The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-02-21
FIRST IMPREssIoNs-A RETROSPECT.

FIRST IMPREssIONS-A RETROSPECT.
There is certainly some virtue in falsehood--
If by virtue we mean efficacy, or power. Is
generally no easy matter 10 eradicate first lm-
pre,sions and many a noble spirit has been
crushed beaeath the weight Of caumny, simply
from the difficulty of making the truth apparent
10 minds rendered impenetrable to conviction by
prejudice.
II is now near eighteen months since sell
constituted committee of Wing members OF
Congress, comprising both Senators and Rep
resen,atives, all of them bearing the reputation
of upright and honorable men, affixed their
names to public address or manifesto, the
chief object of which was TO fasten upon the
present Chief Magistrate of the nation one OF
the gravest imputations that can be brought
agains, any individual, public or private, hum
bic or exalted. This charge, unsupported bv a
particle of testimony, and resting solely on the
personal responsibility Of those who made it,
was indusl riousy circulated from one end oil
the country TO the other, and produced, for
time a. least, all the effect which was hoped and
expected from it. For the very nature OF the
accusation was one to excite the strongest de-
gree of prejudice: while the peculiar situation
Of the individual assailed left him scarcely an
avenue open to free and generous defence.
If the authors of the charge knew it to be
false when they penned it, or volched for IT. we
must say that more deliberate and mischievous
falsehood never before was so solemnly promu-
gated from high source. And if they did not
take all pains to ascertain whether it were true
or false, their ,urpi,ude was hardly less. 1t was
an attempt not only to disturb public tranquility
Blu, cruelty, for mere party purposes, to sacrifice
the honor of an individual, who, during long
public career had preserved an unimpeached
reputation, and whose only offence was his
anxiety 10 adhere strictly to his political integ-
rity in matter where he was so deeply COM
mitted, that departure from political integrity
would have been as dsgracelul as private dis
honesty.
We propose now, as the moment is some
what propitious, to take brief and final review
of this once celebrated Wing manifesto. We
shall make it very brief, for the lapse of time in
the present instance, and recent Developments of
the temper and spirit of the ultra Wing party
in Congress, have fortunately enabled the pub
lie at large SO justly to appreciate both the ca
lumny and the authors Of it, that neither of
them seem to deserve more than hasty notice.
The authors of the Wing address, before
stating their grave accusation against Mr.. Ty-
Ter, say in relation to him
at is true that towards that individual, even at
the moment Of the selection for the Vice Presidency,
very earnest public attention had been directed,
and it "a equally true that but passing regard
bestowed upon the current Of his previous life and
opinions"
If the assertion were true, very natural
question would be, how came the Wing party
TO sci ect as their candidate for the Vice Presi-
dsncy an individual of whose political opinions
they knew little or no,hing7 Had they none
among them worthy of that high Office, whose
opinions they did know and were certain of
But the assertion is false. The whole coun
try knew that Mr.. Tyler was selected for the
purpose of conciliating the support Of that por
tion of the opposition to the administration OF
the day, who held opinions in common with
him, and were similarly circumstanced-sece
ders from the existing admin sralion, State
rights hen, and conservatives. He was select
ed because his opinions rere well known-se.
lected for 4 certain and definite purpose. II was
not an ignorant, but, as they fancied, cunning
choice.
Besides, Mr.. Tyler, in common with others
had been publicly ca,echised as TO his opinions
particularly on the Bank ques,on-and had
taken no pains TO conceal them. On the con
uary it was impossible for him to have beer
more explicit than he was in referring, as in.b
letter 10 the voters in Henrco in 1910, TO hi
speech delivered in the House Of Representa-
tives Of the United States in 1919, and to hi
vote in the Senate in 1882, against the recharte
of the late Bank, as an evidence Of what hi
course would be at any future time, on the ques
tion Of Bank. On the first of these occasions
he had said:
"ror, sir, inasmuch as believe the creation Of thi
corpora ton to be unconstitutional cannot, ucitsoui
violation Of my osth, hesitate 10 repair the breach hp
~HsAs in Ue Constellation tchtr opportunity presn
stse0 Of doing scihod rioiaing the p,lbin fa,hn
No one, therefore, who took any trouble Z
ascertain Mr.. Tyler's opinions on the Ban
question, can plead ignorance Of them: an
those who took no such trouble, voted FOR hin
ut their own risk. One OF his bitterest assailant,
Mr.. Ewing, has acknowledged "the extern,
which he (Mr. Tyler was committed on tn
question:"
When, by Mr.. Tyler's elevation to the Pres
deney, his opinions on the subject OF Bank b,
came matter of great importance, there wa
still less excuse for remaining in ignorance
them.
In long editorial article headed "ihe al
preaching session of Congress-" which appeal
ed in the National Iutelligencer, about tire
weeks before the commencement Of the ertr
session, we find the following paragraph;