CHAPTER LXXXV.

REPUDIATION OF MR. TYLER BY THE WHIG PARTY: THEIR MANIFESTO:

COUNTER MANIFESTO BY MR. CALEB CUSHING.

The conduct of Mr. Tyler in relation to a national bank produced

its natural effect upon the party which had elected him--disgust

and revolt. In both Houses of Congress individual members boldly

denounced and renounced him. He seemed to be crushed there, for his

assailants were many and fierce--his defenders few, and feeble. But

a more formal act of condemnation, and separation was wanted--and

had. On the 11th day of September--the day of the cabinet

resignations, and two days after the transmission of the second

veto message--the whigs of the two Houses had a formal meeting to

consider what they should do in the new, anomalous, and acephalous

condition in which they found themselves. The deliberations were

conducted with all form. Mr. Senator Dixon of Rhode Island and Mr.

Jeremiah Morrow of Ohio--both of them men venerable for age and

character--were appointed presidents; and Messrs. Kenneth Rayner

of North Carolina, Mr. Christopher Morgan of New York, and Richard

W. Thompson of Indiana--all members of the House--were appointed

secretaries. Mr. Mangum of North Carolina, then offered two

resolutions:

"1. That it is expedient for the whigs of the Senate and House

of Representatives of the United States to publish an address

to the people of the United States, containing a succinct

exposition of the prominent proceedings of the extra session

of Congress, of the measures that have been adopted, and those

in which they have failed, and the causes of such failure;

together with such other matters as may exhibit truly the

condition of the whig party and whig prospects.

"2. That a committee of three on the part of the Senate, and

five on the part of the House, be appointed to prepare such

address, and submit it to a meeting of the whigs on Monday

morning next, the 13th inst., at half past 8 o'clock."

Both resolutions were unanimously adopted, and Messrs. Berrien of

Georgia, Tallmadge of New York, and Smith of Indiana were appointed

on the part of the Senate; and Messrs. Everett of Vermont, Mason of

Ohio, Kennedy of Maryland, John C. Clark of New York, and Rayner of

North Carolina, on the part of the House.

At the appointed time the meeting reassembled, and the committee

made their report. Much of it was taken up with views and

recommendations in relation to the general policy of the party: it

is only of what relates to the repudiation of Mr. Tyler that this

history intends to speak: for government with us is a struggle of

parties: and it is necessary to know how parties are put up, and

put down, in order to understand how the government is managed.

An opening paragraph of the address set forth that, for twelve

years the whigs had carried on a contest for the regulation of

the currency, the equalization of exchanges, the economical

administration of the finances, and the advancement of industry--all

to be accomplished by means of a national bank--declaring these

objects to be misunderstood by no one--and the bank itself held to

be secured in the presidential election, and its establishment the

main object of the extra session. The address then goes on to tell

how these cherished hopes were frustrated:

"It is with profound and poignant regret that we find ourselves

called upon to invoke your attention to this point. Upon the

great and leading measure touching this question, our anxious

endeavors to respond to the earnest prayer of the nation have

been frustrated by an act as unlooked for as it is to be

lamented. We grieve to say to you that by the exercise of that

power in the constitution which has ever been regarded with

suspicion, and often with odium, by the people--a power which

we had hoped was never to be exhibited on this subject, by a

whig President--we have been defeated in two attempts to create

a fiscal agent, which the wants of the country had demonstrated

to us, in the most absolute form of proof, to be eminently

necessary and proper in the present emergency. Twice have we,

with the utmost diligence and deliberation, matured a plan

for the collection, safe-keeping and disbursing of the public

moneys through the agency of a corporation adapted to that end,

and twice has it been our fate to encounter the opposition

of the President, through the application of the veto power.

