Indianapolis Indiana Journal in Indianapolis, Indiana 31 Mar 1830
Read an issue on 31 Mar 1830 in Indianapolis, Indiana and find what was happening, who was there, and other important and exciting news from the times. You can also check out other issues in The Indianapolis Indiana Journal.
We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology to make the text on a newspaper image searchable. Below is the OCR data for 31 Mar 1830 Indianapolis Indiana Journal in Indianapolis, Indiana. Because of the nature of the OCR technology, sometimes the language can appear to be nonsensical. The best way to see what’s on the page is to view the newspaper page.
Indianapolis Indiana Journal (Newspaper) - March 31, 1830, Indianapolis, Indiana
Indiana journal. Vol. , wednesday March 31, 1830. No. 362. Published by Douglass amp Maguire. Terms. Two dollars per admit if paid in Advance. Three dollars at the end of the year. Advertise monks inserted at the debate. Or. Webster s speech Coniff a gentleman to whom i have already referred in this debate had come into Congress during my Abs nce from it from South Carolina and had brought with him a High reputation for ability. He came from a school with which we had been acquainted it nos Citurs a soc is. I hold in my hand sir a printed speech of this distinguished gentleman or. Mcduffie Quot on internal improvements Quot delivered a bout the period to which i now refer and printed with a few introductory remarks upon consolidation in which sir i think he quite consolidated the arguments of his opponents the radicals if to crush be to consolidate. I give you a Short but substantive quotation from these remarks. He is speaking of a pamphlet then recently published entitled Quot consolidation Quot and having alluded to the question of re chartering the former Bank of the United states he says Quot moreover in the Early history of parties and when or. Crawford advocated the renewal of the old charter it was considered a Federal measure Wlinich internal improvement never Zucas As this author erroneously states. This Laiter measure originated in the administration of or. Jefferson with the appropriation for the Cumberland and was first proposed As a system by or. Calhoun and carried through the House of representatives by a Large majority of the republicans including almost every one of the Reading men who carried us through the Lale so then internal improvement is not one of the Federal heresies. One paragraph More sir Quot the author in question not Content with denouncing As federalists general Jackson or. Adams or. Calhoun and the Noa Jority of the South Carolina delegation in Congress modestly extends the denunciation to or. Monroe and the whole Republican Here Are his words during the administration of Xor. Monroe much has passed which the Republican party would be glad to approve if they could but the principle feature and that which has chiefly elicited these observe to ions is the renewal of the system of internal improvements now this measure was adopted by a vote of 115 to 86, of a Republican Congress an sanctioned by a Republican president. Who then is this author who assumes the High prerogative of denouncing in the name of the Republican party the Republican administration of the country a denunciation including within its sweep Calhoun Lowndes and Cheves men who will be regarded As the brightest ornaments of South Caro it Lina and the strongest i Lars of the Republican party As Long As the late War shall be remembered and talents and patriotism Sham be regarded As the proper objects of the admiration and gratitude of a free people Quot such Are the opinions sir which were maintained by South Carolina gentlemen in the House of representatives on the subject of internal improvement when i took my seat there As a member from Massachusetts in 1823. But this is not alb we had a Bill before us and passed in that House entitled Quot an act to procure the necessary surveys plans and estimates upon the subject of roads and it authorised the president to cause surveys and estimates to be made of the routes of such roads and canals As he might deem of National importance in a commercial or military Point of View or for the transportation of the mail and appropriated thirty thousand dollars out of the Treasury to defray the expense. This act though preliminary in its nature covered the whole ground. It took for granted the Complete Power of internal improvement As far As any of its advocates had Ever contended for it. Having passed the other House the Bill came up to the Senate and was Here considered and debated in april 1824. The honorable member from South Carolina was a member of the Senate at that time. While the Bill was under consideration Here a motion was made to add the following proviso that nothing herein contained shall be construed to affirm or admit a Power in Congress on their own authority to make roads or canals within any of the slates of the the yeas and nays were taken on this proviso and the honorable member voted in the negative. . A motion was then made to add this proviso Viz provided that the Faith of the United states is hereby pledged that no Money shall Ever be expended for roads or Janals except it shall be a Mong the several states and in the same proportion As direct taxes Are Laid and assessed by the provisions of the the honorable member voted against this proviso also and it failed. The Bill was then put on its passage and the honorable member voted for it and it passed and became a Law. Now it strikes me sir that there is no maintaining these votes but upon the Power of internal improvement in its broadest sense. In truth these Bills for surveys and estimates have always been considered As test questions. They show who is for and who against internal improvement. This Law itself went the whole length and assumed the full and Complete Power. The gentleman s votes sustained that Power in every form in which the various propositions to Amend presented it. He went for the entire and unrestrained authority without consulting the