Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

o their deserted habitation, cooing and strut*ing, in conscious security, after an exile of more than two months. The following night, they rook roost in their own house, but stationed one at each window for asentine!. And as this or ier was strictly adhered to each successive night, we were led t > apprehend, there might he a remaining foe on ll'.e premises. Another ambush on my part was successful in taking the surviving partner in crime, and from that moment, the sentinel* have been recalled, nidification is resumed, and ^all appears blithesome, and full of hope. Wee-ping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.?Ps. xxx. 5. March 12, 1S39. G. P. REMARKS OF MR. ELY MOORE,OF NEW YORK. in Hnneo of Representatives. February I li %??^ I 9 m 4 1833, on presenting a remonstrance from citzens oft. c District of Columbia, against the reception of abolition petitions, &e. Mr. Speaker?I present to the House a emonstrance, signed by several hundred citizens of this District, against the recept on of petitions from the citizens of the States, praying for the abolition of slavery it; the District of Columbia. The memorialalists represent that they regard Congress as the local Legislature of this District, standing in the same relation to the itizens of the District that a Legislature does to the ci izens of a State; and that they claim the right to advise or instruct the Congress, as their local Legislature, on all subjects re'ating exclusively to the local interests and municipal institu:ions of the District.? And further?that they regard the interference of persons residing without the limits of the District, by petition or otherwise, as inlru-irc and unwarrantable j and claim mc paternal protection 01 congress ugaiusi such interference with their rights and in. tercsts. I concur with ihe views of the memoralists, and shall proceed ;o vindicate them to the best of my abilities. I believe, Mr. Speaker, I am justified in tl?e declaration that since I have had the honor of a seat in this body, at least one# I third of our time has been unnecessarily j waited, or mischievously employed, I will J not undertake to say which, in debating pc. I titions, resolutions, &c., touching the abolition of slavery in the District ofColum. Oia. In other words, if I am correct in iho views which I would beg leave to submit to the consideration of the House before I take my s< a\ we have for the last four scs. sions of Congress, consumed a large portion nil# tim,? in fJisrusainff a subject over ! ~jr - ? -p? - j which the Federal Leg' 'ature, in their fed. -rrui capacity, have no jurisdiction. If this be so, is it not time that we pause; nay, is it not high time that we so chunge our course of action on this exciting and vexatious subject as to reject, outright, nil petitions and memorials praying for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia? It is well known to the members of this House, that all attempts to suppress discussion on this subject, have proved utterly { abortive. And so long as we continue to receive petitions from citizens of the States on the subject of slavery, so long will our time, as heretofore, be occupied in agitn* ting this question Nay, it must be apparent to all, row lhat abolitionism has assumed a political character, that this perplexing subject will become, from year to year, inoro and more embai rasing to the Federal Legis lature, unless there shall be found sufficient firmness in a majority of its members to that down the gate at once upon all petitions of mn aboli'ion character. And, Sir, permit me to say, that I am not altogether confident the American people do not at strk unrlun imnortance tO tllO Ntlht, *'of PC tition," when understood in a. brood and po. litical sense?in that sense, I moan, in which it has ever been regarded in England. When I hear gentlemen on this floor declaim with so much warmth and energy on what they are pleased to call the "blessed, sacred, and inestimable rig.it of the people to assemble and to petition, for redress of grievances," I am sometimes inclined to believe that their zeal is not according to knowledge, and that they have nor duly considered the character and genius of our free ins itu:ions. It is iru*', Bnd to my mind it is as strange as it is true, that the Congress of 1789 deemt d pr per to propose an amendment to tbe Constitution, recognizing "the ngh.