THE WHIG VICTORY IN NEW YORK.

THE State and City elections of New York on the 6th November, have shown a superiority of strength in the Republican and Conservative party over the united forces of the remains of the old Jackson organization, called Loco Focos, and of the new party, who go by the name of Barn Burn

ers.

to a great height. A complete rupture took place all over the Union. It was resolved by the Barn Burning faction that Mr. Cass, who headed the Old Hunker division, should be defeated, cost what it might. The body of the party, however, had been so entirely corrupted by the enjoyment of office, and by other causes of political decay incident to the unscrupulous employment of power, that the new division of them found themselves, to their great surprise, without a single principle of organization; in fact, in the race for power they had left their principles behind, and forgotten where they left them. They had nothing positive about them. They were opposed to prohibitory duties and unnecessary tariffs, it is true, but so were the majority of the Whigs. In Kane letters, and other recorded documents, they advocated protection, incidental, certainly, but still protection. They thought it a good thing, so it was not carried too far and so did the Whigs. They were opposed to the establishment of a National Bank with unlimited powers. They announced, in Presidents' messages, and elsewhere, that they thought a Bank, unless it were prop

The origin of these two factions in the State of New York arose upon a quarrel between the old office holders, who came in under the old Jackson dynasty, and the younger members of the same party, who wished to succeed them in the offices which they had so long held. The two factions organized themselves under the name of Barn Burners and Old Hunkers. (We put these facts on record for the benefit of future historians, as they are likely to be forgotten.) The Old Hunkers were the successors of, or were themselves, the men who went over from the ranks of Federalism to join the no-principle party of General Jackson; they, however, carried their principles with them in their pockets, to be used upon occasion. In order to win over the body of foreign emigration, more especially in the city of New York, they assumed the name of Democrats, synono-erly regulated, and placed under proper mous with Jackson men, or friends of the restrictions, a dangerous experiment, and people. Unluckily for themselves, however, so did the Whigs. They professed themas it proved in the sequel, they adopted the selves opposed to an unlimited and extravnew doctrine of rotation in office, and be-agant system of improvements. They ing, of late years, extremely slow and loth | thought it necessary that the money of the in its application to themselves, there sprang up a number of enthusiastic young philosophers, very practical men too, who undertook to see that the doctrine was applied; the consequence was the formation of a new party, who called themselves Barn Burners, because they had undertaken to set fire to the barn in order to drive out the rats.

Government should be expended constitutionally, and in cases that were deemed necessary to the national welfare, and so were and did the Whigs. They were opposed to the interference of Congress in the domestic affairs of the Southern States, and so were the Whigs. They thought it necessary to make a peace with Mexico, on terms favorable to the honor of this country-the Whigs indicated with great distinctness that they were of the same opinion. They believed in a certain readid the Whigs, as was proved by the election of General Taylor. They thought it

Under Mr. Polk's Administration the unpopularity of the old office-holding, or old Hunker division of that scion of Federalism which claims the name of Democ-sonable rotation of office, and so indeed

racy, but which goes commonly by the more appropriate title of Loco Foco, rose

necessary that Representatives should rep-❘ resent their constituents, and that what a man had promised to vote for in Congress he should vote for; in fact, to their amazement, they found that they had not a single principle left them. Old Hunkerism, even, had but one, and that it had inherited from Federalism, the unscrupulous application, namely, of the Presidential veto, and of this they conld make no capital, taken by itself. The principle was nothing in itself. To have any basis of organization at all, to have any soul, thought, or speculation, to have any thing efficient or statesmanlike about them, they must find something, they must find some fresh and lively opinion, some new and philosophical sentiment, that should serve as a soul to animate the, as yet, dull and lifeless faction.

that Congress had no right to interfere to prevent the extension of slavery over the national territory. Could the new faction set itself in opposition to this doctrine, there was the hope of something like an organization. They made it a point to say, with the Whigs, that slavery ought not to be extended over the national domain. They endeavored to have a form of law given to this principle; and, under the name of Wilmot Proviso, it came before the country, and was rejected, chiefly because of the untimeliness of its appearance, and the injudicious manner of its introduction, and its insulting and repulsive appearance to the South. The majority of the people were clearly in favor of preventing the extension of slavery over the national domain, but the Wilmot Proviso neither is, nor ever will be, the means of that prevention.

