Newspapers / The North Carolinian (Wilson, … / Sept. 7, 1850, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The North Carolinian (Wilson, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
FUttLISUEn EVBIXV SATUIIDAY in advance. Der vear.S'2 00. A i " rt . i 1 r i XSot paid in auvaace, ; uu Not paid until six months have expir ed. 300 Not paid till the year - has expired, 350 No subscription received for a less tune than a year, unless the price be paid in advance. 0ri CHARACTER. IS AS IMPORTANT TO STATES AS IT IS TO INDIVIDUALS J AND THE GLORY OF THE STATE IS THE COMMON PROPERTY OF ITS CITIZENS. JJ TERMS Of APVSRTISXKGi l) fYiiAnn irarenftwentV-CT MEines or less, for one inser tion, -tit) cents ; every sub seq.uetitiusertfon,S0 cents 'except it remain fn lor sev ;! eralm'onf?!!?, when it will charged $3 for two I months, jM for three, &c , (!tflO for twelve months. WM. XZ. BAY WE I PAYETTEVILLE, N..C, SEPTEMBER 7, 1850- J VOL. 113MO. 60. r Liberal deduction for large advertisement , hy tle year oisix niorfks. i NORTH CAROLINIAN. Wm. II- Baynei Editor and Proprietor. FAYETTEVILLE, X. C. SEPTEMBER. 7, 1850. (vj-Mr Cass, in reply to n letter from Gen. Garibaldi, the Italian hero who has reached this country, expresses his jC's) high appreciation of Garibaldi's efforts in the cause of freedom in Italv. gf- An intended insurrection of 1 or 500 slaves was detected week before last, in Lowndes coun ty, Ala., instigated by several white abolitionists. A large number of the negroes will probably be hung, and the abolitionists too. if they are caught. Hot pursuit was on their trail. The nearest tree will be a good gallows. Case of Lactation in a Male. C. W. Horner, M. D. of Philadelphia, fur nishes the following particulars of the case of lactation in an adult male. It occurred in the person of an athletic American, named Charles Collins, aged 22 years, a blacksmith working at his trade in New York. About the 10th of Februaryjast, his attention was first drawn to his left breast, which appeared to be enlarging, and continued to increase in size for three weeks, when he came to Philadelphia. After being in this city for about three weeks he became quite anxious in regard to his condition, for although he suffered very little pair., the mamma had become quite as large as that of a female nursing, lie, therefore, through the persuasion of an aunt, was, on the 22d ot March, induc ed to apply at the Clinic of the Jefferson Medical College, to consult the faculty of that Institution. His case came up be fore Prof. Mutter, who, upon examination, found the mammary gland largely develop ed, ami tilled with the lacteal secretion, which differed in no wise Irom that of a mother. He could assign no cause for his freak of nature ; his health was very good, and the other breast natural. A soap plaster was prescribed and compression ordered to be kept up, which he persisted in for full six weeks, when the gland re turned to its usual size; and when I saw him this morning at Fairmount, where he now resides, it was in every respect like the other. SPEECH OF IIOX. WM. S. ASHE, On President Fillmore's T ?.xas message delivered in the U. S. House of Represen tative on the I5h of August, 1850. Mr Ashe said: Mr Chairman, it is as fortunate for the acting President, as it is unfortunate for the. country, that his late communication to Congress on the subject of our diiliculties with the State of Texas, is possessed of a close and powerful affini ty with that agitating subject which has Inon well described as a "whirling vol te x lie and establish the military authority as paramount to the civil authority; to declare to a sovereign State of this Union, that if she attempted to execute her civil process in territory which she claims as her pro perty, and a portion of which she has in her possession, he would oppose any such attempt by the use of the military authori ty of the U. S. This is the sum and sub stance of the President's reply to the Gov ernor of Texas. The democracy of our country has always maintained the sub ordination of the military to the civil au thority as one of the inestimable blessings of constitutional liberty; and so strongly has this sentiment seized on the public mind, that to assert, the contrary I would have supposed required more boldness, more recklessness ot popular feeling than has fallen to the lot of any of our modern politicians; but in this supposition I have been mistaken. Our acting President has most boldly enounced the military dogma " inter arma leges silent.' ' Sir, I would be deaf to the voice of all history if my mind did not entertain a full conception of the allurement of war on the imagination of the chief executive of a great nation. Success in the field is the never failing stepping-stone to ambitious aggran dizement. The patronage connected with its prosecution is grateful to the human heart, and indeed all those passions which influence us in lile's career, find then and there a free scope for their unbridled in dulgence. Sir, a state of war strews the path of the ambitious with strong and ir resistible temptations. These reflections have deeply impressed on me the truth of an observation made by Mr Madison: That the highest praise you can pronounce on an executive officer, is, that he is the friend of peace.' The same distinguished statesman likewise informs us: That if a free people be a wise people, they will ever bear in mind that their dangers can never be so great as when the advocates of the prerogatives of war can sheathe them in the symbol of peace." Sir, I greatly