Alexandria advertiser and commercial intelligencer. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1800-1803, 1803-02-12

,;a,,,e 20 an action for private damages,
| i cafe any have been iufered BY an m
dividual?
There. could be no douhs, but IN this
very cafe, damages would be recoverable. II
tbe rommiiiions we're withheld by fhe ie-
crcrafy Of fate from any corrups or hniitef
motives. Il was Iillewite ia!d, that the
commiaion was tfima faae evidence OF
the holders rigat to eff e, and not only
70. bur concluhve and as the parties
complaining had net eommiillons, they
could have no conelu!i.e evidence OF their
right This he faid was equally extra
ordinary with many other aiisrtions. II
ieemed 10 be po6,ion laid down oy the
gentlemen, tLat this petition ihould re
oppoied, and any Objection Oh earth, was
pertinent and efficient. II on view OF
this fuhjett there was rot, at les'S CO.
lorable rghtin rhe applicants, he was 5x-
ceedingly miasl<sn right 70 what !; TO
yfiee ? Yes, and right TO their com-
millions which they fay are withheld,
as a proof Of their tight TO Office.
He would obierve one word, upon the
concluiive operation ola Presidential COM
milton, and proclamation pronusatng
treaty. The gentleman lay both are
coDcluiiye, and cannot be invalidatei bY
any pofible teitimony. If 70, hs Thought
the Sloate ihould go home. being ufeieis
at the lest Of government tor il weed be
only requiGte for PRECEDENT to liiue
proclama5lon in cafe OF treaty, and com
milton in cafe of Office, and the advite ana
content Of Senare was always TO be pre-
fumed and the contrary could rot poi
Gbly be fhewn: tbs was faying mott
en,pha,icaly that our pFehdent could Go
nc wrong.
He was clear in this petition, that in
the cafe fs,ed the Petitioners would itand
IN need of the extratt requeaed, and that
they had right TO il. hat granting IT
would do no harm, and Withholding il
would Be an arbitrary 5enai OF juif'ce. lie
therefore houId vote fog The reiolntion.
Mr.. Baldwin Had not been in the
hou(e when the debate commenced. lho't
as il related 70 executive bu!lneis II ought
70 have been Conducted as inch buff
nefs ufually is. Thar as the queition
then food he lhould be againh the reiolu-
ton. He conlidcred il as relating TO a
part of our contribution which the FACES
who framed and certainly thofe VINO
adopted il had always conGdered as
secnl;a.Iy delicate. That it was ole
Of thofe nice theories. which in vary
ING from efabIifhed erattice, ought to be
carried inso effect with great diicretion.
That he had ever thought the unity OF
executive power efen'lal 10 the energy OF
action which ought to prevail. Every
thing therefore which tended 70 divide
thar ouentG 70 defIable, ought 10 be
avoided. That it was true the ahent OF
the Senate was required by the contltu-
ton before an appointment of officers could
take place - That on the nominaslon OF
the preGdent the buGnefs was inchoate,
and although while II was II fraghfu the
Senate kept Journal for their own IA
tistattion, yet, he thought fuch their pri-
vate Journal, ought MOTTO be made public,
more especially as it would delroy that
dehrable ouenels 70 uie'ul IN all things
which concern the executive power
That he was however, unwilling toseitab,
lifh precedent Of any fort. He tho't no
general rule fhould be made either TO grant
or II withhold extracts from the Journal.
Every application lhoald he thought, be
conGdered and decided Under lis partlcu-
lar circumstances. That the preient cafe
was an application for ,nandanus to the
fecretary of fate, by per(ons conceiving or
iiating themlelyes to be jnltices OF the peace.
That even if they could obtain the ex-
tract they ak for, it would not anfwer
their purpoie, for altho' the Senate ap-
proved Ct an officer when dominated by
4 4