Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1857-05-01
eoy. WISE $ POSITION on DISTRIBUTION

RICHMOND, Va, April nth, lS'''
To ths Editor f"Thc South:"
Sir-In your paper Of this morning, under the peou
Of "Fsllacies OF the Distributionists," you say
Replying constitutional difficulties the in'eisen
Ger says: go, al
tn Jefferson, or Jackson or Calhoun, or nut
Wise, when they favored the policy OF Disrbu.ion
Chief Justice Marshall whose opinions upon const.u.o
al questions were once thought to be Of some
did not regard il unconstitutional Neither did pahei
Webster, the first and constitutional jus' inc
country has yet produced"
We are ny no means certain whether Sir. JEFFERSON,
Gen JACKSON or Mr. CALHOUN ever. AT any tirae avoe"
such proposition rs advanced by the Distributor
lists This much do know, that President JACKSON
toed Mr. CLAYs famous Land Bill in 1872 and that MI.
argument against the constiuonaiy of Distributor
which the discussion of that subject has yet elected
The reference 10 Mr.. BUCHANAN and Gov vase npau'
the Opposition nohins' bur only Rires rs an oApor'HHng
shor that thoe distinsushed Sentien are riser "o
than they fifteen tpenty years ago They hare setn
proper change their opinions this subject JUST as "
Clay opposed National Bank in 1911, constitutional
grounds and 1876 advocated, with equal ZEAL liz re-
charter and just as almost every other e mi csng
of this country has ut some period OF hs le chHs
ed his opinions upon fundamental questions oil consu
tonal construction
l beg leave to withdraw from the defence upon
which your kindness has placed me in the foregoing
article. / have ncrer "seen proper TO change my
opinions" on the subject of Distribution or Deposit
When the opinions Of public man arc dealt wlth'
for the purpose either of attack or defence, they
ought to be correctly stated. During my time ID
Congress- from 1888 to 1874, this question arose but
twice, in two forms. The first was the act Of June,
1886, called the deposit act-Senate bill No. A. en-
titled "An act to regulate the deposits of the public
money!
At every stage of the BILL 10 amend, perfect pass
it, voted against it-lSee Journal House Of Repre-.
sentaves lat session, 24th Congress, 1880 80, pages
| 1866 1867, 1868. l069, 1910, 1911, lO72l
was the only Wing, of that day, in the House. who
did vote against it, on the main question, with As
Democrats, and the questions "shai the bill paes
with 81 Democrats. In the Senate on the question
shall this bill pass7" it determined in the afr.
| mative-yeas SO, nays 6. The frsttco names among
| the yeas are Me,ws. Buchanan, Calhoun, &c. lSee
Senate Journal. lst session. 24lh Congress, 1856.
| Again, the question was presented IN the form OF
the Distribution bill, as it was called of September
ls4l voted against ths bill in the House, at every
stage Of its progress, and finally on lie passssge and
spoke often ana urgently against it.!See House
Journal, Let session, 9th Congress, l5ill In the
Senate, on the question shall this bill passl
It was determined in the afirmatve-yeas 70, nays
%. The third and fourth name. among the nays are
Messrs BUCHANAN, CALHOUN, &c.
Thus, whilst opposed both bllIs,-the one for De-
post and the other for Distribuon-both Messrs
buchanan and Calhoun rofsa for ne trst, and ooM
poed against the last. And with these facts on the
| Journal, why an put down as having changed my
| opinions; whilst it is doubted whether Dir. CAL.
HUN ever, at any time favored such proposition;
and why distinction IS drawn IN favor OF Mr.. Cal
Hous's consistency and orthodoxy, as between him
and Mir BUCHANAN, when they voted precisely alike
on both bills cannot conceive, unless il be that our
opinious all have been guessed at only without refer
euce TO the record Gen. JACKSON himself signed the
bill of June, 1886, and of course at that time, sane
toned this proposition, whilst voted against IL.
| The only ground upon which the impression has
been founded, that evor countenanced the Distrbu
ton measure, certain passages in my speech made
| at Louisa Courthouse in the campaign OF lo39-I0
~ oc bpfor nd "a nj If lSl1
after the Louisa speech; my own real opinions were
given in speeches and votes on these acts, in my re-
preventative place; aud the Louisa speech was made
at the hustipgs in excited political canvass when,
as the speech shows to every candid mind no Will
read it, that the intent not 10 put forth my oUn
opinion. on measures OF policy and constitutional CUES
TONS so much a. contrast and compare the opinions
of Mr. Clay 10Th those of Mr.. Van Buren,, at time
,chen ,cds thought they could Be the competing can
dates for the Preideacy. Ouce again. repeat, that
NY pinions on leading measures as public man, are
not to be found in that speech, which has been so OF.
ten yarbled to misrepresent them but they are to be
found in my speeches and votes whilst
defy the specification Of singe vote OF mine de-
parting from the strict construction Of the State
Rights school of Mr. MADISON; or single change of
opinion on any leading measure OF policy, except me
the Bank question in 1867. Whether acting with
the Democratic or Wing party, on all subjects OF
constitutional law and strict construction l nave au,
hered, without variabeness shadow Of turning, to
the Virginia school Of JEFFERSON and MADISON.
opposed the acts of 1886 and 1884, for Deposit and
Distribution and uniformly sustained in every sort of
action the vetoes Mr TYLER on these and all other
subjects, including the Bank vetoes
As you have made mistake in your friendly de.
fence of my opinions which have been thought wor'
thy of discussion of late, respectfully ask you TO
give this correction place in your Journal az an act
Of simple justice to
Your obedieut servant.
HENRY A. WISE.
Gov. Wise does us no more than justice, In his ap'
probation Of our defence Of bis position on the Land
Question. or course, it was not for US TO disclam
the I,ouiss Speech and we were therefore, reduced
to the extremity of supposng the possibility of a
change of opinion on the part Of bis Excelency.-
The South.