^f the people peaceably to assemble and petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The statesmen of that day, as well as those oftii- present, were too much in the habit of looking to England, not only for precedents, b;ii lor political principles and practices. And from that source did dersrc t!?eir idcag concerning the sancHp.ar:d impor ar>ce of the right of the peo " #1 10 assemble and pennon meir vjuverum?nt. Thai the right of petition has ever been held dear and sacred by the oppressed and down-trodden subjects of Great Brtain, is not to be marvelled at. Nothing couid be more natural than a people, whose political franchises ha 1 been wrenched from them by the iron hand of despotic power, should esteem it a boon to be graciously pernutte i to assemble, and make known their wrongs, nnd to petition, to supplicate for redress. It was the only avenue to the throne which tyranny had left them; the only mode to obtain, or rather lo solicit, redress, which the sovereign had vouchsafed to tliem. The grievances complained ot by the subjects?I speak particuiariy in reference to by gone times?were mostly general in their effects, and political in their character, and originated with the Government. And iheonly general or political remedy, ifremedy it could be called, u Ki<-?li (kn f.ikloNa ii'orp rvrmitlpd tn >V ? IOVK HIV OUUJ^VIV " v?. v w | was to assemble and petition ilie Crown relative thereto. Hence, ever associated with die "right of petition" is the idea of an expression oi the public will. But with what propriety th s identical idea has been transferred to the American Constitution, I confess i am at a loss to detetmine. In England, especially in the reign of John, of 'Oiaijna Cbnrta" men?orr. and ofihc first three Henrys, the peop loudlv and earnestly clamored foi the rig of petition, because their voice could on reach the throne through the medium ofsu plication?of petition. It was the omnip< tency of the prince on the one hand, ar the impotency of the subject on thcother.' Under such circumstances, it was not on natural but politic for the subject to addre the soveieign in the abject language of suj plication?of petition. B it, sir, docs it bt come American freemen, the sovereign pet pie?in whom ail power resi ?es?t > oj prouch their representatives?their agen ?their servants?the creatures of their ow making?with the abject, servile languor of petition, pjavcr, supplication ? No si No ! Thank God ! it is the peculiar pre | vincc, the proud privilege of the America i people, to speak to those in power, on a | subjects of general poli'ical moment, in th 1 potent and authoritative language of instrur i tion?of tiicla ion. And who will alhrr j that the right to instruct, to dictate, uoc not supersede the poor privilege to petition What, sir; shall it be deemed a priviieg for the creator to supplicate the creature The master to petition the servant ? Wh) sir this would he investing the order of thing 1 with a witness. I hold that it is not befi'tin 1 the American people to address the lati ! guage of prayer?of petition?of supplied i tion?to any power save to that of Almigh' power. When freemen pray let them sup plica e the only power superior to tliei own?the God of the Universe! But, sir, it is not my intention to dwe longer, at this time, on the subject. Oi j some future day I may enter fully info j | discussion of this question. It shall now b i my object lo prove?admitting the right c : petition, ns I now do, in all its length an< ( breadth?that the citizens of the States hav< i i _ | _ no right lo petition Congress to aootisn sia very in the District of Columbia. Let n< man charge me with a desire to strangle th right of petition in order to make out nv case, i hold that I am not obnoxious to tlv charge. I am the last man that would*at tempt, by word or deed, directly or indirect Iy, to embarrass or abridge the logilimati | exercise of any valuable right. Nor, sir ! would I bring MY important privilege int< dispn'c or contempt by the abuse of it.? And I contend that it is as much an abusi of this privilege for tlio citizens of the States and especially to the non-slaveholdinj States, to petition the American Congres; to abolish slavery in the District of Colum bia as it would hi for such citizens to peti tion the Parliament of Great Britain, or th< French Chamber of Deputies, for a like purpose; or as it would be for the citizen; of Maine to petition the Legislature of Vir ginia to abolish slavery within the limits o that State. No man, in the possession o his wits, having the least acquaintance with the character of our Government, will as. s rt that it would be a denial oftho right o petition, for the Legislature of Virginia t( reject petitions from the citizens of the State of Maine praying for the abolition of slavery And if it would not be a denial of the righ of petition in this case, how can it be a de nial ofthat right for the Legislature of thii D strict to reject petitions of like import fron i7ono t\f hr? Kiaioc ? Wnnl 1 it Mot b( VKIOVlto VI iliv VV ?f VMt ? -w. -equally proper for the citizens of the Distric ol Columbia to petition the Legislature o Massachusetts to pass laws for the relie and melioration of the condition of the la, borers employed in the manufactories of tha Siatt\ as for the citizens of Massachusetts t< petition Congress to abolish slavery in th District of Columbia? If rejection of pc litions would not be a denial or the right c petition in the one case, how could it be si in the other ? Fori contend, and shai show most conclusively, that the citizen ! ofthe District of Columbia have the sain > right to interfere in