Yale University Library
39002035236182

Everttt , A. H.
All Oratioii. .
Bostou, l'^3'. .

A, i). *^*

«fl,
YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

1942

¦'¦ ¦ ¦ AN!-'..
orIltio

BELlVEiKiBD' BY

llilJtfrDERH. EVERETT
HOI* 1.197017,

AN

ORATION

DELIVERED AT

UOJLL.I8TOI¥, IflAiSS

®PTT3Tff

'H ©IF OTriL¥. mm.

AT THE REQUEST OF THE

DEMOCRATIC CITIZENS

OF THE

NINTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.

BY A. H. EVERETT.

3Joston :
HENRY L. DBVEREDX, PRINTER,
4 Water Street.

1839.

HOLLISTON, July 5, 1839.
Sir:— At a meeting of the Committee of Arrangements for
celebrating the sixty third Anniversary of our National
Independence in the Ninth Congressional District, at Holliston,
the undersigned were appointed a Committee to present their
thanks for your truly Democratic Oration on that occasion,
and to request a copy of the same for publication.
Very Respectfully, Your Obedient Servants,
S. G. BURNAP,
LUCAS POND,
ARTEMAS BROWN,
ARIEL BRAGG,
CHARLES MAYO,
E. W. STONE,
EZRA WILKINSON,
M. M. FISHER.
Hon. a. H. Everett.

ROXBURY, July 11, 1839.
Gentlemen : —
I HAVE received your letter of the Sth instant, and agreeably
to your request have the honor to place at your disposal a copy
of the Address. With many thanks for the friendly terms in
which your communication is made,
I remain, Gentlemen,
Most truly and faithfully,
Your Friend and Obedient Servant,
A. H. EVERETT.
Messrs. S. G. Burnap,
Lucas Pond,

Artemas Brown,
Ariel Bragg,
Charles Mayo,
E. W. Stone,
Ezra Wilkinson,
M. M. Fisher,

Committee.

ORATION.

Fellow Citizens : — The progress of the United
States since their first settlement as British
Colonies, and especially since the great day which
announced their independence, and of which we
now commemorate the anniversary, — is entirely
unparalleled in history. If a century ago some
modern Plato or Harrington had published, as an
imaginary picture, a description of a state of things
like that now existing in this country, it would
have been decried as a mere Utopian dream, —
beautiful, but entirely impracticable on this terres
trial sphere.
A community of nearly twenty millions, —
doubling its population every five-and-twenty
years, — advancing still more rapidly in wealth,
political importance, and all the useful and orna
mental arts-- remarkable individually for enterprize,
industry, good morals, and respect for religion, —
cultivating friendly relations as a first-rate power
with all other nations, and sustaining its rights when

necessary, by force against the most iraportant of
them, — and all this without any portion of that
oppressive and burdensome apparatus of standing
armies, hereditary magistracies, privileged orders,
national debts and established churches, which have
heretofore been considered essential to a strong
and permanent governraent, — this, I repeat, fellow
citizens, is a state of things not only unexampled
in history, but surpassing in its bright reality, the
visions ofthe most enthusiastic theorists ; and this,
I need not add, is a true and simple description of
the actual situation of the people of the United
States. Of these States, Massachusetts is perhaps the
one which derives the greatest amount of positive
advantages from this favorable condition of the
country. Beside those, which she enjoys in com
mon with all the other States, she has been favored
from the outset with peculiar privileges of the most
important character. While the great agricultural
interest, which is that of nine tenths at least of the
people, has never received any favor or protection
from the government, other departments of industry,
of which Massachusetts is one of the principal
Representatives, have been the objects of special
encouragement. Her navigation has been pro
tected by discriminating duties; — her fisheries
by bounties ; — her manufactures by a protecting
tariflf ; — her commerce by the sleepless \Wi-
lance and unwearied activity, in peace and war,
of the general governraent. The effect of these
encouragements co-operating with the industry,

enterprize, and intelligence of the people is too
apparent to be questioned, and forras a most
agreeable subject of conteraplation for the friends
of equal rights and human happiness. It exhibits
the triumph of good laws and their consequence
good morals over the greatest natural difficulties.
Far less richly gifted than most of her sisters, in
soil and climate, Massachusetts has a larger popu
lation, in proportion to the extent of her territory,
and a greater amount of wealth in proportion to
her population than any of them. In navigation,
manufactures and the fisheries, she takes the lead :
in commerce, though inferior to some, she sustains
herself in proportion to her resources, among the
most ffourishing. I may add, perhaps, without
offending the pretensions of any, that she is not
inferior to the most distinguished among thera in
care for education, in intellectual culture, and the
progress of the useful and ornaraental arts, or in
attention to morals and religion. Every harbor on
her coast is crowded with her merchant navies :
every water-fall within her territory gathers round it
a village of industrious and thriving artisans : alraost
every town improves its agricultural resources by
the profitable pursuit of some kind of manufac
tures. After satisfying the deraands of all these
various forras of industry at horae, she sends forth
from her exhaustless resources the raost precious
of her products, — raen — high-rainded men, — to
subdue the wilderness and instruct and civilize the
younger states. Their pulpits, professcrships,
warehouses and offices, their courts of justice and

halls of legislation, are crowded with the pupils of
your colleges : their forests bow before the sturdy
stroke of your hardy yeomanry. Great as your
advantages are, they are daily and hourly
advancing under the impulse recently imparted to
them by the pubhc works now in progress, with a
rapidity scarcely surpassed by the wonders of im
provement which are witnessed on the virgin soils
ofthe great west. The coraraunication, which is
now about to be opened by the Western Rail Road
between these rich soils and the dense manufac
turing population of New-England will form a new
era in our history, distinguished by achievements
in cora.parison with which those of the present
period will sink into insignificance.
Your own village, fellow citizens, furnishes
one of the most agreeable and striking illus
trations of the truth of these remarks. What
was it before the revolution.^ A simple, agricul
tural hamlet, painfully sustaining by the products
of its rocky soil, a frugal and industrious but
scanty population, prohibited by the cruel and
ill-judged policy of the mother-country from manu
facturing so much as a hob-nail. What is it now ?
Fellow Citizens, it wears another face. It has put
on the bright array of rapidly increasing prosperi
ty. New streets of handsome dwellings intersect
its territory. Schools, churches, academies, lyce
ums, appear among them. A single branch of
manufactures pours into its bosom an annual trib
ute of a quarter of a million of dollars. It has
become, in short, one of the most industrious,

thriving and beautiful towns in the Commonwealth.
Such, fellow citizens, are the advantages, enjoy
ed by Massachusetts, and derived, in a greal de
gree, from the action of the General Government.
One would naturally suppose that in a community
so peculiarly favored, the prevailing sentiment
would be that of proud and grateful satisfaction
with things as they are. Instead of this the politi
cal relation assumed by Massachusetts towards the
General Government has been, for forty years past,
with sorae short intervals, that of stern, bitter, —
often furious, — sometimes almost rebellious oppo
sition. At this very raoment, when she is in the
full fruition of the political advantages which I have
been describing, which place her condition, on the
whole, perhaps above that of any other country on
the face of the globe, and which, as I said before,
are derived mainly from the action of the General
Governraent, — a stranger would suppose frora the
habitual tone and language of the journals, repre
senting the dorainant party in the state, that we
were living under a tyranny raore oppressive than
those of Algiers or Turkey. Nor is this senseless
virulence confined to the newspapers. The mem
bers of the Legislature and the delegation of the
Comraonwealth in Congress, are employed, with
honorable exceptions, not in facilitating the action
of the General Government, but in thwarting its
eflTorts, and embarrassing, as far as possible, the
machinery, to the operation of which we are in
debted for all our public and private prosperity.
Within two years one of the prominent merchants

