had felt this in the secession of many of those men who were drawn into its ranks in 1830, by the proscriptive character of anti-masonry, while the western anti-masonic counties have remained as true and steady to their recent alliance, as they were staunch and energetic on their old battle field. Twelve years of repeated experiments upon these western counties, only serve to show that they came out stronger at every trial-were powerful against every opposition. This tenacity of purpose which has marked the anti-masonic counties, seems to indicate a reliable steadiness which it is almost hopeless for their opponents to attempt to change, and which those counties have undoubtedly acquired from the stern and vindictive contests which were thus waged in the earlier days of anti-masonry. It is the spirit of anti-masonry which there still exists which causes this steadiness, and which will probably not abate until at least the present generation shall have passed away. It has been of material service in advancing the present whig administration into power, and sustaining them therein. Whether it will continue to furnish such aid with the same success, it remains for the future political historian to record.

CHAPTER XXXIX.

FROM JANUARY 1, 1832, TO JANUARY 1, 1883.

Very little improvement was made in either of the legislative houses by the new members chosen at the late election. From the eighth district, the anti-masons had chosen Judge Birdsall, a man of respectable talents, but unfortunately, constitutionally nervous, and occasionally subject to dyspeptic affections, which depressed his mental energies and rendered him indisposed to take that active part in the business of legislation and in political operations, for which, had he been in mind and body in sound health, he was eminently qualified.

Mr. John W. Edmonds was an exceedingly active partizan, and possessed of considerable talent. His taste, however, seemed to lead him to devote his attention more to political management, than to the important and serious part of legislation.

Mr. Robert Lansing, a senator from Jefferson county, was inexperienced in public life, but a young man of fair mind, and endowed with talents sufficient to render him an useful member of the legislature. His diffidence and modesty prevented his taking a very active part in the

senate.

In the assembly, the anti-masons again returned Mr. Granger and Mr. Nicholas. The party however suffered a loss by Mr. Fillmore not being returned. He was, I believe, a member of congress. That loss was, nevertheless, nearly, if not quite, made good by the election of a plain farmer from the county of Livingston. I allude to George W. Patterson, whose strong, vigorous powers of mind were not immediately developed, but who in the

course of the session began to afford evidence of intellectual energies of no ordinary character or grade.

The national republicans of the county of Queens this year returned Mr. John A. King, of whom I have before spoken. The same party also elected Jedediah Miller, a respectable and very popular lawyer from the county of Schoharie, and Hiram Bennett, formerly a regency member from the county of Sullivan.

The Jackson party added very little to the talents of their party in the assembly this year, except from the city of New-York, whose representation was, I think, somewhat improved by the election of Judah Hammond and Myndert Van Schaick, both of them respectable as lawyers and estimable as citizens.

Mr. Isaac R. Van Duzer, an active young man of promising talents, was elected on the Jackson ticket from the county of Orange, and though he afterwards became somewhat erratic in his political course, soon gave evidence of considerable talents as a legislator.

Mr. Charles L. Livingston was again elected speaker without serious opposition.

Two or three of the first pages of the governor's message, as printed in the Senate Journal, are occupied by him in laying down general maxims in relation to good governments, and in comparing the American with European governments. The same obscurity and awkwardness as a writer are manifested by the governor on this occason, as were exhibited by him in his inaugural address. I will not take up the time of the reader by presenting him with quotations to prove the correctness of this remark. It is nevertheless remarkable that in what may properly be called the business part of this message, and where the governor exhibits to the legislature the financial condition of the state, his views are presented clearly, without tautology,

and with neatness, and in some places, with elegance.* The topics embraced by the message were of the ordinary character. He recommended a state tax to supply the deficiency in the general fund, and he says, "a hope is held out to us that the public lands or the proceeds of the sale of them may be distributed among the states." His remarks in relation to common schools and agriculture, and his suggestions of necessary improvements in our penitentiary system and criminal code, are judicious and in all respects praiseworthy.

Although the charter of the bank of the United States did not expire until the year 1836, it applied at the session of congress in the winter of 1832 for a renewal of its charter. Whether the opponents of the re-election of General Jackson had encouraged this course, under an impression that, considering the attitude he had assumed in relation to the question of re-chartering the bank, the agitation of the question of its re-charter might embarrass him and aid them; or whether the friends of the bank being, as they were, certain of a majority in both houses in their favor, entertained the belief that, if the bill for renewing the charter should pass both houses, the president would not venture to veto it; or if he did, that that act, together with the influence the bank could bring to bear against him, would be sufficient to defeat his election; or rather, whether all these considerations combined, did not induce this early application, are questions which I shall not attempt to decide. The fact that such application had been made, furnished an excuse for an expression of opinion by the New-York legislature; and, indeed, it must be admitted, that the occasion afforded a much better reason for the legislative action of this state, than existed

• Some of the opponents of Gov. Throop affected to believe that this part of the message was written by Comptroller Wright.

when Mr. Morehouse offered his resolution in the session of 1831.

Pretty early in the session, Mr. Dietz, an honest and unpretending member of the senate, from the county of Schoharie, was chosen by the Jackson leaders to introduce a joint resolution into that house, against the renewal of the charter of the bank of the United States, and instructing the senators, and requesting the members in the house of representatives of the congress of the United States, to resist such renewal. The resolution was very fully and ably discussed. It was supported by Messrs. Beardsley, Tallmadge and Edmonds, and opposed by Messrs. Allen, Bronson, Maynard and Seward; but on the 10th of February it passed by a vote of twenty against ten.

Messrs. Allen of New-York, Bronson of Oswego, and Rexford of Delaware, were the only members of the senate belonging to the Jackson party who voted against it. Mr. Tracy does not appear to have voted on the question. All the other anti-masons were in their seats, and voted against it.

When the resolution reached the assembly, it there encountered a very vigorous opposition, but finally passed by the strong vote of seventy-five to thirty-seven. It is worthy of remark, that Mr. Speaker Livingston, Mr. Hammond, Mr. Morgan, Mr. Van Schaick and Mr. Stillwell, four of the most distinguished members from the city of New-York, voted against the resolution.

I have mentioned that Mr. Van Buren was appointed by Gen. Jackson minister to England. He had sailed for London the summer preceding this session, and was now our accredited representative at the court of St. James. But the United States senate had not yet passed upon his nomination by the president. The president, early in the session, sent in his nomination to the senate, but action upon it was by that body long delayed, and finally it was