Mexico Territorial 
 bill were in the House united, and passed in one bill. 
 
 The reader is requested to bear in mind two facts : 
 First, these measures, called the " compromise measures of 
 1850," were intended as a final settlement of the Slavery 
 question, and were repeatedly declared to be so since their 
 enactment. Secondly, there was no intimation, in the long 
 debate on these measures, that their adoption would involve 
 or imply a repeal of the Missouri restriction. We shall 
 soon have occasion to advert to these facts. 
 
 While these measures were pending, on the 9th of July, 
 1850, President Taylor died. On the next day, Mr. Fill- 
 more, Vice-President, took the oath of office, and entered 
 upon the duties of President ; and the day following, Wm. 
 R. King, Senator from Alabama, was elected President of 
 the Senate, pro tern. 
 
 Mr. Fill more reconstructed the Cabinet. He appointed 
 Daniel Webster Secretary of State ; Thomas C->r\vin, of 
 Ohio, Secretary of the Treasury ; Charles M. Conrad, of 
 Louisiana, Secretary of War ; Wm. A. Graham, of North 
 Carolina, Secretary of the Navy ; Alexander H. II. Stnart, 
 of Va., Secretary of the Interior ; Nathan K. Hall, of New 
 York, Postmaster-General ; and John J. Crittenden, of 
 Ky., Attorney-General. 
 
 Although a state of comparative peace on the subject of 
 Slavery succeeded the excitement which had been produced 
 by the " measures of 1850," certain events connected with 
 :\nd resulting from these measures arc deserving of notice. 
 During their pendency in Congress, a material change on 
 the question of Slavery was manifested by some distin 
 guished Whigs. One of these gentlemen was Mr. Web- 
 eter. No man had been more fully committed against tho 
 extension of Slavery than he. He had on this ground op- 
 
FILLMORE S ADMINISTRATION. 1G9 
 
 posed the annexation of Texas. In 1847, be made a speech 
 at a Whig State Convention at Springfield, Mass., in which 
 he said of the Wilmot Proviso : 
 
 " This is certainly a just sentiment, but it is not a senti 
 ment to found any new party upon. It is not a sentiment 
 on which Massachusetts Whigs differ. There is not a man 
 in this hall who holds to it more firmly than I do, nor one 
 who adheres to it more than another. 
 
 " I feel some interest in this matter, Sir. Did not I com 
 mit myself in 1838 to the whole doctrine, fully, entirely ? 
 And 1 must be permitted to say, that I can not quite con 
 sent that more recent discoverers should take out a patent. 
 I deny the priority of their invention. Allow me to say, 
 Sir, it is not their thunder. * * We are to use the 
 
 first, and last, and every occasion which offers, to oppose 
 the extension of the Slave Power." 
 
 When, afterwards, legislation became necessary to es 
 tablish Governments for California and New Mexico, Mr. 
 Webster was not in favor of " using this occasion" to apply 
 the Proviso, to which, in 1847, he held so "firmly." He 
 would leave it to the " physical geography of the country" 
 to a law " superior to the Proviso the law of nature" to 
 "exclude African Slavery there. It needed not the appli 
 cation of a proviso. If the question were now before the 
 Senate, he would not vote to add a prohibition to reaffirm 
 an ordinance of nature, nor reenact the will of God." Mr. 
 Webster also spoke of " Southern grievances" of the obli 
 gations of the North in regard to the returning of fugitive 
 slaves. Northern Legislatures had displeased the South 
 by passing resolutions on the subject of Slavery in the 
 District of Columbia, and sometimes even in regard to its 
 abolition in the States. He denounced Abolition Societies 
 for interfering with the South. Mr. W., however, made 
 allusion also to the grievances of the North. The time had 
 been when, in defending the North, he did not think himself 
 called on to make an offset by bringing in the groundless 
 complaints of the South. 
 
 Mr. Fillmorc, too, changed his position on this question. 
 He had, in Congress and out of Congress, long occupied 
 high Anti-Slavery ground. But for this fact, it is doubtful 
 whether the Whig candidates would have received so 
 
170 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 heavy majorities in 1848. Many Anti-Slavery Whigs, not 
 withstanding their having pledged themselves to support 
 no man for President who was not known to be in favor of 
 the Wilmot Proviso, voted for the party ticket, alleging as 
 a reason, that a thorough Anti-Slavery man was the candi 
 date for Vioe-President. These men subsequently con 
 demned the course pursued by their political favorite. He 
 was severely censured for having approved the new Fugi 
 tive Slave law with all its repulsive features. They re 
 garded the old law as sufficiently stringent to answer the 
 demands of the Constitution in relation to the reclamation 
 of fugitive slaves. But he had in other respects truckled 
 to the South. He had given the weight of his influence 
 in favor of the whole series of pro-slavery measures enacted 
 by Congress in 1850. 
 
 President Taylor had not been long in office before he 
 found himself in the midst of an opposition, which, though 
 not as yet open and avowed, threatened to embarass his 
 administration. Mr. Clay and Mr. Webster had long 
 aspired to the Presidency ; and the success of Gen. Taylor 
 at the last nominating Convention, had probably extin 
 guished all hopes of their ever reaching the Presidential 
 chair, to which, it is conceded, few American statesmen had 
 stronger claims. It is not very strange that these gentle 
 men and their particular friends did not render a very cor 
 dial support to the administration. Mr. Webster had, 
 before the election, declared the nomination of Gen. Taylor 
 to be " a nomination not fit to be made." 
 
 President Taylor, however, disappointed, in some measure, 
 the Anti-Slavery Whigs who refused to support him on ac 
 count of his supposed friendship for Slavery. It was soon 
 ascertained that he was determined the influence of his 
 administration should not be given to the Slave Power. 
 As has been intimated, he desired to avoid the agitation of 
 the subject of Slavery, which would probably be produced 
 by efforts to prohibit it in California and New Mexico ; and, 
 with this view, he favored their admission as States when 
 ever the people should apply for admission, without requir 
 ing them to pass through the Territorial condition. Slavery 
 having been abolished by Mexico before the Territory was 
 ceded to the United States, it was presumed the States 
 
FILLMORE S ADMINISTRATION. 171 
 
 would come in as Free States. His policy not being suffi 
 ciently Southern to please the slaveholders, he met with 
 opposition from both sections of the Union. 
 
 It is well known that, among those who first suggested 
 the nomination of Gen. Taylor, was Mr. Seward. It is be 
 lieved by some that the idea originated with him and his 
 friend, Mr. Weed. Mr. Seward and Gen. Taylor enjoyed in 
 a high degree each others confidence. The former entered 
 the Senate cotcrnporaneously with the accession of the lat 
 ter to the Presidency. ; and it is not improbable that he 
 may have had some influence in shaping the policy of Presi 
 dent Taylor on this question. The support which the 
 President received from the Senator, gave occasion to the 
 representatives of the Slave Power to excite the jealousy of 
 Mr. Webster, Mr. Clay, and Mr. Fillmore and their friends 
 toward Mr. Seward, who was considered, especially by the 
 Vice-President, as a political rival. 
 
 The reader probab y begins to see the cause of the somer 
 set performed by Mr. Fillmore on the Slavery question. In 
 1844, these two distinguished New Yorkers stood upon the 
 same political platform, and addressed the same audiences 
 from the same stands. The Whig State Convention of that 
 year, which nominated Mr. Fillmore for Governor ; the 
 Convention of 1847, which nominated him for Controller ; 
 and the Conventions of 1848, 1849, and 1850, all adopted 
 resolutions indorsing the Wilmot Proviso. In the series of 
 resolutions adopted in 1850, was one expressing thanks to 
 William H. Seward for the ability and fidelity with which 
 he had sustained, in the United States Senate, the princi 
 ples of public policy so long cherished by the Whigs of the 
 Empire State, expressed in State and County Conventions, 
 as well as in the votes and instructions of the Legislature. 
 To this resolution, the special friends of Mr. Fillmore ob 
 jected, declaring, if it should pass, the Whig party of New 
 York would be immediately broken up ; and that where the 
 dissenters would go would be determined thereafter. The 
 resolution was adopted. The leaders of the minority, among 
 whom was the Chairman of the Convention, Mr. Granger, 
 then retired, followed by most of those who had voted for 
 the obnoxious resolution, to a Hotel, where they resolved to 
 support Mr. Fillmore, and abjured allegiance to the party 
 
172 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 supporting Mr. Scword. The} 7 resolved also to meet with 
 their friends from other parts of the State at Utica in Sep 
 tember. A Convention was accordingly held, and a new 
 party organized, called " Silver Gray," having, it was said, 
 been thus named by its presiding officer, Mr. Granger, who 
 had been again elected Chairman. 
 
 Additional evidence of the apostacy of Mr. Fillmore is 
 seen in the removal of the Cabinet officers appointed by 
 Gen. Taylor ; in effecting the displacement of the editor of 
 the administration paper at Washington by one more pro- 
 slavery ; in the withdrawal of nominations to the Senate 
 made by his predecessor and not yet acted upon, and the 
 nomination, in their place, of his own particular friends ; 
 and in an alleged bargain, express or implied, with South 
 ern Democratic Senators while he xvas Vice-President it 
 being understood that, in case of a tie in the Senate on the 
 " Omnibus bill," he was to save the bill by his casting vote,* 
 in consideration of which Southern Senators were to vote 
 against the confirmation of certain nominations made by 
 President Taylor at the suggestion, as was supposed, of 
 Mr. Seward. This allegation was made by Senator Footc, 
 of Mississippi, in a public speech, and, us is believed, has 
 not been contradicted. 
 
 But for the death of President Taylor, he would probably 
 very soon have been openly assailed by a matured and 
 powerful opposition, embracing many of the old Whig 
 leaders, with the probable result, if not the design, of bring 
 ing him into subjection to the Slave Power, liis adminis 
 tration had already been declared to be infected with 
 "Sewardism," which was known to be less attractive to 
 Southern Whigs generally than that " Conservatism" to 
 which Mr. Fillmore had just become a convert. The pre 
 cise object of this Whig opposition to the administration, 
 further than to effect its overthrow, can not be stated with 
 certainty. It was believed by many that it was intended 
 to form a new party more popular at the South than the 
 old Whig party with its strong Anti-Slavery element in the 
 North, and of which new party Mr. Fillmore was to be the 
 head. Others supposed that an alliance with the Democra 
 tic party was contemplated. That such a union was 
 designed to take place at some future time appears some 
 
FILLMORE S ADMINISTRATION. 173 
 
 what probable from the subsequent course of these Whigs. 
 A large portion, if not a majority of them, have since slid- 
 den through the avenue of Know-Nothingism into the 
 ranks of the slaveholders, with whom they have, in the last 
 two presidential campaigns, fought valiantly against prin 
 ciple s and measures which they had as zealously supported. 
 
 But whatever may have been the ulterior design of Mr. 
 Fillrnorc and his friends, the immediate object was evi 
 dently a nomination in 1852. And his reward for the 
 abandonment of a noble and long cherished principle, con 
 sists in his having been beaten in Convention by Gen. Scott, 
 and thus saved the mortification of a defeat at the polls by 
 such a man as Franklin Pierce ; and in the satisfaction of 
 having received the electoral vote of one State, and that a 
 Slave State, in 1856 1 
 
 The National Democratic Convention met at Baltimore, 
 on the 1st of June, 1852. On the first ballot, Gen. Cass 
 received 117 votes ; James Buchanan, 93 ; Stephen A. 
 Douglas, 20 ; Wm. L. Marcy, 27. Ballotings were con 
 tinued on two subsequent days, when, on the 49th ballot, 
 Franklin Pierce, of N. II., received the unanimous vote of 
 the Convention. Wm. E. King, of Alabama, was nominated 
 for Vice-President, 
 
 The Whig Convention met at the same place on the 16th 
 of June, and, as the other Convention had been, was in ses 
 sion five days. A platform of principles was adopted, 227 
 to 60, before any attempt at nomination had been made. 
 Mr. Fillmore received on the first ballot, 132 votes ; Gen. 
 Scott, 131 ; Mr. Webster, 29. Balloting was resumed the 
 next day with the 7th ballot ; and on the 53d, the result 
 was, for Scott, 159 ; Fillmore, 112 ; Webster, 21. Wm. A. 
 Graham, of N. C., was nominated for Vice-President. Scott 
 and Graham were both declared unanimously nominated. 
 
 The platforms adopted by the two Conventions were less 
 dissimilar than usual ; on the question of Slavery, they 
 were substantially the same. The Democrats resolved to 
 " resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or out of it, 
 the agitation of the Slavery question, under whatever shape 
 or color the attempt may be made." The Whigs declared, 
 " That the series of acts of the 31st Congress the act 
 known as the Fugitive Slave Law included are received 
 
174 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 and acquiesced in by the Whig party of the United States ; 
 . . . and we deprecate all further agitation of the ques 
 tion thus settled, as dangerous to our peace ; and will dis 
 countenance all efforts to continue or renew such agitation 
 whenever, wherever, and however the attempt may be 
 made ; and we will maintain this system as essential to 
 the nationality of the Whig party of the Union." 
 
 The adoption of such a platform was the death blow to 
 the Whig party it was political suicide. The Northern 
 portion of it had been distinguished from their opponents 
 for their advocacy of free speech, free soil, and free labor ; 
 and in former National Conventions they had gone no far 
 ther than to be silent on the subject of Slavery, as a matter 
 of necessity ; but this humiliating bid against the Demo 
 crats for Southern votes was more than some Northern 
 Whigs could indorse. Still the contest was spirited, and 
 exhibited a fair vote for their electoral ticket. The aboli 
 tion vote, however, for Mr. Hale, was more than double that 
 given for Mr. Birney in 1844. Gen. Scott received the 
 electoral votes of Vermont, Massachusetts, Kentucky, and 
 Tennessee, in all 42. Gen. Pierce received the votes of all 
 the other States, 254. 
 
PIEBCE S ADMINISTRATION. 176 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Administration of Franklin Pierce. 
 
 FRANKLIN PIERCE was inaugurated the 4th of March, 
 1853. He alluded in his Address to the subject " which 
 had recently agitated the nation." Slavery was recognized 
 by the Constitution ; the States where it existed were en 
 titled to efficient remedies to enforce the constitutional pro 
 visions ; the " compromise measures of 1850" were consti 
 tutional, and must be carried into effect ; and he said : " I 
 fervently hope that the question is at rest, and that no 
 sectional, or ambitious, or fanatical excitement may again 
 threaten the durability of our institutions, or obscure the 
 light of our prosperity." 
 
 The 83d Congress began its 1st session December 5th, 
 1853. The President, in his Message, again alluded to the 
 late excitement, and spoke of the restoration of " repose 
 and security to the public mind throughout the Confeder 
 acy ;" and said : " That this repose is to suffer no shock 
 during my official term, if I have powerto avert it, those 
 who placed rne here may be assured." 
 
 On the first day of the session, the day before the deliv 
 ery of the Message, Senator Dodge, of Iowa, gave notice of 
 a bill to organize the Territory of Nebraska. It was 
 referred to the Committee on Territories, and on the 15th 
 was reported by Mr. Douglas with amendments. Doubts 
 having been expressed whether the amendments repealed 
 the Missouri Compromise, he made a special report on the 
 4th of January, 1854, so amending the bill as to assert that 
 the said Compromise " was superseded by the principles of 
 the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise 
 measures," and to declare the Missouri restriction " inoper 
 ative and void." 
 
176 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 This declaration was afterwards, on his own motion, 
 struck out, and the following inserted : 
 
 " Which, (the Missouri Compromise,) being inconsistent 
 with the principle of non-intervention by Congress with 
 Slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by the 
 legislation of 1850, (commonly called the Compromise 
 Measures,) is hereby declared inoperative and void ; it be 
 ing the true intent and meaning of this act, not to legislate 
 Slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it there 
 from, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and 
 regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only 
 to the Constitution of the United States." 
 
 It is not easy to perceive how any one could sincerely 
 maintain that the Missouri Compromise was, or could have 
 been, repealed by the acts of 1850. It has been observed 
 already, that no intimation to that effect had been made 
 during the debates on them. Mr. Chase, in a speech on. 
 his motion to strike out the assertion for which the above 
 was afterward substituted on Mr. Douglas own motion, 
 denied the truth of the statement. He said that, during 
 the long discussion of these measures in 1850, it was never 
 suggested that they were to supersede the Missouri prohi 
 bition. At the last session, (1852-1853,) a Nebraska bill 
 passed the House, came to the Senate, and was reported on 
 by Mr. Douglas, who made a speech in its favor ; arid in 
 all not a word was said about a repeal by supersedure. 
 The Senator from Missouri, (Mr. Atchison,) had also spoken 
 upon the bill, and had distinctly declared, that the Missouri 
 prohibition was not and could not be repealed. The same bill 
 was introduced by the Senator from Iowa, at the commence 
 ment of the present session. Nor had he, nor any other 
 rnan here, so far as could be judged from any discussion, 
 or statement, or remark, even then received the notion that 
 the Missouri prohibition had been superseded. Nor had 
 Mr. Douglas own report, made only thirty days ago, (Jan. 
 4th,) expressed such opinion. Besides all these, said Mr. 
 Chase, the Committee on- Territories themselves declared, 
 tha*i it was not wise, nor prudent, nor right to renew the 
 old controversy, and to rouse agitation ; but they would ab 
 stain from any recommendation of a repeal of the prohibition. 
 
 Now let the candid reader, from these facts, judge of the 
 
PIERCE S ADMINISTRATION. 177 
 
 honesty of a Senator, who had the hardihood to insert in 
 his bill and to advocate the declaration, that the Missouri 
 restriction had been repealed. And the reader is requested 
 particularly to note the fact above stated, that the Commit 
 tee would not recommend such repeal, as the recommendation 
 would " rouse agitation." And yet, from that day to this, has 
 the Democratic party, from its leaders down to their 
 humblest followers, denounced their opponents as the au 
 thors of the agitation ! Must not the man be either very 
 dishonest or grossly ignorant, who charges the agitation 
 upon those who have seen fit to resist the long train of 
 flagrant outrages which were for years perpetrated both by 
 our higher " public functionaries" and the " border ruffians," 
 in their attempts to force Slavery into Kansas ? 
 
 The bill of Mr. Douglas passed the Senate, 37 to 14. 
 
 A bill had also been reported in the House, on the same 
 subject, for which the bill of Mr. Douglas was substituted, 
 which passed. 113 to 100. Yeas from the Free States, 44, 
 all Democrats ; from the Slave States 69, of whom 12 were 
 Whigs. Nays from Free States, 91, all Whigs, except two 
 or three, who were called Abolitionists ; from Slave States, 
 9 7 Whigs, 2 Democrats. Absent, and not voting, 21. 
 
 The Slave Power having now, by the aid of the Demo 
 cratic party in Congress, headed by a leading Free State 
 Senator, broken down the barrier which had for thirty-four 
 years restricted Slavery below the Compromise line estab 
 lished in 1820, determined to appropriate the Territory to 
 its own use. Meetings were held in various places, some 
 of them attended by leading citizens of Missouri, to devise 
 measures to prevent " abolitionists," (as they termed all 
 the opponents of the extension of Slavery,) from settling in 
 the Territory. 
 
 At one of these meetings, the two following resolu 
 tions similar to those passed at other meetings were 
 adopted : 
 
 " That we will afford protection to no abolitionist as a 
 settler in this Territory. 
 
 " That we recognize the institution of Slavery as already 
 existing in this Territory, and advise slaveholders to intro 
 duce their property as early as possible." 
 
 Before any election had been held, a secret society was 
 
178 DEMOCRATIC MIRR03 
 
 formed in Missouri, known by different names, as " Social 
 Band," "Blue Lodge," " Sons of the South/ whose mem 
 bers were bound together by oaths, and had passwords, 
 signs ar.d grips, by which they were known to each other. 
 They avowed their purpose to be to extend Slavery into 
 Kansas, by organizing and sending men thither to vote at 
 elections. And at the election in November following, 
 (1854,) for electing a Delegate to Congress, as the Con 
 gressional Investigating Committee afterwards reported 
 more than two-thirds of the rotes were cast ly non residents. Re 
 peatedly did companies of men go from Missouri into the 
 Territory to control the elections. With arms they forced 
 their way to the ballot-box ; threatened judges of elections 
 if they did not instantly resign ; and thus dispersed the 
 judges, and elected others in their stead. Ami because 
 the Governor set aside the elections in some of the districts, 
 and ordered new ones, he incurred the displeasure of these 
 lawless desperadoes, who would not attend the elections, 
 at which Free State men were elected. 
 
 And what reason was offered for those unlawful acts ? 
 Men from Free States, many of them from New England, 
 under the auspices of Emigrant Aid Societies, were settling 
 in the Territories, with the view, as the " ruffians" asserted, 
 to make Kansas a Free State. For such a reason, these out 
 rages have been cither palliated or fully justified by the 
 greater portion of the Democratic party, including the two 
 Presidents under whose administration the struggle for 
 Freedom took place ! 
 
 It is not strange that a Legislature thus elected should 
 enact laws that would cause a savage to blush. Any per 
 son writing, printing, or circulating anything that might 
 endanger the rights of the slaveholder, by inducing his 
 slaves to escape, or in any way assisting in such writing, 
 publishing, &c., was made liable to imprisonment not less 
 than five years. For a free person to assert that persons 
 had no right to hold slaves in the Territory, he incurred a 
 penalty of imprisonment at hard labor for two years 1 By 
 whom were these inhuman acts condemned ? Not by the 
 mass of the Democratic party, now so alarmed at what they 
 consider violations of personal liberty and freedom of 
 Bpeech 1 
 
PIERCE S ADMINISTRATION. 179 
 
 A Convention was called, and Delegates chosen by the 
 Free State men, who met at Topeka in October, and formed 
 a State Constitution, which was adopted by the people in 
 December, by a vote of 1,131 to 46 ; the Pro-Slavery party 
 taking- no part in the election. And when the Free State 
 Legislature met, the members were dispersed by an armed 
 force, 
 
 Congress met in December, 1855. What notice ought 
 the President, in his Message, to have taken of the Kansas 
 outrages ? He should have unequivocally condemned them, 
 arid have recommended provision to be made for the pro 
 tection of the settlers in the enjoyment of their rights, 
 every candid man will readily answer. But instead of this, 
 he charged the Free States with a disregard of their con 
 stitutional obligations, by interfering with the domestic 
 institutions of the Slave States, and vindicated the latter 
 from the charge of aggression upon the rights and interests 
 of the former. He also charged the Governor with a want 
 of vigilance, which he assigned as one of the causes for 
 which he had removed him. He had not done enough to 
 prevent or counteract the tendencies to illegality ; notwith 
 standing the fact that the Governor had endeavored to cor 
 rect these illegalities, by ordering new elections ; arid this 
 is the true reason why he was regarded as not the right 
 man for the place. This is sufficiently evident from the 
 fact, that every Governor appointed by President Pierce 
 as also by Buchanan during the Kansas struggle, 
 whenever he undertook to check ruffianism, or to secure 
 fair play to the Free State party, was dismissed or com 
 pelled to resign ! 
 
 In the Senate, the subject was referred to the Committee 
 on Territories, whose Chairman, (Mr. Douglas,) reported, 
 it was no part of the duty of the Committee to examine and r&- 
 view the laws of the Kansas Legislature. But it seemed rather 
 to be their duty to indorse the Message of the President, 
 which charged the blame upon those who endeavored to 
 establish free institutions in the Territor} 7 , and " to prevent 
 the free and natural action of its inhabitants in its internal 
 organization, and thus to anticipate or to force the deter 
 mination of that question (Slavery) in this inchoate State." 
 And as did the President, so did Mr. Douglas, censure the 
 
180 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Aid Societies for designing to force a Free State into the 
 Union. The Committee uttered not a word of condem 
 nation against the meetings held in the Territory immedi 
 ately after the passage of the Kansas bill, to preconcert 
 measures to keep Anti-Slavery men out of the State. Bor 
 der Ruffianism met no rebuke, but was rather justified. 
 The report stated, in substance, that the Missourians were 
 alarmed by the rapid filling up of Kansas by the opponents 
 of Slavery ; that this might endanger the institution in 
 that State ; and that its citizens might properly resist the 
 formation of an Anti-Slavery State in their neighborhood. 
 Such a report was made by men who were among the ac 
 knowledged leaders of a party claiming to be Democratic ; 
 and that report has received the approval of the party. 
 
 In the House a bill was reported by Mr. Grow, of Pa., 
 for the admission of Kansas under the Topeka Constitution 
 as a Free State. This bill finally passed the House, 99 to 
 97. Mr. Dunn, of Indiana, afterward succeeded in substi 
 tuting for this bill one of his own, repealing that clause of 
 the Kansas-Nebraska act which declares the Missouri re 
 striction inoperative and void ; and allowing the owners of 
 slaves time until the 1st of January, 1858, to remove them 
 from the State. If not permanently removed before that 
 time, the slaves were to be free. This bill passed the 
 House, 88 to 74. 
 
 The repeal of the Missouri Compromise by the slave 
 holders and their Northern allies, very naturally led to the 
 formation of a new party. This aggressive act of the 
 Slave Power was soon followed by organizations in -some 
 of the States, composed of the friends of freedom, irrespec 
 tive of former party connections, to resist the further intru 
 sion of Slavery upon free territory. And in February, 
 1856, a National Convention was held at Pittsburg to form 
 a national party. Resolutions were adopted containing 
 substantially the principles which subsequently constituted 
 the basis of the Republican party. 
 
 The time having arrived for the nomination of a succes 
 sor to Mr. Pierce, the Democratic National Convention met 
 at Cincinnati on the 2d day of June, 1856. Mr. Buchanan 
 had been a prominent candidate in the Convention of 1852, 
 having received, of the four principle candidates, Cass, 
 
PIERCE S ADMINISTRATION. 181 
 
 Douglas, Marcy, and himself, on the first 19 ballots, next 
 to Gen. Cass, the highest number of votes. Mr. Pierce re 
 ceived the nomination only because the Convention was 
 unable to agree upon any other candidate. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan had bowed as humbly before the Slave 
 Power for twenty years as any Northern man had ever 
 done. And although he had failed in 1852, he did not re 
 linquish the hope of yet attaining the coveted honor of a 
 nomination for the Presidency. He was appointed by Mr. 
 Pierce, as Minister to Great Britain. Before his departure 
 for England, he made one more low conge, to his Southern 
 master, as if to assure him of his continued loyalty during 
 his absence. Whether remembered or not, while abroad, it is 
 certain that He did not forget his master. A conference was 
 held at Ostend, by himself and our Ministers to France and 
 Spain, Mason and Sou e, at which the project wo.s discussed, 
 of acquiring Cuba for annexation to the United States, the 
 price named for the purchase being 150 or 200 millions of 
 dollars. These three gentlemen accordingly issued a Mani 
 festo, in which they said : " After we shall have offered 
 Spain a price for Cuba far beyond its present value, and 
 this shall have been refused, it will then be time to con 
 sider the question : Does Cuba, in the possession of Spain, 
 seriously endanger our internal peace, and the existence of 
 our cherished Union ? Should this question be answered 
 in the affirmative, then, by every law, human and divine, 
 we shall be justified in wresting it from Spain, if we have the 
 fiower." Stronger evidence it was hardly possible to give 
 of devotion to Southern interests than had been repeatedly 
 given by him. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan resigned his mission in season to return 
 and attend to the great object of his political aspirations. 
 He was successful. On the first ballot, the vote was, for 
 Buchanan, 135; for Pierce, 122; for Douglas, 33; for 
 Cass, 5. After a few ballots, the friends of Pierce gradu 
 ally transferred their votes to Douglas. On the 16th bal 
 lot, Buchanan received 168 votes ; Douglas 121 ; Cass 
 C. On the next ballot, all the votes, 296, were for 
 Buchanan. 
 