10
of the metropolis,— previously its Representative
in Congress,— declared publicly, at a meeting in
Faneuil Hall, that " no people on the face of God's
earth was ever so much outraged, oppressed and
trampled upon by its government as that of the
United States."
Now, I ask you, fellow citizens, is this course of
conduct right and honorable ? Is it consistent with
the character which Massachusetts wishes to sup
port of a well-informed, moral and rehgious peo
ple ? If we have any real faith in the religion we
profess, have we not reason to fear that a good,
but at the same time just and wise Providence,
offended by this long-continued strain of peevish
ingratitude in the midst of so many blessings, may
at length withdraw his favor and leave us for a
time to the trial of adversity ? For myself I can
truly say that I desire no worse fortune to the in
dividuals, who take the raost active part in stirring
up this unnatural spirit of discontent, than that
they may have the opportunity of making trial of
some one of those foreign governraents, which they
affect to regard as so much preferable to our own.
After a few months' experience of the tender mer
cies of the Mahmouds, the Metternichs and the
Talleyrands of the old world, our worthy burghers
would be quite willing, I suspect, to compound for
a residence in the good old Bay State, even though
encumbered with the terrible infliction of being
compelled by law to pay their dues to the govern
ment in hard money.
At this moment, fellow citizens, we are again

11
called upon by the political party now prevailing
in the Commonwealth, to engage in another cru
sade against the administration of the General Go
vernment. A violent eflTort is made to keep
the State upon the sarae track of reckless and in-
discrirainate opposition which we have been pur
suing wilh so little apparent advantage for the last
forty years, and to employ its influence and votes
in preventing the re-election of the present chief-
magistrate of the Union. We are told anew, from
day to day, by the prominent merabers and organs
of the party, that our public servants are men of
corrupt character, — that their measures are fraught
with ruin, — and that there is no salvation for us
except in comraitting the conduct of aflairs to the
hands of the opposition, who are supposed to
mouopohze all the talents, learning, decency,
morals and religion of the coramunity. Before
we yield to these suggestions raay it not be well,
fellow citizens, lo examine with coolness and
impartiality the objections that are made to the
policy of the Adrainistration and the character of
its principal merabers ? In giving this course to
your reflections during the reraainder of the tirae,
which we are lo pass together, I shall not, I trust,
be accused of creating party divisions. These
divisions exist. The responsibility for raising and
nourishing them rests with those, who deem il
their duty to inflanie the people against the
constituted authorities of the Union, which we are
all bound by the plainest precepts of morals and
religion to support when we can do it conscien-

12
liously, and at all events, to treat uniformly with
respect and decorum. As friends ofthe Adminis
tration,— as members of the great democratic
party, by which it was formed and is supported, —
we stand on the defensive. We repel the attacks
that are constantly raade upon us ; and we cannot
be justly charged with creating dissensions, if in so
doing we sometimes carry back the war into
Africa. I shall, however, proceed, in this respect,
with proper caution ; and shall endeavor to speak
of " all the talents, all the learning, and all the
decency," with all the deference to which they
may be supposed to feel themselves entitled, and
which they are so unwilling to extend to the
persons who have been entrusted by the unbought
suffrages of a free people with the care of their
highest political interests. In pursuance of the
plan just proposed, I will advert very briefly in
succession to the objections that have been made
to the foreign and domestic policy of the present
adrainistration and to the character ofthe President
as its chief responsible head.
I. On the foreign policy of the adrainistration
it will not be necessary lo coramenl at any greal
length, inasmuch as the opposition themselves
have apparently seen little or nothing in it lo
blame. The course pursued by the President upon
the Boundary question, — the only one of much in
terest connected with our foreign policy, which has
corae up within the last two years, — has met the
unaniraous and hearty approval of the whole
people without distinction of party, and found its.

13
best justification in immediate success. Il is, in
fact, a rather singular comment upon the sincerity
of the opposition, that, at the same lime when
they were daily, in no qualified terms,' charging
the administration with gross corruption, they
united, almost to a man, with its friends in Con
gress, in entrusting to the President a coraraand of
the Purse and Sword, that had never, under any
circumstances, been entrusted to any of his pre
decessors. On this subject, fellow citizens, so
vitally important to the Commonwealth, I think I
may say, — without imputing any thing worse than
unintentional error to any one, — that we were
misrepresented by our agents, especially in the
Senate, — that had their policy been adopted, the
result would have been ruinous to our interest, —
that the President has been throughout this affair
the true Representative of Massachusetts and
Maine, and has entitled himself by his firm, prudent,
sagacious and successful manner of conducting it
lo our hearty and decided support. This question,
fellow citizens, was one of the most delicate and
difficult character ; it involved the tranquillity of
the country. It required in its management the
exercise of many of the highest qualities of states
manship, and, at the same time, admitted of no
delay. Had the plan proposed by Mr. Webster
been pursued, where should we have now been ?
On this very day, — or according to the gentleman's
ingenious commentary on his own text, — dn-sonae
following Fourth of July, — we should have been
taking up the line of march for the disputed
2

14
territory, bearing on our banners the pacific
proposition, — Drive us from it, if you can. In
other words, we should have been at war with
Ensland. Where are we now ? In the raidst of
a train of araicable negociation, which proraises,
al no distant period, the most favorable results.
If under such circumstances Massachusetts should
continue her present system of indiscriminate
opposition to the General Government, founded on
no intelligible principles and adopted apparently
for no other purpose than that of gi\ing Mr.
Webster a comraanding influence in the govern
ment, we should exhibit, as it seems to rae, a
disregard for our own interest and a spirit of
ingratitude to our present public servants, which
would do very little credit to the head or heart of
the Old Bay State, — unless, indeed, there should
be objections to the doraestic policy of the adminis
tration, so decided and important as to outweigh
the benefits resulting from their eminently judicious
and successful conduct of our foreign aflfairs and
to render opposition a duty. This consideration
brings rae to the second topic to which I intended
to invite your attention, and that is the domestic
policy of the administration. I pass rapidh- over
great and momentous subjects, but the limits
prescribed by the occasion will not admit of detail,
and your familiarity with the facts alluded to will
supply what may be wanting in ray exposition.
-jjr ''in the domestic policy of the adrainistration
the principal subject of complaint has been the
Independent Treasury Bill. After all, fellow

