Page images
PDF
EPUB

27TH CONG......3D SESS.

him to cause an authenticated copy of the record to be made, and forwarded to him. This was done. Meantime, however, a friend in New Orleans had sent him the copy now in the hands of the Senator from Delaware, which he brought to the Senate a few days ago, when this bill was last up, and exhibited it to several members as a document ascer taining the proceedings connected with the imposi tion of the fine on General Jackson. By a singu lar chance, it is a copy made out shortly after the proceedings occurred, and is certified by the clerk who officiated in them. It is dated in: D cember, 1815. The gentleman who sent it to him stated (as well as he recollected) that it had been found among the papers of some person deceased, by the notary who made the inventory of his estate, and had been preserved as a curiosity.

So far had it been from his (Mr. CONRAD's) intention, or that of any other Senator, to suppress this document, that it was determined to lay it before the committee to which the bill should be .referred, if it were referred, or to submit it to the Senate if the bill were not referred. In the meantime, it had been shown to many Senators, who had expressed a curiosity to see it; and it was now at the service of the Senator from Missouri, if he desired to examine it. Perhaps, indeed, it would be well to adopt the suggestion of that Senator, and have it printed for the use of the Senate.

On the question now pending before the Senate, he would only say that it was entirely indifferent to him what course the bill might take. It must be recollected, however, that in fact there had been, as yet, no report on the bill-the committee to which the former bill was referred having had no evidence before it upon which it was considered a report could be based. If the object of the Senator from Missouri was really to have this money refunded to General Jackson on terms honorable to him, (and he did not doubt that this was his object,) and not to make political capital out of the question, it appeared to him that the only way in which his object could be attained would be by the reference of the bill. What was the Senator now attempting? To have the bill adopted by the identical body which, after a protracted discussion, rejected it by a large majority, not five months ago. He submitted to that Senator's candor, whether he could expect the Senate to reverse its former decision, except on such evidence as should satisfy the majority they were wrong? On the other band, if the bill were referred to a committee, the facts might be reported, and some mode might be suggested in its report by which the money could be refunded to General Jackson, without doing any injustice to the character of others, or encouraging the exercise, by future military commanders, of powers not conferred by the Constitution, and dangerous to the lives and liberties of our citizens.

Mr. BUCHANAN had but a few words to say on this subject. The Senator from Delaware [Mr. BAYARD] bad been discharging his heavy artillery against nothing. He had not even a target to aim at. It had never been contended on this floor that a military commander possessed the power, under the Constitution of the United States, to declare martial law. No such principle had ever been asserted on this (the Democratic) side of the House. He had been induced to make this disclaimer in consequence of an attack which had been made upon him, in a well-written pamphlet signed "A Kentuckian," for having advocated such a doc. trine, in conjunction, strangely enough, with the Senator from Georgia [Mr. BERRIEN] and a distinguished member of the other House, [Mr. ADAMS] He did not know who might be the author of this pamphlet; but he must express his surprise how any candid man, who had read his remarks at the last session of Congress on the subject of the remission of General Jackson's fine, could have fallen into such an error. He had then expressly declared (and the published report of the debate, which he had recently examined, would justify bim in this assertion) that we did not contend, strictly speaking, that General Jackson had any constitutional right to declare martial law at New Orleans; but tha', as this exercise of power was the only means of saving the city from capture by the

Debate on the fine on General Jackson.

enemy, he stood amply justified before his country for the act. We placed the argument not upon the ground of strict constitutional right, but of such an overruling necessity as left General Jackson no alternative but the establishment of martial law, or the sacrifice of New Orleans to the rapine and lust of the British soldiery. On this ground Mr B. bad planted himself firmly at the last session of Congress; and here he intended to remain.

In the history of every nation at war, cases might occur of such extreme and overpowering necessi⚫ ty, that, in order to save the country, a military commander might be compelled to resort to the establishment of martial law. Emergencies might exist, in which he would be guilty of culpable negligence, if he refused to adopt this expedient. This was eminently the position of General Jackson at New Orleans. If, knowing, as he did, that a traitorous correspondence was carried on with the enemy, and that no other means of arresting it existed, he would justly have exposed himself to the severest censure, had he suffered the city to be sacked, rather than save it by declaring martial law. But, in every such case, the commanding general acted upon his own responsibility, and at his own peril; and must afterwards appeal to his country for his justification. To that country he had made his appeal, and it had nobly justified his conduct. It was an act of the most heroic patriotism-of the sternest duty. Most fortunate had it

been for us, that a man commanded in that city who never shrunk from personal responsibility when his country was in danger.

General Jackson's situation at New Orleans presented the case par excellence for such an exercise of power. If we were to search the history of the world for examples—if imagination were permitted to take the widest range, we could not present, or even fancy, a case more strongly justifying, in every particular, the declaration of martial law, than that which existed at New Orleans. All the attendant circumstances are now matters of authentic history. General Jackson was sent to defend our great Western commercial city against the British forces. He was almost destitute of regular soldiers. A few thousand raw militia, suddenly brought together, constituted nearly his whole army. All that he had to rely upon was their native but undisciplined courage. He had to organize them, to discipline them, to infuse into them his own indomitable spirit, and then to lead them to battle and to victory.

And what was the condition and character of the enemy against whom he had to contend? The British General commanded a numerous and wellprovided army of regulars, in a perfect state of discipline, and flushed with victory over the conquerors of Europe. Such were the fearful odds against General Jackson! We can all remember that, for a time, despair sat on almost every countenance; and we have been informed that when the news of the victory reached Congress, there was such a burst of enthusiastic joy as had never been witnessed before in these halls. This was the effusion of patriotic hearts upon the delivery of their country from fearful and impending danger.

By what means did the General achieve this great and glorious victory?

Louisiana had been a Spanish province but a few years before. Its ancient inhabitants had not become warmly attached to our Constitution and laws, as they are at present. Besides, there were many discontented foreigners within the city of New Orleans. Whilst a very large majority of the inhabitants displayed their patriotism and their courage on the field of battle, the city harbored within its bosom a number of traitors, who were in correspondence with the enemy. The General's weakness and his plan of defence were in this manner com. municated to the British commander, who was thus instructed in the best mode of attack.

