The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-10-12

nes ale pi upon their posts and suffered the enemy
To enter the citadel, II the bank question was the
lie fading object with the Wing party Those who
know those editors Ia almost all matters affecting |
their political creeds, will not be creduiouss as TO
hug such dc Iuson 10 their bosoms- These editors
are known to be Of intelligence and information
and whose zeal and industry In propagatng the Prin-
cples of their party untring IS il to be supposed
that they stood by with folded arms, and suffered
man To be put in nomination, with full knowledge
of his hostility 10 their fayorte system OF policy,
thew desired the establishment Of bank! Is II TO be
supposed that the late Mr. Niles the editor OF the
Register who compiInented MIR Tyler on account
Of his liberal views mbodied IN the report, con-
sderng his kno,on hostility 10 the institution arising out
of his views OF the powers As delegated IN the Con
siitution ignorant Of the opinions OF Mr. Tyler,
and that he would have attended the Convention IN
Baltimore in 1885, and eounte nanced his nomination,
if the bank of the questions which Tie
Wings were struggling TO bring into existence'
From this view of the state OF things existing an
terror to the assembling Of the Convention, well
as the events which transpred there The conclusion Is
iney liable that the Bank question not considered
at all in selecting individuals TO fill the highest ohces
in the Government. If il were one OF the prominent
systems Of policy which led to the struggle OF lS4O
il must e evident to all minds, that the Convention
in full possession of the constitutional principles
of Mr.. Tyler, and that he has practced no deception
on the Wing party-that he has violated no pledges
As to the violation of pledges, it is known full well
that none were eXacted from MIR. Tyler 10 the
practice of giving pledges General Harrison was
opposed. When travelling through Ohio and making
speeches TO the people, he declared at Fort Meigs
that he did not think candidate for the Presidency
should give pledges, " for" says he, If We give
pledges, the battle will not always be TO the strong
10 the heart full of PATRIOTISM but to the man who
can tell the most lies and make the most pledges.
And at Cleveland he said, :" / deem it inconsistent
with the genius Of Institutions for candidates Tor
office 10 give pledges to the public before the cleo
tion.n
Let us examine further the doctrine OF plea
ton. We remark, that the representations on this
subject pregnant with such contradictions, and RE
above each other in such regular graduation OF absur-
dy as will not be easily conceived or, perhaps, has
scarcely been equalled At the very outset Of this
address the author declares that all who attended the
Convention entertained but opinion IN relation TO
the future policy OF the Government, and the pow
that should be exercised by the Congress OF the
United States. 1t is well known that large number
of Wings, who attended the Convention, were deci-
dedly hostile 10 high protective tariff. VIII It be
commended that because they became members oil tins
Convention, they, bs that act pledged themselves 10
support policy against which they had warred for
years that they thus cut themselves loose from their
long cherished principles as regards the action OF The
Federal Government, and long settled views OF pub
lie policy; If the position assumed in this address
be applicable TO Mr. Tyler, in becoming member OF
the Convention, he stood pledged to sustain Bank
Of the United States no matter how organized, or
however obnoxious TO the provisions OF the Consltu
ton, how stands the question with regard TO those
tariff as unconstitutional Now, a large majority of
the Convention believed that such measure was
both expedient and constitutional and the address
maintains that the protective policy was one OF the
questions upon which the revolution Of 1s4O took
place-ergo, those who now maintain their ground in
opposition to such policy, guilty of treachery
and deception. We ask if Mr. Leigh, of Virginia, is
the advocate of such policy if the Wings from
North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Virginia,
recognized the policy of high protective tariff, as
ei her or Set
to the Mary land Address, they all stood committed
to that policy, because forsooth they members
of that convention. Suppose Mr.. Leigh had receiv-
ed the nomination for the Vice Presidency it to be
supposed that be would have considered himself bound
to carry out the views of that convention In favor OF
high protective tariff? and if he refused would he
have been properly chargeable with deception
Thus far we dispute the accuracy of this authors
statements, and are disposed to question the correct
ness of the inference he has drawn from some insu
lated facts But this IS not the only fault have to
find with this part of the Address He has not only
in our opinion, been led into conclusions,
but has utterly failed in catching the distinguishing
features in the aspect of the times; that his pic
ture bears sort of resemblance to the original
He has painted nothing he has only given an ac- |
count Of what he thought the opinions Of the
bsrs Of the Contention. 1t must be evident to every
that the most striking characteristic of the times
to which we aude namely, the year 1899, was the |
violent opposition to the then Administration, and the
general disposition in the members Of the community
to take decided part, and overthrow it. In tins
dertaking politicians Of erery hue inroked 10 par
tieipate. general amnesty between hostile parties
was exchanged. To this circumstance the writer |
has never ad verted. We must therefore mpule his |
silence TO the well-weighed dictates of prudence |
which admonished him of the possibility of beraying
himself into some admissions favorable to our side,
by such a discussion.
CITIZEN OF THE WEST.
To be continued.