15
citizens, what is this famous Independent Treasury,
of which we hear so much ? What is the nature
of il ? As I understand the matter il is simply
this. On the expiration of the charter of the
United States' Bank, which was not renewed, the
Government provided by law that the public
money should be deposited, during the interval
between its collection and disbursement, in certain
State Banks to be selected by the Secretary of the
Treasury. This law was enforced wilh apparent
advantage fot some time, until the simultaneous
failure of all the banks in 1837 proved that the
funds of the people were not safe in their hands.
The President now recommends that these funds
should be kept by oflicial treasurers to be appointed
for the purpose, and that monies due lo the
government should be paid in the legal currency
ofthe country, and not in the promissory notes of
private corporations or individuals. This is the
whole. This is the entire sum and substance in a
nut-shell of the odious, execrable, abominable,
detestable Sub-Treasury bill.
Now, fellow citizens, I put it to the conscience
of any intelligent person, here or elsewhere, — is
there any harm in this .- Is it not a plain, simple,
natural, intelligible method. — I might ask, — is it
not the only plain, siraple, natural, intelhgible
method of disposing of the public funds .' Is it
not the method that has been employed from time
immemorial for this purpose, by every government
upon the face ofthe globe, with the exception of
our own during the twenty years' existence of the

16
second United Stales' Bank.? Tbe first United
States' Bank, as you are aware, was not made by
law the depository of the pubhc funds. Is il not
the method, which every man employs, as a matter
of course, in the management of his own con
cerns .? The State Banks are institutions over
which the General Government has no control.
They are chartered by the States, and are respon
sible to the States for their conduct. They may
violate their charters in the most essential points, —
as we have twice seen thera do by simultaneously
refusing to redeem their notes, — without incurring
in any way the regular notice of the General
Government. If then, the General Government
employ State Banks as depositories of the public
money, they place the funds of the people in the
hands of agents, over whom they have no regular
control, and who are under no direct responsibility
to them for their conduct. Would any man of
comraon prudence take this course ? Most cer
tainly not. Let us suppose, however, in order to
make the case still stronger, that an individual had
been led by circuraslances to make trial of such a
method, and had actually sufliered the inconve
niences that might naturally be expected to result
frora it ; that the agent, with whora he had placed
his funds had refused to pay them over excepting
in his own depreciated paper, and that the injured
individual had found himself without any adequate
remedy; would he feel any great disposition lo try
the experiment a second time ? Would the faith
less agent have the face to ask him so lo do .? If

17
he did he would receive from any man of spirit a
pretty pointed reply. No, fellow citizens, you all
feel that such a thing would not even be thought
of ; that an individual who, under such circum
stances, should without necessity entrust his pro
perty a second tirae to the sarae irresponsible
agent, who had proved faithless once before,
would be considered by his friends as incapable of
managing his own concerns with comraon prudence
and would be forthwith placed under guardianship.
And I raust say that I consider the conduct of the
banks in pertinaciously claiming as a right, — after
all that has passed, — to be entrusted with the
public funds, as furnishing one of the most extra
ordinary instances of modest assurance lo be met
with in history.
Such, fellow citizens, is the famous Independent
Treasury bill. What are the objections to il ?
We are sometiraes told that it increases the power,
patronage, and influence of the Executive depart
ment of the government. This objection is worth
a raoraent's attention, were it only for its
singularity. The truth is that the Independent
Treasury is less favorable to executive influence
than alraost any other plan for keeping the public
funds that can be devised ; that the system of
depositing thera in banks, whether state or nation
al, is more favorable than alraost any other to such
influence ; — and that the latter raethod ought, for
that very reason, and were there no other objection
to it, to be regarded as entirely and forever inad
missible.

18
Let us for a moment, fellow citizens, look at
this matter. When the banks are entrusted
wilh the custody of the public money, they are
authorised and even requested by the government,
to discount freely upon it,—i\\a.i is, lo consider il as
a part of their capital and to loan out twice the
amount in their own notes, which are equivalent
for ordinary purposes lo money. Now let us
suppose that the President, or the Secretary ofthe
Treasury, or any person employed in the Executive
departraent of the governraent, wishes to make use
of a portion of the public funds. Would he find
any difficulty in getting into his hands the sum he
wanted ? Could not he write to a confidential
person in any of the cities where there was a
deposit bank, and request him to intimate lo the
bank that il would be agreeable in a certain
quarter if the bank would discount the notes of a
certain person to a certain amount ? Would a
bank, which held the advantage of the public
deposites at the discretion of the Executive, be
very likely to turn a deaf ear to such an overture .''
Of course not ; and observe, fellow citizens, thai,
although the transaction is essentially corrupt,
neither the Executive officer in requesting, nor the
bank in giving such accommodation, violates any
law or charter, or incurs any legal responsibility.
Corruption, under these circumstances, assumes
the form of a " fair business transaction." How
then stands the case ? Siraply thus. When the
public funds are deposited in banks, whether stale
or national, they are virtually al the disposal of the

19
Executive for personal or political purposes, with
out let, limit or restraint, and without in any
quarter any positive infraction of law. How is il on
the other side ? On the plan contemplated in the
Independent Treasury biU not a dollar can be
drawn from the treasury by any one without a
regular warrant, nor can any Executive Agent or
any other person, get possession of a dollar in any
indirect way without such a positive infraction
of law by more than one individual as would
subject the offender to an infamous punishment,
and in the usual course of things, would not happen
twice in a century.
Why, fellow citizens, if the wits of the most
ingenious financier were put upon the stretch to
devise such a method of keeping the public frinds
as would be mosl favorable lo the influence of the
Executive, he could not possibly invent any other,
so well fitted for the purpose as that of depositing
them in banks to be designated by the head ofthe
Treasury department. If there were no objections
to this sysiem on the score of insecurity, it ought,
as I remarked just now, lo be set aside al once
and without hesitation, solely on account of the
opening which it affords for abuse and corruption.
Yet this is the system, which is preferred by the
opposition lo the Independent Treasury bill, as
one less favorable lo Executive influence.
Other objections, or apologies for objections, are
sometimes made to the bill, which are really
almost loo frivolous lo be mentioned. We are
told, for example, that il establishes two sorts of

20
currency, — one for the government and the other
for the people,— as if the General Government,
because it cannot sustain the paper of all the local
banks at its nominal value, ought not to take care
that the public treasury does not suflier by the
depreciation. Again : we hear much of holts,
bars, iron che.sts and the dark ages; as if the public
money would not be kept in precisely the sarae
way in the vaults of the banks, and in those of an
official treasurer. When I hear such mere verbiage
as this, — to give it no worse' name, — brought for
ward by men of acknowledged ability, I cannot
help concluding, — independently of all the other
reasons for holding that opinion, — that they raust
be encurabered with the defence of a very bad
^Such, fellow citizens, and so frivolous are the
objections that have been urged against the
Independent Treasury bill. At the opening of the
extraordinary session of Congress in 1837. it was
recommended by the President in a raessage,
distinguished by his usual sagacity, firmness, good
sense and good teraper. From the iraportance of
the subject and the critical circumstances of the
period, this document will probably be regarded
hereafter as one of the most interesting state
papers of the day. As both branches of Congress
included a majority of members elected as friends
of the adrainistration, the bill would have passed
without difficulty had it not been for the defection
of a sraall section of the party, who on this occa
sion separated from their associates, and acted

