partisans. That the gentleman should move in opposition to his own professions in 1828, in the face of the principles of the President, contained in the letter which he held in his hand, should say that all statesmen of all parties agree that cabinet ministers should be partisans, is but the beginning of the difficulty in which he has involved himself by undertaking to make a whole-hog defence of the administration.

[H. of R.

this administration had no respect to party, I addressed a a note of inquiry to Mr. Kendall, and here is his answer: He says Colonel Taylor was appointed postmaster on the day of, 1826, three years before the commencement of General Jackson's first term.

[Here Mr. FRENCH rose to explain, and said that he had been led into the error by information which he had received in Clark county, where he was well acquainted; that he had not intentionally made the misstatement; but, upon inquiry of Mr. Kendall, he had found that Mr. Thomas Edminson had also been appointed to a post of fice, who was an opposition man; so that, although he was mistaken as to Colonel Taylor, yet he was right as to the number.]

The

My colleague then proceeded, in direct opposition to what he had advanced in the sentence before, to say: "It is true, sir, that all the citizens of the United States are equally eligible to office, and entitled to equal benefits from the Government;" and went on to prove that equal justice had been done to all parties in the distribution of offices. He said that he had inquired of the most Mr. ALLAN proceeded. Sir, I am very sure that the intelligent citizens of this city, and had been informed statement in regard to Colonel Taylor's appointment by them that the opposition have their due proportion of was made under a mistake; and I take this occasion, offices throughout the Union. I should have been with great pleasure, to bear witness that my colleague is pleased if my friend had given the names of his witnes- incapable of making an intentional misstatement on this ses. I should like to know if they were not office-hold- or any other subject. Yet it appears to me, in fairness, ers, in the receipt of the spoils. I very much regret the gentleman ought to have stated that Mr. Edminson that a statesman from Kentucky should have been re- and Mr. Pace lived in the same house, at different times, duced to the necessity of making such an inquiry in this and had been appointed for the same office, and that city, and of founding a grave argument upon the testi- there was no Jackson man at the place to appoint. I mony of witnesses whose names he has thought properam informed by Mr. Kendall that this office was discon to keep to himself. Does not every body know, as well tinued last fall, because no one would have it. as the gentleman's nameless witnesses under the eaves of whole income of the office, for the year 1855, was $17. the palace, what is the truth on the subject? What is the So that the only case that the diligent researches of my question? It is this: In the appointment of public offi- friend could find to prove that this administration had recers, "have characters been selected most conspicuous duced to practice, in good faith, the advice which Genfor their probity, virtue, capacity, and firmness, without eral Jackson gave to President Monroe, is the bestowal regard to party," agreeably to the solemn pledge which of a country post office, where no one lived but the posthad been given, and upon the faith of which the present master, that was worth five dollars and sixty-one cents Chief Magistrate was elected? Now, my friend knows per annum! being 33 per cent. on $17. As to Colo. perfectly well, what every one knows, that no individu- nel Taylor, the liberality was not in the appointment, al has been selected to fill office but a devoted partisan; but in the forbearance to turn him out; and this forbear. yet he goes into the purlieus of the palace to inquire for ance is owing to the fact that there is no one of the information. If the gentleman did not know, he ought "party" at Colebyville to take the place of the present to have consulted the public records; there he would incumbent. have found who had been appointed home and foreign ministers, judges of courts, and to all the offices in the nation. But, when the gentleman leaves his Washington city testimony, and relies on his own knowledge, and takes a range throughout the land to find instances to prove that, in the selection of public officers, no regard has been had to party, he has found two signal cases in the Western country, both of which occurred in the county in which I live. He says that Colonel Coleby, H. Taylor, and James Pace, opposition men, were appointed postmasters by this disinterested and liberal administration. The gentleman has been very unfortunate in his allusion to the Post Office patronage in Clark county, as will appear in the sequel. I would not myself have voluntarily made any allusion to the subject; but as it has been introduced for the purpose of proving that, in the appointment of public officers, this administration has had no regard to party or party spirit," the whole truth must come out. The post office at Colonel Taylor's is in the county where no Jackson man lives. The office yields no profit of consequence. Colonel Taylor did not take the office with any view of making money; he is a very obliging gentleman, and agreed to take the office merely with a view to accommodate his neighbors. The office at Pace's was in all respects similarly situated. These being the only cases in the whole Western country that the researches of my friend could find where opposition men had received appointments from this administration, could any thing prove more clearly how hard he was pressed, than to be compelled to refer to two such instances to prove impartiality? But even here the gentleman is mistaken. As he thought proper to bring up these two offices in a grave argument in Congress to prove that, in the appointment of officers, VOL. XII.-246

