Centinel 22

It was my intention to appropriate this number to the consideration of the enormous sums of public money unaccounted for by individuals, now ascertained by a late investigation of Congress; but accidentally meeting with an address to the freemen of Pennsylvania, signed Lucullus, published in the Federal Gazette of November 6th, I thought no time should be lost in detecting the atrocious falsehoods, and counteracting the baneful poison contained in that address. In a former number I noticed the base policy practised by the Republicans^ as they styled themselves, of imitating and prejudicing that part of the community who were disaffected to our cause in the late war against the constitutional Whigs, by the grossest calumny and misrepresentation of their conduct and principles, and thereby duping the disaffected into the support of measures, which their dispassionate judgment would have reprobated as highly injurious to the common welfare. That address is a continuation of the same policy, and from characteristic features, is known to be the production of Galen, who has done more to destroy the harmony of Pennsylvania, and forward the vassalage of her citizens to the rich and aspiring than all the other firebrands of party and instruments of ambition.

We are now hastening, to a crisis that will determine the fate of this great country — that will decide whether the United States is to be ruled by a free government, or subjected to the supremacy of a lordly and profligate few. Hitherto the gratification of party spirit and prejudice was attended with the ruin of the honest Whigs and the emolument and aggrandizement of the Republicans at the common expense; but now it would be attended with the loss of all liberty and the establishment of a general thraldom — men of all descriptions, except our rulers, would equally wear the fetters, and experience the evils of despotism ; it therefore behooves every man who has any regard for the welfare and happiness of his country, of himself, or his posterity, to endeavor to divest himself of all prejudices that may bias or blind his judgment on this great occasion. In confidence of a dispassionate perusal and consideration, I will now take up the address and expose its fallacy. It begins, "You will be called upon on the last Wednesday of the present month to give your votes for eight persons to represent you in the Legislature of the United States. You never were called upon to exercise the privilege of electing rulers upon a more important occasion. Two tickets will be offered you. The one will contain men who will support the new constitution in its present form : the other ticket will contain men who will overset the government under the specious pretext of amending it." Here is a plain, explicit avowal that the new constitution is to be supported in its present form] I hope this declaration will open the eyes of those people who have been deluded by the deceitful promises of amendments, and that being thereby convinced of the fallacy of the reiterated assurances of amendments, they will now embrace the only method left of obtaining them, by giving their suffrages and influence to the other ticket. The bugbear raised to intimidate the people from voting for this ticket, viz: "that the design is to destroy the government under the specious pretext of amending it," I trust will be treated with the deserved contempt, and that this low device will only confirm the people the more in their determination to support men favorable to amendments. The address proceeds, "To give you just ideas of the anti-federal ticket, I shall only add that it was composed and will be supported by persons who violated the rights of conscience by imposing a wicked and tyrannical test-law vc^on the Quakers, Mennonists, and other sects of Christians who hold war to be unlawful." In regard to the test-law, I shall only observe that the circumstances of the times justified, nay, made it indispensably necessary; that it was a dictate of common sense and agreeable to the great law of self-preservation to draw a line of discrimination, and exclude from our councils and places of power and trust those persons who were inimical to our cause; and that such has been, and must ever be, from the nature of things, the practice of all nations when engaged in civil war. However, I am clearly of opinion that sound policy dictates the repeal of such laws as soon as it can be done consistent with the public safety, to prevent men of such principles and views of Galen and his party from availing themselves of the irritated feelings of the non-jurors and their friends, to compass designs prejudicial to the public liberties and welfare.

The tender law stands next in the catalogue of crimes. ' ' Who ruined half the widows, orphans and aged citizens in the State, by an unjust and cruel tender law?" In order to form a judgment of the propriety of this law, we must recur to the occasion of making it. When the thirteen late provinces, now States of America, in Congress assembled, came to the resolution of supporting their liberty and independence by the sword, they found it necessary to anticipate the resources of the country by emitting bills of credit; and as the value and efficiency of this means depended on their being received in all transactions equal to gold and silver money of like denominations, a legal compulsion to ensure this currency to them was then deemed essentially necessary, and accordingly Congress recommended the measure to the several States, who, in compliance therewith, passed laws making the continental money a legal tender. This paper money was the sinew of the war, and as such was to be cherished — upon its credit depended our. political salvation. However, it is my decided opinion that Congress was mistaken in supposing that the credit of paper money could be supported by making it a legal tender: it is adequate funds of redemption being provided, and public confidence only that can stamp the value of money on paper.

