Слике страница
PDF
ePub

JAN. 25, 1837.]

Freedom of Elections.

[H. of R.

vice--the disgrace of American politics. It will be perceived, and must be acknowledged, that this principle is founded upon the abuse of patronage. It can have no existence or operation but in the abuse of patronage. The doctrine is, that all the public offices and employ. | ments belong, as a matter of right, to the successful party in a political contest, and should be distributed among them in the same manner that the spoils, whether of lands or goods, plundered from a conquered people in war, belong to and ought to be distributed among the victors. It is impossible that a principle so odious and tyrannical, and one which has been discarded as dishonorable, and against natural law, even in war, among civ. ized nations, could have received the sanction of any respectable portion of the people, if they had not been deluded and their confidence abused by their favorite leaders; if the principle itself had not been arrayed in the guises of patriotism. And accordingly we find that such was the fact. The people have been told that their best friends, and the only true patriots, were contending The charge that the British general encouraged the against a powerful combination to change the character troops before New Orleans, during the late war, by holdand administration of the Government from a govern- ing out the beauty and booty of the city as the rewards ment of the people into an aristocracy--a Government of their valor and success, was thought so dishonorable of and for the rich only. The President, as we have al to the British army as to have led to a correspondence ready seen, condescended to give his sanction to this ar with the American general, as I have been informed, tifice, by charging that the supporters of Judge White, with a view to procure a retraction of the imputation. in Tennessee, were "attempting to undermine our re- But in what does this new principle of party association publican system." Upon such grounds as these the peo. differ from that which was thought so disgraceful to ple have been prevailed on to bear with, and, in some British arms? I repeat the question: how does the spoils sort, to sanction every abuse; and if they believe half the principle of the party now in power, in this country, statements made to them upon this subject, they are differ, as regards the honor or safety of it, from the right. They act upon the same principle upon which watchword of the British general? If, in war between General Jackson, in the defence of New Orleans and civilized nations, the spoils principle is regarded as too the liberty of his country, called in the aid of notorious great a temptation to licentiousness, and too dangerous pirates. The people suppose that the defenders of their for the general safety of property and society, how much liberty and of our free constitution, against the wealth more dangerous and insufferable must such a principle and aristocracy of the land, whatever may be their merits be, when applied to the contests for power between poin other respects, are at least entitled to all the offices litical parties in a free Government? In truth, sir, what and employments in the public control. The circum- is this principle but the watchword invented by a polit stances that many of the leaders of the party which thus ical chief to animate his followers to a savage and unclaims to be arrayed against the rich are themselves, scrupulous warfare: sparing neither sex; practising every Among the most wealthy citizens of the country; and species of fraud and hypocrisy; confounding right and that many of those profligate incendiaries, who have been wrong; and often robbing the innocent and virtuous of most active in exciting the poor against the rich, have their only treasure-their honest fame? What is it, I re actually become rich themselves upon the spoils of of-peat, but a proclamation to the venal and corrupt, of all fice, and are taking their stand in the ranks of the parties, to rally to the standard of a chief who, like the wealthy, even while they are yet hoarse with bawling leader of an army of bandits, points to the Treasury, and the fire-cry of the party, with which they have alarmed says to them, that shall be the reward of victory? Sir, the slumbering senses of the country, appear to have this is no exaggeration. Disguise it as you will, it is a had no effect in undeceiving those who set out the vic-system of corruption and plunder. fims of delusion.

largest class of crimes known in the criminal code of every country? Do you know sir, that this same spoils principle has been the cause of more devastation, wretch. edness, and guilt, individual and national, than any other in the history of human suffering; that it is the incentive alike to the burglar who breaks and enters your house at night, and the highwayman who waylays your path and takes your life; that, rising from individuals to mul titudes and nations, it is the actuating motive to all the plunderings and desolations of military conquests; that it forces the gates of cities, plunders temples of religion, overturning in its course, indiscriminately, republican States and imperial dynasties? It is the great despoiler of private rights and of national independence. It was the spoils principle which united the barbarians of the North, and finally overthrew the vast fabric of Roman policy, law, and civilization-the work of ages; and it is the only principle which can ever shake the solid fabric of our own free and happy institutions.