By assiduous writing, speaking, and teaching, the Whig party had, after many years of almost hopeless effort, succeeded in creating a powerful opinion against the extension of slavery over new territory. They had succeeded in convincing the South that every additional acre of cotton, cultivated by slave labor, would serve only to lower the price of cotton, and diminish the profits of the older planters. They had succeeded in convincing the South that its true policy was rather to diminish than to increase the number of cotton planters. They had shown them moreover, nay, had convinced them, as they had convinced the entire North, that Congress had full power either to extend or to limit slavery in the territories of the nation. They had also established the doctrine that the sovereignty of a State created upon new territory, was perfect from the instant of its birth, and that new States could not be interfered with to force them either to suppress or to erect among themselves the institution of slavery. It was the original doctrine of the Whigs that new States should legislate for or against slavery on their own responsibility, and with full powers. This doctrine so unluckily appropriated by the Whigs, was of no avail to either section of their adversaries, except under a very bold and dangerous system of lying and misrepresentation, such as is followed by the Union newspaper. The Old Hunker division, on the other hand, were disposed to hold to the doctrine | by constitutional means.

The Abolition third party, which had hitherto distinguished itself by annually putting a certain number of good votes in limbo, witnessing the unfortunate predicament of the young faction, came forward with a very handsome offer to furnish out a new stock of principles, of a very racy and enlivening character, such as would have a good sound, and chime in well with the sentimental passion of the day. Barn Burnerism took the hint, and accepted this very handsome offer in part; it announced itself, on a sudden, as the champion of Free Soil, much to the astonishment of the Whigs, who had hitherto imagined that they alone were the defenders of free institutions in the new territories; that they alone, for reasons both economical and philanthropical, had set themselves against the extension of domestic slavery. The orators of the new faction, overjoyed at the discovery of a principle-a thing unheard of since the election of Gen. Jacksonwere at vast pains to impress the minds of the masses with a proper sense of the dignity of their mission. They stepped forward with great self-possession, as the defenders of human rights in general, especially as they appear in the person of the negro; but they were not unconstitutional, oh! no, not they! They were not disposed to meddle with the domestic institutions of the South, oh! no, not they! all that they professed was an intention to prevent the spread of slavery over new territories, and For a time the new organization flour- | to their opponents to come over and work

ished wonderfully. They adopted a leader who was by no means a man of straw, but a powerful and able politician; in fact the original organizer of the party of which they were now the most important faction. Mr. Van Buren led off the new movement very handsomely, pledging himself to do every thing to prevent the extension of slavery, and committing himself to nothing farther. It is said that he allowed himself to be placed in this position in order that he might revenge himself upon the Southern division of the party who had previously defeated his nomination at Baltimore. However this may be, the new faction succeeded in defeating the old one; the Whigs came into power, and Old Hunkerism fell prostrate; deprived of of fice, and, consequently, as it had nothing else, deprived of organizing power. To be, at once, without office and without a principle, was the condition of Old Hunkerism; it consisted now of a clique of rejected office holders, who could not, for their lives, show any man a reason, or the shadow of a reason, why they should be returned to office-an imbecile and wretched condition.

Finding their case hopeless, and witnessing with a sullen discontent and jealousy the rising power of their new enemies, formerly their brothers, or their sons, they began to make overtures to the new faction. Old Hunker made a very liberal offer to young Barn Burner that they two should clap each a shoulder to the wheel, and having, by the union of numbers, achieved a victory, they should divide the spoil between them. In New York especially, for some months previous to the late election, this union was agitated, and finally agreed upon by most of the leaders. Newspapers on the Old Hunker side addressed hearty and soul-stirring invitations

together with them to defeat the Whigs. Democrats, cried the liberal Globe newspaper, with the characteristic Old Hunker bon hommie, shall we go to work and elect our whole ticket, which will enable us all to partake of the fat things which will fall from the Democratic cornucopia? or shall we remain divided, and be compelled for a number of years to feed on short commons, until we have not strength to withstand an old fashioned North Wester-what do you say? The appeal was irresistible; the two factions closed their ranks, and voted together; but, to the amazement of all concerned, they were beaten by a good majority.

That men should make sacrifices in a great cause is necessary to their success; they are called upon, in a good cause, to sacrifice whatever is most dear and precious to them; and when such sacrifices have been made, how great is our sympathy and pity for those to whom they have availed nothing! The Barn Burner faction, stimulated by a patriotism truly elevated, resolved that no sacrifice should be esteemed too great for the advancement of that cause of which it was the sworn advocate; the cause, as it avowed it, of freedom and humanity; no sacrifice seemed too great; it was ready to throw aside that which it held most dear, its own jewel, its sole principle, its very honor. As the principle for which it existed was the thing of all others which it held most dear, that was the thing of all others which it determined to sacrifice.

