undaunted firmness, resisted the thrice-repeated attempt to enlarge executive power and put into the hands of the President the means of corruption, disclosed in a manner calculated to alarm the Republicans of the old Dominion, and "indicating a hostility to State institutions, which augured badly for the rights of the States." In this he has considerably and steadily "walked in the footsteps of the illustrious predecessor of Mr. Van Buren, and maintained the position which in common with the whole Republican party, and indeed in common with almost the entire body of the Opposition party, he occupied in 1835. [See Note B.]

For what, then, is he to be immolated? Is it because he has been faithful to his principles, or not sufficiently submissive to party? Is it because his political morality is not sufficiently elastic, to enable him to turn a somersault at the word of command? Is it that he prefers the service and approbation of this good old Commonwealth, to all the rank and station which power can bestow, and will not "bend the pregnant hinges of the knee, that thrift may follow fawning"? Or is it that, like Aristides, he is to be ostracised for his very virtues? There are some, probably, who feel that the daily beauty and integrity of his life and conversation make them ugly, and who like the hump-backed tyrant, view him as a "spider in their path, and would have it crushed." He gloried in the proud character of a Virginian senator, conscious that he was honestly and truly discharging the responsible duties of his station, and he manfully scorned to make pledges calculated to destroy the moral force of his opposition to measures which he deemed revolutionary, disorganizing and demoralizing, and fraught with the most pernicious consequences to the prosperity of the country. We see those calling themselves Republicans, although they approve the Sub-Treasury, avowing their readiness to give him their support, if he would give assurances for future party

devotion to the administration-when the humiliating and almost disgusting spectacle is exhibited, of men who agree with him in condemning the Sub-Treasury as pernicious and who have been cheering him on in opposing it, yet demanding his expulsion from the senate with all the violence of "tone to hatred turned," only because he will not pledge himself to sustain the future acts of the administration, and promise in advance to "sink or swim" with Martin Van Buren; when we find the ultra-partisans of the Whig party requiring proofs of his party devotion to the interests of the opposition, as the condition of their support; when we see all these things, are we not fully justified in asserting that the great question, the vital principle, involved in this contest is, whether the Senate of the United States should be reduced to a mere instrument to accomplish the purposes and execute the will of the Executive of whatever party may be in the ascendant? He so regarded it. And so viewing it, the contest swelled immensely beyond a question of preference for William C. Rives for his superior talents and political orthodoxy; it became of infinitely more consequence than the defeat of the SubTreasury project, destructive as we believe that measure to be in a political, economical and financial view. It became a great question of political ethics, reaching to the foundations of the edifice of civil liberty. It involves the stability of the pillars on which our Republican institutions rest. Let it be once established as the recognised and cardinal canon of party fidelity, that no politician shall oppose the will of his partizan chief, or stubbornly refuse to accompany his opposition with professions of future support, and continued allegiance, without being shot for desertion, or branded with ignominy as an apostate, and it is obvious, that all political responsibility of the President is at an end, and every barrier to the possession of absolute power is thrown down. Representative independence and fidelity

to the people are converted into treason to the Executive, and although the externals of a Republican Government may, for awhile, be preserved, we shall have established in substance, an elective despotism in its worst form. The President, from being a servant of the people, and subject, through their organized agents, to constant control and restraint, will have become an irresponsible monarch. The Representatives of the State and of the people deserting the high function and duty of "eternal vigilance" upon his conduct, will be bound, at the hazard of being exposed to the most unsparing reprobation, as deserters and apostates, to become his apologists and flatterers, aiding and abetting him in each new encroachment upon the constitution or outrage upon the principles of free governments. As Republicans as Freemen-as Virginians, we renounce and repudiate all such servility. As Representatives, we felt that we would have betrayed the trust confided to us, if we could have consented to aid in any act which would have sanctioned it.-[See Note C.]

Why should a Senator of Virginia be desired to give any opinion, or express any preference as to who ought to be elected President of the United States two years hence? What has he to do in his character of Senator with the election of President? Nothing-emphatically nothing. As an individual citizen he may give his own suffrage as every other citizen gives his, for that individual whose election, under all the circumstances, will be most likely to advance the prosperity of the country: no matter who is elected, the Senator, if he be honest and independent, will sustain the measures and recommendations of the President, so far as they are, in his judgment, consonant to the interests and honour of the country, and the principles of the State he represents.

The seductive influences and corrupting tendencies of overgrown and constantly increasing Executive

patronage, are sufficiently potent in subduing the spirit and weakening the independence and fidelity of the representatives of the States and the people. Let us take care how we do anything to require them to manifest an obsequious and deferential submission to the Executive will, as the only passport to popular favour. We believe We believe that, under the circumstances of the case, the refusal of Virginia to sustain Mr. Rives in his present position would go far, very far, to infuse such a spirit amongst the representatives of the people. The State of Virginia has ever exerted a powerful moral influence in the admimistration of the affairs of the general Government. It has ever been her boast that she adhered to certain great principles, and sustained her public men so long as they were faithful to those principles, no matter from what quarter they were assailed. The time has never been, when, in the patriotic and eloquent language of Mr. Rives, she did not expect her representatives to remember "that they had a country to serve as well as a party to obey."

It was, we believe, from a conviction that the great Conservative principle of representative fidelity and independence was about being cloven down, and that a servile spirit of undeviating acquiescence in the opinions and wishes of party leaders, would be fostered, by permitting Mr. Rives to fall a victim to the furious and vindictive resentment of remorseless partisans, that induced many of the most influential of the Whig party in the Legislature to prefer his election to that of any man in the Commonwealth. It was the same persuasion, strengthened by the disclosures of the feeling of peculiar zeal and anxiety exhibited by the Sub-Treasury democrats, to defeat him, and even to prefer any one (Whig or Tory) to him, that finally reconciled almost the entire body of the Whig party to unite with us in endeavouring to re-elect Mr. Rives. With the course of the fragment of that party who refused to co-operate

with the rest of their brethren, and thus prevented his election, we have nothing to do. We shall not even impute to them the responsibility of defeating the election, however justified we might be by a portion of that squad who, with remarkable modesty, have made a similar charge against the Conservatives.

The support thus given by the Whig party to Mr. Rives, affords honourable testimony, that many of them were willing to forego a mere party triumph in the support of so important a principle as Senatorial independence. And why should we or Mr. Rives have any repugnance to such aid from the Whigs? For ourselves, we avow our willingness to derive support from any quarter, in checking the extravagant and pernicious measures of any party, in restraining its excesses, preventing the abuses which it may run into, and preserving the ancient and approved principles of the Republican party from being overwhelmed by the wild spirit of rash innovation, and the mad projects of radicalism and agrarianism.

Who are these Whigs, [See Note B.] that contaminate by their support and assistance? They are our fellow-citizens, comprising nearly one half of the population of the State, and embracing a full proportion of its virtue, intelligence and patriotism. It is true, that they, like their rival contemporaries, the Democrats, have in their ranks numbers of every variety of complexion, from the rankest nullifier, and Ultra State Rights men, down to the most uniform and consistent consolidationists. If every man were obstinately to refuse to support for public office only those who agreed with him in every opinion, it is obvious that no public man ever could be elected, and no popular Government ever could exist. We have already shown that there was a great political principal involved in the re-election of Mr. Rives, which appealed with irresistible force to those Whigs who