The character of that veto in each case, the circumstances in

which it was administered, and the grounds upon which it has

met the decided disapprobation of your friends in Congress,

are sufficiently apparent in the public documents and the

debates relating to it. This subject has acquired a painful

interest with us, and will doubtless acquire it with you, from

the unhappy developments with which it is accompanied. We are

constrained to say, that we find no ground to justify us in the

conviction that the veto of the President has been interposed

on this question solely upon conscientious and well-considered

opinions of constitutional scruple as to his duty in the case

presented. On the contrary, too many proofs have been forced

upon our observation to leave us free from the apprehension,

that the President has permitted himself to be beguiled into an

opinion that, by this exhibition of his prerogative, he might be

able to divert the policy of his administration into a channel

which should lead to new political combinations, and accomplish

results which must overthrow the present divisions of party in

the country; and finally produce a state of things which those

who elected him, at least, have never contemplated. We have seen

from an early period of the session, that the whig party did

not enjoy the confidence of the President. With mortification

we have observed that his associations more sedulously aimed

at a free communion with those who have been busy to prostrate

our purposes, rather than those whose principles seemed to

be most identified with the power by which he was elected.

We have reason to believe that he has permitted himself to

be approached, counselled and influenced by those who have

manifested least interest in the success of whig measures. What

were represented to be his opinions and designs have been freely

and even insolently put forth in certain portions, and those not

the most reputable, of the public press, in a manner that ought

to be deemed offensive to his honor, as it certainly was to the

feelings of those who were believed to be his friends. In the

earnest endeavor manifested by the members of the whig party in

Congress to ascertain specifically the President's notions in

reference to the details of such a bill relating to a fiscal

agent as would be likely to meet his approbation, the frequent

changes of his opinion, and the singular want of consistency in

his views, have baffled his best friends, and rendered the hope

of adjustment with him impossible."

"The plan of an exchange bank, such as was reported after the

first veto, the President is understood by more than one member

of Congress to whom he expressed his opinion, to have regarded

as a favorite measure. It was in view of this opinion, suggested

as it is in his first veto, and after using every proper effort

to ascertain his precise views upon it, that the committee of

the House of Representatives reported their second bill. It made

provision for a bank without the privilege of local discounting,

and was adapted as closely as possible to that class of

mercantile operations which the first veto message describes

with approbation, and which that paper specifically illustrates

by reference to the 'dealings in the exchanges' of the Bank

of the United States in 1833, which the President affirms

'amounted to upwards of one hundred millions of dollars.' Yet

this plan, when it was submitted to him, was objected to on a

new ground. The last veto has narrowed the question of a bank

down to the basis of the sub-treasury scheme, and it is obvious

from the opinions of that message that the country is not to

expect any thing better than the exploded sub-treasury, or some

measure of the same character, from Mr. TYLER. In the midst

of all these varieties of opinion, an impenetrable mystery

seemed to hang over the whole question. There was no such

frank interchange of sentiment as ought to characterize the

intercourse of a President and his friends, and the last persons

in the government who would seem to have been intrusted with his

confidence on those embarrassing topics were the constitutional

advisers which the laws had provided for him. In this review of

the position into which the late events have thrown the whig

party, it is with profound sorrow we look to the course pursued

by the President. He has wrested from us one of the best fruits

of a long and painful struggle, and the consummation of a

glorious victory; he has even perhaps thrown us once more upon

the field of political strife, not weakened in numbers, nor

shorn of the support of the country, but stripped of the arms

which success had placed in our hands, and left again to rely

upon that high patriotism which for twelve years sustained us in

a conflict of unequalled asperity, and which finally brought us

to the fulfilment of those brilliant hopes which he has done so

much to destroy."

Having thus shown the loss, by the conduct of the President, of all

the main fruits of a great victory after a twelve years' contest,

the address goes on to look to the future, and to inquire what is

to be the conduct of the party in such unexpected and disastrous

circumstances? and the first answer to that inquiry is, to establish

a permanent separation of the whig party from Mr. Tyler, and to

wash their hands of all accountability for his acts.

