Lynchburg Virginian

President Jackson's Veto, versus General Jackson's Principles!—When, in the ordinary concerns of life, we meet with a man whose principles and practice do not harmonize, we justly set him down as a hypocrite, and treat him with undisguised contempt. We know no reason why our public men, when they act in a similar manner in relation to great national interests, should not be likewise so regarded and so treated. That Gen. Jackson has done so, in rejecting the internal improvement bills passed by the last Congress, is susceptible of the clearest proof. The Editor of the Raleigh Register has referred to the Journals of the Senate, of the year 1814, when Gen. Jackson was a member of that body, and finds the following facts: General Jackson voted for a bill authorizing the President to cause a road to be marked out from the frontier of Missouri to the confines of Mexico, and making appropriations therefor. How very national! The Register says, this road was strictly local in its character, for it could benefit no portion of the Union but the Western States, and but one or two of them. The most extraordinary part of this bill, however, was, that 800 miles of the road contemplated were without the limits of the United States, and within the territory of another power, to wit, that of Mexico! If Congress has not the power to make roads within the States, we should like to know where the power would be derived for expending the public money within the domains of another sovereign power? Again—Gen. Jackson voted for the bill appropriating $150,000 for the extension of the Cumberland Road from the Ohio to the Muskingum, at Zanesville. And again—he voted for the bill authorizing a subscription of 1500 shares of stock of the Delaware and Chesapeake Canal Company. During the discussion of this bill (says the Register) Mr. Tazewell moved an additional section, authorizing a subscription on the part of the government of 400 shares of the Dismal Swamp Canal Company. After considerable debate, this motion was rejected, only ten Senators voting for its adoption, among whom was Andrew Jackson! How can the friends of the President gloss over these inconsistencies? And how can the people confide in him who has been guilty of them?