Now that the office at Pace's has been abandoned, my colleague must turn his admiration to the signal forbearance practised towards Colonel Taylor as the remaining monument left to illustrate the liberality of this administration, and to prove that "the Chief Magistrate of a great and powerful nation acts for the whole, and not for a part of the community."

The only post office in Clark county that was profita ble when the party" came into power was held by Mr. J. B. Duncan, a gentleman of the very first respectability, and perfectly well qualified; whose unoffending and amiable manners enabled him to discharge the duties of the office to the entire satisfaction of all parties. Mr. Duncan, during the late war, shouldered his rifle, and fought in the battles of his country. My colleague has known Mr. Duncan intimately for more than twenty years, and will not deny the statement I have made concerning him. He will go farther; he will agree that there is not a more worthy man in the county of Clark, nor one better qualified for the office, than Mr. Duncan. He will agree that there is not an officer in the United States who gave more universal satisfaction in the discharge of the duties of his office than did Mr. Duncan. But Mr. Duncan had committed the unpardonable sin of having voted against the President, and for this sin he was punished by removal from office, and a worthy young man placed in the office, as a reward for the partisan services of influential relatives.

Now, that the committee have the whole of the facts on the subject, they can judge how far the post office patronage in the county of Clark was used, regardless of party and party spirit.

All others, except my colleague, had prudently pass ed in silence the letter of the President to the Tennes

H. OF R.]

Fortification Bill.

see Legislature, but he has thought proper to reproduce that letter; where General Jackson states, in substance, that, if important appointments continue to devolve on members of Congress, corruption will become the order of the day. Since which time, as President, he has appointed such a large number of members of both Houses to the highest offices, as to draw between five and six hundred thousand dollars from the Treasury for their salaries. This inconsistency between profession and practice, being so glaring as to deter all other debaters from attempting to reconcile them, did not in the least stay the zeal of my colleague in his determination to defend the administration at all points. And to get out of the difficulty, he said:

"Suppose, Mr. Chairman, General Jackson, in that letter, bad suggested to the Legislature of Tennessee an amendment to the constitution, by which the President of the United States should be deprived of having any voice in the passage of laws by Congress, by which the power that now makes it his duty to approve and sign bills passed by Congress before they have the force of laws should be taken away forever. Suppose, also, the General, after having given this opinion, had been elected President of the United States, and that he had refused to approve and sign bills passed by Congress, upon the ground that he had given to the Legislature of Tennessee the opinion that the President ought not to have such power. Sir, in the case supposed, the President would have been impeached and removed from office, if he had refused to approve and sign bills upon the ground stated, when, by the constitution, it was his sworn duty to do so; he would have deserved impeachment and removal from office. What, then, I ask, is the difference in principle between the case supposed and the case in the letter? The amendment suggested in the letter has never been made to the constitution."

Thus spoke my colleague; and if he really can see any similitude between the case supposed and the profession in the letter, I will not stop to reason with him, as it is not probable that another person can be found who will be able to discover the most remote resemblance. The gentleman went on to say:

By the constitution, members of Congress are eligible to executive appointments. The President is sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution,' as it is, not as he would have it to be. If, then, the President had introduced in practice what would have been a virtual amendment to the constitution itself, he would have been guilty of the high crime of usurpation."

