USA > Alabama > Reminiscences of public men in Alabama : for thirty years, with an appendix > Part 33
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87
The member from Sumter first took his seat in the House in 1841, and again in 1842, 1844 and 1845. He was a hard-work- ing public servant. On several occasions he addressed the House, chiefly as head of the committee on roads, bridges and ferries, to which a great many petitions, bills and memorials had been referred. He was a sound-headed planter, with smooth delivery, and unpretending language.
In 1853, Mr. Woodward was elected to the Senate from the District composed of Sumter, Choctaw and Washington, and in the canvass for reelection in 1855, he was beaten by Col. Thomas McCarroll Prince, of the latter county, upon the Know-Nothing question. In 1857, he was again elected to the Senate, and served four years, which concluded his public life. He is a prom- inent minister of the Baptist Church, and resides in Choctaw county, perhaps at his old home, cut off from Sumter in forming the new county, to commemorate the large tribe of Indians who previous to the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit, in 1832, were proprie- tors and occupants of the soil.
With all his gravity of deportment as a clergyman, he pos- sessed a fine flow of spirits, and indulged occasionally in innocent humor among his friends in the social relations of life. He is a most worthy and useful citizen, and enjoys universal respect.
Among the very prominent members at the session of 1842, Messrs. A. B. Moore, of Perry, and Thomas H. Watts, of Butler,
328
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
of the House, and John A. Winston, of the Senate, were included by general consent. As each of these gentlemen was elected Governor of the State at a future period, a special notice of them will appear under the proper heads of Administrations. A simi- lar remark will apply to William R. Smith, Esq., of Tuskaloosa, who was subsequently elected a Representative in the United States Congress,
CHAPTER XIX.
Congressional Elections, 1843-Spirit of the Canvass-Sketches of Candidates.
After the excitement and legislation of the preceding session, a calm succeeded in the public mind, and except so far that it was moved upon by the discussion of Federal politics, the year 1843 was comparatively quiet. Gov. Fitzpatrick was reelected without opposition. In the Congressional Districts, however, there was more or less activity in the canvass, except in the Huntsville Dis- trict, where the Hon. Reuben Chapman was reelected without opposition.
In the Florence District, Robert Armstrong, Esq., was the competitor of Gen. George S. Houston, and was beaten. For the Tuskaloosa District, Mr. Payne was reelected over Col. Elisha Young. In the Mobile District, the canvass was very animated, and the result very doubtful, until the ballot in August declared the victory to the Hon. James Dellet, Whig, over the Hon. Henry Goldthwaite, who had resigned the office of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, to accept the nomination unanimously ten- dered by his democratic friends in convention, as a candidate to wrest the District from the control of the Whigs. The campaign was marked by signal ability in the competitors, who addressed the people in every direction, and enlisted all the strength which personal or party considerations could bring to the support of their respective candidates. It was indeed a war of giants, which has never been equalled in power and dexterity by any political com- batants in Alabama. It was the first instance of the kind, probably, where so high a judicial position had been surrendered, to engage in a party contest. The sacrifice, however, was not the less merito- rious on principle, after failure, than if it had resulted in success.
324
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
In the Dallas District, the Hon. Dixon H, Lewis was opposed by Henry C. Lea, Esq., a Whig, the latter being defeated by a large majority. In the Montgomery District, Col. John W. A. Pettit was the nominee of the Whig party, who was successfully opposed by James E. Belser, Esq. The District was considered decidedly Whig, but as the canvass proceeded, a reaction took place, and Mr. Belser was elected by a good majority.
Here it is proper to say, that several gentlemen whose names have been mentioned in connection with the Congressional elec- tions of 1843, have been already noticed, or will be noticed here- after, in this work, from other standpoints, in relation to the public service. A few brief sketches will be here given, as circum- stances seem to require.
1. GEN. GEORGE S. HOUSTON had been a member of the Leg- islature previous to 1837, and was that year elected Solicitor of the Limestone District over Mr. Richardson, the incumbent, who was a gentleman of fine standing, and a lawyer of good ability. He was the son-in-law of Captain Nicholas Davis, and continued to practice law successfully until his death in Limestone county a few years ago. Among the sons he left, is Capt. Richardson, a lawyer of Huntsville, of whom the State may be proud.
