the condition of things did not allow that country, sensible as it was to their services and merits, to do them the full justice which it desired. It could not entirely fulfil its engagements. The army was to be disbanded; but it was unpaid. It was to lay down its own power; but there was no government with adequate power to perform what had been promised to it. In this critical moment, what is its conduct? Does it disgrace its high character? Is temptation able to seduce it? Does it speak of righting itself? Does it undertake to redress its own wrongs by its own sword? Does it lose its patriotism in its deep sense of injury and injustice? Does military ambition cause its integrity to swerve? Far, far otherwise.

It had faithfully served and saved the country; and to that country it now referred, with unhesitating confidence, its claim and its complaints. It laid down its arms with alacrity; it mingled itself with the mass of the community; and it waited till, in better times, and under a new government, its services might be rewarded, and the promises made to it fulfilled. Sir, this example is worth more, far more, to the cause of civil liberty, than this bill will cost us. We can hardly recur to it too often, or dwell on it too much, for the honor of our country and of its defenders. Allow me to say, again, that meritorious service in civil war is worthy of peculiar consideration; not only because there is, in such wars, usually less power to restrain irregularities, but because, also, they expose all prominent actors in them to different kinds of danger. It is rebellion as well as war. Those who engage in it must look, not only to the dangers of the field, but to confiscation also, and attainder, and ignominious death. With no efficient and settled government, either to sustain or to control them, and with every sort of danger before them, it is great merit to have conducted themselves with fidelity to the country, under every discouragement on the one hand, and with unconquerable bravery towards the common enemy on the other. Such, Sir, was the conduct of the officers and soldiers of the Revolutionary army.

I would not, and do not, underrate the services or the sufferings of others. I know well, that in the Revolutionary contest all made sacrifices, and all endured sufferings; as well those who paid for service, as those who performed it. I know that, in the records of all the little municipalities of New England, abundant

Mr. Chairman, I will only detain you with one more reflection on this subject. We cannot be so blind, we cannot so shut up our senses and smother our faculties, as not to see, that, in the progress and the establishment of South American liberty, our own example has been among the most stimulating causes. In their emergencies, they have looked to our experience; in their political institutions, they have followed our models; in their deliberations, they have invoked the presiding spirit of our own liberty. They have looked steadily, in every adversity, to the great Northern light. In the hour of bloody conflict, they have remembered the fields which have been consecrated by the blood of our own fathers; and when they have fallen, they have wished only to be remembered with them, as men who had acted their parts bravely for the cause of liberty in the Western World.

Sir, I have done. If it be weakness to feel the sympathy of one's nature excited for such men, in such a cause, I am guilty of that weakness. If it be prudence to meet their proffered civility, not with reciprocal kindness, but with coldness or with insult, I choose still to follow where natural impulse leads, and to give up that false and mistaken prudence for the voluntary sentiments of my heart.

REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS.*

MR. PRESIDENT,- It has not been my purpose to take any part in the discussion of this bill. My opinions in regard to its general object, I hope, are well known; and I had intended to content myself with a steady and persevering vote in its favor. But when the moment of final decision has come, and the division is so likely to be nearly equal, I feel it to be a duty to put, not only my own vote, but my own earnest wishes also, and my fervent entreaties to others, into the doubtful scale.

It must be admitted, Sir, that the persons for whose benefit this bill is designed are, in some respects, peculiarly unfortunate. They are compelled to meet not only objections to the principle, but, whichever way they turn themselves, embarrassing objections also to details. One friend hesitates at this provision, and another at that; while those who are not friends at all of course oppose every thing, and propose nothing. When it was contemplated, heretofore, to give the petitioners a sum outright in satisfaction of their claim, then the argument was, among other things, that the treasury could not bear so heavy a draught on its means at the present moment. The plan is accordingly changed; an annuity is proposed; and then the objection changes also. It is now said, that this is but granting pensions, and that the pension system has already been carried too far. I confess, Sir, I felt wounded, deeply hurt, at the observations of the gentleman from Georgia. "So, then," said he, "these modest and high-minded gentlemen take a pension at last!" How is it possible that a gentleman of his generosity of character, and gen