the internal police c Massachusetts, that the citizens of Massa j chusetts have to interfere in the internal pol I ice of the District of Columbia. It will be perceived by the House, fror what I have stated, that I regard Congres as the local Legislature of this District standing in the same relation, in one resp c ! to the citizens of the District, as do the Slat I Legislatures to the citizens of the States i Entertaining this opinion, then, I conten j that the rejection bv Congress of petitions ' coming from citizen-! of any of the States j praying for the abolition of slavery in th j District of Columbia, is no more a denial c ! the right of petition than it would be for th ! Legislature of Maryland or of Arkansas t j reject petitions coming from, citizens ofVci ' mont or Rhode Island, praying for the abc I lit:on of slavery. It will be conceded by a ' ?at least by all professing the Dcmocrati j faith?that "every free citizen must be ref j resented and that the power of ft e reprt I sentative is derived Iroin the will of the I resented. This elementaly principle oftli American constitution forms the basis ol'u legislation. Tnis being so, it follows, th; the Iree citizens of this District "must L represented.Previous to the cession ( the "ten miles square," by the States < j Maryland and Virginia, the citizens of thes i States residing within the present limits < ! this District were represented by the respet tive Legislature of these States, And s j neither Virginia 'nor Maryland had the pov j er so far to disfranchise their citizens us t i deprive them of the right to be "represen'ed, i that rieht, of course, icmains unimpairec The States making the "cession" coul delegate no power to Congress which t e themselves did not possess; consequently j Congress can exercise no power by virtu ! of the "acts of session," which :t would n< j have been competent for those States I have exercised. The citizens of the Dt: trici of Columbia, therefore, like ail oth< free Citizens, are entitled to be representor And as they are not represented by tl; States w hich made the "cession" they mus necessarily, be represented by Congress, 1 whom the "cession" was made. But wh; must be regarded as decisive on this poin is the fact that Congress may tax the cit zens of District of Columbia, just as a Stat j Legislature may tax the citizens of a Stat< i Sir, the character and genius of our frc j government preclude, repudiate, and abh( ' the idea of taxation without reprove'at :ei * 1c j Sir. ihe Congress of tiic United States are! b ht | the representatives of the citizens of the Dis.' ! Iv j trict of Columbia. Congress, as a Jog is In." I p. j tive body, exercise two species of legisla-j ti r,. j tive power over this District; the one Fed- o ,j mal, the other municipal. The first, limi- [ - ted as to its objects, but co-extensive* with 0 !y the Union. The Ia*r, unlimited as to ob~ w s's jeers, but inoperative beyond the territory! i I p. limits of tins District. The relation in j tl 3. which Congress stands to the citizens of j 0 3. j the District, therefore, is t w0 fold. First In j as the represent!! ves of the whole Union i 0 {s I and second, as the local Legislature of the ! Ir n | District. In the lartcr capacitv. Congress ' In ro I stand precisely in tne same rtilation to the c; P Citizens ot the District, as the State Legis-j ci j ! latures to the citizens of States;?and, con- i C ~ | sequently, are as much bound, in ail their j ir U j acts affecting merely this District, to obey & e j the will of the people residing within the Km-' n! .. ' its of the District, as are State legislatures! hi n I to obey the wili of the citizens of the States, j st ,s j Without the consent of the people of the I ei ? i District, therefore, Congress have no right1 cl c : to abolish slavery within its limits. Congress, j 1S as the Federal Legislature, acting in their ? r I federative capacity, have no more right to ? ,g ! abolish slavery in the Dis'rict of-Columbia ? ? than they have to abolish slavery -in the ? j State of South Carolina. If Congress * ! possess the power at all, they can only ex- 01 y' ercisc it as the local Legislature of 'the itu ! District, and in pursuance of the will of the ; uf j.! citizens residing within tli linfts of the Dis- oi ; trict. To affirm the contrary, to assert that i th II ; ihe municipal institutions, the domestic or n j local rights and interests of the citizens of the District of Columbia are subject to the arbitrary will and control of the citizens of! remote, distinct and independent States or j pc j communities, or, which is in effect the same. of Congress, is to assert that the people of . the District do not posses the right of self3 government, and that the power of Congress ^ L> over them and theirs is plenary and absolute. Who will avow this openly ? Who will say in direct terms, that Congress, or ^ _ I the citizens of remote States, through their oi _ j immediate Representatives in Congress, of I may rightfully and constitutionally interfere : e. * 1 M. I .? 