It is true the President cannot appoint any one who is ineligible; but I never heard before that eligibility created any obligation on the President to appoint mem. bers of Congress to office, and that his failure to do so would amount to the high crime of usurpation, for which he ought to be impeached and removed from office. But as my friend is inthe secrets of the cabinet, and if this constitutional interpretation is entertained there, and the President drew so largely on both Houses of Congress and the Treasury under the terrors of impeachment, it will certainly justify him in the eyes of my colleague, and all others who understand the constitution as he understands it.

The gentleman contends that the President could not, with propriety, refuse to appoint members of Congress to office until the constitution was changed so as to render them ineligible! The President was of opinion that the practice of appointing members of Congress to high offices would destroy the purity and independence of the Legislature, and make corruption the order of the day. Now my friend contends that the President was bound to continue a practice attended with those consequences until he was prevented by a change of the constitution!

If every thing may with propriety be done to make

[MAY 24, 1836.

corruption the order of the day that is not prohibited by
the constitution, the administration has a broad field to
move in. It is probably the first time under the sun that
the introduction of corruption into the administration of
the Government was justified on the ground that it was
not prohibited by the constitution. The gentleman says
the President was sworn to support the constitution; and
as members of Congress were eligible to office under
that instrument, it would have been a dangerous assump-
tion of power on the part of the President to have ex-
cluded them. If every body is to have office who is
eligible, we shall have a goodly number of them. But I
suppose the gentleman confines his notion of eligibility
to "his party." It was not at all unconstitutional to pro-
scribe and render ineligible every man in and out of Con-
gress in the United States who had not given in his ad-
hesion at the footstool of power; but it would have been
very unconstitutional for the President to have refused
to appoint partisan members of Congress to office. If
this be enforcing the constitution, the President has fully
administered, he has marched platoons out of both Houses
of Congress, as was once observed by the gentleman
from Ohio, [Mr. ConwIN.] There is something, no
doubt, very pleasant in this idea of administering the
constitution to a member of Congress of the right faith
who stands on the roll of promotion, for this kind of luck
goes round so fast that it will not take it long to reach
And when it comes to the turn of my col-
every one.
league, I have no doubt that he will think it more con-
stitutional than ever.

The gentleman eulogizes the administration for the vast sums of money which it has expended in works of internal improvement since the year 1829. Sir, how will the people of Kentucky feel when they know that a member from that State rose upon this floor, and vaunted the praises of this administration for the profuse outpour of millions for works of internal improvement, of all sorts, in all parts of the Union except Kentuckywhen they recollect that they were told, in the midst of this profusion, that the pitiful sum of $150,000 could not be spared for a Kentucky road until the national debt was paid?

It is amusing to hear a controversy in this House between two of the party" upon the much-agitated question, "what are the principles of this administration?" From parts of the Union where internal improvements are unpopular, we hear gentlemen praising the administration for having subverted the whole system; while equal praise is bestowed from sections of the Union where such works are in favor, upon the orthodox opinions and lavish expenditures of the present administration in the advancement of the great cause of public improvements. I do not know which swelled the note of admiration to the highest key, the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. GARLAND, ] because the President had overthrown, or my colleague, because he had upheld, internal improvements.

[Mr. GARLAND rose to explain, and said he did not intend to convey the idea that the President had entirely crushed internal improvements. He wished to be understood as saying the President had done much to overthrow such works, but that he had not gone the full length of the Virginia doctrine.]

Mr. ALLAN proceeded. Sir, the explanation does not affect the sense of what I was saying. The gentleman from Virginia exults that so much has been done to destroy, while the gentleman from Kentucky exults that so much has been done to build up, the system.