But why censure the Government of Pennsylvania for laws that were made ministerially, in compliance with the recommendation of Congress? May not every government in the union be stigmatized on the same principle, as they all passed similar laws? Moreover, with what consistency can the Republicans adduce the tender laws as a crime against the Constitutionalists^ when the former were the authors of the most oppressive of them, when they renewed these laws after they had been suspended by the Constitutionalists? A recurrents to the minutes of the assembly and the laws of the State will fully establish this fact. It will thereby appear that the assembly elected in October 1779, who were to a man Constitutionalists, suspended the operation of the laws making the continental money a legal tender for three months, by their act passed on the 31st May, 1780, which was further continued by their act of the 22d of September following; and by the succeeding assembly, which were Republicans^ it was continued without limitation. Thus the legal tender of the continental money was first suspended by the Constitutionalists; and this same assembly passed a law, on the 25th March, 1780, for emitting ;^ioo,ooo in bills of credit, founded on the City Lots and Province Island, without mading them a legal tender.

It will also appear by the minutes of Assembly and laws, that the Republicans afterwards, viz., on the 9th of April, 1781, emitted the enormous sum of ;^5oo,ooo in bills of credit, at a time when the public exigencies did not require or justify this oppressive emission of paper money, and could only be accounted for by the scene of profitable speculation that was made on this money by the Cofferer and his friends; and this paper the Republicans made a legal tender, with heavy forfeitures and penalties in case of refusal.

The Republicans moreover made the ;^ioo,ooo island money emitted by the Constitutionalists a legal tender, although the fund of redemption was so abundantly adequate, the consequence of which was a greater depreciation. And these tender laws were not made in pursuance of recommendations of Congress, but were the original acts of the Republicans.

If the tender laws have been so cruel and wicked, so destructive as "to ruin half the widows, orphans, and aged citizens in the state," how came the immaculate Republicans to renew them at so late a period in the war, when they must have been fully informed of their operation, and when they had not so good a plea to justify them ? What unparalleled impudence to charge the Constitutionalists with the hardships and evils of laws that they, the Republicans, were instrumental in reviving and continuing! And yet as extravagant and inconsistent as this charge is, the prejudice and credulity of party spirit has implicitly believed it. Although the Republican party devised and made the last tender laws for their private emolument, although they reaped the rich harvest of speculations on the public credit by means of these laws, yet the Constitutionalists must bear all the odium of them.

The Doctor has exhibited a most exaggerated picture of the grievous consequences of the militia law; he says "that wagons have been sold for 3s. gd, cows for gd, etc. Whoever reprobates the militia law, must on the same principle reprobate the late glorious contest for liberty; for any person the least acquainted with the transactions of the war, must know that the militia were very instrumental to our success; a law was therefore necessary to form and call forth this militia when requisite. If, in the execution of a general system, hardships have happened to individuals, they are to be considered as private misfortunes, not public oppressions ; or if collectors and other officers have prostituted this law to private gain, they are to be stigmatized, not the law or its framers.

The address continues, "who have pocketed, or squandered away as much confiscated property as would have paid, if it had been properly disposed of, half the debt of the state ! ' ' This is a charge easily made, but until the mere assertion of an anonymous writer is deemed sufficient to substantiate the fact, the public will expect better evidence. I call upon the doctor to name the instances, point out the persons, and produce the proof of this peculation on the confiscated property; and in answer to the other part of the charge, viz : ' ' that it was squandered, ' ' I will say it is equally groundless, whether as to the appropriation that was made of this property, or as to the premature disposition of it; for if we may judge from the temper and conduct of succeeding houses of assembly, it is evident that had the sales of this property been postponed, they would never have taken place, as it would have been restored to the original owners.