91 - t ? " , .wun ana con.roi me wnoie inTernai police; rr. ! I of the District, in defiance of the wishes and _ I regardless of the remonstrances of its citi- nc s j zens ? Who, I ask, will openiy confess him- tri '1 self the advocate of doctrines and principles H ' so alien to the character and genius of our ^ ? Government, so fraughl with tyranny and j I despotism, and so utterly repugnant to the * ; greit principle upon which our institutions as *' are founded?the right of the people to be he I represented, or, in other words, the right of \\ ^ the people to self government ? Let him ^ I who would strike at the r ights of a commu- , j-inity remember that the blow would be J equally dangerous to liberty as if aimed at so j the rights of individuals. I shall be told, of th course, that by the 16lh article of the 8th gr j. I section of the constitution of the United } | States, Congress have "exclusive jurisdic,! lion over the ten miles square." Well, m Sir, how are we to understand this exclusive th | legislative power? Why, sir, in .the first sp place it was evidently iU wiention oftlie * framers of the constitution to exclude from ,. 1 the territory embracing the seat of the Fed.. 1 \ cral Legislature the jurisdiction ofthe States, a " which should cede such territory, as well as aj f all other State authority. Ani, in the so- re P cond place, that Congress, as the local Le- ^ gislatureof such District, should assume the "j jurisdiction and exercise the 'egislalive r powers surrendered up by the States Which 3 made the "cessionCongress, in pursu8 a nee of this right of "exclusive jurisdic- w j- tion," exercise the same legislative funcv ^ tions over the District of Columbia, when 3 .1*11 - . I . .1 _ L,.... j acting rn tnetr local capacity, mat ine ouue Legislatures do over tho States. When Sl Congress, therefore, act in pursuance of j. their exclusive legislative power over the "ten miles square/' they abandon their na- ai j" tional functions, and assume the functions of pi a local or State Legislature ; and all the g laws passed by Congress when acting in this local capacity are limited in their operation . to the territory comprising the "ten miles l< ' squarejust as the laws enacted by a State ^ Legislature, are inoperative beyond tho lim. ic | its of such State. In other words, laws g j j passed by Congress in their local legislative ; capacity, are no more obligatory beyond the j ''; bounds of this District, than are laws passed j; ' by the Legislature of Maryland, for exam- '? pi pie, binding beyond the limits of Maryland. s< j In this opinion I am fully sustained by a n | decision of the Supreme Court of tho United 0 States. The court decided that the tickets in a lottery authorized by a law of Congress ^ wilhln lliH District nf f'nlnmhift. rnnM not . t( J1 ? 1 i be vended in the State of Virginia, in con. j w c travention of the laws of that State, (Cohens | w *! versus Virginia.) i ,i ?. j a J i tl ).; The general or national powe/B which ^ ie Congress exercises over, and which arc ^ II binding upon the States, were delegated by lt i the States; and the powers of "exclusive >' ,e j Legislation," which Congress exercises c 3f' over the Dis'rict of Columbia, and which c 3f are effective only within the District, were ^ ;e derived from the Slates of Maryland and , 3f Virginia, by virtue of certain acts in which t! they ceded to Congress this District. Had w ls Congress been invested with no other pow- a /. or than that of exclusive legislation over a o the "icn miles square," could there be any _ ** question with regard to the extent of their j, j, power ? Or would it have been alleged in id j that case that all laws passed by Congress c' v | were essentially national in their character, fa j and operative without, as well as within the ^ ie i limits of the District ? f presume not, sir ; , because the power ot exclusive legislation ' x.l.InU f t . ... Al'nH illi\ n.LlJ .1 . C t I q UUHjjrws w?ci inn uisinci 01 s. j Columbia can be of no greater extent than n< .r ] if such power had been the only one con- Ci j, { ferrcd. Congress cannot exercise exclusive ^ lt>! legislative power over the Slates, because g it of the reservation of power to the States, or 0' to the people thereof. Even the "ten miles!NV it square" the power of Congress is limited by te t the acts of "cession." With what propriety, b j! then, can it be contended that because a a e law is passed by Congress it is, therefore, a . law of the United States, and of universal :c) obligation? No, sir ; whenever Congress c )r! legislate in virtue of their local and cxclu-; u r,, I ?:vo junHsctirn uvr the District of Cnhim.'d iia, they act as a local or municipal Lrgisiture, and the acts passed by them, in that apaciiy, are limited in their operation to je tei ritory of the District. A law of Conress to have the eflkct of a Law of the Jnited States, must be passed in execution fsomc of the federal powers, or, in other rords, in pursuance of delegated power.? tut all laws of Congress passed in virtue of ic power to exercise exclusive legislation vcr the District of Columbia, are local or municipal in their character, and cannot pcrate cxtrn-territorinlly, or beyond the mts of the District. True, there tire certain tws passed by Congress which have a lo? ;il reference to this District, and which pro *ed trom the delegated powers with which ongress are invested. Acts appropriating mneys for the- erection of public buildings, ;c.,areof this description. These acts, though local in their immediate operation, i ive reference to national objects, are past/1 in . i.ftlrt ft... ' ?n/i.