General Jackson was thus placed in a position of awful responsibility. On the one hand, he was aware that the letter of the Constitution conferred upon him no authority to declare martial law; whilst, on the other, he knew that the establishment of martial law was the only human means of ar resting this traitorous correspondence with the enemy, and saving the city. Before this act was per

Senate.

formed, he had consul'ed the leading inhabitants of New Orleans, who entirely approved the measure.

Suppose General Jackson had refused to establish martial law, and the city had been captured: how could he then have justified his conduct to his country? Could he have said, "I knew there was a band of traitors within the city, who were in correspondence with the enemy; I knew that, in this manner, all my plans for its defence would be defeated; I knew that, by declaring martial law, the city could have been saved: I knew all this, but such was my reverence for the letter of the Constitution, that, rather than violate it, I determined that New Orleans should be surrendered to the possession and pillage of the enemy? I would not, even for a few days, restrain the constitutional liberty of the citizens, even to secure the permanent salvation of the city."

No, sir, no. Excusable is not the word. General Jackson stands justified-amply justified-in the judgment of his whole country, for his conduct. This is no party question; at least, so far as I am acquainted with the feelings of the people. Posterity has already decided the question; because more than a quarter of a century has elapsed since the event. The passage of this bill, there. fore, is only important as it will embody public sentiment, and place upon the records of the nation the vindication of their General.

Mr. B. bad confidently hoped that, in this era of good feeling, the bill might have been permitted to pass without a word of comment. It was destined to pass; it would pass; it must pass, and that at no distant day. This act of justice towards General Jackson would as certainly be performed as that the American people were grateful to their distinguished benefactor. Then why delay it? Let the healing balm of our approbation go home to him whilst he was yet in the land of the living. Mr. B. strongly appealed to his patriotic and gallant political enemies in the Senate to suffer the bill to pass without further delay.

Mr. ALLEN made some remarks against the reference, and argued in justification of the declaration of martial law by General Jackson at New Orleans. He maintained that its declaration was indispensable to the safety of that city, and that the necessity was a full justification of the act.

Mr. CRITTENDEN followed in reply to Mr. ALLEN.

Mr. BERRIEN observed that his remarks had been misconceived in the report quoted by the author of the pamphlet signed "A Kentuckian." I said (continued Mr. B.) in the debate which took place at the last session, I gave no opinion as to the right of a military commander to establish martial law, unless the expression of my belief, that Judge Hall was bound to issue the writ of habeas corpus, may be considered as a denial of it: for the very obvious reason that that right and this obligation could not co-exist. If martial law was rightfully established in New Orleans, superseding, in the extent which was practically given to it, all civil authority, Judge Hall, thus stripped of authority, could have been under no obligation to issue this writ. When, therefore, I asserted this obligation, (which I did expressly in that debate,) I denied inferentially the right to establish martial law.

I did, however, say on that occasion, and now repeat it, that, if Gen. Jackson believed (and I did not question the sincerity of his belief) that the safety of New Orleans required the confirement or removal of Louallier, and persons similarly situated, he was excusable in disobeying the writ of habeas corpus, relying upon the country to absolve him from a responsibility which he had assumed, by adopting a measure which he deemed necessary for its defence, when the responsibility of making that defence was thrown upon him. I do not recollect that any gentleman asserted in that debate that General Jackson had a right, under the Constitution and laws of the United States, to establish martial law in the military district under his command-that is, to subject its inhabitants to the rules and articles of war. There were those who maintained that he was justifiable in doing so; which I did not. When it was admitted that the Constitution and laws of the United States gave no such authority, the legal question was at an end

27TH CONG....3D SESS.

because the authority of General Jackson as the military commander of that district was derived, and could be derived, only from that Constitution and laws; and beyond these, he could have no rightful authority. I held, however, that the act of disobedience to the writ of habeas corpus was excusable, if it was done under a belief that it was indispensable to the safety of the city with the defence of which he was intrusted.

Mr PORTER said he would not have detained the Senate a moment at this stage of the discussion, but for the fact that he considered himself as called out by the allusion made by the Senator from Missouri [Mr. LINN] to certain resolutions adopted by the Legislature of Michigan a year ago, purporting to instruct the Senators from that State on this floor how to vote on this bill. It is true, that such resolutions were sent to me, and were in my hands pending this bill during the last session. It is also true, that I did not present them to the Senate. I regarded them as a legislative expression of opinion, addressed to myself only, and not to this body. They assumed to control my action here, but not that of anybody else. They related merely to a private claim of small pecuniary amount, and not to any great measure of national policy. It was not necessary they should be presented, in order that their moral effect should be felt here; for the fact that this legistive movement had been made, was sufficiently notorious. Whether the Legislature of Michigan be entitled to the honor, in this instance, of first imparting warmth to national gratitude, which had lain cold for more than a quarter of a century, I am not prepared to say. It would seem, however, from the remarks of the Senator, that the arrival of these resolutions in this city first prompted him to action here. That action was the introduction of a bill, at the last session, precisely like the one now before us. The fate of that bill is well known. An amendment was offered, which di rected the refunding of this fine, with costs and interest; with the proviso, "that this act should not be construed as an expression of the opinion of Congress upon any judicial proceeding or legal questions growing out of the declaration of martial law by General Jackson during the defence of New Orleans." I voted for this amendment, and it was adopted by the Senate. On the question which next presented itself, viz: the engrossment of the bill, I voted in the affirmative. But that vote was rendered ineffectual by that of the Senator and his friends. The bill was lost.

It will be seen, from this reference to the history of the case during the last session, that my course has been strictly in conformity with the wishes of the Legislature of Michigan, as expressed in these resolutions. Had I been disposed to regard them as mandatory on me, I could not have acted differently. In saying this, however, I mean not to be understood as admitting myself to have been under any obligation, constitutional or otherwise, to yield the right which they assumed to exercise.

Mr. WOODBRIDGE said: It will not have es caped observation, Mr. President, that I, too, stand in the same relation to this matter with my friend and colleague from Michigan. It is true, sir, that resolutions, such as have been described by the honorable Senator from Missouri, passed the Legisla'ure of Michigan, and were sent duly certified to us here: nor was it at all necessary, I think, that we should thus have been reminded of the fact.

The gentleman from Missouri has been pleased, also, to draw into notice our omission to present those resolutions to the Senate. For the present occasion, at least, I am satisfied, so far as regards myself, with the brief but general exposition made by my colleague, of the motives which may have induced the course we each of us pursued.

