按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
the party in this very way。 And just now； and just so；
opposition to internal improvements is to be established if
General Cass shall be elected。 Almost half the Democrats here
are for improvements； but they will vote for Cass； and if he
succeeds； their vote will have aided in closing the doors against
improvements。 Now this is a process which we think is wrong。 We
prefer a candidate who； like General Taylor； will allow the
people to have their own way； regardless of his private opinions；
and I should think the internal…improvement Democrats； at least；
ought to prefer such a candidate。 He would force nothing on them
which they don't want； and he would allow them to have
improvements which their own candidate； if elected； will not。
Mr。 Speaker； I have said General Taylor's position is as well
defined as is that of General Cass。 In saying this； I admit I do
not certainly know what he would do on the Wilmot Proviso。 I am
a Northern man or rather a Western Free…State man； with a
constituency I believe to be； and with personal feelings I know
to be； against the extension of slavery。 As such； and with what
information I have； I hope and believe General Taylor； if
elected； would not veto the proviso。 But I do not know it。 Yet
if I knew he would； I still would vote for him。 I should do so
because； in my judgment； his election alone can defeat General
Cass； and because； should slavery thereby go to the territory we
now have； just so much will certainly happen by the election of
Cass； and in addition a course of policy leading to new wars； new
acquisitions of territory and still further extensions of
slavery。 One of the two is to be President。 Which is
preferable？
But there is as much doubt of Cass on improvements as there is of
Taylor on the proviso。 I have no doubt myself of General Cass on
this question； but I know the Democrats differ among themselves
as to his position。 My internal…improvement colleague ＇Mr。
Wentworth＇ stated on this floor the other day that he was
satisfied Cass was for improvements； because he had voted for all
the bills that he ＇Mr。 Wentworth＇ had。 So far so good。 But Mr。
Polk vetoed some of these very bills。 The Baltimore convention
passed a set of resolutions； among other things； approving these
vetoes； and General Cass declares； in his letter accepting the
nomination； that he has carefully read these resolutions； and
that he adheres to them as firmly as he approves them cordially。
In other words； General Cass voted for the bills； and thinks the
President did right to veto them； and his friends here are
amiable enough to consider him as being on one side or the other；
just as one or the other may correspond with their own respective
inclinations。 My colleague admits that the platform declares
against the constitutionality of a general system of
improvements； and that General Cass indorses the platform； but he
still thinks General Cass is in favor of some sort of
improvements。 Well； what are they？ As he is against general
objects； those he is for must be particular and local。 Now this
is taking the subject precisely by the wrong end。 Particularity
expending the money of the whole people for an object which will
benefit only a portion of themis the greatest real objection to
improvements； and has been so held by General Jackson； Mr。 Polk；
and all others； I believe； till now。 But now； behold； the
objects most generalnearest free from this objectionare to be
rejected； while those most liable to it are to be embraced。 To
return： I cannot help believing that General Cass； when he wrote
his letter of acceptance； well understood he was to be claimed by
the advocates of both sides of this question； and that he then
closed the door against all further expressions of opinion
purposely to retain the benefits of that double position。 His
subsequent equivocation at Cleveland； to my mind； proves such to
have been the case。
One word more； and I shall have done with this branch of the
subject。 You Democrats； and your candidate； in the main are in
favor of laying down in advance a platforma set of party
positionsas a unit； and then of forcing the people； by every
sort of appliance； to ratify them； however unpalatable some of
them may be。 We and our candidate are in favor of making
Presidential elections and the legislation of the country
distinct matters； so that the people can elect whom they please；
and afterward legislate just as they please； without any
hindrance； save only so much as may guard against infractions of
the Constitution； undue haste； and want of consideration。 The
difference between us is clear as noonday。 That we are right we
cannot doubt。 We hold the true Republican position。 In leaving
the people's business in their hands； we cannot be wrong。 We are
willing； and even anxious； to go to the people on this issue。
But I suppose I cannot reasonably hope to convince you that we
have any principles。 The most I can expect is to assure you that
we think we have and are quite contented with them。 The other
day one of the gentlemen from Georgia ＇Mr。 Iverson＇； an eloquent
man； and a man of learning； so far as I can judge； not being
learned myself； came down upon us astonishingly。 He spoke in
what the 'Baltimore American' calls the 〃scathing and withering
style。〃 At the end of his second severe flash I was struck blind；
and found myself feeling with my fingers for an assurance of my
continued existence。 A little of the bone was left； and I
gradually revived。 He eulogized Mr。 Clay in high and beautiful
terms； and then declared that we had deserted all our principles；
and had turned Henry Clay out； like an old horse； to root。 This
is terribly severe。 It cannot be answered by argumentat least
I cannot so answer it。 I merely wish to ask the gentleman if the
Whigs are the only party he can think of who sometimes turn old
horses out to root。 Is not a certain Martin Van Buren an old
horse which your own party have turned out to root？ and is he
not rooting a little to your discomfort about now？ But in not
nominating Mr。 Clay we deserted our principles； you say。 Ah！ In
what？ Tell us； ye men of principle； what principle we violated。
We say you did violate principle in discarding Van Buren； and we
can tell you how。 You violated the primary； the cardinal； the
one great living principle of all democratic representative
governmentthe principle that the representative is bound to
carry out the known will of his constituents。 A large majority
of the Baltimore convention of 1844 were； by their constituents；
instructed to procure Van Buren 's nomination if they could。 In
violationin utter glaring contempt of this； you rejected him；
rejected him； as the gentleman from New York ＇Mr。 Birdsall＇ the
other day expressly admitted； for availabilitythat same
〃general availability〃 which you charge upon us； and daily chew
over here； as something exceedingly o