-i 1 lj.1?--1 .*I u *11 %uiuv> vji UHJ gc&i^Kii n'gi^iaiivt; |IUW* ?, and arc general or national in their i liurac:er. (to be continued.) ;HMTAW"gazkt IE: FRIDAY. APRIL 5t 1839. What quantity of turnips can be raised in ir climate on our light soil ? What kind of mips is most productive in our common iland soil when well prepared? Will any ir readers furnish us with facta bearing on ese questions ? What quantity of carrots can be raised on tr light up lands ? Who will answer ? A classic Scholar. A Tennessee corresindent of a New York paper by way of \ustral\71g the attainments of h s atate in both erature and horse flesh refers to several irses by name, ?cum otuItum aiiis Mr. Biddle has resigned the office of irector of the U. S. Bank of Pennsvlvaa, which of course involved a resignation ' the Presidency of that institution. No ent coqld hnve boon more unexpected* lie N. Y. Courier and Enquirer in an>uncing to its readers the resignation says, uly : "Mr. Biddle needs no eulogy. The istory of the United States during the last teen years cannot be faithfully written, ilhout giving to Mr. Biddlo Replace in it, honorable to himself as his whole fa has ten eminently useful to his country.? rithin the last week we heard an eminent rokerof this City eay?one who has ever ten a friend and supporter of Gen. Jackin and an opponent of the U. S. Bank? at Mr. Biddle's course in regard to our eat staple, Cotton, during the last eighteen onths, had saved not less than twenty five illions of dollars to die Country ; and that is alone, had enabled the Banks to resume iccie payments." The reason assigned by Mr. BidcITe, in s letter to the Directors, for resigning, is wish for the relaxation and repose which iproaching age and precarious health quire, after more than 20 years service in ic arduous dutios connected with the di. sctorship and Presidency of the bank. Several cases of small pox have occurred ithin a few weeks in both Wilmington and lewbern N. C. Presbyterian Church case.?This is a lit at law before a civil court in Pennsyl. ania, and has excited so much attention, ad been so generally noticed by the news, apers that we shall, as briefly as possible, ive such an account of it as shall enable ?e reader to undersiand the relative posi. on of the parties. For the last 4(1 or 50 years, the Presby. irian Church has readily admitted Congre. ationalists into its communion. Such were le friendly relations between tho two (lurches that a Congregationalist passing 'om New England info any of the middle, authern or western states considered itallost as much a matter of course that he was > becomo connected with the Presbyterian Ihurch, as that he was to become subject ) the civil government of the state into /hich he was emigrating. So generally ras this the case, that, notwithstanding the lonsands upon thousands of Congregation lists annually emigrating south and west rom New England, there was, a very few ears ago, hardly any where else, in the ountrv a single Congregational Church ex. ept a few of long standing in and near J.iarits on ; 01 at least if there were any, ley were net so considered abroad. They ere every where, nominally Presbyterian, nd as such, were represented in the eeciesisticalassembliesofthat church. This imaU amntion was followed by no controversy or bcorcl, as long as the Congregational liurclies of New England adhered to the titli oi thoir pilgrim fathers ; which differed ut little from the Confession of Faith of io Pre3bvteria'n Church. In process of me, however, doctrines nearly allied to, if ot identical with Pelagianism began to reep into the New England churches, and y means of some of their Theological emmaries, were rapidly propagated. They ere of course introduced into the Prcsby. triun Church and extensively disseminated y emigrants and missionaries; they were Iso, in many places, accompanied by much ixiiy and disorder in government and disiplinc, Sound Presbyterians looking pon these dcctrincs as both erroneous on 1 nngerous, opposed dierr. Hence the troversy. Their propagate*# are callei the New School, an accowntof their innovn lions upon the doctrines and order of th< church , and their opponents the Old School because they adhere to their old written Confession of Faith, and Form of Govern ment. A few who wt reeducated in the Pres byterian church, or who made their firs profession of religion in it are of the New School; and a considerable number o original Congregationalists