"In this state of things, the whigs will naturally look with

anxiety to the future, and inquire what are the actual relations

between the President and those who brought him into power;

and what, in the opinion of their friends in Congress, should

be their course hereafter. On both of these questions we feel

it to be our duty to address you in perfect frankness and

without reserve, but, at the same time, with due respect to

others. In regard to the first, we are constrained to say that

the President, by the course he has adopted in respect to the

application of the veto power to two successive bank charters,

each of which there was just reason to believe would meet his

approbation; by his withdrawal of confidence from his real

friends in Congress and from the members of his cabinet; by

his bestowal of it upon others notwithstanding their notorious

opposition to leading measures of his administration, has

voluntarily separated himself from those by whose exertions

and suffrages he was elevated to that office through which he

reached his present exalted station. The existence of this

unnatural relation is as extraordinary as the annunciation of

it is painful and mortifying. What are the consequences and

duties which grow out of it? The first consequence is, that

those who brought the President into power can be no longer,

in any manner or degree, justly held responsible or blamed for

the administration of the executive branch of the government;

and that the President and his advisers should be exclusively

hereafter deemed accountable."

Then comes the consideration of what they are to do? and after

inculcating, in the ancient form, the laudable policy of supporting

their obnoxious President when he was '_right_,' and opposing him

when he was '_wrong_'--phrases repeated by all parties, to be

complied with by none--they go on to recommend courage and unity

to their discomfited ranks--to promise a new victory at the next

election; and with it the establishment of all their measures,

crowned by a national bank.

"The conduct of the President has occasioned bitter

mortification and deep regret. Shall the party, therefore,

yielding to sentiments of despair, abandon its duty, and submit

to defeat and disgrace? Far from suffering such dishonorable

consequences, the very disappointment which it has unfortunately

experienced should serve only to redouble its exertions, and

to inspire it with fresh courage to persevere with a spirit

unsubdued and a resolution unshaken, until the prosperity of

the country is fully re-established, and its liberties firmly

secured against all danger from the abuses, encroachments or

usurpations of the executive department of the government."

This was the manifesto, so far as it concerns the repudiation of Mr.

Tyler, which the whig members of Congress put forth: it was answered

(under the name of an address to his constituents) by Mr. Cushing,

in what may be called a counter manifesto: for it was on the same

subject as the other, and counter to it at all points--especially

on the fundamental point of, _which party the President was to

belong to!_ the manifesto of the whig members assigning him to the

democracy--the counter manifesto claiming him for the whigs! In

this, Mr. Cushing followed the lead of Mr. Webster in his letter of

resignation: and, in fact, the whole of his pleading (for such it

was) was an amplification of Mr. Webster's letter to the editors

of the National Intelligencer, and of the one to Messrs. Bates

and Choate, and of another to Mr. Ketchum, of New York. The first

part of the address of Mr. Cushing, is to justify the President

for changing his course on the fiscal corporation bill; and this

attempted in a thrust at Mr Clay thus:

"A caucus dictatorship has been set up in Congress, which,

not satisfied with ruling that body to the extinguishment of

individual freedom of opinion, seeks to control the President in

his proper sphere of duty, denounces him before you for refusing

to surrender his independence and his conscience to its decree,

and proposes, through subversion of the fundamental provisions

and principles of the constitution, to usurp the command of

the government. It is a question, therefore, in fact, not of

legislative measures, but of revolution. What is the visible,

and the only professed, origin of these extraordinary movements?

The whig party in Congress have been extremely desirous to

cause a law to be enacted at the late session, incorporating a

national bank. Encountering, in the veto of the President, a

constitutional obstacle to the enactment of such a law at the

late session, a certain portion of the whig party, represented

by the caucus dictatorship, proceeds then, in the beginning, to

denounce the President. Will you concur in this denunciation of

the President?"

This was the accusation, first hinted at by Mr. Rives in the

Senate, afterwards obscurely intimated in Mr. Webster's letter to

the two Massachusetts senators; and now broadly stated by Mr.

