Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-02-19

election OF Ean 10 tnis toSpaH.,bs posi-, has views
on State policy should not alone be considered,
but also those matters pertaining 10 the Union
at large Had the gentleman forgotten that the Con
sthutinn conferred upon the Governor the poser
OF appointing 10 fill that might occur
IN the Senate: case might arise in which the Gu
vernon would be called upon To exercise this ppwrr.-
ne people took an interest in "ho was chosen and 1t
WINS requisite that he should look 10 the politics OF the
man he might nominate TO fill vacancy. Gen Watts
was held up candidate in opposition TO Mr. Taylor
MI H. washed TO know it he approved Of the measures
passed at the Extra Session Of Congress. Would he
carry ont the policy Of the party who called that ses.
sion and adopted tlrse measures; IL he approved Of
II, the fact identified him, if with the old Federal
party, at least with the National Republican party,
which was next kin TO the Federal. Did he not APP
prove of National Bank and an increased Tariff: On
these subjects, his friends silent to his opinions.
DIR. Taylor was known 10 be opposed TO them. HIS
opinions had been defined distinctly, unequivocally,
and without reserve. How any one opposed TO the
measures adopted at the late extraordinary session OF
Congress could prefer Gen. Watts to such man, Mr.
H. could only account for by referring the doml
MON Of party.
The gentleman from Fauquer had sld much about the
power of the President and had endeavored TO hold the
Democratic party responsible for the distress which, he
said, 10 very great extent existed IN the country lie
insisted much on the power and patronage OF the Execu
tive as being too great and asked whether the opinion
OF Mr. Taylor favorable TO its increase. Mr.. H.
could answer him. 1t not but, like the gentleman
from Fnuquier himself, Mr.. II. opposed to an in
crease OF executive power He would do all that was
in his power TO limit it, Unlike the gentleman, however,
he not only opposed accumulation Of power IN
any department of the Government but he was OPP
posed to consolidaon-to all constructive powers. lie
threw back the charge made by the gentleman. The
disresses Of the country proceeded from WHAT From
undue exercise Of the Legislative powers, and an
exercise of some not warranted By the Constitution
Whence came the patronage Of the President? From
the expenditure of money which took place under his d.
rectinn And he would call attention to the fact that
Mr. " Buren, the only President who ever reduced
the expenditures of the General Government. Another
principal Of Executive patronage, charged
the appointment of members of Congress to Office.
Did Mr.. v b. appoint nny What, too, was the course
OF the late President? He pledged himself against it. lie
often declared himself opposed TO the CUSTOM and made
it a boast that he held such an opinion. The gentle
from Fauquier, also said, that opposition TO il was
Wing doctrine Yet, what did Gen. Harrison do?-
that magnet of attraction upon whom were conccntra-
ted the hopes wishes, and expectations of so many
what did this magnet do, when placed the pivot OF
power, it lost lis polarity; Four of his Cabinet were
members Of Congress. In New York city, he bestowed
two Of the most responsible and lucrative Offices on
members, and other Offices in different parts Of the coun
try. Mr. Tyler had not appointed single Congress
man to any Office: yeth was denouncedby the Wings
all the country.
Mr. Ii. said he took il that Gen. Watts approved Of
the measures OF tie extra session Of Congress, and it
vote for him. lie at loss to perceive how gen.
tlemen protesting adherence 10 the State Right
doctrines could support gentleman holding such OPT
Mons As to the distresses of the country OF which
The gentleman from Fauquier had drawn such PIC.
ture the proceedings OF the gatherer and the sell
ing Of the poor mans COW, NC, Mr. II. could not
agree with him as 10 the source whence they came
Moreover, he doubted if the gentleman, when he was
passing such high encomiums on the Distribution Law
right in saying that the Federal Government would
,,lo ,hnfa IIa
not consent To its revenue distributed Tor such
reason neither was he in favor of raising money through
the Federal Government 10 be distributed 10 the States
Mr. H. held cardinal principle that each Govern
ment should raise its own revenue III burdens had 10
be imposed for the purpose of sustaining the Govern
ment lie preferred heavy taxes by the State Govern
me nj TO heavy by The Federal. Where was the
power and authority by which the Federal Government
assumed 10 raise money to give to the States? lie knew
of no warrant for 10 in the Constitution. Whence came
this fund which the General Government had resolved
TO distribute, From The lands coded by the States, and
acquired b. the treasure OF the Union. On what con-
dtions those lands given up 10 the United States:
Was it for the purpose of distributing the proceeds OF
their sule back to all the States, Would Virginia have
given up her North. western Territory, had she supposed
i would have been sold and distributed, 1t struck
him that she never would The public lands were
ded enable the United States to preserve the public
faith unimpaired and pay off debts contracted By the
Union, and not by the States in their individual cha
racter.
But continued Mr.. H., the gentleman from Eau
quer had declared that this just and an equal
law Where, he asked, the equality of giving
the new States 5000 900 OF land, TO the preju
dces of the DID, and giving it condition that il
was 10 be devoted TO works Of Internal Improve
ment Ii might be given on any other condition
whatever, if the principle correct There was an
other principle of the Distribution Law TO which Mr..
H. objected. 1t was that by which the States
to receive ten per cent IN addition TO their share
of the proceeds derived from the sale of lands This
was provision not warranted by the deeds OF cession
Mr. H. said he would not go further into the discussion
of the Distribution Law-for it was not before the
House-neither he afraid TO discuss il, since he
should oppose the law on high constitutional grounds.
The gentleman from Fauquier charged the Demo-
cratic party with having made war upon the Legisa-
tive Department Of the Government. Mr. Fl. con-
tended that the the fact The Legislative
Department had warred on the States and the people.
So far, too, from the distress pervadng the country
being attributable to the action of the Federal Execu
tive he asked gentlemen TO look 10 the extravaganza
and speculation originating in overgrown surplus
revenue caused by protective tariff tor the true
The origin Of the evil not with the Executive, but
owing 10 the acts of the Legislative Department.
There was another position Of the gentleman from
read from the Messages of Mr. Jefferson to prove that
we wrong in opposing Distribution Law. He
called the attention of the House to the fact that Mr.
Jefferson looked to amendment to the Constitution
tor the power OF distributing tne revenue oil the Re-
deral Government. What conclusion did Mr.. Jeffer-
son come in after years, when his judgment ripe
and all his opinions maturely reviewed. lie the
stern opponent of any grant Of additional power
to the Congress of the U. S. No was firmer in
his opposition 10 enlargement Of the powers of Con-
gress, aud he could not now be quoted in support Of
the power without doing gross injustice to his prnci-
plies and opinions.
The gentleman from Fauquer said that had to
choose between an old Federalist and NuGer-that
if the statements which had been made were true, we
would be reduced TO the necessity Of choosing between
the two This proved that Gen. Watts nearer 10
Federalism than Mr.. Taylor
Mr.. Scorr only said that Gen. Watts was not
Nulifier.
MIR. HoLLADAY. Is Mr.. Taylor a Nullifer? The
charge has been made, but not proved. Mr. H. con-
cuded by asking if the people of Virginia expect
ed to sustain man who approved Of the measures of
doctrine Of John Taylor of Caroline and the fundamen
tai PRINCIPLES of Vrrnia. Should Mr.. TAYLOR receive