REPEAL OF THE BANKRUPT ACT: ATTACK OF MR. CUSHING ON MR. CLAY:
ITS REBUKE.
This measure was immediately commenced in the House of
Representatives, and pressed with vigor to its conclusion. Mr.
Everett, of Vermont, brought in the repeal bill on leave, and
after a strenuous contest from a tenacious minority, it was passed
by the unexpected vote of two to one--to be precise--140 to 72.
In the Senate it had the same success, and greater, being passed
by nearly three to one--34 to 13: and the repealing act being
carried to Mr. Tyler, he signed it as promptly as he had signed
the bankrupt act itself. This was a splendid victory for the
minority who had resisted the passage of the bill, and for the
people who had condemned it. The same members, sitting in the same
chairs, who a year and a half before, passed the act, now repealed
it. The same President who had recommended it in a message, and
signed the act as soon as it passed, now signed the act which put
an end to its existence. A vicious and criminal law, corruptly
passed, and made the means of passing two other odious measures,
was itself now brought to judgment, condemned, and struck from the
statute-book; and this great result was the work of the people.
All the authorities--legislative, executive, and judicial--had
sustained the act. Only one judge in the whole United States (R. W.
Wells, Esq., United States district judge for Missouri), condemned
it as unconstitutional. All the rest sustained it, and he was
overruled. But the intuitive sense of honor and justice in the
people revolted at it. They rose against it in masses, and condemned
it in every form--in public meetings, in legislative resolves, in
the press, in memorials to Congress, and in elections. The tables
of the two Houses were loaded with petitions and remonstrances,
demanding the repeal, and the members were simply the organs of the
people in pronouncing it. Never had the popular voice been more
effective--never more meritoriously raised. The odious act was not
only repealed, but its authors rebuked, and compelled to pronounce
the rebuke upon themselves. It was a proud and triumphant instance
of the innate, upright sentiment of the people, rising above all
the learning and wisdom of the constituted authorities. Nor was
it the only instance. The bankrupt act of forty years before,
though strictly a bankrupt act as known to the legislation of all
commercial countries, was repealed within two years after its
passage--and that by the democratic administration of Mr. Jefferson:
this of 1841, a bankrupt act only in name--an act for the abolition
of debts at the will of the debtor in reality--had a still shorter
course, and a still more ignominious death. Two such condemnations
of acts for getting rid of debts, are honorable to the people,
and bespeak a high degree of reverence for the sacred obligations
between debtor and creditor; and while credit is due to many of the
party discriminated as federal in 1800, and as whig in 1840 (but
always the same), for their assistance in condemning these acts,
yet as party measures, the honor of resisting their passage and
conducting their repeal, in both instances, belongs to the democracy.
The repeal of this act, though carried by such large majorities, and
so fully in accordance with the will of the people, was a bitter
mortification to the administration. It was their measure, and one
of their measures of "relief" to the country. Mr. Webster had drawn
the bill, and made the main speech for it in the Senate, before he
went into the cabinet. Mr. Tyler had recommended it in a special
message, and promptly gave it his approving signature. To have to
sign a repeal bill, so soon, condemning what he had recommended and
approved, was most unpalatable: to see a measure intended for the
"relief" of the people repulsed by those it was intended to relieve,
was a most unwelcome vision. From the beginning the repeal was
resisted, and by a species of argument, not addressed to the merits
of the measure, but to the state of parties, the conduct of men, and
the means of getting the government carried on. Mr. Caleb Cushing
was the organ of the President, and of the Secretary of State in the
House; and, identifying himself with these two in his attacks and
defences, he presented a sort of triumvirate in which he became the
spokesman of the others. In this character he spoke often, and with
a zeal which outran discretion, and brought him into much collision
with the House, and kept him much occupied in defending himself,
and the two eminent personages who were not in a position to speak
for themselves. A few passages from these speeches, from both sides,
will be given to show the state of men and parties at that time,
and how much personal considerations had to do with transacting the
business of Congress. Thus:
"Mr. Cushing, who was entitled to the floor, addressed the House
at length, in reply to the remarks made by various gentlemen,
during the last three weeks, in relation to the present
administration. He commenced by remarking that the President
of the United States was accused of obstructing the passage
of whig measures of relief, and was charged with uncertainty
and vacillation of purpose. As these charges had been made
against the President, he felt it to be his duty to ask the
country who was chargeable with vacillation and uncertainty of
purpose, and the destruction of measures of relief? Who were
they who, with sacrilegious hands, were seeking to expunge
the last measure of the 'ill-starred' extra session from the
statute-books? Forty-seven whigs, he answered, associated with
the democratic party in the House, and formed a coalition to
blot out that measure. He repeated it: forty-seven whigs formed
a coalition with the democrats to expunge all the remains of the
extra session which existed. For three weeks past, there had
been constantly poured forth the most eloquent denunciations
of the President, of the Secretary of State, and of himself.