21
with the opposition. This division, the symptoms
of which had been for some lime apparent in
various quarters, had its principal seal in the city
of New York. The person mosl active in the
ranks of the so-called Conservatives was Mr.
SwARTwouT, then Collector of the Port. Whether
this functionary, in the course which he pursued
on this subject had any view to the facilities which
would be afforded him by the present unsettled
slate of the revenue laws for continuing upon an
enlarged scale the system of embezzleraent which
he had already coraraenced, is a question which I
win not now discuss. It is certain, however, that
such was the effect ; that had the Independent
Treasury bill been adopted at the extra session of
Congress, he could not have carried his defalca
tions to any considerable extent, — and that the
opposition, who prevented the passage of the bill,
are themselves responsible to the people for these
very defalcations, which, however, they made no
scruple of endeavoring to use as a weapon for attack
ing the administration. The bill, when reported
in the Senate, was sustained with signal ability, by
the leading friends of the adrainistration, and
especially the able, cool and clear-headed Wright.
It was resisted by the opposition with violence but
with great M'eakness of argument, — no very un
common companions. It was adopted in the
Senate by a handsome majority. In the House of
Representatives the Conservatives, by uniting wilh
the opposition, defeated its passage. A similar
course was pursued, and a similar result look

22
place at the two succeeding sessions. Here
terminated the triuraphs,— I raay say, perhaps, the
existence of the so-called conservative parly. The
popularity and ample resources of their original
New York leader, Swartwout, the adhesion of
Messrs. Talmadge and Rives to his views, the es
tablishraent of a journal at Washington and the
course pursued by the Richmond Enquirer, had
given to this little coterie for a tirae an appearance
of importance, which was sustained by their con
sequence in the House of Representatives, where
the equal division of parties enabled them to hold
the balance. From the people they have received
no countenance. In New York and Virginia, the
only quarters in which they exhibited any strength,
they have been signally defeated. The defalca
tions of Swartwout have thrown discredit on their
very name. The larger portion of them have al
ready re-united themselves with the friends of the
administration, and the rest must take the same
course, or find refuge with Rives and Talmadge
in the ranks of the regular opposition.
III. So much, fellow citizens, for the objec
tions, — or, to speak more correctly, — the entire
want of any distinct and well-grounded objections
to the foreign and doraestic policy of the adminis
tration. It only reraains to inquire whether there
is any difficulty in regard to the personal or politi
cal character ofthe President, which render it the
duty or the policy of Massachusetts lo oppose his
re-election. On this head, fellow citizens, I can speak with

23
irapartiahty. My political course has been through
life entirely independent of that of Mr. Van
BuREN ; at tiraes I have been politically opposed
to hira. I can therefore say, without exposing
myself to the suspicion of being biassed by feelings
of raerely personal or party attachraent, that I
consider the President as uncoramonly well quali
fied to discharge the duties ofthe chief-magistracy
with distinction, usefulness and success. Much
has been said against hira, but, so far as I have
observed, alraost always in the way of vague and
unmeaning invective. Few, if any, specific objec
tions have ever, so far as I can learn, been even
suggested, — far less, distinctly and satisfactorily
raade out. The President has been denorainated a
inagician. The sarae epithet or others of equiva
lent meaning were freely applied in his day to Mr.
Jefferso^n. It was observed, in both cases, that
the individuals alluded to enjoyed a high degree of
popularity and possessed an extensive influence
over the minds of their countrymen, — that they
were considered as in a manner the personal
representatives ofthe democratic principle ;^and
the opposition, — unable to reconcile such results
with their views of the principles and character of
these distinguished statesmen, — were led to attri
bute them to fraud, trick, and corruption. But,
by what imaginable means and arts could a citizen
of this democratic country, — where no one posses
ses any advantages over the rest, or has anything
lo depend upon but his own character and talents,
— how, I say, in such a state of society could any

24
one, especially men like Van Buren and Jeffer
son, who have always acted in opposition to the
moneyed interest, succeed in acquiring power by
fraud or corruption .'' The thing is obviously
impossible. No, fellow citizens, in this country
where force and fraud, which carry all before them
in other states of society, are frora the nature of
the case entirely unknown, the only m«g-?c by which
one citizen can secure an extensive influence over
others is the ascendancy which belongs lo
superior intelligence and devotion to the public
good. Nor is this superiority necessarily or even
most effectually displayed in splendid bursts of
eloquence or dazzling exhibitions of military
talent, the triuraphs of the battle-field, or the
Senate House. When the storm rages and the
lightening shoots along the sky, the traveller wraps
his cloak more closely around him. He opens his
bosom to the gentle influences of the warm sun
and the western breeze. The magic arts, which
in this country and indeed every other, conciliate
favor, disarm opposition, pour oil on the swelling
ocean of party contention and sweetness into the
bitter fountains of private animosity, which enable
their possessors to steal into the hearts of others, as
it were without their knowledge, are Good Teraper
and Discretion. Less imposing than some other
qualities of a merely superficial character, they are
far raore valuable to their possessor and far more
valuable to the country. They are the qualities
most likely to elevate a man to political influence
and most important for a successful administration

25
of the public affairs. They are the qualities by
which Van Buren and Jefferson, — men in no
way distinguished above the crowd of their com
petitors by adventitious advantages or the personal
gifts that are soraeliraes thought to sway the souls
of others, — have exercised an influence over the
minds of their countrymen so extensive and
extraordinary that it has been characterised in the
language of party as a sort of witchcraft.
Non-committalism is only another name for
discretion, manufactured by an effort of party
feeling to account on unfavorable principles for
merely natural results. Mr. Van Buren has
not run headlong into every temporary excite
ment that has ruffled during his time the ever
agitated sea of public opinion. But at what
period or on what occasion has he ever shrunk
from expressing his sentiments with firraness and
openness upon any question of real iraportance ?
Behold hira in early life, dependent for his fortune
entirely on his own exertions, — residing in a region
controlled entirely by federal influences,— :-hiraself
surrounded, educated, befriended by federalists, —
see hira under these circuraslances, with utter
disregard and to the probable entire sacrifice of
professional success, — ^embracing with enthusaism
and actively sustaining through good and evil
report, the cause of Democracy ? Was this non-
committalism ? View him on his first appearance
in the State Senate of New York in that last, most
eventful, most glorious year of the second war of
independence ; a hostile fleet on the coast and a
3.