ap prehend that this is the source of our pre sent danger. The President makes a manifestation of peace, but accompanies it with a declaration ot war. War is made to wear the symbol of peace. But as I am not disposed to cast uncalled-for censure on him, let us examine the facts. As I understand the position assumed by the President, it may be thus stated : By the constitution of the U. S. it is made th"e dutv of the President to have the laws of the Union faithfully executed; and as by the second section of the sixth article of the same instrument, the constitution and the treaties made in pursuance there of, are declared to be the supreme law of the land, they, he assumes, are to be ex ecuted through his agency. This position being assumed as correct, the President, conceiving that by the treaty of Hidalgo we stipulated to extend to the residents of our newly-acquired territories protection of life, liberty, and property, it becomes his duty as the executor of these treaty stipulations, to resist any interference made with their rights by the authorities of the State of Texas. I "have endeavored to represent the position of the President fairly ami justly; now let us examine the - ! ' I -II I...l...........t..t " in-ulfin-r every consideration of pub- j consequences ne wouiu ueuu ....... ... business and public convenience. Its t ivgarus nis responsiuiiiiy. .ii. in fluence is so paramount, so controlling, that toe rres.uent is uoun. m r-v it I believe it is only when wu are caiieu -t j .ii c c .... . nrtiim t Pnllin-OsS clVint 111 111 llOWer to I J in thi on to mourn companions that we enjoy a respite from its contagion. I intend no censorious re flections by these remarks. No, sir, I am read v to acknowledge my full share of the censure, if any should be deserved. My constituents have their rights under the constitution, and a sense of duty to them has compelled me to use all the means which either the constitution or the rules of business place in my hands for their pro tection. This policy has been denounced as revolutionary: if it is, it is yet bloodless, and being bloodless, it i3 far preferable to a sectional strife, to a civil war. It is a sort of revolution, the consummation ol which involves not the destruction of American liberty. It is a quiet, peaceful remedy. I have indulged in this episode, in-order to exonerate myself from any cen sure which the unreflecting might be dis posed to cast on my conduct. I will now come io the consideration of the Presi dent's message, and reiterate that it is fortunate for him ami unfortunate for the country that it is possessed of an affinity with the great and leading subject of Con gressional agitation. Sir, it is this affinity which shields this communication, as a protecting aegis, from that burst of indig nation winch its high-toned federal charac ter so richly demands. - It was remarked in my presence, a few days since, by a friend of the present dy nasty, "that now our country would be blessed with a homogeneous whig adminis tration." If by the term whig, federal was meant, the remark was superfluous, as this message but too clearly shows the ear marks of a federal dynasty. The arroga tion of undelegated authority has invaria bly distinguished the course of that party. It has never been in power, however ephemerally," but that it encroached upon the constitution. I will not detain the committee by an enumeration of its mis deeds in this respect, but will proceed to examine the reasons which the President informs us induced him, in a time of the most profound peace, at a time when the Congress of the U. States, the war-declaring power," was in session, to declare sor vn tne contrary, is not ssucu cuugies sional action indispensable to give force and vitality to such stipulations? Treaties are the emanations of the executive power. The Senate in giving or withholding its as sent to treaties, acts "quo ad hoc,'" not as a legislative, but as an executive council. Ami now, if the President is correct, there would necessarily ensue a total abrogation of the legislative department of Govern ment. A few examples will illustrate this. By the treaty already alluded to, our government is required to pay to Mex ico such an amount of money in annual in stalments. In case of the delinquency of Congress to make an appropriation of money for this purpose, would the Presi dent deem himself authorized to draw the money from the Treasury without a previ ous law empowering him to do so, or to divert funds from any other source in or der to preserve the treaty inviolate? According to the opinions avowed in this communication, the President would not merely have a right, but it would be his duty, to raise the necessary funds from one or the other of these expedients. Again: By the treaty of 1842, with Ureat Britain, it is stated that criminals shall be surrendered by the authorities of one gov ernment to that of the other. In case Congress should have failed to authorize by law the execution of this article, could the President have assumed the right to execute it by his own pvver? Was not that article dead letter until Congress authorized its execution? I will cite but another instance from treatv stipulations, showing the absurdity of the President's views. By the ninth article of the treaty of Hidalgo, (the very article which the President cites as author ity for his action,) an equal participation in the right of government is secured to such Mexican citizens as may elect to abide under oar government. This is one of the stipulations of the treaty which the