ever, be concealed from the view of all men of observation, that the profligacy which the paper system has introduced among us, has already made deep inroads upon the resources of some of the States, and bids fair to prove a heavy source of future taxation. Whether another generation of legislators will be inclined to see themselves and their constituents impoverished, without making a serious struggle to relieve themselves from the burdens which have been, in so many cases, improvidently imposed, cannot be foreseen. The most prudent and advisable course undoubtedly is, to avoid any occasion for such efforts by forecast and economy in all public expenditures. The experience of the English nation, in the accucumulation of debt, ought not to be disregarded. A general condition of poverty and degradation cannot be fastened upon the people of this country, by a system of exorbitant taxes levied upon the many to support the luxury of the few. No standing armies can be kept on foot, among us, for the purpose of repressing the desperation of want. The greatest happiness of the greatest number is the only safe maxim, and, in the long run, will prove as advantageous to the security of the rich as it will be beneficial to the comfort of the poor and the industrious. SONNET. ANDREW JACKSON. Come, stand the nearest to thy country's sire, Sublimer far than Kings by birth may claim, And battled 'gainst the wrong; thy holiest aim Misconstrued motives and unmeasured blame. Thy worth shall with thy country's name endure, And greener grow thy fame through every coming year. MARCH 4, 1839. THE HEART'S TRUST. BY MRS. DA PONTE. I trust in thee! I trust in all That doth my mind, my soul enthral Truth lives within thy thoughtful eye; Nay, take not thou away thy hand! Thou art my dream of youth. And though I may not, must not show Feelings that from thy sight I hide, I hear thy voice when others speak, It comes in hours of revelry, In midnight dreams, in midnight glee I drink the sound! And then they deem Of mirth and levity! Well do I feign joy's mad excess, As through that mighty throng I press, But only trust in thee! . DEFALCATIONS." The people of the United States are at last favored with the result of the labors of the far-famed Committee of Investigation. After two months consumed in spreading a partizan version through the land, we are permitted to behold the proofs on which they depend to establish the bold charges so widely, and, we may say, so recklessly, disseminated. Their bulky document is at length forthcoming. "Verbosa et grandis epistola venit, E Capreis." From the secret chambers of this new inquisition, (for such its conduct, its acts, its extreme injustice, its unmanly and secret mode of proceeding, so totally at variance with American character and American institutions, prove that it was,) from these six members of Congress-than whom no six ever so wantonly neglected to perform a duty they had assumed, or so unjustly perverted a high trust to malignant and unworthy purposes-we have a volume of seven hundred and eighty-six pages, printed with the public money, and diffused through the country at the public expense. We do not characterize it unjustly. No man, devoid of the heated feelings of a partizan, can look on the proceedings or productions of this Coinmittee without mingled feelings of contempt and pity. We speak thus of this document, after a perusal as careful as its tedious pages would permit. We were anxious to arrive at the truth-to know whether, in spite of the unfair conduct of this Committee, its disclosures might not bring proofs of misconduct against public functionaries. We were prepared to pass the severest judgment against any officer of the people who might be found censurable or corrupt, notwithstanding the partiality of the inquest by which the charges were preferred. There are few who shall commence a similar perusal, that will be found willing to persevere through the same unprofitable task. Probably it was part of the design of the Committee that they should not. Probably it was thought best that their "conclusions" should be supported by a bundle of documents so complicated and tedious, that no human patience would essay. the labor of proving, by a comparison with the evidence, their falsehood or truth. We pronounce, however, without hesitation, that no candid and honorable man, who shall read this book or report, will hesitate to say that the whole proceeding has been most * Report of the Committee of Investigation, chosen by ballot, by the House of Representatives, January 17th and 19th, 1839, on the subject of the defalcations of Samuel Swartwout and others, and the correctness of the returns of collectors and receivers of the public money. partial and unjust; that the Committee have been grossly negligent in the manner and extent of their investigation, wholly omitting to do that which Congress and the country intended and expected would be done; and that the "conclusions" they profess to establish are totally unsupported by the evidence they have themselves adduced. The proceeding, from the beginning to the end, has been marked by a spirit of partizanship-not by a love of truth. The object of the investigation has been to obtain, if possible, some available