* A Speech delivered in the Senate of the United States, on the 25th of April, 1828, on the Bill for the Relief of the Surviving Officers of the Revolution.

to discuss the measure; not believing that, in the present state of things, any good could be done by me in that way. But the frequent declaration that this was altogether a New England measure, a bill for securing a monopoly to the capitalists of the North, and other expressions of a similar nature, have induced me to address the Senate on the subject.

New England, Sir, has not been a leader in this policy. On the contrary, she held back herself and tried to hold others back from it, from the adoption of the Constitution to 1824. Up to 1824, she was accused of sinister and selfish designs, because she discountenanced the progress of this policy. It was laid to her charge then, that, having established her manufactures herself, she wished that others should not have the power of rivalling her, and for that reason opposed all legislative encouragement. Under this angry denunciation against her, the act of 1824 passed. Now, the imputation is precisely of an opposite character. The present measure is pronounced to be exclusively for the benefit of New England; to be brought forward by her agency, and designed to gratify the cupidity of the proprietors of her wealthy establishments.

Both charges, Sir, are equally without the slightest foundation. The opinion of New England up to 1824 was founded in the conviction that, on the whole, it was wisest and best, both for herself and others, that manufactures should make haste slowly. She felt a reluctance to trust great interests on the foundation of government patronage; for who could tell how long such patronage would last, or with what steadiness, skill, or perseverance it would continue to be granted? It is now nearly fifteen years since, among the first things which I ever ventured to say here, I expressed a serious doubt whether this government was fitted, by its construction, to administer aid and protection to particular pursuits; whether, having called such pursuits into being by indications of its favor, it would not afterwards desert them, should troubles come upon them, and leave them to their fate. Whether this prediction, the result, certainly, of chance, and not of sagacity, is about to be fulfilled, remains to be seen.

At the same time it is true, that, from the very first commencement of the government, those who have administered its concerns have held a tone of encouragement and invitation towards

and that, for aught we know, the same mistake may be committed now.

Is this objection well founded? Let me say, in the first place, that if one measure, right in itself, has gone farther than it was intended to be carried, for want of accurate provisions and adequate guards, this may furnish a very good reason for supplying such guards and provisions in another measure, but can afford no ground at all for rejecting such other measure altogether, if it be in itself just and reasonable. We should avail ourselves of our experience, it seems to me, to correct what has been found amiss; and not draw from it an undistinguishing resolution to do nothing, merely because it has taught us, that, in something we have already done, we have acted with too little care. In the next place, does the fact bear out this objection? Is there any difficulty in ascertaining the number of the officers who will be benefited by this bill, and in estimating the expense, therefore, which it will create? I think there is none. The records in the department of war and the treasury furnish such evidence that there is no danger of material mistake. The diligence of the chairman of the committee has enabled him to lay the facts connected with this part of the case so fully and minutely before the Senate, that I think no one can feel serious doubt. Indeed, it is admitted by the adversaries of the bill, that this objection does not apply here with the same force as in the former pension-law. It is admitted that there is a greater facility in this case than in that, in ascertaining the number and names of those who will be entitled to receive that bounty.

This objection, then, is not founded in true principle; and if it were, it is not sustained by the facts. I think we ought not to yield to it, unless, (which I know is not the sentiment which pervades the Senate,) feeling that the measure ought not to pass, we still prefer not to place our opposition to it on a distinct and visible ground, but to veil it under vague and general objec tions.

In the second place, it has been objected that the operation of the bill will be unequal, because all officers of the same rank will receive equal benefit from it, although they entered the army at different times, and were of different ages. Sir, is not this that sort of inequality which must always exist in every general provision. Is it possible that any law can descend into such par