Capt. Marryatt, Part I [pp. 253-276]

27 Cae araeadhsDay ARt
that the treaty for the removal of that tribe was fairly concluded, yet, when they refused to emigrate, it should have
been considered proof that they had never concurred in that
compact, nor should those cruel measures of compulsion,
resulting in so lavish an effusion of blood and treasure,
have ever been resorted to. Neither carn any adequate
apology be offered for the treacherous seizure of the Indians, who came within our reach on the faith of a truce,
solemnly concluded by our accredited agents; for, though
the foe might be faithless, a powerful and civilized nation
should disdain to retaliate upon ignorant savages by measures which so deeply implicate its honor. The policy of
transplanting the Indian tribes beyond the Mississippi, even
with their consent, always appeared to us of doubtful expepediency, and the pretexts, by which it was justified, shallow and frivolous in the extreme; but to expel them by
force from the land of their fathers, is an act of crying injustice, which must fix an indelible stigma on the American name. To the disgrace of human nature, the history
of all nations, both savage and civilized, furnish too many
examples of a like character, and we must submit to share
in the general reproach.
To offset the practice of bribing voters confessedly prevalent in England, our author asserts that similar abuses
are to be found in the management of our elections; and, to
support the charge, refers to what has occurred in our large
cities, bloated as they are with the foul tide of European
emigration. We nmaintain, on the contrary, that, in our
country elections, bribery is extremely rare, and, indeed,
that, from the immense number of our voters, it cannot possibly be practised to any available extent. It is where the
electors are few, that corruption is most practicable, and
where it is, on that account, most frequently resorted to.
What is the case in England? Were not the rotten boroughs, and small corporations, entitled to a representation in
Parliament, notoriously bought and sold, like any other
commodity, in the market? Is it not a fact that the expenses of a canvass in the English counties are so exorbitant, that none but men of affluent fortune can venture to
become candidates? How is this money expended? Indubitably in the purchase of votes, and in promoting, by
every device, the success of the aspirants. Nothing parallel to this wholesale venality can be found even in our cities.
Our author's other proofs of the corruption of our governinent apply, almost exclusively, to the administration in
power during his visit to this country. It is impossible to
analyze them without touching party questions, and we
must therefore refrain from the examination. In passing
however we will ask whether the perversion of patronage
to the augmentation of executive power by rewarding friends,
punishing enemies, and operating on elections, is peculiar
to this country? Whether such things have not been immemorially practised in England? Whether defalcations
do not frequently occur in the financial department of that
government? Whether thousands, who have enriched themselves by improper practices in various branches of the public service, have not been permitted to enjoy their ill-gotten
gains unmolested? If he be candid, Capt. Marryatt must
respond affirmatively to these questions. Should he hazard
a negative, we have not leisure or space to exhibit the
proofs of such abuses, with which English history abounds.
We will however point to one conspicuous and signal example, namely: the princely fortune amassed by Warren
Hastings, by the plunder of nations; the unhallowed fruits
of which, enjoyed through a long life, enabled him to ward
off the threatened vengeance of retributive justice. If this
does not satisfy our author, we will refer him to his own infallible maxim, that human nature is the same everywhere.
In a government, whose expenditures are so enormous, and
operations so extensive as that of England, the facilities
for the increase of executive power are great; the oppottu
nities and temptations to pecuniary embezzlement frequent;
and so long as man is fallible, the combined effect of these
causes nmust assuredly generate a vast mass of corruption.
But, at most, what inference should be deduced from all
these alleged malversations and abuses in the American go vernment? Simply that when our author was in this coun try, we had a corrupt administration. And have there not
been corrupt administrations in England? Ministers sup ported by the whole influence of the crown and favor of the
people, who have prostituted their power to the vilest pur poses? If there be any truth in history, such men and such
administrations have existed in that country; but it does
not therefore follow as a logical corollary, that the govern ment and the people are habitually depraved. All sove reigns, whether it be one man or many, are liable to be de luded and deceived-to have their confidence abused by
crafty and designing men. It never was pretended by any
one, that ambitious, unprincipled men, might not, by prac tising on the honest credulity of the people, thrust them selves into the lead of affairs in a republic; hut, to make
the admission of any value to our author's argument, he
should establish that such things are peculiar to that form
of government. In charity, and in fairness therefore, our
author should have concluded from his facts, that it was
the ministers and not the government that were corrupt.
But to guard against such an interpretation, and to involve
all political parties among us in the infamy of this accusa tion, our author affirms, (second series, page 172,) that "the
struggle in America is for place, and not for principle; for
which ever party obtains power, their principle of action is
much the same." Upon what does he found this sweeping
anathema? Not surely on his own observation. No change
of parties occurred while he was in this country. How
then could he undertake to say that the opposition party,
when clothed with power, would not pursue different mea sures from their opponents? Were not the principles and
proceedings of the party in power the constant theme of
their denunciations? This illiberal remark of our author
therefore is altogether gratuitous.
To fortify his preferences for aristocracy by the authority
of Washington, and to show that even that illustrious pa triot had no confidence in the stability of our institutions,
our author quotes a passage from one of his letters to John
Jay, written in the year 1787. Now it is well known, that
the apprehension, expressed in the letter referred to, that
our government would not succeed, was founded on the
feeble character of the old confederation, and the disorgani zation consequent on that want of energy. Not a sentence,
we believe, can be produced from the public or private
writings of that great man, subsequent to the adoption of
the present constitution, indicating a belief that the experi ment of republican government in this country would prove
a failure. So much for the support which our author's
speculations on government derive from the opinions of
Washington.
Capt. Marryatt supposes that a warfare, like the struggle
between the Manichean principles of good and evil, must
perpetually exist between the rich and poor in all communities, which can only be tempered and restrained by all
hereditary executive. When affairs have come to that
pass, that the poor are prepared to make a direct attack
upon property, society will be so corrupt, that forms of go.
vernment will be of little consequence, since none could
reform that lawless spirit of rapine. A depraved people do
not deserve, and are incapable of enjoying the blessings of
regulated freedom. But if there be any one principle in
the construction of a government more calculated than any
other to sap the foundations of political morality, it is the
;transmission of executive power by inheritance. It is the
disposition of all power to encroach-to strengthen itselfto draw within its vortex every floating and doubtful pre
Capt. Marryall and his Diary.
[ArRir,,
274