Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1848-04-04
THE ENQUIRER.
saturday Morning, April l, ls4s.
RICHMOND, VA.

-, VA.
saturday Morning, April 1, ls4s.
rHe WING AND THE TRUTH OF HISTORY"
We are glad ,ha. the Wbis has At length no.
,iced, las we considered it bound to do, IN some
way our reply TO It's uutounded charge OF IT.
hrats tals.aood against some of its political OPP
ponen.s-a charge as devoid OF courtesy ana pro-
ptiety as it was unwarran,ed and unfonnded.-
we are pleased to fud that the term deliberate IS
no longer used, though it is only silently dropped
and the charge repeated in The rather less Often
siye terms OF tihe Justification OF the truth Of
history" We may NOT exactly understand the
ground nov assumed BY the Wing; but it really
appears 10 us, that it attempts itself TO evace The
real issue, while il charges that auemp. on our
selves. The Wing says: "f The ENQUIRER VII
eophne itself 10 the issue OF The fact really mace
By rs. in regard 10 jhe FEDskALfsxN aNahonai
Rank, instead of raising one OF It's own, ana 'neh
combating i, as if i, had originated with Us" &C.
Now we are no, told what this issue OF our ra's'
;re is: but if we understand ourselves, 1t was e1-
ac,ly 10 that Of ",he FEDERALISM OF a Na''oua'
Bank" that we addressed our remarks; III ONE
words as we believe we stated The ques'ion,
whether the Federal or Republican party were Inc
a,,bors and advocates Of this measure. We
thouobt the Wing party had been striving, might
and main, for years past, TO prove hat a National
Bank was not a Federal measure; and though
they may moi, in 80 many words, have claimed
Il, :yr the Republican parry, yet that they have
been erdeavoring 10 produce The impression, thai
:, was Republican. Have we been mistaken II
so, We desire the Wing to correct US.
Blu, perhaps, the Whis means only TO say that
we did not combat The Issue of fact really made
by it, en- which it based its charge of delibe-
tate fslsehood against the authors OF the Demo
cratic address; Ter it Immediately adds:
1.-THE Justification OF the truth OF history charg.
ed upon that document wasthal II represented the
Bank unaualihedly asa Federal measure, when
the writer must have been aware that The last
Bank was recommended to Congress BY a Repnb-
lican Administration, and that the bill incorpora-
ling \, was passed BY the vole o; a large majority
OF The Republican members OF that body, in OPP
no iiion TO the nea'ls u"animous votes OF The Fe-
deral members. AID h,~as The basis OF our
charge, and TIE 9nly ipce,ac oAus'on made BY vs."
Do we UNDERSTAND Inc Wing to say that II
charged the address xi.h ial,iiying the truth OF
history, merely because in giving an account OF
the Bank question, it tailed 10 add TO its account
the fact that Mr.. Madison's administration recon-.
mended The last Bank. and that then a majority o.
he Republican members OF Congress voted tor II,
and most OF Federal members voted against i'll
Why, they might as we'll say that The address talsi-
fed history because i, also failed to add the fact,
that Mr.. Clay once spoke against a Bank rs un-
constitutional and Federal in 1911, and in less than
Ave years after advocated i, as perfectly c%onslitu.
tional and Republican; or, that The address omit
ted 10 slate every other fact connected with the
Bank history, whether material or not. We con-
slider Mr.. Clay's alternate speaking in favor oil
and then against a Bank, Just as material to de-
lermine The true character Of the measure, as Mr..
Madison's alternate veto and subsequent sanction
of ii; or that certain members of Congress VINO
had once voted agains, il, now voted tor it, and
certain others who before voted for it now voted
against it.
The Wing says, we made no reference our.
selves TO the facts il seems 10 consider so impor-
tanL We beg pardon OF the editors; vs d'd 80
dlaisetly-nay admitted them to be in the main
true, and, for the sake o. argument, admitted even
more; and we insisted, as We now insist, that they
are wholly immaterial, a. 10 the federalism OF
the measure. We stated then, 10 substance, what
we now repeat; that although the last Bank was
sanctioned by MIR. Madison and passed by a Con.
gress 10 which a majority of the members were
Republicans, yet it never received the appfoba-
ton of the Republican Party. On the contrary
il is we'll known that Mr. Madison himself was
subjected to censure for this very act; that for the
most part the Republican members who then sus-
tanned the Bank, either subsequently changed
their opinions, as We believe Mr.. Crawford did,
or abandoned their party altogether, and that the
party itself condemned the measure, by resnlu-
lions in The Stale Legislatures and through every
other organ by which 1t could speak and he
Wing denies none Of this, bu, merely states what
Mr.. McDufRe onee said and repeats what Mr..
Crawford once did. We cannot conceive how
the acis or votes Of particular MEMBERS OF q par
~, however high, can aller the character OF /;
measure, whether Federal or Republican. The
measures rather, in our conception, determine
the character Of the men. II every Republican
member Of Congress were 10 vote for the esiab-
li,hment Of n monarchy, it would not convert
monarchical into republican principles; il would
on CONVEX! the Republican members into mo-
anarchists. We can, we think, understand how
The editors of the Wing became "perplexed in The
exueme' by these varying acts and votes Of in,
fuen,ial politicians. They have SO long talked
of MIR. Clay as the embodiment OF Wing prin-
ciples," that they may have brought themselves to
The conclusion, that their party leaders are not
merely The exponen,s and representatives of their
party principles, while advocated by those
leaders but that the men are in fact and
in truth the very principles ,hemselves-and
hence the principles must vary as the men
changed Thus il seems that they complain
OF the Democratic address, not so much for
representing the Bank as Federal measure, as
",ha, it represented the Bank nnqnallfedly as a
Federal measufe.s Now, we humbly conceive,
ifa Federal measure at all, i, must be "anquol.
yGedly" so. Or does The Wing mean 10 i~nsinuate
hat it ought 10 be represented as half Federal
and halt Republican; or that, being Federal in
1871, it turned Republican 10 lsi67 As, accord
ing 10 the Wing classification, il was voted for
and opposed partly by Federal and partly by Re.
publican members Of Congress, il ought therefore,
perhaps, TO be considered a sort Of "haltand-balt'
measure-nei,her fish nor hash bu, ubajf boree
and half alliga,or"-and as a Fedora, adni.is.
tration once sanctioned Il, and afterwards a Re.
publican ednini,traAos did the same thing, per.
haps it should therefore be considered as Of the
"Chameleon's dye" changing with the changing
ma Of the political horizon, or as when,
"Like HOLSTERS boiled the moon,
From black to red, 6sgixs 70 turn"
Or does the Wing mean 10 maintain that It
should not be considered a party measure at all;
A-l IT, - -. - IN