It did this, and lost the election;-catastrophe truly to be deplored! -melancholy comment upon the vanity of human wishes, and the futility of the best laid schemes! It had laid a wager to swim across the river with a bag of gold, and as a preliminary step, threw away the bag.

J. D. W.

CANAL POLICY OF NEW YORK.

ABSTRACT OF THE LETTER OF MR. RUGGLES.

in the city of New York, among its merchants and capitalists. After an eight years' struggle, on the 15th of April, 1817, the law authorizing the Canal passed through the Legislature. The whole delegation of the City of New York voted against it.

On the 24th of October, SAMUEL B. RUG- | chimerical, and this was more especially true GLES, Esq., of this city, addressed to a committee of gentlemen residing in Rochester, an able letter in vindication of the policy that has been pursued in the construction of canals in this state, from the time of Clinton to the present period. Being too long for publication in the Review, we shall endeavor to furnish, in a condensed form, all its important facts and conclusions.

The great subject of his letter is introduced by asking three questions: "What is the present state of the Erie Canal enlargement? What has brought it to its present condition? What are its prospects?" The three questions, though distinct, he examines together. He first gives a graphic sketch of the three political parties at present existing in the state. The Whigs, he says, consist mainly of those, and the descendants of those, who supported CLINTON in the great work of the Erie Canal; -they are those who advocate, as part of their creed, improvements of the interior as well as of the sea-board, and who believe that the commerce of rivers, and canals, and lakes, are as important to national interests as that of the

ocean.

Opposed to this party is that of those who call themselves Democrats. This last is divided into two sections, one of which is wholly averse to every kind of internal improvements at the expense of the state, and is known by the terrible name of "BARNBURNERS," the most prominent leader of which is Col. SAMUEL YOUNG, aided by Mr. MICHAEL HOFFMAN, and Mr. FLAGG, the late Comptroller.

It was during these contests that the political parties which even now agitate the State, found their origin and early organization. Mr. SILAS WRIGHT, since elected Governor, and Mr. AZARIAH C. FLAGG, the late Comptroller, came into public life about that time, the active opponents of Mr. CLINTON.

In 1823 Mr. CLINTON retired from the office of Governor; from the year 1810, when the first explorations and surveys were made, to the year 1823, he had held the honorary post of Canal Commissioner, without salary or emolument. In 1824, the great work was near its completion. His adversaries, having a majority in both branches of the Legislature, passed joint resolution, supported by Mr. WRIGHT in the Senate, and Mr. FLAGG in the Assembly, removing him from that post, which he had so long and so ably filled.

a

The whole community was shocked at this cold-blooded, intentional insult to a great public benefactor. Mr. CLINTON was at once put in nomination for re-election as Governor the approaching autumn, and he swept Colonel YOUNG, the opposing candidate, from the field by an immense majority.

In the large views of Mr. CLINTON, however valuable the Erie Canal might be, as the main commercial artery of the State, it needed the contributions of lateral canals, branching off into the more interior recesses of the country. He, therefore, recommended successive additions to the system, which should connect Lake Ontario and the Black River, the Cayuga and Seneca Lakes, and the fertile regions of the Genesee, the Susquehanna and the AlleState.

Midway between this wing of the Democracy and the Whig party, is that portion who enjoy the comfortable title of "OLD HUNKERS;" and it is their creed that public works ought to be "judiciously" prosecuted-provided they themselves can fill the offices of honor or profit connected with the administration. The most eminent leader of this school is Govern-gany, with the great trunk traversing the

or MARCY.

This was the origin of the lateral canals. From the moment of their construction they have been the theme of the most malignant abuse which party could devise. Disregarding their palpable effects in swelling the revenues of the main line and the general com

The present generation, enjoying as it does the daily benefits of the Erie Canal, can hardly realize the difficulties which its projectors were obliged to encounter. Forty years ago, when the plan was first announced of constructing a canal from the Hudson River to Lake Erie, the idea was treated as purely | merce of the State, their tolls have always

been studiously kept separate from those of the Erie Canal, and the expense of maintaining them in repair, is paraded by their opponents as a perpetual burthen upon the treasury of the State.

