Western Sun & General Advertiser, Volume 14, Number 7, Vincennes, Knox County, 15 March 1823 — Page 1

WESTERN SUN & GENERAL ABYEilTISEK,

BY EI.II1U STOUT. VINCENNES, (IND.) SATURDAY, MARCH 15, 18S3. Vol. 14. No. 7.

THE WESTERN SUXy

IS published at Two Dollars and Fifty Cents tor Fifty lvo A'umbers ; which ma) be discharged by the pay-; ment of TWO DOLLARS at the time vof Subscription. Payment in advance being the mutual interest of both parties, that mode is solicited. A failure to notify a wish to discontinue at the expiration of the time subscribed for, will be considered a new tngagement No subscriber at liberty to discontinue Until all arrearages are paid. Subscribers must pay thepostage of their papers sent by mail. Letters by mail to the Editor on business m istbe paid, or they will not be attended to. Advertisements inserted on the customary terms. C7" Persons sending Advertisements, must specify the number cf times they wish them inserted, or they will be continued until ordered out, and must be paid for accordingly. NATIONAL POLITICS AND HISTORY. Concluded from our last.' It is remarkable, that the minority, with whom I voted against the clause forbidding the importation of slaves trom abroad into Louisiana, consisted of Mr. Baldwin and General James Jackson, of Georgia, Mr. Bradley, and Mr. Isarael Smith of Vermont, and Mr. Ellery of Rhode Island According to the logic of General Smyth, they were all in the same dilemma with mc. They were all among the most arde'nt republicans, and the most fie voted friends to Mr. Jefferson's administration, in the country and Mr Bradley was the man who, in December, 1805, moved for leave to bring in the bill to prohibit the slave trade after the first of January, 1808 ; who actually brought it in and at the succeeding session of congress carried it through the senate. Upon the question for leave to bring in the bill, I voted against it, thinking that the letter of the constitution forbade con gross from acting on the subject before 18 )8. But the Driricinle havine been settled, that the prohibition might be charted in anticipation, though not to take effect till 1803, I voted for the bill itself, when it passed in January, 1807. Upon reviewing all these votes now, the only one upon the correctness ,of "which I feel a diffidence, is that of December, 1805, against the leave to brin in a bill. It was a question not upon an ngt anted, but upon an interdicted power. Including always against the assumption by congress of any power not clearly granted, perhaps I indulge unnecessary scruples against that of power expressly forbidden. Had the temper of the times, in relation to the slave trade, been in 1805, when the bill as brought in, the same a it had been in 1787, when the interdiction of the power of prohibition to congress was inserted in the constitution, I have little doubt that the construction of the clause, upon which I voted, would have been held to be the only one of winch it would fairlv admit. But. in the interval, a threat and happy change of the public mind had taken place. The slave trade, which, in 1 787, had been reserved as a privilege teo precious to be submitted even to the prohibitory power of congress, in 1805, had palled uprm the taste and become an object of general abhorrence and disgust. Even those, to i . 1 i? . 1 1 wnose uueresis ami uesirs me original interduction had been conceded, were willing to forgo the remnant of benefit which they might have claimed from it. and to join, two years before its time, in proscribing that prohibition, which, until then, could not be carried into eflVct. But if I, from an overweening scruple against the exercise of a power, 'one day N before it became unequivocally lawful', am to be doomed as unquestionably a ifricnd to the slave trade, what is to be said of those patriots and sages, with "Washington at their head, who, in 1787, expressly denied to congress, for twenty years, the power of prohibiting this flagitious traffic at all ? A vote upon another grave subject is charged upon me as evidence of my histility to the republicans ; a vote against wearing crafie one month, in memory of " Samuel Adams and Edmund Prndelton, two of the most distinguished fiiends of Tirtue and liberty. My objection to it was a precedent. Oh the same day an unanimous vote had passed to wear crape for one month, for 3totern Thompson Mason, a raojnbf r of

the senate, then recently deceased. As a usual compliment to a member of the body, I assented to this. But when on

