Washington sentinel., 1854-03-29

terests; we should be driven, however reluc
family, to resist her injustice.
This was Congress. Its objects was the
formation Of new confederacy and the name
is endeared to every man Of the good old thir.
teen States of America, and is deservedly dear
to them and the shoots, the scions that have
sprung from them-the other States. And what
are the other States? They are bone of our
bone, and flesh of our flesh. This word Con-
gress, sir, was deservedly dear to the American
people; for out of it grew their confederation
and their Independence; and when the new
Constitution was made, the trainers of it were
men well enough versed in human nature To
know that words were things, and they called
the new project the Congress Of the United
States of America. 1t is Congress by force
of the Constitution; but to all intents and
| purposes, it is not Congress according to the
meaning of the wore, in the English language.
4 What then, is it? II is a convention, or legis-
! lature, like another proposed Congress for q
coniederacy. Suppose that, during the late
war, every State in the Union had sent depu-
tation, as Mr.. Jefferson had said, to T" the
Hartford Nation;" it would have been Con-
| gress, such as we are now invited to. Sup
psse, now, under the Constitution, a convention,
to be got up to amend the Constitution, accor-
ding to its provisions in article FIVE; will it not
be what the Constitution declares it to be--a
conventions coming together of States for
particular purposes Now, sir, in reference
to that on which my resolution bears, suppose
thar, during the last war, France, or any other
4 neutral power France was not neutral pow
er-any neutral power, if such could have been
| tound-had sent deputies to our Congress at
Hartford, for purposes certainly not Of embar-
RAISING, much less endangering, the Union,
but of giving force and effect--such under
stood to have been the avowed motive Of that
! meeting-to the war-could they have shown
authority from their government for so doing? ?
Would they not have partaken Of your bel
! lgerent nature and character? ! go furth-
er, and say, that, in Congress of States, it is
a very strange sort of bargain that the Con-
gress should be constituted by deputies from
each OF its States, and that we twenty four
States should be represented by deputies only
from the aggregate body Of States. If we are
| to go, let as 90, the representatives of all the
States: let each OF our States be represented
as well as their States; and why not? This
is the fact-they, as Spanish American Con-
| federation, are one body polite; we, as n
North American confederacy, are another
| Who ever heard Of Congress of ministers
/ Aioiii wv SoSCL ,4NOJ oAS = ohOulu ID
soon expect to hear of a concert of two instru-
ments; we might have duet; but who ever
heard Of Congress where there we're only
two parties? We have treaty with Great
Britain that makes special provision for an
| umpire to decide in certain cases Of difference.
| Our umpire is dead; he does not sleep, he is
dead, and his death will constitute to any man
who can and will look before as we'll as after
who is not engrossed with the present, and that
with his own ARRANGEMENTS consideration
| that will make him pause before he does any
thing that might influence, directly or indi-
rectly the peace, the safety, the neutrality, Of
these United States. which, under the new cir
cumstances in which the world is about to be
placed, we shall find it no easy matter to pre-
serve without any foreign entanglements.
Mr.. Fox was statesman; he was not only
an orator, confessedly the first debatcr that the
world ever saw, but statesman. am one of
those who think that this world has been much
injured by parliamentary eloquence; by a false
notion, that ability of this sort is necessary
qualification for government; and England to
her dying day-if she ever does die-will re-
pent her Of the dialectics Of Mr.. Pitt. He was
admirably qualified for professor of rhetoric;
he would have filled that chair well at Cdm-
bridSe-I do not mean Cantabridia Nov-Ang.
lorum, but Cambridge in Old England-but as
| minister, his great measures all failed He
was, indeed, most expert gladiator on the
| floor Of Parliament--n good Palinurus in
smooth water-but he too, must be soldier,
and from that day, as to his measures, they
every one failed and his friend and admirer,
Mr.. Windham, assigns their failure in justif-
cation of his vote Of refusal to grant him the
honor OF public funeral; for there, and every
| ,ph hy,f baro r,nhl;o f,naro1
| something as it ought to do-on the ground
that public funerals and monuments should
never be erected except to eminently success
fri statesmen, generals or admirals, not to the
deieated-and the public funeral and the monu-
| ment of Pitt Mr.. Windham, with his manly in
dependence and sagacity of character, was un-
willing to pay for-(he did not grudge the
money-that was another consideration---he
voted to pay the debts of Pitt)-and that fu-
| neral and monument voted to the defeated
statesman-the monument Of the pilot that
did not weather the storm-was the torerunner
of the monument voted to General Packenham
for his glorious attack on New Orleans.-This
is the way to render that cheap and worthless,
which is above all price; that which indeed
may well be called the cheap defence of ma
tions.
Mr.. Fox said, speaking Of the history Of
James the Second and Charles the Second,
that Of all governments in the world, restora-
| tions were the worst. He applied it to the res
toration of the House of Stuart not against
the consent of the people, but by general ac-
clamation, which soon led to as general vote
of expulsion of that misguided unteachable,
bigot race. The House of Bourbon, restored
by foreign bayonets, forced upon France against
the wishes Of large majority of her people,
was not then an example to which the illustri-
GUS historian could have referred-a yet strong
er proof of the truth and sagacity Of that
wonderful man. There is, said Mr., r. another
restoration Of another illustrious house, push
the parallel no further. BY what means it has
been brought back upon u.s. ] shall not no,o
stop to inquire, though in my heart and con-
| science, ! believe, the sceptre having been
clutched, this is the last four years of the
| administration of the father, renewed in the
person of the son. am not afraid Of the re.
enactment Of the sedition law; no, not at oil.
One of our diplomatists said, in Paris think,
speaking Of their Protean vexations Of our