"Man bears nothing with more impatience, than the exposure of his errors, and the contempt of his authority. Those who had provoked Jackson's violent measure against the French subjects, availed themselves of the paroxysms of the ire which the publication excited: they threw fuel into the fire, and blew it into a flame. They persuaded him Louallier had been guilty of an offence, punishable with death, and he should have him tried by a court martial, as a spy. Yielding to this suggestion, and preparatory to such a trial, he ordered the publication of the second section of the rules and articles of war, which denounces the punishment of death against spies, and directed Louallier to be arrested and confined. Eaton is mistaken when he asserts that the section had been published before. The adjutant's letter to Leclerc, the printer of the Ami des Lois, requesting him to publish it, bears date of the fourth of March, the day after Louallier's publication made its appearance. The section was followed by a notice that 'the city of New-Orleans and its environs, being under martial law, and several encampments and fortifications within its limits, it was deemed necessary to give publicity to the section, for the information of all concerned.'

"Great, indeed, must have been Jackson's excitement, when he suffered himself to be persuaded, that Louallier could successfully be prosecuted as a spy. Eaton informs us, Louallier was prosecuted as one owing allegiance to the United States. The very circumstance of his owing that allegiance, prevented his being liable to a prosecution as a spy. He was a citizen of the United States: his being a member of the legislature, was evidence of this. If he, therefore, committed any act, which would constitute an alien a spy, he was guilty of high treason, and ought to have been delivered to the legitimate magistrate, to be prosecuted as a traitor."

Judge Martin goes into a short, but satisfactory argument, to prove that a citizen cannot be prosecuted as a spy under the articles of war. Whether, however, the General and his advisers considered Louallier as a spy, or a traitor, he "was arrested on Sunday the 5th of March, at noon, near the Exchange Coffee-house." He applied to a gentleman of the bar for legal relief. An application for this purpose was made to Judge Martin, (our author) one of the members of the Supreme Court of the state. The judge thought he had no jurisdiction over the case, and could not interfere. Hall, the District Judge of the United States, was then called upon for a writ of habeas corpus, which was granted. The attorney was directed by the Judge to inform the General of his application for the writ and the order for issuing it.—This was in courtesy.

"On receiving Morel's communication, the ebullition of Jackson's anger was such, that reason appeared to have lost its control. Those who had suggested the harsh measure against the French citizens, and the still more harsh one against Louallier, imagined the moment was come, when their enmity towards Hall might be gratified. We have seen that a number of individuals, who had hitherto sustained a fair character, were now known as accomplices of the Barrataria pirates. Prosecutions had been commenced against some of them, and Hall manifested that stern severity of character, which appals guilt. The counsel of these men had conceived the idea that he did not view their efforts to screen their clients, with the liberality and indulgence they deserved. The opportunity now offered of humbling this worthy magistrate, was not suffered to remain unimproved; and Jackson was assured that Hall, like Louallier, was guilty of an offence punishable with death.

"The general's attention was drawn to the seventh section of the rules and articles of war, which denounces the last punishment against persons aiding or abetting mutiny; and he was pressed to prosecute the judge before a court martial. As a preparatory step, with that promptitude of decision, which Eaton says is a leading trait in his character, he signed an instrument at once, the warrant for the arrest, and the mittimus for the imprisonment of Hall. He wrote to Colonel Arbuckle, who commanded at the barracks, that having received proof that Dominick A. Hall had been aiding, abetting, and exciting mutiny in his camp, he desired that a detachment might be ordered forthwith, to arrest and confine him; and that a report might be made as soon as he was arrested. 'You will,' as it is said in the conclusion of this paper, 'be vigilant; as the agents of our enemy are more numerous than we expected. You will be guarded against escapes.'

"The prosecution of the judge was intended to be grounded on the seventh section of the articles of war, which is in these words:—'Any officer or soldier, who shall begin, cause, excite, or join in, any mutiny or sedition, in any troop or company, in the service of the United States, or in any post, detachment, or guard, shall suffer death, or any other punishment, as by a court martial shall be inflicted.'

"Hall was not an officer, in the sense of the act of Congress—he was not a soldier, in the ordinary meaning of that word; but, according to the jurisprudence of head quarters, the proclamation of martial law had transformed every inhabitant of New-Orleans into a soldier, and rendered him punishable under the articles of war.

"The judge was accordingly arrested in his own house, at nine o'clock, and confined in the same apartment with Louallier, in the barracks.

"As soon as this was reported at head quarters, Major Chotard was despatched to demand from Claiborne, the clerk of the district court of the United States, the surrender of Louallier's petition, on the back of which Hall had written the order for issuing the writ of habeas corpus. It has been seen that there was not any officer of the state government, nor of the United States, out of the army, who imagined that a proclamation of martial law gave the general any right, nor imposed on others any obligation, which did not exist before. The clerk accordingly answered that there was a rule of court, which forbade him to part with any original paper lodged in his office; and he was ignorant of any right, in the commander of the army, to interfere with the records of the court. He however was, after much solicitation, prevailed on to take the document in his pocket, and accompany Chotard to head quarters.

"In the meanwhile, an express from the department of war had arrived, with the intelligence that the President of the United States had ratified the treaty, and an exchange of the ratifications had taken place at Washington, on the 17th of February, the preceding month. By an accident, which was not accounted for, a packet had been put into the hands of the messenger, instead of the one containing the official information of the exchange of the ratifications. But the man was bearer of an open order of the postmaster, to all his deputies on the road, to expedite him with the utmost celerity, as he carried information of the recent peace. He declared he had handed an official notice of this event to the governor of the state of Tennessee.

"On the arrival of the clerk at head quarters, Jackson asked him whether it was his intention to issue the writ: he replied it was his bounden duty to do so, and he most assuredly would. He was threatened with an arrest, but persisted in his asseveration that he would obey the judge's order. He had handed Louallier's petition to Jackson, and, before he retired, demanded the return of it; this was peremptorily refused, and the paper was withheld. It appears the date of the fifth of March had been originally on this document, and that being Sunday, Hall changed it to that of the following day, the sixth. The idea had been cherished, that this alteration might support an additional article, in the charges against Hall. It is not extraordinary, that those who imagined that, as Louallier might be tried for a libel, in a court martial, Hall might for forgery. Thus one inconsistency almost universally leads to another.

"Duplessis, the marshal of the United States, had volunteered his services, as an aid to Jackson; a little after midnight he visited head quarters. The imprisonment of Hall, and the accounts from Washington, had brought a great concourse of people near the general; who, elated by the success of the evening, met the marshal at the door, and announced to him, he had shopped the judge. Perceiving that Duplessis did not show his exultation, he inquired whether he would serve Hall's writ. The marshal replied, he had ever done his duty, which obliged him to execute all writs directed to him by the court, whose ministerial officer he was; and, looking sternly at the person who addressed him, added, he would execute the court's writ on any man. A copy of the proclamation of martial law, that lay on the table, was pointed to him, and Jackson said, he also would do his duty.

"A large concourse of people had been drawn to the Exchange coffee-house, during the night, by the passing events, which were not there, as at head quarters, a subject of exultation and gratulation. The circumstances were not unlike those of the year 1806, which Livingston describes as 'so new in the history of our country, that they will not easily gain belief, at a distance, and can scarcely be realized by those who beheld them. A dictatorial power, assumed by the commander of the American army—the military arrest of citizens, charged with a civil offence—the violation of the sanctuary of justice—an attempt to overawe, by denunciations, those who dared, professionally, to assert the authority of the laws—the unblushing avowal of the employment of military force, to punish a civil offence, and the hardy menace of persevering in the same course, were circumstances that must command attention, and excite the corresponding sentiments of grief, indignation, and contempt.'"

We have made our extract so copiously of this dangerous and extravagant proceeding, because we wish it to be represented in the language of the author, and not by any abridgment of ours. General Jackson having received intelligence of the treaty which he chose to agree that he relied upon, addressed a despatch to the British commander "to anticipate the happy return of peace." We again take up our author.