It will be observed, sir, that my name, too, is registered among those who, last summer, voted for a bill, the object of which was, without casting reproach upon the distinguished judge who passed the sentence, to remit the pecuniary fine imposed upon General Jackson. Nor am I prepared to say that I have since had occasion to vary the opinions then entertained in the matter. With regard to the degree of respect in which I should hold the expressed wishes or opinions of the authorities of

The Bankrupt Law-Mr. Weller.

Michigan, on any subject, as well as with respect to my own estimate of the extent of the obligation which such resolu ions as are alluded to may be deemed to impose, I-am certainly not without some opinions of my own-and opinions I have no disposition to conceal. And I assure my friend from Missouri that I will feel myself at all times ready, if he desire it, to explain them very fully and frankly to him; or, when a fit occasion shall occur, to expose them in extenso here in the Senate. But now, at this late hour, I do not desire to delay the S na'e by entering upon an exposition which would consume so much time. Indeed, after what my colleague has said, I should hardly have risen now, but for his omission-accidental, I presume-to notice the imputations I was very sorry to hear, but which the Senator from Missouri allowed himself to cast upon the gentleman who has the honor, in the other wing of the Capitol, to represent the interests of Michigan. I do not know in what terms that gentleman thought proper to announce the resolutions in question, in the other House; nor do I at all remember to have read the newspaper which, we are informed, contained the account of that procedure.

But, relatively to the animadversions in which the gentleman from Missouri has been pleased to indulge, and waiving all comment upon the competency or propriety of making thus the action of the other House, or of any of its members there, the subject of comment or criticism, much more of censure, here, I ask leave to say that the Representative from Michigan in the other House is, I have no doubt, abundantly competent, and on any proper occasion will be equally willing, fully to justify and defend his course, whatever it might have been in this regard; and I only regret that the gentleman from Missouri should here, in another forum, have permitted himself thus to impugn the conduct of an absent person.

The further consideration of the bill was then, on motion to that effect, postponed to the succeeding Tuesday.

Mr. LINN hoped there would be no objection to the publicity of the document in the possession of the Senator from Louisiana, and that the Sena tor would consent to lay it before the Senate in the proper manner to warrant that course.

Mr. CONRAD had no objection.

The copy of the record was then presented in form to the Senate; and, on motion of Mr. LINN, ordered to be printed.

The Senate then adjourned.

REMARKS OF MR. WELLER,

OF OHIO.

In the House of Representatives, January 3d, 1843. The bill to repeal the bankrupt law being under consideration, and the debate having taken a wide range

Mr. WELLER rose, and said he had not risen with any disposition to discuss the question really before the House. This, indeed, was required by the parliamentary law; but the common usage since he had the honor of a seat here, had been to discuss anything else except the question upon which we were called to vote. In this instance, he found it more convenient to observe the usage than the rules of the House; and he should, after a few remarks upon the question, allude to other topics introduced by other gentlemen in this debate.

Mr. W. said he was opposed to the passage of the bankrupt law at the extra session, because he then believed, as he still does, that such a law was neither sanctioned by the Constitution, nor called for by the voice of the people. After a careful examination of that instrument, he could not find that it authorized Congress to pass a law sanctioning the violation of contracts-he alluded to the retrospective feature in the law. For himself, he was in favor of a strict construction of the Constitution, and he denied to Congress the exercise of any power not expressly delegated, or absolutely necessary to the exercise of a delegated pow.

er.

But gentlemen infer, because the States are in express terms forbidden to pass any laws violating contracts, and the General Government is not, that therefore Congress may violate contracts! Are we, then; to assume the power, because it is not forbidden by the Constitution? Did not the framers of

H. of Reps.

that instrument intend that this should be a Govern. ment of limited, of delegated powers? If the latitudinous construction claimed by gentlemen be given to that Constitution, then the General Government is omnipotent. The States are prohibited from passing laws violating contracts; the Federal Government is not. Why is this? Simply because the States would have had the power, if not prohibited, to pass laws of that character; and be cause the Federal Government, deriving all its legis lative power directly from the Constitution, can do nothing except that which it is expressly authorized to do. If in this he was correct, the only question which remained to be decided, was, whether Con. gress could exercise the power conferred to pass uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcy, without vio lating contracts. If this could be done, then he held we had not the power to violate contracts. That it can be done, must be obvious to all. A prospective bankrupt law, to operate on contracts made after its passage, would be a uniform law upon the subject of bankruptcy, and no violation of the Constitution. To such a bill, properly guarded against fraud, and so framed as to include your banks and all other incorporations, he might not be disposed to object. Then individuals would make their bargains with a full knowledge of the law. He could easily see that such a measure might operate beneficially upon the country, in checking excessive credit, and, by drawing the banks within its influence, save the people from the immense losses herefore sustained by the frauds of those institu. tions.

This law, (said Mr. W.,) which we are now called on to repeal, was passed under very peculiar circumstances. At the extra session, after the bill had been laid on the table (where every one supposed it was destined to sleep the sleep of death) by à decisive majority, the Whig members here were entertained that evening at a certain board, where the sparkling champagne flowed pretty freely, and where rumor said an agreement was made to reconsider the vote next morning. Sure enough, when morning came, the identical same men came into this hall, reconsidered the vote of the previons day, and, in the twinkling of an eye, this bill, with all its acknowledged imperfections, was passed. A majority of this House at that very time was opposed to it; but it was passed to secure the enactment of another bill, in which certain Western Whigs felt a deep interest-he meant the land bill; for it is well known that all the laws passed at that session were passed by contract. Not one of them had merits of its own sufficient to secure its passage, if standing alone. It therefore became necessary, in order to carry one bill, to pass several. The land bill has been virtually repealed; and now the friends of that, seeing the contract has been violated, demand the repeal of the bankrupt law. And hence we find the very men who aided by their votes in passing this bill, now clamorous for its repeal! What wonderful stability and harmony there is in Whig legislation!

