It is a party that hopes to succeed by the supposed errors of their opponents, without reference to any fundamental principles of their own. It favors the interests of the rich, the power of corporations, the influence of the few at the expense of the many. It claims for government a conservative action, it claims for office an advisory privilege, and for its members a superiority of position.

The great questions which have marked its acts having been settled, the party is now without a standard. They have been proved to be in the wrong by the success of widely different measures, upon the same subjects, of the dominant party. They are still in the opposition, and without a standard. They ask for power on any conditions. They are willing to join any other party, if, by combination, they can defeat the democracy, provided the victory, if gained, may be called their victory.

There is too much truth in the remark of Matthew Carey, addressed by that writer, in the Olive Branch, to the federal party, in 1814, as applicable to the whig party of the present day: "Your party rises as your country sinks; it sinks as your country rises."

When General Jackson was elevated to the presidency, they knew no precedent so dangerous as to elect a "military chieftain to that high office. Now they have deserted their own great leaders because without prospect of success, and have confirmed the nomination of an independent candidate who acknowledges no party, and who is distinguished only as a military chieftain. He was one of the principal heroes of the Mexican war. They opposed the war, not because they deemed it unjust; not because they were friendly to Mexico, for while they were busy in their opposition, they voted supplies for the army and abused the Mexicans, but because they had been opposed to the government of the people; and, to be consistent, their opposition must be still continued. When it was found that the hero of Buena Vista was an available candidate, they came forward to sustain him as their candidate, not because they approved his views, or that he was

pledged to sustain theirs, but because he was placed in opposition to the candidate of the people. They had, in Massachusetts, refused to vote him thanks for faithfully serving his country; not because they deemed him unworthy, but because they were opposed to the administration that enabled him to become distinguished. Now that the war is finished, they participate in its glory, and are ready to make him president of the United States, not because he is conversant with the great principles of government, and has had experience in the administration of its affairs, but because he was successful in killing the Mexicans; and yet, but a few months ago, they declared it the enormity of sins that they were killed at all. But it may be said, that “this was done under orders!"

This is infinitely worse. They are even willing to sustain General Taylor, as their candidate, at the expense of his honor and integrity,—to make it appear that he considered himself a mere hireling, and was ready to fight in an unjust war for a salary! *

If General Taylor be what many suppose him, a man of sound sense, of firmness, of patriotism, of honor, and integrity; a gentleman of wealth, and wanting the aid of no man, of no government; a man, indeed, fitted by nature and education to honor the highest office of this country, - how shall we speak of a deliberate opinion, that such a person, a citizen soldier, should plan the destruction of an innocent people, the people of an injured nation!

Having a high respect for that distinguished officer, we doubt much whether he will consider such views either as creditable to their authors or complimentary to himself. If he should prove to be the choice of the people, and if we are correct with respect to the peculiar features of his character, this party, we are inclined to believe, will have but little reason to congratulate themselves upon that influence which they covet,

* Our army is made up of citizens; its officers are citizens; and if any deem a war unjust, the way is open for resignation.

or upon that harmony of views, of which they speak so much, and know so little.

Upon the subject of slavery, this party is disposed to take both sides of the question. It opposes Governor Cass because he is against the Wilmot Proviso. It opposes the Wilmot Proviso, because General Taylor is not in favor of it. It opposes Governor Cass, because he upholds the South in their constitutional rights in regard to slavery. It favors General Taylor, although they know him to be pledged, as a citizen and slaveholder, to sustain those interests which include his own.

We point out these peculiar inconsistencies to illustrate our views, rather than to enjoy any satisfaction which such an analysis yields. We candidly confess there is no pleasure to be derived from facts which seem to indicate so little selfrespect, so little regard for party integrity, and so little faith in their own supposed great principles.

A review of the democratic party of this country would exhibit results highly gratifying, but our limits preclude it in this place. It has had its share of error, unquestionably, but of its permanency, its triumphant success, no one can doubt. Its measures have become a part of history. Its views have made the nation's policy, and its principles the nation's glory.

In this connection it is but an act of justice, due alike to the present administration, and to the people, to notice two great measures which have already proved the profound sagacity of their projectors, and have added strength and glory to the democratic party. We allude to the "constitutional treasury," and the tariff of 1846.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL TREASURY.

THE question of the currency is one of the most important, the most difficult, that can claim the action of government or the attention of the people.

Without a good system of currency, enterprise loses its inducements, business becomes confused, and industry fails to receive its just reward.

In the currency of a country every man's interest is involved, and as it is regulated by government, as a question it is frequently made an engine of political influence. Its peculiar power is well understood by politicians. If times are prosperous, credit is given to the government for judicious management, even though government has done nothing to make them so. If times are adverse or disastrous, then the government is made responsible for the folly of the people, or their institutions; and many are ready to unite in opposition to all its measures, though the subject of the currency may not be involved in any one of them.

A good system may be badly managed, or a bad system may be well managed, and both appear equally successful. A good system may be perverted, or subjected to extraneous influences. It becomes, therefore, a matter of great importance that a system should be as free as possible from all these contingent relations. That it should be independent in its operations of those circumstances of interest, excess of transaction, or adverse results of trade, of which this country has no

occasion to be advised. That its safeguards should be within itself, standing as a whole, in relation to the people.

As yet such a system has not been reached. The different States have different banking systems, and with what success they have managed their affairs may be inferred from the fact that in fifty years from 1789 to 1841-395 banks failed, involving a total loss to the country of nearly $400,000,000.*

These systems in the different States have diversity of merit; but the greatest source of difficulty in all failures of banks, has been found to be in their mismanagement. There is one feature, however, which is common to them all. They admit a specie basis of silver and gold. This, then, is the only true standard known to, or that can be recognized by, our general government.

It is true, at one period there was an United States Bank, an institution which appeared to accommodate the whole country. It was chartered, however, with no peculiar provisions not adopted by the State banks. It had a large capital, and it had its branches. Its basis, and its mode of doing business were nearly the same as those of the State institutions. It was

* In 1841, the secretary of the treasury, the Hon. Levi Woodbury, made an able report on "the losses by the general government, and by the people of the United States, from the use of banks and bank paper," from which we take the following

SUMMARY.

Losses by bank failures,

Losses by suspension of specie payments by banks; consequent depreciation on their notes,

Losses by destruction of bank notes by accident,

Losses by counterfeit bank notes, beyond losses by coin, Losses by fluctuations in bank currency affecting prices, extravagance in living, sacrifices of property, and by only a part of the other incidents to the banking system, not computed above, at least,

$108,882,721

95,000,000

7,121,332 4,444,444

150,000,000

$365,451,497