Cushing; without, however, naming the imputed dictator; which was,

in fact, unnecessary. Every body knew that Mr. Clay was the person

intended; with what justice, not to repeat proofs already given,

let the single fact answer, that these caucus meetings (for such

there were) were all subsequent to Mr. Tyler's change on the bank

question! and in consequence of it! and solely with a view to get

him back! and that by conciliation until after the second veto. In

this thrust at Mr. Clay Mr. Cushing was acting in the interest of

Mr. Webster's feelings as well as those of Tyler; for since 1832

Mr. Clay and Mr. Webster had not been amicable, and barely kept

in civil relations by friends, who had frequently to interpose to

prevent, or compose outbreaks; and even to make in the Senate formal

annunciation of reconciliation effected between them. But the design

required Mr. Clay to be made the cause of the rejection of the bank

bills; and also required him to be crippled as the leader of the

anti-administration whigs. In this view Mr. Cushing resumes:

"When Lord Grenville broke up the whig party of England, in

1807, by the unseasonable pressure of some great question, and

its consequent loss, 'Why,' said Sheridan, 'did they not put it

off as Fox did? I have heard of men running their heads against

a wall; but this is the first time I ever heard of men building

a wall, and squaring it, and clamping it, for the express

purpose of knocking out their brains against it.' This _bon mot_

of Sheridan's will apply to the whig party in Congress, if, on

account of the failure of the bank bill at the late session,

they secede from the administration, and set up as a _Tertium

Quid_ in the government, neither administration nor opposition."

Having presented this spectacle of their brains beaten out against a

wall of their own raising, if the whig party should follow Mr. Clay

into opposition to the Tyler-Webster administration, Mr. Cushing

took the party on another tack--that of the bird in the hand, which

is worth two in the bush; and softly commences with them on the

profit of using the presidential power while they had it:

"Is it wise for the whig party to throw away the actuality of

power for the current four years? If so, for what object? For

some contingent _possibility_ four years hence? If so, what one?

Is the contingent possibility of advancing to power four years

hence any one particular man in its ranks, whoever he may be,

and however eminently deserving, a sufficient object to induce

the whig party to abdicate the power which itself as a body

possesses now?"

And changing again, and from seduction to terror, he presents

to them, as the most appalling of all calamities, the possible

election of a democratic President at the next election through the

deplorable divisions of the whig party.

"If so, will its abdication of power now tend to promote that

object? Is it not, on the contrary, the very means to make sure

the success of some candidate of the democratic party?"

Proceeding to the direct defence of the President, he then boldly

absolves him from any violation of faith in rejecting the two bank

bills. Thus:

"In refusing to sign those bills, then, he violated no

engagement, and committed no act of perfidy in the sense of a

forfeited pledge."

And advancing from exculpation to applause, he makes it an act

of conscience in Mr. Tyler in refusing to sign them, and places

him under the imperious command of a triple power--conscience,

constitution, oath; without the faculty of doing otherwise than he

did.

"But, in this particular, the President, as an upright

man, could do no otherwise than he did. He conscientiously

_disapproved_ those bills. And the constitution, which he was

sworn to obey, _commands_ him, expressly and peremptorily

commands him, if he do not approve of any bill presented to him

for his signature, to return it to the House of Congress in

which it originated. 'If he approve he shall sign it: _if not_,

he SHALL return it,' are the words of the constitution. Would

you as conscientious men yourselves, forbid the President of the

United States to have a conscience?"

Acquittal of the President of all hand in the initiation of the

second bill, is the next task of Mr. Cushing, and he boldly essays

it.

"The President, it is charged, trifled with one or more of the

retiring secretaries. Of what occurred at cabinet meetings, the

public knows and can know nothing. But, as to the main point,

whether he initiated the fiscal corporation bill. This idea is

incompatible with the dates and facts above stated, which show

that the consideration of a new bill was forced on the President

by members of Congress. It is, also, incompatible with the fact

that, on Tuesday, the 17th of August, as it is said by the

Secretary of War, the President expressed to him doubt as to

any bill."

Now what happened in these cabinet meetings is well known to the

public from the concurrent statement of three of the secretaries,

and from presidential declarations to members of Congress, and these

statements cover the main point of the initiation of the second

bill by the President himself; and that not on the 18th, but the

16th of August, and not only to his cabinet but to Mr. Stuart of

Virginia the same evening; and that it was two days afterwards that

the two members of Congress called upon him (Messrs. Sergeant and

Berrien), not to force him to take a bill, but to be forced by him

to run his own bill through in three days. Demurring to the idea

that the President could be forced by members of Congress to adopt

an obnoxious bill, the brief statement is, that it is not true. The

same is to be said of the quoted remark of the Secretary at War, Mr.

