and expense rather than profit. To establish these facts, there is copied in the report the following extract of a letter from a man at the South, to whose sister a gentleman of New York had sent two abolition pamphlets:

666 Do you remember the two books you sent out to my sister by me? My two black boys, William and Jim, who lived better and easier than I did, read them, and, in consequence, ran off, and after eleven days' riding, and two hundred and sixtyseven dollars cost, I got them; and now their place is wretched by their own conduct, as I sold them at a loss of nine hundred dollars to a trader.'

"The report then goes on to urge, that to increase the desire and disposition of the slave to run away to the greatest possible pitch, it is necessary that the Northern States should adopt such a course of policy as to render his recapture impossible after he has escaped there. The effect which such a course of policy would produce, in decreasing the value of slaves, is then minutely exemplified. The report then urges upon the Northern States to pass laws, providing such a mode of trial in the case of fugitives from labor as will enable them to raise the question of the legality of the bondage in which they are held.

"These are the objects which the Abolitionists have in view in their ordinary movements here; but this proviso is advocated by them in the hope that they may be able to form a cordon of free states entirely around us, in which, in the language of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Delano), the fires of liberty are to be lit up, and, by them, the South consumed.

"These are the objects of the prime movers in this matter; and now I put it to the country, are they proper-are they humane-are they philanthropic-are they patriotic?"

And he thus concludes:

"Mr. Jefferson was right when he said that the fell spirit of abolitionism had only been hushed for a moment, and that the Missouri Compromise was a reprieve' and 'not a final sentence.' No, sir; from that day to this its progress has been rapid. The concessions which the South then made have but invited new aggressions. The demands of the Abolitionists have constantly been more and more exacting, until now they insist upon an unconditional surrender of all our rights; and this is done in a tone as offensive as the demand is unjust.

"As a faithful sentinel on the watch-tower, I warn my countrymen of the danger which is so rapidly approaching. I warn them to suspect-more than suspect-that man who would try to lull them into a false security. I see the danger in all its hideousness, and I will not betray a confiding constituency by crying out all is well,' when I know all is not well. Sir. the boldness and the strength of the Abolitionists have increased with wonderful rapidity; and I am amazed to see how quiet Southern men are. I have had to school myself for this dis cussion. For more than ten years I have had my eye upon this monster. I have marked his movements well. I have seen the insidious character of them. I have tried to hold them up to my state in all their atrocity. But I grieve to say they have not awakened the spirit which they should. The increase of the strength of the Abolitionists has been so gradual that the country has not been sufficiently alive to it. I will not detain the committee with any long details on this point. I beg such of my constituents as have it, to read the speech I made in the Legislature of Virginia in 1841, on the New York Inspection Law, and see how my predictions have been fulfilled. I can not, however, forbear to remind the committee of the rapidity with which the votes at each successive session of Congress against the rule providing for laying abolition petitions on the table have increased. The vote against the Pinckney resolutions, in 1836, ranged from forty to forty-five; against Patton's, at the succeeding Congress, it was sixty; against Johnson's, in 1840, it was seventy; at the last Congress the vote was near a tie; at this, the rule was repealed by an overwhelming majority. We were told that the twenty-first rule created all the abolition excitement; and that, if it was repealed, there would be an end of it. I knew and predicted it would be otherwise. I predicted that, as soon as that pretext for agitation was removed, they would find some other; and stronger proof of their determination to keep up this war upon us could not be produced than the offering of the Wilmot Proviso. Here is an uncalled-for attempt to legislate for a country which is not, and never may be ours, and in reference to which we would have no right to legislate if it was. Why is this? Does not every one know that it is done for the purpose of abolition excitement?

"I warn Southern men that we have arrived at a point at which we must take a firm stand, if we ever mean to do it. We have arrived at a point when further concessions to the Abolitionists would be alike dishonorable and fatal. I repeat, if we ever mean to act with firmness, let us do it now."

Mr. Bayly was married in May, 1837, to Evelyn, the eldest daughter of Judge May, of Petersburg, Virginia, and has one daughter living.

He is among the ablest advocates of Democratic principles in the House of Representatives. As a debater he holds deservedly a high rank. The characteristics of his mind seem to be strength, clearness, and sound logical power, sustained by the aids of a good classical education. He has the ardor which gives him efficiency in speaking, and possesses much of the tact of a tried parliamentary debater. To these advantages he unites a fine voice, audible under all circumstances. We heard a highly intelligent gentleman, who had been a listener to his recent speech touching the power of Congress to legislate for the Territories, say that he had put the Wilmot Proviso Question in a better position for the South than it had ever been stated before in either branch of Congress.

Occasionally, in the heat of debate, a little severity of tone or suddenness of manner is perceptible, of which, we think, he is not conscious, and which has appeared to us to constitute the only obstacle in the way of that general popularity in public, life which his excellent personal qualities have secured to him in the private and social circle.

M CLERNAND, JOHN ALEXANDER.

THE father of this gentleman, John M'Clernand, was a native of Antrim, Ireland. He was educated in the University of Dublin, and was designed by his father, Alexander M⭑Clernand, for the clergy. After graduating at the Dublin University, he determined to study the medical profession, and accordingly went to Edinburgh, Scotland, where he graduated with the honors of that celebrated university. In 1801, Doctor M'Clernand, with many other Irish patriots, became involved in the civil disturbances of that period, and, preferring liberty in a distant land to tyranny in his native country, he sought a refuge in America, and landed at Philadelphia. At an early period he removed to Kentucky, and settled near Hardinsburg, in Breckenridge county. Here he married Fatima Seaton, whose maiden name was Cummins. She was the widow of Richard A. Seaton, and was born in Prince William county, Virginia. Her father left that state among the early settlers of Kentucky, and taught one of the first schools ever opened in the city of Louisville. She lived until her son arrived at the age of manhood, when, in 1834, she was gathered to a Christian's grave.

John A. M-Clernand, the only living child of John and Fatima M'Clernand, was born in Breckenridge county, Kentucky, on the 30th of May, 1812. In 1813 the family removed to Shawneetown, Illinois, then a new town in a new country. In 1816 Doctor M'Clernand died, his son being then only four years of age. The following letter to Mr. M'Clernand, from a distant branch of the family, contains some further details of its origin:

"You request me to inform you, as far as practicable, of our family genealogy, and, as many of the family records are in my hands at my residence in Tampico, I can do so with accuracy. The family can be traced back to the reign of Malcolm the