states and without agreeing to any proportionate distribution. And now suffer me to remind you or. President that it is this very same Power thus sanctioned in every form by the gentleman s own opinion that is so Plain and Manifest a usurpation that the state of South Carolina is supposed to be justified in refusing submission to any Laws carrying the Power into effect. Truly sir is not this a Little too hard May we not crave some mercy under favor and Protection of the gentleman s own authority admitting that a Road or a Ca Nal must be written Down Flat usurpation As Ever was committed May we find no mitigation in our respect for his vote As one that knows the Law the Tariff which South Carolina had an efficient hand in establishing in 1816, and this asserted Power of internal improvement advanced by her in the same year and As we have now seen approved and sanctioned by her representatives in 1824, these two measures Are the great grounds on which she is now thought to be justified in breaking up the Union if she see fit to break it up i May now safely say i think that we have had the authority of leading and distinguished gentlemen from s. Carolina in support of the doctrine of internal improvement. I repeat that up to 1824, 1 for one followed South Carolina but when that Star in its ascension veered off in an unexpected direction i relied on its Light no longer. Here the vice president said does the chair understand the gentleman from Massachusetts to say that the person now occupying the chair of the Senate has changed his opinions on the subject of internal in prove ments from nothing Ever said to to sir Hiiva i had reason to know of any change in the opinions of the person filling the chair of the Senate. If such change has taken place i regret it i speak generally of the state of South Carolina individuals we know there Are who hold opinions favourable to the Power. An application for its exercise in behalf of a Public work in South Carolina itself is now pending i believe in the other House presented by members from that state. I have thus sir perhaps not without some tediousness of detail shown that if i am in error on the subject of internal improvements How and in what company i fell into that error. If i am wrong it is apparent who misled me. I go to other remarks of the honorable member and i have to complain of an entire misapprehension of w hat i said on the subject of the National debt though i can hardly perceive How any one could misunderstand me. What i said was not that i wished to put off the payment of the debt but on the contrary that i had always voted for every measure for its reduction As uniformly As the gentleman himself. He seems to claim the exclusive Merit of a disposition to reduce the Public charge i do not allow it to him. As a debt i was i am for paying it because it is a charge on our finances and on the Industry of the country. But i observed that i thought i perceived a morbid Fervour on that subject an excessive Ati piety to pay off the debt not so much because it is a debt simply As because while it lasts it furnishes one objection to disunion. It is a lie of common interest while it lasts. I did not impute such motives to the honorable member himself but that there is such a feeling in existence i have not a particle of doubt. The most i said was that if one effect of the debt was to strengthen our Union that effect itself was not regretted by me however much others might regret it. The gentleman has not seen How to reply to this otherwise than by supposing me to have advanced the doctrine that a National debt is a National Blessing. Others i must Hope will find less difficulty in understanding me. I distinctly and pointedly cautioned the honorable member not to understand me As expressing an opinion favourable to the continuance of the debt i repeated this caution and repeated it More than once but it was thrown away. On yet another Point i was still More unaccountably misunderstood. The gentleman had harangued against i told him in reply that there was one kind of consolidation to which i was attached and that was the consolidation of our Union and that this was precisely that consolidation to which i feared others were not attached. That such Consolida lion was the very end of the constitutions the leading Obj. It As they had informed is themselves which its Fra mers had kept in View. I turned to their communication and read their very words Quot the consolidation of the Union Quot a and expressed my Devotion to this sort of consolidation. I said in terms that i wished not in the slightest degree to augment the Powers of this government that my object was to preserve not to enlarge and that by consolidating the Union i under stood no More than the strengthening of the Union and perpetuating having been thus explicit having thus read from the printed Book the precise words which i adopted As expressing my own sentiments it passes comprehension How any Man could understand me As contending for an Extension of the Powers of the government or for consolidation in that odious sense in which it Means an accumulation in the Federal government of the Powers properly belonging to the states. I repeat sir that in adopting the sentiment of the framers of the constr tut Iofi 1 read their language audibly and word for word and 1 jointed out the distinction just As fully As i have now done Between the consolidation of the Union and that other obnoxious consolidation which i disclaimed. And yet the honorable Mem tar misunderstood me the gentleman had said that he wished for no fixed Revenue not a shilling. If by a word he could convert the Capitol into Gold he would not do it. Why All this tear of Revenue Why sir because As the gentleman told us it lends to consolidation. Now this can mean neither More nor less than that a common Revenue is a common interest and that All common interests tend to hold the Union of the slates together. I Ctm fess i like that tendency if the gentleman dislikes it he is right in deprecating a shilling s fixed Revenue. So much sir