the criterion of orthodoxy, and his notions obtain a dominion over the public sentiment, which facilitates the most dangerous encroachments, and demands the most jealous supervision. In proportion as a government is free, the spirit of bold inquiry, of animated interest in its measures, and of firm opposition where they are not approved, becomes essential to its purity and continuance. And he, who, in a democracy, or republic, attempts to control the will of the popular idol of the day, may envy the luxurious ease with which ministerial oppressions are opposed and thwarted in governments which are less free.

Intemperance of party, wherever found, never will meet with an advocate in me. It is a most calamitous scourge to our countrythe bane of social enjoyment, of individual justice, and of public virtue-unfriendly to the best pursuits of man, his interest and his duty; it renders useless or even pernicious the highest endowments of intellect, and the noblest disposition of the soul. But, sir, whatever may be the evil necessarily inherent in its nature, its ravages are the most enormous and desolating when it is seated on the throne of power, and vested with all the attributes of rule.

I mean not to follow the gentleman from South Carolina over the classic ground of Greece, Carthage and Rome, to refute his theory, and show, that not to vehement opposition, but to the abuse of factious and intolerant power, their doom is to be attributed. Nor will I examine some more modern instances of republics whose destruction has the same origin. The thing is no longer matter of discussion; it has passed into a settled truth in the science of political philosophy. One, who, on a question of historical deduction, of political theory, is entitled to high respect, has given us an admirable summary of the experience of republics on this interesting inquiry. In the tenth number of the Federalist, written by Mr. Madison, we find the following apt and judicious observations :"By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community. The inference to which we are brought is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects. If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest, both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the

public good and private rights against the dangers of such a faction, and, at the same time, to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let me add, that it is the great desideratum by which alone this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind."

If this doctrine were, then, to be collected from the history of the world, can it now be doubted, since the experience of the last twenty-five years? Go to France, once revolutionary, now imperial France, and ask her whether factious power, or intemperate opposition, be the more fatal to freedom and happiness? Perhaps, at some moment when the eagle eye of her master is turned away, she may whisper to you, to behold the demolition of Lyons or the devastation of La Vendee. Perhaps she will give you a written answer-Draw near to the once fatal lamp-post, and by its flickering light, read it as traced in characters of blood that flowed from the guillotine-" Faction is a demon! faction out of power is a demond enchained! faction vested with the attributes of rule is a Moloch of destruction!"

Sir, if the denunciations which gentlemen have pronounced against factious violence, are not merely the image of rhetorical pomp, if they are, indeed, solicitous to mitigate the rancor of party feuds, in the sincerity of my soul, I wish them success.

It is melancholy to behold the miserable jealousies and malignant suspicions which so extensively prevail, to the destruction of social comfort, and the eminent peril of the republic. On this subject I have reflected much; not merely in the intervals stolen from the bustle of business or the gayeties of amusement; but in the moments of" depression and solitude," the most favorable to the correction of error. For one, I am willing to bring a portion of party feeling and party prejudice, as an oblation at the shrine of my country. But no offering can avail any thing, if not made on the part of those who are the political favorites of the day. On them it is incumbent to come forward and set the magnanimous example. Approaches or concessions on the side of the minority would be misconstrued into indications of timidity, or of a hankering for favor. But a spirit of conciliation arising from those ranks would be hailed as the harbinger of sunny days, as a challenge to liberality. and to a generous contention for the public weal. This spirit requires not any departure from deliberate opinion, unless it is shown to be erroneous. Such a concession would be a dereliction of duty. Its injunctions would be few, and, it is to be hoped, not difficult of observance. Seek to uphold your measures by the force of argument, not of denunciation; stigmatize not opposition to your notions with offensive epithets. These prove nothing but your anger or your

302 MR. GASTON'S SPEECH ON THE LOAN BILL.

weakness, and are sure to generate a spirit of "moral resistance," not easily to be checked or tamed. Give to presidential views constitutional respect, but suffer them not to supersede the exercise of independent inquiry. Encourage instead of suppressing fair discussion, so that those, who approve not, may at least have a respectful hearing. Thus, without derogating a particle from the energy of your measures, you will impart a tone to political dissensions which would deprive them of their acrimony, and render them harmless to the nation.

