BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.*

ALBERT G. BROWN was born in Chester District, S. C., May 31, 1813, and is the second son of Joseph Brown, a respectable planter, who settled in what is now Copiah county, in the state of Mississippi, in the winter of 1823. The country was then a wilderness. The white man had not yet taken possession of the "new purchase," and the fire of the red man was at that time smoking, so recent had been his exit from the country.

In indigent circumstances, Joseph Brown had sought this forest home, contented to brave its hardships, in the hope of rearing his children to better fortune than his own. His two sons, Edwin and Albert, then small boys, performed such labor in opening the farm as they were able to endure. Albert, then ten years of age, was a sort of man of all work. It was his business to mind the stock, work a little on the farm, go to mill on Saturday, and attend school occasionally when there was nothing else to do.

If it should be thought by any that this was an indifferent method of opening the way to the boy's fortune, it must be borne in mind that the family was surrounded by the most trying circumstances, and the future promised nothing but what industry, honesty, and the most rigid economy might yield. Pitching his tent in the unbroken woods, not a tree missing from the dense forest, far from the settled parts of the country, without provisions, and almost without money, and not an acquaintance or a friend on whom he could call for help-it will be readily seen that the whole business and cares of the elder Mr. Brown's life were founded on the single word "bread."

After the first two or three years, thanks to industry, economy, and a fertile soil, hard fortune began to relax her iron. grasp. Well-stored granaries, sleek herds of cattle, fat hogs and horses, attested the thrift which followed on the heels of retreating poverty. About this time attention was given to Albert's strong inclination for books, and he was kept pretty steadily at such inferior neighborhood schools as may be found in a frontier country-that is, barring the interruptions which

* This biographical sketch was published in the Democratic Review in 1849, with the exception of the record of his life since that time, it being from the pen of the editor of this compilation.

going to mill and working on the farm in times of great need would occasionally interpose.

In February, 1829, having made tolerable proficiency in the rudiments of an English education, and given evidence of sprightliness, his father consented, with as much readiness as was consistent with his limited means, to send him to Mississippi College, then a respectable school, under the management of that excellent man and pure Christian, the Rev. D. Comfort. Here he remained three years, endearing himself to a large circle of class and school mates, almost all of whom have since been his fastest and truest friends, and winning the confidence and affection of his venerable teacher, who still survives to witness the success of his pupil, and to enjoy the happy consciousness that his parental cares and sage counsel have lifted a poor boy to distinction, and placed him on the highway to fame and fortune. The writer has often heard the subject of this notice confess with deep emotion his gratitude to his old preceptor, and declare that to him he owed, in a great measure, whatever of success had attended him through life. From Mr. Comfort's school, young Brown was transferred, in the winter of 1832, to Jefferson College, where he remained six months-when, becoming dissatisfied with the institution, he left it and went home, under a partial promise from his father to send him for a regular collegiate course to Princeton or Yale. But, after counting the cost, and making allowance for the care of a then rather numerous family of sons and daughters, Mr. Brown (the father) concluded that he should be unable to send his son to college. Thus closed the school-boy days of Albert G. Brown. With an education very imperfect, suddenly disappointed in his cherished hope of prosecuting his studies in one of the old schools, he was, at the early age of nineteen years, left to select his future course. This was a critical period, and few young men thus suddenly crossed and thrown back upon their own resources would have behaved better. Mr. Brown, not entirely desponding, but greatly chagrined at being thus cut off with an education scarcely commenced, went of his own choice to the county village, Gallatin, entered into an arrangement with a lawyer of high standing (E. G. Peyton, Esq.), and the next day began the study of the law. In less than a year, he was examined before the Supreme Court of Mississippi, and admitted to the bar, with appropriate evidences of his qualifications. Though closely pursuing his studies, Mr. Brown found ample time in his hours of recreation to extend his acquaintance among the people, and by his bland and courteous deportment to lay deep and solid the foundation of that singular personal popularity, which no change of parties or political convulsion has ever shaken.