for consolidation. As Well As i recollect the course of his remarks the honorable gentleman next recurred to the subject of the Tariff. He did not doubt the word must be of unpleasant sound to me and proceeded with an Effort neither new nor attended with new Success to involve me and my Voles in inconsistency and contradiction. I am Happy the honorable gentleman has furnished me an Opportunity of a timely remark or two on that subject. I was glad he approached it for it is a question i enter upon without fear from any body. The strenuous toil of the gentleman has been to raise an inconsistency Between my dissent to the Tariff in 1824 and my vote in 1828. It is labor lost. He pays an undeserved compliment to mgt speech in 1824 but this is to raise Rne High that my fall As he would have it in 1828, May be the More signal. Sir there was no fall at All. Between the ground i stood on in 1824, and that 1 took in 1828, there was not Only no precipice but no Declivity. It was a change of position to meet new circumstances but on the same level. A Plain tale explains the whole matter. In 1816, i had not acquiesced in the Tariff then supported by South Carolina. To some parts of it especially i Felt and expressed great repugnance. I held the same opinions in 1821 at the meeting in Faneuil Hall to which the gentleman has alluded. I said then and say now that As an original question the authority of con Gress to exercise the Revenue Power with direct reference to the Protection of manufactures is a questionable authority far More questionable in my judgment than the Power of internal improvements. I must confess sir that in one respect some impression Lias been made on my opinions lately. Or. Madison s publication has put the Power in a very Strong Light. He has placed it i must acknowledge upon grounds of construction and argument which seem impregnable. But even if the Power were doubtful on the face of the Constitution itself it had been assumed and asserted in the first Revenue Law Ever passed under that same Constitution and on this ground As a matter settled by contemporaneous practice i had refrained from expressing the opinion that the Tariff Laws transcended constitutional limits As the gentleman supposes. What i did say at Faneuil Hall As far As i now remember was that this was originally matter of doubtful construction. The gentleman himself i suppose thinks there is no doubt about it and that the Laws Are plainly against the Constitution. Or. Madison s letters already referred to contain in my judgment by fair the most Able exposition extant of this part of the Constitution. He has satisfied me so far As the practice of the government had left it an open question. With a great majority of the representatives of Massachusetts i voted against the Tariff of 1824. My reasons were then Given and i will not now repeat them. But notwithstanding our dissent the great states of new York Pennsylvania Ohio and Kentucky went for the Bill in Alrin Ost unbroken column and it passed. Congress and the president sanctioned it and it became the Law of the land. What then were we to do our Only option was either to fall in with this settled course of Public policy and a Corn Iodate ourselves to it As Well As we could or to embrace the South Carolina doctrine and talk of nullifying the statute by state interference. This last alternative did not suit our principles and of course we a doped the former. In 1827, the subject came again before Congress on a proposition favourable to Wool and woollens. We looked upon the system of Protection As being fixed and settled. The Law of 1824 remained. It had gone into full operation and in regard to some objects intended by it perhaps most of them had produced All its expected effects. No Man proposed to repeal it no Man attempted to renew the general contest on its principle. But owing to subsequent and unforeseen occurrences the Benefit intended by it to Wool and Woollen fabrics had not been realized. Events not known Here when the Law passed had taken place which Defeated its object in that particular respect. A Meas tire was accordingly brought Forward to meet this precise deficiency to remedy this particular defect. It was limited to Wool and was Ever any thing More reasonable if the policy of the Tariff Laws had be come established in principle As the permanent policy of the government should they not be revised and amended and made equal like other Laws As exigencies should arise or Justice require a care we had doubled a bout adopting the system were we to refuse to cure its Manifest defects after it became adopted and when no one attempted its repeal and this sir is the inconsistency so n Uch Bruit de. I had voted against the Tariff of 1824�?bul it passed and in 1827 and 1828, i voted to Amend it in a Point essential to the interest of my constituents. Where is the Incon Silenc ? could i do otherwise sir does political consistency consist in always giving negative votes does it require of a Public Man to refuse to concur in amending Laws because they passed against his consent having voted against the Tariff originally does consistency demand that 1 should do All in my Power to maintain an unequal Tariff burdensome to my own constituents in Many respects favourable in none to consistency of that sort i Lay no claim and there is another sort to which i Lay As utile and that is a kind of consistency by which persons feel themselves As much bound to oppose a proposition after it has become the Law of the land As before. The Bill of 1827, limited As i have said to the single object in which the Tariff of 1824, had manifestly failed in its effect passed the House of representatives but was lost Here. We had then the act of 1828. I need not recur to the history of a measure so recent. Its enemies spiced it with whatsoever they thought would Render it distasteful its friends took if drugged As it was. Vast amounts of property Many millions had been invested in manufactures under the inducements of 1824. Events called loudly As i thought for further regulation to secure