But, sir, is it not a little remarkable that those who claim all the public virtue, all the disinterestedness, all the patriotism, and exclusive devotion to free and equal rights, should be the champions of a system of plunder; affecting to despise and fear riches, as the source of all oppression and injustice, yet seizing upon, and appropriating exclusively to themselves, the entire national Treasury; a capital which yields an annual income of at least twenty-five millions! Is it not remarkable that such , with such professions daily upon their lips, should be the inventors and supporters of a principle of party ociation, a motive to party action, the most mercenary, the most tyrannical, the most corrupting, and founded more exclusively in a thirst for riches, than any which has ever been known heretofore in the history of Gov.

trament!

Sr, what is the true spirit and character of the spoils principle, as avowed by some of the leaders of the party power? That it is detestable, is felt by many; but be dangerous it is, I believe has not yet been duly condered. Have you, sir, ever reflected upon its nature? Do you know that this principle is the foundation of the

"The

There was a time, Mr. Speaker, in the history of modern Europe, when, whatever discord prevailed among the Christian nations which occupied that fair continent, however bloody and furious the wars which raged be. tween them, the moment it was announced by pilgrim messengers that the infidel Powers of the East were assembled, and advancing their standard to the confines of Christendom, the sacred tocsin was sounded! truce of God" was proclaimed, and Christian armies which had lately met in deadly strife, upon many a bloody field, were now seen advancing harmoniously in united columns, a consolidated phalanx, rolling back the tide of war upon the haughty Turk! I will not say, sir, that the parallel is complete. It would be profane to do so; but I will say, that next to the Christian religion, as an instrument for the improvement of the condition of the human race, that which is most precious on earth is in peril. The constitution of the United States is invaded! The janizaries are mustered; the infidel powers advance; already are the outworks carried; they ap proach the citadel, and nothing but a united effort, and the most determined courage and good conduct, can

save it from irretrievable destruction."

H. OF R.]

Admission of Michigan.

ADMISSION OF MICHIGAN. Before Mr. BELL had concluded his speech, as given entire in preceding pages, the House passed to the orders of the day, and resumed the consideration of the bill from the Senate entitled "An act to provide for the admission of the State of Michigan into the Union on an equal footing with the original States."

The question pending was the demand for the previ ous question, made yesterday by Mr. MANN, of New York, and the motion of Mr. JENIFER for a call of the House.

Mr. JENIFER withdrew his motion for a call of the House.

Mr. MERCER inquired of the Speaker whether, if the demand for the previous question should be seconded, the question could not be separately taken on the preamble and the bill?

The CHAIR replied that there was no precedent for such a division.

Mr. MANN asked if, when the bill was on its passage, after its engrossment, a motion to recommit it, with instructions to strike out the preamble, would not be in order.

The CHAIR. Every member of the House must know that that motion would be in order.

The House seconded the demand for the previous question: Yeas 84, nays 67; and the question recurring on ordering the main question to be put

[JAN. 25, 1837.

Lawrence, Lewis, Lincoln, Love, S. Mason, McCarty,
McKennan, McLene, Mercer, Milligan, J. A. Pearce,
Phillips, Pickens, Pinckney, Potts, Reed, Rencher,
Russell, Slade, Sloane, Steele, Storer, Taliaferro, W.
Thompson, Underwood, Vinton, E. Whittlesey, L. Wil
liams, S. Williams, Wise, Young-57.

So the bill was ordered to be read a third time to-day. The bill was then read a third time, and the question being on its final passage,

Mr. JENIFER inquired if the bill was then open for discussion.

The CHAIR replied that its merits were open in the broadest latitude at that stage.

Mr. JENIFER then addressed the House as follows: Mr. Speaker: The question being on the final passage of the bill, the previous question having been carried on the third reading, precludes the motion, which I had intended to make, to strike out the preamble. I cannot see the propriety of having a reason assigned which does not exist in point of fact. The preamble in reference to the act of Congress of the 15th June, 1836, providing for the admission of Michigan into the Union, declares "that a convention of delegates elected by the people of the State of Michigan, &c., did, on the 15th of December, 1836, assent to the provisions of said act," when it is so notoriously the reverse, that the advocates of the bill have themselves admitted that not one third of the legally qualified voters elected that convention; still, an impres sion is attempted to be made, that it was by the assent of the people of Michigan that that convention was held. I do not desire to be considered as opposed to the admission of Michigan; but I am unwilling she should be admitted illegally or unconstitutionally.