But why could not the law be repealed? Could it be pretended that the people were in favor of its retention on the statute-book? Would any gentle man rise in his place and tell him that? No, sir, no one has the hardihood to hazard such a declaration. Why not, then, pass this bill instantly? Was it not the duty of this House first to ascertain public sentiment, and then make legislation conform to it? When our masters, the people have clearly (as in this case) expressed their will, are we not bound to bow submissively to it? But we have been told that the people in 1840, by electing a majority of Whigs to this House, decided in favor of of a bankrupt law! He denied this in toto. No such issue had been presented-no such decision made. The act was passed by the Whig members here, without consulting with their constituents; or else why is it that you now find some twenty of thirty of the very men who voted for it in favor its repeal? Again: It has been said that the peo ple do not understand this bill-that their hostility to it grows out of their ignorance! It is the practice of a certain class of politicians to denounce the people as ignorant whenever they do not act in conformity with their particular opinions. At one time you will hear them demanding that a law shall be passed, because the people desire it; bul when the people are found to be opposed to it, then it is said their opposition grows out of their ignorWell, (said Mr. W.) I am inclined to the opinion that the honest farmers in my dish ict, who have lost large amounts by the bankrupt law, know

ance!

་་

[ocr errors]

27TH CONG....SD SESS.

something of its practical operation. They have seen enough of it to satisfy them that it should be repealed. The merits and demerits of the law have since its passage been freely discussed in the newspapers and in the popular assemblies, and the people have almost with one voice demanded its repeal. Why should not their judgment be carried into effect?

Mr. W. admitted that the unconditional repeal of the law might operate hard, and even unjust. ly, upon many individuals; for he had no doubt some honest men would be compelled to declare themselves bankrupts, in consequence of the discharge of their debtors. Some of them would, perhaps, after having been made bankrupts by the law, be excluded from its benefits. Besides, owing to the decision of one of the States, (Missouri,) that the act was unconstitutional, no one there had been permitted to avail himself of its provisions. He deeply sympathised with the unfortunate debtor, and was willing to exercise all the power conferred on him by the Constitution to alleviate his sufferings, or release him from imprisonment; but, as he held that this law was unconstitutional, he must vote for its repeal. Those who believed with him, that the act was unconstitutional, were compelled to seize the earliest opportunity to repair the breach made in its enactment. It is true, the retroactive part of the law is pretty well spent, and the greatest amount of evil resulting from it has already been felt; but, no matter what benefits might result to the country from its prospective features, he was bound to vote for the repeal of this bill.

Having said this much on the subject before the House, he would notice other questions discussed in extenso by some of the gentlemen who had preceded him. In ranging over the wide field of party debate, he was but following in the footsteps of his illustrious predecessors.

He knew and admitted that the present Executive had had difficulties to encounter, such as never obstructed the path of his predecessor. He came into power upon the top of a popular wave, which dashed from office a party which, for twelve years, had had, to a great extent, the possession of the Government. It could scarcely be expected that we, who had been ejected from power by the influence of his name, in conjunction with that of another distinguished individual-we, who had been so signally defeated at the ballot-box, would cherish any very friendly feelings for him. It was but natural that we should look with distrust-yea, even unkindness-upon the individual who had been one of the active agents in producing our overthrow. We came here, however, (said Mr. W.,) at the extra session, with every disposition to aid in the proper administration of the Government. That generosity and forbearance which brave and chivalric knights always extend to a defeated adversary, was not extended to us. We were taunted with our defeat; and whenever we dared to raise our voices in this hall, were told that the people had condemned us -that we were like criminals in the cart, waiting but for the arrival of the executioner to do his office upon us! You of the Whig party were then in a triumphant majority. Your victorious banner waved over twenty of the States of this Confederacy. So complete, so triumphant a victory, had never before been achieved in the annals of party warfare. He would not stop to inquire by what means this revolution had been effected. It was enough for him to say that they were such as had since been condemned by the sober judgment of the people-such as should cause a blush to mantle the cheek of those who used them-such as he trusted, for the honor of this country, would never again be resorted to. Your distinguished leader, (Mr. Clay,) whom a majority of you have so long delighted to honor, was then in the other end of the Capitol, to shapen legislation so as to secure the succession to himself. That was a happy hour for him; it was the day of his triumph. He then imagined that the difficulties which had heretofore obstructed his path to the Presidency were all removed, and that he would have an easy and rapid march to the goal of his ambition-that goal for the attainment of which he had directed all the mighty energies of his mind for more than twenty years. Already he imagined himself seated in the Presidenial chair, and dispensing with a lordly munificence the patronage of the office amongst his friends and followers. But, alas! how short-sighted is man! How soon the destiny of the politician may be changed! To-day, courted and caressed by a

The Bankrupt Law-Mr. Weller.

crowd of fawning flatterers; to-morrow, when adversity falls upon him, there are "none so poor to do him reverence." Yes, (said Mr. W.,) your chieftain has fallen-fallen "like Lucifer, never to hope again"-blasted, scathed by the lightning of popular indignation, he stands a most melancholy monument of ill-directed ambition. He might philosophize over his present prostrate condition, and repeat as applicable to his own case the lines ascribed by Shakspeare to Cardinal Wolsey in the hour of his misfortune. He would not trouble the House to recite them.

[Several gentlemen around Mr. W. said, "Repeat them-let us hear them-recite them."]

Well, (said Mr. W.) I will quote them for the edification of gentlemen

"This is the state of man; to-day he puts forth
The tender leaves of hope; to-morrow blossoms,
And bears his blushing honors thick upon him;
The third day comes a frost, a killing frost;
And-when he thinks good easy man, full surely
His greatness is a ripening,-nips his rooL,
And then he falls as I do. I have ventur'd,
Like little wanton boys that swim on bladders,
This many summers in a sea of glory,
But far beyond my depth; my high blown pride
At length broke under me; and now has left me,
Weary, and old with service, to the mercy
Of a rude stream that must forever hide me."

Yes, sir, there has been a "frost, a killing frost," in Ohio, where your captain went to take charge of his troops in propriâ persona-in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Maine-and, in fact, nearly all the States-which has nipped the root of his hopes, and produced an explosion of his "highblown pride." That banner which waved so proudly in 1840, and under which he believed that his friends could again be rallied to victory, is now tattered, and torn, and trailing in the dust. But he had no disposition to exult over a fallen foe, nor to do violence to the feelings of his gallant friends who had adhered to him through good and through evil report, and who were still willing to do batile under his lead.

It is said, "whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth." If the degree of affection is to be measured by the amount of chastening bestowed, one would suppose that our Whig friends were.the especial favorites of Heaven. Surely, no party has ever been so severely whipped. But there are some men who do not profit by experience. There are some whose souls are hardened by adversity; and he doubted very much whether the recent afflictions of the Whigs had softened their hearts, corrected their principles, improved their manners, or disposed them to abandon their heresies. Well, let them go on in their wild and reckless course. They will find that "the way of the transgressor is hard." The people, seeing that their prosperity lies in the defeat of the Whigs, will "laugh at their calamities, and mock when their fear cometh." In their efforts to break down the Executive for the exercise of a constitutional power, they will find they are "kicking against the pricks."

