The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-07-05
From the Signal
GENERAL PIERCE'S "NEGATIVE
STRENGTH ,,

we have been somewhat amused by the
parade making in the Locofoco journals,
in regard to what they call very humor-
ously the ''negative strength' of their
Presidential candidate. This seems to US
very much as if we should praise awoman
for her "negative beauty"-or trades
man for his sEnegative honesty" And
yet there is curious felicity in this phrase
as applied to General PIERCE. His whole
career, civil and political, is made up of
negatives of the most extraordinary char
ac,er ; and its strength, therefore, if it is
not negative, is nothing.
Mr.. PIERCE is very clever gentleman,
but what he has done in this world to &C.
cupy eight mortal columns of the news
papers, with broad columns and small type,
his best friends will be the most puzzled
to answer. We have read the whole
eight columns, as they appeared originally
in the Boston Post, and have been copied
into the Washington Union. We have
read them with amazement. His worst
enemies could not have wished for more
opportune or fatal publication.
Three columns Of the eight are devoted
to the connexion of General PIERCE with
| the Mexican war. This is simply ludic-
rous. We had hoped for the sake of an
amiable man that his friends would not
seek to make hero or soldier of him.
General PIERCE knows as well as any one
how little he deserves such reputation.
From the first moment he landed in Mex
leo, General PIERCE relied entirely on the
! advice and directions of the young officers
Of the regular army, who were in his staff,
or within his reach. He never hesitated
to avow his entire ignorance of military
affairs, and his absolute unftness for his
new employment, and in this he showed
much more good sense than his friends do
in claiming military character for him.
We have no doubt that he is brave man,
but he possesses no military aptitude; and
he resigned his commission the first mo-
ment he could do it with propriety, avow
ing that he had mistaken his vocation. 1t
may we'll be that he would have distin-
guished himself by his gallantry, if he
had been favored with an occasion; but
a succession of accidents and misfortunes
withdrew him from the field on several
critical moments, just as the time arrived
for winning laurels.
But the difficulty in General PIERcE's
case is more deeply seated than this. 1t
is not merely that his military character is
one of exclusively ''negative strength"
but his civil career is equally remarkable
in this regard. He was some years in the
New Hampshire legislature, and it is not
pretended that he accomplished anything
worthy of mention in that interesting as
sembly.
As a member of the House of Repre-
sentatives of the United States in June,
1886, he voted against the bill making
additional appropriations for the Delaware
breakwater, and for certain harbors, and
removing distractions in and at the mouths
of certain rivers, and for other purposes,
for the year 1886" 1t cannot be claimed
that he rendered any particular service by
this vote, for the bill was passed, ard a
few days afterwards received the sigma
ture of General JACKSON.
At the same session Mr.. PIERCE voted
against the bill "making appropriations
for the improvement of certain harbors
therein mentioned" This was omega
tive" but not very effective one Tor
this bill, in spite of Mr.. PIERcE's mega
ton, passed both Houses of Congress,
and was signed by General JACKSON.
At the same session he voted against
"the bill to continue the Cumberland
road in the States of Ohio, Indiana, and
Illinois," This vote, too, was Of as little
consequence as any thing that ever hap
pened to Mr. TooTs. The bill received
a majority of votes in both branches OF
the Legislature, and received the sigma
ture of General JACKSON.
These are the prominent points of his
career in the House. As far as the conn
try is concerned, it was certainly of no
" consequence" We do not think that
these votes call very loudly on the Amer
lean people to make him President.
We next find him in the Senate In
the session of lS37-'3S, he voted against
a Hsrbor and River bill that was voted for
by Mr. WRIGHT and Mr.. BUCHANAN.
But in this case, also, his vote was of no
sort of +" consequence. At the same
session he voted, in minority Of sir,