"Jackson now paused to deliberate, whether these circumstances did not require him, by a cessation of all measures of violence, to allow his fellow-citizens in New-Orleans, to anticipate this happy return of peace, the account of which, the first direct intelligence was to bring to him, in an official form—the untoward arrival of an orderly sergeant, with a message from Arbuckle, to whom the custody of Hall had been committed, prevented Jackson coming to that conclusion, which his unprejudiced judgment would have suggested. The prisoner had requested, that a magistrate might be permitted to have access to him, to receive an affidavit, which he wished to make, in order to resort to legal measures, for his release. Arbuckle desired to know the general's pleasure, on this application. Naturally impatient of any thing like control or restraint, the idea of a superior power to be employed against his decisions, threw Jackson into emotions of rage. Before they had sufficiently subsided to allow him to act on the message, some of his ordinary advisers came in, to recommend the arrest of Hollander, a merchant of some note. What was the offence of this man, has never been known; but Jackson's temper of mind was favourable to the views of his visiters. He ordered the arrest of the merchant, and forbade the access of the magistrate to Hall; the idea of allowing his fellow-citizens to anticipate the happy return of peace was abandoned, and measures were directed to be taken for the trial of Louallier."

The boasted "promptitude and decision" of the General's character, admirable qualities in their proper places and under proper regulation, carried him on, deeper and deeper, into the violation of the most sacred rights of a free citizen, and of the immunities of the officers of the law in the administration of the laws.

"Dick, the attorney of the United States, made application to Lewis, one of the district judges of the state, who was serving as a subaltern officer, in the Orleans rifle company, and whose conduct during the invasion, had received Jackson's particular commendation. Believing that his duty as a military man, did not diminish his obligation, as a judge, to protect his fellow-citizens from illegal arrest, Lewis, without hesitation, on the first call of Dick, laid down his rifle, and allowed the writ.

"Information of this having been carried to head quarters, Jackson immediately ordered the arrest of Lewis and Dick.

"Arbuckle, to whom Lewis's writ, in favour of Hall, was directed, refused to surrender his prisoner, on the ground he was committed by Jackson, under the authority of the United States.

"The orders for the arrest of Lewis and Dick were countermanded."

The effect of such proceedings, without parallel in a free government, and without apology any where, may be well imagined.

"The irritation of the public mind manifested itself, in the evening, by the destruction of a transparent painting, in honour of Jackson, which the proprietor of the Exchange coffee-house displayed, in the largest hall."

This brought the military in support of their General.

"A number of officers had compelled the proprietor of the Exchange coffee-house, to exhibit a new transparent painting, and to illuminate the hall in a more than usual manner. They attended in the evening, and stood near the painting, with the apparent intention of indicating a determination, to resist the attempt of taking down the painting. It was reported, a number of soldiers were in the neighbourhood, ready to march to the coffee-house, at the first call. This was not calculated to allay the excitement of the public mind. The prostration of the legitimate government; the imprisonment of the district judge of the United States, the only magistrate, whose interference could be successfully invoked, on an illegal arrest, under colour of the authority of the United States, the ascendency assumed by the military, appeared to have dissolved all the bands of social order in New-Orleans."

The good sense, we are told, of some of the most influential characters in the city, prevented the extremities to which these proceedings were fast approaching. The injured and the irritated were assured, "that Jackson's day of reckoning would arrive; that Hall, with the authority (though now without the power) of chastising the encroachments of the military, possessed the resolution, and would soon have the power to punish the violators of the law." The court martial, by whom Louallier was tried, acquitted him.

"Jackson was greatly disappointed at the conclusion to which the court martial had arrived; he, however, did not release either of his prisoners, and on the tenth issued the following general order:—

"'The commanding general disapproves of the sentence of the court martial, of which Major-general Gaines is president, on the several charges and specifications exhibited against Mr. Louallier; and is induced by the novelty and importance of the matters submitted to the decision of that court, to assign the reasons of this disapproval.'"

He gave his reasons at length, which only show how hard it is for certain tempers to acknowledge a wrong, or return to the right.

"The court martial consoled themselves, by the reflection, that their sentence, though disapproved by Jackson, was in perfect conformity with decisions of the President of the United States, and of the supreme court of the state of New-York, in similar cases."

There is something in the name and character of a Court, which assures us of its respect for justice and the law.

"The independent stand, taken by the court martial, had left no glimpse of hope, at head quarters, that the prosecution of Hall, on the charge of mutiny, on which he had been imprisoned, could be attempted with any prospect of success—the futility of any further proceedings against Louallier was evident—Jackson, therefore, put an end to Hall's imprisonment on Saturday, the 11th of March. The word imprisonment is used, because Eaton assures his readers, that 'Judge Hall was not imprisoned; it was merely an arrest.' Hall had been taken from his bed chamber, on the preceding Sunday, at 9 o'clock in the evening, by a detachment of about one hundred men, dragged through the streets, and confined in the same apartment with Louallier, in the barracks. Three days after, it had been officially announced to the inhabitants of New-Orleans, that Jackson was in possession of persuasive evidence, that a state of peace existed, and the militia had been discharged, the door of Hall's prison was thrown open, but not for his release. He was put under a guard, who led him several miles beyond the limits of the city, where they left him, with a prohibition to return, 'till the ratification of the treaty was regularly announced, or the British shall have left the southern coast.'

"This last, and useless display of usurped power, astonished the inhabitants. They thought, that, if the general feared the return of the British, the safety of New-Orleans would be better insured, by his recall of the militia, than by the banishment of the legitimate magistrate. It was the last expansion of light, and momentary effulgence, that precedes the extinguishment of a taper.

"At the dawn of light, on Monday, the 13th, an express reached head quarters, with the despatch which had accidentally been misplaced, in the office of the secretary of war, three weeks before. The cannon soon announced the arrival of this important document, and Louallier was indebted for his liberation, to the precaution, which Eaton says, the President of the United States had taken, to direct Jackson to issue a proclamation for the pardon of all military offences."

Judge Hall had suffered indignity without being disgraced; he had submitted to physical force without yielding his spirit to debasement; or surrendering one of his official or personal rights. His reward awaited him, and it is eloquently recorded by our historian.

"Hall's return to the city was greeted by the acclamations of the inhabitants. He was the first judge of the United States they had received, and they had admired in him the distinguishing characteristics of an American magistrate—a pure heart, clean hands, and a mind susceptible of no fear, but that of God. His firmness had, eight years before, arrested Wilkinson in his despotic measures. He was now looked upon to show, that if he had been unable to stop Jackson's arbitrary steps, he would prevent him from exulting, in the impunity of his trespass."

Dick, the District Attorney, has a fair claim to a participation in these honours.

"He was anxious to lose no time, in calling the attention of the district court of the United States, to the violent proceedings, during the week that had followed the arrival of the first messenger of peace; but Hall insisted on a few days being exclusively given to the manifestation of the joyous feelings, which the termination of the war excited. He did not yield to Dick's wishes till the 21st. The affidavits of the clerk of the district court, of the marshal of the United States, of the attorney of Louallier, and of the commander at the barracks, were then laid before the court."

The case presented to the court, was substantially such as appears in the foregoing narrative. Hall was as resolute in his court, as Jackson at the head of an army; the Judge was as fearless in maintaining the law, as the General had been in trampling upon it. "On motion of the Attorney of the United States, a rule to show cause, why process of attachment should not issue against Jackson, was granted."

On the return day, the General, accompanied by one of his aids, appeared before the court, and presented his answer to the rule. Some legal questions were discussed and decided on the propriety of admitting the answer. Finally, the rule was made absolute, that is, the attachment was ordered. The General is still haunted by bad advisers.

"Jackson's advisers now found he could not be defended on the merits, with the slightest hope of success, as the attorney of the United States would probably draw from him by interrogatories, the admission, that both Louallier and the judge were kept in prison, long after persuasive evidence had been received at head quarters, of the cessation of the state of war. They therefore recommended to him not to answer the interrogatories, which would authorize the insinuation that he had been condemned unheard.