The nominal party distinctions, sir, have become mere cabalistic terms. It is no longer a question whether, according to the theory of our constitution, there is more danger of the federal en croaching on the state governments, or the democracy of the state governments paralyzing the arm of federal power. Federalism and democracy have lost their meaning. It is now a question of commerce, peace and union of the states. On this question, unless the honesty and intelligence of the nation shall confederate into one great American party, disdaining petty office-keeping and office-hunting views, defying alike the insolence of the popular prints, the prejudices of faction, and the dominion of executive influence I fear a decision will be pronounced fatal to the hopes, to the existence of the nation. In this question, I assuredly have a very deep interest; but it is the interest of a citizen only. My public career, I hope, will not continue long. Should it please the Disposer of events to permit me to see the great interests of this nation confided to men who will secure its rights by firmness, moderation and impartiality abroad, and at home cultivate the arts of peace, encourage honest industry in all its branches, dispense equal justice to all classes of the community, and thus administer the government in the true spirit of the constitution, as a trust for the people, not as the property of a party, it will be to me utterly unimportant by what political epithet they may be characterized. As a private citizen, grateful for the blessings I may enjoy, and yielding a prompt obedience to every legitimate demand that can be made upon me, I shall rejoice, as far as my little sphere may extend, to foster the same dispositions among those who surround me.

A convention between the United States and Great Britain was signed at London, in July, 1815, and subsequently ratified by the president and senate, by which it was stipulated that the discriminating duties on British vessels and their cargoes, then subsisting under certain acts of congress, should be abolished, in return for a reciprocal stipulation on the part of Great Britain. On this occasion, a bill was brought into the house of representatives to carry the convention into effect, specifically enacting the stipulations contained in the convention itself. This bill was opposed by Mr. Pinkney in the following speech :—

MR. CHAIRMAN,

I intended yesterday, if the state of my health had permitted, to have trespassed on the house with a short sketch of the grounds upon which I disapprove of the bill. What I could not do then, I am about to endeavor now, under the pressure, nevertheless, of continuing indisposition, as well as under the influence of a natural reluctance thus to manifest an apparently ambitious and improvident hurry to lay aside the character of a listener to the wisdom of others, by which I could not fail to profit, for that of an expounder of my own humble notions, which are not likely to be profitable to any body. It is, indeed, but too probable that I should best have consulted both delicacy and discretion, if I had forborne this precipitate attempt to launch my little bark upon what an honorable member has aptly termed the "torrent of debate" which this bill has produced. I am conscious that it may, with singular propriety, be said of me, that I am novus hospes here; that I have scarcely begun to acquire a domicil among those whom I am undertaking to address; and that, recently transplanted hither from courts of judicature, I ought, for a season, to look upon myself as a sort of exotic, which time has not sufficiently familiarized with the soil to which it has been removed, to enable it to

put forth either fruit or flower. However all this may be, it is now too late to be silent. I proceed, therefore, to entreat your indulgent attention to the few words with which I have to trouble you upon the subject under deliberation.

That subject has already been treated with an admirable force and perspicuity on all sides of the house. The strong power of argument has drawn aside, as it ought to do, the veil which is supposed to belong to it, and which some of us seem unwilling to disturb; and the stronger power of genius, from a higher region than that of argument, has thrown upon it all the light with which it is the prerogative of genius to invest and illustrate every thing. It is fit that it should be so; for the subject is worthy by its dignity and importance to employ in the discussion of it all the powers of the mind, and all the eloquence by which I have already felt that this assembly is distinguished. The subject is the fundamental law. We owe it to the people to labor with sincerity and diligence, to ascertain the true construction of that law, which is but a record of their will. We owe it to the obligations of the oath which has recently been imprinted upon our consciences, as well as to the people, to be obedient to that will when we have succeeded in ascertaining it. I shall give you my opinion upon this matter, with the utmost deference for the judgment of others, but, at the same time, with that honest and unreserved freedom which becomes this place, and is suited to my habits.

Before we can be in a situation to decide whether this bill ought to pass, we must know precisely what it is; what it is not, is obvious. It is not a bill which is auxiliary to the treaty. It does not deal with details which the treaty does not bear in its own bosom. It contains no subsidiary enactments, no dependent provisions, flowing as corollaries from the treaty. It is not to raise money or to make appropriations, or to do any thing else beyond or out of the treaty. It acts simply as the echo of the treaty.

It

Ingeminat voces, auditaque verba reportat. It may properly be called the twin-brother of the treaty; its duplicate, its reflected image, for it reenacts with a timid fidelity, somewhat inconsistent with the boldness of its pretensions, all that the treaty stipulates, and having performed that work of supererogation, stops. once attempted something more, indeed; but that surplus has been expunged from it as a desperate intruder, as something which might violate, by a misinterpretation of the treaty, that very public. faith which we are now prepared to say the treaty has never vlighted in any the smallest degree. In one word, the bill is a fac simile of the treaty in all its clauses.

I am warranted in concluding, then, that, if it be any thing but an empty form of words, it is a confirmation or ratification of the treaty; or, to speak with a more guarded accuracy, is an act to