The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-06-14
MIR, EWING AGAIN.

posed OF MIR. Ewing's testimony, we propose
now to look somewhat into the statement OF this
gentleman published last September, and now
republished by him for the edi6cation OF his
readers. This publication has never been sub
mitted to that analysis to which it claims title.
We have said that, in our opinion, a holder at
tempt to catch the conscience Of a man was,
from the first, never made; but before we saw this
publication and gave it second perusal, we
had not conceived that the accuser would fur
nish so conclusively matter for his own condem-
nation, and that of others with whom he is as
ISOLATED. $50"
He was not at all disposed to blame the Pre-
sident-no, not he-for his Veto OF the first
Bank bill. In justice to the President, this inn
maculate man acquits him from having CIV
en- his assent at any time to the first Bank bill
81 knew the extent to which the President was
committed on the question, and dreaded from
the first the most disastrous consequences,
when the project of compromise which pre-
scented at an early day, was rejected" Such is
Mr.. Ewing's own language. The emphasizing
is our own Y es, sir, we do not doubt but that you
knew all about it. We do not doubt but that the
President had, after the frankness of his nature,
over and over again expressed to the Cabinet the
insuperabe obstacles which existed in the
way of any Bank that should, in the Ian
guage of his Vetos, be authorized to ope
rate per Sc over the Union. Nor do we doubt,
for we have heard it stated, over and over
again, that the only mode which could be
adopted to overcome his difficulties was the
very one which you and the whole Cabi-
net was said, at the time, to have adopt
ed, viz: the passage of a law, by Congress,
as the local Legislature for the District
of Columbia, Incorporating q Bank NTH
leave to establish branches IN the States, by
and aoih the assent Of the States Have we
not right to conclude that this was the extent
of your information, from the fear you enter
tanned "of the most disastrous consequences"
from the rejection of that measure ? Did you
urge the passage of your bill in good faith? Or
did you and the Cabinet only pretendedly adopt
it afterwards to cause its rejection or what
caused its failure? Who was the traitor to the
Wing party then? and have not ''the disastrous
consequences anticipated by you been conse-
quent upon ssthe pertinacity" with which some
other person adhered to his opinions? Come,
let us have the whole truth, from first to last
You like the Office of informer and accuser
Cabinet consultations are not sacred with
you-and surely you can have no objection
to tell the public all that passed between your
self and other great personages relative to that
bill. A whisper has got out that you had
spoken, on more occasions than one, OF con-
versation held between certain great person
and the President in relation to that bill. VIII
you tell the country what that conversation
was? Don't go TO Ashland in order to consult
as to what you shall say, but let us have, from
the place Of your retirement, all that passed
in regard to your Bank bill. Did not the
whole Cabinet endorse it?-and why was 1t
not adopted? Who took upon himself the die
tatorial authority ofits rejection? and to whom
is to be ascribed ''the disastrous consequences"
which have since transpired2 The President
has been called traitor, and every term OF re-
proach has been heaped upon him. You saw
on his part, we doubt not, the most extreme
anxiety to settle that question If it could
be settled by him. And why is 1t that
it was not settled2 If it was not his
fault, why have you, like miserable cur, barked
at his heels, instead of throttling the real thief,
in order to bring him to justice The reason OF
your course is obvious. You were the lege
subject of another and now, by your own con-
fesson, instead of countenancing no effort to
involve the President, you become the advo-
cate of the compromise feature OF Mr.. Clay's
BILL Ga pretty compromise, truly.) wlthou
holding any, the slightest, consultation, as
you admit, with the President. You
hoped he would approve it, did you? was
it modest and becoming in Cabinet officer,
to commit the President to measure from his
hopes? Would Congress ever have passed that
bill but for the belief under which the members
labored, that it met the approval of the Presl-
dent? 1t was your hopes that produced all the
mischief. Your hopes realized the first Veto,
and subjected the man, who was leaning upon
YOU for advice, to all the vile and base I'M
putations TO which he has been subjected
We cannot permit you to leave the stand yet,
Mr. Ewing. Answer us further. So tar your
hopes having dictated your advocacy OF MIR.
Clay's amendment, did you not know that the
President had been consulted about that very
amendment--and that it had received his posi-
tive and unqualified rejection? We infer this
from the fact of your relations to the President,
and our want of belief in your statement that
his opinions were not known to you on a ques
ton upon which above all others you were bouht
to have known them
We have but entered upon the threshold o
our examination of you but we permit you TO
q moment to retire from the stand in order tina