The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-08-19
WASHINGTON, d. C
THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 1853.


party to which you have referred-the Nationa,
Wing party; political association, sir, an
sure you will grant, of which no one need b.
ashamed. The prostration Of my health conn
PEELED nae, four years ago, to resign the honor
able post which / then filled in the public
service. Since that period, new parties hsvs
been organized old ones have either retired
for q while, at least from the field, or have
been forced in some degree on new issues and
if felt the slightest inclination, (which 1 dc
not, with the partial restoration of my health
to return to public life, 1 should be deterree
| from it by the fact, that between the extremes
of opinion which distract and threaten to con-
vulse the country, / find no middle path o.
practical usefulness which friend of moderate
| counsels is permitted to pursue. Statesman
| ship, as it was understood in my younget
days-that is, the study of the foreign relstiont
| of the country, its defences naval and military
its currency and finances, its internal improve
ments, its great industrial interests, and the,
| relations of the Government to the Indian,
| tribes-has almost become an obsolete idea, and
our political life has assumed almost exclusive
y the form of sectional agitation. Into thar
dreary and proftless agitation have no heart
to enter."-Ar. Ereretfs Speech to the Young
Mems Democratic, Club in Boston, on the ST.
July.
Craftsmanship, in this country has Away
been understood to embrace in its studies {
knowledge of the Constitution, the powers auS,
limitations of the Federal Government. Ths
rights of the States respectively, the powers
delegated to the General Government, and the
powers reserved to the States, have commanded
the attention of the ablest and best minds, from
the adoption of the Constitution. There have
been differences of opinion among our country:
men on these subjects, that have led to the
organization of parties at different periods, and
Mr.. Everett enumerates various political ques.
tons that have on different occasions interested
the people and entered into our elections.
Such men as Mr.. Jefferson and Samuel
Adams belonged to the State Rights school Of
politics, and insisted on a strict construction
of the Constitution, denying to the Federal
Government the exercise of any powers that
we're not expressly granted or were clearly an
incident, but maintaining for the States their
sovereignty and the exercise of power not
delegated. But others, like Hamilton and
Ames, of different school, were for more i'm
perial central authority, and not disposed
to coufne the action of the Federal Govern.
ment within rigid constitutional restrictions,
but, under vague and general clauses to promote
the general welfare" would exercise what
ever power was deemed necessary or expedient.
These men, thus widely differing in their
views on fundamental principles, were statesmen
in the highest sense Of the word, and their diff
ferences involved the profoundest statesman.
ship. The very points on which they disagreed,
we're the standard by which those political and
party questions which Mr.. Everett specifies
were measured and tested. They did not all
spring into existence as controverted questions
at the commencement of the Government, but
were brought forward at different periods, were
disposed of in conformity with rightful consti.
tutional principles. In every instance, the
topics, mentioned by Mr. Everett as constitu.
ting the study and craftsmanship of his younger
years, were matters of party controversy be.
tween the Centralists on the one hand, and the
State Rights men on the other The parties
thus in conflict have been known by different
names at different periods-at one time they
were Republican and Federal, at another Dem
ocrat and Wing, but always and forever the
marked line of division, by whatever name des.
ignated, separated those who adhered to State
Rights, State Sovereignty, and a strict censtruc-
ton of the Constitution, from the advocates Of
Centralism, latitudinous assumption of power,
and consolidation.
As these several questions, which Mr. Everett
defines as constituting the craftsmanship I'M.
derstood in his younger days." successfully
arose and passed the ordeal of public opinion,
they were met and canvassed by the master
minds of the period, who did not shrink an
honest expression of their views in regard to
them. The virtues of statesmauship did not
alone consist in the study of past controverted
questions, but in meeting existing exigencies
and adapting great principles to the promotion
of rightful results.
1t would seem, from the statement of the
scholar of Massachusetts,, that the Territorial
policy of the Government did not enter into
the study of his younger days-that the freedom
, or enslsvement of the new and rising States Of
the Union did not receive his attention. AND
hence are not considered b. him among the &C
complisbments of a statesman. "The relation,
OF the Government to the Indian tribes." h,
designates among the qualities of statesman
e ship, but the relations of the Government I,
" the Territories, and his countrymen in the Ter
ritories, are exempted from his catalogue O
. qualifications. They were not embraced in th
requirements of craftsmanship as understood,
: in his younger days." and he therefore did no
study those questions, and he is too old O
timid now. But his neglect then, or timidit
now, cannot alter the fact that the Territoris
7 policy Of the Government is one of its most az
sential attributes, nor is it to be denied thu
one ignorant in regard to it, or who woul
6 conceal his opinions, or evade action thereo
. when the necessity for action has arisen, i
wanting in the essential qualities of a goo
statesman and good citizen.
# Unfortunately, the Territorial policy has 70
some years past been made to assume sec
. tional character. From 1884, in the DAYS q
4 the old Confederation, until the latter part G
the Folk administration, there can scarcely b
said to have been divided opinion on the sui
: ject-the principles and policy of the Govern
ment were settled. But that long establishe
% policy, coeval at least with the Constitution 4
s self, originating with such statesmen as Jeffe,
81 son and Nathan Dane, sustained by Washine
ton and every succeeding President to Fillmor,
!. has been abandoned by later Administration,
8 and the nullifying theory of sectional soutl
n ern Rights party substituted in its place. tn
E. people are divided on this question, and state