He might imagine, as was said by Warren Hastings when such
torrents of denunciation were poured out upon him, that there
was some foundation for the imputation of the orators. He should
inquire into the merits of the political questions, and into the
accusations made against him. He was told that he had thrown a
firebrand into the House--that he had brought a tomahawk here.
He denied it. He had done no such thing. It was not true that he
commenced the debate which was carried on; and when gentlemen
said that he had volunteered remarks out of the regular order,
in reply to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. ARNOLD], he
told them that they were not judges. His mode of defence was
counter-attack, and it was for him to judge of the argument. If
he carried the war into the enemy's camp, the responsibility was
with those who commenced the attack."
Mr. Clay, though retiring from Congress, and not a member of the
House of Representatives, was brought into the debate, and accused
of setting up a dictatorship, and baffling or controlling the
constitutional administration:
"The position of the two great parties, and those few who
stood here to defend the acts of the administration, was
peculiar. Our government was now undergoing a test in a new
particular. This was the first time that the administration of
the government had ever devolved upon the Vice-President. Now,
he had called upon the people and the House to adapt themselves
to that contingency, and support the constitution; for with the
'constitutional fact' was associated the party fact; and whilst
the President was not a party chief, there was a party chief of
the party in power. The question was, whether there could be
two administrations--one, a constitutional administration, by
the President; and the other a party administration, exercised
by a party chief in the capitol? With this issue before
him--whether the President, or the party leader--the chief in
the White House, or the chief in the capitol--should carry on
the administration--he felt it to be a duty which he owed to the
government of his country to give his aid to the constitutional
chief. That was the real question which had pervaded all our
contests thus far."
Such an unparliamentary reference to Mr. Clay, a member of a
different House, could not pass without reply in a place where he
could not speak for himself, but where his friends were abundant.
Mr. Garret Davis, of Kentucky, performed that office, and found in
the fifteen years' support of Mr. Clay by Mr. Cushing (previous to
his sudden adhesion to Mr. Tyler at the extra session), matter of
personal recrimination:
"Mr. Garret Davis replied to the portion of the speech of the
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. CUSHING] relating to the
alleged dictation of the ex-senator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY].
The gentleman from Massachusetts declared that there were but
two alternatives--one, a constitutional administration, under
the lead of the President; and the other, a faction, under the
lead of the senator from Kentucky. Such remarks were no more
nor less than calumnies on that distinguished man; and he would
ask the gentleman what principle Mr. Clay had changed, by which
he had obtained the ill-will of the gentleman, after having had
his support for fifteen years previous to the extra session?
He asked, Did the senator from Kentucky bring forward any new
measure at the extra session? Did he enter upon any untrodden
path, in order to embarrass the path of John Tyler? No, was the
answer."
Reverting to the attacks on the administration, Mr. Cushing
considered them as the impotent blows of a faction, beating its
brains out against the immovable rock of the Tyler government:
"It was now nearly two years since, in accordance with a vote
of the people, a change took place in the administration
of the government. Since that time, an internecine war had
arisen in the dominant party. The war had now been pursued
for about one year and a half; but, in the midst of it, the
federal government, with its fixed constitution, had stood,
like the god Terminus, defying the progress of those who were
rushing against it. The country had seen one party throw itself
against the immovable rock of the constitution. What had been
the consequence? The party thus hurling itself against the
constitutional rock was dashed to atoms."
Mr. Cushing did not confine his attempts to gain adherents to
Mr. Tyler, to the terrors of denunciations and anathemas: he
superadded the seductive arguments of persuasion and enticement, and
carried his overtures so far as to be charged with putting up the
administration favor to auction, and soliciting bidders. He had said:
"Now he would suppose a man called to be President of the United
States. It mattered not whether he was elected, or whether
the office devolved upon him by contingencies contemplated in
the constitution. He was President. What, then, was his first
duty? To consider how to discharge his functions. He (Mr. C.)
thought the President was bound to look around at the facts,
and see by what circumstances he was supported. Gentlemen might
talk of treason; much had been said on that subject; but the
question for the individual who might happen to be President to
consider was, How is the government to be carried out? By whose
aid? He (Mr. Cushing) would say to that party now having the
majority (and whom, on account of that circumstance, it was more
important he should address), that if they gave him no aid, it
was his duty to seek aid from their adversaries. If the whigs
continue to blockade the wheels of the government, he trusted
that the democrats would be patriotic enough to carry it on."