At the extra session, we were (said Mr. W.) in a lean minority--a minority almost hopeless. Our voices were too weak to resist the passage of the unconstitutional and dangerous laws of that session; but we fortunately found a Chief Magistrate sufficiently devoted to the Constitution (in some respects, at least) to save it from the ruthless hands of the spoilers. He vetoed the bank bill, and thus defeated a measure fraught with the most dangerous consequences to the country. He believed, if such an institution had been permitted to go into full operation, with branches extended all over the States of this Union, its corrupting influence upon the ballot-box, and upon the legislation of the country, would have been such as to have required a revolution to put it down. We all know the influence of concentrated, of organized wealth, in the hands of ambitious, designing politicians. The history of the late Bank of the United States furnishes us with abundant evidence on this subject. Well, (said Mr. W.,) the President, in the exercise of his constitutional prerogative, arrested the bill: and is it to be wondered at that we applaud him for the act? Would Whig orators on this floor expect us to denounce, with their fish-market epithets, a man who had thus nobly vindicated our principles? Did they suppose that the same base ingratitude which had, upon more than one occasion, signalized their conduct, would be exhibited by us? But he is denounced as a traitor! What right had they to expect that Mr. Tyler would approve of their bank charters? Had he not repeatedly, when in public life, denied, in the most solemn manner,

H. of Reps.

the constitutional power of Congress to incorporate such an institution? Does any man pretend that he recanted these sentiments, when canvassing for the second office in the Government? Did he not, in his first message to Congress, say that such an institution had been condemned by the people? Could they expect him to disregard the solemn judgment of the people upon this question? Why, then, charge him with treachery? Why, say they, he is a traitor to the "universal Whig party!" During the past administration, Mr. Van Buren was denounced as the President of a party, which they said was dangerous-ay, exceedingly dangerous to the liberties of the people. Yes, said he, these eloquent orators wanted no party President; they wanted a man who would soar above party trammels, and preside with impartiality over the whole republic! Oh, no; there was nothing selfish in their movements; they cared nothing for office! Nothing but the most devoted affectionthe most ardent love for that unhappy country which had been ruined, as they said, by the maladministration of a party President-fired their bosoms, or nerved their arms, in the ever-memorable contest of 1840! Well, sir, how stands the case now? Mr. Tyler refuses to be a mere party President; he refuses to permit a legislative caucus of Whig members to prescribe to him the manner in which he shall discharge his executive duties; he refuses to let other men construe for him that instrument which he had sworn to maintain and defend; in the language of the spoils haters of 1840, he soars above party discipline; he refuses to fill the capacious maws of the horde of hungry office-seekers who are constantly besetting him. This is the head and front of his offending; and for this, he is daily denounced on this floor by these same disinterested, no-party patriots of 1840, as a base and an infamous traitor!

Mr. W. said, he repeated that John Tyler had had no ordinary difficulties to encounter. He had been placed in a position requiring the exercise of great firmness and moral courage. He came into office when the tariff had run down to its minimum point, with an accruing revenue wholly inadequate to defray the necessary wants of the Government. The banking system-which, under vicious State legislation, had swollen to an enormous bulk-was exploding, spreading ruin and desolation over all the interests of the country. States, as well as individuals, were deeply involved in debt, and national bankruptcy seemed almost inevitable. In this emergency, he was backed by no party here. Both of the great parties in this hall were arrayed against him. The Whigs would not sustain him, because he refused to obey the mandates of their CaptainGeneral, and because he would not direct his patronage in such a way as to secure him in the succession. The Democrats, it is true, supported some of his measures zealously; but there were others which they were compelled to oppose. Besides, they then saw, as they still see, around him some men in whom they never have had, and never can have, the slightest degree of confidence. That the President has been actuated in the discharge of his official duties, by the highest considerations of patriotism, he had never doubted. That he conscientiously believes that the measures which he has from time to time recommended to our consideration are calculated to advance the interests, and secure the permanent prosperity of the country, he did not question. And he would venture the prediction, that, after the excitement which now prevails should have subsided, and reason was once more permitted to exercise her proper influence over the minds of men, after the brawling partisans who are now denouncing him here have turned their attention to some other object, the purity of his intentions, the integrity of his motives (whatever may be the errors of his administration) will be doubted by none. Cherishing, then, (said Mr. W.,) as he certainly did, the utmost feelings of kindness and respect for the President, he trusted that he should not be charged with a factious spirit in opposing some of his measures. Whatever his personal feeling might be, that could not influence his political sentiments; he never suffered his personal attachments to control his political opinions. He was wedded to Democratic principles; he had sworn upon the altar of his country to devote his life to their maintenance and dissemination; and neither the sunny smiles or the courtly praises of friends, nor the curses or threats of enemies, could change his course.

We should not (said Mr. W.) attempt to stop the

27TH CONG.... 3D SESS.

wheels of Government merely because the man at the helm may not be the individual of our choice. As unwise would it be in the brave sailor to scuttle his vessel and sink her beneath the waves of the ocean, because the commanding officer did not navigate her in accordance with his preconceived opinions. What do we gain by stopping the Government? Do we inflict chastisement on the President, or do we spread ruin and distress amongst our consituents? This Government belongs to no party-it is the common property of us all-we are joint tenants in the glorious inheritance which has been transmitted to us by our ancestors; and we, who are charged with legislative duties, are under an obligation to see that its blessings are undiminished under our guardianship. The stars and the stripes under which our brave countrymen have so often rallied and so gallantly fought, belong to no party; they are the representatives of the whole American Republic. He humbly conceived that it was the duty of the Democratic party to sustain the Administration, whenever they could do so without abandoning any of the principles upon which they have hitherto acted. Our political creed, being that upon which Jefferson and Jackson acted, is well understood by the country; and whenever the measures of Mr. Tyler are in conformity with that creed, they will receive our cordial support; but when they come to us in questionable shape, containing any of the old leaven of Federalism, we are bound to oppose them; and he trusted we should do so boldly and fearlessly, regardless of the consequences to ourselves. He would make no compromises with any party, which required the sacrifice of a Democratic principle.