My colleague says that the vast sums which this administration has expended "on works of internal improvement are not local, but national, in their character." In the true spirit of non-committal, in which school, by the way, he is not a very young scholar, my colleague

said he would not undertake to say whether the Maysville road and the Louisville canal were local or national improvements. Now, I regret to hear my friend say that the new roads in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Maine, &c., on which hundreds of thousands have been expended, were national, while he stands in a state of non-committal as to the nationality of a Kentucky road. I regret to hear the gentleman vindicating the national character of improvements which this administration has made at the mouths of creeks which he can with difficulty find on the maps, while he will not say whether the Louisville canal, along which half the commerce of the whole Union passes, is local or national. I can very well remember a time when the gentleman and his political friends in Kentucky thought the Maysville road a national improvement. When the news arrived in that State of the passage of the Maysville road bill through both Houses of Congress, the gentleman and his friends were filled with joy, and they exultingly proclaimed from the housetops that the new administration had already done more for Kentucky than ever had been done. And just in the flood-tide of their rejoicings came another mail, and brought the veto, which did not at all abate their joy; they faced about, and said the veto was certainly the greatest act that ever was performed in the tide of time, always excepting the battle of New Orleans. On the subject of the extravagant expenditures of this administration the gentleman has had before him the tables in my speech for two months, and I am happy to find that he has not denied the accuracy of a single figure in them. I proved that the expenditure from the 4th of March, 1829, to the 4th of March, 1837, will exceed the expenditure for the preceding eight years by the sum of $45,116,634 47. Not being able to find any inaccuracy in my tables, he seeks to evade their force by making calculations for different periods of time. But, after all his calculations, he does not deny the increase of expenditure during this administration of over forty-five millions of dollars; which he has undertaken to excuse and defend, and to prove that an increase was unavoidable, from the growth of the country.

[H. OF R.

which I regret my friend did not tell of while he was on the subject; but as he has failed to do so, I will endeavor to supply what he has omitted. The treaties with the Indians for their lands were formerly made for the benefit of the country: now, much of the benefit is reserved as a means of patronage to reward partisans for political services. In almost all of the treaties with the Indians for cessions of their lands, large reservations are made to particular chiefs and headmen of the best parts of the territories ceded, in fee simple, with power to such chiefs and headmen to sell the same to such persons as the President or his agents shall agree may buy. No one can purchase against the consent of the President. So that the accusation of cheating the Indians out of these

reservations is exclusive.

We have seen large portions of the public lands brought into conflict with the public liberty, by being, under the forms of treaties, drawn into the vortex of governmental patronage. We have also seen eleven millions of acres, the common property of all the States, distributed by partial legislation to six of them; while the pioneers of Kentucky, the founders of the great Western empire, who bore the winter's cold and the summer's heat, and stood firm for a score of years in the front of a hundred battles, are most unjustly deprived of any share in the public domain, which is the fruit of their victories.

The gentleman eulogized the administration, especially, for the new system of removing the Indians. This novelty being a total departure from the benevolent policy of Washington, and all of his successors, has to be tested by time and experience, before we can judge correctly of its wisdom. This administration has under. taken to move the numerous tribes to the same territory. There have already been removed 31,348 Indians, and 72,181 are yet to be removed, making in all 103,529. What will be the result of placing so many tribes near together, with their fierce passions roused to the highest point of resentment, from having been forced to leave the land and graves of their fathers, where, by their union and their wrongs, they can learn their strength, time will show.