grounds of attacking the Administration-not to inquire really and honestly into the adequacy of the existing laws that regulate the Treasury; into the mode by which frauds upon it have been successfully perpetrated; into the delinquencies of those who are really guilty but to gather evidence in secret; to concoct partial statements; to draw unjust but plausible inferences, by which they may heap censure and odium on the Treasury Department. The object has been evidently, from first to last, to criminate public officers for political purposes-not to guard or protect the Treasury. What citizen rises from the perusal of this big book with additional knowledge as to the extent of defalcations, or the means of preventing them? What lights have been thrown upon the subject to guide the future legislation of Congress? The citizen or the legislator finds nothing of this; he has, instead, a train of voluminous sophistry, the sole object of which is to abuse the individual officers of the Treasury Department, and to manufacture materials to be used in electioneering for a future President. The object, we repeat the evident object, the undisguised object of this proceeding from first to last—has been political crimination, not the search for truth. Let us look back on the commencement of these proceedings. Towards the close of the second session of the late Congress, certain correspondence was called for in regard to the receivers of public moneys; but how was it called for? Why, one-half the correspondence was demanded, while the rest was carefully excluded. The letters written by the Secretary of the Treasury are required; but no call is made for the answers he received. Every instance in which he finds occasion to complain of these officers as wanting in punctuality or correctness is thus brought before Congress; but the reply that might give an explanation or defence is excluded by the terms of the resolution. The document thus garbled, thus partial, presenting but one side, and that, the side most injurious to the officer, is circulated through the country under the supposed sanction of its being a public record, and even the self-defence of the person attacked is carefully suppressed. Is it possible to misunderstand the object of a proceeding like this? Is it possible to doubt the manner in which a scheme thus commenced would be carried through? "Ex pede Herculem "-the contemplated scheme of monstrous injustice is thus disclosed, in the unfairness by which its incipient movements are distinguished. The succeeding session of Congress was scarcely commenced, when the next steps were taken in the same partial, unjust, and factious spirit. No preliminary inquiry was made into the truth of facts-no defence, if needed, was allowed-no explanation was asked for; but days and days were consumed in long speeches, filled with the most abusive language against public officers, and especially the Secretary of the Treasury. He was charged in advance with offences for which, if they were true, it was the duty of those who charged him to present articles of impeachment. He demanded that proceeding through his friends, but it was uniformly refused. Not merely was such a trial refused, but the very demand for it was made the ground for increased detraction. To have specified official delinquency, and to venture to sustain it before the American people, and in the face of day, by unperverted evidence and facts, was a task the accusers were not hardy enough to assume. To have substituted an open and honest development of truth, for vagueness of factious declamation and appeals to the passions and interest of party, would have checked the progress of the contemplated scheme. No one can read the speeches that were made on this subject, during the first month of the late session of Congress, without pronouncing them to be unparalleled in the history of American legislation. In language they are coarse, in spirit they are uncandid and unfair, to a degree of which no previous example can be adduced. What could be the object of this? What sufficient motive for it is to be found? None can be assigned except that of prejudging the accused, of perverting the truth, of assuming in advance what was deemed expedient and useful for the purposes of party, but which would not be established by the results of an impartial and legitimate examination. We challenge the production of a parallel case, in the most heated days of political rivalry and excitement, of an instance where a high constitutional officer has been declared guilty in advance of impeachable acts, in speeches on the floor of Congress, without notice or an opportunity of defence, without a previous offer of inquiry, and in language so personal, and offensive. The conduct of the Senate towards President Jackson in 1834, odious and revolting as it was, did not venture to assume or pervert the facts on which it relied-these at least were stated, notwithstanding the rank injustice of the judgment pretended to be deduced from them. What then, we repeat, was the object of the course pursued last winter, with a spirit, and in a manner so vindictive and unjust? Was it not crimination for party purposes, instead of development of truth for the benefit of the country? |