If (said Mr. W.) the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. CUSHING] had, as was represented, come into this hall holding up the patronage of the General Government as a prize to be struggled for by the respective parties, he would have told him that the President had not patronage enough (even if he was so disposed) to purchase so humble a member as he was much less a majority of the Democratic party. No, sir; he would sooner see his own right arm stricken from his body, and his tongue palsied, than sacrifice his principles, or any portion of his independence of character, at the footstool of any President. The mass of the Democratic party were made of sterner stuff than to be seduced from the allegiance they owe to their principles by the hope of office.

If (said Mr. W.) there be an idea in the mind of any one that a party can be organized and sustained on executive gifts, let me say that, in my judgment, it is entirely fallacious. The Administra. tion must rely upon principles; and, if it expects the support of the Democracy, it must take care to make those principles Democratic. Executive patronage may gather around the person of the President the speculating, trading politicians, who regard public virtue as the mere coquetry of political prostitution; but the first cloud of adversity that rests upon him will be the signal for a general desertion of his cause. In the hour of his prosper. ity, they may load his ears with fulsome praises; but in the hour of need they will abandon him.

Other gentlemen had defined their position in relation to the coming contest. So far as he was concerned, if any gentleman desired to know where he expected to be, he could answer that in a few months he should lay aside his legislative robes and become a private citizen. He expected that a national convention would be held, to reconcile the differences of opinion which now exist among us as to who the candidate shall be. When the result is announced, he should be found as an humble private, supporting that nominee, come he from the North or South, the East or West. He held on to the principles upon which he came into public life, and, sink or swim, he should not abandon them.

[blocks in formation]

The Bankrupt Law-Mr. A. Kennedy.

bargain, he would undertake to renew the motion when he was through with his remarks.

Mr. EVERETT persisted in his motion. [Cries of "Vote it down." And the question being put on a second to the previous question, the House, by a clamorous majority, refused the second. Whereupon,

Mr. KENNEDY proceeded to address the House as follows:

Mr. Speaker: The question of repealing the bankrupt law has unexpectedly created great excitement in this House, not so much from the debate on the main proposition of repeal, as from some incidental remarks which have fallen from two sides of the triangle on this floor. And as I belong to the other side of this three-cornered fight, I beg to be heard a few moments before the debate closes.

It is known to members here that I voted against the passage of this law. I did not give this vote because I was opposed to a well-regulated system of bankruptcy, but because this bill was not such a one as I believed the Constitution contemplated or the interest of the country demanded. But, however objectionable it was in its original inception, I am free to confess that, in my judgment, it has worked its worst; or, in the language of the gentleman from Vermont, who advocated its passage, and now seeks its repeal, "It has answered the purpose of its passage," or, as I would express it, "It has answered the purposes of those who passed it." It has given the power to many millionary debtors, who, in equity, should never have had the benefit of its provisions to wipe out their honest debts; and now, when the time has arrived that some honest men, who have been made bankrupts by applying this sponge to debts due them, are about receiving the benefits of the law, it is to be repealed; and repealed, too, on the motion of those who advocated its passage, and who have the effrontery now to declare that they intended originally that it should have but a temporary duration.

I respond, then, to the declaration of the gentleman from Vermont, when he says "It has accomplished its object." And I say to that gentleman, and to the House, that, although I voted against this law in its inception, yet if I had any well grounded hope that a proper system could be ingrafted on this act, I would freely and fearlessly vote against its repeal. But, sir, this thing has gone forth to our constituents in its original deformity, and accumulated against it such a fearful denunciation as calls for its sudden and total repeal.

Under these circumstances, I shall vote for the repeal, hoping that, at some future time, an equitable and constitutional bankrupt law may be enacted. But, whilst I am on this subject, I beg leave to say, that the mode and manner of passing this law has done more to render it so universally odious than even its unjust provisions. In treating of this subject, I hope the House will excuse me if I speak plainly.

What were the circumstances under which this law was passed? I understood at the time of its passage-nay, it was then bold y avowed-that its passage was to secure the passage of another law: I mean the distribution act. But I have been told by a member of this House, (and one, too, who avowed his participation in the act,) that it was passed for the purpose of carrying the elections in the States of New York and Maine. I understood from this gentleman that it was feared, and so represented in Whig caucus by the members from those States, that, unless this law was passed, the Whig party would he defeated there in the then coming elections. What a reason of state for the passage of a law! If you Western Whigs, whose constituents are opposed to the law, will nevertheless pass it, we, on our part, will stipulate and agree to use it as an instrument to carry the elections in our States for the Whig party. Shame on such a prostitution of legislative functions! But it turns out, in the sequel, that although the price was paid for Whig delegates in the 28th Congress from the States of Maine and New York, yet the votes are not forthcoming. There has been a Yankee trick played off on our Western gentlemen. The Whigs have been routed, horse, foot, and dragoons-or rather I should say "rac coons"-in these two States. And I suppose our boys, not to be outdone by their Yankee brethren, are determined to take back the consideration by re pealing the law.

Now, sir, I say, on leaving this part of the subject, that if this law was passed by these means,

H. of Reps.

and for such objects, it was an unholy, dishonorable, and damnable combination; and if such practices be tolerated by the people of this country, it will end in the total corruption and overthrow of the legislative functions of this Government. I repeat, then, that the mode and manner of the pas sage of this law went further in rendering it universally odious than even its unjust provisions. It is objectionable, first, for what it contains; and, secondly, for what it does not contain. The law ought never to have operated retrospectively; for, by destroying existing contracts, it amounts to repudiation. It is a congressional sponge, that wipes out all old scores. This feature rendered it justly odi But further, it ought

ous to a debt-paying people. to have embraced within its provisions all corporaions issuing paper to circulate as money. It was odious, then, from this omission. And hence the people demand its repeal; and repealed it must be. So much for the repeal bill.

The debate on this bill was opened by the gentleman from New York [Mr. BARNARD] with a long and doleful history of the discomfitures and disas ters it had occasioned the universal Whig party. Sir, whilst listening to that lamentable recapitula. tion, I really had my sympathies enlisted. My heart is warm, and rather tender; and although I can war against the Whigs to the knife-ay, and the knife to the hilt-whilst they are before me in the open field; yet when they come to us with such tales of wo as have been repeated on this occasion, I cannot and will not withhold a sympathizing

tear.