 Mr. Pierce had served the slaveholders most faithfully. 
 Whether he was surpassed ID his fidelity to their interests 
 
182 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 by liis successor, let the history of the next administra 
 tion decide. 
 
 As a Platform, the Convention adopted the leading prin 
 ciples declared by former Conventions, with numerous ad 
 ditional resolutions, directed against the American party, 
 " which bases its exclusive organization upon religious 
 opinions and accidental birth-place ;" and against the Re 
 publican party, as " sectional," and " seeking to embroil 
 the States and incite to treason and armed resistance in 
 the Territories." They also adopted, as a principle, " non 
 interference by Congress with Slavery in the Territories or 
 in the District of Columbia ; approved the " Monroe Doc 
 trine ;" " sympathized with the efforts of the people of 
 Central America, to regulate that portion of the continent 
 which covers the passage across the inter-oceanic isthmus ;" 
 meaning, it is presumed, the attempt of the fillibusterer, 
 Walker, to revolutionize that country; and "expect of 
 the next administration every proper effort to insure our 
 ascendancy in the Gulf of Mexico ;" in plain language, to 
 acquire Cuba as plunder from Spain. 
 
 The Republican National Convention was held in Phila 
 delphia on the 17th of June. Messrs. Seward, Fremont, 
 Banks, and Judge M Lean, were candidates. Mr. Seward, 
 as was announced before the balloting commenced, had re 
 quested the withdrawal of his name. Col. Fremont was, 
 after several ballots, declared unanimously nominated. 
 
 The resolutions adopted as the Republican Platform, 
 " deny the authority of Congress, or of a Territorial Legis 
 lature, to give legal existence to Slavery in any Territory ;" 
 claim for Congress "sovereign power over the Territories 
 for their government f charge Pierce s administration with 
 sanctioning violations of the constitutional rights of the 
 people of Kansas, enumerating many of the outrages, mur 
 ders, &c. ; condemned the Ostend Circular as unworthy of 
 American diplomacy, embodying " the highwayman s plea, 
 might makes right ; ; n declare a Railroad to the Paciiic to 
 be imperatively demanded ; and "appropriations b^ Con 
 gress for the improvement of rivers and harbors 01 a na 
 tional character, required for the accommodation and 
 security of existing commerce, to be authorized by tho 
 Constitution." 
 
PIERCE S ADMINISTRATION. 183 
 
 Mr. Buchanan received the electoral votes of all the Slavo 
 States, except Maryland, and of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 
 Indiana, Illinois, and California; in all, 174 votes. Mr. Fill- 
 more, candidate of the American party, received the votes ot 
 the electors of Maryland, 8. Col. John C. Fremont received 
 the votes of all the Free States, except the five before men 
 tioned, 11 1. 
 
 The last session of Congress under Mr. Pierce, met the 1st 
 of December, 1856. The President in noticing the election 
 just past, says, " the people have asserted the constitutional 
 equality of all the States," and "have condemned the idea of 
 organizing more geographical parties." He censured those 
 who " seek to prevent the spread of Slavery into the present 
 or future States of the Union ;" says, " they endeavor to pre 
 pare the people of the United States for civil war ;" that " vio 
 lent attack from the North" begets "a spirit of angry defiance 
 at the South." He mentions as among " the long series of 
 acts of indirect aggression" upon the South, the " objecting to 
 the admission of Missouri" as a Slave State, and the prohibit 
 ing of Slavery in Territories; and he attributes the disturb 
 ances in Kansas to the u unjust interference on the part of 
 persons not inhabitants of the Territory." Of course he does 
 not mean by these officious " persons" the Missourians who 
 went thither with the avowed purpose of " interfering" with the 
 elections ! Again there is no utterance of condemnation 
 against the violence and the frauds committed by the Missouri 
 intruders or the Pro-Slavery residents, who cooperated with 
 them in their atrocities. 
 
 Who can contemplate such servility to the Slave Power as 
 is manifested in the Messages and acts of this President, with 
 out disgust and indignation ? But he has already received a 
 large installment of deserved retribution. Mr. Pierce and his 
 successor can hardly fail to see, that, by their making common 
 cause with the South against the advocates of freedom in tho 
 North, not merely conniving at, but positively aiding in carry 
 ing out their flagitious purpose of subjecting Free Territory to 
 the dominion of Slavery, they have encouraged the slavehold 
 ers in their insolent demands upon the North for further con 
 cessions, the denial of which was made the occasion of tho 
 Rebellion, for which they these Northern Democratic lead 
 ers are to be held in a great measure responsible. 
 
184 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Again Congress failed to pass a law for the benefit of 
 Kansas. Mr. Grow, of Pa., reported lo the House a bill, de 
 claring the acts of the Territorial Legislature to be a viola 
 tion of the organic act, and therefore of no effect, and requir 
 ing the Governor to order an election for choosing members 
 of a new Legislature, and providing against unlawful and 
 fraudulent voting. This bill passed the House, 98 to 79. The 
 Yeas, 92 Kepublicans and 6 Fillmore men, were all from 
 Free States. Of the Nays, 65 were from Slave States, and 14 
 from Free States ; 20 Fillmore Americans, and 59 Democrats. 
 
 In the Senate, the bill was laid on the table, 30 to 20. 
 Yeas, from Slave States, 22 ; from Free States, 8. Nays, 
 from Free States, 18 ; from Slave States, 2. 
 
 Notwithstanding these failures to provide relief for Kan 
 sas, its condition had been improved under the administra 
 tion of Gov. John W. Geary, who had been appointed in July, 
 1856. It being understood that he intended to side with 
 neither party, the Pro-Slavery leaders published an address, 
 in which they complained that they had not found in him such a 
 successor as they had asked ; and they feared that " he would 
 prove no more efficient than his predecessors," (Keeder and 
 Shannon.) They therefore hastened to gather an army from 
 Missouri and other Slave States before the arrival of the 
 Governor. Acting-Governor Woodson, by proclamation, de 
 clared the Territory in a state of rebellion and insurrection, 
 and called upon the militia and other citizens to aid in put 
 ting down and punishing the insurrectionists. 
 
 Gov. Geary arrived. He ordered a restoration of property; 
 declared publicly his intentions to do justice to all classes ; 
 and advised forbearance on the part of the Free State men, 
 as they could ask the next Legislature to revise the laws. 
 He endeavored also to increase the energy of the judges, 
 whose inefficiency had become notorious. 
 
 In January, 1857, the Free State Legislature met at To- 
 peka; but a large portion of its members were arrested by a 
 deputy marshal, and the session was broken up. The Terri 
 torial Legislature met the next week at Lecompton ; and as 
 the Free State men had taken no part in the election, both 
 bodies were entirely Pro-Slavery. Gov. Geary recom 
 mended the repeal of some objectionable acts; but his recom 
 mendation was disregarded. An act was passed to provide for 
 
PIERCE S ADMINISTRATION. 185 
 
 electing a Convention to frame a Constitution ; the election to 
 be held in June, and the Delegates to meet at Lecompton in 
 September. None were to be allowed to vote who were not 
 in the Territory on or before the 15th of March. This was 
 designed to shut out the votes of the Free State men, who had 
 fled from their homes during the distal bances of the past year, 
 and would be unable to return before that day. Another ob 
 jection was the Constitution was not to be submitted to the 
 people for their sanction or rejection. The Governor had in 
 formed certain members, before its passage, that if this objec 
 tion should be removed, he would waive other objections, and 
 approve the bill. They replied, that this would defeat the ob 
 ject of the act, which was to secure Kansas to the South as a 
 Slave State The bill was passed, vetoed, and again passed, 
 and became a law. 
 
 Another act. was passed for the election of a new Legisla 
 ture, in October, all persons not in the Territory by the 15th 
 of March, being again excluded. 
 
 Gov. Geary, thinking that he was not duly sustained by the 
 Government, resigned his office at the close of Mr. Pierce s 
 administration. 
 
186 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Administration of James Buchanan. 
 
 JAJIES BUCHANAN commenced his Presidential teim on the 
 4th of March, 1857. 
 
 We come now to a new Chapter in the history of Pro- 
 Slavery Democracy. A new plank is inserted in the Demo 
 cratic Platform. The time-honored doctrine held and prac 
 ticed by the political Fathers, that Congress had power over 
 Slavery in the Territories, and that, being against natural 
 right, it could exist only by special, positive enactment, was 
 superseded, in 1848, by a, new article in the Democratic creed, 
 introduced by Gen. Cass, known by the now familiar name of 
 "popular," or "squatter sovereignty;" which places the 
 power exclusively in the hands of tl.e people of the Territories. 
 This principle was sought to be carried into effect by Mr. 
 Douglas in his Kansas-Nebraska bill, which proposed " to 
 leave the people free to form and regulate their domestic insti 
 tutions in their own way." 
 
 President Buchanan, in his Inaugural Address, announced, 
 as about to appear, still another improvement in the Pro- 
 Slavery Platform. Slavery in the Territories had been found 
 to be a judicial question, belonging to the Supreme Court of 
 the United States, before whom it was now pending, and 
 would be speedily and finally settled. lie did not, however, 
 inform the public what the decision was to be, although he 
 probably knew. He gave it as his opinion that, under the 
 Kansas-Nebraska act, the proper time for the people of a Ter 
 ritory to determine the question would be when the number 
 of residents in the Territory should justify the formation of a 
 Constitution with a view to admission as a State. The non 
 intervention doctrine of Cass and Douglas had been under 
 stood to concede to the people, represented in their Legisla 
 ture, full power over Slavery. But this doctrine was by the 
 Inaugural scattered to the winds. Nobody ever doubted the 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 1ST 
 
 right of the people to delude Slavery on adopting 1 a Consti 
 tution. But if this is THE way to do it, it must be out of 
 the power of the Territorial Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan, however, was wrong in saying that this 
 question was now pending in the Supreme Court ; that is, 
 judicially. The question " legitimately" before the Court was 
 one which involved the right of Dred Scott and his family 
 to freedom. The Court, (according to previous under 
 standing, as some believe,) two days after the Inaugura 
 tion pronounced judgment, reversing the judgment of the 
 Circuit Court of St. Louis County, and directed the dismis 
 sal of the suit for want of jurisdiction. Scott s master had 
 taken him into Illinois and Minnesota, and remained with 
 him in free territory for several years. It had been held, 
 until now, that a Slave taken by his master into a free 
 State, became free. Some readers may desire to know 
 upon what ground Chief Justice Taney based his new de 
 cision. It was, that free negroes, whose ancestors were 
 slaves, could neier Income, citizens. The" Constitution did not 
 recognize them as citizens. He said : " They had fur more 
 than a century been regarded as beings of an inferior order, 
 and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either 
 in moral or political relations ; and so far inferior, that then 
 had TIO rights which the while man was bound to respxt ; and the 
 negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to Slavery for his bene 
 fit" The reader may ask : What relation had this decision 
 to the question of power over Slavery in the Territories ? 
 None at all. The " decision" to which the President pro 
 bably alluded, was a volunteer opinion of the Judges, wholly 
 extra-judicial. The doctrine of "popular sovereignty," it 
 was found, was not likely to secure the establishment of 
 Slavery in Kansas ; and it might hereafter prove equally 
 ineffectual in other territory. The people could not be 
 tiusted to settle and regulate "their own institutions." 
 Slaveholders wanted some improvement in the Democratic 
 creed which would authorize them to carry their slaves in 
 to all territory " without let or hindrance." Their wish 
 was gratified. The Supreme Court Judges gave it as their 
 opinion, that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional ; 
 that Congress had no power over Slavery in the Territories ; 
 and that slaveholders have the right to take their slaves 
 
188 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 into an} territory os any other property. A few ultra 
 Southern statesmen had been bold enough to assert this 
 doctrine ; but it remained for the Judges of the highest 
 judicial tribunal of the Union to come to their help by giv* 
 ing them the benefit of the weight of their opinion. Judi 
 cially it decides nothing, as there was no case of this kind 
 before them as a Court for decision. Folititally, it had the 
 effect of encouraging the Pro-Slavery party in their at 
 tempts to extend Slavery, as they were assured that the 
 question of their right to hold slaves in the Territories, if 
 such question should ever be tried, would be decided in 
 their favor. 
 
 The minority Justices maintained the old doctrine estab 
 lished by the Courts, and held by eminent statesmen, North 
 and South, that " all Slavery has its origin in power, and 
 is against right ;" that it requires, as essential to its exist 
 ence, municipal regulations, which the Constitution has 
 neither made nor provided for. In eight distinct instances, 
 beginning with the first Congress, has Congress excluded 
 Slavery from territory of the United States ; and in six 
 distinct instances in which Congress organized govern 
 ments for territories, has Slavery been recognized and con 
 tinued, beginning also with the tirst Congress, and coming 
 down to the year 1822. These acts were severally signed 
 by seven Presidents of the United States, beginning with 
 Gen. Washington, and coming down as far as John Quincy 
 Adams ; thus including all who were in public life when 
 the Constitution was adopted. Hence they inferred that, 
 by taking the plaintiff into a State where Slavery was pro 
 hibited, he became free. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan appointed Itobert J. Walker, of Miss., 
 Governor of Kansas, to succeed J. W. Geary ; and Fred 
 erick P. Stan tori, of Tenn., was appointed Secretary. Mr. 
 Stanton, who arrived first in Kansas, as well as Gov. 
 Walker after his arrival, advised the Free State men to 
 take a part in the election of Delegates to the Constitutional 
 Convention, assuring them that there should be a fair elec 
 tion. But they declined. Many, however, were induced to 
 vote at the October Territorial election. Gov. Walker ad 
 mitted the unfairness of the apportionment, by which some 
 Free State Counties were not allowed a Representative in 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 189 
 
 either branch of the Legislature ; but he promised to pro 
 tect the polls against illegal voters. The result was, that 
 the Free State Delegate to Congress, nine of the thirteen 
 Councilmen, and twenty -seven of the thirty-nine Represen 
 tatives, were elected by the Free State party I 
 
 The Constitution framed at Lecompton, affirmed the right 
 of slave-owners to hold their slaves in the Territory as 
 other property, and prohibited laws for the emancipating 
 slaves without the consent of their owners, or without pay 
 ment being made for them. It also prohibited laws to 
 prevent emigrants to the State from bringing with them 
 their slaves. 
 
 Prominent among the efforts of the Pro-Slavery party to 
 force Slavery upon the people of Kansas, was the " Le 
 compton swindle," as it was familiarly termed. The peo 
 ple were not allowed to vote for or against the Constitu 
 tion. Only the Slavery sections were submitted, and these 
 in such a manner that every person voting musf vote for 
 the Constitution. The ballots were to be indorsed, " Con 
 stitution with Slavery," or " Constitution with no Slavery." 
 So obnoxious were some of its provisions, that many Demo 
 crats were opposed to it, among whom was Mr. Douglas 
 himself, who desired that the people should have a fair 
 opportunity of voting on the question of its adoption. 
 Every voter, if challenged, must take an oath to support 
 the Constitution, if adopted. It was to be in force after its 
 ratification by the people, before, it could receive the sanction of 
 Congress, and required an election, as soon as possible, for 
 State officers, members of the Legislature, and a Delegate 
 to Congress ; the object of which was, to supersede the Repub 
 lican incumbents recently elected. It also prevented the present 
 Anti-Slavery Legislature from repealing the laws of the old 
 Territorial Legislature. And it prohibited any amendment 
 previous to 1864, until which time Slavery might not be 
 abolished. 
 
 Gov. Walker having, in pursuance of instructions from 
 Mr. Buchanan, pledged his efforts to procure its submission 
 to the popular vote, and having failed, the Free State party 
 determined to put their own government into operation, at 
 all events : and the peace of the Territory was seriously 
 threatened. Gov. Walker had gone to Washington to con- 
 
190 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 fcr with the President upon the subject ; but had found, on 
 his arrival, that Mr. Buchanan had already given the Le- 
 compton scheme his approval ! Before, however, this fact 
 could be communicated to Kansas, Secretary Stanton, (then 
 Acting-Governor,) had (December 3d,) called the new 
 Legislature to meet on the 7th, to provide for a direct vote 
 upon the Constitution on the 21st. The President, on be 
 ing informed of this act, removed Mr. Stanton, and appoint 
 ed J. W. Denver in his stead. 
 
 The President had said in his instructions to Gov. 
 Walker, that " unless the Convention should submit the 
 Constitution to the vote of all the actual settlers of Kansas, 
 and the election should be fairly conducted, the Constitution 
 ought to be, and, he believed, would be rejected by Con 
 gress." But Gov. Walker, finding himself not sustained by 
 the President, resigned his office rather than return to Kan 
 sas, and force the President to remove him for disobedience 
 to his instructions. In his letter of resignation, addressed 
 to the State Department, he gave a statement of the unfair 
 apportionment of the Delegates, the omission of many coun 
 ties from the registry, and the taking of the census in less 
 than ore half of them, &c., &c. 
 
 The Free State men not voting, the result was, " For the 
 Lecompton Constitution with. Slavery," 6,143 j " For the Le- 
 compton Constitution without Slavery," 569. Many votes 
 were alleged to have been illegal. The Territorial Legisla 
 ture convened by Gov. Stanton, ordered an election two 
 wei ks later, (Jan. 4th, 1858.) at which the vote was, "For the 
 Constitution with Slavery," 138 ; " For the Constitution 
 without Slavery," 24 ; "Against the Constitution," 10,226 I 
 
 The election of State officers, &c., provided for by the 
 Constitution, was held on the 4th of January. Only a por 
 tion of the Free State party voted. Calhoun, President of 
 the Convention, with men of his own selection, canvassed 
 the election returns, and reported the election of the entire 
 Stite ticket by an average majority of about 500, and tvvo- 
 ihirds of the Legislature. One or more men were arrested 
 fur getting up fraudulent returns ; and Calhoun, having re 
 fused to appear as witness, and having been arrested on a 
 writ of attach men t, escaped to Washington. So gross were 
 the frauds represented to be on the authority of both Mr. 
 
191 
 
 Stanton and Gov. Denver, that certificates of election were 
 granted to Free State candidates. 
 
 On the 2d of February, 1858, President Buchanan trans 
 mitted a copy of the Lecompton Constitution to Congress. 
 In his accompanying Message, he said a part of the people 
 of Kansas were " in a state of rebellion," and had " done 
 all they could to overthrow the Government established by 
 Congress." And in the face of all the facts, and especially 
 of that most unfair mode of presenting the question of 
 Slavery, which denied the people the privilege of voting 
 against the Constitution at all, he said the election of the 
 21st of December, had " afforded them opportunities, if in 
 the majority, of making Kansas a Free State according to 
 their own professed desire." And he pronounced the whole 
 movement legal and fair I He said, too, that it had been 
 adjudged by our highest judicial tribunal, that Slavery 
 exists in Kansas by virtue of the Constitution of the United 
 States ; and Kansas is therefore, at this moment, as 
 much a Slave State as Georgia or South Carolina." 
 
 The Senate Committee on Territories reported a bill for 
 the admission of Kansas. Mr. Douglas dissented, and made 
 a separate report. He said there was no evidence that the 
 Constitution was the act and deed of the people of Kansas. 
 The only lawful election was that held on the 4th of Janu 
 ary, which had rejected it. 
 
 Mr. Douglas opposed the admission of Kansas under the 
 Lecompton Constitution, not because it authorized Slavery ; 
 for he said he did not care whether it was voted down or 
 voted up ; but because the administration was opposed to 
 his favorite doctrine of popular sovereignty, upon, which 
 the administration had come into power. 
 
 To overcome the opposition of the people of Kansas to 
 the Lecompton Constitution, Congress made to them a pro 
 position in the nature of a bribe. The proposition was, to 
 admit Kansas with her Pro-Slavery Constitution, and to 
 grant to the State large quantities of land lor the support 
 of schools and a university, for public buildings, &c. ; the 
 salt springs, not exceeding twelve ; and five per cent, of 
 the proceeds of the sales of the public lands for making 
 roads and internal improvements. These propositions were 
 to be voted on at an election, each ballot to be indorsed, 
 
192 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 " For proposition of Congress and admission," or " Against 
 proposition of Congress and admission." And as an ad 
 ditional inducement to accept the proposition, the admis 
 sion was to be immediate ; but if the proposition should bo 
 rejected, admission was to be deferred until the population 
 should be equal to the ratio of representation, which was 
 then about 93,000, which number might not be reached for 
 years. At the election, (Aug. 2, 1858,) there were, to accept 
 the proposition, 1,788 votes ; to reject it, 11,088. 
 
 The President, in his next Annual Message, (December, 
 1858,) again speaks of the Lecompton Constitution as un 
 exceptionable in its general features, and as having pro 
 vided for submitting the Slavery question to the people ; 
 and charged its opponents with preferring a continuance of 
 Slavery to a surrender of their revolutionary organization. 
 Having twice rejected the Constitution, they should have 
 no authority to form another, until they should have 
 a population equal to the ratio required for a Repre 
 sentative. 
 
 The vindictiveuess of the President and his friends in 
 Congress towards the people of Kansas, was further 
 evinced by their treatment of the application from Oregon 
 for admission. The population of this Territory was less 
 than that of Kansas 5 yet this was not made an objection 
 to its admission, while Kansas was to be punished by being 
 kept out of the Union for an indefinite period. 
 
 Gov. Denver having resigned, Samuel Medary, of Ohio, 
 was appointed as his successor, and entered upon his duties 
 in December, 1858. The Territorial Legislature met in 
 January, 1859. An act was passed repealing the obnox 
 ious laws of the first Legislature, called the " bogus laws ;" 
 also an act for submitting to the people the question of a 
 new Constitutional Convention at an election to be held on 
 the 3d Monday in March ; and a bill to abolish and pro 
 hibit Slavery, which, however, failed, having been passed 
 at so late a day as to enable the Governor to defeat it, by 
 refusing to sign and return it. 
 
 At the election in March, the majority in favor of a Con 
 vention was nearly 4,000. Of the Delegates chosen at the 
 election in June, 35 were Republicans, 17 were Democrats. 
 The Convention met at Wyandot on the 5th of July, and 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 193 
 
 adjourned on the 27th, after adopting a Constitution by a 
 vote of 34 to 13. All the Democrats present voted against 
 it, and refused to sign it. It prohibited Slavery. In Oc 
 tober, it was ratified by a majority of about 4,-000. The 
 Democrats professed to be opposed to making Kansas a 
 Slave State, and to be in favor of Mr. Douglas Territorial 
 sovereignty doctrine. They desired the annexation to Kan 
 sas of that part of Nebraska south of the Platte ; the retain 
 ing of the gold region about Pike s Peak ; the exclusion of 
 free negroes from the State, and the prohibition of bank 
 issues ; in all of which they had been defeated. 
 
 The President, in his Annual Message, December, 1859, 
 did not recommend the admission of Kansas with her new 
 Constitution, as he had done the year before with a Slavery 
 Constitution. But he again " cordially congratulates" Con 
 gress " upon the final settlement, by the Supreme Court, of 
 the question of Slavery in the Territories ;" which gave 
 to every citizen " the right to take his property of any 
 kind, including slaves, into the common Territories, and to 
 have it protected there under the Federal Constitution. 
 Neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature, nor any 
 human power, has any authority to annul or impair this 
 vested right." Hereafter, when a Territory shall have a suffi 
 cient population to form a State, they may exercise the right 
 3f Popular Sovereignty in forming a State Constitution 
 preparatory to admission. 
 
 The House passed a bill for the admission of Kansas 
 under the Wyandot Constitution, 134 to 13. In the Senate, 
 Mr. Seward introduced a bill for this purpose, which, after 
 considerable delay, was rejected, 27 to 32. Of the Yeas, 
 2 were Democrats ; Nays, all Democrats. So Kansas was 
 left still in the condition of a Territory. 
 
 For some years past, efforts have been made to keep the 
 Public Lands from going into the hands of monopolists and 
 speculators. Millions of acres have been bought in large 
 tracts on speculation ; and persons wishing to purchase 
 lands in small quantities for actual occupation, have been 
 compelled to pay exorbitant prices, or seek farms in less 
 desirable localities. For the benefit of the poorer class of 
 laboring men, preemption acts have been passed. Attempts 
 have also been made to procure the passage of a law, 
 
194 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 granting gratuitously, or for a merely nominal price, to 
 every actual settler, a limited quantity of land as a Home 
 stead. The selling of large tracts to speculators is deemed 
 objectionable as leading to a landed aristocracy. But the 
 division of land into small freeholds is unfavorable to the 
 existence of Slavery. Hence, this policy has been opposed 
 by the South and the Democratic party. 
 
 In January, 1859, a bill relating to preemptions being 
 under consideration in the House, Mr. Grow, of Pa., moved 
 to amend the bill by adding a section, providing, " that no 
 public land shall be exposed to sale by proclamation of 
 the President, unless the same shall have been surveyed, 
 and the return of each survey duly filed in the Land Office, 
 for ten years or more before such sale." The effect of this 
 amendment would be to open these lands to preemption ten 
 years before they could get into the hands of the specu 
 lator ; thus giving the industrious settler time to pay for 
 his farm from the products of the soil. 
 
 To defeat this amendment, a motion was made to refer 
 the bill and amendment to the Committee of the Whole, 
 where it would probably have been buried for the session. 
 The motion failed : Yeas, 90 ; Nays, 92. The amendment 
 was then adopted : Yeas, 98 ; Nays, 81. AH the Repub 
 licans present voted in the affirmative, together with 18 
 Democrats. Mr. Blair, of Missouri, Republican, was the 
 only member from a Slave State who voted for the bill. Of 
 the votes from the Slave States, all but 9 were in the nega 
 tive. The question was then taken upon the passage of 
 the bill, and lost : Yeas, 91 ; Nays, 95. Of those who 
 voted in the affirmative, 80 were Republicans, 9 Democrats, 
 and 1, (Mr. Davis, of Md.,) American. Of those who voted 
 in the negative, 85 were Democrats, and 1 were Ameri 
 cans ; all of the latter being from Slave States. Of the 
 Democrats, 26 were from the Free States. Of the 9 South 
 ern members who had voted for Mr. Grow s amendment, 
 all but Mr. Blair voted against the bill ; from which it 
 would appear that they were opposed to the amendment, 
 though they voted for it. 
 
 Both of the members from Minnesota, (Cavanaugh and 
 Phelps,) expressed their high displeasure at the vote of 
 their political friends. Mr. C. said : 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 195 
 
 " With reference to the vote on this bill to-day, with an 
 overwhelming 1 majority of this side of the House voting- 
 against my colleague and myself, voting against this bill, 
 I say it frankly, I say it in sorrow, that it was to the Re 
 publican side of the House to whom we were compelled to 
 look for support of this just and honorable measure. Gen 
 tlemen from the South, who have broad acres and wide 
 plantations, aided here to-day by their votes more to make 
 Republican States in the North, than by any vote which 
 has been cast within the last two years. These gentlemen 
 came here to ask us to support the South ; yet they, to a 
 man almost, vote against the free, independent labor of the 
 North and West. 
 
 " I, Sir, have inherited my Democracy ; have been at 
 tached to the Democratic party from my boyhood, have 
 believed in the great truths as enunciated by the fathers 
 of the faith. . . . But, Sir, when I see Southern gen 
 tlemen come up, as I did to-day, and refuse, by their votes, 
 to aid my constituents, refuse to place the actual tiller of 
 the soil, the honest, industrious laborer, beyond the grasp 
 and avarice of the speculator, I tell you, Sir, I falter, and 
 I hesitate." 
 
