Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1837-09-28
Fran eur correspondent RosA,child, No. XXXH.l

WAsnISGroN Sept 20, 1881.
From the vote IN the Senate yesterday, there seems
some disposition to meet the question OF SEPARATION.
There is no telling however Several senators have
yet to speak. 1t IS easy put OIL the decision till the
day now proposed for adjournment, the 9Th OF DC
tober. The party thought II requisite that the people
should know they did not intend at least TO post
pone. Delay from other causes they have ms control
over All that is wanted is sort OF an earnest that
this for separation has been made in Congress
Public opinion must mature under this policy. III Is
fair way of rpenng If we were TO Judge from the
dolngs of the people IN your city.
There is one remarkable incident in the movements
II the party here IL goes tar to give color TO Mr..
Rves : suggestion that Dir. Calhoun Is now the file
leader of the party, and by consequence that pre-
vious understanding existed. In the lower house the
sub treasury bill stated the kind of moneys TO bere
ceved. The tenth section provides tina; nothing shall
be taken in payment of dues but gold and silver or
Their equivalent in government paper. Here then
was the separation clause La the senate sbll no such
provision IL found Ii IL less by one section than the
bill of the house. Mr. Wright in reply TO question
put by Mr. Rives this subject SAID i was the In
tenton of the committee en finance to leave thelaws
as they now Stand. But IN the house Mr.. Cambre
leng meets the issue presented by the President,
openly. Why is this difference Of opinion between
Messrs. Wright and Cambreleng Let US see.
Contrary to expectation, Mr.. Calhoun submits
the very proposition omitted by Wright IN the Sc
mates bill and lnsertedb by Cambreleng IN that of Tho
house. Tscre 10 slight difference in the mode Of
effecung the separation OF bank and state but the
main Issue is the same. Mr. Calhoun is for gradual
dIsconnection, while MIR. Csabreleng i Tor prompt
and effectual separation. Would IL not be avioaton
of probability to suppose that all this was the work 81
chancel The subsequent conduct of the real sepa
uonlsts proves TO my mind that 1t previously
determined hr. Calhoun should introduce the amend
ment II was cheerfully accepted by Mr.. Wright
notwth standing his answer TO Mr.. Rives, and Mr..
Benton was content merely to offer few hints and
express himself satisfied. Again, the amendment was
proposed to the treasury note bill, but withdrawn
without objection and tackled to the sub treasury pro-
ieet. II can hardly be supposed that Mr. Benton
would have submitted so kindly TO see himself sup
planted by Mr.. Calhoun, If there had not been some
previous concert Of acton
The business Of Legislation, you well know, is
the business Of compromise OF private OPINIONS and
feelings. Yet ihs must not DC known % the people
Why not Some demsgogue would raise the hue
and cry al once OF political dishonesty. do nol
blame Mr. Calhoun for advocating hrs favonte theory
under the best auspices He has seen enough to con-
vince him Of the fiiility Of proposing any measure
that is unwelcome 10 the administration. Aid from
such quarter as South Carolina was not t. be reas-
ed by Mr.. Van Blrcn. All hope y, that the junction
of the Van Boron and State Rights parties may mo-
derate The wlful obs,inscy Of the former II the re-
sult Of their union should substitute the rule OF the
collected wisdom Of the party for the will Of one
mas, good will flow out Of II.
Should a decision be had upon Calhoun amend
ment this SESSION, which DO not look for, and OF
which Mr. Calhoun will not complain, yov viii see
the rial separa,ionists voting for H. Mr. Rves hss
moved 10 ssbsu,e 10 bill for the whole cub treasu
W scheme The vote this question viii deubtless
come up vii present our@os association OF aycs