"It appears that some of his party, at this period, entertained the hope that Hall could be intimidated, and prevented from proceeding further. A report was accordingly circulated, that a mob would assemble in and about the court-house—that the pirates of Barataria, to whom the judge had rendered himself obnoxious before the war, by his zeal and strictness, in the prosecution that had been instituted against several of their ringleaders, would improve this opportunity of humbling him. Accordingly, groups of them took their stands, in different parts of the hall, and gave a shout when Jackson entered it. It is due to him to state, that it did not appear that he had the least intimation that a disturbance was intended, and his influence was honestly exercised to prevent disorder."

When the General was called, "he addressed a few words to the court, expressive of his intention not to avail himself of the faculty to answer interrogatories." The District Attorney then addressed the court, with firmness, but good temper. In conclusion he said,—

"That credulity itself could not admit the proposition, that persuasive evidence that the war had ceased, and belief that necessity required that violent measures should be persisted in to prevent the exercise of the judicial power of the legitimate tribunal, could exist, at the same time, in the defendant's mind."

The defendant—General Jackson—resorted to a strange equivocation to extricate himself.

"The general made a last effort to avert the judgment of the court against him, by an asseveration, he had imprisoned Dominick A. Hall, and not the judge: his attention was drawn to the affidavit of the marshal, in which he swore Jackson had told him, 'I have shopped the judge.'"

We come, with unaffected gratification, to the final triumph of the law, in this contest with military power.

"The court, desirous of manifesting moderation, in the punishment of the defendant for the want of it, said that, in consideration of the services the general had rendered to his country, imprisonment should make no part of the sentence, and condemned him to pay a fine of one thousand dollars and costs, only."

We should indeed regret, if our history terminated these memorable transactions here. Every reader will be anxious to learn—How did the impetuous spirit of the General, inflamed by his recent triumphs and glories in the field, receive the condemnation of the law? What bursts of passionate violence did he exhibit? What terrible explosion followed the sentence of the court? Not a symptom or movement of the kind. He seemed to awaken, as from a tempestuous dream, "the helm of reason lost," and to fall into the character of a good citizen with dignity and grace.

"On Jackson's coming out of the court-house, his friends procured a hack, in which he entered, and they dragged it to the Exchange coffee-house, where he made a speech, in the conclusion of which he observed, that, 'during the invasion, he had exerted every faculty in support of the constitution and laws—on that day, he had been called on to submit to their operation, under circumstances, which many persons might have deemed sufficient to justify resistance. Considering obedience to the laws, even when we think them unjustly applied, as the first duty of the citizen, he did not hesitate to comply with the sentence they had heard pronounced;' and he entreated the people, to remember the example he had given them, of respectful submission to the administration of justice."

We heartily wish that the scene had closed here, and the General had appeared no more on that stage. But there was that within him which forbade a quiet and unresisting resignation to his discomfiture and humiliation.

"A few days after, he published, in the Ami des Lois, the answer he had offered to the district court, preceded by an exordium, in which he complained, that the court had refused to hear it. He added, that the judge 'had indulged himself, on his route to Bayou Sarah, in manifesting apprehensions as to the fate of the country, equally disgraceful to himself, and injurious to the interest and safety of the state,' and concluded—'should Judge Hall deny this statement, the general is prepared to prove it, fully and satisfactorily.'

"The gauntlet did not long remain on the ground, and the following piece appeared in the Louisiana Courier:

"'It is stated in the introductory remarks of General Jackson,' that 'on the judge's route to Bayou Sarah, he manifested apprehensions as to the safety of the country, disgraceful to himself, and injurious to the state.' Judge Hall knows full well, how easy it is for one, with the influence and patronage of General Jackson, to procure certificates and affidavits. He knows that men, usurping authority, have their delators and spies: and that, in the sunshine of imperial or dictatorial power, swarms of miserable creatures are easily generated, from the surrounding corruption, and rapidly changed into the shape of buzzing informers. Notwithstanding which, Judge Hall declares, that on his route to Bayou Sarah, he uttered no sentiment disgraceful to himself, or injurious to the state. He calls upon General Jackson, to furnish that full and satisfactory evidence of his assertion, which he says he is enabled to do.' The pledge was never redeemed."

Judge Martin's book is here brought to a conclusion, with some appropriate and forcible reflections upon the duties and uses of History, in affording lessons to men, high in authority, to bridle their passions; to select capable and honest advisers; with other wise and wholesome admonitions.

We heartily unite with the Judge in his just and patriotic aspirations in behalf of the Judiciary.

* * * * *

NOTE.—In quoting from our history the anecdote respecting the residence and imprisonment of Fenelon in Canada, we do not intend to express a belief in its authenticity. It is the first time we have heard that the celebrated author of Telemachus had ever been in this country; and, as Judge Martin does not inform us of the authority on which the story is related, we know not what credit it is entitled to.



ART. IX.—A Full and Accurate Method of Curing Dyspepsia, Discovered and Practised by O. HALSTED. New-York: 1830.

Every era has possessed its false prophet in religion, from the days of Mahomet to those of Joanna Southcot and Fanny Wright; not that the race commenced with the former, or has terminated with the latter; the records of history supply us with examples of "lying augurs," in every period previously to the career of the Impostor of Mecca, and our daily experience furnishes us with proofs that the tribe is by no means extinct. As in religion, so has it been, and still continues, in philosophy, and the whole circle of science: pretenders to excellence have started up in every age, and although their efforts in the cause of imposition have not been so splendid as the exertions of those who have made religion their tool, they have yet been sufficiently remarkable to excite the eager attention of mankind, and sufficiently profitable to reward themselves. Medical science in particular may boast of a numerous host of these worthies: it would far exceed the limits of this publication to trace the progress of the charlatan, through the records of ancient history; for the sake of brevity, a retrospective glance must not be directed beyond the fifteenth century, when the arch priest of "modern quackery" made his appearance upon the medical stage. In the year 1493, Phillippus Aureolus Theophrastus Paracelsus Bombastus de Hohenheim, was ushered into existence, and at a very early age announced his discovery, that the recognised principles of medical science were erroneous, and that in him alone was vested "the art divine, to heal each lurking ill." Possessing a panacea capable, as he boasted, of curing all diseases, and even of prolonging life to an indefinite period, this empiric made war upon the health of mankind, and at last, after a life of the most infamous debauchery, he died, in the forty-eighth year of his age, with a bottle of the "Elixir Vitae" in his pocket. The mantle of Paracelsus has been left behind, and a rich inheritance of ignorance, insolence, and vanity, bequeathed to a multitude of heirs; the value of the legacy, however, would have been trifling, but for the credulity of mankind, which renders these worthless possessions of inestimable importance: during the last century, in particular, these descendants have attained an eminence truly astonishing. Medicine is admitted to be one of the noblest sciences, as tending, in its practice, to relieve the most irksome restraints upon existence; it is acknowledged to be a science founded upon close observation, and so nearly allied to other sciences, that its pursuit is impracticable without them; that it requires years of patient toil to fathom its mysteries, and the undivided efforts of a mind to comprehend its purposes; and yet we are daily told of the most extraordinary cures, and of the discovery of sovereign remedies, in all cases and descriptions of disease, by individuals who have never

"Toil'd an hour in physic's cause, Or giv'n one thought to Nature's laws:"

By men, in short, who are incapable of forming one rational opinion upon the subject, and unprepared, by previous study or information, to detect or remove one symptom.

It is an old and apt saying, that "the wilder the tale, the wider the ear;" and experience proves, that from the nursery to the tomb, no legend is too marvellous for the faith of the credulous, and that in many instances, the more incomprehensible the story, the more confirmed is the belief.