 A Home&tead bill was introduced at the same session, 
 which proposed to give a quarter-section of land to every 
 actual settler continuing to occupy it for five years from 
 the time of entry. The bill passed the House, February 1, 
 1869, 120 to 76. Of the Yeas, 82 were Republicans, 38 
 were Democrats. Of the Nays, 75 were Democrats and 
 Southern Americans ; and 1 Republican, Nichols, of Ohio. 
 Of the Democrats who voted for the bill, only three were 
 from Slave States. 
 
 In the Senate, where the Democratic majority was larger 
 than in the House, no direct vote was permitted to be 
 taken upon the measure ; Southern Senators having suc 
 ceeded in obtaining priority to other bills, one of which 
 was the bill for the purchase of Cuba, of the passage of 
 which, not one Senator, probably, had the least expectation. 
 It will be seen that the question was one between Free 
 Labor and Slave Labor, or between the Republican party 
 and the Democratic or Slaveholders party. This will still 
 more clearly appear from subsequent action upon the subject. 
 
196 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 At the next session, on the 6th of March, Mr. Lovejoy, 
 from the Committee on Public Lands, reported a bill, (pre 
 viously introduced by Mr. Grow,) offering to actual settlers 
 one hundred and sixty acres of land which was subject to 
 preemption at $1 25 per acre, or eighty acres at $2 50 per 
 acre, on terms similar to those of the bill of the preceding 
 session. On receiving the patent, the settler was to pay 
 $10, which sum was to be considered as a compensation 
 for expense of survey, &c. 
 
 The bill was read twice and referred to the Committee of 
 the Whole. On the 12th of March, a motion to reconsider 
 the vote by which the bill had been referred to that Com 
 mittee, was agreed to, 106 to 67. In the affirmative, 83 
 Republicans, 23 Democrats of the latter were 5 Anti-Le- 
 compton Democrats, as they were called from their opposi 
 tion to the efforts of the administration to force upon the 
 people of Kansas the Constitution formed at Lecomptorr. 
 In the negative, 52 Democrats, and 15 Southern Americans, 
 who generally cooperated with the Democrats. 
 
 The bill being now before the House, Mr. Lovejoy moved 
 that the bill be engrossed and read the third time. Mr. 
 Branch, of N. C., moved to lay it on the table. Lost, <>2 to 
 112 ; the Yeas being all from the South, except Mr. Mont 
 gomery, Democrat, of Pa. ; the Nays all from the North, 
 except Mr. Craig, Democrat, of Missouri. The bill was 
 then read a third time and passed : Yeas, 115 Republi 
 cans, 86 ; Democrats, 28 ; North American, 1. Nays, 
 Democrats, 47 ; South Americans, 18. 
 
 In the Senate, a substitute for the House bill was re 
 ported by Mr. Johnson, of Tenn., granting Homesteads at 
 25 cents an acre, not to include the prctimptors then occu 
 pying public lands. Mr. Wade moved to substitute the 
 House bill. Lost, 26 to 31 : Yeas, all Republicans, except 
 3, Douglas, Rice, and Toombs ; Nays, all Democrats. On 
 the 10th of May, Johnson s bill was passed, 44 to 8. The 
 House refused to concur ; and the Senate refused to recede. 
 A Committee of Conference agreed upon the Senate bill 
 with slight amendments ; one of which restricted its bene 
 fits to heads of families. The friends of the measure 
 being unable to pass such a bill as they wished, accepted 
 this. The House agreed to the report of the Commit- 
 
 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 197 
 
 tee, 115 to 51 ; the Nays all from the Slave States : the 
 Senate, 36 to 2. 
 
 The bill was sent to the President, (Buchanan,) who, as 
 if determined to let no opportunity pass without showing 
 his devotion to Southern interests, returned the bill to the 
 Senate, with his veto. He professed to see in it, unconsti- 
 tutionality, inequality, and injustice to several classes of 
 individuals and to the old States, and a reduction of the 
 revenue. The question was then taken on the passage of 
 the bill against the objections of the President. Yeas, 28 ; 
 Republicans, 19 ; Democrats, 9. Nays, 18, all from the 
 South. So the bill failed for want of a two-thirds 
 majority. 
 
 That the Democratic party was then, as it long had been, in 
 fact, the Pro-Slavery party, received additional confirmation 
 at this session. Senator Davis, (now Southern President,) 
 submitted a series of resolutions of an extreme Southern 
 character, declaring the intermeddling, by any State or its 
 citizens, with the domestic institutions of other States, on 
 any pretext whatever, political, moral, or religious, to be 
 in violation of the Constitution, insulting to the States, and 
 tended to weaken and destroy the Union ; asserting the 
 right of slaveholders to take their " peculiar" property into 
 the Territories ; denying to Congress or a Territorial Legis 
 lature the power either by direct, or by indirect and " un 
 friendly" legislation, to impair or to annul this right ; de 
 claring that if the Judicial and Executive authority should 
 not possess means to insure adequate protection to these 
 constitutional rights in a Territory, it would be the duty of 
 Congress to supply such deficiency ; that a State should be 
 entitled to admission with or without Slavery ; and that 
 any interference with the rendition of fugitive slaves, was 
 subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary. 
 
 All ^the resolutions except one, after having been 
 thoroughly debated by such approved Democrats as Daviq, 
 Benjami-n, and other Senators of the " fire-eating" stamp, 
 were adopted by an almost strict party vote. Even the- 
 first and second, which were expressly directed against all 
 discussion of the morality or political expediency of Slavery, 
 were adopted by a vote of 36 to 18 or 20 ! Mr. Harlan, of 
 Iowa, Republican, offered an amendment to the second, as 
 follows : 
 
198 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 " But the free discussion of the morality and expediency 
 of Slavery should never be interfered with by the laws of 
 anv State or of the United States ; and the freedom of 
 speech and of the press, on this and every other subject of 
 domestic and national policy, should be maintained invio 
 late to all the States." 
 
 What would the political Fathers have thought, if such 
 a sentiment had been voted down by any legislative body 
 in their day ? So scrupulous on the subject of freedom of 
 speech and of the press were some of the ratifying State 
 Conventions, that they were indisposed to ratify, without 
 submitting to Congress, among other propositions for 
 amendment, a guaranty to this very right ; and so proper 
 was it regarded, that it was at once adopted by the States 
 as a part of the Constitution. Yet, in the Senate of the 
 United States, in the year 1860, a resolution substantially de 
 claring the exercise of this right unconstitutional, and a violation 
 of the most solemn obligations, was adopted by q vote of two to 
 one; the majority at the same time claiming to be the re 
 presentatives of American Democracy I Is it strange that 
 Northern Democrats should now manifest such opposition 
 to an administration which is employing the forces of the 
 nation to put down a rebellion instigated and led by the 
 authors and advocates of these resolutions, which were in 
 tended as the creed of the Democratic party ? The general 
 acquiescence of the party and its presses in these resolu 
 tions, leaves no doubt, that, had the South remained in the 
 Union, the sentiments of these resolutions would constitute 
 the party Platform in 1864, as they probably will, even if 
 the rebel States shall not have returned. 
 
 The country was now entering upon another exciting 
 Presidential campaign. The principles involved in the 
 election of 1860 its incidents its momentous consequen 
 ces render it memorable beyond any that had ever occur 
 red. And it was the Kansas question which, more than 
 any other cause, contributed to give it this distinction. 
 The honors and the emoluments of the Presidential office 
 had for many years been dispensed by the Slave Power. 
 It had, in 1852, erected the Platforms of both the Democra 
 tic and Whig parties, and the Democratic Platform in 1856, 
 into which Mr. Buchanan assured the people he had merged 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 199 
 
 himself, and which, as the event showed, served the purpose 
 of his election. This platform was essentially the Cass and 
 Douglas doctrine of Non-intervention, or Popular Sovereignty. 
 The latest improvement in Democracy had not then beon an 
 nounced ; or the time had not come when it was deemed safe 
 to present it for acceptance to the North. Bat having been 
 enunciated by the Supreme Court, and the public mind hav 
 ing partially recovered from the shock which its announce 
 ment had produced, it was now proclaimed as the true Demo 
 cratic doctrine. 
 
 But, as we have seen, the Southern Democracy committed 
 a fatal mistake in their hasty attempt to force this innovation 
 into the Democratic creed, which has resulted, not only in the 
 division of the party, and the disruption of the Union, but in 
 the infliction of a mortal wound upon itself. To secure 
 Southern favor was the principal motive that prompted the re 
 peal of the Missouri Compromise by the Kansas-Nebraska act, 
 the claims of whose author had not, in previous Conventions, 
 been duly appreciated, and who intended not to be outdone in 
 obsequiousness to the Southern Oligarchy. Bat the honors 
 in the Presidential game having been awarded to Mr. Bu 
 chanan, Mr. Douglas hope must necessarily be deferred until 
 1860. But unfortunately his favorite doctrine of Popular 
 Sovereignty had been superseded, and a cloud had somewhat 
 obscured his prospects. 
 
 The Democratic National Convention met at Charleston on 
 the 23d of April, 1860. The number of Delegates was 303 ; 
 and, having adopted the two-thirds rule, 202 votes were neces 
 sary to nominate. But the Convention decided to adopt a 
 Platform before proceeding to ballot for a candidate. Having 
 endeavored for seven days in vain to agree upon one, and 
 there being no hope of such a result, (the Platform reported 
 by the Douglas men having been adopted, 165 to 138,) whole 
 delegations of some, and parts of the delegations of others, of 
 the States of Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Texas, Louisiana, 
 Arkansas, Delaware, South Carolina, and North Carolina, se 
 ceded from the Convention ; met in another place, and adopted 
 a series of resolutions of the ultra Southern character; and 
 adjourned to meet at Richmond the llth of June. 
 
 The regular Convention proceeded to ballot, 202 votes still 
 
200 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 being declared necessary to a choice. After 57 ballots had 
 been taken, in which Mr. Douglas had received on each 
 ballot from 145 to 152 votes against about 100 for all 
 others, the Convention adjourned to meet at Baltimore on 
 the 18th of June. 
 
 The Republican National Convention assembled at Chi 
 cago the 16th of May. The contest was chiefly between 
 the friends of Mr. Seward and Mr. Lincoln. On the 3d 
 ballot, the latter received a majority of all the votes, and 
 was declared unanimously nominated. Hannibal Hamlin, 
 of Maine, was nominated for Vice-President. 
 
 The Democratic seceders met at Richmond on the llth 
 of June, and the next day adjourned to the 21st. They 
 then reassembled, and adjourned from day to day, awaiting 
 the action of the Convention at Baltimore, which had met 
 on the 18th, pursuant to adjournment. The week was 
 spent by the latter in fruitless endeavors to determine the 
 claims of delegates, when a large portion of them again 
 withdrew from the Convention, leaving few besides the 
 friends of Mr. Douglas, who proceeded to ballot fur Presi 
 dent, and gave him 181| votes ; J. C. Bnickinridge, 7 ; 
 Mr. Guthrie, 5J. 
 
 The Beceders subsequently nominated John C. Breckin- 
 ridge, of Ky., for President, and Joseph Lane, of Oregon, 
 for Vice President. 
 
 A fourth nomination was made by a Convention claiming 
 to be representatives of the " Constitutional Union Party/ 
 who met at Baltimore the 9th of May, from twenty States, 
 and nominated John Bell, of Tenn., for President, and 
 Edward Everett, of Mass., for Vice-President. This Con 
 vention constructed no party Platform, other than to de 
 clare that " platforms adopted by partisan Conventions 
 have the effect to mislead and deceive the people, and to 
 widen the political divisions of the country, by the creation 
 and encouragement of geographical and sectional parties," 
 and to resolve, " That it is both the part of patriotism and of 
 duty to recognize no political principle other than the Con 
 stitution of the country, the Union of the Stales, and the enforce 
 ment of the laws, &fc. 
 
 The principles of the other parties were more definitely 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 201 
 
 expressed, so that, however discordant, they were not liable, 
 without doing violence to language, " to mislead and de 
 ceive the people." 
 
 The Republican Convention reasserted the doctrines of 
 the Declaration of Independence in regard to human Rights, 
 and declared no principle at variance with any previously 
 affirmed. The lapse of time, however, required the intro 
 duction of several new subjects. The " new dogma that 
 the Constitution of its own force carries Slavery into the 
 Territories ;" the efforts of the administration to keep Kan 
 sas out of the Union with a Constitution prohibiting 
 Slavery ; and sundry other measures were severely con 
 demned. 
 
 The Seceders or Brecldnridge Convention affirmed the 
 Cincinnati Platform of 1856, but, with such explanations 
 as virtually to annul it. It declared, that all citizens have 
 an equal right to settle in the Territories, without having 
 their rights of person or property impaired by Congres 
 sional or Territorial legislation ; that it is the duty of the 
 Federal Government to protect these rights ; and that the 
 right of Sovereignty commences when the people of a Ter 
 ritory, having an adequate population, form a State Con 
 stitution. What does this leave of the Popular Sovereignty 
 of 1856 ? 
 
 It was the boast of Mr. Douglas and his party, that they 
 still adhered to that principle. Let their Platform adopted 
 at Baltimore decide. It adopts, as did the other Democra 
 tic Convention, the Platform, of 1856, adding only certain 
 other resolutions ; one of which declares, " That the Demo 
 cratic party will abide, by the decision of the, Supreme Court of 
 the United States over the institution of Slavery within the Ter 
 ritories." Another, " That it is the duty of the United States 
 to afford ample and complete protection to all its citizens, at 
 home or abroad." And another, " That it is in accordance 
 with the true interpretation of the Cincinnati Platform 
 that, during the existence of Territorial Government, the 
 measure of restriction imposed by the Federal Constitution 
 on the powers of the Territorial Legislature over the sub 
 ject of domestic relations, as the same has been, or shall here 
 after be, finally determined by the Supreme Court, shall be re- 
 
202 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 spected by all good citizens, and enforced with promptness 
 and fidelity by every branch of the Federal Government." 
 
 Here we see that the party was pledged to the support of 
 the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case. 
 That decision was, that " every citizen has a right to take 
 with him into the Territory any article of property 
 which the Constitution of the United States recognizes as pro 
 perty. The Constitution recognizes slaves as property, and 
 pledges the Federal Government to protect it" And as was 
 asked concerning the other Platform, so we ask concerning 
 this, What does it leave of Popular Sovereignty ? 
 
 The truth is, Mr. Douglas was in a dilemma. In his efforts 
 to open the way for the spread of Slavery by the repeal of the 
 Missouri Compromise, he had aimed at Southern support for 
 the Presidency. No other man had rendered the South 
 greater service. During the Kansas struggle, prior to the 
 perpetration of the Lecompton swindle, he had sustained the 
 Ruffian atrocities. Not a word of condemnation had escaped 
 his lips. He then, probably, anticipated no repudiation of his 
 cherished non-intervention principle. When, however, the 
 new doctrine was announced by the Supreme Court, he was 
 compelled either to adopt it, or abandon all hope of Southern 
 favor. He chose the former. He publicly declared that he 
 accepted the Dred Scott dec sion, and then endeavored tc re 
 concile it with the Popular Sovereignty of 1856. He from 
 necessity admitted the right to take slaves into the Terri 
 tories, and that the owners, if protected at all, must be pro 
 tected by the Territorial Legislature. These might either 
 refuse to act upon the subject, or might, by "unfriendly 
 action," prohibit Slavery. This could be done by refusing 
 remedies to the slaveholders, or by imposing heavy taxes upon, 
 his chattels. But an appeal might be mado to the Supieme 
 Court, which might declare these laws unconstitutional. This, 
 however, is unworthy of being called an argument. It is virtu 
 ally an abandonment of his original ground. Yet in his 
 public speeches during the campaign of 1860, he ignored his 
 own party platform, at least in certain latitudes, and declared, 
 as in his speech at Concord, N. H., that " the principle he 
 stood upon was the right of the people to make their own 
 laws, and to establish institutions to suit themselves. It is 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 203 
 
 not easy to reconcile this language either with the Platform 
 or with common honesty. 
 
 Of the electors chosen in November, Mr. Lincoln received 
 all the votes of all the Free States, except New Jersey, in 
 which, in consequence of a fusion of the opposition parties, a 
 part of the Lincoln electors was chosen. 
 
 For Lincoln and Hamlin : California, 4 ; Connecticut, 6 ; 
 Illinois, 11 ; Indiana, 13 ; Iowa, 4 ; Maine, 8 ; Massachusetts, 
 13; Michigan, 6; Minnesota, 4 ; New Hampshire, 5; New 
 Jersey, 4 ; New York, 35 ; Oregon, 3 ; Pennsylvania, 27 ; 
 "Rhode Island, 4 ; Vermont, 5 ; Wisconsin, 5; Ohio, 23. 180 
 
 For Breckinridge and Lane: Alabama, 9 ; Arkansas, 4; 
 Delaware, 3; Florida, 3; Georgia, 10; Louisiana, 6; Mary 
 land, 8; Mississippi, 7; ftorth Carolina, 10; South Carolina, 
 8 ; Texas, 4 Total, 72. 
 
 For Bell and Everett : Kentucky, 12 ; Tennessee, 12 ; 
 Virginia, 15. Total, 39. 
 
 For Douglas and Johnson : New Jersey, 3 ; Missouri, 9. 
 Total, 12. 
 
 Immediately after the result of the election was known, 
 movements began to be made at the South to carry into effect 
 the long studied purpose of the Secessionists. That this pur 
 pose was not first formed after the election, there is abundant 
 evidence. In the first place, they had reason to believe, and 
 probably did believe, that the strength of the party, concen 
 trated upon a single candidate, was sufficient to elect him. 
 And Mr. Douglas, having a decided majority of the Delegates 
 in the Charleston Convention, was entitled to the nomination. 
 His services in the cause of the South had been all that could 
 have been reasonably expected from the most loyal South 
 erner. True, he had, from fear of endangering his prospects 
 at the North, spoken somewhat equivocally on the subjects of 
 non-intervention and the Dred Scott decision ; but having 
 gone so far as to declare his acceptance of that decision, the 
 South had no just ground to suspect his loyalty to the Slave 
 Power. The secession from the Charleston Convention, there 
 fore, furnishes, of itself, reasonable evidence of a purpose in 
 directly to aid the election of Mr. Lincoln, which was to be 
 made the pretext for seceding. 
 
 In addition to this evidence of premeditated secession, is 
 
204 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the fact that the Republican party had uniformly disclaimed 
 the intention, and denied to the General Goveinment the 
 power, to interfere with Slavery in the States; and some of 
 the secession members of Congress had the frankness to admit, 
 in the debates at the succeeding session of Congress, that they 
 apprehended, under Mr. Lincoln, no interference with their 
 rights in this respect. Moreover, it had been ascertained that 
 there would be, in both Houses of Congress, Pro-Slavery ma 
 jorities ; which fact, in connection with the declared opinion 
 of the Supreme Court, placed the supremacy of the Slave 
 Power beyond all question, notwithstanding the election of a 
 Republican President. 
 
 Much clamor was made in Congress about what were called 
 the " Personal Liberty Acts" of some of the Northern States, 
 and resistance to the recapture of fugitive slaves. This, too, 
 was a mere pretense, intended to deceive, not only the North, 
 but their own constituents, a majority of whom were opposed 
 to secession. The real intention, as both prior and subse 
 quent events and declarations prove, was to establish a great 
 Slave Empire, which was ultimately to include Mexico, Cuba, 
 and several of the South American States, and in which the 
 Republican principle was to be either almost or altogether 
 superseded by a system in which wealth and labor should be 
 separated. 
 
 But we have positive testimony to prove the designs of the 
 South. When, in 1850, it was proposed to convene "a South 
 ern Congress" for the initiation of measures looking to the de 
 fense of the South, a debate was had on the subject in the 
 Legislature of South Carolina, from which some extracts 
 are here given. In reference to the wrongs inflicted upon 
 the South 
 
 " Mr. Lyles said : The remedy is the union of the South, 
 and the formation of a Southern Confederacy. The friends 
 of the Southern movement in the other States look to the ac 
 tion of Soutli Carolina ; and he would make the issue in a 
 reasonable time, and the only way to do it is by secession. 
 There would be no concert among the Southern States until a 
 blow is struck. 
 
 " Mr. Sullivan . . . denied the right or the power of 
 the General Government to coerce the State in the case of 
 
205 
 
 secession. He thought there never would be a union of 
 the South until this State strikes the blow and makes the 
 issue. 
 
 " Mr. Kichardson said there was no remedy for these 
 evils in the Government ; we have no alternative left us 
 but to come out cf the Government. 
 
 " Mr. Preston said he was opposed to calling a Conven 
 tion, because he thought it would impede the action of this 
 State on the question before the country. He thought it 
 would impede our progress towards disunion. He thought Con 
 ventions dangerous things, except when the necessities 
 of the country absolutely demand them. He said he had 
 adopted the course he had taken, simply and entirely with 
 the view of hastening the dissolution of this Union.. 
 
 11 Mr. Keitt said he would sustain the bill for electing 
 Delegates to a Southern Congress, because he thought it 
 would bring about a more speedy dissolution of the Union." 
 
 In 1856, leading statesmen and editors in the Southern 
 States, as they have since done, avowed their determina 
 tion, in case of the election of an Anti-Slavery President, to 
 dissolve the Union. Senator Slidell, of Louisiana, said, " if 
 Fremont should be elected, the Union would be dissolved." 
 Toombs, of Georgia, said, " The Union would be dissolved, 
 and ought to be dissolved." 
 
 Senator Butler, of South Carolina, said : " When Fre 
 mont is elected, we must rely upon what we have a good 
 State Government. Every Governor of the South should 
 call the Legislature of his State together, and have mea 
 sures of the South decided upon. If they did not, and sub 
 mit to the degradation, they would deserve the fate of 
 slaves. I should advise my Legislature to go at the tap of 
 the drum." 
 
 Mr. Keitt, of S. C., a member of Congress, said, in a 
 speech at Lynchburg, Va. : " If Fremont is elected, adher 
 ence to the Union is treason to liberty. (Loud cheers.) I tell 
 you now, that the Southern man who will submit to his election, 
 is a traitor and a coward." (Enthusiastic cheers.) 
 
 Preston S. Brooks, at a festival made by his constituents, 
 and intended as a compliment for his attempted assassina 
 tion of Senator Sumner, said : " We have the issue upon 
 us now ; and how are we to meet it ? I tell you, fellow 
 
206 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 citizens, from the bottom of my heart, the only mode which 
 I think available for meeting it, is just to tear the Constitu 
 tion of the United States, trample it under foot, and form a 
 Southern Confederacy, every State ofwhic/i icill be a slaveholding 
 Stale. (Loud and prolonged cheers.) I believe it, as I 
 stand in the face of my Maker ; I believe it, on my respon 
 sibility to you as your honored representative, that the only 
 hope of the South is in the South, and that the only available 
 means of making that hope effective, is to cut asunder the 
 bonds that tie us togetJier, and take our separate position among 
 the family of nations. These are my opinions. They have 
 always been my opinions. I have been a disunionist from the 
 time I could think" 
 
 " If I was a commander of an army, I would never post a 
 sentinel who would not swear that Slavery is right" 
 
 11 If Fremont be elected President of the United States, I 
 am for the people in their majesty rising above the law and 
 leaders, taking the power into their own hands, going by 
 concert, or not by concert, and laying the strong arm of South 
 ern freemen upon the Treasury and arc/lives of the Government" 
 (Applause.) 
 
 The Charleston Mercury, the chief organ of South Caro 
 lina Democrac3 T , said : " Upon the policy of dividing the Union, 
 of separating the South from her Northern enemies, and 
 establishing a Southern Confederacy, parlies, presses, politi 
 cians, and people, are a unit. There is not a single public man in 
 her limits, not one of her present Senators or Representatives in 
 Congress, who is not pledged to the lips in favor of disunion." 
 
 Gov. Wise, of Virginia, in 1856, said : " To tell me we 
 should submit to the election of a Black Republican, is to 
 tell me that Virginia and the fourteen Slave States are 
 already subjugated and degraded, (cheers ;) that the 
 Southern people are without spirit and without purpose to 
 defend the rights they know and dare not maintain." 
 
 Said a writer from Washington in a New Orleans paper : 
 " It is already arranged, in the event of Fremont s election, 
 or a failure to elect by the people, to call the Legislatures 
 of Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia to concert mea 
 sures to withdraw from the Union before Fremont can get 
 possession of the army and navy and the purse-strings of 
 the Government. Gov. Wise is actively at work already 
 
207 
 
 in the matter TJie South can rely on the President in the emer 
 gency contemplated." 
 
 Judge Daily, at a meeting held at Knoxville, Tenn., 
 since the election of 1856, said : "During the Presidential 
 contest, Gov. Wise had addressed letters to all the South 
 ern Governors, and that the one to the Governor of Florida 
 had been shown him, in which Gov. Wise said he had an army 
 in readiness to prevent Fremont from taking his seat if elected, 
 and asking the cooperation of those to whom he wrote." 
 
 Charles J. Faulkner, formerly a Congressman from Vir 
 ginia, and Minister to France under Buchanan, said at a 
 public meeting in Virginia : " Should William H. Seward 
 be elected in 1860, where is the man in our midst who 
 would not call for the impeachment of a Governor of Vir 
 ginia, who would silently suffer that armory (at Harper s 
 Ferry) to pass under the control of such an Executive 
 head ?" 
 
 The Richmond Enquirer, an acknowledged exponent of 
 Southern Democracy, said in reference to the assault on 
 Sumner : " Sumner and Suinner s friends must be punished 
 and silenced. Either such wretches must be hung, or put- 
 in the penitentiary, or the South should prepare at once to 
 quit the Union. 
 
 " If Fremont is elected, the Union will not last an hour 
 after Mr. Pierce s term expires. ... It will be the 
 duty of the South to dissolve the Union, and form a South 
 ern Confederacy. 
 
 " Let the South present a compact and individual front. 
 Let her, if possible, detach Pennsylvania, Southern Ohio, 
 Southern Indiana, and Southern Illinois, from the North, 
 and make the highlands between the Ohio and the lakes 
 the dividing line. Let the South treat with California ; 
 and, if necessary, ally herself with Russia, with Cuba, 
 and Brazil." 
 
 Senator Iverson, of Georgia, addressing his constituents 
 before his departure for Washington, in 1860, said : 
 " Slavery must be maintained in the Union, if possible ; out of 
 it, if necessary : peaceably, if we may, forcibly, if we must. 
 
 11 In a confederated government of their own, the South 
 ern States would enjoy sources of wealth, prosperity, and 
 power, unsurpassed by any nation on earth. No neutrality 
 
208 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 laws would restrain our adventurous sons. Our expand 
 ing policy would stretch far beyond present limits. Cen 
 tral America would join her destiny to ours, and so would 
 Cuba, now withheld from us by the voice and votes of 
 Abolition enemies." 
 
 Jefferson Davis, U. S. Senator from Mississippi, in a 
 speech to the people of that State, in 1859, said : " For 
 myself, I say, as I said on a former occasion, in the con 
 tingency of the election of a President on the platform of 
 Mr. Seward s Rochester speech, let the Union be dissolved. 
 Let the great, but not the greatest of evils, come." 
 
 A volume of similar expressions might be collected from 
 the speeches and writings of Southern men, showing their 
 hatred of the Union, and their intention of quitting it when 
 ever the Government should pass out of the hands of the 
 Pro-Slavery Democratic party. And, it may here be 
 asked, From what prominent Northern Democrat now 
 in good standing in the party, has such language ever 
 met with deserved rebuke ? Instead ot this, these Dis- 
 unionists have received the caresses and enjoyed the con 
 fidence of their Northern friends down to the time of the 
 Secession, and have retained their sympathies to the present 
 day. 
 
 In the debates on the passage of the ordinance of seces 
 sion, and other proceedings of the Convention of South 
 Carolina, are the following : 
 
 "Mr. Parker It is no spasmodic effort that has come 
 suddenly upon us, but it has been gradually culminating 
 for along series of years, until at last it has come to that 
 point when we may say the matter is entirely right. 
 