President has declared his determination to execute by the aid, if necessary, of the military authority of the United States. Now, sir, the American residents of Cali fornia, under the advice and direction of the late President, assembled into a mock convention, with the view of organizing a State government, and formed a constitu tion. The second article of that constitu tion prescribes the qualifications of elec tors; and in doing so, indisputably deprives three-fourths of the Mexican citizens of all participation in the elective franchise. Here we have perpetrated an express and positive abrogation of the high and inesti mable right of denization; yet do we hear of any complaints against this aggression from the Executive? On the contrary, do we not find the free-soil friends of the Pres ident contending for a confirmation of this act ol the conv ention by the Congress of the the United States? Has it ever been in timated that the President of the United States would refuse his sanction to a law of Congress legitimating and confirming this invidious discrimination against the treaty rights of the native Californians? No, sir; notwithstanding the President has informed us of his determination to support, by the militarv authority, the full enjoyment on the part of the Mexican cit izens ot all civil and political rignts, yet we find him tamely, quietly, and submis sively approving of this constitutional re striction, or rather disfranchisement. But, Mr Chairman, it is not only treaties, but the Constitution is declared to be the supreme law of the land, in addition to the President's obligation to execute the laws, he has taken a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution. It then, his views are correct, the consequence is ine vitable, that he must execute all the pro visions of the Constitution. The second section of the fourth article provides for the reclamation of fugitive slaves. The language of this section is express and de cided. Would the President consider it as his duty to call out the military authority to execute this provision of the Constitu tion, without the intervention of an act of Congress authorizing him to do so? By the same section of the same article, fugi tives from justice are to be surrendered on demand ; yet this provision was found impossible of execution, until Congress, by its action, gave it life and force. If President Washington, even with the aid and counsel of Knox and Hamilton, could have conceived it was his constitutional duty to execute this provision, he never would have recommended to Congress the necessity of the law of 1793, authorizing the execution of these sections, Wherever the Constitution has imposed a duty on the President, the legislative department of our Government has always been called on to nass necessary laws to enable him to discharge those duties. And the great error of the acting President is in supposing that, in the absence of such laws, he is at liberty to supply the omission But, Mr Chairman, the arrogation of such authority by the President, is not the only objection to his policy, as shadow ed forth in this communication, As I have read it, as I understand it, the Presi dent of the United States undertakes, by Ids " ipse dixit," backed by the strong arm of Government, to prescribe territorial limits to a sovereign State. Sir, more than that, he uiulertakes to dismember a sover eign State, to cut, slash, and divide her at his pleasure. He cites from the treaty of Hidalgo the article which establishes the boundary, the line of demarkation between the U. S. and Mexico. What is that line? This line, the President informs us, com mences at the mouth of the Ilio Grande, and follows the deepest channel of that river until it intersects the southern boun dary of New Mexico : then it assumes a westwardly direction to the river Gila, and thence to the Pacific. This is the line as described by the treaty, and as quoted by the President, and in connection with it he hesitates not to'declaie, that all the coun try ly ing east and north of this line belongs to the United States is the property of the United States. I will not do the Presi dent the injustice to suppose that he in tended to inchu:e in this description the whole of the State of Texas. Yet, under the claim as made by the United States, her title is as good to the Sabine as it is to every foot of the territory lying e'ast of the Mio "Grande. The President has failed to intimate what boundary he will, by the force of the military power, establish be tween Texas and the United States ; but n a nnrtion of his friends have alwavs in sisted npon the Nueces as the western limit of Texas, this, doubtless, will be his ultimatum Now, Mr Chairman, is it not well known that for months and months before the breaking out ot the war with Mexico, that all of this country was represented in this Mouse bv the predecessor of my honorable friend who sits before me ? Is it not well known was it not known to the Presi dent, before the commencement of the war, 'That we constructed forts, established post offices and post roads, and located collection districts throughout the whole of that country lying between the Neuces and the Rio Grande ?" But if these facts should not have re moved all doubt from the President's mind, the letters of his illustrious predecessor. Gen: Tavlor letters written during the time of his military adjourn in this country should have afforded him relief.' I have before me all those official communications, and they each bear the significant super scription of