ptiblick moneys, _
and more especially the whole class of our
money gathering Agents, and such others as
are made removeable by him, for cause relat-
ing to their ofiicial conduct,oi- fitness for then
stations; but such removal or suspensioij is
subject to the restraining powers of the Sen-
ate, on cause shown. The publick interest
and safety require it should be so : and ourin-
stitutions are conformed to the _exigency.—-
This, like other powers, is a public toast, 9-115
to pervert it from its original purpose is an a-
buse, and not a lawful use of the power.‘ The‘
cause of removal generates and gives life to
Hie power of removal, as the overt act of trea-
son gives application and life to the power to
hang for treason. Will any senator here a-
vow the opinion that these offices and their
emoluments, or the provisional _i-emovmg pow-
er of the president, were designed as either
the means of bribery or instruments pun-
ishment, in the hands of a candidate for the
presidency, or ofa piesidentiti oflice. _to buy
votes, or punish the votes in our presidential
contests? N ot one man will avow this. '1 hat
would be grossly abusing a power conferred
for the publick good. and corrupting the very
sources of republican, elective, and represen-
tative government—the great elective fran-
chise itself. _ _ .
A removal of this class of publick oflic_e_rs IS.
likea nomination for office, only provisional
and inchoate.uiitil it becomes absolute and
definitive by the subsequent sanction of the
Senate, to be given in our established and
long practiced manner of proceeding upon
Executive business.
As in nominating to oflice, so also in remo-
ving, or displacing from office, in this class of
the publick oflicers, the originating act is,a_nd
for the publick convenience ought to be, with
the president; and in ordinary cases and times
the act of the President receives the undispu-
ted sanction of the Senate. All past experi-
ence shows this to be the fact, either because
the representatives or senators of the person
nominated or removed know his suitableness
or qualification for ofiice, orthe cause of his
removal, or because presidents are not ordi-
narily disposed to abuse their powers ; but for
the security of the publick, if there be an alle-
gation or suggestion of the unfitness of the
nominee, or of the illegality of the removal, it
becomes the duty of the Senate to_ inquire
into the matter, and act accordingly, by
an active exertion of their restraining power.
One design ofrepresentation is to avail the
ptiblick of the better lights from the scene of
appointment or removal than a presidciit,pent
up in the Metropolis can have.
But let me examine the true nature and ex-
tent ofthe despotism now proclaimed by the
majority ; the arguments by which they at-
tempt to sustain themselves in their new au-
tocracy—contrary to all their arguments, re-
ports and votes heretofore; and, if possible,
the causes and practical consequences of this
astounding proclamation.
The founders of the Republic, and the peo-
ple of the U. States, when they adopted the
Federal Constitution, were especially jealous
of the Powers of the President, and the en-
croaching spirit of Executive will.
To that point all their principal fears were
concentrated ; and the history of that day
shows that it was with some difficult y the peo-
ple of the U. S. could be induced to adopt the
Union,lest- the president,with the powers then
accorded to him, should become the destroyer
of their liberties.
Their fears of Executive encroachment
were not idle chimeras ofthe fancy; nor were
they affected from mere impatience of regula-
ted liberty and a government of laws. To
them they were devoted. The histories of all
nations which had lost their liberties lay open
before them ; and they saw on their pages
that arbitrary Executive discretion and will,
availing themselves of the spirit of discord a-
uioug the people, and the want of firmness a-
mong their Representatives, in governments
where the Representative principle was adop-
ted, had been the destroyers of nationalliberty
throughout the greater part of the world,where
wild anarchy had not supplanted them, and
that they had effected their conquests by gra-
dual approaches and by corrupting the senti-
nels of'libcrty ; and the fathers did intend. &
the most of them left this world in the pater-
nal confideuce that they had effected the ob-
ject, to establish a government of law and of
checks and restraints upon Executive will, in:
which no case should exist In which the fate
of the humblest citizen, whether in private or"
public life, could depend upon the arbitrary
will ofa single man.
N 0, their fears were not idle ; and with
such lights before them : and the then recent
claim to arbitrary power urged by the British
Crown thrilling in their bosoms, they never
- would have adopted the Federal Constitution
without the restraining power and duty of the
Senate during the Presidential term, when, it’.
ever, he would be disposed to violate the rights
ofthe citizen.
Let me new examine the substance of the
arguments by which this despotic principle is
supported.
flnd first in order is the Pr sident himself‘.
In his first message, he labors to progagate the
idea that offices, in this country, are not pri-
vate property, but public trusts.
\_Ve admit it. The President is right.-
Will he admit, in turn, our propositions, =1-
bove laid down; and more expecially that
offices are not the private property ofa Pres-
ident or Cabinet, with which to buy populariti‘
and votes, or to reward men for votes or in-
fluence, oras instruments with which to pun-
ish opponents for their votes and, opinions?
His argument is a two-edged sword, and cuts
both ways with equal keenness and force ;
unless indeed it be sinful in the cardinal and
Bishop to eat pig and lamb, in order that his
holiness the Pope may monopolize the market
of Rome, and eat them all himself! The
Senator from Tennessee[Mr. Grundy] has
disappointed all my hopes in him upon those
momentous question. I had been tauglit.-—
and I now discover greatly mistaught—to
look to him as a star of constitutional liberty
in the West.