The gentleman has entirely changed over since the year 1828, when he was electioneering for the office of In addition to the removed Indians, there are of the elector; he told the people that the expenses of the indigenous tribes, within striking distance of the fronFederal Government were too high, and ought to be tier, 150,341; so that, altogether, there will be a body brought down to the scale of Jeffersonian economy. of 253,870. We are bound to take part in all the wars Now, in 1836, when the gentleman's party is in the that may occur among these numerous hostile bands, or receipt of the spoils, he tells the people that, so far from which may occur between any of them and Mexico; for reducing, it is necessary that the increasing expenditure we have agreed by treaty to protect and defend the reshould keep pace with the growth of the country. It moved Indians, and to prevent all the Indians within our now appears that what he told them in 1828 was a mis-borders from making war over the Mexican line. The take. When I was listening to the gentleman's discourses in 1828 upon economy and reform, I little thought of ever standing by his side in this hall, and seeing him the advocate of increasing the expenses of this Government in proportion to the increase of the population and resources of the nation. Did not the gentleman know in 1828 that the numbers and wealth of the nation would increase? Why did he not then tell the people that it would be necessary for General Jackson's administration to increase the public expenses in proportion to the growth of the nation? The case being altered, alters the case. "The party" was then seeking power, and to talk of reform and retrenchment was the way to get it. Now that they have power, the way to get spoils is to increase expenditure.

The gentleman, with great apparent satisfaction, produced the number of Indian treaties and the quantity of land purchased from them, as evidences of the diplomatic skill of this administration. There is nothing new in this: the business of buying land from the Indians has been carried on for a long time. But I agree that this administration has introduced several new practices,

fruit of this Indian-driving policy, so far, does not argue much good for the future. It has already cost us several millions of money, and produced three wars. The Black Hawk war cost $1,237,473; it is estimated that the Florida war will cost $5,000,000; and what the Creek war will cost, we cannot tell. We have this session appropriated $1,000,000 to enable General Gaines to keep peace on the frontier. We have been compelled to add two regiments of mounted dragoons to the regular army, and to pass a bill authorizing the President to raise a provisional army of 10,000 volunteers, and the commanding general has written for an increase of the regu. lar army to 20,000 men. The new relations of the numerous tribes will, it is anticipated, produce a general Indian war.

These are some of the fruits which have already ripened, by driving the Indians to despair. In fifty years, if this system does not cost a hundred millions of dollars and fifty thousand lives, we shall get off better than many anticipate. I hope for the best, and shall rejoice if all the good comes of it that its friends anticipate.

The gentleman brought forward, also, a great many

H. OF R.]

Fortification Bill.

foreign treaties, and the amount of indemnity secured thereby, with as much exultation as if the art of treatymaking was a very late discovery. If the honorable member had extended his diplomatic researches a little further back, and looked into the treaties with Spain, England, Denmark, and many others, he would have found a greater amount of indemnity secured to our citizens than that of which he boasts.

To prove that we are passing rapidly from a paper money currency to one of the precious metals, the gentleman has produced the amount of coinage at the mint during the different years it has been in operation. Now, sir, I wonder if my friend does, in sober seriousness, intend to convey the idea to the people that the coinage at the mint increases the amount of gold in the country, or adds a cent to the national wealth? Does he intend to give the administration credit for working the mines? This would be even worse than the credit claimed for the payment of the national debt. The amount of gold and the payment of the public debt depended on the same cause-the industry of the people. In place of introducing a metallic currency, this Government surrendered its constitutional control over the subject into the hands of the States; and the national circulating medium being thereby destroyed, the necessity was imposed on the States of supplying its place in the best manner they could. And now, when banks are springing up as fast as mushrooms, when paper money is overspreading the land beyond any former example, my colleague gets up here, in defence of "his party," and holds up the tables of coinage, to show his constituents that a golden era is about to commence, and that paper money is near its end! Sir, after the gentleman has informed himself of the present condition of the public money and the currency, I am astonished that he, in the character of a public sentinel, announces to the people that all is well. Does he not know that the fact has been announced by a distinguished leader in his party, in public debate, that if the land bill were to pass, and the deposite banks were called on to pay the public money, it would not only break the whole of them, but cause an explosion in the whole paper system of the United States?

