The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-02-22

MIR. DAvIS'S REPORT.
In the Intelligencer of Saturday we read the
long and elaborate report presented and signed
by Mr.. Davis Of Kentucky, in which he critl-
cises the Exchequer plan as submitted by the
Secretary of the Treasury and as modified by
the abors of the committee. We do not en-
ploy language capable of giving offence when
we say that it does not surprise US by any orr
ginality of conception or novelty of argument,
for, Judging by internal evidence, we conceive
that it contemplates to make no pretension to
either Its tone and style, when assuming the
title of report to the House, surprised US not a
little.
In some passages, it exhibits not merely the
violence of political partsanship but something
like the rancor of personal feeling, and, alto
gether, it is not a paper possessing the attrI-
butes which should characterize state paper
written and presented in his Representative ca
pacity, and intended to imbody his opinions on
great Government measure, and assigning
the reasons why they have been adopted. 1t
has not met the report of the Secretary in the
spirit in which it was written-a spirit OF mod
Grafton and compromise. 1t bears too strongly
the impress of faction. 1t would not be diff
cult to give groof of this assertion, did we sup
pose it necessary to furnish any long extracts
from the report.
It's preliminary paragraphs demonstrate re-
markable ingenuity in faut-hnding-a pecu-
liar aptitude to take offence. His attention
was strongly arrested by the following passage
in the report:
"The people have right to quire that what is to
be done should be done without further delay in order
that they NAV accommodate themselves to the policy
of the Government, &c.
His remarks upon this sentence manifest
singular captiousness-and the language OF the
concluding sentence exhibits but little of the
dignity of state paper, commenting on mea-
sures proposed by the Executive. He thinks
that ''the Executive and its Departments would
be quite as well employed In the performance OF
their duties as in framing for Congress hypo-
careproof" Weleave this sentence without
comment If the Secretary of the Treasury has
offended the dignity of Congress by simply
urging upon it the necessity of prompt and de-
cisive action on some financial measure, he and
his colleagues in the Cabinet must feel them
selves SulllCleully ny liiC lC'Oi' VI Ai'
Davis, who advises them with so much tart
ness to attend to their own business. We have
always been under the impression that the Ian
guage Of the Secretary's report. so far from be-
ing arrogant and dictatoria, was peculiarly cha
racterized by its modesty. But we suppose
that we must now acknowledge that we stand
corrected.
NJ, obc
not condemn Mr.. Davis for an honest adherence
to the principles which he deems corrective
design to make no severity of comment on any
train of argument by which he endeavors to
sustain the correctness of those principles We
make no remark whatever on his obstinate at
tachment to any incorporated bank, though he
must be aware that such an institution has been
more than once disapproved by the popular
voice We do not venture to remind him that
the passage of his favorite bank bill through all
the legislative branches is impossible. We do
not call his attention the fact, that perverse
attachment to a dogma, and the determination
to reject every system that is not in perfect uni
son through all the details with the one to which
he is attached, is unworthy of the patriot and
his duty, when his own favorite scheme cannot
be adopted, to yield his prepossessons for the
good of his country, and in the spirit of compro-
mise, to take such plan as shows probability
of ehecting the most of those objects which he
thinks ought to be ful6iled but we condemn
him for making state paper the,vehcle of in
sidious charges against the Administration, in
stead of giving it the character it ought to bear
"a manly exposition of his own views on
finance.
The whole report shows the impress OF vio
lent and reckless partisanship. 1t differs in cha
racter very remarkably from that of the majority
of the Committee. Whatever errors of doc
trine, or fallacy of reasoning, ingenuity may de
tect or dissent may think it can discover in the
latter, those the most irreconcilably opposed t.
heprnciples it inculcates, will at least ack now
ledge that it is characterised by liberal views
and patriotic spirit. So much cannot be sail
of the state paper of Mr.. Davis Its intent can
not be mistaken. Its whole purport appears t
be, not to disprove, by a fair train of argument
what are sound principles OF currency, but VIVA
inconsistencies he conceives to exist between
the details of the bill and opinions expressed a
different periods by the Secretary of State.