The Senutors from Virginia and Louisiana
[Messrs. Tazewell & Livingston] have point-
ed out the power ofimpeaching the president
as our only remedy for an abusive exercise of
the power of removal—and the Senator from
Missouri [Mr. Benton] concurs with the for-
mer in placing these matters upon ‘ the high
responsibility ofthe president !’——mcaniug ini-
peachment as a remedy, or that ‘the King can
do no wrong!’ and the two former also urge
auxiliary arguments, which I shall notice nep-
aratcly.
Upon this common doctrine oftliemnjoi-ity,
that impeaclirnentia our only reinedy,ive cori-
tend they are wrong upon the reason and util-
ity ofthe thing, as well as upon the autliority
of the case.
As well might some philanthropist travel in the
Smtti, imdvthere pi-or-laiin, triimpet-tongucd. to the
I,
and Custom House Otlicersq slaves‘ ofAnierica, "Prise ! impeach your inasters,‘ Under this dereliction ofduty, the Uf States are'
before themselves, for holding your race in slavery
two hundred years!” -
And if the children of Africa should doubt the
practicability of inducing the inasti-rs to impeach
and condemn themselves, when made judges in
their own cause, let him explain himsell'intelligi-
bly——“ Rise, turn the tables on your masters; cit-
“ slave them for two hundred years in your turn.
' and make them raise com, cotton and rice, indi-
“ go, tobacco and sugar cane, for you " _ _
But suppose the uiiracle performed, ofa majori-
ty, in the zenith of power, impeachiiig themselves
in the House of Representatives for the uses they
have made of the President’s popularity and milita-
ry eclat. . _
Is it quite sure we could persude twothirds in the
Senate to condemn &.punish "mm for cause,e_ven if
that werethe preventive remedy against arbitrary
will ‘I
Mr. I-Iamilton. in writing his seventy-seventh
number of the Federalist, wasa prophet. In treat-
ing of the supposed danger ofthe Senate overrul-
ing the President, and assuming the government.
he said. “Besides this, it is evident that the rowan
“ that can originate the disposition of honors and e-
“ molumenis, is more likely to attract than to be at-
“ tracted by the rowan which can merely obstruct
“ their course.”
And Mr. Hamilton like another Elijah, seems to
have shed his mantle upon his Elisha.
A foreigner, supposed to be Mr. Poletica, tliclate
. Minister from Russia to this governmenhin writing
of the United States,says the first term of an Amer-
ican President is always spent in securing his re-e-
lectiou to asecond; and as to the restraining pow-
crs ofthe Senate, a little iiiniiagciiieiit in the dispo-
sition of ofliees can always secure a majority of
that body. There was too much truth in that book,
whether it be palatable or not.
No, Sir, instead ofa dominant party, such as the
present triumpliiiut combination, impeaching their
President,the astonishing scene at this moment ex-
hibited iii this body shows the impossibilitv of that
being the appropriate preventive against the abuse
of power by the Executive.
I appeal from the interested argiimciits ofthe
dominant party, who are accused by the niiiiority
of this violation ofour constitutional rights. to the
venei'ablel&disinteresterl authority of the illustrious
dead, who founded the Govcrnnieut,'aud set it in
motion ; and in due time I will appeal to the past
acts of the inajority,as good authority against them-
selves, and no more.
In the concluding paragraph of the same No. 77,
of the Federalist, upon this very subject of appoint-
ment and removal, alter showing the constant re-
straining power ofthe Senate to be the preventive
remedy to" save the Rcpublick from harm, by the
encroaclimciit of Executive will, Mr. Hamilton
points out “ his liability at all times to impeach-
“ merit, ti'ial,dismission from office, incapacity to
“ serve in any other, and to the lbrfeitui-e of life and
“ estate, by subsequent prosecution in the common
“ course oflaw. But these precautions, great as
“ they are, are not the only ones which the plan of
“ ilie Conveiition has provided in favor ofthe pub-
“ lick seciiritj. In ti o only instances in whichtlic
“ abuse ofthe Executive antliority was materially
“ to be feared, the Cliiefillagistrate of the United
“ States would, by that plan, be subjected to the
“ control ofa branch of the legislative hotly. ‘.Vhat
“ desire?”
Such was the exposition upon which the people
adopted the Constitution cfgoveriiment presented
by its framers
Thus we see that the high power of impeach-
mentwas iiiteiided only for punishment and dis-
qualification, in extraordinary cases of corruption
and crime : and in party times, can never be used
until after the dominant party is down, if at all. It
was never intended as the common preventive rem-
cdy of restraiiit u ion the encroachment of Execu-
tive will pending thcPresidential term When. ifeV-
cr, the mischief will be done.
The Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Livingston,)
as a reason for excluding the light of inquiry from
the deeds of the admiiiistration‘,"points us, in addi-
tion to the power of impeachment, to the responsi-
tliis term ! And even says that is bttterand more
direct than the greatly divided responsibility ofthis
more numerous body !
But let us examine this new security forthe pub-
the homely proverbs, of shutting the door after the
horse is stolen, or adgtniiiistvriiig medicine after the
patient is dead.
The President is responsible, to the extent of his
re-ciectioii, at the end ofliis term; btit does that ei-
ther prevent or cure the harm done the republick
during the term ’.?
So is the whole class of officers now before the
Senate responsible, to the extent of a re-appoiut-
merit, to the appointing power at the end of the
time: but has that been found efficient to prevent
them from embezzling our funds, and ruining our
affairs, so far as they lie within their circle ofaction,
during the term; and then escaping from the cou-
fiuement, through the mouths of our great rivers and
estuaries, or going to Texas or Mexico, before that
responsibility attaches .7
Beverly Allen, District Attney of Missouri, to
whose case I will advert for the sake of illustration,
as to holy ground, where the flag of opposition to
this despotic inquisitorial abuse of power was first
uiifur'lcd, in his memorial, concluded in coinmoii
charity,wlien his rcinoval,pending his teriii,was an-
nounced to him, that some causes had been repre-
sented to the Administration for such a summary
condemnation without notice and he asked for the
cause.
He asked the Secretary of State, and he declin-
cd to answer him ! He inquired then of the Presi-
dent -and he stood mute! He besought the Son-
ate ofthe U. S to tell him, and the majority refused
to priiitliisrespectful and laconic memorial; and
now, declare that they will not eveuinquiie into the.
cause ofhis contleiiinatioii!
The culprit arraigned at the bar,and the military
subject to the personal orders ofthe President, and
liable to be stricken from the roll by his fiat, are on-
titled to more courtesy and fairness than this’
And on behalfofthe outraged rights ofthe coun-
try I now appeal to Mr. Madison, who is still liv-
ing, and to thejiist spirits of the illustrious dead.
whose voice is to be heard in the constitution ofthe
U. States; in the cotcmporancous expositions of
that instrument; and in the early legislation of the
country, and to the laws ofthe land, to learn the
true extent oftliis power ofremoval from office, the
causes for which it may be exei ted, and the con-
current and restraining powcrsof the Senate of the
United States in such cases, to secure the citizen
from the arbitrary will of a single man. ~
The opinion of Mr. Madison we have in the cas
where by law the President has the absolute power
of removing his creature at will, that no wanton
use can be made even of that absolute power —an
opinion in consonance with the genius of our Re-
public, which views all powers as publick trusts
and none as mere prerogatives. '
The Constitution, Art 2, Sect. 2. gives the ap-
pomtmeni ofthe whole class ofoflicers of the pith-
. ick now before you, with tcruis, tenure-s, and du-
ties prescribed by law, and not by Executive will,
to the President and Senate ofthe U States. Con-
gress has not thoughtit proper, ifthcy possess the
power, tobestow the apointnicnt elsewhere; lint
has left this whole class upon the provisions of the
constitution.
.I have attempted to demonstrate. and the Seria-
to_r from Louisiana (Mr. L.) admits, that the doc-
trine now coiiteiided for by the majority aniiiliilutcs
the appointing power of the Senate, and renders
the President absolute, and at liberty to keep in or
turn oiitiiien in defiance of the Senate! The re-
s‘training_ power belongsto the organization of the
Senate for thepublick security; is ahigh constitu-
tioual trust._witliout_wliicli the appointing power of
the Senate is aiiiiiliilzrtud; and we cmmoi rwounce
it. iioi'dcsei't our constitutional post, as guardians of
the publick liberty. To abandon it changes the
{“““_"= 0‘ 01" (-’70V,’l. and as you yourselves declared
:11: Adams 5 time, makes the President a Mon-
“ more can an enlightened and reasonable people‘
bility ofthe President to the people at the end of
lick, which looks very much like a new edition of
4
no longer a Republick! _,
Tell us no more of the tyranny of Kpgs, and of
the scrvilit of parasites and Courticrs, bowing and
acknowle ging ‘ the King can do no wrong.’ It is
a striking circumstance that they who have pre-
tended rnost regard for popular rights and democ-
racy, are the advocates of the alarming power now
conceded to the President.
Le: us now hear the contemporaneous cxpositors
of the Constitution, to learn if such arbitrary and
unexaiiiinable discretion was coiitcmpluted. Mr.
would be the gist of the whole--on that issue would
be joiiied—that would be tried, and on that judg-
ineut of condemnation would be rendered, before
the removing power could be exerted.
And when, with the sole view of saving the pub-
lic moneys, it summary proceeding is given, does
the cause ofremoval becomes less essential ‘.1 Does
the necessity ofassigning it, or the rightof the Sen-
ate and public to know it, become less absolute?
The necessity and propriety of knowing the
cause become more iiiipeiious, as the proceeding is
rendered more snminary, because there is more
Hamiltoinone of the framers ofthe Coiistitution,iii
the 77th No. of the Federalist. says, when he, and
Madison, and Jay, were expounding the nature of
our Gov‘t to induce the people to adopt it:
“ It has been mentioned as one of the advantages '
to be expected from the co-operation of the Senate
in the business of appointments, that itwould cou-
trlbute to the stability of the B(ll1)llll$l.l'ul.l0l). The
Consent oftliat body would be iizice‘ssaryto displace
as well as appoint A change of the Chief Magis-
trate, therefore. would not occasion so violent or so
general a revolution in the officers of the govern-
ment as might be expected iflie were the sole dis-
poser ofoflices. Vv"iiert- a man in any st:ttion_ had
given s:itisf'actoiy evidence of his fitness for it, a
new President would be restrained from attempting
a change in favor ofa person more agreeable to him,
by the apprehension that the discouiitcnaiice of the
Senate might frusti ate the attempt, and bring some
tlcizme of discredit on himself. Those who can
best cstiinatc the value ofa steady adrninistratioii
will be most disposed to prize ii. provision which
connects the oflicial existence ofpublick men with
the approbation or disapprobation of that body,wli.
froin the greater perniaiieucyofits own coniposiiion
will,‘ in all probability belnss subject to iiicr)inpe-
tcncv than any other member ofthe gov’t.“. -
After refuting some objections of that day. that
the Senate would influence the President and as-
sunic the control of the government, Mr. H. says,
“If by inlluencingtlie President he meant restrain-
ing liini, this is precisely wliatmust have been iii-
tentlctl. And it has been shown that the restraint
would be salutary. at the same time that would not
be such as to destroy a single. advantage to belook-
ed for from the uiicontrolled agency ofthat magis-
trate. The right ofiioniiiiation would produce all
the good without the ill." ,
Some aniiotator to this number ofthe Federalist
has appended a note saying, “this construction has
since been rejected by the Legislature; and it is
now-settled in practice that the power of displacing
belongs exclusively to the president.”
This note ought to be expungcd as calculated to
mislead students ancfweak cab_iiiets. It is not true,
in point of fact, that the Legislature has rejected
this construction ; nor true,iu point oflaw, that the
Senate ('.:llll'Cl10llllC8 an iota of their restraining
power tlin‘. belongs to theirorganization, and chief-
ly distinguishes our checked and restrained Execu-
tive from one ofai bitiary will. '
The whole idea of the annotator was taken from
the laws respecting the assistants of the President,
to perform duties prescribed by him as under the
act ofl789, and not applicable to the oflicersofthe
publick, or of the law, to perform duties prescribed
by the laws ofthe land. ‘
The correctness of I-Iamil ton, and the error of the
anuotator and liisdisciples of the majority, can be
deniouslrated ifthere be truth in logicand common
sense. The arguuieut stands t'nus— without the
concurrent power of the Senate in matters of ap-
pointing, (as you admit in your report of 1826. be-
fore quoted,) the President. becomes a Monarch.
The appointing power ofthe Senate is annihilat-
ed by taking away their restraining power, as the
colunm or edifice is prostrated by removingtlie pe-
destal orf'oundatio_n that sustained it.
the restraining power. Hamilton has'bi-en accused
of too strong a bias towards arbitrary power.
But Hamilton was a tame republican in favor of
a checked and restrained Executive: and if a bias
to arbitrary power be_ a proof of true greatness,
much greater, if not more disinterested, statesmen
than Hamilton are here!
The Senator from Virginia (Mr. Tazowell) has
-read us the form ofa commission, statiiigftliat the
oflice, in such cases as we have before US}, is held
at the pleasure oftliel"i'esident! A full proofof‘ the
the necessity for an equally constant restraining
power ofthe Senate, as taught liy the Fathers! but
no proof whatever that the Clerk or Attorney who
made the form ofthe commission, did thereby re-
peal the Coiistitutioii and laws, and the checked
and restraiiietl organization ofour Federal Execu-
tive, which tlistiiiguishes it from a despotism for a
term of years. ,
. I will new approach the strong hold of modern
democracy,clainiiiig uiircstraiiiahle Executive pow-
er in removals from office, supposed by the senator
from New Hampsliire, [Mn \Voodbui'y] to confer
the power now clainied upon the P|'(:‘Sldf!l1t.
'1‘lic act of the 15th May, 1820-“ to limit the
term of certaiiioflicrs therein named, and for oth-
er purposes.” The act tlicu names the very class
of inoiiey-gatliering publiclr ofiicers now before us,
and leaves the appointment to the Prc;-ideiit and
Senate. There is nothing in the title of the act
the PK'0“SldC|lt and Senate, or prcmonishes usofthe
zipproacli ofdark iuquisition, despotic power. orthe
downfzil ofconstitutioiialliberty. The p litical as-
pect oftlie':ict forebodes no revolution 0 .power.—-
All seems to be a inercaffziir of money to secure
our revenues from the infidelity ofdefraudiiig oili-
ccrs ofthe Treasury Department! .It establishes
the tenure ofoflice in these words—‘‘ shall be ap-
pointed for the term offour ycars,but shall , be re-
movable at pleasure.”
At whose pleasure, pray? At the pleasure of
the Prime Minister, or the preinier’s sweeilieart?
Or is it at ilie pleasure of the l’resident’s_arbiti_'ary
will ?
Iauswer no, for that would annihilate the ap
pointing power of the Senate, and niaite the act
unconstitutional, as the Senate cannot renounce.
even by law, the icstraiiiing power that belongs to
its constitutional organiz:ition—not forits own lien-
or: btit for the safety of the public ;—but at the
pleasure ofthe appointing power, in the ordinary.
and hiilierto liariiioiiious, mode of originating by
the l’residv.-iit, and sanctioning or restraining by the
Senate. The coiistruction must be in favor of the
liberty ofthe citizen, and not in favor of the arbi-
trary power, if t.lie law were doubtful Even in
the monarcliy of England, that is the rule. Let us
take the good old connnoii law, and coinmou sense
rule ofcoiistruction laid down by J usticvefilavkstoiie.
and coiisi dei the old law; the mischief of the old
law; and the remedy proposed bythe new law,
and so construe it as to suppress the mischief, and
promote the rcincdy.
By the old law there was no summary power, ex-
cept the disputed one of taking care that the laws
be faittifully executed, to arrest the career of oili-
cial delinqueucy—-—and the process was doubtful
and dilatory by which the cause of removal was
to be established, whether by irnpeaclinieiir, in-
dictnicnt, information, or civil Slllt.
’l‘lic evil of the old law was, that while the gov-
ermnvut was plodding through some tedious pro-
cess oflaw, aiiiidst its delays and proverbial uncer-
tainties. the defaulter could embezzle our funds,
and ruin our affairs, so far as they lay within his
control, and escape to Texas, thc\Vcst Indies,Mex-
tco, South America, or Europe, before the process
had ascertained whether there were lawful causes
for removal or ‘not.
And the remedy here proposed is the summary
suspension of the functions ofthe oflic--r, for cause,
Slll)j(‘Cl. to the coiistltntioiial restraining powers of
the Senate, as in ‘all other, like oi iginating acts.
Thus we see it was far indeed from the design of‘
that law, even were it practicable_to change the
relative powers of the government, or totrnake the
offices of the country the private property of the
Presitlent to buy v0l(‘S, or punish opponents, or to
render the ciiu.-te ofremoval lesstlie very gist of the
whole pi occcding than it was before that law.
If the proceeding were by iinpcacliirient.iiid1t~;t-
ment, or inforiiiation, or civil action. the cause
Tlierefore you have proclaimed your President a
Monarch, acording to your own premises-and argu-
ments, by refusing the light necessarv to the use of
constant encrouclinieiit of Executive will, and of
that warns us of a change in the relative powers of
danger of the arbitrary will ofa single man in the
latterthan in the foinier mode of proceeding.
The cause gives life and action to the power of
removal. Until the cause be given the power re-
mains a dead letter, a more power in obeyancc —
The Luv oftreason confers a salutary power on the
Judiciary Department of the governiiient to con
deiiinthe traitor; but until the overt act. or the
cause ofapplying the law exist, the judiciary has
no right to issue a mandate to hang a iiiiin. The
Executive Department has no more right to exert
the provi-iniial powerof renioval until the cause oc-
curs, tlriii the judiciary has in the other case. The
power in both cases is apublic trust; and we pro-
tcsi, with the Constitution of our country in our
hands, agaiinst keeping tliecause a State sec-ret,and
thus establishing a secret dark and unicstraiiiuble
inquisiiion !'
The Lcgislator,iu 1820, naturally asked himself,
what term and tenure of office would attain the
desired public security?
To hold for life would be too irresponsible. To
fix his tenure during good behaviour, would not
reriiedy the evils of the old law; tiicii there must
be a process at law to convict him ofthe cause, be-
fore tlic’ removing power could be t.'Xel‘l(!t.l. To
make him removable at the will of the President too
absolute. And hence the provision for it term of
years, providtrd he so long behaved faithfully, re-
movable at the pleasure of the appoiiitiiig power,
during his lcrln, if he gave cause; and the cause is
just as material, and extiiiiiiizilile, here, as under
the old law. Under both it is the very essence of
the matter. The summary proceeding was to stop
the career of deliiiquency and not to confer arbit-
rary powei. ‘
And where is the provision in the law ‘of 189.0.
presuming to confer upon a President the siiti-re-
publican power oflioldiiig a dark inqnisitiou, stri-
king oflicers from the roll, and then refusing to tell
the cause ’! Or making the cause a secret of State,
or removing power an Executive prerogative, abso-
lute as that of an Autocrat of Russia over his serf;
or a King of Persia over his slave?
No. sir, this class ofthe officers of the public do
not hold their public stations ‘at the capricious will
01.31%)’ man 2 but by a legal tenure for four years,
provided they so long perform their duties, and re-
tain their fitiiess for the station. .
Mr. Monroe removed a Surveyor General of Il-
linois. Missouri, and Arkansas, undcra similar law,
for cause siistaiiied by judicial proof, taken in a
suitto which the oilicer wasa party
The accused was notified and present and gave
all exeulpations and cxplutions in his power. Mr.
Monroe, referred the matter to his Attorney Gen-
eral (Mr. \Virt.) He reported the causes, sustain-
ed by proof. That l'e])0I‘l1‘\Vi1StllCll submitted to
his Cabinet for their advice.
Mr. Monroe and his Cabinet did more than they
were bound to have done ; but they erred, if at all,
on the side of constitutional right and liberty.-
Thcre was no suppression of the causes of removal,
or dark iiiqiiisitioii there.
Let us l]0VV:lSSt1ln8 a new poiiitofview, and look
at this matter in another aspect; for its acknowl-
edged iiiipoi-tzince deuiands all our attention.
To create a lawful \ acaiicy by removal or resig-
natioii,thei'c must be a lawful removal or resigna-
tion. Every ouster by pliysical force, is not ala\v-
ful removal ; nor is every forged paper a valid rc-
pjgnation ; nor every feined death a vacation of of-
ice.
Nominations to fill vacancies must and do state
the Senate had nothing to do, as now pretended,
with the t;llCSi.l0I1 whether there was a lawful va-
cancy or not?
A is iiominatcd in place ofB, resigned. B comes
and shows the paper to be u. f‘m-go:-y,und no resigna-
tion. Or C, in place off), tlecenseil, exhibits him-
selfin full life. Or E, to be CliiefJustice of the
Unitcdstates, in place of John Marshall, rciiioved.
Every body knows the Senate could and would in-
quire into the legality ofthe pretended vacancies,
and correct the procedure in the two first cases as
orrors in fact; and in the last case as errors in law.
They would look behind the noinination, and take
notice that the President has no power to remove
the CliiefJustice; but we would reject E, and leave
the ChiefJustice to the hand of time, and his legal
teiiure.
So in those cases, the President has no more
power to remove the ofliccrs ofthe public for their
opiiiiou or vote in an election, nor to make room for
favorites, in the absence of any lawful objection,
than he has to remove the Chief Justice, or to de-
prive citizens of their coiistitutional riglits, or to
change our institiitions into the nionarchical form:
And, there being no other objection to them, they
are in office during their term, unless they give
lawful cause, thereby giving lawful power of ic-
nioving them. At the end of his lawful term, he
may be delivered over to the corrupting party dis-
cipline oftlio times, to be buffettcd; but even there
it is tlicduty ofthe Senate torestrniii the perversion
ofthe public offices, into means of rewards and
punishnierits, or of bribery and tyranny combined.
on discovering sncli a disposition in an executive
—upon the high and patriotic ground that such an
abuse of power strikes at no less vital olijcctjthaii
the root ofour linei'ties—thc elective fratncliisc it-
self!
Yes, sir, in all such cases as are new licfore the
senate, the cause ofreiiioval generates the power of
removal ; and such has been the uniform and bar-
monious practice oftbis gov’t in all the halcyon
(lays of the Republick, (and lawyers themselves do
not look for good prccedciits to troubled and revo-
lutioiiiiry times,) as the commission of any other
offence gives application and life to the appropriate
power ofpreveiitioii for the future,by ptmisliing for
the past-- which but for the commission of the of-
fence would have lain dormant forever.
SECRET DIPLOl\I.-\TIC CORRESPOND-
ENCE.—Tlie Boston Daily Advertiser states that
several volumes of the Secret Diplomatic Corres-
pondence of the old Congress, during the Revolu-
tionary War,ordci'cd by Congress to be published,
are already in the piess of Gray & Bowen, oftliat
city, and the small number of copies not already
ordered for the use of Congress, and for the supply
of the southern market, willsoon be for sale by the
publishers. The work will consist often or twelve
volunios, and is edited by Mr. Sparks, late editor
of the North American Review, who was appoint-
ed by Mr.Clay for that purpose. It consists of the
letters of Benj.Franklin,Eilas Deane,John Adams,
John J ziy. Arthur Lee, William Lee, Francis Dana,
Ralph Izard, John Laurens and others, concerning
the Foreign Relations of,'the U. States during the
whole Revolutiomtogetlicr with the letters in reply
from the Secret Coiiimittee of Congress IIINI the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs Also the whole cor-
respondence of the French Miiiistx rs, Gerard and
Liizerre, with the Congress, while they resided in
this country This collection of papers relaies to
a most interesting period of American liistory.——
Tlit,-y are the more curious as having been secret
when written, and as developing the policy of For-
eign Powers in regard to the United States, at the
time of our great struggle for independence. They
give afull account of the origin and progress ofthe
early negotiations of our public agents with ilie
liuropeaii governments, of the aids derived from
them, and of the principles and history of the first ,
treaties of amity and commerce. Andthc fact that
that they were written by our ablest statesmen and
patriots makes their value still more obvious. As
a repository of political knowledge and liistorical
facts, in relatioii to the period it embraces, this
work will possess claims much superior to any
thing that has been published.
how the vacancy occurred; and to what end, if
CONGRESS.
Tiiurrsnav, April 22.—In the Senate,
Mr. Hayne having offered an amendment
extending-tlio right oftaking out pateutsin
the same manner as to citizens ofthe U. S.
with the exception that the foreigner shall
pay into the ticasury $200 on obtaining a
patent—[The bill provides the charge to
a “ citizen” for a patent shall be in future
$75; if is at present $30.] _
Mr. I-Iolines objected to all the provis-
ions of the bill and the aniendnient,.cxccpt-
ing the section that inflicts a punishment
“for removing from the Patent Oflice, inu-
iilziting or disfiguring-ariy paper, drawing,
or model,” because their tendency he tlio’t,
would be to depress iiiiprovement iii the
niechaiiick arts, &.c,
Mr. Dickcrsoii then moved to amend
the amendment by striking out “$200,”
and inserting “ .%:;50,’’ which was 0p])0St-cl
by Mr. llayne, Mr. Rowan, and Mr.-For
syili, and-fiiia‘lly negatived. The bill was
then laid on the table.
The bill for the removal of the Indians
beyond the Mississippi, was next taken up.
Mr. Frelinghuysen replied to the argu-
ments of Mr. Forsytli. He yielded the
point that the other States had extend their
laws over the Iiidiaiis within their limits
as well as Georgia; but exclaimed how
iiiagiiziiiiuious it would be for the State of
Georgia to have disclainied to follow the
pernicious cxaniple of her sister states.-
Mr. l\l‘Kinley rejoined to Mr. Frelingliuy-
sen, in support of, and maintained the con-
siitutiomilily of the doctrines he had atl-
vanced in his former arguments, and which
he contended Mr. F. had not as yet been
able to answer. \Vhen Mr. M‘Kiiilc_v
concluded, Mr. Forsytli aook the floor,ziiid
supported the rights, and vindicated ilie
conduct of the state of Gr.-orgiii in relation
to ilic Indians within her limits. When
Mr. F. concluded, tlie.Seiiate adj.
FRIDAY, April ‘.23. —The Senate had a-
gain under consideration the bill to pro‘-
vide for exchange oflands with the Indi-
ans residing in any States or -Territories,
and for their removal beyond the Missis-
sippi, but came to no conclusion.
In the House, Mr. Bulies, reported a
bill providing pensims for certain
persons therein named. The resolution
proposing a reduction of the oflicers ofthe
army was again under consideration. The
House then went into committee of the
whole on the case ofJiidge Peck, who is
iinpeaclied, and continued in session until
7' o’clock, when ilie committee rose, and
the house adjourned. [On the following
the resolution ofimpcachmont was passed,
only 49 votes in the negative. 0
Saturcla_1/,,1pril24.——Tlie bill to provide
for an exchange of lands. with the Indians
residing in any of the states or territories,
. and for their |'0fllUV€tlVVCSt of the rivei'Mis-
$ISSl;iPi, was resumed in coniniitlee of the
whole. The question on Mr. Freliiighuy-
scn’s aineiidinent was divided, and first
taken on adding to 'lie bill the fol-
lowing proviso‘: Provided always, Thai
until the said tribes 0|‘ nations shall choose
to remove, as by this act is centenipla-
zed, they shall be protccicdin their pre-
sent possessions, and in the enjoyineiit of
all their rights of territory and government
as heretofore exercised and enjoyed, from
all interruptions and cncroachmerits.
The proviso was rejected, by the fol-
lowing vote : Yeas.—Mcssrs. Barnard,
Barton, Boll, Burnet, Chambers, Chase,
Clayton, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Holmes,
Knight, Marks, Maudaiii, Robbins, Rug-
gles, Seymour, Silsbce, Sprague, VVebsier,
\Villey —.—f20.--Nays.—Messrs. Adams,
Burton, Bibb, Brown, Dickerson, Dudley,
Ellis, Forsyth, Grundy, Ilayne, [lend-
ricks, Ircdell, Johnson, Kane, King,Riv-
ingston, 1\l’Keiiley, M’Lean, Noble, Row-
an, Sanford, Smith, of S. C., Tazcwell,
Troup, Tyler, \-Vliite, VVoodbury.——27'.
The question was then taken on the
other proviso, which is as follows: And
l\Icssrs. Bucliauaii and Storrs, meinbers‘
of the house of Representatives, appeared
at the bar of the Senate with a message‘
from that House, and in the name of the’
House of Representatives, and of all the‘
people of. the United State, impeached
James H. Peck, Judge of the U. States’
Court for the District oflllissouri, of high
misdenieanors in office; whereupon Mr.-
Tazcwell moved ihai a select coinniiitee be‘
appointed to consider and ieport on the
Subject, when on ballotting it appeared-
ihat Messis. 'l‘azcwcll, Bell and \Vobster'
weie chosen. The Senate took up the.
resolution of Mr. Barton, calling upon ‘=
the President for his reasons for removing.
Jziiiics-.Cai*snii from the office of Register
of the Land Ofllcc in Missouri. After‘
some reiiiarks from Messrs. McKinley,
Knight, Barton, and Kane the resolution
was, on mo.ion of Mr. Kane, laid on the
tablc——yeas 22, noes‘15.
The resolution introduced by Mr. De-
sha, from the Military Committee, on the
subject of reducing the number of oili-
cers ofthe army of the United States, was
taken up and passed, directing the Secre-
tary of War to report upon the e.\ipedioii-
cy of the proposed reduction. On mo-
tion of Mr. Pcttis, Judge Peck obtained
leave to withdraw the documents and pa-
lution to ilie charges against him reported
by the Conimittee on the Judiciary. The
bill from the Senate, for the removal of
certain Indians West of the Mississippi,
was read twice,and referred.
The bill altering the tariff laws, so as“
more effectually to enforce their provisions
being again taken up, Mr. M’Duflio sub-
mitted an aiiieiidnient, proposing it repeal
after June next, ofthe tariffof 1828, revi-
ving that of 1824, and after a CCHEIIII pe-
leaving that of 1816 in force; and he
followed his motion by a speech of two
hours in stippori ofit, without having fin-
isliedwhaii he intended to say. The whole
subject ofthe protecting system is thus 0-
pencd, and promised to be dlSS.iS8(I exten-
sively and earnestly.
Tuesday, April 27.—-‘Mr. Taacwell,fr.
the comm. on the subject of the impeach-
ment of Judge Peck, made a report, ac-
companied with the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Senate will take
proper order thereon, of which due notice
shall be given to the II.ofReprescntatives.
Several resolutions were presented by
the reasons of removal from office, &c.—
[On Wednesday,,after Mr. Holmes had
spoken mo hours in favor’ of his resolu-
iioiis, they were indefinitely posipnned.]
In the I'1ti'.iSC Mr. Chilton introduced a
preamble and resolution, stating that ‘ sus-
picions bave gone abroad that under the
present administration, many removals of
public officers have been made from po-
litical considerations alone, and not from
any particular devotion to public interest :
and whereas, there exists considerable ex-
ciieincnt relative to the causes of said re-
lieiision upon this Subjeti-“BB it Resolved,
That the ‘President of the U. States he
respectfully requested to cause to be re-
ported to this House, &c. the precise num-
ber of removals of otlicers, from the high-
est t0 the lowest, &c. ; and that he be al-
so respectfully requested to have expres-
sed the causes for each removal.” The
iiitroductioii of the resolution c.iused great
"excitement. Mr Ramsey moved to lay
the resolution on the table. 'Mr. M’Duf-
fie then demanded the question of consid-
eration, on which the ayes and noes were
ordered. Tlie‘House tlicnrefused to con-
sider, by a vote o'f'12’C to 48.
was occupied during agreat part of the
day in consider-iiig the bill authorizing a
subscription to the stock of the Maysville
. Turnpike Road Company, which was at
length ordered to a 3d reading, 96 to 87.
provided also, That before any removal
shall take place of any of the said tribes
or nations, and -before any exchange or
exclianges of land he made as aforesaid,
that the rights of any such tribes or nations
in the premises, shall be stipulated for, se-
cured, and guaranteed by treaties, as here-
tofore made.
This was also rejected, 19 to 28.
Mr.Sprague then moved to add a provi-
so in the following words: Provided al-
ways, That until the said tribes or nations
shall choose to remove, as is by this act
contemplated, they shall be protected in
their present possesssions, and in the eii-
joynient of all their rights of territory and
governnient, as promised or guaranticd to
Them by treaties with the United States,
according to the true intent and meaning
of such treaties.
The amendment was negaiived by ycas
and nays, 20 to 27, the vote being the same
as on the first proviso.
Mr. F relingliuysen next offered the fol-
lowing proviso. Provided always,
That nothing herein contained shall be so
constructed as to authorize the departure
fiom, or non observance of, any treaty,
compact, agreement, or stipulation here-
tofore entered into and now subsisting be-
tween .lie United States and the Chero-
kee Indians. This amendment was §eject- »
ed by by the same vote as the preceding.
On motion by Mr. White, the blank in
the eighth section was fillcdwith 5000,-
000 dollars, and the bill reported to the
sed.
The remainder of the day was occupied
by Mr. M’Duflie in continuation of his
speech in favor ofa rcduction.of the tariff.-
. —-o—— .
Extract of a letter from Porto Cavello,
ofMarch 22d --“Both Venezuela and Gen-
eral Bolivar, who is invested with unlim-
ited powers by his Congress, are making
great warlike preparations, their respect-
ive armies being already ou the confines
of Venezuela.-Report says that General
O'Leary has the command of the troops
from Bogota. TheVenezucli..n Generals
seem determined to carry the standard of
Liberty to the utmost confines of Colombia.
I,- however indulge the hope that every
thing will be arranged without the effusion
of blood.”
BAHIA, (Brazil) March 4.
A most sad catastrophe took place on
Sunday evening last,ncar theOpeiaSquare, -
by the assassination of his Excellency, the
Visconde de Cammainu, President of this
Province ; who, in alighting from his car-
riage was shot by a pe son on horseback,
who approached him in a very guarded
manner, and shot him with a horse pistol,
from the effects of which he died in the
course of two minutes. No less than two
balls and five slugs were extracted after
death from the body of ilie President. It
consideration had any connexion with the
infernal act, but that it proceeded from
personal pique.
The VVashington. Banner of the Consti-
Sciiate with the amendments, and ordered union says._“1; is evident that Don P3.
to be engrossed foratbird reading,28 to 19. dro has no disposition to see the rights
In the Senate, on Monday, the bill pro- of his daughter to the throne of Poncgai
viding for an exchange of _lands with the abandoned, and we are informed, that an
liidians and their removal beyond the Mi_s- expedition will before long be fined out at
sissippi, was read the third time and pas- Rio de Janeiro, to go against Don Miguel,
The bill from the ‘House niakiiig who mus far, does not appear to have had
appropriaiioiis for the building of,light- the countenance of Great Britain, France,
houses and beacons, placing buoys, ercct- or any other Power which ‘acts upon the
ing of piers, and itiiproveincnt of certain principle, that a Sovereign sliouiglbe such
harbors, was agreed to in Cominittee. dc jam: as wellas defacfa. V
pers presented by him to the House inic- '*
riod further, a repeat of the tariff of 1324, ~
Mr. Holmes calling on the President for T
niovals ; now, to quiet the public appre- _
l"Vednesda_i/, April 28.-The House I
is pretty well ascertained that no political ‘.
,4
.i
\\
Norwalk Chronicler