Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1848-04-04
THE ENQUIRER.
d, VA.
Monday Morning., April 3, ls4s.
THE Il AND BANK.

Ire wing represents Us aS RAISING soine he"
issue "in regard 10 The FEDERALISM Of a Nation.
al Bank" and without stating, as before remark.
ed, VIA TIA. new issue is, Cat least inteiligabiy 70
u.s. il expresses lis readiness 10 Heet Us upon il.
We are not sensible OF having presented any new
issue, or OF having "raised" any issue at all abonl
the matter. We certainly intended only Ia
jim the issue "raised" by the Wing, and 10 reply
to its IN support vi the SIDE selected b.
itself, and which i, has eadeavored % maintain
moi merely with zeal AMI perseverance,, but with
occasional exhibitions Of violence and passion.-
We were impelled 10 Go this, mainly IN conse-
duence Of whal VIC conceived 10 be the gross anu
iiiibcial character oil the charge preferred BY me
Wing against the authors Of the Democratic ad-
dress; which We still trust, was, in It's terms al
least. the mere result Of haste or Of momenlary hear,
| OF which The Editors have already repenied them
| selves; and having afforded them The oppor'uni-
~ 10 express ,ha! repentance, which We consider
due TO themselves, We leave thu. parl OF The mat
Ter with Them and are done with it-periectly sa.
listed that such improper and unwarranied m
p%ulations against their politica! opponents, VIII
neither do credit TO Wing manners, nor benefit
TO Wing measures.
We have never attached 10 this question oil tine
federalism OF National Bank" The importance
which the Wing seems to have attached TO IT. we
have always been opposed 10 he measure ana
shall continue 10 be so, whether called Fsder0l
or misca!led Republican; for with US and we be-
lieye with our party, ia ,os. by any other name
vii smell as sweet" We have never believed,
as The Wing appears 10 believe, that The in'tl''-
sepce OF The people can be imposed npcn BY
changes in The mere names, either o.iheir party or
Of ils measures, and hence we have hitherto been
willing TO let The Wing have very much lis own
way in this matter and to call lis party and the
Bank, or any ,taer Of is party measures. nd
,inpal"aFederal ""Repablican, conservative"
or even "Democraric," jnst as suited IFS own TAN
70. satisfied that their lrua character would remain
and be understood, "nickna;De them as you VII"
Having been impell-d INFO this discussion Of
";he Federalism Of a National Bank" IN the
manner above stated, We endcavnred 10 meet Inc
question openly, candidly and iaihy. We SUI
desire % do 50. and if we have no, heretofore and
do roi now STATE it correctly and meet II. directly,
il is from mistake aud no, design, and because
we may NOT comprehend precisely what me
Whig is dfivins al. We therefore repeal, that as
we understand il, The WbiS and is coadlui'rs
have been striving s,renuopsiy f. years pas', as
now. 10 prove iha! this measure. a "Na'ionai
Rank is no; a Federal measure, aud shouli
no, be represented as such. To accomp ism mat
object. they must, as we conceive, MAINTAIN
and establish one or another Of these three pf"fo-
s,,ions: Ether that the Federal and Republican
parties we're never divided upon this question %
10 National Bank"-so tina, il was no. 4 parry
measure AT all or, if so divided, that il was The
Republican party which sustained the Bank sne
the Federal party which opposed it-so 'o"' Z"
was never Federal, bu, always Repueltcan; o.,
admitting that the Federal party proposed ana al
vocated the measure, or at least upheld il alter II
was adop;ed, in Inc frs, instance, and that hen
The Republican party opposed it-so mat II Dc
can Fsdsral, We, that afterwards The Republican
party adopted il, and hen The Fedeta al party OPP
nosed i,-so that ii ended Republican, and we
ought therefore to cease 10 call ii by It's old NAME,
and learn to call it By its new one. We can see
NO other proposition involved in The question
We confess we do no, understand exactly which
oftbese lhree proposi,ionslhe Wing has chosen 10
maintain, or now advocates ascorrect. As well as
no ran understand its views on the subject, which
seem to u, very perple1ed and confused, it at
tempts TO sustain all three propositions, though
to our mind they are wholly inconsistent; and to
contend, first, that a Bank is not a party mea
,ure: second, that it is a measure of the RePub-
lican party; and bird, that it was once a Federal
but tina, it turned into a Republican measure
We do not mean to say that the Wing has stated
these propositions, or any distinct proposition oh
the subiect; but only that all three wouid result
!, seems TO US, from the Wings mooe Oh feasoh-
ing upon it. We wish the Editors Oh 'nas paper
,,o,,td stot.. in some prseiss and tangible tor'n,
Tho s,.ct nroposi,ion they do maintain ''in re-
-. .ha federalism of an ,tianal Bank"
In the mean time we meet all three OF those
ahove stated; and contend that this Bank cues
finn wa, one Of the questions which did divide
the Federal and Republican parties; that the Fe-
aeral party, and no, the Republican party, were
the authors and advocates of the Bank; and that
the Re publican party uniformly opposed it; in
other words, that, as a Governmental measure,
it is in lis character and history essentially Fe'
deraI, and not Republican.
A, the best means Of s.eer:aining the Jssh