 " Mr. Inglis As to delay for the purpose of a discus 
 sion, I for one am opposed to it. As my friend Mr. Parker 
 has yaid, most of us have had this matter under considera 
 tion for the last twenty years, and I presume we have by 
 this time arrived at a decision upon the subject. 
 
 " Mr. Keitt Sir, we are performing a great act, which 
 involves not only the stirring present, but embraces the 
 whole great future of ages to come. I have been engaged 
 in this movement ever since I entered political life. We have 
 carried the body of this Union to its last resting place, and 
 now we will drop the flag over its grave. After that is 
 

 BUCHANANS ADMINISTRATION. 200 
 
 done, I am ready to adjourn and leave the remaining cere 
 monies for to-morrow. 
 
 " Mr. Rlictt The secession of South Carolina is not the 
 event of a day. It, is not anything produced by Mr. Lin- 
 colti s election, or by non-execution of the Fugitive Slave law. 
 It has been a matter which has been, gathering head for 
 thirty years. . . In regard to the Fugitive Slave law, 
 I myself donbt its constitutionality, and I doubted it on 
 the floor of the Senate when I was a member of that body. 
 The States, acting in their sovereign capacit.y, should bo 
 responsible for the rendition of fugitive slaves. That was 
 our best security." 
 
 From these and other evidences of the determination of 
 the more Southern Slave States to secede, how unnecessary 
 were all attempts, by compromise and concession, to arrest 
 the progress of secession ! Coercion was the only preven 
 tive ; and had President Buchanan had the honesty and 
 the moral courage to take the necessary measures to re- 
 enforce the forts near Charleston, and enforced the collec 
 tion of revenue in the Southern ports, the Rebellion with its 
 tremendous consequences might have been prevented. Ho 
 was importuned by his friends to act in the matter ; but, 
 either from sympathy with the seceders, or from timidity, 
 he persisted in leaving them to carry their designs intoeffect. 
 Such a responsibility no other public functionary in this 
 country ever incurred. The decision of the President not 
 to send additional troops to strengthen the Charleston forts 
 on the urgent call of Major Anderson, then in command of 
 Fort Moultrie, induced Gen. Cass, Secretary of State, to 
 resign ; he having contended, it is said, that such reSn- 
 forcement was necessary to insure peace, arid to protect 
 the public property, which was the duty of the Govern 
 ment. 
 
 Gen. Scott, as early as October 29, 1860, wrote to tho 
 President : " It is my solemn conviction that there is somo 
 danger of an early act of rashness preliminary to secession, 
 viz., the seizure of some of the following forts :" naming- 
 some eight or ten, including Moultrie and Sutnter, most of 
 them without garrisons or with insufficient ones, and re 
 commended their being guarded " against surprises." Ho 
 said also : " With the army faithful to its allegiance, and 
 
210 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 the navy probably equally so, and with a Federal Execu 
 tive, for the next twelve months, of firmness and modera 
 tion, which the country has a right to expect moderation 
 being 1 an element of power not less th an firmness-* there is 
 good reason to hope that the danger of secession may be 
 made to pass away without one conflict of arms, one exe 
 cution, or one arrest for treason." But the President con 
 tinued inactive ; his Secretaries plundering the Treasury, 
 plotting treason, placing the national arms at the disposal 
 of the traitors, and scattering the navy ; and the Govern 
 ment was betrayed, powerless, into the hands of its enemies. 
 
 One act of service to the slaveholders remained to Mr. 
 Buchanan. Having another Annual Message to prepare, 
 he took occasion to give the "Northern agitators" one 
 more thrust before his retirement. It was in iris view a 
 serious offense, that, for five and twenty years, they had 
 presumed to express their dislike of Slavery, without the 
 fear of Southern lordlings before their eyes. The old pa 
 triots and statesmen spoke of Slavery as a moral and politi 
 cal evil a " curse" and of slaveholders as " despots " 
 terms quite as severe as are used by the Phillipses and 
 Garrisons of the present day. Now, a man can not, with 
 out incurring the strongest censure of the Democrats, so 
 much as say to a slaveholder, " Why do you thus ?" 
 
 Mr. Buchanan said " the Slavery question could be easily 
 settled, and peace and harmony restored. All for which 
 the Slave States have ever contended, is to be let alone." 
 True, Mr, President.. Had the slaveholders been permitted 
 to do just as they pleased to spread the curse of Slavery 
 over an empire, to be divided, as fast as might be neces 
 sary to keep up the desired " equilibrium," and formed into 
 States inhabited mainly by an unpaid, ignorant, mixed, and 
 degraded population, dwelling in rude and filthy cabins, 
 instead of being peopled by industrious free laborers, whoso 
 thrift, intelligence, and high social position, are evinced by 
 the convenient dwellings, by churches, and school-houses, 
 and manufactories which overspread the country ; could 
 these petty " despots," as Jefferson called them, have con 
 tinued to lord it over their fellow men, and to riot upon 
 their unrequited labor, without extracting from the friends 
 of humanity an expression of sympathy fur their suffering 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 211 
 
 brethren, or an effort for their relief ; and could they have 
 extorted from the people one more concession a constitu 
 tional guaranty of the right to govern, ly the lash and the chain, 
 all the territory now owned, and hereafter to be acquired, ly the 
 United States, and enactments prohibiting the discussion of 
 the morality of the " peculiar institution, 3> and the trans 
 mission, by mail, of all obnoxious papers, as Mr. Buchanan 
 and his Democratic associates in Congress attempted to do 
 in ISSfi ; in short, could only the people of the North have 
 been compelled to let the slaveholders alone; then, indeed, 
 " peace and harmony" might have been preserved. Such 
 guaranties would doubtless, even now, appease the traitors, 
 and bring back every Rebel State into the Union. And 
 could Mr. Buchanan be invested with plenary power to set 
 tle this question, " peace and harmony" would be speedily 
 " restored." 
 
 The President denied the constitutional right of Seces 
 sion ; but he told the country he had no authority to en 
 force the obedience of a State ; and so he let the traitors 
 alone, and, in utter disregard of the importunities of loyal 
 Democrats, refused to rceriforce the forts which were too 
 feebly garrisoned for effectual resistance or protection, or 
 to make any other provision ibr the execution of the laws. 
 What could have been more encouraging to the Rebels? 
 
 The message also directs a missile at "geographical" 
 or " sectional parties," intended, of course, for the party 
 which had elected Mr. Lincoln. The general hue and cry 
 about " sectionalism," kept up for years to the eve of the 
 Rebellion, and the repetition of the denunciation of " sec 
 tional parties" by the President, indorsed by the party 
 throughout the North, tended to confirm the hope of the 
 traitors that any efforts of the new administration to en 
 force the laws against them would be resisted by their 
 Northern friends. 
 
 The reader will pardon a digression here to notice this 
 accusation of " sectionalism." Why is a party formed to 
 oppose the extension of Slavery more sectional than one 
 whose object is to promote its extension ? Slavery is a sec 
 tional institution. Freedom is national: to secure its bless 
 ings to THE WHOLE NATION is the object of the Constitution. 
 A party, therefore, organized to effect this object, is not, 
 
213 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 in the true sense of the word, a sectional party. Is not 
 rather a party whose business it is to support a sectional in 
 terest, a sectional party? As, however, it is the grand 
 object of the Democratic party to naticnolize Slavery, I am 
 not d sposed to dispute its claim to nationality. But ad 
 mitting- that a party opposed to Slavery, because its voters 
 are limited to one-half of the States, is really sectional : Is 
 that fact a valid objection to such a party ? Its claims to 
 siippf/rt are to le determined by the nature of its objects; and it 
 is immaterial whether all its members reside in one State, 
 or are scattered through all the States. Every measure of 
 political or moral reform has a local beginning 1 . It is dis 
 cussed ; the sentiments of its advocates arc proclaimed ; 
 the judgment of men is every where addressed through the 
 public Press and otherwise. The friends of the measure 
 depend upon its merits to commend it to the public sup 
 port ; and by free discussion and the dissemination of cor 
 rect information, it soon finds sup 1 , orters in every commu 
 nity. But tl e slaveholders dread discussion, and deny 
 freedom of speech and of the Press. Restore this consti 
 tutional right ; admit light into the benighted* South ; and 
 a Btronger Anti-Slavery party would soon be found there 
 than there has ever been or now is in the North ; and the 
 cry of " sectionalism" would be silenced. 
 
 The sentiment that, because Slavery is confined to a por 
 tion of the Union, it does not concern the people in other 
 portions, has no foundation either in morals or in logic. It 
 is in perfect accordance with that of Cain : <; Am I my bro 
 ther s keeper ?" or with that of a man who should refuse to 
 rescue a fellow man from the hands of a robber. The law 
 of humanity the law of nature, which is the law of God 
 demands interference, by all moral and lawful means, iu be 
 half of the oppressed and the suffering. 
 
 But another reason political expediency justifies opposi 
 tion to Slavery by the people of the Free States. The evils 
 of Slaver} are not altogether local ; it affects the whole nation. 
 That it paralyzes the industry and retards the prosperity of 
 a State, has been 1 a thousand times confessed by slavehold 
 ers themselves, and may bo seen on the slightest compari 
 son between the Free and the Slave States. Slavery closes 
 the doors against the free laborers of other States. It 
 
213 
 
 creates an antagonistic sectional interest ; gives to slavehold 
 ers a disproportionate influence in the Government ; and, 
 as the event shows, endangers the Union. 
 
 To this it will be replied, that the holding of slaves id a 
 constitutional right. True ; and being such, it is not to be 
 infringed. But all due respect for this right does not for-, 
 bid the use of all legal and constitutional means to remove 
 or abate the evil. The necessity which compelled acquies 
 cence in the reservation of this right, does not make Slavery 
 just or expedient ; nor does it rightfully preclude attempts 
 by any man or party to effect its restriction or abolition. 
 
 Slavery also affects the honor of the nation : it is a na 
 tional disgrace, for which the North as well as the South 13 
 responsible. But for the countenance and support which 
 Slavery has received from the people of the Free States, it 
 would long since have been on a rapid decline, if not on 
 the point of extinction. The Rebellion and its awful con 
 sequences would have been avoided ; and we should need 
 no advice from Mr. Buchanan or any other Northern abet 
 tor of treason as to the means of restoring " peace and har 
 mony to a distracted country." Its peace and harmony 
 would never have been disturbed. Could a tithe of all that 
 has been said and done by Northern " doughface " politi 
 cians be at once presented to the minds of candid men, they 
 would not wonder that the nation has been brought into 
 its present perilous condition. What, for example, can be 
 imagined to be more likely to produce such a result than 
 the sentiments expressed by Ex- President Fillrnore in his 
 highly applauded speech at Albany, in 185G ? Forgetting- 
 all his anti-slavery acts and speeches, he said : 
 
 " We see a political party presenting candidates for the 
 Presidency and Vice-Presidency, selected for the first time 
 from the Free States alone. . . . Can it be possible 
 that those who are engaged in such a measure can have 
 seriously reflected upon the consequences which must inevitably 
 foltoyi, in case of success ? Can they have the madness or the 
 folly to leliere that our Southern brethren would submit to le 
 governed by such a Chief Magistrate ?" 
 
 If such language is not treasonable, it is very nearly so, 
 Did the speaker mean to intimate that Gen. Fremont, or 
 Mr. Dayton, Mr. Fiilmore s old Whig brother, had they been 
 
214 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 elected, would have violated their official oaths by infring 
 ing the constitutional rights of the South ? The legitimate 
 inference from his language is, that " our Southern bre 
 thren" would have just cause for refusing to submit to the laws 
 cf the Union. No wonder if, after the utterance of such 
 sentiments by a thousand presses and ten thousand tongues 
 in the Free States for more than twenty years, the slave 
 holders had, in the supposed contingency, refused, or that, 
 four years later, they did refuse, to " submit to be govern 
 ed by such a Chief Magistrate ?" Who believes that " our 
 Southern brethren," if they had been plainly told from the 
 beginning, that all demands for anything more than to be 
 " let alone" within their States would be denied, would ever 
 have rebelled against their Government ? But they were 
 spoiled by the " sugar plum" policy. What they could not 
 readily obtain by teazing, they extorted by threats of run 
 ning away. And the time having come when no further 
 concessions were expected, they turned, and kicked the 
 hand by which they had been fed to surfeiting. And now, 
 both the North arid the South, the latter as principal, the 
 former as accessory, are, fur the giant sin of oppression, 
 writhing under the inflictions of a righteous Providence, 
 who has declared concerning the wicked, " Though hand 
 join in hand, he shall not go unpunished." 
 
 South Carolina seceded the latter part of December, and 
 immediately took measures to obtain possession of the na 
 tional forts within the State. Major Anderson, commander 
 of the forts in the Charleston harbor, aware that Fort Moul- 
 trie, in which tho garrison then was, was unable to resist 
 the land forces, quietly withdrew on the night of the 28th 
 of December, and took possession of Fort Sumter. Other 
 States followed the example of South Carolina, not only in 
 the act of secession, but in robbing the Government, taking 
 possession of United States forts, arsenals, and other pro 
 perty within their borders. Louisiana seized the United 
 States Mint and the Sub-Treasury at New Orleans with 
 half a million of dollars. The traitor Secretaries, Cobb, of 
 the Treasury ; Floyd, of War, and Thompson, of the In 
 terior, resigned their offices ; and Senators and Represen 
 tatives gradually withdrew from Congress ; though some 
 of them remained for a time after the purpose of their States 
 
215 
 
 was known, in order, probably, to influence the public mind 
 in their favor, or to alarm the Government into submis 
 sion. 
 
 The President appointed John A. Dix, of New York, Sec 
 retary of the Treasury, and Joseph Holt, of Kentucky, Sec 
 retary of War. These proved to be faithful and efficient 
 officers, who checked, in some measure, the downward 
 course of the Government. 
 
 One of the most atrocious acts of treachery was perpe 
 trated by Gen. Twiggs, commander of the United States 
 forces for the department of Texas, who surrendered tho 
 military posts and other property under his charge to tho 
 State authorities. 
 
 Several propositions were offered in Congress in the hope 
 of pacifying the South, or at least of preventing the seces 
 sion of the border Slave States. The most prominent one 
 was that of Mr. Crittcnden, of Kentucky, a Union man, who 
 had been elected by the American party. He proposed the 
 restoration of the Missouri Compromise, and an amendment 
 of the Constitution, guarantying Slavery South of the es 
 tablished line, not only in the territory now belonging to 
 the Union, but in all that might hereafter be acquired. This 
 proposition was introduced before many States had seceded, 
 and while the Southern representation was nearly full. 
 Before the purpose of secession had been fully formed, so 
 liberal a concession would, it is presumed, have been 
 promptly accepted by the South. But it was highly objec 
 tionable to the North. The requests of the slaveholders 
 had from an early period been granted by the generous 
 North. Having by indulgence grown exacting, and de 
 manding what once they would hardly have presumed to 
 ask as a favor, these demands also, sometimes enforced by 
 threats of disunion, were conceded by the pliant North. 
 The South having at length broken her faith by the repeal 
 of the Missouri Compromise, and destroyed the confidence 
 of the North in her pledges, any further concession, espe 
 cially one of such magnitude as that now asked, and that, 
 too, under threats of breaking up the Union, would have 
 been dishonorable and humiliating in the extreme. It 
 would also tend to encourage the resistance, in future, oi 
 factious minorities to the will of majorities, however fairly 
 and clearly that will may have been expressed. 
 
216 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 The concession asked was moreover unreasonable. 
 Slavery was aggressive, and never satisfied. Its life de 
 pends upon extension. In time, its allotted territory would 
 be too small ; and some pretext would again be conceived 
 for another invasion of Mexico, or of some other neighbor 
 ing 1 State, with a view to further acquisitions of territory 
 for the extension of the Slave Dominion. And what ren 
 dered the proposition peculiarly objectionable was, that the 
 contemplated concession being secured by a constitutional 
 provision, however ir.juriously it might affect the North, re 
 lief would be impossible. Slavery is inexorable ; and the 
 redress of any grievance dependent upon a constitutional 
 amendment requiring the ratification of three-fourths of the 
 States, would be hopeless. These reasons, (more might be 
 given,) arc sufficient to justify the North in rejecting the 
 proposition of Mr. Critteuden. It would have been an 
 entire surrender to Slave Power for all lime, with no probable 
 benefit to the Union. 
 
 Fixed in the purpose of a separation from the North, 
 State after State seceded ; and before the inauguration of 
 Mr. Lincoln, a Southern Confcderacj was formed, and a 
 provisional Government established at Montgomery, Ala 
 bama. 
 
 One important fact connected with this rebellion and 
 one which inspires the hope of a more ready return of the 
 seceded States to the Union than many are looking for is, 
 that Secession has never been sanctioned by the people of 
 those States. The question has never been fairly submitted 
 to them. It is believed that, if a deliberate and unbiased 
 expression of the will of the people had be^n given, large 
 majorities in all but two or three of the seceding States 
 would have voted against Secession. And hence there is 
 good reason to believe, that, when the authority of the 
 General Government shall have been so far established in 
 any of those States as to insure protection to its inhabi 
 tants, the majority of them will cheerfully return to their 
 allegiance. 
 
 Great anxiety was felt in regard to the probable course 
 of the border Slave States, especially Virginia, as her ac 
 tion would be likely to influence that of other States. In 
 the latter po,rt of January, the Legislature of this State 
 
BUCHANAN S ADMINISTRATION. 217 
 
 adopted resolutions proposing a meeting" of Commissioners 
 from all such States as were willing 1 to unite with Virginia 
 in an effort to adjust the existing controversy, so as to 
 afford to the people of the slavcholding States adequate 
 security to their rights. These resolutions were sent by 
 Ex-President Tyler to the President, by whom they were 
 communicated to Congress. 
 
 In pursuance of this invitation, a " Peace Convention" 
 met at Washington on the 4th of February, 18C1, and ad 
 journed on the 27th. Twenty-one States were represented : 
 Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, lihode 
 Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 
 Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, 
 Tenncss-ee, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, and Kan 
 sas. The Convention adopted a series of propositions to 
 constitute Article 13 of Amendments to the Constitution, 
 with seven sections. (1.) Slavery was prohibited North of 
 the parallel of 3(5 deg. 30 min., and secured South of that 
 line. (2.) No future acquisitions of territory, except by dis 
 covery and for national uses, without the concurrence of a 
 majority of all the Senators from the slavcholdirig States, 
 and a majority of all the Senators of the non-slaveholding 
 States, and in case of acquisition by treaty, two-thirds of 
 each class of States must concur. (3.) Congress was to 
 have no power to contiol Slavery in any State or Territory, 
 nor to interfere with or abolish it in the District of Colum 
 bia, without the consent of Maryland and the owners of 
 slaves, nor without compensation to their owners. Sundry 
 other pi\vi cg;?s were guarantied to slave owners in this 
 Section. (4.) Stales were to have the right to pass laws 
 for enforcing the delivery of fugitive slaves to legal claim 
 ants. (5.) The foreign slave trade was prohibited. ((>.) 
 The provisions in the Constitution relating to Slavery, and 
 the fir^t, third, fiiih, and sixth sections of these Amendments, 
 were not to be altered or abolished without the consent of 
 all the States. (7.) Congress was required to provide by 
 law that the United States should pay the owner of a fugi 
 tive slave the full value of the slave, if rescued by violence 
 or intimidation from mobs, &c. ; arid Congress was requir 
 ed to pass a law for securing to the citizens of each State 
 the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several 
 States. 
 
218 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 The result of the deliberations of the Convention was 
 communicated to Congress on the 27th of February ; but 
 Congress failing to submit the proposed amendment to the 
 States for ratification, the Convention, as was expected, 
 proved a failure. This, however, was little to be regretted. 
 Virginia had, through her leading- citizens, declared her de 
 termination, if force were employed against the rebel States, 
 to join the Confederacy ; and as these were determined on a 
 separation at oil events ; and as coercive measures could 
 not have been deferred until the States could have acted 
 upon the proposed amendments, neither Virginia nor any 
 other of the subsequently seceding States would have been 
 retained. Nor was it at all probable that the propositions 
 of the Convention would have been ratified by three-fourths 
 of the adhering States. 
 
 A few days after the adjournment of the " Peace Conven 
 tion," Mr. Buchanan s administration expired. President 
 Buchanan came into office at a time and under circumstances 
 which enabled him, with ordinary prudence and honesty of 
 purpose, to make his administration a popular one. But it 
 gained notoriety by its imbecility and corruption, and the 
 incalculable amount of mischief which it wrought. A more 
 faithful servant the Slave Power never had in that office. 
 One good, however, has been ascribed to him, for which 
 he is especially entitled to the gratitude of his immediate 
 predecessor : lie made the unpopular administration of 
 Franklin Pierce appear respectable ! Probably no man 
 ever carried from the Presidential chair into retirement so 
 little public respect and such a weight of popular odium, 
 as James Buchanan. Well had it been for his own honor 
 as well as for the honor and good of his country, if he had 
 retired to private life before his election to the Presidency. 
 
LINCOLN S ADMINISTRATION. 219 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 Administration of Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN entered upon the duties of his office as 
 President of the United States, on the 4th of March, 1861. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln s Inaugural Address gave great satisfaction. 
 He assured the people of the Southern States that <; their 
 property, their peace and personal security would not be 
 endangered ;" that he had " no purpose to interfere with the 
 institution of Slavery in the States where it exists f and 
 declared that he had no right nor inclination to do so. He 
 acknowledged the binding force of the constitutional pro 
 vision for reclaiming fugitive slaves. A law designed to 
 carry this provision into effect, ought to guard effectually 
 against the surrender of free men as slaves ; and he sug 
 gested that it would, at the same time, be well to provide 
 by law to enforce that clause of the Constitution which 
 guaranties, that " the citizens of each State shall be en 
 titled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the 
 several States." 
 
 The Constitution, he said, "contemplates the Union to 
 be perpetual ;" " no State, upon its own mere motion, can 
 lawfully get out of the Union ;" and " acts of violence with 
 in any State against the authority of the United States are 
 insurrectionary or revolutionary." He considered that, 
 " in view of the Constitution and the laws, the Union was 
 unbroken, and to the extent of his ability, he should take 
 care that the laws of the Union were faithfully executed in 
 all the States." The mails, unless repelled, would continue 
 to be furnished in all parts of the Union. 
 
 In respect to " the position assumed by some, that consti 
 tutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court," 
 he said he did " not deny that such decision must be bind- 
 
220 . DEMOCRATIC 1IIRROR. 
 
 ing in any case upon the parties to a suit, as to the object 
 of that suit, while it is also entitled to very high respect 
 and consideration in all parallel cases by all other depart 
 ments of the Government." 
 
 Mr. Lincoln appointed, as members of his Cabinet, Wil 
 liam II. Seward, of New York, Secretary of State ; Salmon 
 P. Chase, of Ohio, Secretary of the Treasury ; Simon Came 
 ron, of Pennsylvania, Secretary of War ; Gideon Welles, of 
 Connecticut, Secretary of the Navy ; Caleb B. Smith, of In 
 diana, Secretary of the Interior ; Edward Bates, of Missouri, 
 Attorney-General ; and- Montgomery Blair, of Maryland, 
 Postmaster-General. 
 
 Although the President had declared his intention to see 
 the laws faithfully executed, he deferred the employment of 
 force until an overt act of war had been committed by the 
 State of South Carolina. On the 12th of April, the assault 
 upon Fort Sumter was made. Long before this, however, 
 an act of war had been committed, by firing into the Star 
 of the West, which had been sent to reinforce Fort Sumter, 
 but was compelled to return without accomplishing the 
 purpose for which she had been sent. On the 15th of April, 
 President Lincoln issued his Proclamation, declaring that 
 the laws were opposed and their execution obstructed, in 
 the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, 
 Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, and calling for 75,000 
 troops " to cause the laws to be duly executed," and " to 
 repossess the forts, places, and property which had been 
 seized from the Union." And before midsummer, the na 
 tion was in the midst of one of the most sanguinary and 
 desolating civil wars recorded in history. The Proclama 
 tion also summoned Congress to meet on the 4th of July. 
 
 The call for troops was promptly responded to in all the 
 Northern States ; and money was liberally pledged for the 
 volunteers and their families. Legislatures also made ap 
 propriations in aid of the General Government, The call 
 on the Slave States still in the Union met with a very dif 
 ferent response The Governors of all these States, except 
 Delaware and Maryland, positively refused to obey the re 
 quisition. Some were unwilling to aid the Government in 
 subduing their sister States ; others doubted the constitu- 
 
LINCOLN S ADMINISTRATION. 221 
 
 tionality of the call. Gov. Hick?, of Maryland, would raiso 
 troops only for the defense of Washington. Delaware 
 promptly took her stand with the loyal States. 
 
 The Proclamation of President Lincoln was soon followed 
 by a similar one on the part of President Davis, calling on 
 the Southern States for volunteers. The latter also offered 
 liberal inducements for persons to take out letters of marque 
 and reprisal as privateers. 
 
 Virginia had long been in a state, of indecision. Intima 
 tion had been given that, if the Government should employ 
 force against the rebel States, she would join the Confeder 
 acy. Immediately after the issuing of the Proclamation, 
 her Convention declared the State out of the Union. As 
 the election at which the delegates to the Convention had 
 been chosen indicated a majority against Secession, the act 
 is presumed to have been effected by menace or fraud. The 
 States of Tennessee, North Carolina, and Arkansas, also 
 soon after joined the Confederacy, which was then com 
 posed of eleven States. Four Slave States only remained 
 in the Union ; and three of these contained a strong seces 
 sion element, which rendered their adherence to the Union 
 for a time doubtful. 
 
 Early in May, the President issued a proclamation call 
 ing for 42,000 additional volunteers, and directed an in 
 crease of the regular army and of the navy. In and about 
 Washington were many secret traitors and spies, who did 
 great mischief. Not a few of thorn were men employed in 
 the public offices. Numerous arrests were made , and 
 some of the persons seized got released by means of toe 
 writ of habeas corpits ; which induced the President, as a 
 measure of safety, to suspend the privilege of this writ. 
 The calling out of the troops, and the summary arrest and 
 imprisonment of persons on suspicion of their being trait 
 ors, and the suspension of this writ, have caused much dis 
 cussion. It is held by some that the powers exercised by 
 the Executive in these acts belong to. or can be authorized, 
 only by Congress. Others maintain that the powers exer 
 cised by the Executive are, by a just and liberal construc 
 tion of the Constitution, implied in the powers conferred 
 upon the Executive ; and that, according tD any other in- 
 
222 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 terprctation, ihc Government might, in certain emergen 
 cies, be overthrown. It is also held, that, in a case of im 
 minent peril to the life of the nation, for which no adequate 
 provision has been made, an Executive would be justified 
 in acting without the authority of a positive law. Upon 
 what ground the President justified his acts, will soon ap 
 pear from some extracts from his Message to Congress at 
 the extra session in July. 
 
 Congress met in specjal session on the 4th of July, 1861. 
 
 The Message of President Lincoln was calm in tone and 
 temper, and firm in purpose to preserve the Union. In 
 speaking of the state of the nation as it was at the time of 
 his Inauguration, he said, among other things : 
 
 " A disproportionate share of the Federal muskets and 
 rifles had somehow found their way into these (Southern) 
 States, and had been seized to be used against the Gov 
 ernment. Accumulations of the public, revenue, lying with 
 in them, had been seized for the same object. The navy 
 was scattered in distant seas, leaving but a very small 
 part of it within the immediate reach of the Government. 
 Officers of the Federal army and navy had resigned in 
 great numbers, and of those resigning a large proportion 
 had taken up arms against the Government. Simultan 
 eously and in connection with all this, the purpose to sever 
 the Federal Union was openly avowed ; . . and the 
 Confederate States were already invoking recognition, aid, 
 and intervention from foreign Powers. 
 