26
hostile army threatening invasion from Canada ;
all New-England rushing into open rebellion ; the
whole coast and frontier, — the seat of government
itself, — a scene of ruin, conflagration, and blood ;
federalism triumphant in his ovvn state ; see him,
under these circumstances, which might well have
daunted the most experienced courage, standing
forth, though the youngest member of the Senate,
as the acknowledged leader of the patriotic
supporters of our country's cause against a foreign
and doraestic enemy and after a long and desperate
struggle, achieving the victory and bringing up the
hosts of the Empire State to the battles of the
Union ? Was this non-committalism ? Finally, in
the conflict which has since coraraenced and is
now convulsing the coraraunity between MIXD
and MAMMON, the " Aristocracy of wealth," and
the " Democracy of Numbers," the Banks and the
People, has he shrunk frora expressing his views .'
Did he not as a member of the New York Senate,
move and carry the rejection of every Petition for
the incorporation of a bank which was presented
during his terra ? Did not President Jackson act
with his entire concurrence in negativing the Bank
bill and removing the deposites ? Did not Mr.
Van Buren in person declare uncorapromisinof
hostility to a United States' Bank ? When the
general suspension of payments two years ago
spread dismay through the country and created a
temporary schism in the democracy, the extent of
which could not possibly at the tirae be foreseen with
certainty, did he hesitate to propose the decisive

27
measure of a complete separation of Bank and
State? When New York and Virginia rose
up, as it were, in arms, under their mosl approved
democratic champions, against this proposal ;
when Congress rejected il and when the People
themselves appeared from the results of the
elections to have confirmed the judgment of
their Representatives, did the President
hesitate about renewing the suggestion? All
this, fellow citizens, seems to me to be very
much like the precise opposite of a timid,
wavering, and doubtful course of policy. If I
were disposed to make comparisons, I think I
could mention some other conspicuous statesmen
who have been rather fond of accusing Mr. Van
BtJREN of non-committalism but who have been
much less decided and consistent upon mosl of
the greal political questions of our time ; Avho
have been at one time against the war and who
are now (as they say) in favor of the war, who
have been at one time for the bank and al
another time against the bank, — at one time for
the tariff" and at another time against the tariff" ;
at one time for hard money and at another lime
for paper money. But comparisons are odious.
I content myself with positive facts. Those
who from the testimony of their own hearts
believe il impossible that others can ever act
from patriotic and honorable motives, may affirm,
— though I see not how they can render it
probable, — that Mr. Van Btjren's course, — bold,
unflinching, in some cases desperate as it has been,

28
— was the result of selfish calculation against
honest conviction. I suppose it to have been
the result of correct calculation founded in
honest conviction, — of a settled confidence, — to
use his own felicitous expression, — in the
" sober, second thought of the people." But on
either supposition I find it impossible to con
ceive how a statesraan, who has pursued through
life so decided a career should have rendered
himself obnoxious, in the view of any honest
and intelligent opponent to the charge of non-
committalism. The vague objections to which I have alluded
are, therefore, raerely party names for some ofthe
most valuable qualities that belong to the character
of the practical statesman. But these qualities
alone Avould never have raised Mr. Van Buren to
his present position and influence. Good Temper
and Discretion belong to the outward forms of
character and the modes of transacting business.
They are valuable so far as they go but for the
production of great and lasting results they must
be accompanied by others, more substantial, and
especially in this country by one more essential
than any other or than all others put together, —
I mean a thorough conviction of the truth of the
democratic principle and qf the practicability and
excellence of democratic institutions. No individ
ual rises to extensive influence, or, in the
common phrase, " achieves greatness," without
embodying, and, as it were, personifying the
prevailing spirit of the age and country in which

29
he lives. Eloquence falls unheeded on the
desert air ; action breaks itself without effect
upon the impenetrable rock unless the speaker
and the actor are moved by the same spirit that
animates the mass around them. W^hen this
happens every blow tells, — every accent pierces
to the heart. Such has been the secret of the
greatness of the mighty minds of other times
and countries, — the apostles of Truth, — the
Founders of nations, — the movers of the World.
Now in this country, fellow citizens, the living
spirit, that animates our institutions and without
which every thing about them would be mere in-
eff"ectuai form and show is democracy, — the com
plete, uncontrolled, all-pervading, all-inspiring,
all-conquering power of the People. Right or
wrong, fellow citizens, such is the fact ; and such
being the facl.it is apparent that no man can rise to
extensive influence among us unless he embody
in his own person and speak and act out in the
whole course of his language and conduct this
uncontrolled ascendancy of the democratic prin
ciple. This was the secret of the success and in
fluence of Mr. Jkfferson. Among the band of
patriots, who signed the Declaration, which makes
this day forever memorable in the annals of the
world,there were others far superior lo him in the
gifts of speech, not inferior in sagacity, boldness
and other great and good qualities ; but there
was no one who had imbibed so fully as himself
the free_ spirit of his time and country, and vvho
gave it in all his language and conduct so com-

30
plete an expression. Some put their failh in
Princes; others believed in a nice adjustment of
checks and balances ; for these the British
constitution was the perfect model of govern
ment. Mr. Jefferson believed in the People,
and became in this way the true Expounder of
the Constitution. Educated in his school Ma.
Van Buren has adopted his failh. He professed
it at the outset of his career and has never
deviated from it. There, fellow citizens, lies his
strength, a strength which no combination of
adverse elements can shake. He has acted
through life with great sagacity and discretion
upon the supposition and in the full conviction
that democracy was the ruling principle of our
politicaT institutions. He has become in this
way for the people of the present lime the
successor of Jefferson as the leading personal
representative of this principle. As such and
not as a mere individual the People have raised
him to the chief magistracy in opposition to all
the anti-democratic influences that could be
united against him. Having placed him on this
commanding eminence the People will sustain
him unless they have themselves lost their
power. If associated and privileged wealth has
obtained an artificial influence superior to that
of the democracy, and thus corrupted the princi
ple ofthe government, Mr. Van Buren may be
prostrated but not otherwise. I consider his
re-election as certain as the return of the seasons
or the rising of the sun in the morning, for they

31
are all events that depend not on accidental
causes and fortuitous combinations, but on the
steady operation of the general laws that
regulate the movements of the natural and moral
world. I have no intention, fellow citizens, in making
these remarks, to indulge in a personal eulogy
on Mr. Van Buren. I view him in the light
in which he is viewed by the People as the
leading representative of the democratic princi
ple. Entertaining the same love for our institu
tions and faith in their success which I have
attributed to him, I rejoice in his elevation as a
satisfactory proof that our common failh is true.
When I see a friendless youth wilhout accidental
or adventitious aid rising gradually from the
common walks of life through a long career of
honor and usefulness to the highest, I am
satisfied that our institutions are no empty form ;
that they are what they profess to be, really and
truly democratic ; that after all the various
experiments in government that fill up the
history of the world,~in Mr. Jefferson's eloquent
language, " after all the struggles of infuriated
man, seeking through blood and slaughter his
long lost liberty," the time has al length come
in the order of Providence when the People are
permitted to make, for once, the grand and
final experiment of their own capacity for self-
government. And, fellow citizens, if the eleva
tion of Mr. Van Buren prove the really
democratic character of our institutions, the

32
manner in which he has administered the
government adds another to the thousand proofs
already in existence that this grand experiment
will be successful. When I see a friendless,
self-made boy, after rising in the way I have
mentioned lo the chief magistracy of this great
Union, — a dignity on a level with that of kings
and emperors, — what do I say ? — far superior on
any just estimate of the true constituents of
greatness to any hereditary office ; when I see
him neither elated with success nor depressed
by the overwhelming responsibility attached to
the position, — prompt, firm, sagacious, discreet,
and good tempered in the management of the
public aff"airs, — courteous and aff"able in his
private relations, — uniting the grace and polish
of a courtier with the simplicity of a republican ;
above all, true in his elevation, beyond the most
distant suspicion of variableness or shadow of
turning to the popular principle that placed him
where he is ; I say, fellow citizens, when I see
all this I consider it as another strong proof in
addition to the rest, that our democratic institu
tions can do for us everything in the Avay of
government that we need to wish or want ; that
they are competent to supply us with good
magistrates as well as good citizens and a pros
perous country. The grand march of our
national prosperity is loo imposing not to have
engaged long ago the attention of the world.
Foreigners have at length been compelled to
acknowledge and try to account for it. But the

