Alexandria Gazette

REMARKS OF MR. NAUDAIN, OF DELAWARE
In the Senate, upon the motion to print and refer the proceedings of the "Jackson Republican Delegates, of New Castle County," presented to the Senate, on Wednesday last, by the Vice President.
Mr. NAUDAIN said, that the citizens of New Castle County, speaking for themselves, by their memorial signed by a majority of all the legal voters of that county, appeared a few weeks since before the Senate, declaring their opinion that the distress which pervaded the country, and which seemed to be still increasing, was occasioned by the removal of the public deposites from the Bank of the United States; that, to effect this removal, the President had violated the laws and disregarded the Constitution of the country; and praying Congress to cause the deposites to be restored, and the Bank to be re-chartered, as, in their opinion, the only effectual means of relief.
Now, sir, said Mr. N., we have the proceedings of a meeting of delegates appointed by primary assemblies of the people, in the several hundreds of that county, presented to the Senate through its presiding officer; setting forth, as they say, "the views and opinions of the Democracy of New Castle County," and approving of all the acts of the Executive. Before I proceed to notice the resolutions themselves, I will say a word or two about the manner in which this same meeting of delegates was got up.
First, sir, a paper was circulated for signature, purporting to be a call for all those approving the conduct of the President, to meet in general county meeting, and express their views and sentiments. But when this paper was passed round, so many of the former supporters of the President refused to sign it, that it became obvious, such a meeting must be an entire failure, and expose their impotent attempt to scorn and derision. The plan of operations was then changed. Circulars were sent round to the faithful, in the respective hundreds, to call a meeting in each hundred, and send five delegates from each to a county convention, to express their opinions about the present state of the affairs of the country.
The Jackson party, sir, have hitherto polled something upwards of 1,600 votes in that county. But with all this effort to parade and organize their force, these primary meetings were miserable failures. In the two Southern hundreds of the county, containing about 600 voters, and where the strength of parties was nearly equal, but 25 persons attended these calls, as I have been informed by most respectable authority. And even in the city of Wilmington, with all the advantage of a night meeting and drumming up for their forces, they could bring but about forty or fifty to rally round their standard. And these delegates, thus appointed by a handful of the people of the county; nearly, if not quite one half of them too, old, thorough, uncompromising, proscriptive federalists, have undertaken to express "the views and opinions of the Democracy of New-Castle County."
Sir, if they had professed to express, what their proceedings do express, the sentiments of the Jacksonism of the county, I should not have thought it my duty to trespass upon the time and patience of the Senate, in endeavoring to expose the pretences by which they are attempting to practise upon their fellow citizens.
Mr. President, I have been a citizen of New Castle County more than fifteen years. I was brought up in the school of Democracy. I have been honored with the confidence and support of that portion of my fellow citizens, in days that are past, when the old party lines were strongly drawn. I was thrice nominated by the Democratic State Convention for a seat in the other House of Congress, and received the support of that party in opposition to that distinguished Federalist, the present Secretary of State, whose brother I see is now among the chosen organs of the "Democracy of New Castle County."
Sir, it is well known that political contests in the State, which I have the honor, in part, to represent on this floor, were always fought on the old distinctions of Democracy and Federalism, until the year 1827. Then the spirit of Jacksonism swept over our little State and overturned our old party divisions; and our citizens as they have done every where else, ranged themselves under new banners. And now, sir, after they have pulled down the good old Democratic flag, torn it in pieces, and scattered its fragments to every wind—after associating themselves with the most uncompromising Federalists within the State—with one-half of this very meeting, made up of the bitterest of the opponents of Democracy—men who had spent their political lives in reviling it, and the great founder of the party, Mr. Jefferson; with men among them, too, who not long since declared that "if they thought they had one drop of Democratic blood in their veins, they would have it out at the risk of life," such men, Mr. President, so elected, and so constituted, are talking about "the views and opinions of the Democracy of New Castle County"!!!