 " Finding this condition of things, and believing it to be 
 an imperative duty upon the incoming- Executive, to pre 
 vent, if possible, the consummation of such attempt to des 
 troy the Federal Union, a choice of means to that end be 
 came indispensable. This choice was made, and was de 
 clared in the Inaugural Address. The policy chosen look 
 ed to the exhaustion of all peaceful measures before a re 
 sort to any stronger ones. It sought only to hold all the 
 public places and property not already wrested from the 
 Government, and to collect the revenue, relying for the 
 rest on time, discussion, and the ballot-box. It promised a 
 continuance of the mails, at Government expense, to the 
 very people who were resisting the Government ; and. it 
 
LINCOLN S ADMINISTRATION. 223 
 
 gave repeated pledges against any disturbances to any of 
 the people or any of their rights " 
 
 The President recommended provisions for raising 400,- 
 000 men and $400,000,000. 
 
 In relation to the exercise of the disputed powers just 
 alluded to, after mentioning the call for 75,000 men/and 
 the proclamation ordering the closing of the Southern ports 
 by blockade, oil of which was believed to be strictly legal, 
 he proceeds to say : 
 
 " At this point the insurrectionists announced their pur 
 pose to enter upon the practice of privateering. 
 
 " Other calls were made for volunteers to serve for three 
 years, and also for large additions to the regular army and 
 navy. These measures, whether strictly legal or not, were 
 ventured upon under what appeared to be a popular demand 
 and a public necessity, trusting then, as now, that Congress 
 would readily ratify them. 
 
 " It is believed that nothing has been done beyond the 
 constitutional competency of Congress. Soon after the first 
 call for militia, it was considered a duty to authorize the 
 Commanding-General, in proper cases, according to his 
 discretion, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas 
 corpus, or in other words, to arrest and detain, without re 
 sort to the ordinary processes and forms of law, such indi 
 viduals as he might deem dangerous to the public safety. 
 This authority has purposely been exercised but very spar 
 ingly. Nevertheless, the legality and propriety of what 
 has been done under it are questioned ; and the attention 
 of the country has been called to the proposition, that one 
 who has sworn to take care that the laws be faithfully exe 
 cuted should not himself violate them. Of course, some 
 consideration was given to the questions of power and pro 
 priety before this matter was acted upon. The whole of 
 the laws which were required to be faithfully executed, 
 were being resisted and failing of execution in nearly one- 
 third of the States. Must they be allowed to fail of execu 
 tion, even had it been perfectly clear that, by the use of 
 the means necessary to their execution, some single law 
 made in such extreme tenderness to the citizen s liberty, 
 that, practically, it relieves more of the guilty than the in 
 nocent, should to a very limited extent, be violated ? To 
 
224 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 state the question more directly, arc all the laws but one- tc 
 go unexecuted, and the Government itself go to pieces, lest 
 that one bo violated ? 
 
 " Even in such case, would not the official oath be broken, 
 if the Government should be overthrown, when it was be 
 lieved that disregarding the single law would tend to pre 
 serve it ? But it was not believed that this question was 
 presented. It was not believed that any law was violated. 
 The provision of the Constitution that the privilege of the 
 writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, in 
 cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require 
 it, is equivalent to a provision 13 a provision that such 
 privilege may le suspended, when, in cases of rebellion or 
 invasion, the public safety does require it. 
 
 "It is insisted that Congress, and not the Executive, is 
 vested with this power. But the Constitution itself is 
 silent as to which or who shall exercise the power ; and as 
 the provision was plainly made for a dangerous emergency, 
 it can not be that the framers of tne instrument intended 
 that in every case the danger should run its course until 
 Congress could be called together, the very assembling of 
 which might be prevented, as was intended in this case by 
 the rebellion." 
 
 Quotations of such length from the Message have been 
 given, that the reader may fully understand the reasons of 
 the President for the exercise of powers which hi.s political 
 opponents allege to have been unauthorized. 
 
 Congress adjourned on the 6th of August. The session 
 was remarkable for the unanimity of its proceedings. 
 Party distinctions were scarcely visible. All parties seem 
 ed united in a hearty effort to rescue the Republic from the 
 conspiracy which was striking at its existence. Grants of 
 men and means were voted ; and authority to meet the 
 emergency was conferred upon the Executive. 
 
 To increase the revenue, a Tariff and Direct Tax bill was 
 passed, by which the Tariff of Mar -h was modified ; and a 
 direct tax of $20,000,000 annually was authorized to be 
 levied upon the property and income of the people of the 
 States and Territories, including tlie seceded States. 
 
 As the powers exercised by President Lincoln in his early 
 neasures for the suppression of the Rebellion had been 
 
LINCOLN S ADMINISTRATION. 225 
 
 questioned, Congress passed " An Act further to provide 
 for the Collection of Duties on Import* and for other pur 
 poses," which enables the President, in similar cases, to 
 take the necessary mes.sures to execute the revenue -laws. 
 It provides that, if the duties can not be collected in the 
 ordinary way, and in the obstructed* ports, they may be 
 collected at other ports in the collection district, or on 
 board of vessels ; and such force as shall be deemed neces 
 sary may be employed to carry the law into effect. The 
 act also authorizes the prohibition of all commercial inter 
 course between a rebelling- State and other States. 
 
 A confiscation act was also passed, by which all property 
 employed or used in aiding an insurrection is to be confis 
 cated. And all slaves required or permitted by their mas 
 ters to take up arms against the United States, or to work 
 in or upon forts, intrenchments, navy-yards, ships, &c., 
 against the Government, are to be free. 
 
 It was doubtless, from the beginning, the hope of the 
 rebel leaders to obtain an early recognition of th#ir Con 
 federacy by Foreign Powers ; and especially did they cle- 
 sire such acknowledgment by France and England. In 
 November Mason and Slidell were sent to represent the 
 Confederacy at the Governments of these two countries. 
 Our Government having been informed of their escape from 
 Charleston, dispatched a steamer in pursuit of them. They 
 proceeded, however, to Havana, where they took passage 
 in the English mail packet Trent for England.. Captain 
 Wilkes, on his return from the African coast, having heard 
 of it, waylaid the Trent, brought her to, seized these gen 
 tlemen with their Secretary, Eustace, and brought them in 
 his own ship to the United States. The announcement of 
 their capture caused great rejoicing, until it became 
 known that England considered the seizure of these 
 men an insult to her flag. Mason and Slidell were confined 
 in Fort Warren, near Boston, awaiting the action of the 
 two Governments. A demand was at length made by 
 England for their release, which was granted by our Gov 
 ernment. Secretary Seward, in reply to this demand, as 
 signs as a reason for the surrender of the prisoners, that 
 Captain Wilkes had not, as required by the law of nations, 
 in arresting a vessel of a neutral nation suspected of car 
 
226 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 rj ing contraband articles, brought her into a neutral port 
 for trial. 
 
 Congress met on the 2d of December, 1861. President 
 Lincoln the next day transmitted to both Houses his first 
 Annual Message, this being the first regular session of the 
 37th Congress. In reference to the attitude which the na 
 tion should maintain with regard to slaves and Slavery, he 
 said : 
 
 " In considering" the policy to be adopted for suppressing 
 the insurrection, I have been anxious and careful that the 
 inevitable conflict for this purpose shall not degenerate into 
 a violent and remorseless revolutionary struggle. I have,, 
 therefore, in every case, thought it proper to keep the in 
 tegrity of the Union prominent as the primary object of the 
 contest on our part, leaving all questions which are not of 
 vital military importance to the more deliberate action of 
 the Legiylatjire. In the exercise of my best discretion, I 
 have adhered to the blockade of the ports held by the in 
 surgents, insteafc of putting in force by proclamation the 
 law of Congress enacted at the late session for closing those 
 ports. So also, obeying the dictates of prudence as well rs 
 the obligations of law, instead of transcending, I have ad 
 hered to the act of Congress to confiscate property used for 
 insurrectionary purposes. If a new law upon the same 
 subject shall be proposed, its propriety will be duly con 
 sidered. The Union must be preserved ; and hence all in 
 dispensable means must be employed. We should not be 
 in haste to determine that radical and extreme measures, 
 which may reach the loyal as well o.s the disloyal, are in 
 dispensable." 
 
 Me here alludes to the Confiscation Act passed at the 
 extra session in July. He signed that act with great re 
 luctance ; but his doubts of its policy and justice seem to 
 have been removed. He had become convinced and the 
 public mind was rapidly coming to the conclusion that, 
 as the Rebellion in a great measure derived its support 
 from Slavery, and that, as the labor oTthe slaves was scarce- 
 \y less serviceable than the same number of soldiers, the 
 latter subsisting on. the products of that labor ; it was just 
 and proper that, instead of remanding to their owners 
 slaves that came to our side of the lines, they should be 
 retained, and employed on our works of defense. 
 
227 
 
 An act was passed at tin s session prohibiting Slavery in 
 all present and future Territories of the United States. 
 
 Another act was passed, petitions for which had so long* 
 agitated Congress and the country, but which had many 
 years ago ceased to be prayed for the abolition of Slavery 
 in the District of Columbia. This act contains a provision 
 which requires compensation to be made by the Govern 
 ment to the owners of the slaves. 
 
 In July, 1862, the President issued a Proclamation by 
 which he confiscated the property of all persons who, at 
 the end of sixty days, should still continue in rebellion 
 against the Government. And on the 22d of September he 
 issued the Proclamation of Emancipation, declaring that, 
 on the 1st day of January, all slaves in any rebel State 
 should thereafter be FOREVER FREE ; the States then in re 
 bellion to be designated by proclamation of the President. 
 And he calls attention to the Confiscation Act, and the act 
 of March, 1862, which makes an additional article of war, 
 forbidding the forcible returning of fugitives to their mas 
 ters, and enjoins obedience to the requirements of these 
 acts. 
 
 The policy of proclaiming freedom to the slaves in the 
 rebellious States, had for some time been suggested as a 
 measure of safety to the nation. It was, however, deemed 
 by many as of doubtful expediency as well as constitution 
 ality, Mr. Lincoln, whatever may have been his opinion, 
 prudently deferred action until public sentiment seemed to 
 call for the measure. It was condemned, however, by the 
 mass of the Democratic party ; and not a few of Mr. 
 Lincoln s political friends deemed it impolitic, as it would 
 tend to alienate many Union men in the Southern States, 
 and essentially weaken the Union cause without effecting 
 its intended object. It is believed that comparatively few 
 of the friends of the administration, or of others who do 
 not sympathize with the slaveholders, now regret the 
 measure. 
 
 The idea of this mode of emancipation was n&t conceived 
 since the commencement of the Rebellion. Many years 
 ago, in a debate on a resolution affirming the exclusive 
 right of the Slave States to abolish Slavery, John Quincy 
 Adams said : 
 
228 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 " V> hen your county is actually in war, whether it be 
 a war ot invasion or a war of insurrection, Congress has 
 power to carry on the war, and must carry it on according 
 to the laws of war ; and by the laws of war an invaded 
 country has all its laws and municipal institutions swept by 
 the board, and martial law takes the place of them. This 
 power in Congress has perhaps never been called into ex 
 ercise under the present Constitution of the United States. 
 But when the laws of war are in force, what, I ask, is one 
 of those laws ? It is this : that when a country is invad 
 ed, and two hostile armies are set in martial array, the 
 commanders of both armies have power to emancipate all 
 the slaves in the invaded territory. Nor is this a mere 
 theoretic statement. The history of South America shows 
 that the doctrine has been carried into practical execution 
 within the last thirty years. Slavery was abolished in 
 Colombia, first by the Spanish General Morillo, and second 
 ly by the American General Bolivar. It was abolished by 
 virtue of a military command given at the head of the 
 army, and its abolition continues to be law to this day. 
 It was abolished by the laws of war, and not by municipal 
 enactments. * * * 
 
 " I might furnish a thousand proofs to show that the pre 
 tensions of gentlemen to the sanctity of their municipal in 
 stitutions, under a state of actual invasion and of actual 
 war, whether servile, civil, or foreign, are wholly unfound 
 ed, and that the laws of war do, in all such cases, take the 
 precedence. I lay this down as the law of nations. I say 
 that the military authority takes, for the time, the place of 
 all municipal institutions, Slavery among the rest. Under 
 that state of things, so far from its being true that the 
 States where Slavery exists have the exclusive management 
 of the subject, not only the President of the United States, 
 but the Comnmnder of the Army, has power to order the uni 
 versal emancij)ation of the slaves." 
 
 Nor did this doctrine originate with Mr. Adams. In the 
 Virginia Convention which ratified the Constitution, Patrick 
 Henry opposed the ratification on the ground that it gave 
 to Congress the power, under certain circumstances, to 
 abolish Slavey. He said : 
 
 " One of the great objects of Government is the national 
 
229 
 
 defense. The Constitution gives power to the General 
 Government to provide for the general defense, and the 
 means must be commensurate to the end. All the means 
 in the possession of the people must be given to the Gov 
 ernment which is intrusted with the public defense. May 
 Congress net Gay every black man must fight ? In the war 
 of the Revolution, Virginia passed an act of Assembly, that 
 every slave who would join the army should be free. At 
 some future time, Congress will search the Constitution to 
 see if they have not the power of manumission. And have 
 they not, sir ? Have they not the power to provide for the 
 general defense and welfare ? May they not think that 
 these call for the abolition of slavery ? May they not pro 
 nounce all slaves free ? and will they not be warranted by 
 that power ? The paper speaks to the point ; they have 
 the power in clear, unequivocal terms, and will clearly and 
 certainly exercise it." 
 
 In the latter part of September, a meeting of the Gover 
 nors of the loyal States was held at Altoona, Pa., to con 
 sult on the interests of the nation. About one half of them 
 were present, and some of those absent were represented 
 by men of their choice. They united in a memorial approv 
 ing the President s Emancipation Proclamation, and re 
 solved, by every proper and lawful means, to strengthen 
 the hands of the Government in the struggle against the 
 Rebellion. 
 
 Congress assemble^ on the 1st of December, 1862. The 
 President, in his Message, recommended to Congress a 
 plan of Emancipation, to be embodied in articles, and pro 
 posed to the State Legislatures or to State Conventions 
 for ratification. The propositions were substantially as 
 follows : 
 
 1. Any State abolishing Slavery prior to the 1st of 
 January, 1900, should, receive for each slave emancipated a 
 certain compensation. 
 
 2. Slaves having " enjoyed freedom by the chances of 
 the war," to be forever free ; loyal owners to be compen 
 sated. 
 
 3. Congress might provide for colonizing free colored 
 persons, with their own consent, beyond the limits of the 
 United States. 
 
230 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 These propositions of the President were by some erron 
 eously considered as inconsistent with, or an abandonment 
 of, his Emancipation policy. The project embodied in tha 
 Message, however, had respect to loyal States and those 
 which should become such, and was designed as a measure 
 of conciliation and peace. The Proclamation was a war 
 measure, and intended to operate only on Rebels, to weaken 
 their power. 
 
 The first of January, 18fi3, was approaching, and a deep 
 interest was felt in regard to the promised Proclamation of 
 the President. The opinion had been expressed that ho 
 would recede from the position he had taken in the Pro 
 clamation of September, which declared that " all persons 
 held as slaves within any State or designated part of a 
 State, the people ivhercof shall then be in rebellion against 
 the United States, shall be then, henceforth, and FOREVER 
 
 FREE." 
 
 In the last Proclamation, he designates, as being in re 
 bellion, all the seceded States, except Tennessee, (which 
 is not named,) the forty-eight counties designated as West 
 Virginia, and seven counties, including the Cities of Nor 
 folk and Portsmouth, in the Eastern part of Virginia ; and 
 thirteen parishes, (counties,) including the City of Xew 
 Orleans, in Louisiana. The State and the parts of States ex 
 empted from the effect of the Proclamation, were consider 
 ed as having been recovered to the Union. The people 
 declared free are enjoined to abstain from all violence ; 
 and advised to labor faithfully for reasonable wages ; and 
 they are informed that they will be received into the armed 
 service of the United States. The repugnance to the em 
 ployment of colored men in the army, which long prevail 
 ed, has been nearly overcome ; and about 25,000 of these 
 former aiders of the Rebellion have already been added to 
 the force of the Union. , 
 
 About the time of the issuing of this last Proclamation, 
 West Virginia was, by an act of Congress, admitted into 
 the Union. The measure had met with much opposition 
 both in and out of Congress, but was carried by heavy 
 votes. The President was said to have taken the written 
 opinions of all the members of his Cabinet before he gave 
 the bill his signature. 
 
ANTI-DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 231 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 Present Parties contrasted. The Democratic Party the Party of the 
 Rebellion. 
 
 ALTHOUGH there are in the Free States few who in ex 
 press terms justify the Rebellion, no fact is more clear than 
 that a majority of those who now compose the Democratic 
 party, either sympathize with those who are in arms against 
 the Government, or palliate the treason. In almost every 
 official document relating to the subject, in the proceedings 
 of party Conventions, in speeches, and in private conversa 
 tion, Democrats have charged those who have opposed the 
 extension of Slavery, with being the criminal authors of 
 our present national troubles. On the other hand, scarcely 
 a sentiment uttered, or an act performed, or a public mea 
 sure demanded, by* the slaveholders, in favor of Slavery, 
 has been condemned or opposed by the mass of that party. 
 Certain it is, that many of the most flagitious outrages upon 
 individual rights, murder not excepted, have been palliated 
 or tacitly approved, and not one has been generally and heartily 
 condemned: Some facts sustaining these assertions have 
 been given in preceding Chapters ; to these others will be 
 added. It is designed also to defend the opponents .of the 
 Pro-Slavery Democracy against the slanders and censures 
 of their adversaries, and vindicate their principles and their 
 policy. They entertain or propagate no new sentiments 
 on the subject of Slavery none that were not avowed and 
 inculcated by the Fathers long before and long after <.tho 
 organization of the Government. Their first and leading 
 principle is that self-evident truth asserted in the Declara 
 tion of Independence the political equality of mankind. Mod 
 ern Democrats, North as well as South, deny that Jefferson 
 and his compatriots meant to include in the words, " all 
 men," the African race. This is a wanton siander upon 
 their reputation a modern irjvention. To prove it such, 
 
232 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 we have only to show that they condemned Slavery. The 
 enslavement of the African race is sought to be justified on 
 the ground that they are naturally incapable of taking care 
 of or governing themselves, and consequently were de 
 signed by the Creator to be the chattels of the more highly 
 endowed races. Our Fathers condemned Slavery, and 
 advocated the manumission of the slaves. This they could 
 not consistently do if they had not believed them entitled 
 to the " inalienable rights" which they claimed for themselves. 
 Hear what they said oh this subject : 
 
 " It is checking to human nature that any race, of mankind and 
 their posterity should be sentenced to perpetital Slavery ; nor in 
 justice can we think otherwise of it, than that they are thrown 
 amongst us to le our scourge one day or other for our sins ; and 
 as freedom must be as dear to them as to us, what a scene 
 of horror must it bring about ! And the longer it is unex 
 ecuted, the bloody scene must be the greater." Memorial oj 
 Citizens of New Inverness, Georgia, to Gen. Oglelhorpe, 1739. 
 
 " There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely 
 than I do to see a plan adopted far the abolition of it, (Slavery ;) 
 but there is only one proper and effectual m.ode in which it 
 can be accomplished, and that is by legislative authority ; 
 and this so far as my suffrage will go, shall never be want 
 ing." Washington to Robert Morris* 
 
 " I never mean, unless some particular circumstance 
 should compel me to it, to possess another slave by pur 
 chase, it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted 
 by which Slavery in this country may be abolished by 
 } aw t ,_ Same to John F. Mercer. 
 
 Jefferson, supposing the case of the slaves rising some 
 day for freedom, said : " The Almighty has no attribute 
 which can take sides with us in such a contest." Notes on 
 Virginia. 
 
 " The whole commerce between master and slave is a 
 continual exercise of the most unremitting despotism on the, one 
 part, and degrading submission on the other. ; * * * 
 " With what execration should the statesman be loaded who, 
 permitting one half of the citizens thus to trample on the 
 rights of the other, transforms those into depots, and these 
 into enemies, destroys the morals of the one part, arid the amor 
 patria of the other ! Can the liberties of the nation be 
 
ANTI-DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 233 
 
 thought secure when we have removed their only firm 
 basis a conviction in the minds of the people that these 
 liberties arc the gift of God ? That they are not violated 
 but by his wrath ? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I 
 reflect that God is just, and his justice can not sleep forever." 
 Notes on Virginia. 
 
 " My sentiments [in favor of the abolition of Slavery] 
 have been forty years before the public. Had I repeated 
 them forty times, they would only become more stale and 
 threadbare. Although I shall not live to see them consum 
 mated, they will not die with me; but living or dying, they 
 will ever be in my most fervent prayers." Letter to James 
 Heaton, 1826. 
 
 For language far more mild than that here employed by 
 Jefferson against Slavery, men have since his day suffered 
 death in this land of liberty ! 
 
 " I think it wrong to admit into the Constitution the idea 
 that a man may have property in man." James Madison in 
 Cons. Conv. 
 
 11 The augmentation of slaves weakens the States ; and 
 such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to man 
 kind. As much as I value a union of these States, I would 
 not admit the Southern States [South Carolina and 
 Georgia] into the Union, unless they agree to a discontin 
 uance of this disgraceful trade." George Mason, of Virginia, 
 in Cons. Conv. 
 
 11 By the eternal principles of justice, no master in the 
 State has a right to hold his slave in bondage for a single 
 hour." * * * "In the name of Heaven, with what face 
 can we call ourselves the friends of equal freedom and the 
 inherent rights of our species, when we pass laws inimical 
 to each ; when we reject every opportunity of destroying, 
 by silent and imperceptible degrees, the horrid fabric of in 
 dividual bondage reared by the mercenary bands of those from 
 whom the sacred flame of Liberty received no devotion" Wm. 
 Pinkney to the Maryland Legislature, June, 1789. 
 
 " Never will your country be productive, never will its 
 agriculture, its commerce, or its manufactures flourish, so 
 long as they depend on reluctant bondmen for their pro 
 gress. Even the- very earth/ says Montesquieu, which 
 beams with profusion under the cultivating hand of the 
 
234 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 free-born laborer, shrinks into barrenness from the contam 
 inating sweat of a slave. 7 This sentiment is not more 
 figuratively beautiful than it is just." Same to same, 
 November, 1789. 
 
 Volumes might be filled with quotations from our old 
 patriots and statesmen, similar to the foregoing. To utter 
 or publish such sentiments within the present revolting 
 States would subject him who uttered them to the halter, 
 without judge or jury, or " the benefit of the clergy." The 
 men: suspicion that men have entertained opinions unfavor 
 able to Slavery, has made them the victims of fiendish mobs, 
 instigated by men in high social position, and in politics 
 allied with Northern Democrats in hunting down, and de 
 nouncing as " aggressors upon Southern rights," all who 
 dare question the morality of " the institution," or its right 
 to unlimited extension. Where is the man, however ortho 
 dox in every other respect, yet manifesting the least dis 
 position to weaken the Slave Power, or in any way to 
 oppose its taking possession of our free territory, who has, 
 for many years past, been knowingly nominated and elected 
 to any important office by the Democratic party, or who 
 has been appointed to sucii ollice by a Democratic Execu 
 tive ? There may have been such instances ; but they are 
 believed to be very rare. Sympathy and cooperation with 
 slaveholders have been, and are stilt made by the party, an 
 indispensable qualification for ojjice. The right ot the Slave 
 Power to appropriate to its use all the territorial posses- 
 sioas of the United States, is the very "corner stone" of the 
 Democratic Platform. 
 
 .Not only do the opponents of the Democratic party agree 
 with the political Fathers in respect to the immorality and in 
 justice of Slavery, but also in the political expediency and con 
 stitutionality of its restriction. By a Georgia Colonial Con 
 gress, in 1775, Slavery was pronounced "dangerous to our 
 liberties as well as lives ; debasing part of our fellow crea 
 tures below men, and corrupting the virtue and morals of 
 the rest ; and which is laying the basis of tfiat liberty ice con 
 tend for, and which we pray the Almighty to continue to 
 tbe latest posterity, upon a very wrong foundation ." JelTer- 
 son said, it " transforms men into despots, and endangers our 
 liberties. 1 " Mason said, it " weakens the Stales." Pinkney 
 
ANTI-DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 235 
 
 said, it was " injurious to agriculture, commerce, and manu 
 factures.^ This is proved by a comparison of the- Slave 
 States with the Free States. The expediency of restricting 
 and abolishing Slavery, was not generally questioned at 
 that time ; nor is it now by the opponents of the Democra 
 tic party. 
 
 So also do they hold to the old established doctrine of 
 the power of Congress over Slavery in the Territories. This- 
 power was exercised by the first Congress under the pre 
 sent Constitution, in an act recognizing and enforcing the 
 Ordinance of 1787, which prohibited Slavery in the Terri 
 tory North- West of the Ohio. In this Congress were six 
 teen of the framers of the Constitution, one of whom 
 reported the bill for this act, which was signed by Wash 
 ington, also one of the framers of the Constitution. No one, 
 so far as the record shows, expressed a doubt of its consti 
 tutionality. Subsequently North Carolina and Georgia 
 ceded to the General Government the territory now consti 
 tuting the States of Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama. 
 In the deeds of cession was a condition that Congress 
 should not prohibit Slavery in the territory ; implying that 
 Congress had the power. But, though Congress did not 
 prohibit Slavery, it did interfere with and contract it to 
 some extent. The act of 1798 organizing the Territory of 
 Mississippi, prohibited, by fine, the bringing of slaves into 
 it from any place without the United States ; and slaves so 
 brought were to be free. In this Congress aiso were.seyeral 
 who had been members ^of the Constitutional Convention. 
 A still more marked restriction of Slavery was incorporated 
 into the act organizing, in 180-1, the Territory of Orleans, 
 now the State of Louisiana. In this Congress were two of 
 those who had framed the Constitution. In passing the 
 Missouri Compromise act, power over Slavery was again 
 exercised by Congress, in prohibiting its extension North 
 of latitude 36 deg. 30 nrin. In numerous other acts has 
 the power been exercised, without objection , on constitu- 
 ti^lfial grounds, even from Southern members. The doctrine 
 in question has been tacitly acknowledged or expressly de 
 clared by leading politicians, statesmen, and jurists, North 
 and South, some of whom are now prominent in the Demo 
 cratic party ; also by Democratic State Legislatures. 
 
236 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 In 1848, the Legislature of Wisconsin, (Democratic,) 
 with only three dissenting 1 votes in the Senate, and five in 
 the House, declared Slavery to be " an evil of the first mag 
 nitude, morally and politically," and instructed the Sena 
 tors and requested the Representatives of that State in 
 Congress, to use their influence in favor of inserting in the 
 act organizing any new Territory, a provision against the 
 introduction of Slavery into it. 
 
 In 1849, a Convention of the Democratic party of Maine, 
 declared Slavery to be " at variance with the theory of our 
 Government, abhorrent to the common sentiments of man 
 kind, and fraught with danger to all who come within the 
 sphere of its influence ; and that the. Federal Government pos 
 sesses adequate power to inhibit its existence in t/ie Territories of 
 this Union;" and they enjoined the Senators and Represen 
 tatives to "employ all their influence to procure the passage 
 of a law forever excluding Slavery from the Territories of 
 California and New-Mexico." 
 