33
most intelligent and liberal among them still
affect to assert that the men and particularly the
public men of America are below the standard
of her institutions. If this were true it would
prove that our institutions are not what we
believe them to be, since superior men are the
natural product of good institutions and the only
certain evidence of their goodness. But, fellow
eilizens, I pronounce the assertion to be false.
I invite those who make it to produce from the
annals of any other country a list of public men
superior lo those who have graced the high
places of this from the outset of the gdvernment
to the present time. It is admitted that the
least and lowest of our Presidents is quite
superior lo the ordinary standard of hereditary
kings ; but I invite our foreign detractors lo
compare our distinguished public men of all par
ties wilh the prominent statesmen of Europe, and
tell us whether the Jeffersons, the Hamiltons,
the Adamses, the Madisons, the Clays, the
Weesters, and the Wrights, — lo say nothing of
theuniqueWAsniNGTON, — are in any way inferior
to the Pitts and Foxes, the Lafayette s, the
Metternichs, or the RussELSof the old world.
I invite them to produce from the living slates-
men of Europe an individual more happily
combining and exemplifying all the principal
qualities that belong lo that character, than the
present chief magistrate of the United States.
I have thus, fellow citizens, briefly reviewed
the objections, or pretences for objections, to the

34
policy and personal character of the President,
which are urged as reasons for opposing his
administration and endeavoring lo prevent his
re-election. I have shown you, I think, that they
are entirely without foundation. But these objec
tions, though, no doubt, urged with perfect sincerity
by the opposition, do not probably express the real
difliculty. This is apparent from the fact that
while the opposition has proceeded from the same
quarter and has evidently represented the same
opinions, interests, and feelings from the establish
ment ofthe government to the present tirae, the al
leged reasons for it have been continually changing.
For tv.'o years past the chief pretence for complaint
has been found in the Independent Treasury Bill.
Previously to that the difficulty was on account of
the removal of the deposites and the veto on the
Bank Bill. At more distant periods. Gen. Jackson,
the war, the embargo, the non-intercourse, the pur
chase of Louisiana, Mr. Jefferson and French in
fluence furnished the leading topics. In the midst
of this shifting phantasmagoria of supposed griev
ances, the real nature and objects of the oppo
sition remain the same. What are they, fellow
citizens ? What is this secret power which under
so many different names and for so many different
alleged reasons, has been from the outset of the
government and is now constantly waging war up
on democratic institutions, democratic administra
tions, democratic ideas ? What is this unseen spi
rit which prompts from behind the curtain the
various performers in this long action ? Which

35
told us through the hps of Hamilton that tlie Brit
ish Constitution was the best form of government
the world ever produced : by tlie pen of John
Adams that the same consthution was the most
stupendous fabric of human invention : in the fiery
eloquence of Ames that republican governraent
was impracticable and that democracy was an illu
minated hell : which through the agency of Josiah
Qii.NCY moved the impeachment of Madison. — de
clared that if Louisiana were admitted into the
Union, New Eugland mu«t separate from the other
States, peaceably if she could, forcibly if she raust,
and that it was immoral and irreligious to rejoice
at the naval achievements of the war: which plan
ned the Hartford Conveiuion : which affirmed the
other day at Xew York bv Resolutions at a public
meeting, tliat properly is the lest of merit : and at
Washington not long since through the mouth of
]\Ir. Webster, that ordinnry profes.^ional labor, car
ried en iridwut the aid of banks, is manual toil and
daily dm dgeryf What secret power is it. I repeat
the question, which urges these and so many other
mdividaals not dencient in talent, nor destitute in
many cases of patriotism, to discard all the feelings
that are naturally generated by our glorious insti
tutions, and to array themsehes against the priuci
ples which he at their foundation ?
Those of you. fellow citizens, who have well
considered tlie character of these movements, snd
the ireneraJ aspect of the pohtical world for the
last half century, will probably feel but litde doubt
as to tlie nature of the power to which I have al-

36
luded. Il is the aristocratic principle as established
in Europe, and particularly in England, laboring to
recover or at least retain its influence on the politi
cal institutions and public affairs of America. The
political world, as 1 need not remind you, has been
agitated for a long time past, by the conflict ofthe
two antagonist principles — aristocracy and democ
racy. The democratic principle prevails in this
country and indeed throughout the whole western
continent, where it gives their form and color to
the laws, social habits, institutions, in short, the
whole civilization of the people. The aristocratic
principle, on the other hand, maintains or has till
very recently maintained an equally decided ascen
dancy in Europe, and particularly in England,
where it moulds, in like manner, the whole fabric
of society after its own favorite fashion.
But while each of these principles has thus its
separate and appropriate domain, where it reigns
paramount over all other influences, each, from
the extensive intercourse existing between Europe
and Araerica, exercises a strong influence in the
territories of the other where it appears and acts
in the form of opposition. Thus the mind of
America, forraed under and representing the
deraocratic principle is daily undermining, over
flowing, sweeping down like a swelling flood the
bulwarks of the old aristocratic institutions of
Europe and especially of England ; the country in
Europe with which we have by far the closest con
nexion. In like manner the mind of Ensland,
formed under and representing the aristocratic
principle, has been constantly striving, ever since

37
the separation, with a sort of blind instinct rather
than any formal or regular purpose to counteract
the democratic tendencies of our institutions and
recover the influence which it once possessed over
the continent. This, fellow citizens, is the real
character ofthe opposition which has always man
ifested itself to the general government, and hence
It is that the principal seats of this opposition
have been and still are in the coramercial cities,
which from their frequent communication and inti
mate relations with England, fall to a considerable
extent under the influence of her literature, tastes,
and social habits, all of which, as 1 have remarked,
are fashioned on the aristocratic model. From
its head-quarters in the commercial cities this
influence spreads itself painfully and laboriously to
a limited extent into the country, chiefly through
the hired agency of the newspaper press. In the
country it encounters its natural antidote in the
equal diffusion of intelligence and property which
form the basis of a democratic state of society, —
and gradually weakening as it recedes from the
atmosphere of cities finally becomes iraperceptible
and sinks into nothing.
ll would be easy, fellow citizens, if the lirae
perraitted, by reviewing the course of the party,
which, since the election of Mr. Jefferson, has
constituted the opposition, to show how exactly
their language and conduct indicate their con
nexion vvith the quarter lo which 1 have alluded.
We should see thera, immediately after the war of
Independence,— al a lime when they were strong
4

