FROM THE "ENQUIRER."

September 8th, 1837.-How is it that the great masses of the two parties seem to be respectively shifting the grounds they occupied in '34-the friends of the Administration violently assailed it most of the Republicans, with the President at their head, are inclined to support it. A better soldier than ourselves then gave forth the most serious objections to the scheme.

The public moneys, from the time of their receipt to the time of their disbursement, amounting as they often do, to ten or twelve millions of dollars, must remain in the hands of individuals appointed by the President and removable at his will! They ought not to be kept in their pockets, chests or vaults, where they can approach it every day and use it, without the checks of warrants drawn, countersigned, registered and recorded, and passing through many hands, without which (that is their warrants) not a dollar can now be touched by any public officer, not even the President himself."

We have no desire to see such accumulation of power in the hands of the Executive-no wish to put the money directly into the palms of his friends and partizans. We wish to see the power and patronage of the Executive increased as little as possible the powers of the Federal government not enlarged-the purse and sword not more strongly united, than they are in the hands of the President, and as few means of corruption as possible trusted in his possession.

FROM THE SAME.

September 15th, 1837.-He designates it as "a wild and dangerous scheme" establishing two sorts of currency-the better for the officers of the government, the baser one for the people.

October 20th, 1837.-He says the Sub-Treasury will enlarge the Executive power, already too great for a Republic. In the same paper, speaking of the special deposit, he says, "such is the compromise we beg leave to submit to all the friends of a limited Executive and a guarded exchequer."

January 20th, 1838.-Speaking of the change made in the bill from extra session to the session in December, and of the rapid growth of Executive patronage, which would follow the adoption of the measure, he says: "It has already expanded from collectors to receivers and who shall say that it shall not expand from four receivers to 20 or 50. In fact who shall stop the augmentation of tax receivers under the Administration of some future ambitious President? The bill increases the Executive patronage by the appointment of Receivers Generals, Bank Commissionaries, and places the public funds more immediately under the control of officers appointed by and removable by the President."

In another editorial of the 12th September, (date omitted,) alluding to the premium the merchant must pay to obtain specie for his duty bonds, he says: "who pays all these expenses? The people-for, let the merchants, for instance, pay their bonds in specie, they will ultimately receive it in the advances on their goods. A tax, then, to all intents and purposes, is laid on the people at large, to the amount of the premium on specie, and it goes into the pockets of every man who feeds from the public crib."

Note C.-On the 4th of May, 1830, a select committee, raised at the instance of Hon. Thomas H. Benton, on the subject of Executive patronage, of which he was chairman, and Mr. Van Buren with other distinguished gentlemen of the Jackson party, were members, reported their views at length to the senate of the United States. They represented, with a pencil of

་

light, the inherent tendency of patronage to increaseits insiduous approaches-its almost seductive and resistless influences, and its overpowering energy, when it has once acquired the ascendant. We must look forward, say they, to the time (that period is now arrived) when the public revenue will be doubled; when the civil and military officers of the Federal Government will be quadrupled; when the influence over individuals will be multiplied to an indefinite extent; when the nomination by the President can carry any man through the senate, and his recommendation carry any measure through the two Houses of Congress; when the principle of public action will be open and avowed, the President wants my vote and I want his patronage. I will vote as he wishes and he will give me the office I wish for. What will this be but the government of one man? And what is the government of one man but a monarchy? Names are nothing. The nature of a thing is in its substance, and the name soon accommodates itself to the substance. The first Roman Emperor was styled "Emperor of the Republic," and the last French Emperor took the same title, and their respective countries were just as essentially monarchical before as after the assumption of them. It cannot be denied or dissembled, that the Federal Government gravitates to the same point, and that the election of the executive by the Legislature quickens the impulsion. "Those who make the President, must support him. Their political fate becomes identified, and they must stand or fall together. Right or wrong they must support him.”

What would the authors of these truly patriotic and Republican sentiments have thought of that political servility which openly and unblushingly inculcates a "sink or swim" policy? How would these slavish doctrines square with their Republicanism, as laid down in this report? If Colonel Benton and Mr. Van Buren were sincere and honest in this solemn expression of

their sentiments, they would be compelled by their principles, to repudiate, with as much scorn and indignation as any Conservative, this degrading oath of fealty to a party chief, this unscrupulous endorsement in advance of opinions and conduct which cannot be foreseen or anticipated, this odious and unmanly submission to the capricious and despotic exactions of party. If sincere, their patriotic apprehensions for the perpetuity of our institutions would have been greatly excited and they would have made the very walls of the capitol tremble with the thunder of their denunciations. They would have told us that the prophecy and its fulfilment were contemporaneous; that our Government was a monarchy now. Is there nothing at this day to make us fear that our Government gravitates to monarchy ? If the recommendations of the President can carry this Sub-Treasury measure through the two Houses of Congress, stamped as it has been by the reprobation of almost all men of all parties, throughout our extensive dominion, and receiving especially the almost unanimous reprobation of that party now advocating it, what cannot the President do, under this vassal doctrine of blind and indiscriminate support?

Note D.-When Mr. Roane was elected to the U. States senate, the vote in the House of Delegates, so far as the Whig party was concerned, was for Roane 24, against him and for Judge Daniel 16, with some few scattering. In the senate, for Roane 5 Whigs, against him 2. So that he received the votes of 29, and his competitor those of 18 only. Without the Whigs, Mr. Roane would not, and could not, possibly have been elected. [Note to Mr. Pendleton's speech].

At the dinner which was given to Mr. Rives in the City of Richmond, after the close of the session of Congress, and very shortly after the election of Mr.

Roane, Mr. Rives in responding to a complimentary toast, took occasion to vindicate the principles of that currency bill, which is now so much the subject of obloquy among those very gentlemen who, at the time, were paying the homage of heart-felt gratitude for his distinguished services, and lavishing the most extravagant encomiums upon his republican virtues. Not a discordant note in this numerous assemblage, disturbed the harmonious greeting and joyous gratulations which animated them. It also becomes worthy of remark on this occasion, as Mr. Rives is assailed and condemned by many of Mr. Roane's political friends for not repudiating the aid of the Whigs in the late senatorial election, that Mr. Roane, who, it seems, was obnoxious, in the estimation of some, to a similar objection, in the course of a speech which he made at the same dinner, with a correctness of judgment and feeling, alike creditable to his head and his heart, repelled this new idea of contamination in Whig support. Among many other just and forcible remarks, he said, "Let us never forget that our adversaries are 'bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh,' that they are our friends, our neighbours and our countrymen.' To those who press this objection to Mr. Rives, we would commend the old adage, "ye who live in glass houses should not throw stones at your neighbours' windows.

Note E.-The official organ of General Jackson (the Globe) in 1835, shortly after the Sub-Treasury scheme was broached, and when it was alone countenanced by a few ultra whigs, assailed it in the most violent terms, as a measure fraught with mischief, and threatening our liberties. It asserted "that it would enlarge Executive power by putting in its hands the means of corruption." "That it would transfer the money directly into the palms of Executive agents, the friends and partizans of the President, instead of its being kept on deposit in