In the numerous newspapers daily published in the United States, a list of cures are detailed with sufficient precision to satisfy the sceptical, and sufficient plausibility to convince the ignorant, while a string of medicines is set forth, of such unrivalled excellence, that no disease is protected from their action; the panacea of Paracelsus is rivalled, and every calamity that can afflict the body, from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot, is at once relieved. "Vegetable Powders," "Botanical Syrup," "Bilious Pills," "Jaundice Bitters," "Eye Waters," ointments, &c. &c. are proclaimed as veritable specifics by these veritable physic-mongers: no disease is too subtle, no train of symptoms too severe, for them to contend with; they only meet the foe to conquer, and confer an immortality on suffering humanity and themselves. Thus they flourish, the quacks of the day, the impostors of the multitude, and, perhaps, the dupes of themselves! But if Reason, that plain and simple attribute, in its uncontrouled state, unfettered either by prejudice or wilfulness, can be brought to bear on the question between them and mankind, how little will their claims appear! Reason, in the exertion of a capable authority, is taught to discriminate fairly, and test candidly, and must therefore refuse the evidence tendered by folly, or something worse, by which ignorance is bewitched. Will the man of reflecting mind, and of candid judgment, admit the claims of these pretenders, and match the speculations of avarice and ignorance with the conclusions of science? Impossible! Safety consorts with skill in every path of life; he would not trust himself on the wide ocean with a man ignorant of navigation; nay, he would not trust a bale of merchandise with him; and surely he will not abandon his bark of existence to the command of a charlatan, who knows nothing of the principles of the art he professes, and is altogether incompetent to steer clear of the numerous rocks and quicksands in the course of life; but a man of reflection and judgment is not a very common character; he is surrounded by hundreds who examine not for themselves; and are easily deluded, by the fairest promises, to surrender their opinions to another's guidance: these are the supporters of quackery, and the encouragers of those needy plunderers, who would render medicine a farce, that they might practice jugglery the better.

If the system of man resembled a machine, which, once in motion, continued an unvaried power, and retained an equality of force, merely requiring, when deranged, the tightening of a screw, the readjustment of a strap, or the addition of a quantity of oil, little knowledge would be required in the regulation of its functions; but when we find the constitutions of men as varied as their countenances, the affections of the body, numerous and diversified, never preserving identically the same characters in two cases, or requiring the same exact treatment in diseases, apparently of the same nature, we discover that something more than the artifice of the quack is necessary in their government and repair.

It would indeed be a Herculean task to administer the rod of correction to all the advertizing medical gentry of the day: it could be done, and with justice to the community; but it would be wearisome. A champion, however, has recently entered the medical arena, with whom we would fain contend, not only in the hope of conquest, but in the expectation that others may take warning by his defeat. With him we will now alone engage, and thus throw down our gauntlet.

A work has very lately appeared, professing to be a "New Method of Curing Dyspepsia, discovered and practised by O. Halsted of New-York." This publication sails in the wake of a tolerably successful practice amongst the dyspeptics of the day, who have resorted to the temple of our author "with faith sufficient to promote a cure." So long as this continued, all interference was of course out of the question, as every individual possesses an undoubted right to tamper either with his judgment or his money; but when this aspirer after dyspeptic fame leaves his concealment, and issues his discoveries and practices to the world, he invites the battery of opinion, and renders himself at once amenable to remark and investigation. A few words, however, on the subject of dyspepsia, may not be amiss, before we take leave to reply to Mr. Halsted.

This much abused term, is a compound of two Greek words, signifying "bad concoction," or bad digestion, alias indigestion, and sufficiently expressive of a condition in which the aliments supplied to the stomach are not met by a vigorous and sufficient action for the purposes of health; but this definition, however just, is not comprehensive enough for the genius of mankind. That genius, which, in former times, has sanctioned the appellations of nervous disorders, and bilious complaints, as comprising nearly all others, has now selected the term of dyspepsia, as the covering for a multitude of real and imaginary woes; so that when an invalid approaches with a variety of symptoms, and a host of pains or whimsies, he is at once pronounced to be a Dyspeptic.

The book before us, commences with a short account of the organs engaged in the process of digestion, copied from a periodical work of the day, very good as far as it goes, and leaving nothing to be desired on the score of brevity: our author then pursues his task, by a detail of the symptoms of what he calls dyspepsia; from what work he procured these, or from what unhappy wretch he could gain such a list of grievances, as he describes arising from indigestion, does not appear; if they be in existence now, the sooner the one is burnt and the other buried, the better. It is evident that Mr. Halsted is unaware that dyspepsia occurs, in one of two ways; either as a primary affection, or as a symptom of other diseases; that he is unacquainted with the share the liver, with its biliary apparatus, the pancreas, the spleen, the mesentery, the omentum, &c. take in digestion, and of the symptoms occasioned by an affection of these organs; it may therefore be adviseable to devote a few lines to the consideration of these points, as well for the satisfaction of the public, as for his instruction and the improvement of his second edition. Dyspepsia, or indigestion in its simple form, occurs either as a disease of debility, or as a consequence of excess: the first arises from numerous causes, and seldom exists alone: the secretion of the gastric juice is not only impaired, for the office of no organ continues in a state of activity, all alike feeling the result of that general depression affecting the system at large: the second may be referred to the stomach itself, as a natural effect from over-feeding, or indulgence in spirituous liquors. Dyspepsia, occurring as a symptom in other diseases, appears under numerous characters, either from the effects of sympathy, or from an extension of the malady to the stomach itself. It may be readily granted that all the symptoms described by Mr. Halsted, take place, in consequence of an affection of the stomach, either primarily or secondarily; but to assert that they are the results of a bad concoction of the viands we eat and drink, and to act accordingly, is to misunderstand the meaning of a term, as well as the treatment of a disorder.

It is stated, in this work, that dyspepsia is Protean in its symptoms, but single and uniform in its nature; the very reverse is the fact; its symptoms are of a single character, and of an uniform attack, while its nature is variable and inconstant. A dyspeptic will complain of a want of appetite, a degree of squeamishness and irritability, eructations, heart-burn, pain in the head, stomach, and bowels, with costiveness; his tongue will be furred, and his pulse a little increased in strength and quickness. To use the language of Dr. Armstrong, "the most constant symptoms of dyspepsia, are a furred tongue, flatulence of the stomach, and fretfulness, or depression of spirits;" he goes on to say, "these may arise primarily from disorder or disease in the stomach itself, or they may depend upon an affection of the brain, liver, bowels, or some other remote or adjacent part." The nature of dyspepsia depends totally upon its cause, and where so many circumstances may occasion it, it is difficult to imagine one more variable. The important organs before alluded to, so necessary to the economy of life, are all liable to the most severe visitations of disease. Not to be too prolix, take, for the sake of example, the first on the list, the liver: both in the acute and chronic forms of inflammation of this viscus, how important a change is wrought in the digestive functions, how enfeebled does the system become during its continuance, and how futile would be the attempt to relieve the malady by merely attacking one of its symptoms! And so, of the other viscera, all marked when in a morbid state by peculiar characteristics, not only affecting their own action, but all the parts in their neighbourhood, the stomach as one of the great centres of the system in particular; and yet, with all these facts in review, are we presented with a list of ailments as dependant upon an impropriety in digestion, which may in all probability (at least the greater part of them) be traced to a source totally different. A careful discrimination of the origin of disease is as necessary as any after treatment, which can never, indeed, be applied with a reasonable chance of success without it.

Mr. Halsted recommends a change to a more temperate climate, travelling, regular exercise, particularly on horseback, and above all, moderation in eating and drinking; asserting, that if these means of recovery be neglected, things will inevitably go on from bad to worse. Astonishing! These new precepts, from the pen of such a distinguished practitioner, cannot be too highly extolled, and should be classed with the recommendation of old Parr; "keep your head cool by temperance, your feet warm by exercise; never eat but when you are hungry, nor drink but when nature requires it." Had the author stopped here, there would have been no occasion for a rejoinder to his work; for directions so admirable could only have obtained a ready compliance. In addition, however, to these usual modes of recovering health and appetite, we are put in possession of a few others, as purely original as can be imagined—but of these anon.