 In 1847, the Legislature of Delaware, while the United 
 States were at war with Mexico, declared the war to have 
 been " occasioned by the annexation of Texas, with a view 
 to the addition of Slave Territory to our country, and the 
 extending of the Slave Power in our Union ;" declared such 
 " acquisitions to be hostile to the spirit of our free institu 
 tions, and contrary to sound morality ;" and instructed 
 their members of Congress " to vote against the annexation 
 of any territory to our Union, which shall not thereafter be 
 forever free from Slavery. 7 
 
 In the Legislature of New York, January, 1847, Samuel 
 Young, a Democratic Senator, introduced a resolution to 
 the effect, that, if any territory should be thereafter ac 
 quired, the act by which it should be acquired or annexed, 
 should contain a provision whereby Slavery should be for 
 ever excluded therefrom. 
 
 Similar resolutions have been several times passed by 
 the Legislature of New York by votes nearly unanimous, 
 Democrats voting with their Whig opponents in the aCfrra- 
 ative. The resolutions of 1849 were presented in the Sen 
 ate of the United States, and supported in an able speech, 
 by lion. John A. Dix, a distinguished Democrat. In his 
 speech he said : 
 
f ANTI-DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 23 1 
 
 "With a single exception, all the non-slaveholding and 
 one of the slaveholding States, have declared themselves 
 opposed to the extension of Slavery into territory now free. 
 Sir, I fully concur in the propriety of this declaration. I 
 believe that Congress has the power to prohibit Slavery in 
 California and New-Mexico ; that it is our duty to exercise 
 the power, and that it should be exercised now." 
 
 At a Democratic meeting in the city of New York, in 
 October, 1848, at which those prominent Democrats, S. J. 
 Tilden, John Van Buren, and John Cochrane made speeches, 
 Mr. Cochrane introduced resolutions strongly denouncing 
 Slavery and its extension to new territory ; and they were 
 adopted. 
 
 1^1848, Greene C. Bronson, Chief Justice of the State of 
 New York, then and now a Democrat, in a letter declining 
 an invitation to a political meeting, wrote : 
 
 " Slavery can not exist where there is no positive law to 
 uphold it. It is not necessary that it should be forbidden ; 
 it is enough that it is not specially authorized. If the own 
 er of slaves removes with or sends them into an} r country, 
 State, or Territory, where Slavery does not exist by law, 
 they will from that moment become free men ; and they 
 will have as good a right to command the master, as he 
 will have to command them. Entertaining no doubt upon 
 that question, I can see no occasion for asking Congress to 
 legislate against the extension of Slo,very into free terri 
 tory ; and as a question of policy, I think it had better be 
 let alone." * * * " But if our Southern brethren should 
 make the question, we shall have no choice but to meet it ; 
 and then, whatever consequences may follow, I trust the 
 people of the Free States will give a united voice against 
 allowing Slavery on a single foot of soil where it is not now 
 authorized by law." 
 
 Declarations similar to the foregoing have been made by 
 many other prominent Democratic statesmen ; and resolu 
 tions in favor of prohibiting Slavery in the Territories have 
 been passed by other Democratic Legislatures than those 
 which have been mentioned. 
 
 In view of all this, why has the Republican party been 
 represented as sectional, ultra, radical, and even revolu 
 tionary, when the truth is, it is THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF 
 
233 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. * 
 
 THE uxiox standing upon the Platform b nil I, by tlic founders 
 of ou>- (I oi t tnmcnt, and holding 1 the same doctrines which 
 were until recently avu\ve<l l>y some of the very men who 
 now stigmatize the party as sectional, radical, aggressive, 
 c., &c. Among these men are Gushing and others, of 
 achusetts ; Fillmore, Hunt, Granger, the Brookses, and 
 a large number of others, of New York ; and a greater or 
 less number in other States. 
 
 Passing over the affirmative answers of Mr. Fillmore to 
 the "radical" questions of the Abolitionists in 1838, when 
 he was a candidate for Congress, what sentiments did he 
 utter in his elaborate speech delivered in many places 
 during the Presidential campaign of 1844 ? The principal 
 issues between the Whig and Democratic parties were the 
 Tariff, Oregon, and Texas questions. Having disposed of 
 the others, and come to the last, he remarked, in substance : 
 " Important as are those questions upon which I have 
 spoken, compared with this great question of the extension 
 of Slavery, they dwindle into insignificance / He stated 
 the fact that the South had furnished Presidents for forty- 
 four out of the fifty-six years since the organization of the 
 Government, and was now presenting still another candi 
 date 1 lie told liis hearers also how much more than a due 
 proportion of the time other important offices had been 
 filled by the South. Earnestly did he urge the duty of 
 Congress to prohibit the extension of Slave Territory ; 
 such^prohibition being then, of all others, the object of the 
 Whig party of the North. Of the questions which divided 
 the two great parties in 1844, the two which may be con 
 sidered as not now permanently disposed of or settled, and 
 which arc likely to arise again, are the Tariff and Slavery 
 Restrictions, on both of which the Republican party stands 
 precisely where Mr. Fillmore and his associates stood until 
 1850, when they repudiated this great principle which they 
 had declared more important than all others. Will these 
 old Whig leaders, or any of their bolting friends, mention 
 one important particular in which the Republicans differ in 
 principle from the Northern Whigs of 1844? Or, will 
 they show why the epithets " sectional," " radical," and the 
 like, which they apply so profusely to the opponents of 
 siuve extension, were not equally applicable to themselves ? 
 
DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 239 
 
 Or, will they give the public a reason for deserting 1 those 
 with whom they labored so arduously for the restriction of 
 Slavery, and uniting with their opponents who have ad 
 vanced from their former pro-slavery position to an extreme 
 not then dreamed of, and which is nothing less than the 
 nationalizing of Slavery ? I repeat the declaration, that tho 
 party which proposes to prohibit the extension of Slavery by 
 acts of Congress, is THE TRUE CONSERVATIVE PARTY ; and they 
 who represent this party as having introduced into its 
 creed or platform any anti-slavery principles not in accord 
 ance with those maintained by our most eminent statesmen, 
 from the time of the organization of the Government, down 
 to a comparatively recent period, either know not whereof 
 they affirm, or are guilty of an attempt to deceive. 
 
 Let us now examine the principles and character of the 
 Democratic parry. To bring them more distinctly to -view, 
 I will, after stating a few facts of a general nature, briefly 
 recapitulate some of the more prominent acts of the party 
 which have marked its singular career. Its leading ob 
 ject has been power POLITICAL SUPREMACY. For power, it 
 has not only trampled upon the principles of the political 
 Fathers, but abandoned its own, as occasion required. 
 POWER, not political reform, was the object of its organiza 
 tion. It was founded in corruption. As was stated in the 
 beginning of its history, Mr. Adams administration was to 
 be "put down though pure as the angels," &c. A purer or 
 more enlightened administration there has not been. Yet, 
 by misrepresentation, fraud, and other malign influences, it 
 was " brought down? 7 
 
 Next to its false accusation of Adams and Clay, the first 
 great fraud of this party, and that from which it has de-. 
 xived its greatest and most permanent advantage, is the 
 assumption of its deceptive title, " The Democratic Party." 
 In its name and the popularity of its first chosen leader, its 
 strength mainly consisted. With little experience in civil 
 life, the prestige of the well earned title of " Hero of New 
 Orleans," more than counterbalanced that deficiency. 
 Though he had been extensively denounced as a " Federal 
 ist," and a " Dictator," and utterly " unfit to be the Presi 
 dent of a Republican people," he was adopted by his detrac 
 tors, and christened " Democrat." This covered all his 
 
240 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 past political errors, transformed him into a statesman of 
 fhe highest rank, and drew to his support that large class 
 of electors who are incapable of distinguishing between 
 the name and the principle of Democracy. Such were nine- 
 tentlis of all foreigners. Having from experience learned 
 to hate tyrannical governments, and sought in this country 
 the blessings of free institutions, they were easily inveigled 
 into the Democratic net ; the name being presumed to indi 
 cate the principles of the party, as distinguished from those 
 of their opponents,, which, it was no less natural for these 
 uninformed strangers to presume to be Anti-Republican. 
 The number of foreigners and of the scarcely less ignorant 
 of our native citizens thus deceived, has at all times ex 
 ceeded the Democratic majorities. Add to these the large 
 numbers whom the leaders have always managed to rally 
 from the dram-shops and other haunts of the idle and the 
 vicious, and it is easy to account for the predominance 
 which Sham-Democracy has maintained, with the exception 
 of a few brief intervals, for more than thirty years. 
 
 Look for a moment at the composition of the party. It 
 is readily conceded that a large portion of its members are 
 men of intelligence, high moral worth, and Christian char 
 acter. But it will hardly be denied by persons of ordinary 
 observation, that more than two out of every three of" the 
 more uninformed, the intemperate and vicious portion of 
 most communities belong to that party. Witness, for ex 
 ample, the contrast between the Northern and Southern 
 parts of Illinois. The latter, which from the mental and 
 moral darkness so generally prevalent "there, has acquired 
 the very significant sobriquet of " Egypt," rolls up immense 
 majorities for the Democratic ticket nearly equal, in some 
 townships, to the whole number of votes cast ; while the 
 former, whose population is distinguished for its high civi 
 lization, and its moral and intellectual culture, gives nearly 
 as large majorities against the Democracy. Again, con 
 trast tlie more rural, or more sparsely settled counties, 
 whose electors are composed mainij oi the industrious la 
 boring classes, and where churches and school-houses 
 abound, with the cities, large numbers of whose population 
 grow up in the hot-beds of vice ; and it will generally be 
 found that the Democratic party receives its greatest sup- 
 
PRO-SIJLVERY DEMOCRATIC PAHTY. 241 
 
 port in the latter. The same, or even a greater difference 
 exists between the Sixth Ward of the City of New York, 
 which includes that famed spot called " Five Points," and 
 those wards of the same city, which are peopled by indus 
 trious, thrifty, and intelligent mechanics and other business 
 men. It is in the former, and others most nearly resem 
 bling* it, that the Democratic party usually obtains its 
 majorities of tens of thousands in that city. 
 
 Jt is not contended that correctness of political sentiment 
 in every community is in exact proportion to the measure 
 of its morality and general intelligence. But if, as a gen 
 eral rule, the virtuous and well informed portion of our citi 
 zens are not more likely to form right opinions on matters 
 of public concern, or are not safer depositaries of political 
 power, than the ignorant and vicious, then there is no truth 
 in the old maxim, that "Virtue and intelligence are the 
 only safeguards of liberty ;" and our fathers were fools. 
 
 The expediency of laws for the encouragement and pro 
 tection of home industry against foreign competition, was 
 a favorite doctrine with those who instituted our Govern 
 ment. The want of a power in the General Government 
 to effect this object was the immediate cause of calling the 
 Convention that framed the Constitution, in which this 
 power was inserted. And the first act of a general nature, 
 and the second on record passed under the Constitution, 
 declares, in a preamble, one of its objects to be, " the en 
 couragement and protection of domestic manufactures, by 
 duties on goods, wares and merchandises imported." The 
 policy of protection was generally admitted, and scarcely 
 opposed in Congress, except by representatives of the 
 Northern shipping and importing, and the Southern plant 
 ing interests, until after the organization of the Democratic 
 party and the election of Gen. Jackson. Nor was the 
 power to protect for the, sake of protection to any considerable 
 extent denied : and not until years after the formation of 
 this party was protection made a party question. 
 
 Although laws designed more or less for protection had 
 previously been enacted, protection as a permanent system 
 adapted to a state of peace, was not commenced until 
 1810 ; tho wars of Europe, from the time of the organisa 
 tion of our present Government to the peace of 1815, hav- 
 
242 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 in furnished a market for surplus American bread-stuffs 
 And although the protection afforded to most articles by 
 the first lew nets was inadequate, the policy was continued, 
 and its efficiency from time to time increased, until the 
 reflection of Gen. Jackson. The South having contributed, 
 in the greater proportion, to the strength of the Democratic 
 party, it has dictated and prescribed the policy of the party, 
 which has been the mere instrument or agent of the slave- 
 bold<-rs, through which they have given law to the nation. 
 Democratic protectionists, one after another, abandoned 
 their long cherished principles which they hud learned from 
 Washington and Jefferson and Madison and other states 
 men of their time, and adopted the teachings of Southern 
 free traders arid nullifiers. Even the President, who had 
 carried the protective principle further than many of its 
 advocates, began to descend from the high position he had 
 occupied, and continued his descent, until he well nigh 
 readied the free trade level. From 1833, to the time of the 
 secession, excepting the four years from 1842 to 1846, the 
 industrial interests of the country have been compelled to 
 struggle against the unfriendly legislation dictated by the 
 enemies of protection. Within this period, the country has 
 been several times visited with those commercial revul 
 sions and financial embarrassments, attended with bank 
 suspensions and the general depression of the national in 
 dustry, which the non-protective policy has never failed to 
 produce. 
 
 To serve the slaveholders has been the leading object of 
 the Democratic party. Whatever they have demanded, it 
 has yielded ; and some things have been granted unsoli 
 cited. Hence Democracy has long been the synonym of 
 Slavery. ; and the Democratic party is de facto the Slavery 
 party. Let us see whether the acts of Democrats and of 
 the Democratic party do not sustain these declarations. 
 
 No one will deny that the abandonment of the protective 
 policy, just mentioned, was a concession to the slavehold 
 ers, and intended as such ; for Mr. Clay, the author of the 
 measure, himself declared one object of it to be the pacifica- 
 ticn of tJie. nullificrs. 
 
 In 1837, Mr. Van Buren, in his Inaugural Address, an 
 nounced his predetermination to approve no bill for the 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 243 
 
 abolition of Slavery in the District of Columbia; though 
 he stands on the record as conceding 1 to Congress the con 
 stitutional right to do so. 
 
 For many years the people petitioned Congress to exer 
 cise this power ; but the Democratic party in Congress 
 virtually denied the right of petition, and suppressed free 
 dom of speech in Congress on the subject of Slavery. 
 
 Emigrants, chiefly from the Slave States, settled in Tex 
 as with a view to the revolutionizing of that Mexican pro 
 vince, the reestablishing of Slavery therein, and its annex 
 ation to the United States. Tho Democratic party, the 
 faithful servant of the slaveholders, promptly carried the 
 scheme of annexation into effect, adding to its territory, as 
 Mr. Bentori and other prominent Democrats declared, many 
 thousands of square miles, and securing, by a provision 
 in the act, the right to divide the State into four Slave 
 States. 
 
 Not satisfied with this enormous plunder from a weak 
 nation incapable of resistance or retaliation, the project 
 was conceived of extending* our territorial acquisitions in 
 definitely toward the Pacific. The President, a Democrat 
 and slaveholder, concealing his iniquitous design, ordered 
 our amy into Mexican territory to provoke a war. The 
 object was accomplished. Hostilities were commenced, 
 and the war was prosecuted until Mexico was glad to 
 make peace by the relinquishment of a large portion of her 
 territory, a part of which has been consigned to Slavery. 
 It was in view of this acquisition that Mr. Wilnsot moved 
 his proviso to keep Slavery out of the territory that might 
 be acquired. But it was rejected by the Democratic party 
 in Congress. Arid when, in 1850, governments were to be 
 instituted for the different portions of this territory, Cali 
 fornia applied for admission as a State into the Union, the 
 Democratic party refused the admission of California as a 
 Free State, unless New Mexico and Utah were left open to 
 Slavery, and unless to this concession were added an en 
 actment that Slavery should not be abolished in the Dis 
 trict of Columbia ; arid another providing more effectually 
 for the recapture of fugitive slaves. With all these advan 
 tages, the slaveholders, it was natural to suppose, would 
 be contented ; and for aught that appeared, they were con- 
 
244 DEMOCRATIC MIRIIOR. 
 
 tented ; for it was understood, in 1850, that the Slavery 
 question should not be again agitated in Congress. 
 
 But, ai icr a brief period of peace, (a little more than 
 three yrurs,) a JNorthern Senator, whose claims to the 
 Presidency, presented in National Convention, had not 
 been duly recognized, in order to strengthen these claims, 
 unsolicited, so far as the record shows, tenders to the slave 
 holders his efforts to effect the repeal of the Missouri Com 
 promise, by which alone Slavery had for more than thirty 
 years been kept within a certain boundary line. Southern 
 members of Congress had, in the debates on the measures 
 of 1860, which were to settle this question for all time, ad 
 mitted the sacredness and binding force of that Compro 
 mise, which was not to be disturbed. And Mr. Douglas 
 himself had a few years previously said, in a public speech : 
 " It has received the sanction of all parties in every section 
 of the Union. It had its origin in the hearts of all patri 
 otic men who desired to preserve and perpetuate the bless 
 ings of our glorious Union. . . . All the evidences of 
 public opinion seem to indicate that this Compromise has 
 become canonized in the hearts of the American people as 
 a sacred thing, which 110 ruthless hand would le reckless enough to 
 disturb." After so strong an asseveration, what motive but 
 that to which the act has just been ascribed, could havo 
 impelled the " ruthless hand" of that Senator .to the perpe 
 tration of the * reckless" deed ? A different motive, how 
 ever, must be invented. It now occurs to the Senator that 
 the restrictive act is unconstitutional, and that, by the 
 measures of 1850, it has been rendered "inoperative and 
 void." The slaveholders, though even they had not been 
 " reckless enough" to ask such a favor, would not refuse 
 what the Democratic party, " with superserviceable 
 liberality," (as one aptly expresses it,) " forced on their 
 acceptance." 
 
 The efforts of the party to force Slavery into Kansas, are 
 still fresh in the recollection of the reader. So successful were 
 these efforts, that .Kansas was kept out of the Union until the 
 Senators from the seceding States had retired, and left in tho 
 Semite a Republican majority. 
 
 Nor is this all. To secure entire and perpetual supremacy 
 to the Slave Power, a decree was procured IVoni a party Ju 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 245 
 
 diciary, declaring that slaveholders have a right, under the 
 Constitution, to take their slaves into every Territory of the 
 United States, and to hold them there, any law of the Terri 
 torial Legislature or of Congress to the contrary notwith 
 standing. 
 
 After so long a term of faithful service rendered the slave 
 holders by the Democratic party, and with such apparent alac- 
 rity ; and after so many expressions of sympathy from the 
 Northern branch of the party for the " abused South ;" the 
 slaveholders had no reason to apprehend from their Northern 
 allies any opposition to their meditated secession. By none 
 had more been done to encourage them in their wicked pur 
 pose, than by the last two Presidents. In nearly every An 
 nual Message, they had severely belabored those who resisted 
 the aggressions of the Slave Power, or questioned its right to 
 appropriate all the national territory, but administered not the 
 slightest rebuke to their Southern friends. 
 
 Nor was the zeal of Northern champions for "Southern rights" 
 materially abated by the Secession. Only two or three weeks 
 after South Carolina had formally seceded from the Union, 
 and was fortifying herself by taking possession of the national 
 forts and the custom-house and the revenue in and about 
 Charleston, a great Democratic Mass Convention was held in 
 the city of New Yoik to forestall coercive measures to put 
 down the Rebellion. The Convention was attended by lead 
 ing Democrats, and by them addressed in language berittiug 
 actual Secessionists. 
 
 Two weeks later, (Jan. 31, 18C1,) in an early stage of the 
 Secession, a large Democratic State Convention was held in 
 the city of Albany. Ex-Governor (now Governor) Seymour, 
 whose political orthodoxy is universally acknowledged by his 
 party, addressed the Convention in a speech, then enthusias 
 tically applauded, and republished by the State Committee a^ 
 a campaign electioneering document in 1862, when he was 
 again a candidate for Governor. He spoke as follows : 
 
 " The condition of our affairs forces upon us the alternative 
 of compromise or civil war. Let us contemplate the latter 
 alternative. We are advised by the conservative States of 
 Virginia and Kentucky, that if force is to be used, it must 
 be exerted against the united South. It would be an act of 
 folly and madness, i i entering upon this contest, to underrate 
 
246 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 our opponents, and thus subject ourselves to the disgrace of 
 defeat in an inglorious warfare. Let us als) see if successful 
 coercion, by the North is less revolutionary than successful 
 secession by the South. Shall we prevent revolution by being 
 foremost in overthrowing the principles of our Government, 
 and all that makes it valuable to our people, and distinguishes 
 it among the nations of the earth ? Upon whom are we to 
 wage war ? Our own countrymen, whose white population is 
 three-fold that of the whole country in the time of the Revo 
 lution. Their courage has never been questioned in any con 
 test in which we have been engaged. They battled by our 
 side with equal valor in the Revolutionary struggle, in the 
 last war with Great Britain, and in the Mexican conflict. 
 Virginia sent her sons under the command of Washington to 
 the relief of beleaguered Boston. Alone, the South defeated 
 the last and most desperate effort of BritUh power to divide 
 our country, at the battle of New Orleans. From the days of 
 Washington till this ti-ne they have furnished the full propor 
 tion of soldiers for the iield, of statesmen for the cabinet, and 
 of wise and patriotic Senators for our Legislative halls. 
 
 " It is onlv bigoted ignorance that denies the equality of 
 their public men to those of the North. .To assume that our 
 brethren in fifteen States lack the capacity to understand, and 
 the ability to protect their own interests, is to assume that 
 our Government is a failure, and ought to be overturned. It 
 is to declare that nearly one-half of our people are incapable 
 of self-government * * * 
 
 " In what way is this warfare to be conducted ? None 
 have been mad enough to propose to muster armies to occupy 
 their territory. Great Britain tried that in the Revolution, 
 when the population of the South was less than 2,000,000. 
 She attempted invasion again in the late war, when their 
 numbers were less than 3,500,000. * * * 
 
 " But some have suggested with complacent air, that the 
 South could easily be subjugated by blockading their ports with 
 a few ships of war. * But assuming the success of 
 
 this measure, who are to be the sufferers ? Are we waging 
 war upon the South, or upon the North ? Upon the Southern 
 planter, or upon the Northern merchant, manufacturer, and 
 mechanic ? * * * 
 
 "But let us leave these pecuniary considerations for others 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 247 
 
 more weighty with every patriot. Upon what field shall this 
 contest be waged ? Upon what spot shall Americans shed 
 American blood ? Where, on this broad continent, shall we 
 find the arena where every association and memory of the past 
 will not forbid this fratricidal contest ? . Or, when unnatural 
 war shall have brought upon our people its ruin, and upon our 
 nation its shame, to what ground shall we be brought at last ? 
 To that we should have accepted at the outset " 
 
 What is there in all this but an encomium on Southern pa 
 triotism, Southern valor, Southern statesmanship, and Southern 
 invincibility, on the one hand ; while on the other, the attempt 
 to suppress the Rebellion would be an "inglorious warfare;" 
 in which success would be no less revolutionary than Seces 
 sion. To propose to muster armies to occupy their territory 
 would be "madness;" and to defend the Union against its 
 enemies, would be to incur the guilt and the " shame" of 
 waging an " unnatural war," and of engaging in a " fratricidal 
 contest" 
 
 The reader will note particularly the concluding sentence 
 of the above extracts from the Governor s speech, in answer 
 to ihe question, To what ground shall we be brought at last? 
 " To that ive should have accepted at the outset." In other 
 words, after having waged an " unnatural," a " fratricidal," an 
 " inglorious," and an unsuccessful war upon the South, we 
 shall be compelled to make terms with the slaveholders by a 
 surrender of the rights of free speech, free labor, all the free 
 territory acquired and to be .acquired, and the right of the 
 majority of the people to govern. Will the reader who has 
 read the secession speeches of Davis, and Benjamin, and Iver- 
 son, and Breckinridge, in the Senate of the United States as 
 they were about taking leave of that body, point out any es 
 sential difference between them and the paragraphs quoted 
 from the speech of this " Northern man with Southern princi 
 ples ?" True, he did not he durst not advocate the right 
 of Secession ; but the language is purely Southern, and the 
 speech would find an appropriate place among, the reported 
 speeches of these secessionists in Congress. 
 
 Another popular Democratic speaker, James S. Thayer, in 
 the same Convention, amid general applause, spoke as follows : 
 
 " We can, at least, by discussion, enlighten, settle, and con 
 centrate the public sentiment in the State of New York upon. 
 
248 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 this question, and save it from that fearful current that cir- 
 cnitously, but certainly, sweeps madly on through the narrow 
 gorge of the enforcement of the laws, to the shoreless ocenn 
 of civil war. [Cheers.] Against this, under all circumstan 
 ces, in every flace and form, we must now, and at all times, 
 oppose a resolute and unfaltering resistance. The public 
 mind will bear the avowal, and let us make it that if a rev 
 olution of force is to begin, it shall be inaugurated at home. 
 [Cheers.] And if the incoming administration shall attempt 
 to carry out the line of policy that has been foreshadowed, we 
 announce that when the hand of Black Republican ism turns 
 to blood -red, and seeks from the fragments of the Constitution 
 to construct a scaffold ing for coercion another name for exe 
 cution we will reverse the order of the French Revolution, 
 and save the blood of the people by making those who would 
 inaugurate a reign of terror the first victims of a national 
 guillotine. [Enthusiastic applause.] 
 
 " The Democratic and Union party at the North made the 
 issue at the last election with the Republican party, that in 
 the event of their success, and the establishment of their policy, 
 the Southern States not only would go out of the Union, but 
 would have adequate cause fur doing so. [Applause ] 
 
 " This is the position I took with 813,000 voters in the 
 State of New York, on the Cth of November last. I hall not 
 recede from it, having admitted that, in a certain contingency, 
 the Slave States would have adequate cause for Sfj) f iration I 
 Now that the contingency has happened, I shall not withdraw 
 that admission because they have been unwise or unreason 
 able in the time, mode, and measure of redress. [Applause.] 
 
 " What person, what right of property, what domestic right 
 or privilege, what franchise, what security to life or liberty is 
 infringed by the rupture of the Federal relation between the 
 States? [Applause.] 
 
 "But it is announced that the Republican administration 
 will enforce the laws against and in all the seceding States. 
 A nice discrimination must be made in the performance of this 
 duty, not a hair s breadth outside of the mark. You remem 
 ber the story of William Tell, who, when the condition WAS 
 imposed upon him to shoot an apple from the head of his own 
 child, after he had performed the task, let fall an arrow. For 
 what is that? said Gesler. To kill thee, tyrant, had I blam 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 249 
 
 my boy ! [Cheers.] Let on?, arrow winged by the Federal 
 how strike the. heart of an American citizen, and who can 
 number the avenging dart* that will cloud the heavens in the 
 conflict that will ensue? [Prolonged applause.] What, 
 then, is theT duty of the State of New York ? What shall we 
 say to the people when we come to meet this state of facts V 
 That the Union must be preserved. But if this can not he, 
 what then ? PEACEABLE SEPARATION. [Applause.]" 
 
 Here is an effusion of pure, unalloyed Secessionist!!, without 
 attempt at concealment, indorsed by the chosen representa 
 tives of the Democracy of the State. 
 
 When the proceedings of this Albany Tweddle Hall Con 
 vention reached Washington, Lawrence M. Keitt, member of 
 Congress from South Carolina, an avowed Disunionist, exult- 
 ingly proclaimed : " There ivi.ll be more men in Neiv York 
 alone to fight for us than the whole North can put doivn /" 
 So testifies Hun. R. Conkling, member of Congress from the 
 Utica District, N. Y. 
 
 A meeting was held about the same time in Philadelphia, 
 in which Pennsylvania Democracy gave vent to the same 
 treasonable sentiments. One of the resolutions adopted at 
 the meeting declares, 
 
 "That in the deliberate judgment of the Democracy of 
 Philadelphia, and, so far as we know it, of Pennsylvania, the 
 dissolution of the Union by the separation of the whole South 
 a result we shall most sincerely lament may release the 
 Commonwealth, to a large extent, from the bonds which now 
 connect her with the Confederacy, except so far as for tempo 
 rary convenience she chooses to submit to them, and would 
 authorize and require her citizens, through a Convention to 
 be assembled for that purpose, to determine with whom her 
 lot should be cast ; whether with the -North and East, whose 
 fanaticism has 2^ ^cipitated this misery upon us, or our bre 
 thren of the South, whose wrongs we feel as our own ; or 
 whether Pennsylvania should stand by herself, as a distinct 
 community, ready when occasion offers to bind together the 
 broken Union, and resume her place of loyalty and devotion." 
 