Mr. THOMAS rose, and said he had voted in the negative on the seconding the previous question. But now the position of the bill had been changed, and he hoped the House would not refuse to order that the main question be now put. If that was done, the further action of the House on the bill would be postponed until to-mor- During the last session of Congress, I opposed the row. The bill would be open for discussion after it has bill for the admission; because, after confirming her been read a third time, on the question of its final pas-constitution, it prescribed terms different from the prosage. By ordering the main question, the House will not close the debate, but it will signify a willingness to take the bill as it is, without further amendment. The question was then taken, on ordering the bill to a third reading, and was decided in the affirmative: Yeas 140, nays 57, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Anthony, Ash, Barton, Bean, Bell, Black, Bockee, Boon, Bouldin, Bovee, Boyd, Brown, Buchanan, Bunch, Burns, Bynum, J. Calhoon, Cambreleng, Carr, Casey, Chapman, Chapin, N. H. Claiborne, J. F. H. Claiborne, Cleveland, Coles, Connor, Craig, Cramer, Cushman, Davis, Denny, Doubleday, Dromgoole, Dunlap, Fairfield, Farlin, Forester, Fowler, Fuller, Galbraith, J. Garland, R. Garland, Gholson, Gillet, Glascock, Graham, Grantland, Haley, J. Hall, Hamer, Hannegan, S. S. Harrison, A. G. Harrison, Hawes, Hawkins, Haynes, Henderson, Holsey, Holt, Howard, Howell, Hubley, Hunt, Huntington, Huntsman, Ingham, J. Johnson, R. M. Johnson, C. Johnson, H. Johnson, B. Jones, Kennon, Kilgore, Klingensmith, Lane, Lansing, Laporte, Lawler, Lay, G. Lee, J. Lee, T. Lee, L. Lea, Leonard, Logan, Loyall, Lucas, Lyon, A. Mann, J. Mann, Martin, W. Mason, M. Mason, May, McComas, McKay, McKeon, McKim, Miller, Montgomery, Morgan Morris, Mublenberg, Owens, Page, Parks, Patterson, F. Pierce, D. J. Pearce, Peyton, Phelps, John Reynolds, Joseph Reynolds, Richardson, Rogers, Schenck, Seymour, A. H. Shepperd, Shields, Sickles, Smith, Sprague, Standefer, Sutherland, Taylor, Thomas, J. Thomson, Toucey, Turrill, Vanderpeel, Wagener, Ward, Wardwell, Webster, Weeks, White, T. T. Whittlesey, Yell-140.

NAYS-Messrs. H. Allen, Bailey, Bond, Briggs, W. B. Calhoun, G. Chambers, J. Chambers, Chaney, Chetwood, Darlington, Dawson, Deberry, Elmore, Graves, Grayson, Griffin, H. Hall, Hardin, Harper, Hazeltine, H.ester, Hopkins, legersell, Janes, Jarvis, Jenifer,

visions of that constitution; and because it did not accomplish that which it professed to do, the settlement of the boundary line between the States of Ohio and Mich. igan, but left still open that controversy; and because I believed it was then pressed from other considerations than the desire to benefit the State of Michigan. I have now other and additional reasons. My objections are to the manner in which she is proposed to be admitted; because the people of Michigan have not given their assent to the act of Congress of the 15th June, 1836, admitting her into the Union; and because her admission is predicated upon revolutionary principles.

By the act of last session it is made a "fundamental condition" that the boundaries of the State of Michigan, as defined in that act, shall receive the assent of a convention of delegates elected by people of said State, for the sole purpose of giving the assent herein required; and as soon as the assent herein required shall be given, the President of the United States shall announce the same by proclamation; and thereupon, and without any further proceedings on the part of Congress, the admission of the said State into the Union, as one of the United States of America, shall be considered as complete. Let us examine how far these conditions have been com plied with. The President of the United States, in his message to Congress of 27th December last, in rela tion to Michigan, says: "In November last, I re ceived a communication enclosing the official proceed ings of a convention assembled at Ann Arbor, in Mich igan, on the 26th September, 1836, and which are herewith laid before you. It will be seen by these pa pers that the convention therein referred to was elected by the people of Michigan, pursuant to an act of the State Legislature, passed on the 25th July last, in con sequence of the above-mentioned act of Congress, an that it declined giving its assent to the fundamental cor dition prescribed by Congress, and rejected the same.