th same day a resolution was offered to j wear crane for another month, for two i persons, neither of them a member of the body, and out of the usual course of proceedings, its obvious tendency was to introduce a practice of passing such resolutions upon ihe decease of every eminent man in the union It had the appearance, too, of a disposition to offer them by parts from different sections of the Union ; and of leading to discussions of comparative merits, and to disquisitions upon characters, neither suitable to the time nor the place. The characters of Samuel Adams and Edmund Pendleton were venerable and illustrious : but others equally distinguished had died without that sort of notice, which, the example oncce given, might and probably would be demanded for others less mer itorious until it should lose all vclue, as an unmeaning formality. These were the motives, upon which I, with a veryTCspectable minority, voted against that resolution ; and although a majority voted for it, because they thought a rejection of it, after it was once offered, would have appeared disrespectful to the persons whom it was then specially intended to honour, I have reason to believe that thev were convinced, by the result of that day's debate, that it would bcadvisab'c to offer no more such compound resolutions, and that this mode of political canonizations, if ever proper, should be reserved for characters of at least solitary splendor, Sc with regard to whom there would be neither need nor disposition to take the question by yeas and nays. General Smyth finally charges me with haying, as senator, denied protection to commerce; and seekincr, as usual, a culpable motive for, he imputes it to an unwillingness that the republican administration should have the credit of affording protection to commerce. His proofs are, that in March, 1804, I voted for striking out of the act further to protect the commerce and seamen of the United States against the Barbary powers," the clause imposing tne auty cancel the Med iterranean fund : and, finally, against the act itselt. My recollection respecting this act, and the reasons for my votes upon it are less elea" and distinct, than with regard to any of the others pointed oat by the general for your reprobation ; because, in other cases, I not only voted, but .took an active part in the debates. In his I gave only silent votes, according to "lhe conviction of my judgment, and upon 'the strength of arguments urged by others. I well remember, however; the principal objections against the Mediterranean fund clause, and against the act itself. Bj the first section of the act, an additional duty of two and a half fier cent, ad valorem was imposed upon all goods, wears, and merchandize, imported, which were already charged with ad alorem duties. It was contended that this indi. criminate augmentation of duticsfirpon one class of merchandize, many articles of which were already burdened with charges as heavy as they could well bear, would opperate very unequally and inequitably upon different portions of the union ; that the funds ought to be raised by specific impositions upon specific articles, or by some other mode of taxation. The details of the debate are not ! present to my memory ; but this was the 1 substance of the objection to the tax and ! to the act, and of the reason upon which : my vote was given. I There was another objection to the I second section. It provided that disiinct ac count should be kept of the duties imposed by the act, the proceeds of which shsuld constitute a fund, to be denominated the Mediterranean fund,vrc:X should be applied solely to the fiurfioses designated bv that act; and that the said additional duty should cease and be discontinued at the expiration of three months after the ratification of a treaty with ""Prf poli. unless we should then be at war with any othtr of the Barbary powers, in which casc.the said additional duty should cease and be discontinued at the expiration of three months after the ratification of a treaty of peace with such power. It was objected to this section, that it contained a delusive pled ire or promise to the people, which would never be redeemed ; that it was but sweetening to the nauseous drug of taxation, unworthy of the dignity and discreditable to the sincerity of the legislature ; that it was no other than a costly and cumbersome fraud i that th distinct account of duties

to be applied to the purposes of the act, while altogether useless in itself, would only tend to embarrass and complicate the concerns and management of the treasury ; and that, when once the tax should be thoroughly and quietly saddled upon the people, the Mediterranean fund, and the distinct account, would be drop

ped, but the burden would remain. How far these arguments were founded in truth, and this foresight was justified by the event, let the records of your national legislature decide. The ratifixation of the treaty of peace with Tripoli, three months ufier which, by this promise, the Mediterranean fund duty was to cease and be discontinued, took place in April, 1806. On the 2lst of the same month passed an act by which the first section of the act 44 further to protect the commerce and scan. en of the United States against the Barbary powers," was continued in force until the end of the then next session of congress and no longer. The ptace with Tripoli had been latificd ; we were not at war with any other of the Barbary powers. The Mediterranean fund, the distinct account, and specific ap plication of its proceeds, were all suffered silently to expire, but the additional duty of two and a half per cent, was continued until the end of the next session of congress, and no longer. On the 3d of March, 1807, the same first section of the act, the duty of the two and a half per cent, was continued in force until the first day of January then next, and no longer. On the 19th of January, 1808, it was again revived and continued in force until the first day of January, then next; but without the flattering promise of the words, and no longer. By recurring to the journals of the senate of the 1 1th of January, 1807, it would be seen that it was agreed to expunge these words from the bill. They were expunged at my motion, and in the following manner. The bill was on its passage to a third reading. The venerable George Clinton, then in the chair of the scpate, holding the bill in his hand, and about to put the question on its passage, beckon ed to me to come to him from my seal. When I went up, he whispered to me "I wish you would move to strike out these words 44 and no longer." I answered him that I would with pleasure ; but asked him what reason I should assign for the motion "Why," said he, " I am ashamed to sign my name so often to a lie. " On this hint I made the motion, and the words were expunged. Hut the duty was continued from year to year, until after the declaration of war against Great Britain, when it merged in the double duty act of 1st July, 1812, Fellow citizens, I have explained to vou the reasons and real motives of all my votes, which your represcntative,Gen Alexander Smyth, has laid to my charge, in a priivcd address to you, and to which unusual publicity has been given in the newspapers. I am aware that in presenting myself before you to give this ex planation, my conduct may again be attributed to unworthy motives. The best of actions may be, and have been, and will be, traced to impure sources, by those to whom troubled waters are delight. If in many cases when the characters of public men are canvassed, however severely, it is their duty to suffer and be silent, there are others, in my belief many others whrein their duty to their coun try, as well as to themselves and. the-rr children, is to stand forth, the guardian. and protectors of their own honest fame. Had your representative, in asking again for your votes, contented himself with declaring to you his intentions concerning me, you never would have heard from me in answer to !isv. But when he imputes to inc a di'-M. tuition unworthy of any public man, and adduces in proof mere naked votes, upon questions of great public interest, all given under the s'olcmn sense of duty impressed by an oath to support tne constitution, ana oy tne sacred obligations of a public trusty tojdcj, fend myself against charges so groundless and so unprovoked, is, in my judgment, a duty of respect to yon, no less than a duty of self-vindication to me. I declare to you, that not one of the votes, which General Smyth has culled from an arduous service of five years in the senate of the Union, to stigmatize them in the face of the country, was given from any of the passions or motives to which he ascribes them ; that I never gave a vote, cither in hostility to the administration of Mr Jefferson, or in disregard to republican principle?, or in aversion t republican J