Mr. Halsted arranges dyspepsia in three stages; he has the incipient, the confirmed, and the complicated; in other words, dyspepsia in its commencement, in its continuance, and in its union with other affections. The two first may undoubtedly belong to dyspepsia, but the last, or complicated stage, is the one to which we must object; it is said, that this occurs when other organs are deranged, and a double set of symptoms produced; "when the patient will be said to die of liver complaint, an affection of the lungs, marasmus, dysentery, diarrhoea, or some anomalous complication of all these affections, conveniently classed by the Doctor when he renders his account to the sexton, under the sweeping term, consumption." The medical profession will doubtless appreciate the value of the connexion which Mr. Halsted is anxious to establish between the physician and the respectable officer who acts as the last gentleman-usher to mankind, and duly estimate the candid and gentlemanly mode of introduction of both parties to the public.

Dyspepsia, Mr. H. continues, is the original fountain from whence all this mischief, described in his third stage, proceeds; thus, according to him, a catarrh, pneumonia, and the numerous diseases attacking the respiratory organs, as "affections of the lungs," are occasioned by dyspepsia; the liver cannot be affected but by dyspepsia; marasmus proceeds from dyspepsia; dysentery depends on dyspepsia; and even diarrhoea must own dyspepsia as its parent. The effects of cold and damp, of obstructed perspiration, of scrofulous tendencies, and a thousand other causes, pass for nought; dyspepsia rears its head as the sole parent of ill, and little doubt can be entertained, that in the event of a man, a little weakened by sickness, falling and breaking his leg, this dyspeptic monitor would call the case dyspeptic fracture. Well may the poor patient who peruses the pages of his work be called "an unhappy dyspeptic;" and if he be not so already, he cannot read long, if his attention and conviction go hand in hand, before the discovery of such an accumulation of horrors, and all referred to his own person, will render him a fit subject for the author's experiments. Some of these symptoms are of too extraordinary a character to be passed over without notice: coldness in the head, ears, and eyes, difficulty of speech, and a jarring through the chest, numbness and coldness at the stomach, and sometimes a weight as if a lump of lead were there: if this be the case—

"Who breathes, must suffer; and who thinks, must mourn, And he alone is bless'd, who ne'er was born."

Then again, our author has been told by a sufferer, that he felt as if a number of wires passed up from the stomach to the brain, and there ramifying into small branches, communicated a sort of jarring or vibrating sensation to each particular nerve. This is a perfect musical case of a dyspeptic, who has a sort of piano-forte stomach; we might fancy him exclaiming in the language of Shakspeare,—

"This music mads me; let it sound no more; For though it have help'd madmen to their wits, In me, it seems, it will make wise men mad."

Then come "pains between the shoulders and in the small of the back, cramps, stitches, pains in joints, with universal soreness and weariness." This is as bad as the plague, a very wilderness of agonies. Heaven guard us from them! To crown all, the sufferings of Caliban under the magical touches of Prospero are applied to the wretched dyspeptic, who has "cramps by night, and side-stitches to pen his breath up; old cramps (one attack is not sufficient) shall rack him and fill his bones with aches, making him roar so loud, that beasts shall tremble at his din;" this is the very climax of bodily suffering—long may we all be preserved from the Halsted Dyspepsia!

Error in diet, and want of proper exercise, are correctly assigned as two great causes of this disease; the former as respects the quantity, quality, time and manner of taking food, and the latter as it affects persons of a sedentary habit. These causes lead to actual dyspepsia, or a bad concoction of the food in the stomach, from whence the evils described arise; and which are sufficient of themselves, without adding to the list those affections, dependant upon diseases of other organs, although occupying the stomach as their seat, and all of which our author has indiscriminately classed under his sweeping term, dyspepsia. A very common error of diet, as respects the time and manner of taking food, is not treated of with sufficient force, when its baneful tendency is considered:—the custom that prevails, of dining within a very short period, sometimes only a few minutes, and returning immediately to the avocations of the day; the food is sent to the stomach only half masticated, and the system directly subjected to exertion, during which, the process of digestion cannot take place. If we make a hearty meal, and at once proceed to labour of any kind, the food remains for hours in an unaltered state; whereas, if we give a short repose to our bodies, by assuming an easy posture, and partially dismissing the remembrance of past, and the prospect of future cares, allowing, in fact, the whole business of life a short rest, as far as may be, the stomach will perform its office with ease and certainty. Mr. Halsted devotes one section to the consideration "of the particular condition of the stomach in dyspepsia;" and as he confesses that doctors differ on this subject, he kindly lends his assistance to relieve their indecision, by roundly asserting "that it consists mainly, in a debility or loss of power of action, in the muscular coat of the stomach." That a feebleness of the system may affect the muscular coat of the stomach, is far from a novel doctrine; but the idea that dyspepsia mainly depends upon this cause, is certainly as new as it is startling: the very meaning of the word would dispose us to consider that any want of action in the stomach, preventing the due concoction, or the breaking down of aliment for the purposes of nourishment to the frame, would apply to it, and, strictly speaking, it would; not that the muscular coat is alone, or the most powerful agent, in reducing the food to pulp or chyme; it is one of the many forces in the service of nature. It must be remembered that digestion, however well commenced in the stomach, is not perfected there; that, in the words of Dr. Mason Good, "it ranges through a wide spread of organs closely sympathizing with each other, and each, when disordered, giving rise to dyspepsia." After the formation of chyme, and the food has passed the pyloric orifice of the stomach, it undergoes a new process in the duodenum, when it is converted into chyle, probably by the action of the bile, although this is a point not absolutely determined by physiological experiment; even now, digestion is only half finished, the lacteals (a class of absorbing vessels particularly numerous in the duodenum, and also existing in the larger intestines) take up this fluid, for the purpose of conveying it into the thoracic duct, which terminates in the left subclavian vein, nor is the total process of digestion completed, until, in the language of the author above quoted, "it has been exposed to the action of the atmosphere, travelling, for this purpose, through the lungs, when it becomes completely assimilated with the vital fluids." Hence, although the meaning of dyspepsia must be restricted, as its derivations demand; the term, digestion, bears a much more extensive signification than it generally receives, and any error in its process may be properly denominated indigestion; however, Mr. Halsted regards the term dyspepsia as equivalent to indigestion, and we may, for once, adopt the same phraseology. Now, as digestion is of so complicated a nature, how will Mr. H. explain his reference to the muscular coat of the stomach as a chief cause of its derangement? Is he so admirable a pathologist as to discriminate, when called to a case of dyspepsia, whether, to use his own words, "it consists in a diminished quantity or vitiated state of the gastric fluid, in a morbid secretion from the inner coats of the stomach, or from a peculiar acid generated there; whether chronic inflammation of the mucous membrane of that organ, or a torpid state of the liver and a deficient secretion of the bile occasion it: it would appear that such conditions may exist, and then produce their different symptoms, requiring a modified treatment;" but it frequently happens that these cases, slight in themselves, determine principally to the stomach, and are not apparent to the keenest eye in any other organ upon the first attack. Besides, it is the practice of Mr. Halsted, when he discovers that the digestive apparatus is not originally in fault, but that a chronic inflammation of the stomach, or a torpor of the liver, prevails, to modify his treatment; this, at all events, is new doctrine, to treat inflammation and torpor upon modified principles. If, however, diagnosis is so slight an affair in his hands, let him, without delay, inform his countrymen at what college he studied, and what were his plans of improvement.—Pathology is a difficult science, and needs mentors to point out the best paths for its attainment.

The muscular coat of the stomach has undoubtedly its proper office to perform, and, failing in its functions, it may, in conjunction with other causes, lead to dyspepsia; but to fix upon this, in particular, is to negative the effects of other organs, and to deceive both your patient and yourself.