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Thus it appears that the President of the United States recognised this first convention as legal and constitutional, as elected by the people, pursuant to an act of the State Legislature, in consequence of the act of Congress; and that they declined acceding to the terms therein prescribed, and passed the following resolution: "Resolved, That this convention cannot give their assent to the proposition contained in said proviso, but the same is hereby rejected;" and further protest against the "condition contained in the act of Congress of Juue 15, 1836, as being contrary to the articles of compact contained in the ordinance of 1787, and the constitution of the State Government."

[H. OF R.

recommendation of the measure being almost unanimous. ly rejected? When has he ever evinced any regard for their opinions? Has he not, on all occasions, exercised whatever power may have been placed in his hands, without regard to any tribunal? And had he believed that the latter convention was held by authority, he would not have besitated to issue bis proclamation, according to the act of Congress, and declare Michigan one of the United States. But, sir, the presidential question was then settled; the vote of Michigan was not necessa. ry to insure the succession, and President Jackson was unwilling to take the responsibility without a benefit. The error into which gentlemen have fallen, if error Thus a convention, regularly organized under the law it be, is the denominating this second convention a conof the State, and according to the act of Congress, re-vention of the people of Michigan. Whenever illegal ject the conditions upon which Michigan is proposed to and unjustifiable measures are adopted, an effort is made be admitted into the Union, and communicated the facts to induce a belief that it is the will of the people. But, to the President of the United States. in this particular case, they have not the benefit of that argument, because it is admitted that not more than nine thousand votes, less than one third, were given, with a population, in 1835, of upwards of eighty-seven thousand, and now claimed to exceed two hundred thousand, and this without any act of the Territorial or State Legislature. Thus, then, we have the proceedings of a regularly called convention, held in pursuance of the act of the Legislature, rejecting the condition contained in the act of Congress of the 15th of June, 1836; and of a subsequent convention, in the language of the Presi dent, "not held or elected by virtue of any act of the Territorial or State Legislature," accepting those conditions.

This was then the determination of the people of Michigan, expressed by her delegates, regularly elected under the law of the State, and in pursuance of the act of Congress. This determination has not been authoritatively revoked, as far as the facts are presented to Congress. Still it is pretended that this second conventionor, more properly speaking, caucus-expresses the opinion and wishes of the people of Michigan. Let us examine bow far the facts in the case support these pretensions. This second convention, without authority, was held on the 5th and 6th of December last. It will be recollected that the refusal of Michigan to accept the terms proposed by the act of Congress rendered the election of the Vice President, if not the President, uncertain. This second convention was urged to relieve that doubt. A meeting, called together without authorty, (two whole counties unrepresented,) undertake to reverse the authorized act of the former convention; and, after declaring that the Congress of the United States have no constitutional right to require the assent aforesaid, as a condition preliminary to the admission of Michigan into the Union," they "resolve that the assent required in the foregoing recited act of the Congress of the United States is hereby given;" thus assenting to that which they themselves pronounce to be unconstitutional. Can any gentleman believe that these proceedings were gotten up for other than political purposes? The proceedings of this meeting were also communicated to Congress by the President, but he does not recognise it a & convention of the people of the State of Michigan, so as to justify her admission into the Union; but he says, this message," this latter convention was not held or elected by virtue of any act of the Territorial or State Legislature." But had these latter proceedings come to me during the recess of Congress, I should therefore have felt it my duty, on being satisfied that they emanated from a convention of delegates elected, in point of fact, by the people of the State, for the purpose required, to are issued my proclamation thereon, as provided by

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

I have quoted the President's language to show that e did not believe that this latter convention was elected, point of fact, by the people of the State, as required by the act of Congress; because, had he so believed, he would have issued his proclamation as required, without referring the matter to Gongress. His proclamation was alone necessary to a mit Michigan into the Union; and, hough it has been urged that his respect for Congress duced him to submit it to their decision, no man, who Os the President, will believe that consideration to are influenced him in any degree whatever. When a he ever shrunk from responsibility, or evinced such respect for Congress as to part with one iota of power, en once within his grasp? Where was his respect for Congress when he removed the deposites, to prevent his