 And more of the same kind, had we room, could be given 
 from leading Democrats and presses in that State. 
 
 From these and a thousand other expressions of Northern 
 eentiment, condemning in advance a resort to coercive mea- 
 
250 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 sures to suppress the Rebellion, had not the South reason to 
 expect a divided North, rendering the incoming administra 
 tion powerless against the traitors ? 
 
 War at length came. Sumter fell by the hands of the 
 Rebels. The indignation of the North was aroused. Party 
 seemed to be for a while forgotten. Men of all parties contribu 
 ted liberally of their means for the defense of the nation. And 
 among the evidences of the encouragement which had been 
 given to the Rebellion by these declarations of Northern 
 Democratic Conventions and presses against coercion, is the 
 surprise expressed by Rebels on learning the unanimity of the 
 North in providing for the defense of the Union. Northern 
 men who were at that time in the South, state, that the intel 
 ligence of the Union war meetings here, after the fall of Fort 
 Sumter, struck the Rebel leaders with astonishment. Thev 
 had been led to hope that their Northern friends would crip 
 ple the arm of the administration if raised to strike at the 
 Rebellion. Without such expectation, it is not improbable 
 that ihe Secession, if any had occurred, would have been con 
 fined to two or three States perhaps, as in 1832, to South 
 Carolina alone. 
 
 It was hoped, for a time, that party warfare would be sus 
 pended until the war fjr the Union should be successfully 
 closed. But this hope was soon disappointed. After a few 
 professions of loyalty a few expressions of displeasure or re 
 gret at the conduct of their " Southern brethren" in not "sub 
 mitting to be governed by such a Chief Magistrate" as they 
 were not pleased to vote for j the forces of the party were 
 again rallied, and their batteries directed against the adminis 
 tration. An offensive war has been kept up, without inter 
 mission, for the last two years, during which time ten pon 
 derous blows have been inflicted, with deadly intent, upon Mr. 
 Lincoln and his associates in the Government, for every gen 
 tle rap administered to Jefferson Davis and his Rebel confed 
 erates. 
 
 Scarcely had the excitement caused by the capture of 
 Sumtev subsided, before the Democrats of Maine, in State 
 Convention, 
 
 "Resolved, That the present civil war which Abraham Lin 
 coln is waging upon sovereign States, is alike unconstitutional, 
 inhuman, and unjust, and, unless speedily checked, must end 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC TARTY. 251 
 
 in the complete overthrow of liberty, and in the establishment 
 of a military despotism." 
 
 Not having at hand the entire proceedings of this Conven 
 tion, I can riot say whether any resolution was adopted ex 
 pressing an opinion of " the present civil war which Jefferson 
 Davis is waging upon sovereign States." The participators 
 in a Convention within the borders of his "Confederacy," who 
 should pass the above resolution with the name of Jefferson 
 Davis substituted for that of Abraham Lincoln, would learn, 
 by sad experience, that there are on that side of the line, an 
 " inhumanity/ 1 an "injustice," and a "despotism," which dif 
 fer very materially from the distinguishing characteristics of 
 an administration at home, which leaves them in the full en 
 joyment of the abused constitutional right of freedom of 
 speech ! 
 
 What but the same spirit of disloyalty induced the nomina 
 tion of the notorious Vallandigham as the Democratic candi 
 date for Governor of Ohio ? Self-respect may deter some 
 Democrats from giving him their votes ; but it is believed that, 
 if no other Democratic candidate should be nominated, he 
 will be voted for by the great body of his party. 
 
 Modern Democracy is of the same character in all parts 
 of the Union. Governor Seymour, of New York, from 
 whose Tweddle Hall speech we have quoted, is not the only 
 Governor Seymour who is skilled in the use of Southern 
 language. Connecticut furnishes in her Ex-Governor Sey 
 mour, a man whose proficiency in that indispensable acqui 
 sition of a genuine Northern Democrat the slaveholders 
 dialect is scarcely inferior to that .of his distinguished 
 neighbor of the Empire State. While a candidate for Gov 
 ernor in 1862, he held correspondence with one Captain 
 Gladding, a Rebel officer paroled and sent from the city of 
 New York to Hilton Head for exchange, but arrested there 
 as a Confederate sp3 r , upon whose person was found a let 
 ter from this Democratic candidate for Chief Magistrate of 
 a Free State, in which he writes thus to his Southern 
 friend : 
 
 " DEAR SIR : Your obliging favor of the 28th inst. [July] 
 has been received and read with pleasure. Though you 
 state that you are a stranger to me, I feel myself already 
 introduced to you by th<i friendly words breathed through 
 
252 DEMOCRATIC MIRKOR. 
 
 your letter. Since the appearance of a letter of mine, to 
 which you so kindly allude, I have had the satisfaction of 
 learning from quite a number of persons, at home and 
 abroad, that they approve of its contents. * * * 
 
 " Your allusion to constitutional liberty* suggests pain 
 ful reflections. Since the inauguration of tin s war, the men 
 in power at Washington have been robbing us of our 
 rights. The great safeguards of the citizen, protecting 
 him against illegal arrests and false imprisonments, 
 
 have been struck down by ignorant or wicked rulers. 
 
 * * * * 
 
 " I abhor the whole scheme of Southern invasion, with all 
 its horrible consequences of rapine and plunder. You can 
 not help but see, Sir, what thousands of us are beginning 
 to see, that there can be no Union got in this way. The 
 war might have been avoided, arid the Union saved. And 
 it would have been avoided but for a fanatic set of men be 
 sieging the President, and who wanted blood and plunder. 
 They have got both, and humanity weeps over the wrecks 
 of body and soul. Those who drive the car of war at this 
 time, have no more idea of saving the Union by their bloody 
 sacrifices of this sort, than they have of changing the course 
 of nature. Still they go on. * * * 
 
 " Depend upon it, Heaven will frown on such a cause as 
 this ; it can not and will not come to good. Where you 
 find me, in lamenting or exposing this iniquity, you will 
 find me to the end of the chapter. I would rather have the 
 good opinion of fellow-citizens who, like yourself, have 
 given me their sympathy in a time of some considerable 
 trial of one s faith, than to be first among the slayers qf kin 
 dred, or wear the bloody laurels they may gather in a fra 
 tricidal war. I doubt if the Union can be restored at all 
 things have gone so far now that the only possible chance 
 will be by the adoption of a Christian policy very different 
 from that which prevails at Washington at the present 
 time. 
 
 " Though I only know you, Sir, by your very kind letter, 
 I shall not soon forget that it was written, or by whom. 
 
 "Accept, I pray you, my best wishes, and believe me, 
 dear Sir, respectfully yours." 
 
 Is it diflicult to tell whether Loyalists or llcbcls share 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 253 
 
 more largely in the sympathies of the writer of this letter ? 
 Its importance would be no equivalent for the space it oc 
 cupies, but for the fact that its author is the representative 
 of the Democracy of his" State. The same sentiments were 
 reiterated by him in public speeches during the cam 
 paign, and indorsed by a full party vote at the ensuing 
 election. 
 
 But it is needless to adduce additional evidence to prove 
 the prevalence of a disloyal spirit among Democrats. The 
 fact is apparent to every person of ordinary discernment 
 who has any considerable acquaintance with men of that 
 party. 
 
 " To save the Union" has been with them professedly an 
 object of the deepest solicitude. For this purpose, the con 
 stitutional rights of freedom of speech and of the pi ess 
 have been denied ; and Southern laws, in direct violation 
 of the Constitution, the mobbing and flogging and hanging 
 of peaceable Northern men without legal trial : all must 
 be endured without complaint, lest the slaveholders should 
 break the Union into pieces. Now, when the long medi 
 tated work of destruction is in progress, the Executive can 
 not exercise a power, or perform an act, for which there is 
 not an express " thus saith the Constitution," even to save 
 the naticiCs life, without throwing these sensitive Democrats 
 into spasms from fear that a line or a letter of the Consti 
 tution has been violated. The arrest and confinement of 
 men under the strongest suspicions of being spies and trai 
 tors, arid refusing to allow them, under bail, to run at large 
 while awaiting trial at some distant day, with opportunity 
 to continue their services to the Rebels, have been con 
 demned as an unconstitutional suspension of the privilege 
 of the writ of habeas corpus, and as tyrannical in the ex 
 treme. And the Emancipation Proclamation, which is de 
 signed to deprive the Rebels of one of their principal 
 means of carrying on the war against the Union, is also, 
 in their view, a shocking violation of the Constitution, and 
 apparently as distasteful to them as to the Confederate 
 Government itself. 
 
 Attempts have been made to weaken the Government by 
 misrepresentation and falsehood. The .Democratic presses and 
 politicians call the war an " abolition war," and declare it to 
 
254 DEMOCRATIC MIHROR. 
 
 be waged for the benefit of the negro. They charge Mr, Lin 
 coln with having, by issuing the Proclamation, violated the 
 Constitution and the rights of the States, which, in his Inau- 
 gural, he had pledged himself to maintain. They have repre 
 sented the soldiers as feeling themselves to have been duped 
 in being forced to fight to free the negroes, and as being in 
 dignant at their having been induced to enlist under false pre 
 tenses. Various other arts and devices have been resorted 
 to in order to disaflect soldiers in the service, and to prevent 
 others from enlisting, and thus to weaken the army. 
 
 Resolutions were introduced into the Democratic Legisla 
 ture of Illinois, which * condemn and denounce the flagrant 
 usurpations of the Administration ;" charge the Government 
 with the intention of acknowledging the independence of the 
 Confederacy ; declaring that the great North- West shall never 
 be separated from the Southern States of the Mississippi Val 
 ley; and, among other things, recommended an armistice, or 
 suspension of hostilities professedly to enable the contending 
 parties to meet in Convention to " reason " each other into 
 terms of peace ! which would have given the Rebels which 
 they just then much needed time to strengthen themselves 
 for a renewal of the conflict. Similar resolutions were intro 
 duced in the Legislature of Indiana. But while the resolu 
 tions were pending in these Legislatures, expressions of indig 
 nation came thundering up the Mississippi from the soldiers 
 from these States in the South-Western army; and remon 
 strances against thc r adoption were received, it is said; from 
 leading Democrats in other States, who began to be alarmed 
 at their effect upon the party : and thus their passage was 
 prevented. Their suppression, however, could not conceal the 
 sympathy of their authors for their " Southern biethren," nor 
 the object of their introduction. 
 
 While our armies were wholly dependent upon volunteers, 
 Democrats discouraged enlistments. Since the passage of the 
 law for enrolling and drafting, efforts are making in various 
 ways even n:ob violence has been resorted to to prevent 
 the Draft This opposition to the execution of the law has 
 been greatly encouraged by Democrats in high places, who 
 have endeavored to render the law odious by pronouncing it 
 unconstitutional and oppressive. 
 
 Nor does the late destructive and sanguinary insurrection 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 255 
 
 in the City of New York fail to furnish evidence of Northern 
 sympathy and cooperation with the traitors. Facts have been 
 disclosed which justify the belief, that the instigators of this 
 grand riot, and those who participated in it, were in the in 
 terest of the South, and that their object was to spread the 
 Rebellion into the Free States. And it is believed, that, if 
 our army had been defeated at Gettysburg, the Rebel flag 1 
 would have been raised in New York, as the beginning of a 
 Northern Rebellion. 
 
 On the night before the 4th of July, there was extensively 
 circulated through the city, a Manifesto, denouncing the G 
 
 OV 
 
 eminent in the bitterest terms; declaring "the Southern 
 people" to be justly " righting for their liberties," and that "a 
 Confederate army, whether on our borders or in our midst, we 
 would hail as friends and deliverers, 7 charging " Abraham 
 Lincoln and the men of his council with a violation of their 
 oaths, the Constitution, and the laws, destroying the Union," 
 &c., &c. This was issued at the time of the battle at Gettys 
 burg. The wild and desperate adventure of Lee so far JS orth, 
 countenances the idea that it had reference to some Northern 
 movement. The breaking out of a formidable insurrection 
 which should divert the attention of the Government and a 
 portion of our military strength to the North, might encourage 
 Lee to march upon Washington, or some other important 
 place. This outbreak had been threatened from the South 
 months before it occurred. The most notorious leader was a 
 Virginian, with whom other Southerners were associated. 
 Men in the city openly rejoiced at the escape of Lee and his 
 army, and at his having " out-generaled Meade." Others were 
 heard to laud Fernando Wood and Governor Seymour, and to 
 cheer Jeff. Davis. The Draft, which was in pi ogress, was 
 used to excite the people ; but it was probably the least of the 
 motives to the riot. While the Colored Orphan Asylum was 
 burning, a carriage drove up and two men jumped out, who 
 urged on the mob in the work of destruction. The object of 
 these men may be conjectured from a remark of one of the 
 rioters, that this would compensate Jeff". Davis for the loss of 
 Vicksburg ! 
 
 Now, in all this wanton destruction of property to the 
 amount of millions, in the murders committed, in the vile im 
 precations of vengeance upon the " niggers," the " abolition- 
 
256 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 iats," the President, and others, and in the plaudits bestowed 
 upon Seymour, Wood, and Davis, how many are supposed to 
 have participated who were not politically connected with the 
 Democratic party, or who would not vote for either of these 
 men as the next President, if he should receive a regular party 
 
 nomination 
 
 The Draft was suspended for several weeks. Gen. Dix 
 having been appointed to the Department of the East, he 
 addressed to Guv. Seymour a letter inquiring- whether the 
 military power of the State might be relied on to enforce 
 the execution of the law in case of resistance to it, and ex 
 pressing his reluctance to call on the War Department for 
 troops which were needed in the army. Instead of giving 
 a direct affirmative answer, he informs the General that he 
 had written to the President, whose answer, he believed, 
 would relieve both " from the painfal questions growing 
 out of the enforcement of the Conscription law ;" and that 
 after receiving the President s answeiyhe would write the 
 General again. General Dix, in his reply, expresses his 
 regret that the Governor had characterized the act as the 
 " Conscription law," which, he says, is " a phrase borrowed 
 from a foreign system of enrollment, with odious features, 
 from which ours is wholly free, and originally applied to 
 the law in question by those who desire to bring it into re 
 proach and defeat its execution." 
 
 Nut receiving the promised answer in due season, Gen. 
 D. x applied to the War Department for the necessary force, 
 which was promptly furnished. Three days after the troops 
 had been ordered, he received a letter from the Governor, 
 expressing his regret that the President had declined to 
 comply with his request to give up the Draft, and to con 
 tinue to rely on voluntary enlistments ! Could the Gov 
 ernor have believed that the President would comply with 
 such a request ? What, then, was his object in causing 
 delay ? The reason assigned was, that he had received no 
 notice of the time when the Draft was to be made. 
 
 Having been repeatedly pressed lo declare his purpose, 
 he tells the General that the " State authorities, under no 
 circumstances, can perform duties expressly confided to 
 others ; nor can they undertake to relieve others from their 
 proper responsibilities :" as if he bad said, it was not his 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 257 
 
 business to enforce the laws of the Union. But as any dis 
 turbances of the peace would be " infractions of the, laws of 
 the State," the military would, if necessary, be called into 
 requisition. 
 
 The letters of the Governor are far from being creditable 
 to him. They manifest that spirit of opposition to the ad 
 ministration and the war which is indulged by a large por 
 tion of the Democratic party, especially by its leaders, who 
 find it extremely difficult to conceal their sympathy with 
 the traitors. 
 
 Here I had intended to close this history of Modern De 
 mocracy. But since the last paragraph was written, a letter 
 from Ex-President Pierce to Jefferson Davis made its ap 
 pearance in the public prints, which is too valuable a con 
 tribution to the history of the Kebellion to be withheld. It 
 was found among the papers of Davis which were recently 
 captured by our army at Jackson, Mississippi. 
 
 " CLARENDON HOTEL, Jan. 6, 1860. 
 
 " My DEAR FRIEND : I wrote you an unsatisfactory note 
 a day or two since. I have just had a pleasant interview 
 with Mr. Shepley, whose courage and fidelity are equal to 
 his learning and talents. He says he would rather fight 
 the battle with you as standard bearer, in 1860, than under 
 the auspices of any other leader. The feeling and judg 
 ment of Mr. S. in this relation is, I am confident, rapidly 
 gaining ground in New England. Our people are looking 
 for " the Coming Man." One who is raised by all the ele 
 ments of his character above the atmosphere ordinarily 
 breathed by politicians. A man really fitted for this emer 
 gency by his ability, courage, broad statesmanship and pa 
 triotism. Col. Seymour (Thos. H.) arrived here this morn 
 ing, and expressed his views in this relation in almost the 
 identical language used by Mr. Shepley. It is true that in 
 the present state of things at Washington, and throughout 
 the country, no man can predict what changes two or three 
 months may bring forth. Let me suggest that in the 
 morning debates of Congress, full justice seems to me not 
 to have been done to the Democracy of Ihe North. I do 
 not believe that our friends at the South have any just idea 
 of the etate of feeling hurrying at this moment to the pitch 
 
258 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 of intense exasperation between, those who respect their 
 political obligations, and those who have apparently no im 
 pelling power but that which fanatical passion on the sub 
 ject of Slavery imparts. Without discussing the question of 
 right of abstract power TO SECEDE, / have never believed that ac 
 tual disruption of the Union can occur without blood ; and if 
 through the madness of Northern Abolitionists that dire calamity 
 must come, tfie fighting will not be along JMason and Dixorfs line, 
 merely. IT WILL BE WITHIN OUR OWN BORDERS, IN OUR OWN 
 
 6TREKTS, BETWEEN THE TWO CLASSES OF CITIZENS TO WHOM I HAVE 
 
 REFERRED. Those who defy law and scout constitutional obliga 
 tions, will, if we ever reach the arbitrament of arms, FIND OCCUPA 
 TION ENOUGH AT HOME. 
 
 Nothing but the state of Mrs. Pierce s health could induce 
 me to leave the country now, although it is quite likely 
 that my presence at home would be of little service. 1 
 have tried to impress upon our people, especially in N. H. 
 and Connecticut, where the only elections are to take place 
 during the coming Spring, that while all our Union meet 
 ings are in the right direction and well enough for the 
 present, they will not be worth the paper upon which their 
 resolutions are written, unless we can overthrow political 
 Abolitionism at the polls, and repeal the unconstitutional 
 and obnoxious laws which in the cause of " Personal 
 Liberty" have been placed upon our Statute books. I 
 shall look witii deep interest, and not without hope, for 
 a decided change in this relation. 
 
 Ever and truly your friend, 
 
 " FRANKLIN PIERCE. 
 11 Hon. JEFF. DAVIS, Washington, D. 0." 
 
 The papers of Davis furnish additional evidence of the 
 truth of what is said on a preceding page in respect to the 
 service rendered the slaveholders by the last two Democra; 
 tic Presidents. Mr. Buchanan, in a letter dated some years 
 earlier, and also found among these papers, claimed the 
 honor of having, in a certain instance, gone further in sup 
 port of Slavery than Southerners themselves ; or, as he 
 expressed it, in " out-Heroding Herod." But Mr. Pierce 
 goes a large stride further, and assures his Southern brother, 
 that if war should come, their Anti-Slavery opponents 
 
PRO-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 259 
 
 would " find occupation enough at home !" If this letter 
 does not prove the writer, before an impartial public, to 
 be an accessory to treason, what language could convict a 
 man of that crime ? Could all the correspondence between 
 Northern and Southern Democrats be brought to light, it 
 would astonish the world, and would remove all doubt from 
 the minds of the most skeptical, that, without the encour 
 agement received from the representatives of the Northern 
 Democracy, Secession would never have been attempted, 
 and that the Rebellion is the act of the Democratic party. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 MY history of the Democratic party is written. Whether 
 the task has been well or ill performed, is submitted to the 
 judgment of an intelligent and impartial public. It has 
 been my sincere endeavor to make my " Mirror" reflect a 
 true picture of that party. I have not selected for animad 
 version a few of its most unpopular acts, which are liable 
 to unfavorable criticism ; nor have I condemned indiscrim 
 inately the measures of any Democratic administration. I 
 have noticed such of the principal measures of all parties 
 as were deemed necessary to enable the reader to form a 
 correct opinion of their general character and , policy. 
 
 With the Democratic leaders, POWER has been the ruling 
 motive. This was the object of the organization of the 
 party ; and to perpetuate their ill-gotten power, has been 
 the steady aim of a majority of its leaders. With this view 
 was formed their alliance with the Slave Power, based on 
 Slavery as the cardinal principle of union. On this plat 
 form the party achieved several victories. Elated with its 
 successes, it became rampant. It broke down the long 
 standing barrier to the spread of Slavery ; and, having 
 carried its aggressions upon Freedom beyond the point of 
 Northern endurance, it met a repulse in 1860 ; and its rul 
 ing spirits ruled one-third of the States out of the Union ! 
 This left the party in a minority, without any hope of re- 
 
 faining its ascendency, unless by a reunion with the Slave 
 ower upon the old basis. To this object the efforts of its 
 leaders have been directed ever since the Rebellion com 
 menced. They opposed coercion ; they advocated a recon- * 
 
260 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 Btruction of the Union, with a view to further concessions 
 to the slaveholders ; and they have in various ways 
 opposed the administration in its efforts to suppress the 
 Rebellion. 
 
 They profess an earnest desire for peace ; but they want 
 a peace which shall restore the unity of the party. Hence 
 their opposition to the Emancipation Proclamation. Slav 
 ery abolished, all hope of a restoration of the entirety of 
 the party vanishes for ever. They desire peace ; but they 
 want to negotiate it themselves ; and for this privilege, 
 they would be willing that the war should be protracted 
 until after the 4th of March, 1865. This is a fair inference 
 from both their language and their conduct. After having, 
 in conjunction with their former allies, involved the nation 
 in a desolating war, these Northern Democrats have the 
 assurance to ask for a restoration to power, alleging as a 
 reason, that the Democratic party alone is competent to 
 bring the war to a successful termination ! In other words, 
 the present administration is unwilling to prostrate itself 
 at the footstool of the Slave Power, and beg a peace on 
 such terms as His Majesty may be pleased to prescribe. 
 Into such a humiliating posture is this party endeav 
 oring to bring our Government. And to this humbled 
 condition it will be brought, if this party should retrieve 
 its lost power before the Rebellion shall have- been sup 
 pressed. Do not then the honor and the permanent welfare 
 of the nation demand the efforts of every patriot to put 
 down and exterminate a party under whose despotic mis 
 rule Constitutional Liberty has been placed in imminent 
 peril, and which hopes, after an interregnum of four years, 
 to be reinstalled in power, and to resume its " reign of 
 terror T 
 
 Let the friends of the Union not forget, that they have a 
 foe to contend with on this side as well as one on the other 
 side of Mason and Dixon s line. In the war with Sham- 
 Democracy, no weapon is so effective as LIGHT. The De 
 mocratic masses are honest and patriotic. But they have 
 long been the victims of an inveterate prejudice. They 
 have been taught to look with suspicion upon everything 
 that was not labeled " Democracy." Thousands are be 
 ginning to see that profession is not principle ; that they 
 
CONCLUSION. 261 
 
 have been beguiled into the service of Slavery by men 
 with Democracy on their tongues while allied in heart and 
 purpose with the enemies of Freedom. Expose fully the 
 evil designs and artifices of their leaders, and they will 
 dissolve their present party connection, and join the party 
 of the Union. 
 
 One of the most auspicious " signs of tho times" is the 
 growing sentiment, that permanent peace can be secured 
 only by the overthrow of Slavery ; and that in the present 
 " irrepressible conflict" between Freedom and Slavery, the 
 latter must yield. That Slavery and the Rebellion will 
 end together, is not to be expected. Many years may 
 elapse before the last vestige of the giant curse the pa 
 rent of the present gigantic Rebellion shall disappear. 
 But we rejoice in the hope, that, in the war which it has 
 waged with Freedom, it will receive, if it has not already 
 received, a wound which shall deprive it of its controlling 
 power in the Government, and hasten its extinction. 
 
 Lamentable as the immediate consequences of the Re 
 bellion are, our grief is made tolerable by anticipations of 
 its ultimate happy results. We can not repress the hope, 
 that, when Slavery, which has made us a divided people, 
 shall cease to exist, the two hostile sections will, 
 
 " Like kindred drops, be mingled into one ;" 
 
 will become one in feeling and one in interest. And it is 
 confidently believed that the South will have the greater 
 cause for rejoicing. She will wonder at her folly in hav 
 ing clung with such tenacity to her "peculiar institution/ 
 when she shall have found its loss compensated ten fold 
 by those other institutions which have made the North an 
 object of envy to her less prosperous rival. Northern en- 
 erprise and Northern capital will be no longer circum 
 scribed by sectional boundaries, but will find a new and 
 inviting field beyond the Potomac. An extensive and 
 mutually profitable commercial intercourse between the 
 two sections will be established. Churches and school- 
 houses will be multiplied, and diffuse their salutary influ 
 ence through every Soutnern community ; Southern and 
 Northern society will be assimilated ; and the different 
 
262 DEMOCRATIC MIRROR. 
 
 parts of our great Republic will be united in indissoluble 
 bonds of fraternal affection. Let Slavery and the Rebellion 
 die together, and all these things will be fulfilled before 
 this generation shall have passed away. 
 
Abolition of Slavery in District of Columbia, petitions for, 69, 108, 125. 
 Adams, John, elected vice-president, 18 ; elected president, 29 ; inaugurated, 
 30 ; his course respecting the French Mission, 35, 36, 37 ; opposed by 
 Hamilton and others, 36, 40. 
 
 Adams, John Quincy, elected president, 53 ; inauguration of, 55 ; meets with 
 early opposition, 55, 56 ; his appointment of Clay, 56 ; controversy with 
 Georgia, 61-63 ; charge of coalition against, renewed, 63-65 ; censured 
 for certain acts, 68 ; remarks on his defeat in 1828, 70-72 ; removals and 
 appointments by, 77; opposes Arkansas constitution, 112; speech of, 
 against annexation of Texas, 124, 125 ; on New Jersey election case, 
 128; views of, on abolishing slavery, 137 ; report of, on Tyler s vetoes, 
 136; presents Haverhill petition, 138; attempt to censure him, 138; 
 speech of, on Oregon question, 160. 
 
 Agitation of the slavery question who are its authors ? 176, 177. 
 Alien and Sedition laws, 32-35. 
 Amistad, schooner, capture of, 125, 126 ; Van Buren befriends the slave ateal- 
 
 ers, 126, 127. 
 
 Anderson, Richard C., appointed commissioner to Panama, 58 ; dies, 60. 
 Anderson, Major, occupies Fort Sumter, 214. 
 Annexation of Texas, history of, 140 ; treaty to annex rejected, 141 ; Benton s 
 
 speech against, 141 ; letters of Clay and Van Buren on, 143, 144. 
 Anti-Democratic party, the true conservative party, 231-239. 
 Anti-slavery socie;y formed, its objects, 103 ; opposition to, North and South, 103, 
 104; rewards offered for anti-slavery men, 103; General Government en 
 courages suppression of anti-slavery papers, 104-108 ; bill reported by Cal- 
 houn, 106 ; Van Buren s casting vote, 107 ; bill defeated, 107. 
 Arkansas, admitted as a state, 111, 112. . 
 