One of the most important discoveries in this work appears under the title of "the state of the abdominal muscles during dyspepsia;" which is pronounced to be a very characteristic feature of the disease, never yet noticed by writers on the subject, or particularly attended to by physicians. It would certainly have been somewhat strange for medical writers to enlarge upon a symptom of one disease, which absolutely belongs to another; or for physicians to attend to what they could not detect; and it is equally singular, that this very characteristic feature should only have favoured Mr. Halsted and his patients with a visitation. Whenever the muscles of the abdomen are in a state of constriction, as described by him, the usual cause is spasm of some part of the intestinal canal, produced by colic, either of an accidental nature, arising from some acrid ingesta, which irritate the bowels without producing diarrhoea, attended with griping pains and distention, and spasmodic contraction of the abdominal muscles, with costiveness; or of a bilious form, closely allied to bilious diarrhoea and cholera (Gregory.) These are the varieties of colic which have been confounded with dyspepsia, particularly the first described; the symptom alluded to has little or nothing to do with the office of the stomach, but depends chiefly upon acrid substances, which have passed from that organ, to exercise their pernicious qualities upon the intestines; the sufferings of Mr. Halsted, so pathetically described, may at once be referred to a fit of the colic, which a due want of care rendered very frequent.

Pass we now to the treatment, premising that a ride in a stage-coach led to the discovery of its advantages, and taking care, at the same time, of our abdominal muscles, lest the exertion of laughter should occasion one of the muscular spasms so much dreaded by our author. The plan is divided into four compartments; tickling, pickling, ironing, and throwing up the bowels. The tickling is performed by gentle taps and slight pushes in the pit of the stomach. (Who could bear it? It would throw nine patients out of ten into convulsions!) The pickling, by wrapping up the patient from the chest to the hips with flannel cloths, wrung out in a mixture of equal parts of hot vinegar and water. (This at all events tends to keep him.) The ironing, by spreading a coarse dry towel on the bowels, and passing over them "a bottle filled with boiling water, or, what is better, a common flat-iron, such as is used in smoothing linen, heated as warm as can well be borne, for fifteen or twenty minutes." Make an ironing-board of a patient's bowels! This is worse than all: a man might consent to be tickled and pickled—but to iron him for twenty minutes—mercy on us! the very thought is sudorific.

The throwing up of the bowels comes the last: fancy Mr. Halsted seated on the right side of his patient, and facing him; then placing his right hand upon the lower part of the abdomen, in such a manner, as to effect a lodgment (we quote his words) as it were, under the bowels, suffering them to rest directly upon the edge of the extended palm, and then, by a quick but not violent motion of the hand, in an upward direction, the bowels are thrown up much in the same manner as in riding on horseback, a sensation being communicated like that produced by a slight blow. (It is difficult to imagine who is entitled to the greatest admiration, the practitioner or the patient.) This treatment, it is said, will generally effect an increase in the strength of the pulse, a warmth in the extremities, and a gentle perspiration. So we should imagine: if such a mode of riding, with one's bowels in another man's hands, will not produce perspiration, what will? The position of the sufferer, during the last most remarkable process, may be occasionally altered, the practitioner taking his station behind him; or he may be placed with his back against the wall, whilst all these freedoms are taken with his bowels. Nay, more,—he may be instructed to perform the operation on his own person.

"Wer't not for laughing, I should pity him."

This, then, is the Halstedian treatment!

The former rules of quackery, reduced to the administration of sundry pills or elixirs, must be abandoned in favour of the manipulating and scouring process of the great medical wizard of the day, who relieves by a tap, and cures by a flat-iron; and although it may be difficult to conceive the chain of ideas by which the imagination can connect the bumpings of a stage-coach with the operations we have described, we may exclaim,—

"Your art As well may teach an ass to scour the plain, And bend obedient to the forming rein,"

as cure dyspepsia; still, we must yield our admiration to the novelty of invention, and to the ingenuity of application of these stomach and bowel working wonders.

It unfortunately happens sometimes, that the dyspepsia is connected with inflamed stomach, in which case the punching practice is death. We have heard from eminent physicians, that several lives have, within their knowledge, been endangered by it. Moreover, the real indecency of the Halstedian process, particularly in the case of women, has greatly shocked even the medical observers.

Before we dismiss this book from actual review, we will devote a short space to its probable effect upon the public, and upon the best means of counteracting its tendency.

Man, like a child, is amused by a novelty, and "tickled by a straw." His "reason too often stoops not" to inquiry before a ready surrender, and what is least comprehensible will occasionally receive the readiest credence: bare assertion is admitted without proof, the rhodomontade of enthusiasts passes for gospel, and the "leather and prunella" of impostors are regarded as commodities of sterling value. No wonder, then, that success attends a certain race, who are willing to prey upon the infirmity of reason; that the mountebanks of former days are emulated by the quacks of the present time; that Mr. Halsted has met with abundance of patients, and a ready sale for his work: a hope of relief from disease acts as a stimulant to faith, but "Hope is a cur-tail dog in some affairs."

It is said of Dr. Cameron, one of the most remarkable charlatans of his day, that when reproached by a physician concerning his deception on the public, he replied, "Out of twenty persons who pass this house in an hour, nineteen are fools who come to me, whilst the one wise man applies to you—which has the better practice? Believe me, doctor, that although the wise seek the wise in your person, the fools will find me out." How exactly is this assertion fulfilled in the present day! The wise man, who values his health as his greatest earthly blessing, scorns to resign it to the care of one who knows not the value of the trust; who cannot comprehend the principles upon which it depends, the cause which deranges it; or discover the particular organ requiring assistance: common sense interposes a bar to any communication between a wise man and a charlatan; while the multitude will flock to the snare, or swallow the bait; first the gulls, and then the victims; the nostrums, injurious or poisonous as they may be, find ready mouths for their reception; the dogmas, willing ears; and the system of Mr. Halsted, ready sufferers. Is it not to be lamented, that a man who claims a caste above this multitude, will sometimes forget himself so far as to follow their route, heedless of the lines of Horace?—

"When in a wood we leave the certain way One error fools us, though we various stray."

He madly leaves the track of reason to tread in the steps of folly; but he may perhaps retrace them, and if an injured, yet a wiser man. Not so the generality,—they pursue an ignis fatuus, which, dazzling their perceptions as it lures them on, at last leaves them in the mire (from which no skill perhaps can extricate them) to curse themselves and their deceiver.

The exertion of medical science is sufficient for the removal of diseases capable of cure, and is unaccompanied by the risk of leaving others in their place: quackery, on the contrary, attempts what it cannot, from ignorance, perform, and frequently establishes a malady of more serious character than the one it professed to relieve. The medical man, aware of the structure of the human form, of the disposition and arrangement of its several parts in a state of health, is gradually led to a consideration of their condition in disease: that grand master, experience, enables him to discriminate between the cause and effect of morbid action; a long attention to the detail of practice gives him power over a list of remedies whose properties he has ascertained by observation; and in addition to all this, his daily thoughts are engaged in the investigation of sickness in its many forms, and, frequently, his midnight oil expended, while he peruses the observations, and profits by the researches of others. Again, the advertising quack is frequently an unlettered, never a well-informed man, at least on medical topics: his education, his habits, his purposes, are all foreign to science; the first has not been devoted to the accomplishment of a particular duty; the second have not received that polish, or acquired that delicacy so necessary in the hour of sickness and distress; and the third are directed solely to the purposes of gain, rather than to the noble aim of assisting his fellow-creatures; and yet such a character finds support. To the individual who can depend upon his abilities we may exclaim, "tibi seris, tibi metis," and so dismiss him to his fate.

After all that has been said of the exertions of the charlatan to abuse the confidence of mankind, particularly as far as dyspepsia is concerned, it is due to the medical profession, to state what claims they may fairly advance, to entitle them to the good opinion of the public, in the cure of this much talked of affection.