patriots, or in tavor to the slave trade, or in denial of due protection to commerce. I will add, that, having often difiWed in judgment, upon particular measures, with many of the best and wisest men of the U:.ion, of all parties. 1 have never lest sight, either of the candor due to them in the estimate of their motives, or ot the diffidence with which it was my duly to maintain the result of my own opinions in opposition to theirs. Finally, my fiiends, I have a motive fox meeting thus openly and exp'ici. y iho accusa ions of General Smyth. v inch has reference more to our who'e c 5t,ty than to you aiont or to mc. In ti.v heaits of us all, upon every deliberation, whither in congress, in tl.e state IcgisJatr rck, on the election grounds, or in the public journals, the result to be aimed at by all should be peace, harmony, union, teedom. Public piinciplc can be srtt'.cd in accordance with these ends r n by public discussion. On this, as on novo than one other occasion, a pnscna attack upon me has implicated principles of morals and policy, of the deepest im-

port to you to us all. With cverv voto upon which General Smyth has invoked your censure, was connected a great and important ptinciple. That which ha could trace to no other spring than to selfish passions and sordid purposes I have shown you to have been drawn from the deeper fountains of constitutional law, of genuine human rights, of riiscrimu.ating moral sentiment. Say, if you plcrisc, that upon one, or more, or a of these voes, my judgment was ill advised; but say that the motives by which it was influenced were pure, and that the reasons by which it was misled were not trival or light. To all my votes on the acts legislating upon Louisiana, in the session of 1 80S and 1 804, 1 will conclude with calling your permanent and deliberate atten tion. They involve in the most eminent degree, the question still deeply interesting to you, of the constructive fiotver of Congress. Not indeed in the same point of view in which it is more usually presented to your feelings. Not a question in direct conflict with another question as to the extent of the rights of your sraie legislatures. Not a question between two sets of servants of the stune family, to which of them belongs the power to open a banking house, or to dig a water course. But a question between congress and the Sovereign people of the Union ; between Congress and the people of the four quarters of the globe. Upon the question in this aspect, my sentiment are recorded in the voles which 1 gave when it appeared in its first seminal principle, upon the legislation over Louisiana in 1803 and 1804 The time is perhaps not far distant, when the question, in this aspect, will bear with mo:ncn;oii, weight upon your interests and upon your affections. The seed was hut as a grain of mustard seed The plant may shoo' forth its branches, till it overshadows the earth, JOHN QUI XL Y ADAMS. Washington, Dec 28th, 1822. GENERAL JAClvSOX. On the anniversary of the . ictroy cf New Orleans, a splendid public entertainment was given to genera! J . k-un by the people of Nashville. The f;. .-. lug is the hero's reply to an address delivered on the occasion : Sir I feel sensibly the honor v,M Ji has this day been paid me Words tail in giving utterance to a proper sense of gratitude for the repeated tributes of affection from my fellow citizens of 1 cnnessec; doubly, endeaied to me on this occasion, as emanating in part from those who participated :n lUt same srei-csand encountered the same dangers, Which you have so impressively decribcd. I recognize around me the soldier?- of Telledega, Talbsc-hatchry, Emukfivv and Tohopcka; those who bhd on the plains of the Mississippi, suffered in Florida and triumphed at Orleans. That I have been the humble instrument in the hand of a Supreme Being to arrest the savage scalping knife, to give protection to a bleed ing frontier, and to lead these riiz:n sol diers tovictorv, wiilevrr be remembered with mingled emotions of n!e u:c( and devotion These acts, in pindutinr beneficial results to my country, and in being duly appreciated by my fel'o-.v citizens, carry with them their highest val uc; for. to the patriot soldicr.thc aop' oa tion of one's country is his richest reward. That the commemoration of thU day may. for future ages, bring with it the recollection only of wars that have passed; that my country may long prospor n