38
enough to control public opinion and obtain pos
session ofthe administration,— endeavoring to give
lo our institutions the spirit and, as far as possible,
the form ofthose of England. Faihng in a great
degree in this object we should see them laboring
with more success to introduce araong us the
banking and financial systera of Great Britain, —
the real elements of raodern aristocracy, — and thus
laying the foundation for the desperate struggle
that is now convulsing the country. We should
see them sympathising with the British and aristo
cratic party during the long revolutionary struggles
of Europe, while the democracy of this country
and the mass of the people as naturally syrapathis-
ed with the deraocratic party in Europe and with
France as its leading representative. We should
see the opposition throughout these struggles
sustaining Great Britain in her violations of neu
tral rights and her aggressions on our coraraerce
and searaen. After the coraplete triumph of the
democratic principle at the election of Mr.
Jefferson, we should see the opposition gradually
subsiding until it was again roused into tenfold
fury by the war. We should see it at that tirae
distinctly indicating its British origin and sympa
thies by openly aiding and abetting the enemy,
erabarrassing as rauch as possible the operations
of the governraent, and finally concerting raeasures
which, had the war been continued, must have
ended in an attempt to make a separate peace and
divide New-England from the Union. After the
close of the war we should see the opposition once

39
more subsiding, until it was stimulated again by
the refusal of the democracy to perpetuate the
Bank of the United Stales. At the outset of the
government il was, as I have remarked, compara
tively strong and its views were somewhat more
plausible than they are now. Aristocracy was per
haps the most liberal form of polity which experi
ence had at that time shown to be practicable in a
great community. The British Constitution was
generally regarded as the most approved raodel of
regulated liberty. When Hamilton and John
Adams, and Ames, and Morris, and Pickering, and
Cabot, and Otis declared and believed it lo be
the best systera which the world had produced,
they gave utterance to the prevalent opinion ofthe
preceding age. Their great error was that they
were blind to the day spring from on high which
was rising on the world iu the institutions of our
own country and which was hailed immediately
by the friends of liberty in Europe as the opening
of a new and more auspicious era in the history
of man. As the excellence of these institutions
has becorae more and more apparent, the influence
of the opposition has been constantly decreasing
and the party would probably have long since dis
appeared, had it not been sustained by the recent
prodigious expansion of the Banking System which
has given it for a lirae the control of the currency
and business of the country. On this field the
opposition are now fighting a final and desperate
battle, where defeat, which is inevitable, will be
their destruction. Throughout the whole of these

40
controversies we have seen them quoting the
authority, — echoing the literature and copying the
manners of the British aristocracy. Distrusting
their own capacity for argument, their habitual
weapon is personal invective. As Lord Peter in
the Tale of a Tub proves that his brown loaf is a
shoulder of mutton by consigning his brothers to
eternal perdition if they refuse to say that they be
lieve it, so the standing argument ofthe opposition
and their constant answer to all objections have
always consisted in the repetition of the elegant
and significant terms, jacobin, atheist, agrarian, tory,
scoundrel and loco-foco. But, fellow citizens, the
yeomanry of this country are so stupid that they do
not appear to be satisfied with this kind of logic.
The federalists, by employing it. pretty soon argued
themselves into a minority, where they have re
mained ever since and are destined to remain until
in the progress of opinion the}- shall cease to exist
as a party.
The real source ofthe opposition to the General
Government which has manifested itself ever since
the election of Mr, Jefferson is therefore, the
aristocratic principle as estabhshed in Europe and
especially in England operating through her litera
ture, her luxuries, the pageantry and splendor of her
civilization upon our commercial cities and through
them lo a limited extent upon the mass of the peo
ple. The real objections to the present and all
preceding democratic administrations, are not the
ostensible and constantly varying pretences that are
publicly urged. They are not the Independent

41
Ireasury, nor the removal of the deposites, nor the
veto on the bank bill, nor the war, nor the embargo,
nor the purchase of Louisiana, nor the supposed in
fluence of France, any farther than as some or all the
points thus objected to, raay be considered as in
dicating the real difl[iculty which lies much deeper.
The real objection, fellow citizens, to the present
and all preceding democratic administrations, is
their democracy. The aristocratic principle which
forras the basis of the estabhshed institutions of
Europe, is engaged in a perpetual struggle for life
and death, with the democratic principle, which
has its head quarters in this countiy : and the op
position in this country, which represents the aris
tocratic principle, so far as it has been able to ob
tain a footing araong us, carries on a perpetual
warfare with the administration ofthe general gov
ernment, because the latter is and frora the nature
of our institutions in general must be a true repre
sentation ofthe democratic principle. Federalism,
therefore, as the doctrine of the opposition has
been commonly denominated, is a political faith of
foreign origin. Its temples are the palaces of Eu
rope : its oracles the responses of her ministers,
bishops and bankers : its sacred books, her pamph
lets, newspapers, and reviews. When aristocracy
triumphs in Europe, federalism erects her crest in
this country. Even when the country was at war
with Greal Britain, we saw the opposition celebrate
with rapture the victory of aristocracy as repre
sented by the Holy Alliance over the principle of
democracy as embodied for the time in the person

42
of Napoleon. Even then federalism could not ob
tain the ascendancy throughout the Union, where
democracy, firmly seated as it is in all our institu
tions, reigns and must forever reign paramount
over all opposition. When aristocracy loses ground
abroad, federalism sickens and dies in this country.
And in this fact, fellow citizens, we see the certain
prognostic of its ultimate destruction : for aristoc
racy, as 1 need hardly tell you, is perishing in Eu
rope and especially in England, It is perishing
under the influence of American principles. While
the aristocratic principle of Europe is faintly and
ineffectually struggling to obtain a footing in Ame
rica, the young and vigorous genius of American
democracy has crossed the ocean in its turn and
is carrying back the war into the enemy's territory.
He is leading on the hosts of liberty lo certain vic
tory. What means this heaving of the masses in
the west of Europe : this rolhng and tossing of the
mighty flood of popular opinion in the Spanish
Peninsula, — in Italy, — in France, — in Germany, —
in England, — in the Colonies, — in all parts of
Christendom ? Why is it that the slave, after pa
tiently acquiescing for nearly six thousand years,
under all sorts of misgovernment and oppression
from his brother, is suddenly encouraged to demand
the equality of rights, which God and nature in
tended he should enjoy, — to utter with eff"ect and
power, for the first time in the history of his race,
that simple and sublime declaration, which com
prehends in three little words the whole mystery of
Liberty and Law,— I, TOO, AM A MAN ?