The address proceeds, "who have banished specie and credit from the state, by their last emission of paper money. Who have nearly ruined the state by assuming and funding the debts of the United States, whereby they have checked our agriculture, commerce and manufactures, and driven many thousands of farmers and mechanics to Kentucky and Niagara." If an honest, just compliance with public engagements, if the support of public credit, so prized by every wise nation and inviolably maintained by the enlightened government of Great Britain, as its great resource in time of need, is considered criminal in Pennsylvania, the funding law and the last emission of paper money cannot be vindicated; but I am persuaded the people of this state have too high a sense of justice and too much discernment to their permanent interests for this doctrine to become popular.

"Who have burdened the state with expensive' establishments and salaries, thereby encouraging idleness, dependence and servility among our citizens." This is a groundless assertion and base calumny.

"Who have violated the constitution of the state by sacrilegiously robbing an institution of learning and charity of its charter and funds." I refer my readers to the reasons of the majority of the council of censors, for a complete refutation of this charge.

"Who by the number and weight of their taxes, have reduced landed property to one fourth of its former value, and thereby forced many ancient and respectable farmers and merchants, possessed of large visible estates, to submit to the operations of laws which have reduced them from wellearned affluence or independence to poverty and misery.'^ How lost to all sense of truth and decency must the Doctor be to ascribe the evils of the oppressive taxes to the Constitutionalists., when he knows his party were the authors of them ? Does he forget the enormous tax of 1782, imposed by his friend Mr. Morris^ which vastly exceeded the ability of the people to pay, amounting to ;^425,ooo in specie besides the paper money ? — a tax that has been productive of more distress and mischief than the aggregate of all the previous and subsequent taxes, and is the efficient cause of our present difficulties in taxation; and does the Doctor forget the other numerous taxes imposed by the same party, some of them to favor their speculations in the paper moneys?

' ' Who have opposed the adoption of the Federal government by the grossest falsehoods, by the abuse of the best characters in the United States, and by an attempt to excite a civil war. ' ' A review of the discussion of the new constitution will expose the fallacy of this charge; whilst sound reason and well-supported arguments were made use of by the opposition, scurrility and abuse of every person who dared to object to the new constitution, were lavished by the Federalists., and if there was any danger of a civil war, it arose from their violence and precipitance in forcing down the government without giving the people time or opportunity to examine or judge for themselves.

"Who aim at nothing but power or office — who have nothing to lose, and everything to hope, from a general convulsion." This comes very consistently from a party which abounds in needy office hunters, whose staunch federalism and obsequious services are founded on, and stimulated by, the ravishing prospect of sharing in the great loaves and fishes of the United States, under the new constitution.

"Whose private characters are as profligate as their public conduct has been oppresive, dishonest, and selfish, and who, instead of aiming to share in the honors of the new government, should retire in silent gratitude for having escaped those punishments to which their numerous frauds, oppressions and other crimes, have justly exposed them." If I was disposed to recriminate — there is an ample field — I would begin with the cofferer., the head of the other party, and trace his character through the numerous speculations on the public, from his appointment to the c 1 a y of the United States, to his resignation as f r; I would delineate the corrupt principles and conduct of the rest of the party down to the herd of base parasites and minions, the Doctor included, who would make a conspicuous figure in the black picture. On the other hand, I challenge the Doctor or his associates to sully the integrity, the disinterested conduct of the leaders of the constitutional party, by any colorable charge of peculation or abuse of the public trusts so often confided to them, Like the virtuous Fabricius, they retired from offices of the highest eminence and opportunities of embezzling the public treasure, with unpolluted hands and native integrity; so far from growing rich in the public service, they have impaired their own fortunes by their zeal and contributions for the public welfare; and instead of receiving applause for their patriotism, they are loaded with obloquy, are vilified and stigmatized with that poverty which is their greatest glory, and by the very men too who charge them with peculating on the public. How ungenerous and inconsistent! At the same time I must confess, that there have been villains of the constitutional party, for perfection is not to be expected on this side eternity. But it has been the good fortune of this party, that the instances have been rare and of an inferior kind; they did not ascend to the principals of the party, to the great influential leading characters, who gave the complexion and tone to the measures of government.

The foregoing remarks upon the first part of the address apply equally to the remainder, and prove the fallacy and turpitude of the whole of it.