from Niw Eng. land, both ministers and laymen, adhere tc the Old School, and to the principles which they professed in entering the Presbyterian Church. The innovations npon the doctrines and order of the church finally became so general in some parts of the country, and the ' cv'ls growing out of them so great thai [ the General Assembly, a body composed o( I r _ii n ? .u? | uuif^uirs ironi nil me rresuvien^s. ui iiil meeting of 1837, excluded the delegates of Presbyteries composing four entire Synods, on the ground that these Synods were not in fact Presbyterian, had never been constitutionally connected with thr Presbyterian Church, and were not therefore entitled to purtake in its government. It was expressly declared that this act ol exclusion was not judicial, and was not de .signed to affect the ecclesiastical standing of those to whom it related. They were merely declared not to b3 a part of the Presbyterian Church but were recognized as a distinct denomination. The excluded or disowned bodi:s lay in western New York and Oh o, and were composed chiefly of Congregational emigr. nts from New England. Strange as it may seem, al hough thus repulsed by the Presbyterian Church they still strove to thrust themselves into its /lAmmunrnn tin fl ttifh ih.it view s ,nt una S?Uil1lliUll>VII ) * " -? - - - - -full delegation the next year to claim seats in the General Assembly. In this th?y weie encouraged by their New School brethren within the limits of other Synods, s'ill in connection with the church. When the time for the meeting of the Assembly in 1838 arrived, it appeared that a large majority of the Presbyteries, had approved the disowning act of the previous Assembly, and sent up delegates instructed to carry it out. Even countiug the delegates from the disowned Synods, the New School were greatly in the minority. They were then apparently determined upon a separation from the Old School; and if they lnd gone off peaceably, in the spirit of the rel'gion which they profess, nil w. uld have approved the act; for, to say nothing of the diversity of doctrine between the pnrties, their mutual alienation of feeling was loo great for a continuance in the same communion. But the "loaves nnd fishes" had too 3trong a hold upon the affections of the New School for this, as their conduct lias proved. The funds of :he General Assembly, equal according to one sta'ement which we have seen, to more than $300,000, according t< annthpr. ahmit half that amount, was i prize which they considered worth graspinj at. They contributed little or ncthing t< these funds, but they coveted them non< the less on that account. So, ir? caucus just before the meeting of the Assembly o 1839, under the advisement of a lawyer they devised their scheme for getting hoi of the funds. When the hour of meetinj arrived they marched in a body from cau cus to the place of meeting. According to the constitution ofthe rhurcl the moderator of the last Assembly, if pres ent is to preside at the opening, and till an other is chosen ; and no commissioner o delegate "shall have aright to deliberate o vote in the Assemblv, till his name shul ? * have been enrolled by tl)e clerk, nnd hit commission examined and filed among tlx papers ofthe Assembly." As soon as tin moderator of the previous Assembly tool his chair persons appointed by the New School, in caucus, for the purpose, com. I trenced making motions for the admtssior of dt I igates from the disowned fresbytcries Th^se motions the moderator declared u be out of order. Appeals were taken to thi House ; the moderator refused to put th< appeals, because there was no house nc cordin" to the constitution, to "deliberate 01 O vote" on an appeal or any other question The uproar and confusion which this disorderly conduct produced, so disgusted :h< friends of decorum that an old School min j istc rose and said, do let them alone; nflci they have got through,order will be rcstorec and we can then proceed with the orgamzn | tion of the Assembly. The moderator, whe t had bi-en on his feet endeavoring to main. ! titin ordor,then sat down,and by general con. I sent of the Old School the organization was j suspended and the New School were a|. lowed to proceed in their own way, withou interruption. 'I h.'s was the very thing a which they aimed,though the OldSchoo! wa? no: aware of it. One of them then movec . o appoint a moderator pro tem. The oth i ci ied A YE at the top of their voices, am i j the old school were silent. After choos i ;ng officers a morion was made to adjouri ! to another Iiousj, and of course curried.? j Their moderator then announced that tin j General Assembly of the Presbyteriar ? Chnrcli in the TTni?ed .States" was ndionrne d fo meet immediate!/ in the said bouse.? . u There!" cries one of their leaders who had 31 been With tliem in caucus "Toere ! It is \ done according to law as slick as can be i j and off they marched in high glee. They . 