What do such men know of Democracy?— They have always represented Democracy as the opinions of disorganizers and jacobins; as a political heresy, most dangerous to the stability of the Government and the liberties of the People. Some of these were the black cockade men of '99, the advocates of alien and sedition laws, and all the other abuses of power which thrust the old Federal party from office. These have always been high prerogative men; upholders of the Executive in all assumptions of power; stern opposers of all reform of abuses in the Government; and yet, sir, these men pretend to talk about "the views and opinions of Democracy!"
Sir, the Democrats of '98 contended against the encroachments of Executive power; against all acts tending to the concentration of power in the Executive; against laws passed, as they believed, in derogation of the Constitution, and infringing the liberty of speech and the press. What principles are these, newly-made, recently dyed, Jackson Democrats supporting? The only principle which appears to govern them is Jacksonism—pure, unadulterated, Jacksonism; that is, sir, that Jackson can do no wrong. I, myself, heard some of these same consistent gentlemen electioneering for Jackson in 1828, on the ground that the President should be elected but for one term, because, said they, he might
likely to secure his own re-election, and their favorite war cry, in one part of our State, then was "Four years and Liberty." We all remember this was good Jackson doctrine then. But when the "Old Hero" franked a letter to a Pennsylvania Senator, intimating very broadly that a renomination from the Legislature of that State would be very acceptable, why these same gentlemen could see nothing inconsistent in this, either with his or their former opinions, and so they again supported him. Again, when he was thought to be for the Tariff, they were good Tariff men; but when he was found not to be favorable to the then tariff, their cry was "Down with the Tariff! Hurrah for Jackson." Before Jackson assailed the Bank of the United States, they were its supporters. Its action, then, was beneficent; it was a necessary check to improvident issues by the State banks; it had given us a sound and uniform currency throughout the country; and afforded, as the fiscal agent of the Treasury, the most important facilities in the money transactions of the nation. But when this institution was denounced by the President, then their mental vision was rendered so extremely acute, that they could see most clearly what they had never dreamed of before. It then became "a monster," dangerous to the liberties of the country; it had then utterly failed in all the purposes of its creation; and must be put down, cost what it may; yes, even if the laws were violated, and the Constitution trampled under foot to effect it; even if the Executive (that most safe recipient of power, in their estimation,) should usurp uncontrolled power over the public purse, in defiance of Congress. Yes, in their own words, they "approve of the whole course of the present Administration." The whole, sir; THE WHOLE. They have followed the President in every thing. Light enough always beamed upon them to enable them to follow on through all the Executive doublings; and being actuated by the single principle of Jacksonism, they have never faltered, and doubtless are now as ready to approve all future as all past acts of the Executive. And these men profess they are Democrats! So did I not learn Democracy, Mr. President.
In that school in which it is my pride and boast to have been brought up, I learned a jealous watchfulness of Executive power. I imbibed a profound reverence for the Constitution and laws. I was taught that a division of the powers of Government was necessary for the preservation of our liberties; and that the stability of our blessed form of government depended mainly, under Providence, on each Department being confined to its own constitutional orbit, the one not impinging on the other.
I did not there learn that the President should "execute the constitution and laws" as he understands them. I did not there learn that the President had a dispensing power over the laws and treaties, and might execute them or not at his pleasure. I did not there learn that the President could give a qualified approval of a bill presented to him for his signature, and thus amend a bill which had passed both Houses of Congress, and mould it to suit his own views. I did not learn there that the veto power should be used in a manner more arbitrary, oppressive, and dangerous than it has been used in England since their Revolution, and so as to absorb all legislative power. I did not there learn, sir, that all offices, except the judicial were held by the tenure of an arbitrary executive will; or that all the officers of the Federal Government, were to pay for their appointments, by electioneering services in support of the President and successor of his choice. In short, sir, (and this seems to be the very essence and spirit of Jacksonism) I do not recognize it as legitimate democratic doctrine, "that it is glory enough to serve under any chief."
I again repeat, sir, that if this meeting had professed merely to represent the views and opinions of the Jackson party of Newcastle, I should not have trespassed upon the time of the Senate. But when such men have professed to represent the views and opinions of the good old Democracy of Newcastle, I felt that the duty I owed to that party with whom it was always my pride and pleasure to act, compelled me to break that silence I have hitherto imposed upon myself since I have had the honor to be a member of this body.