Gen. Houston was first elected to Congress on the general ticket in 1841, and continued through successive elections (except in 1849 when the District was represented by the Hon. David Hubbard) until the secession of Alabama, making a period of eighteen years in Congress. On the reorganization of the State Government after the war, he was elected by the Legislature in 1865 a Senator of the United States for the short term. Before. the same Legislature in 1866 he was defeated by Gov. Winston for a new term in the Senate; but in neither case did the one elected take his seat.
While serving in Congress, Gen. Houston attained a strong position in that body. We was successively chairman of the com- mittee on Military Affairs, chairman of the committee on Ways and Means, and chairman of the committee on the Judiciary, a triple honor which, probably, in no other instance has been con- ferred on a Representative. He took a leading part in the debates, and his opinions were much respected. His influence became more established as years progressed, and his familiarity with public questions rendered his aid important. His strict, uniform attention to his public duties, and his large experience gave the stamp of maturity and statesmanship to his views. In his party relations he was recognized as a leader of the Democracy, and his counsels had much weight.
è In person Gen. Houston is firmly and heavily set, wears a
325
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
thoughtful face, and is one of the few men who has passed a long Congressional term in the maintenance of temperate and steady habits. He still resides in Limestone county, engaged in the prac- tice of the law.
2. JAMES DELLET was a native of South Carolina, and settled at Claiborne in the practice of the law, about the time Alabama was passing from a Territorial condition. He was returned to the first Legislature under the State Government, and on its assem- bling at Huntsville, in 1819, was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives. Afterward, he repeatedly served in the Legislature, and always with marked fidelity and distinction.
In 1833, he was a candidate for Congress in the Mobile Dis- trict, and was beaten by Governor Murphy, who, in his turn, in 1839, was defeated by his former competitor in a regular political battle in the same District. While in Congress, Mr. Dellet was recognized for his great powers in debate, as a number of his published speeches will testify. In April, 1840, he delivered in the House of Representatives a speech of thirty pages in pam- phlet form, on the "Civil and Diplomatic Appropriation Bill," equal in ability to that of any of his compeers.
Alluding to the cooperation of Mr. Calhoun with Mr. VanBuren, since 1837, in the sub-treasury scheme, Mr. Dellet exclaimed:
How is it that South Carolina is here, hanging on the outskirts of this last, miserable, perishing remnant of royal aristocracy ? Is she here by permission ? Has she, too, been seduced by intrigue ? Is she here by the sting and the force of the party lash? Or is she here in obedience to the dictates of a cool and delib- erate judgment, dispassionately formed on the facts presented ?
Mr. Dellet then adduces the evidence of disfavor with which South Carolina had regarded Mr. Van Buren, when, in 1831, he was rejected as Minister to England, by the casting vote of Mr. Calhoun, as Vice-President in the Senate; when, in 1832, the State refused to vote for Gen. Jackson for President, or Mr. Van Buren for Vice-President, and then, in 1836, she refused to take part, but stood aloof in the Presidential election, when Mr. Van Buren was a candidate.
After tracing, through public documents, the former opposition of Mr. Calhoun to the fiscal policy of Gen. Jackson and Mr. Van Buren, and noticing the remarks of Mr. Brown, of Mississippi, eulogistic of the Senator from South Carolina, for his independ- ence and honesty in supporting the Sub-Treasury, Mr. Dellet ob- served:
Among others, I will not say his high-wrought or fanciful touches, he likened the late volunteer, the new ally, (Mr. Calhoun,) in a fearful hour, in the service of the commander-in-chief, to one of the sublime and wonderful monuments of the natural world; he compared him to the falls of Niagara. The correctness and
326
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
chastity of figurative language require that the prominent qualities of the object compared should bear a striking similitude to the distinguishing characteristics of the prototype. Does the analogy, then, consist in the resistless outpouring of accumulated and accumulating mighty powers-never-ending noise- ceaseless spray above, and perpetual foam beneath ? Or, is it in the barren, desolate waste, the only relic that commemorates the sweep of mighty waters ? Might he not more correctly have been compared to the king of day, who, by his own self- possessed, internal heat, penetrates the remotest regions, shedding the beams of his splendor upon all minor luminaries, vivifying, producing, and sustaining all animated nature; ever commanding new and increased admiration, save when there may now and then intervene a cloud, or storm, or tempest, created by the intensity of his own rays, which obscures his brightness for a season, sweeping into desolation the most beautiful productions and proudest specimens of his powers ?
