New-York daily tribune., 1843-05-06


| lions and either repudiating or making no proyl-
sion for the payment Of the interest-so that the
Bank was plunged into difficulties, and compelled
to sacrifice their Stocks for fifth part Of their
cost-are here said to have been "fmporer'shed
by the Bank They have borrowed Of 1t wen
ty-odd Millions, and, by bankruptcy or knaVely,
! subjected it to a loss OF three-fourths OF the
amount, running the institution and beggaring us
stockholders, and yet we are told that they nave
been " Impoverished ;" by the Bank how can
this man hope,to escape the scorn and ndlgna-
ton of every candid mind
Mr.. Van Buren, affects to wonder why the late
/ Bank did not wind up It's affairs as quietly and
adyantageously as did the first National Bank
! To this he has himself suggested the proper an
/ swer The first Bank was not Indignantly
warred upon by the then Administrations the
Government Depostes were not removed from 1t,
nor any measure Of hostility resortcd to- the
President never declared it insolvent, nor attempt
ed to break one Of It's remote Branches by col
lecting all its bills and crowding them upon 1t at
once FOR specie. No evils resulted from the wind
ing up of the old Bank, beyond The loss OF ITS ser
vices to the Country, because those who then adj
ministered the Government were Statesmen;
ruin attended and followed the winding up OF the
late Bank, because the Executive power was
welded bv Cen Jackson and Martin Van Buren,.
| We challenge ell History for an instance IN which
National Bank was ever broken or perverted TO
evil uses except by the acton OF the Government.
We not devote more space to tins part oi
the cx PRESIDENT lctter-not even to treat as theF
deserve the bald assertions that a National Bank
must necessarily be irresponsible and potent
for the perpetration of evil when ali ITS powers
are granted and strictly defined by law, and when
Congress and the Secretary of the Treaslry-as
often hostile as friendly-are empowered to exert
over it constant supervision and control VII.
Van Buren, has obviously written this letter Tor
those who do not argue, and seldom read; else
he would not speak Of {" that party which at'oayS
has been, still is, andl lever will be the advocate
and support ofsuch an institution" He well knows
that the late National Bank was chartered IN 1916
by the Democratic party, headed by James Mad
ison, John C. Calhoun, and A. ]. Dallas, and that
a large majority of the Federalists in Congress
voted against il. But what cares he for history
Those for whom he wrote this letter know nothing
of the facts and will take his word for II that the
Democrats were always hostile to Bank, and
the Federaliss untrng in their efforts TO charter
or sustain such an institution
Passing to the Land Distribution, says Mr.
| Van Buren,
"a The tenacy with which opponents adhere TO the
distribution of the proceeds Of the public lands among the
States the presen, condition OF the Treasury Is po
Il ,tfgu Nnla
to reconcile with fair understanding of or proper regard
for Of the country ii any apology Tor II can
be made, he traced to that unwllingnesS TO abandon
the face of their opponents position which has been
sumed with confidence and supported with earnestnessa
indiapostion from which but lew political associations are
altogether exempt"
Now it cannot be uncharltable to say that MIR.
Van Buren, knopS better than this-knows that
the Wings urge the Land Distribution as barrier
against the incessant and formidable attempts.
4 countenancad by himself and the leaders Of his
party, to punder the Old States of their rightful
interest in and advantage from the Public Lands
by reducing the price TO the neighborhood OF
nothing or cedng them outright to the States IN
which they lie. Mr.V. B. well knows that this
is one OF the grounds OH which the Distribution
urged, yet he unfairly conceals it, and says that
the only question is whether certain amount of
money shall be raised from the People by taxes in
order that unequal or less amount shall be dis
trbuted back to them lie knows, too, that the
Distribution is urged tho ground of the irnpol-
icv and in,,rovdence of great nation eating up
its estate in time of profound peace, like prod
gal heir, who sells off his patrimona acres, piece
by piece to replcnsh his table and his cellar until
all are gone. The Wings believe that the Pro-
ceeds of these Public Lands should be so disposed of
that future generations shall be benefited by them
as well the present; and, since the General Gov
ernmcnt rcnounccs the power to make Internal
improvements, they see no other way to.eiect the
object than by a Distribution to the States. Mr..
v. B. may differ from us these points, but why
should he misreprescnt and belle us
We have at last reached the Tariff question,
to which The cx-President devotes two long col
unns after the manner Of his famous Sheep
Speech of 1898. lie is u little more anti-Pro-
{ tcctivc now; and yet can find III his two col
uu.nS no clear avowal of Free Trade sentiments,
like Mr. Calhoun's, or of Protective principles
like McSsrs. jolllson's, CaSs's or Buchanans. His
, paragraphs arc laboriously constructed SO TO
mean little or much, shall be desirable; the
Evening Post says Mr.. V. b. declares himself
$ unequipocaHy hostile to the principle Of Protec-
ton" We tried to prove the same to Van Bu-
rem Protec6onist, with whom we differed on first
receiving the letter; but we could not make ii out
very clearly, while our opponen, insisted that the
letter favors Incidental Protection The directest
expression on this head appears TO be this:
Tbs unbiased sentiment of the country ~ respect 70
ACTON upon this SUBJECT has ,hpk the course
and the progress ef opinion n brought the coaca,ica
krt,fl 4