Up to this point Mr. Cushing had addressed himself to the whigs to
come to the support of Mr. Tyler: despairing of success there he now
turned to the democracy. This open attempt to turn from one party
to the other, and to take whichever he could get, turned upon him a
storm of ridicule and reproach. Mr. Thompson, of Indiana, said:
"The gentleman seemed to have assumed the character of
auctioneer for this bankrupt administration, and he took it that
the gentleman would be entitled to a good part of its effects.
This was the first time in the history of any civilized country
that a government had, through the person of its acknowledged
leader--a man doing most of its speaking, and much of its
thinking--stalked into a representative assembly, and openly
put up the administration in the common market to the highest
bidder."
But Mr. Cushing did not limit himself to seductive appliances in
turning to the democracy for support to Mr. Tyler: he dealt out
denunciation to them also, and menaced them with the fate of the
shattered whig party if they did not come to the rescue. On this Mr.
Thompson remarked:
"The gentleman also told the minority that they would be dashed
to pieces, like their predecessors, unless they came into the
measures of the President; but it yet remained to be seen
whether he would get a bid. Judging from the expression of
opinion by the leading organ of the democratic party, he (Mr.
T.) was inclined to think that no bid would be offered by a
portion of that party. He thought, from givings-out, in various
quarters, that the President would ultimately have to resort to
this 'constitutional fact,' to defend himself against a large
portion even of that party. Indeed, it was doubtful whether
there would be bidders from either side."
Mr. Cushing had said that there were persons connected with the
administration who would yet be heard of for the Presidency, and
seemed to present that contingency also as a reason why support
should be given it. To this intimation Mr. Thompson made an
indignant reply:
"He recollected well--though he was very young at the time, and
not prepared to take part in the political discussions of the
day--that, during the administration of the distinguished and
venerable gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. ADAMS] there arose
in this country a party, who, upon the bare supposition (which
was dispelled on an examination of the facts)--upon the bare
suspicion that there was what was called a bargain, intrigue,
and management between the then head of the administration,
and another distinguished citizen who was a member of his
cabinet, made it a subject of the most bitter and vindictive
denunciation. Yet, notwithstanding that this part of our
history was still fresh in the recollection of the gentleman
from Massachusetts--when we see, in this age of republican
liberty, a gentleman descended from a line of illustrious
Revolutionary ancestry--coming, too, almost from the very Cradle
of Liberty, and acting as the organ of the administration on
this floor--boldly, shamelessly, and unblushingly offering
the spoils of office as a consideration for party support,
we may well have cause for alarm. How many clerkships were
there in Philadelphia to be disposed of in this manner? From
the collector down to the lowest tide-waiter, the power of
appointment was to be directed for the purpose of operating on
the coming presidential contest. Who, now, would charge the whig
party with shaping their measures with a view to the elevation
of a particular individual, after hearing the bold and open
avowal from the gentleman that the present administration would
shape their measures for the purpose of operating on the coming
contest? But (said Mr. T.) there was something exceedingly
ridiculous in the idea of the administration party--and such a
party, too!--coming into the Representative hall, and telling
its members that it had the power to dispose of the various
candidates for the Presidency at its pleasure, and controlling
the votes of nearly three millions of freemen by means of its
veto power, and the power of appointment and removal."
Mr. Cushing had belonged to the federal party, since called whig,
up to the time that he joined Mr. Tyler, and had been all that time
a fierce assailant of the democratic party: the energy with which
he now attacked that party, and the warmth with which he wooed the
other, brought on him many reproaches, some rough and cutting--some
tender and deprecatory; as this from Mr. Thompson:
"The gentleman exulted in the fate of the whig party, and told
them with much satisfaction that their party was destroyed. Now,
let him ask the gentleman, in the utmost sincerity of his heart,
whether he did not feel some little mortification and regret
when he saw the banner under which he had so often rallied
trailing in the dust, and trampled under the feet of those
against whom he had fought for so many years?"