A physician, who understands what he is about, knows very well, when a case of this nature comes before him, that it may proceed from a variety of causes; that it may arise in the stomach from a want of digestive power, from the small intestines by a partial failure in the process of chymification; that it may depend upon the morbid action of the large intestines, or exist merely as a symptom of an affection in other organs. Sedentary habits, or irregularities of diet, are causes which may be supposed to act locally on the digestive organs themselves; but the history of a case will generally show that the derangement of the digestive organs is secondary. When it arises from local irritation, it can only be produced through the medium of the sensorium; when it is idiopathic, it frequently originates in causes which affect the nervous system primarily; such as anxiety, too great exertion of body and mind, and impure air; in many instances, the nervous irritation which has induced the disease, being trivial, is only kept up by the reaction of its effects. Thus says Abernethy, one of the luminaries of modern medical science.

The first duty of a physician, therefore, is to ascertain from what source indigestion proceeds, and to frame his treatment accordingly. To act upon one system of cure, like our friend Mr. Halsted, in a disease arising from such a variety of circumstances, would be as reasonable as applying splints to an arm, when the thigh happens to be fractured; but enough, we would hope, has been said to disabuse the mind of the public of a predilection for these pretenders. Dyspepsia is a disease that has existed for ages, and through ages has it readily been cured. In its simple form there is no mystery about it, and when it becomes complicated, it requires more than the knowledge of a quack to master it. Confidence in a medical attendant, and an adherence to his directions, will surely suffice now, as in former times; and if the public will restrain a longing after novelty, and abandon those "who rather talk than act, and rather kill than cure," in short, who work upon their prejudices by artifice, we shall hear less of dyspepsia, simply because it exists too frequently but in their own fancies. True, there is a certain class, with such mental, as well as bodily infirmities, who, worn down by depraved habits, or suffering under weakened intellects, will permit the wildest chimeras to haunt them; hypochondriacs may be met with every day, and these may be fit patients for the charlatan, or legally subjected to the tickling, pickling, and ironing of Mr. Halsted: extraordinary maladies may justify extraordinary experiments.

The absurd and improper treatment proposed in the work we have noticed, can afford but little hope to any but the hypochondriacal dyspeptic; he may fly to any measures, however desperate or ludicrous; for "a mind diseased no medicine can cure." Let others, however, who cannot plead a malady of the mind as an excuse for resorting to such practice, be informed, that in most of the affections arising from, or confounded with dyspepsia, it is unavailing, and may prove injurious. There are many diseases which it is impossible that Mr. Halsted can distinguish from dyspepsia, and to which he would apply his irons and bottles, towels and vinegar, at the risk of his patient's safety.

His views may be sound if adapted to the animal economy of a horse, but are certainly unsuitable to the constitution of a man.

We would say, then, to the public, in conclusion; be cautious how you trust your health and lives with those who neither comprehend the nature of the one, nor the value of the other—and who would exclaim behind your backs, with Shakspeare's Autolycus, merely altering the description of his wares:—

"Ha! ha! what a fool Honesty is! and Trust, his sworn brother, a very simple gentleman! I have sold all my trumpery; not a counterfeit stone, not a riband, glass, pomander, brooch, table-book, ballad, knife, tape, glove, shoe-tie, bracelet, horn-ring, to keep my pack from fasting: they throng who should buy first, as if my trinkets had been hallowed, and brought a benediction to the buyer; by which means, I saw whose purse was best in picture, and, what I saw, to my good use I remembered."

To the gentle pretenders themselves, we have but a few words to say at parting:—

"Out you impostors, Quack-salving cheating mountebanks—your skill Is to make sound men sick, and sick men, kill."



ART. X.—BANK OF THE UNITED STATES.

1.—Report of the Committee of Ways and Means of the House of Representatives of the United States, to which was referred so much of the President's Message as relates to the Bank of the United States. April 13th, 1830: pp. 31. 8vo.

2.—Message of the President of the United States to both Houses of Congress. December 8th, 1830.

When the President first presented the question of re-chartering the Bank of the United States to the national legislature, at the opening of the session of 1829-30, the measure was viewed very differently by different men. We do not speak of the vulgar herd of politicians, great and small, who approve or condemn indiscriminately all measures of the government, but of that more elevated and independent class, who ask nothing of any administration than that it shall do its duty; and who judge of its acts as they seem to be legal, useful, and wise. To some the president's course appeared to be highly objectionable. The bank charter had then six years to run, and, consequently, they said, neither this congress nor the next had any control over the subject. Nor could it furnish matter of legislation, they added, whilst president Jackson remained in office, unless he should, by being elected for a second term, give his sanction to a principle which he had pronounced impolitic and dangerous. To have brought forward the subject, under these circumstances, with no very doubtful intimation of his own wishes, was as unnecessary as it was unusual, and implied a want of confidence in those who were ultimately to decide the question.

To others, however, this early notice of the subject seemed to be justified by its importance, and they thought that the public could not be too soon engaged in discussing the merits of a question which in so many ways concerned the general welfare. Of this opinion seemed to be the committee of the house of representatives, to which this part of the message was referred, and which, after giving the subject a full consideration, reported in favour of renewing the charter of the present bank, and against the substitute for it which the president had ventured to suggest.

The subject being thus fairly before the people, and in fact undergoing a very thorough investigation in the public journals, it was expected that the president would be contented with having done his duty on the occasion, and, if not silenced by the gentle dissuasive of the senate, or the bold and uncompromising logic of the house, he would merely regret that truth should be so hoodwinked by prejudice, or that error should have found so many apologists and supporters in those august bodies, and that he would leave the question where it properly belonged, and where he himself had placed it—with "the legislature and the people." It was, then, with no little surprise, perceived, that the succeeding annual message, which is at the head of this article, had brought the same subject to the notice of the legislature, consisting precisely of the same individuals as before, when nothing was pretended to have occurred to induce them to change their former opinion, and when the only reason which had been given, at the preceding session, for inviting the consideration of what neither required nor admitted immediate legislation, no longer existed. Public attention had been fully drawn to the subject. The stockholders of the bank, who are profiting by the good management of the institution, and who naturally wish the charter renewed, had taken the alarm, and, trusting to the omnipotence of truth, had every where invited investigation and discussion—and all those who hoped to profit by the new national bank, or who felt themselves bound to second the wishes of the administration, had opposed the renewal of the charter, through the prints devoted to the same cause.

When the avowed purpose of the president had been thus completely answered, by his first communication to congress, it is natural to ask what could have prompted the second? Were the majorities in both houses of congress personally hostile to the president, or unfriendly to his administration; and was it necessary for him to defend himself from party prejudice by an appeal to the people? That could not be; for it is notorious that the president's friends, personal or political, are most numerous in both houses, and this advantage is a daily theme of party boast and congratulation. Were the chairmen of the respective committees his political opponents, and did they insidiously endeavour to bring his party into discredit for the purpose of advancing their own? But they were among his most zealous adherents—nay, it may be questioned whether there was a single individual in the United States to whom the president was more indebted for the vindication of his character before the people, than to Mr. M'Duffie, who wrote one of the reports;—unless it might be to Mr. Adams, when secretary of state. Was it then expected, that the house of representatives, which had disregarded his recommendation, would now approve his project? It is impossible that the president or his advisers could have believed they would carry their complaisance so far. They must have known that the subject would be referred to the same committee, composed of the same persons, as that of the preceding year, and who would be likely, if they reported at all, not only to support their first opinions by further arguments, but to express their disapprobation of a course so wanting in respect to the legislature, and so little calculated to promote harmony between the different branches of the government. As, then, we are compelled to give the negative to all these suppositions, we must infer that the object of this extraordinary course has been to influence public opinion. It seems essential to the views of the present executive of the United States, to put down the present national bank, and to erect another on its ruins; and this favourite purpose it hopes to attain by bringing the president's personal and official influence to bear on the question; and, under the forms of the constitution, to appeal from his party in congress, to his party in the nation.

