The Sumter banner. [volume] (Sumterville, S.C.) 1846-1855, 1849-08-01

tcnSve for wise and cautious delberation and
decision There we're too many interests in
volved. Ifgsneral propositions only are to
Bio laid down in such convention, the object
is not worth the effort; for, in the divided
state of the public mind upon the question,
opinion of parties, and generally of individuals
would remain the same.
If a general plan Of operations is to be pro-
posed and pressed upon Congress, the objec-
tlons are palpable and grave. The members
are under little responsibility; and az each
section Of the country will have it's OWL OBJ
jects TO attain, these must be attained by
concession to the objects of others, and
the result will furnish evidence of mutual
spirit Of accomnlodationdratbc than cautious
regard for the general interest. Such an as-
semblage il very different thing from the
attempt to concentrate opinion and action in
favor Of any improvement affecting a particu-
lar portion Of the Union. where there is a
Community Of information and interest, and
where there is no weighing of one project
agalst, another, nor any sacrifices to insure
the desired result.
And am fully confirmed in my previous
antlcpations concerning the Chicago Convcn-
tion. imagine the first man is yet to be
found who will venture to say that any ad-
But had yet another reason for declining
toattend that convention did not like its or
igin. The earliest notice Of it which saw
was connected with the names Of some we'll
known wings, prominent politicians Oft city
OF New York; and believed, and have yet
no reason TO doubt, that one great object was
TO inJurc the democratic party by taking adj
vantage of the excitement which prevailed IN
certain portions OF the country in consequence
OF the failure of two successive internal i'm
provement bills. And l have since under.
stood, though cannot vouch for the fact,
that such was the actual intention, and that
the proceedings Of the convention would have
assumed party character, and been dircc-
ted to this object, had not the design bccn
frustrated BY the tirmncss of the democratic
members.
Now Mr. Greeley will understand why
did not attend this convention. But cannot
understand why he seeks my opinions on this
question in my letter, which is wholly silent
on The subject, and not in my speeches and
votes IN the Senate of the United States.
Eminent whig politicians whom I could
name, but that it would be invdious 10 do SO,
were invited to attend the Chicago Conven-
ton, but neither answered nor attended. !
thought il due to the gentleman who invited
me to acknowledge his attention, and did So
And this act Of courtesy, which constitutes
the only difference between myself and 9TH
ere, has been made the text book whence nv
OPINIONS are to be deduccd, and by which my
inconsistency IS to be proved. On the qIcs-
ton OF the United States over the subject of
internal improvements, my sentiments are in
accordance with those Of the great democrat
&c party, and are fully expressed in the rcso-
iutions OF the Baltimore Conventions In the
words OF one of these resolutions, | believe
"that the constitution does not confer on the
general government the power to commence
and carry on general system Of internal inn
provement," and no man living has the right
to galnsay this assertion But 9t the same
time have never disputed the right OF Con-
gress to improve some Of the great harbors
and rivers and lakes Of the Union, national in
their character, and important to the COM
merce, and some of them to the defence of
our country. While the democratic party
deny the power to devise and carry on a vast
system OF operations-whosc pecuniary en-
tent no man can forcsce, and what is still
worse, whose corrupting influence, as we'll
IN the Legislature as out Of it, cannot be
viewed but with the most serious apprehcn-
son-the great majority of that party. in.
deed nearly all Of it, has advocated particu-
lar appropriations justified by the circumstan-
ces OF position and importance. Almost at
the same time that declared my adhesion to
the resolutions Of the Baltimore Convention.
voted with equal good faith for bills in the
Senate providing for the improvement OF rv-
ers and harbors and lakes, and advocated
thelr passage in my seat; and this is precisely
the reason why accuse many of the whig
papers and politicians Of dsingcnuousness
or something worse, in asserting that my
Chicago letter, which contained not word
on the subject, was proof of my hostility to
all the action of Congress, in the very face of
my official course and Of my publicly -dcclar-
ed opinions. And my position was that of
most of the prominent men of our party, who
while they held to the doctrines of the rcso
lutlons, held Likewise to the power of special
Legislation, and voted for the same bills.
do not know, indeed, that there is single
senator who denies to Congress all power to
legislatc over this matter. Certainly Mr..
Calhoun does not, who adopts the wholesome
doctrine OF strict construction. am aware
II IS dIfhcult to draw practical line at all
times between objects that ought and that
ought not tc engage the attention Of Con
gress; and think therefore, looking to the
abuse to which the whole subject is liable,
that the effort should be to narrow, and NOT
to enlarge, the circle of power; and such
understand to be the views Of the democratic
party.
The other proof Of ins:nccrity, as I have
already stated, is drawn the fact that in nv
letter to MIR. Nicholson took ground against
the Wilmot Proviso, excluding slavery, by
law from the territories, and now believe that
slavery, with or without that restriction, will
not be established there And the wonder
is gravely expressed how could write that
letter and the letter of three lines to the
Chicago Convention, and yet claim the char
acter OF an honest man. 1t is much gravcr
wonder to me, how intelligent editors OF pub
lie papers, whose influence on public opinion
IS so great, should venture thus to deal even
with political opponent, in utter disregard
OF his true position. 1t will not surprise YOU
but it will many who have viewed my course
only in party aspect, to be told that in that
very letter to Mr.. Nicholson expressly sta.
ted my opinion to be that slavery would new