I think the gentleman likened their cause to that of some miserable criminal, who was condemned to the task of rolling a heavy load up a steep hill, but to be met at the top by a force which would instantly hurl him and his load to the bottom agam. Sir, this was a hard case, but an apt and striking illustration. True, the Whigs have been engaged in rolling a heavy load of condemned and exploded measures, and they have rolled them up the steep of public opinion. These measures had been condemned to the garret of "obsolete ideas" for the last quarter of a century. By immense labor, long-continued, they did, at the extra session, by a desperate effort, succeed in reaching the brow of the hill; and here they were met by an indignant constituency, and they and their load hurled to the bottom, leaving them and their measures in a state of total wreck and ruin.

I now enter upon that part of the debate which has been called the desultory, the incidental, or accidental part.

Here let me refer to the remarks of the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. CUSHING.] He says that the Whigs as a party have dashed themselves to pieces against the buckler of executive power, which power he has ingeniously denominated a "constitutional fact." Now I can tell the gentleman from Massachusetts that he too is mistaken; and I beg leave to correct him, as it is my intention, as I proceed, to strike to the right as well as the left. The gentleman is wrong, then, in supposing that the Whig party has broken itself into the fragments that it now exhibits, either against executive power, executive vetoes, or what the gentleman calls a "constitutional fact." No, sir; they have dashed themselves to atoms against the "buckler" of public opinion. The secret of this fearful destruction which has so unexpectedly overtaken them, is to be found in that series of public measures which was so hastily, at the extra session, called from the storehouse of "obsolete ideas," and attempted to be forced through Congress as a grand whole; and this, before the people had time to cool after the glorious victory of 1840. Now, those gentlemen who believe in their consciences that those measures are for the public good, deserve great credit for their zeal in their enactment, for there is nothing more to be admired in a public man than a fearless and independent discharge of what he thinks his duty; but, in persuading themselves that the people were in favor of those measures, or that they were for the public weal,-in this consisted their

error.

In the last Presidential canvass, the Whigs played the game of hide-and-go-seek with the peo ple. They nominated candidates of doubtful politics, so that it could be said in one section of the country that they were in favor of one set of measures, in another of another; for a bank and against a bank; for a tariff and against a tariff, for distribution and against distribution, according to the section in which the assertion was made, or would suit popular feeling. Thus they contrived

271H CONG..... 3D SESS.

to rally men of all shades of opinion, and by this means united the entire elements of opposition. By the combined efforts of this motley crew, the solid and well-formed ranks of Democracy were broken, and they came into power flushed with an unexpected victory. But what followed? When they ceased to break down, and undertook to build upwhen they ceased to object, and attempted to project-they suddenly found themselves in the fix alluded to in this debate. They soon went to pot; or, as the gentleman from Massachusetts has it, they found themselves dashed to atoms against "a constitutional fact"-against which constitutional fact the gentleman kindly warns us of the Dem. ocratic party that we may chance to knock out our brains.

One word now to my friend and colleague, [Mr. THOMPSON] He says that the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. CUSHING] has set up the Government at auction, to be knocked down to the highest bidder; that that gentleman has openly proposed a coalition with the Democrats; and that if we say nothing, the old rule of "silence gives consent" will attach. Now, I am aware that what is said by that gentleman on this floor is read with great interest by our people at home; and hence I feel myself called on to make an immediate response. For myself, I did not so understand the gentleman from Massachusetts; I did not understand him to sell out the Administration to the highest bidder, though I confess it squinted a little that way. What I understood the gentleman to say was, that the dominant party in this House had become, by its course towards the President, nothing more nor less than a miserable faction; that they were willing to trample under foot all regard for the Constitution, as well as the best interests of the country, in order to "head Capting Tyler;" and that they manifested a spleen totally unbecoming American Representatives. I certainly did not understand the gentleman to mean any more than that, as John Tyler was the President, and it was his duty to discharge the public functions belonging to that station, and being thus opposed by the majority in Congress, he was bound, and would carry on the Government by the best means within his power. To this, and thus far, then, I respond to the gentleman from Massachusetts; and I take it upon myself to say, that, although it is not material to the people of this country who is President, yet it is, nevertheless, very material that their Government should not be stopped. If John Tyler finds the Whigs constantly blocking up his way, in his honest intentions to do his duty-constantly clinging to the wheels of Government to impede its progress-then I hold it not only to be his right, but his bounden duty, as President, to look beyond that party, and to every part of the country, for that aid which he has a right to expect from those who put him in power.

One wore as to the bid that the Democrats will make at this presidential sale, which my colleague says is coming off. I do not speak by authority, but I speak as one of the fifty-three thousand Democrats of the Hoosier State; and as I am the only one of the number who now has the right to speak here, I speak with the more freedom. If I am required to bid, I must first know the terms of sale;whether the bids are to be made orally or in writing. In the latter case, I should be cautious, as I have always found it to be extremely inconvenient and troublesome for a politician to put his though's to paper. They sometimes become extremely hard to explain away.

But, to be serious: I tell my colleague that so far as myself, or those I represent, are concerned, I have no bid to make; no political alliances to form with any man; no threats to fear from any quarter. We have but one set of plain, straightforward principles; and, so far as the Executive is concerned, or any body with the Executive-so far as the Executive will carry out those principles, so far will we stand by and support him; and not one inch further.

As for the offices of the Government, which, it has been supposed, were offered under disguise by the gentleman from Massachusetts-for myself, and my political friends whom I represent, I must say I want none of them. If one of my political friends should ask me to use my influence (if any I possessed) to get him an office, my reply would be, No, sir. And why? Because I do not believe it right to hold office under this, or any other administration, unless you can give it a full and fair support. I hold that John Tyler has a right-nay, more, that it is his duty--to place in office under

The Bankrupt Law-Mr. A. Kennedy.

him such men only as can and will give to his administration a full and free support, if such can be found. I care not if, on this ground, he removes some, and puts in others. I never complained of President Harrison for doing this. I thought it his right and duty thus to act. What sort of policy is it to have enemies in your camp?-men on the watch to undermine or betray all your measures? What is this but political suicide? This is what I shall demand of nobody.

I believe that President Tyler ought to have his friends in the executive offices--provided, always, they are capable, and faithful to their trusts. So far, then, as offices are concerned, the President has none that I would receive or ask for my political friends; and I may add, that I suspect any man's Democracy who may be found applying for them.