Perhaps, in the whole history of parliamentary wrestling, there is not a passage more sarcastic than the construction put by Mr. Dellet; nor was there a more splendid tribute ever paid, than that implied in the figure of the "King of day," as a substitute for the "cataract." It is introduced here as a model of its kind.
This speech of Mr. Dellet, after the example of other gentle- men of both political parties in Congress, embraced every topic, every fact, every influence, from the official records, which was most likely to prejudice Mr. Van Buren, the Democratic nominee, who was then a candidate for reelection as President of the United States, opposed by Gen. Harrison, the Whig nominee. That such was the character of the speech as a campaign document, may be seen from the following paragraph near the close:
Sir, it has been asked, Why will the American people vote for General Har- rison ? Go and ask the brothers, the fathers, and the sons of those who fell at the battle of the Thames, and who honored a soldier's grave at the sortie of Fort Meigs! Go and collect together, in pious gratitude, the bones of your countrymen, the bleached memorials of savage vengeance at Tippacanoe ! Con- verse with those who survived, and escaped the havoc and slaughter of those hero-won fields ! Do that, and never again will you hear the deriding inquiry, Why will the American people vote for General Harrison ? unless it be under indi- cations of self-abasement and withering shame. Sir, those who sneeringly ask that question, have yet to learn that there is in the breast of every American, a warm, animated, living tablet, beating in every pulse, and glowing in every vein, on which is inscribed : He who is as discreet and wise in council, as he has been cautious, prudent, and dauntless in the hour of peril, William Henry Harrison, is entitled to the confidence of his country.
.
The specimens quoted from Mr. Dellet's speech show that he was a classical scholar, and a master of expression. His manner of speaking was animated and agreeable, with force in the argu- ment, and always in good taste. Few men in Alabama have . excelled him in this respect. His person was large and com- . manding. He was in favor of Mr. Adams for the Presidency in 1828; a Whig without discount, always coming fully up to the mark of party faith and principle. His character was of the highest grade in all the relations of life. After his retirement
327
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
from Congress, he devoted himself to the management of his large property, and died in 1849, lamented by all as a great loss to the State.
JOHN MURPHY was a North Carolinian, who first settled as a lawyer in Columbia, South Carolina, and held for some time the office of Secretary of the Senate. Removing to Alabama, he settled in Monroe county, and was a member of the Convention which formed the State Constitution in 1819.
In 1825, he was elected Governor by the Democratic party, of which he was an influential member, and was reelected in 1827; and in 1829, was succeeded by Gabriel Moore. , In 1833, he de- feated Mr. Dellet for Congress, and in 1839, Mr. Dellet prevailed in another contest. This terminated the public life of Gov. Mur- phy, who died in a few years thereafter in Clarke county, which had for some time been his place of residence.
He was another of Alabama's public men who, starting poor, and without patronage, by a strict regard to the duties of the legal profession, devotion to the public interest, and fidelity to all trusts committed to him, attained wealth and eminence. His manners were plain and unpretending, his person large and well devel- oped, with commanding address, and his delivery was easy and forcible as a public speaker.' Few men of his day, in the history of the State, had the public confidence for integrity more ex- tended to him than Gov. Murphy. He acted well his part, and his memory is held in the highest respect by all parties.
JAMES E. BELSER, a native of North Carolina, settled in Mont- gomery as a mechanic, when quite a young man. He was from the start a man of the people, and soon succeeded in identifying himself with them, in fortune and in sympathy. He was elected Clerk of the County Court of Montgomery County. In the meantime he studied law, and having a talent and fondness for writing, he became to some extent connected with the Mont- gomery press.