having been written in the country which was, in his estimation, to be recognized as Texas. I presume not, Mr Chairman, to deter mine how far this message may be the re flection of the judgment of the President's Cabinet advisers, but I think I have before me record evidence. to show that their judgment could not have been harmonious. When the bill delaring that a state of war existed between the United States and Mexico went from this House to the Sen ate, it there met with warm opposition, much discussion was elicited, and much information was, of course, adduced res pecting the validity of the Texan title j yjej, with all this information before them, a large majority of the Whig members, including two of the former and three of the present Cabinet, did not hesitate that this was American ground. I refer to the amendment to the bill offered by Mr Clay. ton, which I will read. Yet in the face of this accumulated evidence, we are informed by the Presi dent that this country, so lying east of the R'.o Grande, is not the property of Texas, but is the property of the United States. This is the strict, the literal reading of this most unfortunate communication; and if it is not its true meaning, the ambiguity rests not on the language, but on the intent. But indulging towards him the most kind ly feelings, I am willing to suppose that in reality the President intends to confine his demonstrations of hostility to any in terference by Texas with New Mexico. He attempts to justify his position, by as suming that at the commencement of the Mexican war, President Polk took forcible possession of this country, and that the treaty of Hidalgo but confirmed and made good that possession. That the treaty, in legal language, joined title to possession, and as it has been in possession of the U. Sttites ever since, he is not now at liberty to regard it otherwise than as our property. This is a syllogistic mode of reasoning, which would answer a very good purpose if the premises were correct, but unfor tunately they are not correct. Gen. Kearny, under the directions of President Polk, did take military possession of that country ; but was not this possession in tended to be for the benefit of Texas ? In answer to a demand by the Governor of Texas, did not President Polk distinctly admit that it was merely a military posses sion growing out of the necessities of the war, and not intended, in the least degree, as apposing the claim of Texas? And furthermore, did not Mr Polk, through his Secretary Gov. Marcy, particularly order and instruct that the military au thority, while in possession of that county. should act in subordination to the civil au thority ot Texas aiding and assisting in its establishment ? These facts are indispu table ; and as the acting President had the evidence of these facts before him, I can but consider it as disingenuous for him to have attempted to deduce the authority of President Polk to sustain his position, when that authority, if accompanied with the appropriate explanations, would have been in direct opposition to his policy. Sir, no aid or countenance can be derived from anything which occurred under Mr Polk9 administration for maintaining the position that this our bare military posses sion gave to us an initiatory title to that country. It is a well-established legal principle, that the possession of land or other property is governed and controlled by the quo animo of the possessor. This act of possession was perfected by Gen. Kearney. I have before me his proclama tion explaining its character. I will read it: Mr Alc'ade and people of New Mexico: I have come amongst you by the orders of my government to take pos session ot your country, and extend OTer it the lawa of the United States. We consider, and haTe for some time considered it. a part of the territory of the U. States," &.c. Here is a distinct admission by General Kearny, that we claimed the country that we took possession of it under a color of title. What title could he have referred to? It must have been the title of Texas. We had no claim or right, no pretence of any-claim or right independent and exclu sive of the title of Texas. But it has been contended in defence of the President that Mr Poik was but an executive officer, and that his opinions could not be conclusive upon the judgment of a subsequent Presi dent. Without entering into an argument on this point, I will observe that the Pre sident takes shelter under no such plea, but, on the contrary, invokes the acts of President Polk as affording to him justifi cation. It is on the military possession consummated by order of President Polk, that President Fillmore relies for title; and we admit the fact of possession, but contend that that possession shall be sub ject to such explanations as accompanying circumstances evolve. The futility of the attempt made ly the President to justify his contemplated step, by the force of the act of 1795, in conjunc tion with the act ot lbU, has been so clearly demonstrated by the honorable gentleman from Georgia, fMr Stephens, lha& it is unnecessary for me to say any thing in addition. As he well and truly remarked, these acts contemplate an ob struction to the judicial process and repulsion of a foreign invasion, as the pro per occasions on which the President should be authorized to call in use the military authority. .We 'have at present uo foreign invasion j we have as yet in that country no judicial process to execute, and hence an obstruction to its execution there, is an impossibility. No law of Congress has as yet been passed affecting in anywise the interests of these people 5 and under this saie offsets, no collision between the laws of Texas and the laws of the United States could possibly occurr. But as on this point the friends of the President have taken issue, and maintain that our treaty stipulations are tantamount to congres sional laws, let me bring to the attention of the House the joint resolution for the annexation of Texas, which is undoubtedly possessed of the'judicial cogency of a treaty. I do not refer to these resolutions now with the purpose of establishing and making good the title in Texas, b'lt for another purpose much more to the point. 