The gentleman has admitted that the public money is under the control of no law; he cannot be ignorant that it is loaned out, without interest, to persons of whom he has no knowledge. He knows that the notes of the deposite banks will not circulate a day's journey from their vaults. He knows that there is a general depreciation; that there are brokers' shops in every town and village; that a traveller across the Union has to submit to have his money shaved every day's ride. He knows that the broker will levy a heavy tax on the labor of the country while this miserable condition of the currency lasts. At this very time the notes of the New York banks are shaved in this city, and the notes issued here undergo the same operation there. In many places the people are compelled to pay five and six per cent. to procure notes on the United States Bank.

[MAY 24, 1836.

the gentleman, in the prevailing spirit of man-worship, ascribes to "the Government," and produces the tables of exports and imports, to show the wonders which he has done for the country. The people are nothing-our ruler is every thing. It is him who makes gold plenty, who pays off the national debt, who raises our exports and imports, and regulates the amount of the cotton crop in the South. The gentleman seems perfectly willing to strip from the people the trophies of their industry, enterprise, and genius, and place them upon the standard of the chieftain under whom it is "a sufficient glory to serve."

The gentleman admits that the public money is now under the control of no law whatever, and has arraigned the Senate and the minority of this House for it. Has the gentleman forgotten who it was that took the public money out of the custody of the law? But he imputes fault to the Senate and the minority of this House for not passing a new law to reclaim the public treasure. If the gentleman had looked through this subject, it is the very last one that he would have alluded to. On the 24th of June, 1834, a bill passed this House to regulate the deposite of the public money in certain State banks, which the minority of this House generally voted against, and which the Senate laid on the table. Now, as the honorable member thought proper to arraign others for not passing this bill, he ought to have given his opinion either for or against it. I am very sure he will never venture to say that bill ought to have passed, for it contains some of the most objectionable provisions of any bill that was ever before Congress. But why did not the gentleman tell all, while he was on the subject? At the same session the Senate passed a bill on the same subject, which this House did not act on. And, further, at the last session a bill was again introduced into this House, and so soon as the minority offered some salutary amendments, which the majority did not like, and which they did not choose to take the responsibility of voting against, they refused to act further on the subject. So that the majority of this House not only refused to pass the bill sent here by the Senate in 1834, but refused to act on the bill of the last session, which they had originated themselves. This session has nearly passed away, and the majority has voted down repeated motions of the minority to take up the subject. So that the same party that took the money out of the custody of the law has refused to make a new law to take it out of the hands of those who hold it against all law.

But the gentleman says that this administration has showered blessings and benefits upon Kentucky in rich profusion. When he came to this part of his speech, I listened with all anxiety to hear what kind of commodities the blessings consisted of which had been bestowed by this administration upon Kentucky, as I never bad heard of any before. My friend, with all imaginable gravity, without moving a single muscle of his face in sympathy with the general smile that went round the hall upon the occasion, announced that this administraIn this condition of things, when the laboring man is tion had appointed to office Messrs. Amos Kendall, Wilcontinually subject to be robbed of his labor, when the liam T. Barry, Thomas P. Moore, Robert B. McAfee, public money is placed in banks where it is admitted and a long list of other Kentuckians! These are the they will break if they are called on to pay, I repeat that blessings. A few men have got high offices and large I am astonished that the gentleman's zeal in defence of sums of money. How this verifies the French sayinghis party should prevent him from apprizing his constit-"that party excitement is the madness of the many for uents of the impending danger.

The combined influence of our free institutions, the industry and enterprise of the people, the introduction of laboring machinery, the establishment of manufactories, modern roads, and steam power, and the high price of our products in Europe, have enabled this young gigantic nation to make such advances to wealth, and power, and prosperity, as to astonish the world. The great result of the combination of all these causes

the benefit of the few." Here are the benefits which the people of Kentucky have derived from all the party conflicts, from all the divisions and heart-burnings among them, which have occurred in the last eight years. We were formerly taught that Government was instituted for the advantage of the people. But my friend eulo. gizes the Government for the benefits which it has bestowed on public officers. I complain that the Government will not expend a fair proportion of the public rev