My first acquaintance with Mr. Belser began in 1838, when he was elected Solicitor of the 8th Circuit, an office which he held a few years, and then resigned. In 1842, Gov. Fitzpatrick ap- pointed him commissioner or agent of the State to visit Washing- ton City and procure a settlement of the claims of Alabama on the General Government for moneys advanced in the Indian war of 1836. He performed this duty in a very able and satisfactory manner, and succeeded in obtaining such legislation by Congress as led to settlement, whereby the State was reimbursed for her expenditures.
328
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
In 1843, Mr. Belser was brought forward by the Democrats of the Montgomery District for Congress, in opposition to Col. Pettit, the Whig nominee. The canvass was spirited, and the District politically revolutionized by the election of Mr. Belser. At the session of 1843-'4, the annexation of Texas to the United States was before Congress. In May, 1844, Mr. Belser made a speech in its support, in which he displayed patient, laborious research touching the several treaties between Spain and France, and be- tween France and the United States, for the cession of Louisiana, embracing all the territory west of the Mississippi, to the Rio Grande. He also recited, copiously, the facts of the colonization of Texas by people of the United States, and the Mexican laws governing the same from 1800 to 1835. He quoted from writers on international law, and from the letters and speeches of public men in our country, and from decisions of the courts, in such a manner, with such force of application, as to make out a strong case on his side of the question, to-wit: That it was a stipulated obligation of the Treaty of Paris, of 1800, for the inhabitants of the territory ceded, to "be incorporated into the United States, and admitted, as soon as possible according to the principles of the Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advan- tages and immunities of the citizens of the United States; and in the meantime, that they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion which they profess."
He contended that either by treaty or joint resolution, it was competent for Texas to be brought into the Union. With regard to the pretended claim by Mexico of jurisdiction over Texas as a province, Mr. Belser said:
The declaration of American independence, and that of Texian also, asserts the fundamental principle that man is capable of governing himself, and this self- evident truth impelled Texas to throw off the Mexican yoke, and take a place in the list of Republics. Does Santa Anna possess the power, by Divine right, to hold on to Texas? Is this Government to await his pleasure for a full recognition of Texian sovereignty? Who made him a king de jure, to acknowledge the inde- pendence of Texas only when he thinks proper ? Can we not move in the matter without his potential assent? He is a usurper, not a ruler de jure. He has vio- lated repeatedly the fundamental laws of Mexico, to which Texas was a party, without her consent. His tyranny toward the Texians, a gallant people, was insupportable. He rendered himself a scourge to the human race, and this au- thorized every foreign power, that saw fit, to come to the rescue against such an oppressor. Well has it been remarked that "all antiquity has praised Hercules for delivering the world from an Antæus, a Busiris, and a Diomede."-See Vattel's Law of Nations, page 156.
In 1837, when the United States refused to receive Texas, no nation had ac- knowledged her independence. Then it was that Mexico had just been using the most active exertions to subjugate her, and her right to enter into treaties had not been admitted by this and other Governments. Whenever one Government acknowledges the independence of another, and her right to make treaties, then it is too late, according to English and American authority, to deny to her full
.
329
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
and entire sovereignty. The treaty between this Government and Texas, by which the two have been united, is a valid compact, and could not hereafter be set aside by Mexico. It is a part of the general right of sovereignty (say the Supreme Court) attached to independent nations, "to fix the disputed boundaries between their respective limits; and the boundaries so established and fixed by compacts between nations, become conclusive on all the subjects and citizens thereof, and are to be treated, to all intents and purposes, as the real boundaries." See 1st Peters' Reports, page 185.
The great industry evinced by Mr. Belser, in selecting and ar- ranging papers from the public archives, and from authors, and the skill with which he deduces the argument, remind the atten- tive reader of the habits of Mr. Benton, in preparing his speeches in the Senate. He gives chapter and verse, and there seems to be no limit to the stores of his information. Mr. Belser, was evi- dently a hard-working member, and never took the floor in de- bate unless he was thoroughly prepared.