1 maintain that these resolutions con template a division of all territory east of the Rio Grande into four new States, which States are to be established with the consent of Texas ; audit is further contemplated that these new States, when so established, by and 'with the consent of Texas, shall be admitted as sisters of the sreat American confedera tion. These resolutions do not indeed partake of the force of a civil or dinance, but most assuredly should be entitled to the respectful consideration of the President of the U. States ; and I am much surprised that when the President and this Cabinet were in deep consulta tion on the subject of their duty, as it re gards New Mexico, they had not at least given to these resolutions a passing notice. 1 am greatly surprised that it never enter ed into the conception of the Cabinet, that as State governments were to be establish ed in this country with the consent of Tex as, it was the duty of the Kxecutive rather to have upheld than to have opposed the ultimate consummation of these measures under the direction of her Government. This law, the highest, the greatest, the supreme law of the land, empowers Texas to establish a State government over this country. The President of the United States, as soon as she makes the first de monstration of her intent to fulfill the law, to execute the purposes of the high and solemn compact, steps forward, puts him self astride of her path, and issues his pro nunciamento that he will resist any ful fillment of the law effected by Texas, with the whole military authority of the United States. Who in this case is the real obstructorof the law that party which makes the attempt, takes the initiatory step to execute the law, to fulfill the pur poses of the compact or on the contrarv, . . . . . 1-1. . that which obstructs and prohiDiis me ex ecution of the law ? Sir. I charge the president as being the actual, the real violator of the law, and that by the arrogation of authority not vest ed in him by the Constitution or the laws, and therefore unwarrantably usurped. Sir, if the peace of the country is destroyed if the lurid light of a civil conflagration illume our happy and prosperous land, the President is the Sylla, on whose head the parricidal crime will rest He may in deed, like his great Roman prototype, flat himself that 'it is only a few rebels that he is punishing," but his experience, the direful experience of his country, will but too fearlully attest his mistake. On a former occasion I stated that a con tention between Texas and the United States would inevitably involve the two great antagonistic interests North and South- Could any southern State contem plate in peace and'quiet the issue of such a struggle? Would not the subjugation of the State of Texas be the prologue of their own destinies? Let us suppose tor a moment the deed done," and what would be the relative situation of affairs? The subjugation of a state must be accom panied with a destruction of its republican existence. It could no longer be consid ered as a sovereign State, but must occupy the position of a conquered territory; and what would be the fate of Texas to day, "according to the principles set forth and arrogated in this commUncatiorl,', might be the doom of any other State of the Un ion to-morrow. If the President can, without the action of Congress, determine upon a casus belli if it is in his power to proscribe the appropriate orbit in which a State is to move, and to punish any devia tion from that circle of motion by the force of the military authority of the Uuion,what other attribute dues he renuire would lie stand in need of. to establish a consolida ted despotism? Understand me, Mr Chair man, 1 impute not to the President any such treasonable design; but it is my object to hold up to public reprobation the prin ciples avowed in this communication. It is my duty to do so, sir There is much truth in the aphorism, "that the price of liberty is' eternal vigilance." Republics, in this enlightened age, have nothing to fear from open aggression; but it is the insidious approach of despotism, under the color of law and authority, that should arouse the patriot from his slumbers. I am well aware that an attempt has been made to justify the tenor of this mes sage by comparing it with the proclamation of Gen Jackson: and this attempt should impress upon our minds the great and live ly necessity of condemning the promulga- Hon oy inose in autnority 01 impolitic and anti-republican principles at all times, and under all circumstances. However well meant that proclamation of Gen. Jackson may have been, yet it contains principles so anti-renuulican that, if thev should ever be adopted and legitimated by the usage of our Government, the destruction 01 oui repubUcau institutions must necessarily ensue. But however obnoxious in my es timation, some of the principles of that proclamation may have