43
Fellow citizens, this is no accidental convulsion,
no Jack Cade outbreak of brute, popular fury.
Mens agitat molem. Mind,— mind alone can thus
agitate the mass. And what mind is it, fellow
citizens.? The mjnd of America, If down-trod
den humanityHias taken heart throughout the
world and boldly proclaims and struggles for and
succeeds in obtaining her rights, it is mainly be
cause your fathers, sixty-three years ago, on that
auspicious day of which we now coraraeraorate the
anniversary, publicly proclaimed for the first time
that these rights were inalienable, and afterwards
sealed the declaration with their blood. Our
fathers were accused at a later period of acting
under French influence, because they sustained
the rights of the country against the aggressions of
Great Britain, and because they rejoiced at the
progress of liberal principles on the continent of
Europe. Need I say to you, fellow citizens, that
this charge was not only false but directly the
the reverse of the truth ? In this greal school of
mutual political instruction, America was the
teacher and not the disciple. So far were our
fathers from acting under French influence that it
was American influence, — the influence of their
doctrine, their example, their high enthusiasm in
the cause of liberty that gave the first impulse lo
the moveraents of revolutionary France. That
mighty Spirilof Reform, which is now striding like
a giant through the civihzed world and trampling
down estabhshed abuses at every step, was rocked
as an infant in the old Cradle of Liberty. America,

44
fellow citizens, democratic America, by her exam
ple, — her success, — is now doing what no dead
letter of doctrine, — not even the iron of oppression,
entering for thousands of years in succession into
the soul could effect. She is changing the aspect
of the civilized world. She revolutionized France.
She emancipated the Spanish and Portugese
Colonies. She has reformed the institutions of all
parts of Europe, She will bring them all up in
due time to the standard of equal rights. By a
silent, slow and gradual, but irresistible operation
she first changes the current of public opinion and
feeling in other countries and makes it flow in
new channels. When the time has come for the
change lo shew itself openly she inspires the
civil champions, the Lafayettes, the O'Connells,
the Rus SELLS, to imitate, however imperfectly,
the high examples of her Franklins, her Adamses,
her Jeffersons. When force must be employed
she raises up the Riegos, the Bolivars, the
BoNAPARTES, to follow, with how unequal steps, in
the glorious track of her Washington. Yes,
fellow citizens, the genius of American democracy,
as I said before, is leading on the hosts of liberty
in Europe to certain victory. Their shouts of
triumph are wafted to us by every eastern breeze
that crosses the Atlantic. At the very last accounts
they were repulsing from the purheux of the
British throne the ghastly spectre of Toryism,
which had gained a temporary footing in the
palace and was stealing, Tarquin-like, into the
Queen's bed chamber. There can be no mistake

45
about this matter, The fate of the foreign aristo
cracy is sealed. The people's hour is come.
Shall we then, fellow citizens, while the spirit
of our institutions is carrying all before it abroad,
distrust, deny, abjure that spirit at home .= Shall
democracy, while she is going on conquering and
to conquer in Europe be doomed lo defeat upon
her own ground in America ? Oh no ! gendemen.
In America democracy must tdways triumph as
she always has triumphed. She has however
known some dark days. Never perhaps did she
know a darker one than the autumn of the year
before last, immediately succeedin^r the suspension
of bank payments. A geueral panic had spread
itself far and wide through the Union, and fright
ened whole states from their propriety. But it
passed away with the cause that produced it. De
mocracy is once more erect, vigorous, active, ra
diant with success. Her raarch is onward from
state to state, — from victory to victory. Let us
rapidly review tbe results of the elections since the
resumption oi pa}- meats by the banks and tlie revi
val of the public prosperity. It will be found that
democracy has in every instance eitlier gained a
decided advantage or shown by large acquisitions
of strength, that she will certainly conquer at the
next time, Alabama led the way. She mingled
her shouts of triumph with the roar of the surges
that break upon her shores from the Gulph of Mex
ico, Missouri.— Illinois followed. They sent forth
their dad response from the sources of the Father
of Waters. Then, gentlemen, rose upon us in the

46
East the Star of Maine, — "day's harbinger" we
may well call it in the beautiful language of Milton,
for it was the sure forerunner of final success. A
star, gentlemen, as you are aware, is the armorial
crest of our sister Republic and on this occasion
she nobly verified her proud devise. Dirigo, — /
take the lead : lor although the results in the \\est
and South-west to which I have alluded, held out
the most encouraging prospects, it was in IMaine
that we witnessed for the first time the unequivo
cal, overwhelming proof of the return of public
sentiment. jMaryland succeeded, — aristocratic
IMaryland, — an unexpected God-send.
Next, gentlemen, of all the States in the Union.
Ohio, — the young Giant of the West. — Ohio — de
mocratic by six thousand majority. This was the
unkindest cut of all : for no sooner had the result
ofthe IMaine election given the alarm in the oppo
sition camp, than INIassachusetts made haste to
withdraw her own candidate and hoist the Harri son
flag in order to secure at least the support of Ohio ;
when behold ! Ohio, as if on purpose to disappoint
her, takes a somerset and throws herself at once
into the arms of democracy. Then conies the
glorious old Key Stone, with amajority of six thou
sand for Porter. This fatal blow seems to have
deprived the opposition tor a time of their usual
self-possession, aud led them to adopt measures
which a moment's rellection rausthave taught them
could not well be successful. They publicly avow
ed their intention to hold the government over by
force as if no election had happened, and actuallv

47
made the attempt at the meeting of the Legis
lature at Harrisburg. But the people soon
satisfied them that this was more easily said
than done. The opposition leaders instead
of placing their candidates in the executive
chair lost for a time their own seats in the Legis
lature, and as a general result the State was secur
ed, beyond the possibility of doubt, to the adminis
tration. New Jersey, where the people also rose
in their strength, and where the opposition leaders,
in possession of a little brief authority, played the
sarae fantastic tricks as in Pennsylvania, will be
secured in the same way. The assembled wisdom
of the Union will re-judge the justice of Governor
Pennington : if it do not the people of New
Jersey will.
Such, gentlemen, were the results of last year's
elections. This year the campaign has opened
under not less favorable auspices. New Hamp
shire, iraraovable as her own ever-during granite,
re-asserted her unchanging fidelity to the demo
cratic cause by an increased majority. The great
Commercial Emporium has returned from her
temporary aberration, — a sure prognostic of a
similar result in autumn throughout the Empire
Slate. Finally,— to crown the whole, —Virginia,—
the noble Old Dominion, — unterrified by the
defection of one of her favorite and most highly
favored sons,— gives in her adhesion,— by small
majorities it is true,— but sufficient, small as they

48
are, to destroy forever, — so far as she is concerned,
— the hopes of the opposition,*
Shall Massachusetts alone, stand aloof from this
general concert of all her sister stales 1 Oh no,
gentlemen. She too shall one day become a
convert lo the generous, the truly christian faith of
equal rights and democratic principles. Her
metropolis may be given over perhaps for some
time longer, as it is now, to the worship of the
idols, Monopoly and Mammon. But her yeomanry,
— her Young Men, — are already embracing with
enthusiasm the doctrine of EQUAL RIGHTS, —
of the Supremacy of the GODLIKE MIND.
Il is congenial to their age, — their character.
The signs of the times are auspicious. The eyes
of the country are upon us. The season for
action is at hand. Let us do our duly.
* While these sheets are passing through the press, the
returns from the elections now in progress in the Western
States, though not yet so complete as to indicate results with
absolute certainty, prove already that the pogular impulse
is constantly gathering new strength and fully confirm the
anticipations of the Address.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 03523 6182

:.:^^^^^t;^^^ ' 1 i^

f '' , 'a'" '' I

' i4

' 1

^^^a^'-^:^^'<:'-"::'M

v" i, ^ ^ , ' .« ' .r ' ^ I Ji f ^

A n -t *^ >

J '

.?

1 f

^ ' ^

A