The treaty for the annexation of Texas to the United States, was concluded at Washington, April 12, 1844, between John C. Calhoun, Secretary of State, and Isaac Van Zandt, and J. Pinckney Henderson, plenipotentiaries of Texas, and transmitted, by Presi- dent Tyler, to the Senate, on the 22d of April, where, after due consideration in secret session, it was rejected by a vote of 16 to 35. The second article of the treaty provided:
The citizens of Texas shall be incorporated into the Union of the United States, maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, and admitted, as soon as may be consistent with the principles of the Federal Consti- tution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, privileges, and immunities, of citizens of the United States.
The closing portion of Mr. Belser's speech is here given:
Sir, we are asked by many what we want with Texas, and what do we expect to gain from its annexation ? If the younger son, described in the parable as hav- ing taken a journey into a far distant country, and there wasted his substance in riotous living, could, on his return to his father's mansion, have spread before him the "fatted calf," and be regaled with "music and dancing," what joy will there be when the " lone star" shall be brought to this Union? Her return will not be like that of the prodigal son, with her substance wasted by licentiousness ; but she will bring with her the fruits of perseverance, and the indomitable spirit of free- dom. Her triumphal entry will be celebrated from Maine to Louisiana, not alone with "music and dancing," but the tear of gratitude to the Ruler of all nations will fall from many an eye, in commemoration of the glorious event.
What we have already witnessed on this subject is but the beginning of the ex- citement. The question of Texian annexation can not die. The silence which at this time pervades some portions of the Union in regard to it, is like unto that which precedes the earthquake. Senators may reject the treaty, but the treaty in the end will reject them. The flame is not to be extinguished. Texas is ours, and no government can deprive a mother of such a daughter. Her Constitution, laws, religion, language, and kindred, are a part of our own; and those whom God has thus united let not nations put asunder. Great Britain may attempt again and again to cajole her into a fatal embrace; but while we remain true to our obliga- tions, she will turn from the wiles of the harlot with increased indignation.
330
Reminiscences of Public Men in Alabama.
Sir, is the proffered boon to be rejected ? Before that God who knows all things, he trusted not. He looked with confidence to the final triumph of man's birthright in every clime and country on the globe. He hailed with delight the influence of liberty everywhere, and was anxious to see that day come when our sacred National banner shall float over Texas, over Oregon, over California, and over Canada too; and when other nations, witnessing our prosperity, shall hasten to oover themselves with its folds, acknowledging that they caught the first spark of freedom's fire from the American example, and forwarding the radiant, beams until they shall have electrified the most benighted portions of the earth.
"O, Liberty, transcendent and sublime, Born on the mountain's solitary crest --- Nature thy nurse, thy sire unconquering Time, Truth the pure inmate of thy glowing breast. Tis thine, when sanguinary demons lower, Amid the thickening host to force thy way, To quell the minions of oppressive power, And shame the vaunted nothings of a day. Still shall the human mind thy name adore, Till chaos ends, and worlds shall be no more."
On the 28th January, 1845, Mr. Belser delivered a speech on the Oregon bill, which abounded in documentary references, showing the right of the United States to terminate the joint occupation of Oregon with Great Britain, under the stipulations of 1818 and 1827, at any time, on twelve months' notice being given by either party after the 20th of October, 1828.
Mr. Belser then examined the provisions of the bill before the House-proposing the organization of a temporary government out of all the country belonging to the United States West of the summit of the Rocky Mountains, and bounded on the South by the fifty-second and on the North by the fifty-fourth degree and forty minutes North latitude, forming an area of three hundred and fifty thousand square miles, drained by the Columbia river and its tributaries. He contended that the bill, so far as regarded boundary, was correct, and that it was the same recognized in our treaties with Spain, Russia and Mexico.
To encourage settlements, the bill requires that provision shall be made by law to secure and grant 640 acres of land to every white male inhabitant of the Territory of Oregon, being a citizen, of the age of eighteen years and upward, who shall cultivate and use the same, or any part thereof, for five consecutive years; and that to every such inhabitant, being a married man, there shall be granted, in addition, 160 acres to his wife, and 160 acres to the father for each child under eighteen years of age.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.