On the dignity or good faith of this course we will not make any comment; but since the question is thus brought before the people, we will cheerfully meet it, and inquire how far the measure recommended by the president, against the opinions of the immediate representatives of the people, seems calculated to advance the public interest, or to promote a distinct and peculiar interest. We shall fearlessly, though temperately, examine the president's propositions, both as to the existing national bank and its proposed substitute; and we shall look at the subject with a single eye to the public good, for we have no other interest in the question than what is common to every citizen of the United States. We know that there is much good sense in this nation, and although there is a full share of prejudice too, yet no one need despair, that the former, if properly addressed, will eventually prevail.

That part of the Message which relates to the bank is in these words,—

"The importance of the principles involved in the inquiry, whether it will be proper to re-charter the Bank of the United States, requires that I should again call the attention of congress to the subject. Nothing has occurred to lessen, in any degree, the dangers which many of our citizens apprehended from that institution, as at present organized. In the spirit of improvement and compromise which distinguishes our country and its institutions, it becomes us to inquire whether it be not possible to secure the advantages afforded by the present bank through the agency of a bank of the United States, so modified in its principles and structure as to obviate constitutional and other objections.

"It is thought practicable to organize such a bank, with the necessary officers, as a branch of the treasury department, based on the public and individual deposits, without power to make loans or purchase property, which shall remit the funds of the government, and the expenses of which may be paid, if thought advisable, by allowing its officers to sell bills of exchange to private individuals at a moderate premium. Not being a corporate body, having no stockholders, debtors, or property, and but few officers, it would not be obnoxious to the constitutional objections which are urged against the present bank; and having no means to operate on the hopes, fears, or interests, of large masses of the community, it would be shorn of the influence which makes that bank formidable. The states would be strengthened by having in their hands the means of furnishing the local paper currency through their own banks; while the bank of the United States, though issuing no paper, would check the issues of the state banks, by taking their notes in deposit, and for exchange, only so long as they continue to be redeemed with specie. In times of public emergency, the capacities of such an institution might be enlarged by legislative provisions.

"These suggestions are made, not so much as a recommendation, as with a view of calling the attention of congress to the possible modifications of a system, which cannot continue to exist in its present form without occasional collisions with the local authorities, and perpetual apprehensions and discontent on the part of the states and the people."

When the president's views, as here disclosed, are analyzed, they seem to involve the following propositions, to each of which we will give a separate consideration.

1. That the present Bank of the United States is unconstitutional.

2. That it exercises a dangerous influence.

3. That it creates discontent with the people, and collisions with the states.

4. That such a bank as is proposed in its place, is free from all these objections.

1. On the constitutionality of the bank, we have little to add to the remarks made on the subject in our last number. The arguments then urged having received no answer, and being, as we conceive, unanswerable, we must consider that the more the question is investigated, the more it will be found that a power which has been recognised by every branch of the government, and at some time or other, by every party that has administered the affairs of the nation, will be found to be correct. We cannot, however, forbear to add one other, because of its peculiar fitness to the present occasion.

It is known, that the power of the general government to establish a national bank, mainly turns on that clause of the Constitution of the United States, which gives congress the power "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution" the powers specifically granted—one party deducing the constitutionality of the bank from a liberal interpretation of the word "necessary," and the other drawing the opposite inference from their interpreting the same word in a narrower sense; both reasoning justly from their respective premises, and both agreeing, that on the true meaning of that term, rest the merits of the controversy.

Whenever a doubt occurs about the meaning of a phrase in a written instrument, it has always been considered a good rule of interpretation, to refer to the use of the same phrase in other parts of the same instrument, for the purpose of discovering the sense attached to it by those who used it. Applying this rule, we find in the article concerning the duties and powers of the president, (3d section) that "he shall, from time to time, give to the congress information of the state of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." It is by virtue of this power thus granted, and of this alone, that the president has recommended the creation of a new bank to the legislature. Now, it will not be pretended that he could have judged this recommendation to be necessary, in the strictest sense of the term, but at most, that it was highly useful and important. It must then be admitted, either that the narrow interpretation of the word "necessary," relied on by those who deny the constitutionality of the bank, is erroneous, or that the president himself has violated the constitution in the recommendation he has made. If it be insisted, that he had the constitutional right to recommend a measure, which both houses of congress had pronounced highly inexpedient, because he believed it prudent, and politic, and salutary—the ground on which he himself places it—then the same liberal interpretation of the term "necessary," which we admit to be the true one, will make the bank constitutional. We have resorted to this rule, not so much because it furnishes an argument ad hominem which is irresistible, as for the higher purpose of throwing light on one of the most controverted parts of the constitution.

But admitting, for the sake of argument, the constitutionality of the bank to be one of those difficult and complicated questions about which men's minds may always be divided, and that there are reasons on either side, sufficient, if not to convince, to perplex and bewilder, and to afford pretexts for those who seek some sinister or selfish ends—and of such character are most constitutional questions—we would ask, if this is never to have a termination? Are questions of this kind to be always unsettled, so that no length of time, however sufficient to quiet private controversies, shall put an end to those which most nearly concern the tranquillity and permanence of the Union?

On this subject of constitutional questions generally, we would trespass awhile on the patience of our readers. It involves far higher considerations than whether this or that individual shall be president—this party or that shall exert a transient sway over the destinies of the country. Our remarks are independent of men, or times, or circumstances; and they are addressed to men of no party—to the intelligent and patriotic of all parties—to that fund of good sense which has ever characterized this nation.

As every officer of the government takes an oath to support the constitution, his conscience is appealed to, and that which he honestly and truly believes to be the meaning of the obligation he has incurred, must influence his votes and acts under the constitution. It is seriously and earnestly maintained by many of our citizens, that every man's own interpretation of the constitution must be his guide; and no matter what the public tribunals have determined—no matter for what length of time, or by what degree of unanimity a particular interpretation may have prevailed, it is to weigh as nothing with him, so far as it seems contrary to the conviction of his own mind. But is this a true understanding of the character of a written constitution, and of the oath which it enjoins? If so, would not the means devised to secure its more faithful observance be the most likely to defeat its provisions; and would it not make such a constitution the most impracticable and absurd form of government that human folly ever devised? Let us consider the consequences of this doctrine.

In the first place, let us call to mind the great number of constitutional questions which have arisen during the short period of little more than forty years, since the Federal government went into operation. In General Washington's administration, the most prominent of those questions were suggested by the establishment of a national bank—by the carriage tax—the proclamation of neutrality—and the appropriations to carry the British treaty into effect: in that of Mr. Adams, the elder, the alien and sedition laws: in Mr. Jefferson's, the repeal of the Judiciary law—the embargo for an indefinite period—the purchase of Louisiana: in Mr. Madison's, the United States Bank again, the power of the federal government over the militia of a state—the right of that government to construct roads: in Mr. Monroe's, the right in congress to pass the bankrupt law—to lay a duty on imports for the encouragement of manufactures—to appropriate money for the relief of the poor of the district of Columbia: and in Mr. John Quincy Adams's, the Cherokee treaty—the nullification doctrine—the power of appointing public officers, together with several of the others previously mentioned.

To these questions we might add many of minor importance or interest, and that multitude which have arisen and been decided in the Supreme Court of the United States. But if the number is already so great, what will it be a century or two hence? Let it be remembered, too, that each of these legislative questions may give rise to many others connected with them, and that each one may be multiplied to infinity in the courts of justice. Thus, if protecting duties for the encouragement of manufactures are unconstitutional, the duty claimed on every bale of imported goods may be called in question.

Whenever, then, any of these constitutional questions can be made, it would be competent for the party interested, by the doctrines of these political puritans, to make them. So that in every controversy, public or private, every conflict of right or interest, as the question of constitutionality would be completely open to the judge, and in criminal cases, to the jury, either party may take his chance of success by urging that interpretation of the constitution which best suits him, and the same question would, of course, be decided one way in one place, and another way in another. One man would be convicted for an offence for which another would go unpunished; and one citizen, or one state, be subjected to taxes under the constitution, from which others would be shielded by the same instrument.