The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-08-25
WHO Is PERFIDIOUsf

Wing papers. and Wing politicians, continue,
(see the speeches Of Messrs. Bolts and Arnold, J
we regret to say, to pour out vials of wrath upon
the head of Mr.. Tyler. The vocabulary of the
language seems to have been ransacked for words
to express their angry denunciations. This is
all exceedingly strange-and strangely unchari-
table. There may have been many more able
and influential, but there were none more jealous
or more industrious than we were, in the contest
which terminated the administration Of Mr.. Van
Buren, But we do protest, most solemny, that,
we were not aware that we were laboring for a
cause, the leading object Of which was, as some
now declare, National Bank. We assert also,
in all sincerity, that we do not believe that the
mass of the people had any idea that they were
sustaining such cause. If they did, where did
they get it2 Certainly not from the columns Of
this paper-certainly not from the principal
Wing papers of the country-surely not from
the stump nor from the halls Of Congress. If a
bank was the leading object, why was not a
bank candidate selected? Why were two gen
tlemen placed upon the ticket, who were open
and Underwriting opponents of bank9 Were
they put forward as decoys, that the votes of the
people might first be secured, and then these de-
coys made the instruments OF design Of which
the people did not hear, and to which they were
not parlies2 Was any such fraud and perfidy
contemplated? If it was, we were not in the
secret. If we had been, and had lent hand to
forward sucna stupendous conspiracy, we should
look upon ourselves as forevermore worthy
object of the scorn and contempt of honest
men.
Let US recur, moment, to portions OF the
history of that memorable contest of 1910, and
see if there be any excuse for the treatment with
which Mr.. Tyler is visited.
Gen. Harrison, in his speech at Dayton, in
October, and Mr.. Tyler, in his Henrco letter Of
the same month, expressed their opposition to a
Bank We have heretofore quoted their views,
and it is unnecessary to repeat them.
We heard many speeches, we read many adj
dresses, and we were daily conversant with
some 800 of the Wing newspapers Of the United
States during the whole contest, and we So
lemnly aver, that we cannot recoect more than
one public address, one speech, and two or
three Wing newspapers, in which National
Bank was urged as desirable measure, or as a
question belonging to the controversy before the
people.
The address we allude to, was the Bunker
Hill declaration, and the speech was that OF
gentleman in Baltimore, which frightened the
committee of arrangements at the time, and they
called another gentleman 10 the stand TO deny
that the issue had been truly presented.
In addition to this negative testimony infe
rental from the general silence of the Wing
party on the subject, we may now quote some
positive evidence that National Bank was not
an issue before the People.
The address of the Wing Central Committee
to the Wings and Conservatives of the United
States, dated Washington, Aug. 30, 1910, and
signed r. Garland and J. c. Clark, in behalf OF
the Committee, does not allude to the question
of National Bank.
The address to the people of Maryland, by
the Wing Central Committee the State, dated
Baltimore, August, 1910, is silent upon the sub
ject Of Bank.
At the great National Convention Of Young
Men, at Baltimore, in May, 1910, we heard not
word said about National Bank.
AT the great meeting Of Wing merchants, ad-
dressed by Mr. Webster at New York, Sep
ember 1S40 a National Bank was not called
for in any Of the resolutions. They did, how
ever, ask Congress TO assert its power 10 inn
prove and regulate the finances and currency of
the country, and so did we.
In the reports Of the proceedings Of the great
meetings at Columbus, at Fort Meigs, at Sara
toga, at Auburn, N. Y, at Richmond, and at
Yorktown. Va, we find no alluson made TO
National Bank.
But on the contrary, in the address OF the
Wing Convention for the nomination of cleo
tors, to the people of Virginia. we find the fol-
lowing against a Bank:
But il opinions upon the Tariff Internal Improve
ments and the Bank or Bank be the true tests OF
Repubica nisn, then how stands General Harrison in
comparison with Mr. Van Buren, We answer that
upsn the Tariff and Internal Improvements he cannot
he worse than Mr.. Van Buren,, as we have shown you
and as 10 the Bank his unqualified declaration hal Is
,cas unconstitutional is before yo and there is rea