As to the supposed threat, that the veto power, at a subsequent period, will be used against us: Í understood the gentleman from Massachusetts to say, in substance, that the Whigs passed certain measures through Congress; that the President had vetoed them; that the wild fury of resentment exhibited by that party against the Executive, for thus exercising the veto power, had destroyed them. Now, gentlemen Democrats, as you will have a majority in the next Congress, I warn you not to adhere to your old musty notions of a sub. treasury, &c., but to come in and go with us for the exchequer; for, if you do persist in sticking at the President your ultra measures, why, he'll hit you across the face with a veto too. For myself, I hardly expect to be a member of the next Congress, as I am persuaded that a pretty considerable number of my worthy constituents have serious objections. But, if it should be my good or bad fortune to be here at the next Congress, I will most assuredly vote for such measures as I think right, regardless of consequences. And, should the President veto any or all of them, although I am not prepared to say what I would do, yet I am fully prepared to say what I would not do: I would not turn round and commence a vindictive and personal war against the President, for an honest discharge of what he believes to be his duty; much less would I, because he had thwarted my favorite plans, take advantage of the excitement it might engender, to tear the Constitution of my country to tattersthus madly destroying this ark of political safety purchased for and handed down to us by our patriotic fathers, at the cost of so much blood and treas

ure.

If, however, my poor advice should be asked by my Democratic friends as to their future policy, I would say to them, give the Executive no occasion to use the veto power against you. I have no notion of making a greater man of John Tyler than the Almighty intended him to be. Therefore, I would avoid giving him occasion to use this powerfully popular weapon. No, sir: I would force on him no bill but such as I was satisfied he could conscientiously approve. I never desire to get a stroke with such a weapon across my political pate. It makes a most ugly scar. If there is any characteristic in a public man that the people admire, it is a bold and fearless discharge of duty; and I have never yet known the veto power used, that the masses did not rally around and sustain the President in its use. It is instinctive in our people to rally round and support the man who fearlessly "assumes the responsibility." It was imputed as a sin to President Jackson that he said, "I take the responsibility." Never did politicians make a greater mistake than charging this as a sin. Sir, it was the consciousness of having taken this responsibility which nerved the old Roman's arm, until it became as an iron sinew. It was this cry against him of "tyrant," which called the honest yeomanry of the country to his support. They believed his heart was pure, and his purposes patriotic; and when they saw him nerve himself to the conflict, regardless of all consequences, then it was that they rallied around and buoyed him up to a poin! in popular affection rarely reached by morta:

man.

One word in relation to my opinion of Presiden Tyler. I think him a very honest man; but not as great a man as General Jackson, by considerable.

I will tell gentlemen further, that there is little likelihood of all the "storms" that have or can be raised ever "blowing" John Tyler into the presidential chair again. Gentlemen need not count much on that. He will be suffered to retire, at the end of his present term, with a good honest name.

H. of Reps

To be sure, it will be somewhat bespattered with the spleen and filth of the party who put him in power; but what of that? The world will appreciate the motives of his calumniators. He has already been treated to a round of billingsgate, and denounced as a traitor. A traitor to what?-to his country? No. No man, as yet, has dared such an avowal. But a traitor to his party! And who is it, pray, who thus deals in epithets? It is the selfsame men who once denounced Gen. Jackson. And what was he denounced for? These classical epithets were poured with much profusion upon his venerable head because he, forsooth, went with his party. According to the notions of these president-revilers, it was treason for him to go with his party, while it is treason in Tyler to go against his party. Sir, the people have seen these pretended patriots denouncing the President because he did, and the President because he does not, until they are becoming somewhat suspicious of the motives of such rabid politicians. But let no man suppose, from this remark, that I am going to join in the hue-andcry lately raised against "radical" or ultra politi cians. No, sir. I am, myself, "radical" to the root. and my party feelings, like the roots of our fores oaks, strike deep into the soil of my social affections. Yes, sir, I am radical throughout, and a pretty terrible fellow when once going; but I beg leave to remind gentlemen again, that when the people hear us clamor one thing to-day, and another to-morrow--denounce one man for sticking to his party, and another for not sticking to his party--they will be apt to conclude it is done more for the party than for the country.

The gentleman from Massachusetts has intimated that there will be trouble in our own ranks; that there are breakers ahead. He says that the names of our candidates for the presidency are "legion." Now, I will take the liberty of informing that gentleman that he need give himself no uneasiness on that subject. It is true, we have many eminent and worthy sons in our ranks, whose talents and services to our country eminently qualify them for that high station. Most, if not all of them, are striving with a laudable ambition, by worthy means, to reach that summit of human ambition. But, the gentleman from Massachusetts must recollect one other thing; and that is, none of our men ever come before they are called. We have a long established usage in our household upon this subject: We submit all our claims, and the claims of our respective friends, to the decision of a majority of our friends in convention. Such a meeting we are yet to have, when the conscript fathers of our faith will meet in council. When they have thus spoken, their voice will be responded to with one universal shout of approval, from Maine to Arkansas. Before that day arrives, we each have our preferences, and will freely express them. After that day has passed, these personal preferences give place to our zeal for the good of the whole. My colleague [Mr. THOMPSON] likewise indulges in the hope that a division may yet spring up amongst the Democracy. And with a view to foment these supposed differences, he has artfully spoken of geographical divisions. He says he had hoped to meet, in our next fight, the great Southern chief. At the same time he expresses this wish, he insinuates that this fancy of his is not likely to be gratified, judging from the "signs of the times."

Let me tell my colleague that he is not a good observer of the "signs of the times." And further, if he supposes that that chief will be the easiest overcome in the coming conflict, he is mistaken in that too. If the mantle of the people's choice should fall upon the shoulders of that chief, I, for one, will give the hearty response--Amen. Under his lead, or that of any one of our great chiefs, I will go into the battle, with full confidence in being able to scatter the cohorts of Whigery, backed though they may be with the disaffected from all quarters; to which you may add, if you please, the influence of the "constitutional fact." Here let me remark, that, if President Tyler can answer the catechism, and receive the nomination of the Democratic convention, then I stand pledged to go for him-[A voice: "And not otherwise"]-and not otherwise.

We seek this unanimity of action in our entire party, not for the purpose of office or patronage; for, however honorable and desirable it may be to serve our country in the numerous offices of trust or profit attached thereto, yet this with us is a secondary consideration. It is for the purpose of carrying out certain great leading Democratic measures that we seek power. [A voice: "What are

« PreviousContinue »