Foremost of the whigs in zeal and activity, Mr. Cushing, as one
of the most prominent men of the party, was appointed when the
presidential vote of 1840 was counted in the House, as one of the
committee of two to wait upon General Harrison and formally make
known to him his election. In two months afterwards General Harrison
died--Mr. Tyler became President and quit the whigs: Mr. Cushing
quit at the same time; and not content with quitting, threw all the
obloquy upon them which, for fifteen years, he had lavished upon
the democracy; and in quitting the whigs he reversed his conduct
in all the measures of his life, and without giving a reason for
the change in a single instance. Mr. Garret Davis summed up these
changes in a scathing peroration, from which some extracts are here
given:
"The gentleman occupies a strange position and puts forth
extraordinary notions, considering the measures and principles
which he always, until the commencement of this administration,
advocated with so much zeal and ability I had read many of
his speeches before I knew him. I admired his talents and
attainments; I approved of the soundness of his views, and
was instructed and fortified in my own. But he is wonderfully
metamorphosed; and I think if he will examine the matter
deliberately, he will find it to be quite as true, that he has
broken his neck politically in jumping his somersets, as that
'the whig party has knocked out its brains against the fixed
fact.' He tells us that party is nothing but an association of
men struggling for power; and that he contemns measures--that
measures are not principles. The gentleman must have been
reading the celebrated treatise, 'The Prince,' for such dicta
are of the school of Machiavelli; and his sudden and total
abandonment of all the principles as well as measures, to which
he was as strongly pledged as any whig, good and true, proves
that he had studied his lesson to some purpose. At the extra
session of 1837, he opposed the sub-treasury in a very elaborate
speech, in which we find these passages: 'We are to have a
government paper currency, recognizable by the government of
the United States, and employed in its dealings; but it is to
be irredeemable government paper? 'If the scheme were not too
laughingly absurd to spend time in arguing about it seriously;
if the mischiefs of a government paper currency had not had an
out-and-out trial both in Europe and America, I might discuss it
as a question of political economy. But I will not occupy the
committee in this way. I am astounded at the fatuity of any set
of men who can think of any such project.' This is what he said
of the sub-treasury. Now, he is the unscrupulous advocate of
the exchequer, a measure embodying both the sub-treasury and a
great organized government bank, and fraught with more frightful
dangers than his own excited imagination had pictured in the
whole three years.
"He was one of the stanchest supporters of a United States bank.
He characterized 'the refusal of the late President (Jackson) to
sign the bill re-chartering the bank, like the removal of the
deposits, to be in defiance and violation of the popular will,'
and characterized as felicitous the periods of time when we
possessed a national bank, and as calamitous the periods that we
were without them, saying--'Twice for long periods of time, have
we tried a national bank, and in each period it has fulfilled
its appointed purpose of supplying a safe and equal currency,
and of regulating and controlling the issues of the State
banks. Twice have we tried for a few years to drag on without a
national bank, and each of these experiments has been a season
of disaster and confusion.' And yet, sir, he has denied that he
was ever the supporter of a bank of the United States, and is
now one of the most rabid revilers of such an institution.
"He was for Mr. Clay's land bill; and he has abandoned, and
now contemns it. No man has been more frequent and unsparing
in his denunciations of General Jackson; and now he is the
sycophantic eulogist of the old hero. He was the unflinching
defender of the constitutional rights and powers of Congress.
This administration has not only resorted to the most flagitious
abuse of the veto power, but has renewed every other assault,
open or insidious, of Presidents Jackson and Van Buren upon
Congress, which he, at the time, so indignantly rebuked; and he
now justifies them all. He has gone far ahead of the extremest
parasites of executive power. John Tyler vetoed four acts of
Congress which the gentleman had voted for, and strange, by
his subtle sophistry, he defended each of the vetoes; and most
strange, when the House, in conformity to the provisions of
the constitution, voted again upon the measures, his vote was
recorded in their favor, and to overrule the very vetoes of
which he had just been the venal advocate."
This versatility of Mr. Cushing, in the support of vetoes, was
one of the striking qualities developed in his present change of
parties. He had condemned the exercise of that power in General
Jackson in the case of the Bank of the United States, and dealt
out upon him unmeasured denunciation for that act: now he became
the supporter of all the vetoes of Mr. Tyler, even when those
vetoes condemned his own votes, and when they condemned the fiscal
bank charter which Mr. Tyler himself had devised and arranged for
Congress. He became the champion, unrivalled, of Mr. Webster and Mr.
Clay, defending them in all things; but now in attacking Mr. Clay
whom he had so long, and until so recently, so closely, followed and
loudly applauded, he became obnoxious to the severe denunciations of
that gentleman's friends.