Bell, that the President expressed to him a doubt whether he would

sign any bank bill--leaving out the astonishment of the Secretary

at that declaration, who had been requested by the President the

day before to furnish facts in favor of the bill; and who came to

deliver a statement of these facts thus prepared, and in great

haste, upon request; and when brought, received with indifference!

and a doubt expressed whether he would sign any bill. Far from

proving that the President had a consistent doubt upon the subject,

which is the object of the mutilated quotation from Mr. Bell--it

proves just the contrary! proves that the President was for the

bill, and began it himself, on the 16th; and was laying an anchor to

windward for its rejection on the 17th! having changed during the

night.

The retirement of all the cabinet ministers but one, and that

for such reasons as they gave, is treated by Mr. Cushing as a

thing of no signification, and of no consequence to any body but

themselves. He calls it a common fact which has happened under

many administrations, and of no permanent consequence, provided

good successors are appointed. All that is right enough where

secretaries retire for personal reasons, such as are often seen; but

when they retire because they impeach the President of great moral

delinquency, and refuse to remain with him on that account, the

state of the case is altered. He and they are public officers; and

officers at the head of the government; and their public conduct is

matter of national concern; and the people have a right to inquire

and to know the public conduct of public men. The fact that Mr.

Webster remained is considered as overbalancing the withdrawal of

all the others; and is thus noticed by Mr. Cushing:

"And that, whilst those gentlemen have retired, yet the

Secretary of State, in whose patriotism and ability you have

more immediate cause to confide, has declared that he knows

no sufficient cause for such separation, and continues to

co-operate cordially with the President in the discharge of the

duties of that station which he fills with so much honor to

himself and advantage to the country."

Certainly it was a circumstance of high moment to Mr. Tyler that

one of his cabinet remained with him. It was something in such a

general withdrawing, and for such reasons as were given, and was

considered a great sacrifice on the part of Mr. Webster at the time.

As such it was well remembered a short time afterwards, when Mr.

Webster, having answered the purposes for which he was retained, was

compelled to follow the example of his old colleagues. The address

of Mr. Cushing goes on to show itself, in terms, to be an answer to

the address of the whig party--saying:

"Yet an address has gone forth from a portion of the members of

Congress, purporting to be the _unanimous_ act of a meeting of

THE whigs of Congress, which, besides arraigning the President

on various allegations of fact and surmises not fact, recommends

such radical changes of the constitution."

The address itself of the whig party is treated as the work of Mr.

Clay--as an emanation of that caucus dictatorship in Congress of

which he was always the embodied idea. He says:

"Those changes, if effected, would concentrate the chief powers

of government in the hands of that of which this document

(the whig address) itself is an emanation, namely a caucus

dictatorship of Congress."

This defence by Mr. Cushing, the letters of Mr. Webster, and all the

writers in the interests of Mr. Tyler himself, signified nothing

against the concurrent statements of the retiring senators, and

the confirmatory statements of many members of Congress. The whig

party recoiled from him. Instead of that "whig President, whig

Congress, and whig people," formed into a unit, with the vision of

which Mr. Webster had been induced to remain when his colleagues

retired--instead of this unity, there was soon found diversity

enough. The whig party remained with Mr. Clay; the whig Secretary

of State returned to Massachusetts, inquiring, "_where am I to

go?_" The whig defender of Mr. Tyler went to China, clothed with a

mission; and returning, found that greatest calamity, the election

of a democratic President, to be a fixed fact; and being so fixed,

he joined it, and got another commission thereby: while Mr. Tyler

himself, who was to have been the Roman cement of this whig unity,

continued his march to the democratic camp--arrived there--knocked

at the gate--asked to be let in: and was refused. The national

democratic Baltimore convention would not recognize him.

Thirty Years' View (Vol. 2 of 2) or, A History of the Working of the American Government for Thirty Years, from 1820 to 1850 · 第 85 / 202 章