But

It is not contended that Michigan is proposed to be admitted in the usual manner of admitting States. her admission, from the proceedings, is justified upon revolutionary principles. If any doubt existed before, upon this subject, it will be only necessary to refer to the opening speech of the chairman of the Judiciary Committee [Mr. THOMAS] to satisfy them on that point, The honorable chairman who reported this bill did not attempt to conceal the fact that those proceedings were revolutionary; and his whole argument was a justification of their principles. In support of which, he bas referred to the manner in which Arkansas, Tennessee, and other States, have been admitted into the Union; to the opinions of distinguished citizens of Virginia; in fine, to all the authorities which he could bring to bear on this subject since the formation of our Government. Sir, the honorable chairman finds no analogy between the cases cited and the present. Those States were admitted after the authorized and expressed will of the people was ascertained, by their consen', legally and constitutionally expressed. How is it with Michigan? Her legally, constitutionally authorized convention rejected the terms proposed by the act of Congress, and the President of the United States recognised it as such. She now proposes to be admitted, by application of a convention got up without authority of law of either Territorial or State Legislature, and which the President has not recognised as being the expression of the will of the people; yet my col. league finds in those proceedings sufficient to justify his doctrines. He does not consider law, constitution, or any authorized Government, a barrier to his principles. He sets out with taking certain positions, the correctness of some of which had never been denied, and of others which it is only necessary to state to show their absurd. ity. He tells us that all power emanates from the people," that "the people have a right to throw off their Government whenever it becomes tyrannical and oppressive;" that a "majority of the people have a right to make a constitution, and, when oppressed, to abolish the old or set up a new one."

Sir, these may be considered as the fundamental prin

H. OF R.]

Admission of Michigan.

ciples of all republican Governments. But when he assumes "that no Government, no constitution, is necessary, because all power emanates from the people; that meetings called by unknown, irresponsible persons, collected together upon the spur of the occasion, by inflammatory addresses or insidious publications, undertake to constitute a convention to uproot the foundations of Government, then his doctrines become those of anarchy and revolution. It will be recollected that the honorable chairman commenced the debate, and, be fore any objection was made to the admission of Michigan, he developed his views, and the grounds upon which he supported her admission. No gentleman who has succeeded him has had the temerity to sanction them. It is true, the gentleman from New York, [Mr. VANDERPOEL,] in reference to his friend's remarks, says, "he cannot endorse nor can be repudiate them." This, in the spirit of the present times, is truly non-committal. But all who listened to my colleague, who had not heard him before upon this subject, must have been astonished at the latitude of his opinions. He does not recognise any sort of law which may not at a moment be abrogated and annulled; and, in the language of the anarchists, bases his position upon the rights of the people. None could doubt the object of his remarks. They were intended to cover and to justify past transactions, the ef fect of which would be to delude the country as to the position he and his friends held in relation to recent revolutionary movements. And, although he thought proper to refer to Virginia and other States for examples to justify the measure, he might have found ample materials nearer home. The honorable chairman need not have gone to Virginia for the support of such doctrines. And here permit me to say that he has done great injustice by calling to his aid the names of some of her distinguished sons who took a prominent part in her convention, both before and at the time of its organization. They held no such doctrines as those advanced by my colleague; they would have repudiated them, as inconsistent with all good government.

They have not been sanctioned, to any considerable extent, except in my colleague's own State. He need not have travelled elsewhere for examples of disorder and attempts at revolution. I say it with deep humili ation, that Marlyand has been the theatre of revolution and anarchy.

I am aware, Mr. Speaker, that the subject under consideration is the bill to admit Michigan into the Union. I am also aware that this bill did not take the usual course of being referred to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, because it was decided that the discussion should be confined to the question immediately before the Chair. And, sir, if, in following the honorable chairman who opened this debate by promulging the principles upon which Michigan is to be admitted, I show that the practical results of such meas.. ures, if carried into effect, will be the prostration of constitutional Government, and the substitution of revolution and anarchy, if not despotism, I trust I shall not be viewed as transgressing beyond the limits of parliamentary rules.