In 1827, Mr. WRIGHT, being still in the State Senate, in an elaborate Financial Report made war upon the whole Canal system, declaring that the actual income of the canals was highly exaggerated, and that any appropriations for other works, unless they should be more profitable than the Erie and Champlain Canals, "would hasten the period when direct taxation must be resorted to." The formula thus furnished by Mr. WRIGHT, has been faithfully repeated by the disciples of his political school ever since. But the fact has not verified the prediction. The Canal paid off its debt nine years after the Report, in July, 1836.

Nevertheless, on the opening of the Legislative Session of 1838, Mr. FLAGG again renewed his recommendation of a direct tax.

The subject was referred to a Committee of Ways and Means, of which Mr. RUGGLES WAS Chairman, and they resolved at once, as their predecessors had done for many years, that the tax was neither necessary nor expedient. They, however, instituted an inquiry as to what would be the fiscal effect of proceeding with more expedition in enlarging the Erie Canal; and to solve this, they endeavored to determine what would probably be its future re

venues.

In conducting the inquiry, the Committee considered the report made to the Assembly, a few days previously, by Mr. Bouck and his colleagues, Canal Commissioners, which predicted that in a few years after the completion of the enlargement, the tolls, being at the present rates, would exceed three millions of dollars annually. They added that they "believed the public interest would be essentially promoted by as speedy a completion of the enlargement of the Erie Canal as the facilities for obtaining means, &c., will justify." Thirteen years before this period, the Canal Commissioners, among whom were Colonel YOUNG and Mr. Bouck, declared that their anticipations as to the tolls "had uniformly fallen short of the reality," and they added, that "they had no doubt but the same fate awaited their present calculations." They then proceeded to estimate the prospective increase of tolls for the thirty years then next succeeding. The following is the result: $1,000,000 for the year 1836; $2,000,000 for the year 1846; and $4,000,000 for the year 1856. The tolls, though materially reduced in rates, amounted, in reality, to $1,614,342, in 1836, and to $2,756,106, in 1846. At the same time, the Canal Commissioners predicted that within fifty years, nine-tenths of the merchandize transported upon the Canal, will pay toll, if it is chargeable, for the use of the whole length of the line. They then estimated the "annual receipt of tolls at nine millions and thirty one thousand and one hundred and seventy-six dollars."

On the death of Mr. CLINTON, in the year 1828, the political power of the State passed, almost without opposition, into the hands of his late opponents, and Mr. WRIGHT became Comptroller, and in due course of time was succeeded by Mr. FLAGG. The manner in which the accounts are kept in the Comptroller's office, makes two distinct Funds, -The Canal Fund and the General Fund. The Canal Fund may be full to overflowing, but if the General Fund is low, there is a cry of an exhausted Treasury. The State may own the Canals, as it owns any other kind of property; and when the loans are cancelled which had been made to construct them, the liens held by lenders cease, and the revenues of the Canals may be applied to the general purposes of the State. When a tax, therefore, is recommended "to replenish the General Fund," it simply means a tax to pay off so much of the Canal debt. During the progress of the Erie Canal and before its revenues had been ascertained, the people paid a tax for its support, but in 1846 it was no longer necessary, and it was discontinued. In pursuance, however, of the policy which dictated his Report of 1827, Mr. WRIGHT, in 1830, as Comptroller, recommended the Legislature to levy once more a direct tax. The proposition was not adopted. It was repeated by him the next year, with the same bad success. In 1834 Mr. FLAGG became Comptroller, and until 1839, continued the system commenced by Mr. WRIGHT of urging the Legislature to impose a tax "to replenish the General Fund." In 1836, the revenues having accumulated to an amount sufficient to pay off the whole of the debt of the Erie and Champlain Canal, the Legislature virtually settled the matter by enacting that $400,000 should annually be taken from the Canal Fund and paid to the General Fund. In addition to this sum, an annual amount of about $310,000 was also received into the same Fund, from the auction and salt duties. ❘ be added ten per cent. for reduction in the

The Report of 1838, was made in all honesty of purpose, and without indulging in any idle dreams of the imagination, but it has been made the standing subject for party ridicule and assault down to the present time.

The estimate of the Report of 1838 was, that if the Erie Canal should be enlarged, its tolls would reach the sum of $3,000,000 at the close of navigation in the year 1849. The Canal has not been enlarged, and its rates of toll have been reduced, and yet the tolls of the year 1848 were $3,252,212, and of the preceding year, (which was one of unusual activity,) $3,635,381. If, to the tolls of 1848,