Page:Nullification Controversy in South Carolina.djvu/103

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
84
Nullification Controversy in South Carolina

one by one, and had concluded that in each case lawyers were the stump orators of the Dis-unionists.[1]

"Anti-Nullification" wrote in May[2] that an almost impassable gulf divided the matter-of-fact business men from the theoretical speculators on the affairs of men — of which they knew little or nothing — who affected a pride, with a flourish of guns, trumpets, and thunder, in ranking themselves under the destructive banner of nullification. The first, the matter-of-fact men, asserted, with ample means to prove it, that business in Charleston had rarely been more vigorous than now. The second, the "Nullificators," asserted, without proof, that everything was "dead or dying, and fast mouldering into insignificance." The writer said he had just returned to the city after an absence of several years and found that the matter-of-fact men were nearer the truth. But he said that the trade of the city could be made much greater if its citizens were to take pains to develop direct trade with Europe. What the people needed was to think more of improving

  1. "A Native of Chesterfield District," in the Courier, September 7, 1830. Compare with above, p. 55.
  2. Courier, May 13, 1830.