 Arrests and suspension of writ of habeas corpus, 221 ; defended by Lincoln, 222. 
 Atherton s " gag resolutions" to suppress anti-slavery petitions, 125. 
 Bank of the United States, incorporation of, 21 ; second bank, 48, 50; attacked 
 T5y Jacksou, 77 ; reports on, in Congress, 78 ; applies for re-charter, 92 ; 
 bill passed and vetoed, 93 ; affairs of, investigated, 93-95 ; Adams report 
 on, 94, 95 ; inquiry to ascertain safety of deposits, 97, 98 ; Jackson deter 
 mines and orders their removal, 98 ; removes Duane, and appoints Taney, 
 98 ; bank vindicated by directors, 99, 100 ; attempt to break it, and the 
 effects, 100, 10 1 ; removal of deposits condemned, 101 ; bills for incor 
 poration of, vetoed by Tyler, 133, 134 ; fiscal agent recommended by 
 Tyler, 134. 
 
 Bankrupt law of 1841, passed, 134. 
 Banks, state, increased, 130 ; made deposit banks, 98. 
 Bell, John, nominated for president, 200. 
 
 Benton, Thomas H., of Mo., constitutional amendments and reform bills proposed 
 by, 57 ; supports South Carolina doctrine, 85 ; his expunging resolu 
 tions, opposed by Calhoun, Clay, and Webster, and passed, 102 ; opposes 
 
264 INDEX. 
 
 anti-slavery petition?, 109; on the specie circular, 111; propositions 
 fur annexing Texas, 142; 148; opposes the treaty of annexation, 142; 
 against Cal houh on Mexican bill, 155, 156 ; on Oregon question, 160. 
 Berlin and Milan decrees of France, 44, 45 ; repealed, 47. 
 Beverly, Carter, charges of, against Adams and Clay, 63, 64. 
 Uirnoy, James (3., nominated for president, 130. 
 Blockade of southern ports ordered by Lincoln, 223. 
 Bolts, John M., of Va., moves to censure Giddings, 140. 
 Breckcnridge, John C., nomination of, for president, 200. 
 
 feronson, Greene C., in favor of power of Congress over slavery in territories, 237. 
 Buchanan, James, agency of, in charges against Adams and Clay, 64, 65 ; nomi 
 nated for president ; his antecedents, 181 ; joins in issuing the Ostend 
 manifesto, proposing to acquire Cuba, 181 ; adopts the Cincinnati 
 platform, 182; elected president, 183; inauguration of, 186; re 
 nounces the Cincinnati platform, 186 ; presents Lecompton constitution 
 to Congress, 191 ; annual message of 1859, 193 ; refuses to reenforce 
 the southern forts, 209 ; last annual message of, 210, 211 ; term of, 
 expires, 218. 
 
 Burr, Aaron, candidate for president, 40. 
 
 California, Douglas bill to admit, as a state 164 ; admission of, 167. 
 Calhoun, John, president of Lecompton constitutional convention, escape of, 190. 
 Caihoun, John C., opposes Benton s expunging resolution, 102 ; opposes the re 
 ception of petitions for abolishing slavery in the District, 108 ; re-unites 
 with the Democrats, 123 ; negotiates treaty to annex Texas, 141 ; col 
 lision of, with Benton on Mexican affairs, 155. 
 Carson, of N. C., charges Jackson with nullification, 90. 
 Caaa, Lewis, nominated for president, 165 ; views cf, on prohibition of slavery in 
 
 territories, 165. 
 
 Caucus, congressional, origin of, 53; nomination by, in 1824, 53. 
 Cavanaugh, of Wis., speech of, on pre-emption bill. 195. 
 
 Charleston, national Democratic convcution at, in 1860, 199; disruption and ad 
 journment of, 199, 200. 
 Chase, Salmon P., speech of, on Kansas-Nebraska bill, 176 ; appointed secretary 
 
 of the treasury, 220. 
 
 Chilton, resolutions on retrenchment, offered by, 67-69. 
 Cincinnati, national Democratic convention at, and platform, 180-132. 
 Clay, Henry, candidate for president, 53, 95, 145 ; charged with corrupt coalition 
 with Adams, 56 ; charge renewed, 63-65 ; compromise tariff bill intro 
 duced by, 88 ; land proceeds distribution bill introduced by, 91, 92 ; reso- 
 lutions of. condemning removal of deposits, 101 ; opposes Benton s expung 
 ing resolution, 103 ; distribution, bilbof, again defeated, but incorporated 
 in the surplus revenue distribution act, H3; letter of, on annexation of 
 Texas, 143 ; letter of, to the South, on annexation, 149; slavery compro 
 mise of 1850, 167, 168. 
 
 Clinton, De Witt, candidate for president, 49. 
 Clayton, John M., of Del., exposes Polk a secret orders to Gen. Taylor to invade 
 
 Mexico, 156, 157 ; appointed secretary of state, by Taylor, 166. 
 Collection of duties, acts to enforce, 87, 88, 225. 
 
 Commerce, no power under the confederation to regulate, 15 ; meeting of commis 
 sioners at Annapolis to regulate, 15, 16 ; power conferred by consti 
 tution, art. 1, section 8. 
 Compromise tariff bill, (Clay s) 88 ; compromise measures of 1850, and on slavery, 
 
 167, 168 ; resolutions for, by Crittenden, 215, 216. 
 Confederacy, southern, formed, 210. 
 
INDEX. 265 
 
 Confederation, government under, description of, 13-15. 
 Confiscation act, under Lincoln, passed, 225. 
 
 Congress, under confederation, want of power of, 14, 15 ; first meeting of, under 
 the constitution, petitioned for protection, 18 ; power of, over slavery in 
 territories, 188. 
 
 Contested seats in Congress, 1839, New Jersey case, 127-129. 
 Continental money, depreciation of, 19. 
 
 Constitution, convention called to frame, 16 ; opposition to a national govern 
 ment, 16. 
 
 Corwin, Thomas, opposes raising supplies for Mexican war, 157. 
 Crawford, Wm. H., nominated for president, 53. 
 Crittcnden, John J., compromise resolutions of, 215, 216. 
 
 Currency, war against, by Jackson, 109 ; restriction of paper money, 109 ; spe 
 cie circular, 110. 
 
 Gushing, Caleb, of Mass., opposes Arkansas state constitution, 112. 
 Daniel, of Ky., charges Jackson with nullification, 89, 90. 
 Davie, Win., of N. C., minister to France, 36. 
 
 Davis. Jefferson, pro-slavery resolutions of, in senate, 197, 198 ; Harlan s amend 
 ment voted down, 198 ; as president of confederate states, issues a procla 
 mation for volunteers, and orders reprisal. 221. 
 Delaware, legislature of, in favor of restriction of slavery by Congress, 236 ; 
 
 loyalty of, in 1861. 
 
 Democratic party, formed, 57 ; early identified with slavery, 107, 108, 125 ; 
 character of, 239-241 ; abandons protection, 241, 242 ; is the slavery 
 party, 242, &G. ; denies right of petition, 243; repeals Missouri com 
 promise, 244 ; encourages secession, 245-252 ; opposes war measures, 
 253-257 ; aims to regain power, 259, 260. 
 
 Democratic national convention of 1860 ; disruption of, 199, 200 ; meets at Balti 
 more, and nominates Douglas, 200 ; seceders meet at Richmond, and 
 nominate Breckenridge, 200. 
 
 Democrats, northern, abandon their principles, 145, 146. 
 
 Deposits, removal of, 97-99; effects of, and condemned, ICO, 101 ; Clay s reso 
 lutions, 101. 
 District of Columbia, petition of citizens of, for abolishing slavery in, 69 ; Ather 
 
 ton s resolutions to suppress petitions, 125. ^ 
 
 Dix, John A., secretary of the treasury, 215. 
 Dodge, senator of Iowa, introduces Nebraska bill, 175. 
 
 Douglas, Stephen A., proposes to extend compromise line to the Pacific, 163 ; in 
 troduces bill to admit California, 164 ; reports of, on Nebraska bill, 175, 
 176 ; and on Kansas outrages, 179, 180 ; opposes the Lecompton con 
 stitution, 191 ; candidate for president at Charleston, nominated at Bal 
 timore, 199, 200 ; his dilemma, 202 ; his electoral vote, 203. 
 Draft, opposed by Democrats, 254-257. 
 
 Duane, Wm J., reasons of, for not removing deposits, and his removal by Jack 
 son, 98, 99. 
 
 Embargo law, 45 ; effects of, and repeal, 46. 
 
 Emancipation, proclamation of. by Lincoln, 227 ; as a war measure, views on, by 
 J. Q. Adams, and by Patrick Henry, 228, 229 ; plan of, recom 
 mended by Lincoln, 229. 
 Executive departments, reorganized, 19. 
 Federal party, origin of, 13, 17 ; disbanded, 52, 53. 
 
 Fillinore, Millard, elected vice-president, 165 ; succeeds Taylor, 168 . bis cab 
 inet, 168 ; his pro-slavery course, 169-172 ; defection of his friend^ 
 171, 172; his rewar^ 173; electoral vote for in 1856, IBS; his Ai. 
 
2C6 INDEX. 
 
 bany speech, 213 ; answer of, to abolitionists, 238 ; speech* of, in 
 1844, 239. 
 
 Floor riot in the city of New York, 121, 122. 
 
 France, our relations with, 21 ; dissatisfied with the Jay treaty, 27 ; authorizes 
 the capture of American vessels, 27; the object of her retaliation, 28 ; 
 difficulties with, under John Adams, 30-32 ; same under Jefferson, 44. 
 Force bill, under Jackson, against South Carolina, 87, 68. 
 Freedom national, slavery sectional, 211, 212. 
 Fremont, John C, nominated for president, in 1856, 182. 
 
 Geary, J. W., appointed governor of Kansas, 184 ; his administration, 184 ; re 
 signs, 165. 
 Genet, Edmund C , French minister, conduct at Charleston, and at Philadelphia, 
 
 22, 23 ; recalled, 23. 
 Georgia, protest of, against tariff of 1828, 69, 70 ; controversy with the general 
 
 government, under J. Q. Adams, 80, 81. 
 
 Giddings, Joshua R., presents a petition, and offers resolutions, is censured, re 
 signs, and is re-elected, 139, 140. 
 Gilmer, of Va., resolution of, to censure Adams, 138. 
 Governors of loyal states, meeting of, at Altoona, 229. 
 
 Great Britain, restrictive policy of, 15 ; commercial difficulties with ; Jay treaty, 
 24, 25 ; renewed difficulties with, 44-48 ; declaration of war against, 
 47 ; minister at Washington departs, 47 ; her orders in council re 
 voked, 47 ; American seamen impressed by, 44, 47, 48 ; treaty of 
 peace with, 48. 
 
 Hamilton, Alexander, secretary of the treasury ; his financial policy, 19-21 ; op 
 poses Adams, 36, 40. 
 
 Harrison, AVm. II., nominated for president, 116, 130 ; elected, 131 ; his inaugu 
 ration; convenes congress ; dies, 132. 
 Hayne, R. Y., of S. C , advocates nullification, 85 
 Henry Patrick, approves the alien and sedition laws, 33 ; declines mission to 
 
 France, 36. 
 
 Holt, Joseph, of Ky.. appointed secretary of war, 215. 
 
 Homestead bill, in 1859, passed by the house, 195 ; defeated in the senate, 195 ; 
 bill reported in I860, by Lovejoy ; modified in the senate, passed, and 
 vetoad, 196, 197 [A bill, similar to that introduced by Mr. Grow in 
 I860, was passed in 1862, but inadvertently unnoticed in thia work.J 
 Hubbard, Henry, of N. H., on sub-treasury, 121. 
 Hunter, R. M. T., of Va., elected speaker, 129. 
 Illinois, legislature of, resolutions introduced in, condemning Lincoln and the 
 
 war, 254. 
 
 Impressment of seamen by Great Britain, 44-48. 
 Indiana, legislature of, anti-war resolutions, 254. 
 
 Jackson, Andrew, candidate for president, 53 ; charges corruption upon Adams 
 and Clay, 63-65 ; elected president, 70; inaugurated; his cabinet, 73 ; 
 his " antecedents," 73-75 ; letter of, to Gov. Ray, 74 ; hig reward and 
 punishment system, 75-77 ; assails the bank, 77 ; vetoes internal im 
 provement bills, 78 ; hts Indian policy, 78-81 ; nullifies supreme court 
 decision, 81 ; alleged support of nullification, 86, 89, 90 ; proclamation 
 ngainst South Carolina, 87 ; inconsistency of his vetoes, 91 ; is re-elected, 
 96 ; orders bank deposits removed, 97-99 ; removes Duane and appoint* 
 Taney, 99 ; attempts to break the bank, 100 ; protests against Clay s 
 resolutions, 101 ; recommends suppression of anti-slavery papers, 105. 
 Jefferson, Thomas, appointed secretary of state, 19 ; elected vice-president, 29 ; 
 draws up the " Kentucky resolution?," 34 ; is elected president, 40 ; in- 
 
INDEX. 2 67 
 
 augurated; revokes Adams appointments, 42 ; recommends gun-boats, 
 43 ; suppresses certain documents, 45. 
 Judiciary, national, established in 1789, 19 ; act assailed by the Jackson 
 
 party, 89. 
 
 Kansas and Nebraska bills reported, 175, 17(5 ; non-intervention principle intro 
 duced in, 176 ; Chase s speech on, 176 ; bills passed, 177. 
 
 Kansas, early efforts to establish slavery in, 177, 178 ; secret societies for this 
 purpose, 177, 178 ; election frauds in, 178 ; pro-slavery laws enacted in. 
 178 ; Topeka constitution (free state,) formed, 179 ; Pierce defends the 
 ruffians. 179; Douglas report censures the Aid Societies, and encou 
 rages "ruffianism, 179, 180; Grow s bill to admit as a state, 160; 
 Dunn s substitute, 180 ; Grow s bill for the relief of, 184 ; condition of, 
 under Gov. Geary, 184 ; meeting of Topeka legislature, 184 ; territorial 
 legislature calls constitutional convention at Lecompton, 185 ; provisions 
 of the convention act, 185 ; Gov. Geary resigns, 185 ; R. J. Walker, ap 
 pointed governor, and F. P. Stan ton, secretary, 188 ; Stanton removed ; 
 Denver appointed ; Walker resigns, 190 ; Denver, acting-governor re 
 signs ; Medary appointed, 192; Wyandotte constitution, 192, 193; Bu 
 chanan repeats his new doctrines, 193 ; bill to admit, with Wyandotte con 
 stitution, passes the house, 193. [At the next session, (Jan., 1861,) after 
 the retirement of senators from seceded states, Kansas was admitted with 
 the Wyandotte constitution, as a free state.] 
 
 Kendall, Amos, bank agency of, 98. 
 
 Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1798. 34, 35. 
 
 Land proceeds, distribution bills of Mr. Clay, defeated. 91, 113; bill passed, 134. 
 
 Lecompton constitution, history of, 189-191 ; people not allowed to vote on, 189 ; 
 vote of the people on, authorized ; constitution rejected, 190 ; presented 
 to Congress, 191 ; inducements offered to insure its adoption, 191 ; 
 rejected, 192. 
 
 Leigh, B. W-, sent as mediator to South Carolina, 88. 
 
 Lincoln, Abraham, nominated for president, 200 ; elected, 203 ; inaugurated, 
 219 ; his cabinet, 220 ; issues his proclamation and call for troops, and 
 convenes Congress, 220 ; response from states, 220, 221 ; second call, 
 221 ; defends arrests and suspensiou of habeas corpus, 222, 223, 224 ; 
 first annual message of, 226 ; proclamation confiscating rebel property, 
 227 ; proclamation of emancipation, 227 ; proclamations condemned by 
 Democratic party, 227 ; recommends a plan of Emancipation, 229 ; pro 
 claims freedom, Jan. 1, 1863, 230. 
 
 Loco-foco, origin and application of, 121. 
 
 Louisiana, purchase of, 42. 43 ; division of, 43. 
 
 Maine, Democrats of, for slavery prohibition, 236. 
 
 Madison, James, introduces a bill for protection and revenue, 18 ; joins the oppo 
 sition, 20 ; author of Virginia resolutions of 1798, 34 ; proclaims removal 
 of restrictions against France, 46 ; re-elected, 48 ; recommends protec 
 tive tariff, 50, 51. 
 
 Marcy, Wm. L., defends New York politics, 84, 85. 
 
 Marshall, of Ky., resolution of, to censure Adams, 138. 
 
 Mason and Slid ell, capture and release of, 225. 
 
 McDuffie, bill of, to reduce the tariff, 87 ; report of, on the bank, 78 ; proposition 
 of, for annexing Texas, 148. 
 
 McHenry, secretary of war, resigns, 37. 
 
 McLane, Louis, negotiates West India arrangement, 82 ; is appointed secretary 
 of the treasury, 84. 
 
268 INDEX. 
 
 Medary, Samuel, appointed governor of "Kansas, 192 ; defeats the bill to abolish 
 
 sin very. 192. 
 
 Mexico, difficulty with, 115; protests against annexation of Texns ; diplomatic 
 intercourse ceases, 152 ; propositions of, to Texns, 152 ; U. S. army sent 
 into, 152; offers to treat with U- S., 152 ; Gen. Taylor ordered to the Rio 
 Grande ; Polk announces war with, 153; dilemma of the Whigs, 153, 
 154 ; Polk proposes negotiation with, and asks for money ; bill passes 
 the house with Wilinot proviso, 154 ; a second bill, witiout proviso, 
 passed, 154, 155 ; debate thereon in the senate ; collision Benton and 
 Calhoun, 155, 156. 
 
 Michigan admitted as a state, 111, 112. 
 Minimum, definition and explanation of, 65, 66. 
 Missouri compromise, pronounced unconstitutional, 187. 
 Monroe doctrine. 59. 
 
 Murray, William Vans, minister to Netherlands and to France, 36. 
 Naturalization law, altered under John Adams, 39. 
 
 Nebraska, bill to organize the territory of. 175. [Afterward reported by Douglas, 
 amended so as to make two territories, Kansas and Nebraska, and to 
 repeal the Missouri compromise.] Chase s speech on, 175 ; bills 
 passed, 177. 
 
 New Jersey, elect on case of, in Congress, 127-129. 
 New Mexico, remonstrance of, against being annexed to Texas, aud against 
 
 slavery, 164. 
 
 New York, legislature of, in favor of slavery restriction, 236 j Democratic meet 
 ings in the city of, 237, 245. 
 
 Non-intercourse law, against France and England, 46. 
 Non-intervention, asserted by Cass, 161 ; by Douglas, 176. 
 Nullification, origin of, 34 ; supported by Democrats, 85, 86, 89 ; opposed by 
 
 Webster, 85. 
 
 Oregon question, 145 ; to be disposed of by Polk ; territorial government for, 
 passes the house, 153; danger of war, 159, 160; speeches of Adams and 
 Benton on, 160 ; concession to G. Britain ; peace, 160 ; agency of slavery 
 in, 161 ; territorial government for, 162-164. 
 Orders in council, British, 44 ; revoked, 47. 
 Panama mission, 58-61. 
 Peace, negotiation of, with Great Britain, 49. 
 Peace convention, proceedings and result of, 217, 218. 
 Pickering, Timothy, secretary of state, removed by Adams, 37. 
 Pierce, Franklin, nominated for president, 173 ; elected. 174 ; inaugurated ; de 
 claration of, against slavery agitation, 175 ; defends slavery and the 
 South, 183 ; secession letter of, to Jeff. Davis, 257. 
 Pinckney, C. C., minister to France, 23 ; candidate for president, 40. 
 Platforms of parties, in 1852, 173, 174 ; in 1S56, 180-182; in I860, 200, 201. 
 Poinsett, Joel R., minister to Panama, 58. 
 
 Polk, J. K., nominated for president, 145; letters on tariff, 147; elected, 148 ; 
 his inauguration, and cabinet, 151 ; orders army into Mexico; announces 
 war, 152, 153 ; proposes negotiation with Mexico ; reasserts the Rio Grande 
 boundary, 154. 
 
 Power of removal, by the executive, 19. 
 Pre-emption bill, Qrow s amendment to, 194, 195. 
 Protection, recommended by Washington, 19. 
 Publishers of laws, changes in, by J. Q. Adams, 63. 
 Randolph, Edmund, presents a plan of government, 16. 
 Ray, Gov. of Indiana, letter of, to Jackson, 74. 
 
INDEX. 269 
 
 Resolutions of Virginia and Kentucky, 34, 45, 85 ; claimed in support of nulli 
 fication, 85. 
 
 Republican party formed, 180 ; national conventions of, in 1856, and 1860. 
 Revolution in 1766, causes of 15. 
 Revulsion, pecuniary, in 1837, 118, 119. 
 Rochester, Win. B., secretary of Panama mission, 68. 
 Rowan, senator of Ky., advocates nullification, 85, 86. 
 Scott, General, nominated for president, 173 ; advises Buchanan to strengthen 
 
 southern fort?, 209, 210. 
 Scott, Dred, decision of. the- case of, 187, 183. 
 Seamen, impressment of, by Great Britain, 44, 48. 
 Secession, long premeditated, evidence of, 203-209; not the will of the nrcjor- 
 
 ity, 216. 
 
 Sectionalism, charge of, answered, 211-214. 
 Secretaries Cobb, Floyd, and Thompson, traitors, 214. 
 Sedition and alien laws, 31, 33. 
 Sergeant, John, commissioner to Panama, 58. 
 Seward, W. H., reasons for releasing Mason and Slidell, 225. 
 Seymour, Gov. of N. Y.. speech of, at Albany, 1861, 245-247; his course on the 
 
 draft, 256, 257. 
 
 Seymour, Gov. of Conn., traitorous letter of, 251, 252. 
 
 Slavery, union of, with Democracy, 107, 108, 125 ; petitions against, opposed by 
 Calhoun, 108; compromise with, in 1850, 167, 168; sectional, inexpe 
 dient, disgraceful, 211-213 ; in territories, legislated on, 227 ; abolished 
 in District Columbia, 227 ; views of early statesmen on, 231-235 ; con 
 stitutionality of its restriction by Congress formerly recognized by Demo 
 crats, 235-237. 
 
 Slidell, John, minister to Mexico, 152 ; Confederate minister to Europe, 225. 
 Smith, C. B., of Ind., reports Oregon territorial bill, 163 ; upper California bill, 164. 
 South Carolina, protests against tariff, 69, 70 ; nullifying ordinance of, in 1832, 
 
 87 ; repealed, 89 ; secedes and seizes the national property, 214. 
 Speaker, long contests for election of, in 1839, 127-129 ; in 1849, 166. [Fn 1855- 
 1856, the balloting was continued two months ; N. P. Banks was chosen. 
 In 1659-1860, the contest lasted about two months ; ending in the elec 
 tion of Win. Pennington, of N.] 
 
 Specie circular, and its effects; resolution to rescind, vetoed, 110, 111; re 
 pealed, 123. 
 Stanton, E. P., secretary of Kansas, 188 ; convenes the legislature to authorizo a 
 
 vote on the Lecompton constitution, and is removed, 190. 
 Sub-treasury scheme, twice defeated, 119-121 ; debate on, 121-123 ; established, 
 
 129 ; repealed, 133 ; re-established, 162. 
 
 Surplus revenue, distribution of, recommended by Jackson, 92 ; act for distri 
 bution, by depositing with the states, 113. 
 Tiillinadge, N. P., speech of, on sub-treasury, 121-123. 
 Tiinoy, Ro^er B., appointed secretary of the treasury, 99. 
 
 Tariff, of 1816, 50, 51 ; of 1824, 52; of 1828, 65-67 ; of 1832, 86; Verplanck g 
 and AicDuffie a bills to reduce. 86, 87 ; Clay s compromise, 88 ; act of 1642, 
 135, 136 ; its workings, 146, 147 ; the Polk swindle on, 147, 148 ; protec 
 tive, destroyed by the Democracy, 161 ; of 1846, and effects of, 161, 162. 
 [A protective tariff was passed, March, 1861.] Tariff and tfx bill, 
 passed, 224. 
 
 Taylor, Zachary, candidate for president, views of, an/1 his election, 164. 165 ; hig 
 inauguration ; cabinet ; torritorial policy, 166 ; his death/ 163 > opposi 
 tion to his administration, and his relations with Seward, 170-173. 
 
2TO INDEX. 
 
 Texas, recognition of, 113-115; annexation of, proposed, debated, proposition 
 withdrawn, 124, 125; pro-slavery revolution in, 140 ; history of annex 
 ation ; treaty rejected, 141; Benton s speech, 142; letters of Clay and 
 Van Buren on annexation of, 143, 144 ; annexation effected, 143, 149 ; ac 
 cepts terms of annexation, 152. 
 
 Thayer, J. S., secession speech of, at Albany, 247-249. 
 
 Topeka, Kansas, constitution formed at, 179; legislative session broken up, 184. 
 
 Treaty with France under John Adams, 37-39. 
 
 Twiggs, Gen., atrocious treason of, 215. 
 
 Tyler, John, elected vice-president, 131 ; succeeds Harrison as president, 132; 
 message to Congress, special session, 133 ; vetoes two bank bills; his cab 
 inet resigns, 133, 134 ; vetoes tariff bill, 136 ; is claimed again by the 
 South, 137 ; suggests forcible intervention between Texas and Mexico, 141 ; 
 again recommends annexation, 14R ; consummates it, 149. 
 
 Union, states rights view of, 34, 35, 85, 86 ; views of Webster and Living 
 ston, 85, 87. 
 
 Van Buren, Martin, rejected as minister to England, 34 ; nominated and elected 
 president, 115, 116 ; inaugurated ; pledged against abolishing slavery 
 in District of Columbia, 117 ; convenes Congress, 118 ; renominated, 
 130; letter of. on annexation, 143, 144; nominated, 165. 
 
 Virginia, resolutions of 1798, 34, 35 ; legislature of, proposes a peace conven 
 tion, 216, 217. 
 
 Walker, R. J., appointed governor of Kansas, 188; his policy, 188, 189 : re 
 signs, 190. 
 
 War, declared against Great Britain; opposed by Federalists, 47; with Mexico, 
 
 Washington elected president, 18; cabinet of, 19; his proclamation of neu 
 trality, 22. 
 
 Webster, Daniel, views of, on the nature of the Union, 85, 86 ; on Benton s ex 
 punging resolution, 102; on the slavery question, 168, 169. 
 West Virginia, admitted as a state, 230. 
 
 West India trade, 81-84 ; negotiation for under Adams, 81, 82; LoasUd arrange 
 ment under Jackson, 82-84 ; effects of, 137 
 Whiskey insurrection, 20, 21. 
 
 Wisconsin, legislature of, on slavery restriction, 236. 
 Wright, Silas, vote on tariff of 1842, 136. 
 
ERRATA 
 
 Page 42, in the title to the Chapter, for "John Quincy 
 
 Adams," read Mr. Monroe. 
 
 45, line. 16 from bottom, after one," insert/row. 
 85, line 9 from bottom, for " 33," read 34. 
 ^ 98, line 13 from top, for Moses," read Amos. 
 :< 214, line 12 from bottom, for " 28," read 26. 
 

- 
 
I 
 
 
 14 DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 LOAN DEPT. 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 Hi .IE f> i^^t r-i Pi 
 
 ty t* 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 err 
 
 
 rLj - 
 
 
 L ^AN DEPT. 
 
 T. mc"7 
 
 
 R 196/ 
 
 
 RECEIVED 
 
 
 OK U $7 -4PM 
 
 
 L< ^AN DPPT 
 
 
 APR J 5 I^DS i 5 
 
 
 RECEiV 
 
 
 APR15B8-8AM 
 
 
 
 JUL301970 55 
 
 REC DLD JUL2 
 
 170 -12 AM 81 
 
 
 
 LD iMA-GOm-T. GG 
 -7slO)476B 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
3735 
 
 M130114 
 
 JK 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY