Doings Reviewed.

MR. EDITOR:—Last week I was too unwell
to write; but being sufficiently recovered, on
Tuesday evening I took a seat at my desk,
and was about to begin another letter, when
the penny-post came in and handed me your
paper of the 28th ultimo. I opened it with
same eagerness to see if it contained my last
letter. I confess that I felt some peculiar
concern about that letter; for it had cost me
a full half day of thought and labor to write
it; moreover, it contained one of my darling
measures for our pecuniary advancement.—I
allude to a National Fund or Bank, and its
branches. This to me was the grand idea of
the letter, without which it was no letter at
all. I was continually thinking of what a
fine auxilary it would be to our National
Council, to receive, keep, and disburse the
"poll tax," fees for memberhip, and all
other monies—of purchase and sale of
notes, drafts, and bills of exchange—and of
the mighty influence which such an institu
tion could be made to wield. In the midst
of this reverie, I found the letter and began
to read. In the second paragraph I found
that the word "interests," after the word
"best," had been left out, which very much
obscured the sense. But no matter; as it
did not concern my Bank, my nerves remain
ed tranquil. I read on till I came to the
paragraph relating to the NATIONAL FUND,
but Oh horror! What did I see? Instead
of NATIONAL FUND, "national friend!" Now
of late, Mr. Editor, I have had some peculiar
sensations in reference to the term "friend,"
in which you ought to sympathize with me,
and which should make you very cautious in
the use of it. I know that a real friend is a
capital thing in its place; but this was not, in
my humble judgment, the place for a
"friend."

But the havoc of the printer did not stop
here, for, by leaving out a line in the last
paragraph of my letter, the sense is entirely
perverted, so that what was intended to ap
ply to the character of the meeting held in
New York, is made to apply to the Conven
tion held in Rochester.

The discovery of these mutilations under
the peculiar circumstances, so deranged my
nerves, and caused such a relapse as to pre
vent me from writing for the past few days.
And now it is with a trembling hand that I
begin, lest the like should again occur; but
I hope for better.

It was intimated in my preceding letter,
that in my next I would say something of
the proceedings of the meeting of the 8th of
May, 1850—a brief history of which I then
gave in connexion with the proceedings of
the Convention of the 6th of July, 1853. In
doing which, I shall discard all personal and
sectional feeling, and be guided solely by a
desire to promote the general good. More
over, I am fully aware that in reviewing the
measures of others, it is much easier and
much more common to find fault with them,
than to produce better ones ourselves.—Hence, I have not the vanity to suppose that
because I may have found an error in a
measure, I have, therefore, found the best
mode of correcting it. To discover the de
fects of a measure may be the limit of my
ability, the end of my mission, to discover
and apply the proper remedy may be the
work of another and abler mind.

I am also fully aware that the work of our
entire elevation and enfranchisement is not
the work of a day, or of an individual, but
of ages and of multitudes. Therefore he
who by selfishness or by captiousness, iso
lates himself in his work, contributes in the
most effectual way to his own hindrance.—Hence, in carrying forward our work, we
should endeavor not only to be wise but har
monious, active, and at the same time united.
With my mind duly impressed with these
considerations, I proceed with the main ob
ject of my letter.

On a review of the decisions of the meet
ing of the 8th of May, the attentive reader
cannot fail to be impressed with their pro
found comprehension, simplicity, and practi
cal adaptation to our real wants. They are
expressed in few and simple words, it is true,
yet they fully explore our condition, bring
to view our greatest evil, and prescribe the
best remedy. Their great beauty and force
consist in this, that they avoid all extraneous
considerations, and concentrate all our ener
gies on a given object, in gaining which it is
supposed that we gain everything.

The resolutions of the Convention of the
6th of July differ in no essential particular
from these decisions; and hence they should
be used mutally to sustain and promote
each other. That the resolutions overlook
ed the important matter of Banks and Fairs,
I think is a serious defect, but this can be
supplied by borrowing from the decisions.—With this brief comparison of this much of
the proceedings of the two bodies, I proceed
to review the Constitution of the National
Council.

Viewed in reference to its great object, this
is one of the most important documents ever
submitted to our consideration. I shall ever
honor the head that conceived, and assist the
hand that executed it. That like all human
productions, it is defective, is no just cause
for rejecting it, but rather a call to our wis
dom and patriotism to rally for its support,
development, and perfection. With this no
tice of its general character and design, i
proceed to point out its defects:

1. It is defective in this, that in its pro
visions for the election of members of the
National Council, it is contradictory and ob
scure.

2. It makes no provision for the represen
tation of states having a population of less
than five thousand, of which there are eight,
viz.: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,
Rhode Island, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa,
and California.

3. It makes no provision for the represen
tation of large fractions, such as are found
in Massachusetts, Connecticut and New
York.

4. It makes no provision for the collection
and transmission of its funds to its treasury,
or how and for what purposes they shall be
paid out. Some objects are mentioned, it is
true, such as travelling expenses, but they
are without limit, and therefore defective.

5. The frequent meetings of committees
render it too expensive for a people of our
circumstances.

6. The general scope and provisions of
the Constitution adapt it more to the benefit
of the population of large towns and cities,
than the population of the country. And in
this there is manifest defect; for although
large numbers are now "huddled together"
in these places, yet this has always been con
sidered an evil which the Constitution should
aim to remedy.

These defects in the Constitution are pal
pable, and such as greatly to impair its use
fulness. Hence, one of the first things which
we have got to do is to call a National Con
vention to amend the Constitution.

Having now taxed the patience of your
readers sufficiently with what I had to say in
reference to doings past. I yet beg their in
dulgences for one more letter in reference to
doings future.

Yours, &c., L WOODSON.

PITTSBURGH, Nov. 4, 1853.