This is not the first occasion upon which my colleague has advanced those or similar opinions; this is not the first time he has denounced constitutional Government; nor is it the first time that he has raised his voice in favor of revolution! During the last session of Congress, not satisfied with expressing his opinion in favor of republican Government, he thought proper to denounce, on this floor, the constitution and Legislature of his own State, and then to predict that the ensuing election would purge her of her tyrannical oppressors; "that the republicans, the democratic republicans of Maryland, were in motion, roused by the recollection of many

[ocr errors]

[JAN. 25, 1837.

wrongs; that State will heave, from the Atlantic to the Alleghanies, to throw off that incubus which has long weighed upon her heart!" Sir, the means by which this was to be accomplished, and which were resorted to, within the last six or eight months, in Maryland, should admonish this House and the country of the danger of sanctioning such measures. In exposing the conduct of those who, forgetful of the high obligations they owed to their Government, and reckless of the consequences to their fellow-citizens, for political purposes were willing. to sacrifice the best interests of the State, I do not desire to do injustice to my colleague, and therefore shall confine myself to that which has become matter of history, or fairly deducible from facts as they existed.

I feel that the character of Maryland has been at stake. I know that a misapprehension has prevailed, to some extent, throughout the country, with regard to her Government and her people; this misapprehension was for a time entertained within her borders, and it bas been the policy of those who produced it to continue it. It is too true that a dark clond for a while hung upon her horizon; that she had within her limits men whose want of principle would have led them to the perpetration of any act, for personal or political preferment; whose every nerve was strained to bring her constitution and laws into disrepute, to render her citizens dissatisfied with their Governmen', and to plunge the State into anarchy and revolution.

But Maryland stands redeemed-redeemed by the virtue of her people and the energy of her Government!

I hope I may be indulged on this occasion (although it might have been more proper elsewhere) in defending my native State from the obloquy which has been attempted to be heaped on her constitution, her Legislature, and her people. I know that an impression has been attempted to be made, that such was the aristocra cy of her constitution, and the tyranny of her Executive and Legislature in the administration of the Government, that the people were oppressed and their wishes disregarded; and this coming, too, from some of her own native citizens. The people have never desired an alteration in her constitution, which has not been made. The constitution and laws of Maryland, like all other fallible instruments, require changes according to time and circumstances. The former is altered or amended by an act of the Legislature, (submitted to the people, who annually elect their delegates to the popular branch,) and confirmed by the subsequent Legislature. And no case can be cited where the people have expressed a desire at the polls, or otherwise made known their wishes for a change, which has not been made. But the Legislature is too enlightened, too regardful of the rights of the people, to permit them selves to be influenced by self-constituted conventions or caucuses, without authority of law, to subserve the views of political demagogues, although they may call themselves the proper exponents of the popular will. Sir, the people know and feel that anarchy is not liber ty, that revolution is not reform, and without law there can be no security. It is by professing that the people desire those changes that these disorganizers endeavo to render their own acts acceptable to popular feeling

Before we can properly appreciate the motives of th originators of the intended revolution in Maryland, will be necessary to understand the origin, the prog ress, and the result of those movements.

A reform in the constitution was the ostensible ob ject; the real one, a political ascendency in the State It was intended to give the vote of Ma yland to M Van Buren and Mr. R. M. Johnson, and thereby insur for themselves places of high preferment. The mear by which this was to be accomplished will show the

|

[blocks in formation]

total disregard of honorable engagements, and a treacherous abandonment of their own friends.

A reform in the constitution of Maryland had been, at repeated sessions of her Legislature, a subject of consideration; and, in fact, during the last session, a bill had passed making some changes approximating more nearly to the wishes of the larger counties, and a spirit was evinced to carry it much further. Various propositions had heretofore been made to give a more numerous representation to the more populous counties; but no digested plan had ever been agreed on by them. selves, much less to have a representation according to populition. The peculiar situation of Maryland, having a large commercial city, so dispr. portioned in her population to the other parts of the State, that but few intelligent men, from any section of it, would advocate a representation according to population. Many of her voters are transient residents; hundreds vote at the election without any residence whatever.

I speak from a knowledge of the fact, that many of the most respectable citizens of the smaller counties are, and a'ways have been, willing and anxious to increase the representation, in either branch of the Legislature, from the city of Baltimore and the larger counties. But those alterations were not before attempted to be made by revolution. It was reserved for the pa riots of the present day to signalize themselves by so inglorious an achievement.

In 1836 the Jickson party proposed a union with their political adversaries, to further the objects of reform. This was acceded to by the whigs, and both parties in several of the counties sent delegates to a Convention which assembled in the city of Baltimore on the 6th June, 1836. In that convention the counties of Cecil, Harford, Baltimore, Frederick, Montgomery, and Washington, and Baltimore city, were represented. The following resolutions were adopted:

"1st. Resolved, That it be recommended by this convention, to the people of the counties and cities friendly to a reform of the constitution of the State, to elect, at the next October election, delegates faithfully pledged to the people to introduce and support a bill to provide for taking the sense of the people on the question of reforming the constitution of the State, on the first Monday in May, 1837; and in the event of a majority of the people declaring themselves in favor of such reform, providing in the same bill for the calling of a convention for that object.

"2d. Resolved, That in the bill providing for the call of a convention, the members of the convention ought to be distributed equally among the several congressional districts of this State, with the exception of the fourth, which, being a double congressional district, ought to have twice the number of representatives of any other dstrict; that the members of the convention should be elec ed on the first Monday in June, 1837, to assemble ia the city of Annapolis, on the 4th day of July therealer, to prepare and present a constitution for the ratiSca ion of the people of Maryland at the following Oc. tuber election."

Amongst honorable men of all parties this would have been considered binding, and the period to which they bad referred would have been awaited, so as to have ascertained the wishes of the people, and to have adopted measures accordingly. But instead of waiting until the October election, to see whether delegates were chosen to the Legislature favorable to a reform, as deared, the moment the September elections for electors of the Senate had taken place, and it was ascertained Bat twenty-one whigs and nineteen in favor of Mr. Van Baren had been elected, the arch intriguer put in opeao, his insidious plans, not to reform her constitution, but to revolutionize Maryland.

[H. OF R.

By the constitution of the State, the duties of electors of the Senate are defined and limited. They are pointed out in the 15th article of that instrument, which ordains: "That the said electors of the Senate meet at the city of Annapolis, or such other place as shall be appointed for convening the Legislature, on the third Monday in September, 1781, and on the same day in every fifth year forever thereafter; and they, or any twenty. four of them, so met, shall proceed to elect, by ballot, either out of their own body or the people at large, fifteen Senators, (nine of whom to be residents of the Western, and six to be residents of the Eastern Shore,) men of the most wisdom, experience, and virtue, above twentyfive years of age, residents of the State above three whole years next preceding the election."

This very article (which shows the spirit of compromise which formed the constitution) gives to the Eastern Shore six Senators out of the fifteen, was to represent and protect the minority of the State; and without such compromise the constitution could not have been formed. With their duties thus defined, most of them under the solemn obligation of an oath to support the constitution, all of them pledged to the people for a faithful discharge of the duties which they had solicited to be intrusted with, these nineteen violators of pledged faith, usurping powers not given them, have the unparalleled effrontery to refuse to go into the electoral college and perform their duties, unless the twenty one electors will pledge themselves to violate their honor and their oaths, by bargaining away the rights of their constituents.

Mr. Speaker, I do not desire to reflect on those electors, who are not here to protect and answer for themselves; nor do I consider them responsible for the iniquity of their acts. With but few exceptions, they knew not what they did. They were not capable of originating or carrying out those revolutionary objects. No, sir, they were not men for such a crisis. The honor or the renown of originating and enacting the traitorous deed is justly due to others in another sphere. Who those men are, who should be held responsible for this attempt at treason against their native State, and who "with the will to do, had not the heart to dare," after the facts which I shall develop, I leave to this House and the country to determine.

Sir, the first meeting which took place after the September elections, to instruct the electors to violate their solemn duty, was held in the county of Frederick, the county and district which my colleague, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, [Mr. THOMAS,] represents upon this floor. I wish it to be distinctly understood that I am not about to give vague or doubtful rumors, but a recital of facts as they occurred; in doing which, if I err I desire that my colleague may correct me. I intend not to do injustice; but I feel that it is due to the State of Maryland and her people, that they should be disabused from the odium attempted to be cast upon them, and that no language can be too strong (confined within parliamentary limits) in reprobation of such conduct.

At this meeting in Frederick county, a committee of five, Mr. Francis Thomas one of the number, reported sundry resolutions, amongst which were the following:

"Whereas the fifteenth section of the constitution declares that no Senate can be formed unless twentyfour electors agree to meet for the appointment of the members of which it is to consist: therefore,

"Resolved, That the senatorial electors of this county be instructed to require of the twenty-one whig electors a pledge that no member of the former Senate, and no member of the House of Delegates who opposed the bill calling a convention of the people, shall be elected to the next Senate of the State. That at least eight of the members of the Senate, to be chosen by the electoral college, shall be selected from among persons known to

« ПретходнаНастави »