New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-06-19


Ro,r,d Tint in The election OF Andrew Jackson in 1872,
and Of hurtin Van Buren, le the People OF the United
S.ae' declared u9compr.,ns Of .uch hostility was
impaired by the election o Genera iht.p IN ioty uh
DO, t uhr nyuvn him at his opinions regard
q National bank uucr ms association wat" the
ddate fr the Vice Presidency wh;ne wv VIZ hnwh
md lint ,her. 10 believe That pnic opinion On
as brs changed tn election efGene,a Jackson
csr,d Tint Bank of the United STATES ~ nature,
the -plr'' "f our institutions and hh IL establish
would be destructive TO the n'efes and dansero. to the
liberties Of the people
This was of coarse party ciap.traP, got up 10
show that there is one proposition on which they
all hang together. II had no possible reference
to any legislation had or proposed by this Con-
gress, bat was a mere eicctioneering flyer put
forth to make little capital. 1t commences
with an un,ruth-namely that the People de-
cared uncompromising hostility to Bank OF
the United States in rejecting Gen. Jackson in
1882 Now Gen Jackson himself said in the
Veto Message on the Charter OF the existing
Bank ION which Veto the issue made up 1o-
that Election)
THAT Bank of the United States, competent
to all the duties which may be required by The GOV
eminent, might be organized a. not 10 infringe on
our delegated powers or The reserved nights oil the
States do not entertain a doubt. " Had Con
free from Constitutional objections the duty rouid
hare been cheerjuHy pertormed'
How can any honest man say, in view Of this
explicit avowa that Gen. Jackson declared or
The People decided agains; any Bank?
These gentlemen have rule that works but
one way. Mr.. Van Buren, was elected over Gen.
Harrison in 1885, and that proved that the PEG
pie were dead Set against Bank but Gen. Har-
rison was elected over Mr.. Van Buren, in 1910 On
4 greatly increased vote, and by much larger
majority, and that proves just nothing at all Ii
IS all Heads | win, Tails you lose, with these
gamcsters.
The allusion to the 'avowas made by Gen.
Harrison in l540' is wholly unwaran'ed Gen.
Harrison said nothing against a National Bank,
out avowed himselfready TO unite in giving effect
to the will of the People, as expressed through
their Representatives. MIR. Tyler was nominated
Tor Vice President without the least regard TO or
thought Of his opposition to a Bank, ii any such
existed Yet we expect this lie to Eeappear
thousand times this season.
And then just look at the second resolution =
Is it not an insult to the intelligence of the Coun
try "A Bank Of the United States in It's
;ure hostile to the spirit of our Institutions =
What is there in is nature differing from the
nature of any other Bank Why should e.
). Bank operate in this way rather than State
Bank These men must think the people dest
tute of sense and information Did not WASH
lyGToH approve the first Bank Did not MAp
no
having watched the course OF the first throughl, Us
whole existence? Yes and the last public letter
nc ever wrote, Just before his death, was devoted
10 a deu onstration of the Constitulonalty and
pcneficelce OF National Bank. SO WILLIAM
H. CRAWFORD democratic Caucus candidate for
President in 1924. supported by Van Buren, and
his party,) was through life determined, avowcd
advocate OF National Bank. He voted to re-
charter the first Bank in 1911; advocated the
Ch.uterlng oil the second and It's lecharje,lns III
i powerful letter written just before he died. So
Mr. C.. NJ. Dallas voted throughout when III
Congress, himself introducing the bill TO rechar-
Ter and Supporting it against al! gainsaycrs And
can any man believe that this institution can be
me in its aature hostile to the spirit Of our IN
,litutons," and yet none Of these great men or
his little one ever discovered it? -Four different
Congresses, including the Republican Congress o.
1916 and the jackson Congress OF 1882, have
voted TO Charter a National Bank; nearly ali
nave acquiesced and confded in one which the,
found in existence. What wrctched, knavlsh cant,
then is this OF such an institution being in It's
nature destructive 10 the Interests and dangerous
% the Liberties OF the People"
II Girls thinks ought 10 publish Col.
Stones second leuer, because published Bishop
iIushess, to which it processes 10 be reply. Why
not Mr. Benefits replies also The Herald pub
shed, after lis fashion, Bishop IIushes's Letters
he Commercial did not; the obligation OF courtesy
would therefore be much stronger rs in favor OF the
former than the latter. We cannot see how any ont
:an claim that should copy the replies OF Col
Stone when he has published what he profess
es To answer.
We will make an offer 10 Civis,' which we think
he must deem fair, viz: We will publish such {,
statement OF his side of the School Question as Col
Stone shall prepare or approve, ii The Commercial
vii publish one equal length from us in reply
md we leave the length TO the option OF our oppo
nents VIII that do AS we do not wish sssal
or discuss any body's religion OF philanthropy, We
would prefer that our opponents keep as near the
question as possible, but will not be tenacious or
that point. But copying their gross attacks on thu
religious faith philaurropc effort OF others (oiten
not even nominally connected with the School Cues
tiou when we know that no reply will be admitted
into their coupus is not the fair thing, and We have
mad enough OF ii.
From Amos HcpdalfS EIp0Sitor
EVERY Satisfying hatred OF foreigners pei
yneS the couniryuoi foreign lord aud bankers
cgu and Democrats Slf. Clay would
III, them the preempton privileges natives
he Newl Wings prescribe them when natGralzed from
e privileges citizens: aud Phadepha Wings burn their
no,t, and churches and denounce, mpfSon and murder
diem Ia, defending tnem,elveS
IL Ii does seem that this Amos Kendall is
,,,-,, Ike an inctrn.te feud Than human BEING