the degree of Protection intended by that act. I was disposed to vote for such regulation and desired nothing More but certain was not to be bantered out of my purpose by a threat ened augmentation of duty on molasses put into the Bill for the avowed purpose of making it obnoxious. The vote May have been right or wrong Wise or unwise but it is Little less than absurd to allege against it an inconsistency with opposition to the former Law sir As to the general subject of the Tariff i have Little now to say. Another Opportunity May be presented i remarked the other Day that this policy did not begin with us in new England and yet sir. New England is charged with vehemence As being a to Gablej or charged with equal vehemence As being unfavourable to the Tariff policy just As Best suits the time place and occasion for making some charge against her. The credulity of the Public has been put to its extreme capacity of false impression relative to her conduct in this through All the South during the late contest it was new England policy and a new England administration that was afflicting the country with a Tariff policy beyond All endurance while on the other Side of the Alleghany even the act of 1828 itself the very sublimated essence of oppression according to Southern opinions was pronounced to be one of those blessings for which the West was indebted to the Quot generous with Large investments in manufacturing establishments and Many and various interests connected with and dependent on them it is not to be expected that new England anymore than other portions of the country will now consent to any measure destructive or highly dangerous. The duty of the government at the present moment would seem to be to persevere not to destroy to maintain the position which it has assumed and for one i shall feel it an indispensable obligation to hold it steady As far As in my Power to that degree of Protection which it has undertaken to More of the Tariff. Professing to be provoked by what he chose to consider a charge made by me against South Carolino the honorable member or. President has taken up a new crusade against not w England. Leaving altogether the subject of the Public lands in which his Success perhaps had been neither distinguished or satisfactory and letting go also of the topic of the Tariff he sallied Forth in a general assault on the opinions politics and parties of Nevy England As they have been exhibited in the last thirty a ars. This is natural. The Quot narrow policy Quot of the Public lands had proved a Legal sentiment in South Carolina and was not to be removed. The Quot accursed policy Quot of the Tariff also had established the fact of its birth and parentage in the same state. No wonder therefore the gentleman wished to carry the War As he expressed it into the enemy s country. Prudently willing to quit these subjects he was doubtless desirous of fastening on others that could not be transferred South of Mason and Dixon s line. The politics of new England became his theme and it was in this part of i speech i think that he menaced to with such sore discomfiture. Discomfiture Why sir when he attacks any thing which i maintain and overthrows it when he turns the right or left of any position which i take up when he drives me from any or Iund i choose to occupy he May then talk of discomfiture but not till that Distant Day. What has he done has he maintained his own charges has he proved what he alleged has he sustained himself in the attack on the government and on the history of the North in the matter of the Public lands has he disproved a fact refuted a proposition weakened an argument maintained by me has a come within beat of drum of any position of mine of no but he has Quot carried the War into the enemy s country Quot carried the War into the enemy s country yes sir and what sort of a War has he made of it Why sir he has stretched a drag net Over the whole surface of perished pamphlets indiscreet sermons Frothy paragraphs and fuming popular addresses Over whatever the pulpit in ils moments of alarm the press in its heats and parties in their extravagance have severally thrown off in times of general excitement and violence. He has thus swept together a mass of such things As but that they Are now old the pubs lie health would have required him rather o leave in their state of dispersion. For a Good Long hour or two we had the unbroken pleasure of listening to the honorable member while he recited with his usual Grace and spirit and with evident High gusto speeches pamphlets addresses and All the e Ceteras of the political press such As warm Heads produce in warm times
Search the Indianapolis Indiana Journal Today
with a Free Trial
We want people to find what they are looking for at NewspaperArchive. We are confident that we have the newspapers that will increase the value of your family history or other historical research.
With our 7-day free trial, you can view the documents you find for free.
Looking for more information? If you’re not ready to talk to a representative, here are some frequently asked questions to help you determine if institutional access to Newspaper Archive is for you and your institution.
Why are newspaper sites important?
Newspapers allow readers to step into the life and times of past decades and centuries from all over the world. Not only do they have interesting and unique articles and photos, but they also have advertisements, comics, classifieds, and more.
What is the best way to search newspaper archives?
The NewspaperArchive collection can be searched several different ways - advanced search, browse, and publications. The advanced search offers filters to narrow your search for more precise results.
Why should I get a NewspaperArchive subscription?
NewspaperArchive’s collection of newspapers boasts more than 85% unique content compared to other newspaper sites. In addition to big city newspapers, we have a wide variety of newspapers from small towns that hold a wealth of information about day-to-day life. Our collection dates back to 1607!