and talents, has produced the most benign effects, and our prosperity is calculated to excite the warmest expressions of gratitude rather than the murmurs of disaffection.

4. Our Treasury exhibits the truth of these remarks. It is clear from the statement in the Appendix, to which every reader will advert with pleasure, that the people of Connecticut annually receive thirty seven thousand four hundred and fifty-five dollars and seventy six cents more from the Treasury than they pay into it by taxes and duties.—At the close of the late war such had been our exertions, we were encumbered with a debt of nearly two millions of dollars. Now that debt is paid and we have nearly that sum in advance. Where is the state which can justly boast of greater prosperity?

Notwithstanding this enviable situation a clamour is excited, the people are agitated, and discord, with its train of evils, is prevailing. Some of our citizens, in the height of political prosperity, are seeking to destroy an order of things which has prevailed an hundred and fifty years, and throw themselves into the arms of projectors and reformers. Is there nothing unaccountable in such conduct? Is there nothing calculated to excite indignation? My fellow citizens, shall any considerable portion of the people of Connecticut subject themselves to the reproach which rested on an ancient people? "The ox knoweth his owner and the ass his master's crib, but my people do not know, Israel doth not consider."

Secondly. Let us examine some of the plans and projects proposed for our adoption and estimate the probably cost attending them. Here we must speak with less certainty—What the present condition of Connecticut is we know—respecting its future destiny we can only judge by arguing from cause to effect. Why a man who regards the happiness of his fellow men, should attempt a change here, is too wonderful for an ordinary capacity. No prudent farmer ever pulled up a hill of corn, which was flourishing, to see if there was not a worm at the root.

One of these projects is the repeal of all laws for the support of religious institutions. The language of those who favor the measure is, that religion will take care of itself—that no external aid is necessary—that all legislative interference is impious. Many, and it is believed by far the greater part, of those who make these declarations, intend to throw down all the barriers which christianity has erected against vice. They are obstinately determined to banish from the public mind all affection and veneration for the Clergy, and respect for the institutions of religion, and to reduce Connecticut to that condition which knows no distinction between "him who serveth God and him who serveth him not." They wish to see a Republic without religion; and should they be gratified, the consequence would speedily be, a miserable race of men without virtue, walling in vice and ripening for a dreadful destruction. If infinite truth is to be credited, "God will pour out his indignation on the heathen who know him not."

These reformers, under the specious pretext of exercising unbounded liberality in matters of religion, become intolerant to all who differ from them, charging the professors of christianity with breathing out a spirit of persecution, they become the most furious persecutors, and while they affect to possess great moderation and candor towards all denominations of Christians, they clearly evince that they would grant indulgence or protection to none. On the other hand a great majority of the people and the Legislature, insist that every man in the community who is able, should contribute, in some way, towards the support of the institutions of religion. No wish is entertained to legislate in matters of faith, or to establish one sect in preference to another. Our laws permit every man to worship God when, where, and in the manner most agreeable to his principles or to his inclination, and not the least restraint is imposed; all ideas of dictating to the conscience are discarded, and every man "sits under his own vine and fig tree." Our laws only enforce the great principle abovementioned that the members of the community should contribute towards the support of these institutions, as means to promote the prosperity of the people in the same manner as they provide for the public accommodation, peace and happiness, by the maintenance of the roads and bridges, the organization of the militia, and the support of schools of instruction. Should objections be urged by any individuals that they cannot conscientiously contribute to the promotion of these objects, their objections would be disregarded. There is a class of men, very respectable for the sobriety of their habits, and their peaceful deportment, who always refuse to be taxed for military defence. No one doubts that in their opposition, they are conscientious, and yet few doubt the propriety of enforcing such taxes.

The principle now advocated is interwoven with all our laws and habits —it has existed from the first settlement of the State—it has produced much good—it ought not therefore to be abandoned without the utmost deliberation. The clamor against this principle, is the clamor of those who wish to see the State revolutionized—it is the clamor of those turbulent spirits which delight in confusion and which pull down and destroy with a dexterity which they never shew in building up. Let the sober citizens of Connecticut look at the authors of this clamor—Let them view such men as Abraham Bishop, and eye the path which they have trodden from their youth, and then ask their own hearts, if they are not under some apprehension, lest if they should enlist under such leaders and fight their cause, they may be found contending against the best interests of society, and "fighting against God."

Another project zealously supported is that of Districting the State for the choice of Assistants, and Representatives in Congress. The only argument which is urged for the adoption of this measure with any plausibility, is that in the District elections the candidate would be better known. To this argument it may be replied, the State of Connecticut is so limited in its extent, information of all kinds is so generally diffused, and there is such a flood of newspapers that the characters of all the candidates for office may be thoroughly known by all who will bestow any attention to the subject. This State is scarcely more extensive than a single county in many other States, and the intercourse of the inhabitants of the various parts with each other is such that no evil can exist in our present mode of elections—But there are serious and weighty objections against District elections.

1. Such elections open wide the door for intrigue.—As this door, already too widely extended, the most alarming mischiefs enter— mischiefs which sap the foundations of an elective government by corrupting the minds of the freemen and this converting an election ground into a theatre on which is displayed the most vile and demoralizing practices. Let the reader satisfy himself as to the truth of this observation by examining the history of an election in the Southern States, where this mode alone is adopted. Let him learn that they candidates for office and his host of dependents and tools, are employed for weeks before and on the days of election, in the most infamous intrigues, and that falsehood and bribery are so much in fashion, and are so universally resorted to, that success invariably attends the most impudent and the most profligate, while the man of modesty and virtue, though possessing the fairest claims to promotion, is abashed, confounded and overwhelmed.

2ndly. The candidate when elected becomes the creature of the district and not the ruler of a State—He is and must be devoted to the interest of that portion of the community which has elected him, and their views and schemes must be patronized