Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-04-26

Andrew Jackson as well as of both branches Of
Congress. | might say, Mr. Democrat II you can,
not point out why it is not unconstitutional Will
not point out why it is. Why, says Mr.. Democrat
it is not constitutional because powers not express
" given are expressly withheld. But says the vo.
ter find that Congress has power to collect taxes
and take it for granted that some means is provi-
ded by which taxes can be taken care of In add
ten, Congress has power to coin money and regu
late the value thereof. Above all they have the
power to enact all laws necessary for carrying into
execution the foregoing powers and all others Con
stitutional What answer have you to make to that
Mr.. Democrat? And what do you propose instead
of this Bank A SubTreasury, says the Demo
craft Ali but don't find a Sub-Treasury here
(Cheers.) Now the true Interpretation is that Con
gress shall have power to make all laws which are
indiSpenSdbLy necessary says the voter.
MIR. Bolts here alluded briefly to the opinions Of
Col. II. NJ. johnson, John G.. Calhoun and Others
lie would not undertake to discuss the question
of the expe6iency of the Tariff with any of the
Democratic Party, because he considered pract
cal fact worth pound of theory and speculation
Let any man contrast the condition of this country
when we have had low duties, with the high Tariff
times, and he will see the advantage. Let him &C
buck TO 1889, and he will find that the second Law
passed by Congress, commences with a preamble
in these words: "Whereas it is necessary for the
support of Government and for the protection Of
Domestic Manufactures that duties should be levied
be it enacted, &C." (Doafenng applause.) You
will find that no man has filled the Presidential
Chair of the United States who has not recognized
the eXpedency Of Tariff, When the principle
of Protection was fought in Congress in 1921, and
Henry Clay stood there as the champion of the
policy, who were they who followed the footsteps
of their illustrious predecessor? Who were they
who looked up to Henry Clay for information, voted
as he did, and sustained him in all his measures !?
"Tell it not in Gath-publsh it not in the streets
of Askalon,' for it will not be believed by the Dem
ocrats of the present day. (Cheers.) Who voted
with him for Protective Tariff? Andrew Jack
son, Martin Van Buren,, Thomas Hart Benton
"a laugh.)
Mr.. Bolts here made few remarks in relation
to the Distribution of the Proceeds Of the Sales of
the Public Lands and two or three other topics,
which we are compelled to pass over. He proceed
ed to speak of the annexation of Texas to the u
nited States. He opposed it in the strongest terms
1t was secret and clandestine treaty, and one
which strikes deep at the foundation of our Govern
nent 1t was rather for the annexation of the Uni
ted States to Texas 1t was question of the great
est magnitude, the consequences Of which no one
can foresee; and that it will lead if consummated
to an immediate or ultimate dissolution Of this u
mon he could not for one moment doubt lie was
Union man. lie not Southern man with
Northern feelings, but Southern man with Ma
tlonal feelings By the annexation of Texas we
are to identify our policy with hers, and not her
policy with ours. We are to assume the debts of
Texas in this age of retrenchment and reform; we
are to engage in her brawls. Suppose Great Brit
ain desires to occupy Texas-does it follow, be.
cause we don't want Great Britain to occupy it that
we must take it? Ry no means. We have recog.
nized the independence of Texas We have done
it because she proclaimed herself independents
We have territory enough already. The Annexa-
ton OF Texas! I'm against it out and out, be it
popular or unpopular. (Cheers.) This Government
take Towns ENGLAND EnUon1 has No
more right to Texas than we have. She don't want
it. She can want it for purpose but fer the cul-
tivation Of Cotton; Cotton in this country only
be cultivated by Slave labor, and England don't
tolerate Slavery.
The same interests which would drive us to a
dissolution from the North, would tend to unite
Texas to the South; but | never will, as long as
we can live in harmony with the Northern States,
never will hazard dissolution of the Union.
nave thus, fellow citizens rudely and too imperfect
y sketched some of the issues Of the great contest
now approaching. Permit me for one moment to
turn your attention to the two representatives of
the two great parties that are presented as their
champions and leaders; will not insult your I'M
dersanding so much however, as to draw com
parison between the Lion and the Weasel. Ap'
plause.) No | will not insult your understanding
by comparing the brilliant light Of the meridian
sun to the feeble flame Of an expiring taper-by
comparing giant and dwarf-Martin Van Blu
rem and Henry Clay. (Applause) What page of
the Nations History, pray, can we turn to and not
see his name recorded in letters of gold Whose
voice thrilled in the ears Of the people in vindica
ton of the peoples honor! and has ever been op
posed to the sneaking, skulking acts ofMartin Van
Buren,? Who was ii that was heard in support of
De Witt Clinton? have never denounced those
opposed to the declaration o. war, because belle
we'd that honest and patriotic men were among those
that made that declaration, who voted from proper
TnntiVps 1O think that he IS entitled to credit for
lending his energies to its prosecution after war
was declared.
! asked what page you could tun to where you
would not find Clay's name? Why, look at the
Missouri question, which shook this nation to its We
ny centre. Who looked at Van Buren, then?
Did any one turn to Mr.. Van Buren, at that cri
sis! (4aughter) Would any man look at him if
such question should again come under discus
sion? Who was it when the question of Nulit
cation was raised and every man looked with fear
and trembling for fear OF dissolution of the I'M
ion and secession of States who, when all eyes
were turned upon him, wac firm and unhinching
Aye, there he is pointing to one of the banners on
which was a correct likeness Of Henry Clay and
his is a combination and form indeed; and on his
brow every god did seem to set his seal to give the
world assurance of great man. Great applause.)
Now, what of Mr.. Van Buren,. QLaughter In
what great scheme is his name associated: IA
voice, I" ub-Treasury.") Why is it, | ask of his
TRENDS, that no charge mas ever yet Deen maue a.
gainst him that has not been sustained and yet
from which he has not been successfully defended?
Simply because he has made it point to take every
side of every question. lie has been Tariff man,
and an anti-Tariff man he has been Bank man,
and an Bank man, under direction. A Bank man
for q branch of that institution in Albany, and an
anti Bank man by his declaration of eternal hostil
ty to the institution. What question has ever been
raised that he has not taken both sides? Do you
a Uh M has 81 lWnVg bppn DrOWllnU and
housing about like cat in watch for her prey, to
man noted for talent and wisdom? Look at the
effects of his reelection to the Presidency-exam-
inc well his conduct while in power. But why
need we fear? What have we to fear? He is the
only man of their party that can be run, with one
exception-and the only thing we have to fear is
that he will not get the nomination Of his own par
ty-that exception is John c. Calhoun; and the on
ly difference between them is this-Calhoun can
carry the State of South Carolina, while Martin
Van Buren, can carry the State of New Hampshire ;
and South Carolina is rather the larger of the two