been, yet you will not find there the assumption of ant such authority as nmv claimed by the executive of the country. What vterc the circum stances which elicitated that proclamation? The rfTterciffn fremrle of Sooth CarOhrfa, regularly assembled in corttenf ioYi,- not onfy declared the laws of the United States rinllt and void, but adopted the necessary meas ures to resifft their eeetftiem.r AmoTig" these measures was one effecting a total obstruction of (he judicial authority of the United States. These1 heavy pains and penalties were (o be enforced agairrst all of her citizens who might assist in the execu tion of the judicial process. This was the attitude which the sovereign State of South Carolina occupied, and it was under the heavy sense of danger (hen threatening our Government, then Andrew Jackson issued his proclamation. Sir, is (here any, even the farintest, resemblance between the circumstances of that momentous period and those which now surround tls? Has the State of Texas attempted to obstruct the judicial process of the United States, or to arrest the execution of any of its laws? No, sir; the President himself in forms us that she is but engaged in the es tablishment of a civil government. She really and actually making an effort tor ex ecute an existing law 'the law of annexa tion and if the infringement of any right of the United States should be involved, she has ret used no submission to the judicial authority. No, sirjit is the President'who has taken this step it is the President on whom the responsibility must rest of avoid-" ing Judicial progress The President' casus belli will illustrate the truth of this charge. He has declared that if the State of Texas shall attempt to punish any of those citizens of New Mexico ho have resisted the establishment of her civil gov ernment, he will employ the military au thority of the United States to prevent it Now, sir; this punishment is contemplated to be a legal, to be a judicial punishment; and we all must be aware, that if any civil law, or any treaty stipulations should be violated in the process of trial at law, a clear, ready, and unequivocal redress can be obtained at the hands of the Supreme Federal Court, either by appeal or writ of error. It is this judicial determination by the Supreme Court which the President, by the use of military authority, would pre vent. What was General Jackson's deep solitude to sustain and uphold, it is the Pre sident's policy to intercept and frustrate. But, Mr Chairman, let us compare the conduct of President Jackson and Presi dent Fillmore a little further. The for mer, in the pressing emergency stated, ex pressly refused to use the military author ity during the session of Congress, and respectfully invites Congress to invest him .1.1 . i 1 a -wi'it . . wiin mat power rresiueni riumore, un der the operation of the same law, not only, claims the lejjal right and declares his de termination to use, the military authority while Congress is in session, and at the very time Congress i9 engaged in an earn est effort to remove the difficulty, to pour the oil of peace upon the troubled waters.'' The conduct of the former is a high and noble illustration of a warrior statesman, who, most deeply impressed with the dan gers of the crisis, threw himself upon the wisdom of Congress for counsel and advice. iiu tatitri, uiiiiu as 11 ,cit: iu inc tuiiac quences of intestine war, invites not the action of Congress awaits not its action, but boldly declares his determination to pursue the dictates of his own judgement at all hazards at all risks. Indeed, we have failed upon evil times; on every side the lowering clouds most fearfully betoken the perils of the crisis. The most cool and and consummate prudence is required on our part to preserve the noble vessel of State from destruction. Its destiny is in our hands, and, as patriot states men, let us lay aside all bickering, all sectional strife, and approach the great work with a determination to do our duly ourwhule dutv. . - ? r. The Puesidkncy J? Volunteer. Capt . Alden Partridge, so well known for h'i9 c- 1 1' .-. 11 1 -t. r.- ivj unary ccnoois or voiieges, auu wu .mi. a tew years was rnncipai 01 tne Military Academy in this city, we see it stated, ha. issued a Circular, ottering himsell as an Independent candidate for the Presidency. He is a radical democrat. The Captain was very popular as an Instructed atone time; but we have not heard tuucfi about him of late years. He has a perfect right to propose himself as a candidate and people that chose, may vole for him but although a man of great talent, and n man of an iron constitution that would stand all thejrare ami worry and vexations .of the Presidency yet his position has been too retired to render his chance worth much If he could only get into Congress, where his talents would not be hid, there might be some chance for him But as it is, it is a hopeless one. Middletown Sentinel. The new three cent pieces recently is sued at the Philadelphia Mint, have, on one side the words "United " States of America," in which a circular, wreath, in closing the numeral III- On the re verse side is the Liberty Cap, inscribed with the word ''Liberty," and surrounded with the rays. Underneath the cap are the figures 1850." Mrs. Mowatt has been restored to per fect health at I)r Wilson's Water-cure es tablishment at Melvern, England. Her disease was consumption. .'-
The North Carolinian (Wilson, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Sept. 7, 1850, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75