During his six months' stay at Jefferson College, previously mentioned, he underwent a course of military training; and, recommended by this circumstance, the people of his county attested their confidence

in him by electing him a colonel of militia before he was nineteen years old. This was the first office he ever held. The next year he was chosen a brigadier-general of militia.

Mr. Brown was scarcely twenty years of age when he applied for admission to the bar, and the writer has heard him speak of his extreme anxiety, lest the usual question (where there can be any doubt)—" are you twenty-one?" should be propounded. This was the only question to which he could not have given a satisfactory answer, and by singular good fortune (for him) it was not asked.

He began the practice of his profession in the autumn of 1833, and succeeded at once. He took rank with the oldest and most distinguished professional gentlemen at the bar where he practised. His business steadily and rapidly increased to 1839, when he withdrew from the profession to accept a seat in Congress, in the enjoyment of the fullest and most lucrative practice, being professionally employed in nearly five hundred causes during the year in which he retired from the bar.

In October, 1835, Mr. Brown (or General Brown, by which title he was then better known) was married to Elizabeth Frances Taliaferro, a Virginia lady of accomplishments, of great personal worth, and of excellent family. She survived the marriage only about five months. Her family have subsequently been among the most steadfast of General Brown's numerous friends and supporters.

In this year, 1835, began the political career of General Brown. At the November election, he was chosen a representative to the State Legislature, to fill the first vacancy occurring after he was twenty-one years old. It was an interesting period in the legislation of Mississippi, and there was great competition for the seats. In 1835, Copiah, the county of Mr. Brown's residence, was entitled to three representatives, and he was one of nine candidates, nearly all Democrats, or, as they were called, "Jackson men." Great pains were taken to defeat him, as the aspiring and ambitious thought he would be in their way on future occasions. Some maintained that he was too young, but the great bulk of the opposition rested upon an alleged unsoundness in his political views. For this charge there was no better foundation than that General Brown's father was a Whig, or, as he was not ashamed to call himself, a Federalist of the old school. The election transpired, and General Brown was successful, being the second successful candidate, and leading his next highest competitor about seventy-five votes. His representative duties were discharged with marked fidelity, and so entirely to the satisfaction of his constituents, that at the next election he was returned without a struggle, the opposition being only nominal. He took an active and leading part in the debates, and in all the business of legislation; and before the expiration of his first term, the speakership having been vacated by the indisposition of the presiding officer of the house, he was chosen speaker pro tem., by acclamation. It is to be

regretted that the debates in the Legislature of Mississippi at that period were not preserved, as they were intrinsically valuable, and, if now in existence, would throw a flood of light on the political history of the state. A record of these debates would exhibit, in relief, admirable and bold, the political forecast of General Brown. Though almost the youngest member of the house, he counselled his more aged compeers in many an earnest speech against that system of banking which has since rendered the financial policy of Mississippi so remarkable throughout the world.

General Brown took his seat in the Legislature under his second election in January, 1838. The banking system had already given way, and was tottering to its fall. Just then, Governor Lynch, the first and last Whig governor of Mississippi, recommended the Legislature "to express its opinion on the subject of a National Bank," and entered himself into an elaborate argument in favor of that institution. This recommendation was referred to a committee, of which General Brown was chairman, and his report contains many strong views in opposition to the bank, both on the ground of unconstitutionality and of its inexpediency. We have only room for one or two short extracts, as follows:

"Chief Justice Marshall, in delivering the opinion of the court, in the celebrated case of McCullough against the state of Maryland, lays down the principle in broad terms, That when the law is not prohibited, and is intended to carry into effect any power intrusted to the government, Congress is to be the exclusive judge of the degree of its necessity.' Suppose this to be the settled doctrine upon this subject, the abolition of slavery is not expressly prohibited in the District of Columbia, nor any of the states where it exists, and among the enumerated powers of the general government, is one authorizing it to provide for the common defence and general welfare. Suppose then that the Abolitionists of the North, whose strength, disguise it as you will, is increasing with frightful rapidity, should, under this rule of construction adopted by jurists, and sanctioned by politicians, insist that in all cases it was their duty to provide for the 'general welfare,' in obedience to the power given them, and that to carry into effect this specific grant of power, if it was 'necessary' to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and the states where it exists—we ask, whether it might not be competent for them to do so, or how this case is distinguished from the one immediately under consideration, to wit, the power to charter a National Bank, because it is a measure 'necessary' for the general welfare;' and if the Supreme Court thought it incompetent for them to inquire into the degree of necessity involved in the first case, could they undertake to make the inquiry in the latter? We think not. Again, suppose the nation, in the present enfeebled state of its treasury, be suddenly involved in a conflict with Great Britain, or some other foreign power, Congress is called upon to furnish money to carry on the war; this she refuses to do, by levying a direct tax which shall bear equally upon all portions of the United States, but incorporates a company, and invests them with exclusive power to navigate the Mississippi river for fifty years, in consideration that the company will pay the Government a bonus of twenty-five millions of money. The power to have such action on the part of the general government is well questioned; it is not, however, expressly prohibited, and Congress asserts that it is necessary' in providing for the 'common defence and general welfare' to charter said company, and invest them

with such powers, for the consideration of the twenty-five million bonus; and the Supreme Court, if appealed to, says, Congress is to be the judge of the necessity, and we will not interfere.

"We ask if such rules of construction, with such arguments to sustain them, may not, indeed if they are not likely to lead to the most disastrous consequences-consequences portentous of great evil to the rights of the states, and threatening at once the stability of our excellent forms of government? Your committee are of opinion, that this clause of the Constitution furnishes no warrant for the establishment of a National Bank."

The report continued with various other views of the constitutional question, chiefly in answer to the arguments urged by the friends of the bank. It set forth many and strong arguments against the expediency of the bank, and concluded as follows:

"If, then, it does not render the labor of the citizens more valuable, we are at a loss to discern the great advantages which the working man is to derive from its creation. But we are satisfied of its effects, when the redundancy of paper money which it circulates has swelled in a twofold relation the value of every horse, plough, harrow, and other articles of husbandry or family consumption which the laborer buys. Then we find it is an institution which, instead of lightening the poor man's toils, in fact levies a heavy contribution upon the wages of his industry. It is an institution which makes the weak weaker, and the potent more powerful; ever filching from the poor man's hand to replenish the rich man's purse. Your committee have mistaken the duties of legislators, if it is their province to guard over the peculiar interest of the speculator and gambler, who live by the patronage of banks, to the detriment and ruin of the honest yeomen, whose toils have raised our happy republic from a few dependent colonies, to the highest pinnacle of national fame, causing Indian wigwams to give place to splendid cities, and the whole wilderness to bloom and blossom as the rose. It is well said that the laborer is worthy of his hire;' and the illustrious Burke never uttered a sentiment which better deserved to be embalmed in the hearts of freemen, than that the workingman should feel the wages of his labor in his pocket, and hear it jingle.

·

"In conclusion, we recommend, as an expression of this body on the subject of a National Bank, the adoption of the following resolutions :

"1. Resolved, That the government of the United States has no constitutional right to charter a National Bank.

2. Resolved, That it is inexpedient and improper to charter such an institution at this time, even if Congress had the constitutional right to do so."

This report elicited the warmest commendation on the part of the anti-bank press and party, whilst all the bank interests assailed it with denunciation, attempts at ridicule, and occasionally with something like argument. It was extensively published at the time, and is believed to have had a salutary influence in awakening public inquiry on the subject in Mississippi.

In the fall of the same year (1838), General Brown being absent from the state, the bank party took advantage of a general panic in the public mind, growing out of the existing pecuniary embarrassments in Mississippi, to get up written instructions requiring him to vote for a bank United States Senator, or resign. He chose the latter alternative. Although, in a moment of panic, seven hundred and fifty out of