1 thenceforth continued to hold their meet. ingj as a distinct body, claiming to be the t u lawful" General Assembly, and brought r suit against the Old School for the funds, f contributed, held and always managed by . them. For whenever the New School > contiibutcd funds it was to endow and supi port Theological Seminaries and other i institutions of their own, which they ! wc re always careful to keep out of the hands of the General Aossembly? and to manage through their own synods and ! Presbyteries. After the New School had , ) i ,i i r. t r? ' ' ? i; icureu, me uia ocnooi rroceeaea wmi j their organization, in which they had been j interrupted. In what quibble does the reader suppose the N ew School based the legality i of their claim, to the funds of the Pres* '' byterian church to establish which they ; j went i.ito a civil court "before unbelievers."? Why, that the Old School at the opening of the Assembly, in letting them carry their disorderly motions to elect their own moderator and then to adjourn, did actually vote \ Cor these motions, because silent members - are to be understood as voting with the majority. Here then we have men, professing to be followeis of the Prince of Peace and Righteousness, going into a court of law ' with a palpable untruth on their lips, well known by ihemstlv-s to be such, and grounding upon this untruth their claim to 1 a large amount of money thep in the possession of its only rightful owners. And ! yet the judge d.d actually charge the jury that this quibble was the law ; that "by intent 1 rnent of law" the old Scltool had really voted for the New Scho< 1 motions, and that they ' were bound to decide accordingly. We 1 had alwavs sunnnard that law was founded on reason and common sense. That iho internment of law" in a case like the present would be fo ascertain the truth, the M in* t? nment" of ihe parties, and to determine accordingly. According te the decision of the Philadelphia judge, and Philadelphia jary howi verthis is not the ense. If "the internment of law" in Pennsylvania is not to maintain justice between man and man, ' but to furnish a snare by whicb-honest men f may be defrauded of their rights by trickery t then we have hi herto greatly mistaken l!*e character of that State. The case is carried * up to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ' by motion for a new trial. The desigr. of the New School in the course pursued by them is evident from ii>6 I lime of making their motions. If the mo? r tiuns had been delayed till after the organic zation of the Assembly, when their motions ? would be in order, and questions would bo i fairly taken on them they were aware that ) then the Old School members would vote ? and defeat them, because that party had a I very large majority. Their plan was evL J dently framed with a view to the very result s! which followed. , j The New School are generally in the f | middle and North Western States. Tb? ' | numb< r at the South is comparatively small.. J The Farmer's Register The March No. of ? this valuable periodical has coroe to hand. i. Among the excellent articles which fill its columns, is a well written essay of 10 pages , by the Editor On the production of silk, and the peculiar advantages of Virginia for (ha culture. The influence of such publications '* as the Farmer's Register and the Southern r Agriculturist upon the agriculture and r and prt sperity of the Southern States cannot !1 but be eminently beneficial. Their Editors s are entitled to more gratitude and tenfold 2 richer rewards from the country and from all , lovers of the country, and its true prosperity, t than a whole array of ambitious, selfish, 6peech f making, strife stirring politicians. The following is the table of contents of the '; No. before ug of the Register. 1 j Original Communications. . j Essay on the production of silk, and the . 4 pecnliar advantages of Virginia for the cul j ture. ' j On the causes of failure of the crop of {' cocoons, in 1834, in the department of Gard. i Profit of improving poor land. " i The advantage of steaming food for stock, r; Improvement of land by grass husbandry . j May making. Improving land by liming. Essay on Vegetable Physiology by Prof, i' Armstrong, Chap. V. Do. Chap. VI. " ; Sale of Durham short-horn cows, r: Is the planet which we inhabit becoming 1 ; colder ? Remarks on wine-making. ' j A profitable mode of cultivating copi. > ! Extracts from the ancient laws and records . ! of Virginia. ! Boirowers of the Farmers' Register. : Humbugs. Multicauiis 6ecd and Chinese ; ! corn. p j Reprint of Vol. I. of Farmers' Register. " 5 Smith fund, tj State of mulberry trade, t i Answers and explanations la subsribere. Selections. i Essay on the breeding of livestock,and 1 ; the conif arativc influence of the male and fe.! male parent in the offspring, (concluded.) i Ice-houses, i Lime?its profits and cost, -1 Exhibit of the value of silks imported in the (]! United States, and exported from 1821 tv .837 [ inclusive, ~ | The short-horn fever in Kentucky, 3 j Electro-magnetic power, j j Sugar beet and ruta baga. , | " Ou the preparation of orchard grass-seed rl for sow'ng.