Edwardsville spectator. [volume] (Edwardsville, Ill.) 1819-1826, 1822-05-04

S"I(4i'Io'
: The committee believe it to have
been usual in the War Department, also,
TO employ members OF Congress as coun-
: sci IN behalf of the United States, and thew
refer particularly to the instances of Mr..
Baldwin, Of the House OF Representa-.
tives, and of Mr.. Rodney, of Delaware.
OF The Senate, employed and paid as
, counsel, under the direction of the pre-
sent Secretary of War.
The committee refer, also, to he case
OF member OF the House of r presen-
tailves in the present Congress, VINO is
employed, under the authority OF the
War Department, as superintendent
of fortihcalion of the United States, for
which he rec elves AN annual compensa-
ton.
4 Upon these instances the committee
iorbear any comment; proceeding to
remark, however, that III this practical
construction, there has been an uniformi-
ty, which could scarcely have resulted
from any thing else than universal i'm
preston ofthe rea meaning ofthe law. By
the 5th section it has been perceived
that the Secretary of',he TNasury, Sc
cretary OF War. and oil the Nav, and
the Postmaster General, are directed to
make annual statements 10 Congress, Of
such contracts, made in their respective
departments, as are comprehended in
the law. But III none Of these returns,
which have been annually made, are m
Guided any of the cases enumera Ell, 7phe-
tier the service had been he' formed by
a member of on gress, or any other fer
son, and under The idea that these were
not Of the description of contracts to
which the law had reference, the returns
embrace only contracts for labor, for
furnishing supplies, and for carrying the
mail; and ii is also worthy of obser-
va,ion, that, though this fifth section de-
signs TO compel a return OF all contracts
within The law, it does not require any
such return from the Department of
State, in which, though it is true no
such contracts as gave rise 10 the law are
ever made, it has, nevertheless, an ex-
tensivc patronage, a part of which is
that of authorizing the publication Of
VIZ ioNo5 With may W AiopttioNb w
members of Congress, and, as we, have
seen, falling clearly within the general
scope Of The words of the law OF 1903.
Neither has il been usual, or deemed
necessary, to make record III either OF
the Departments, of any such instances,
whether the service was performed by
member of Congress, or Others, pursu-
ant to the law, requiring all contracts
made by the respective Departments, in
behalf of The United States, to be re-
corded.
The committee do not wish to be un-.
Aerstcod as referring to these instances,
and to this course of practice, to justify or
excuse an error in one Department, ny
detecting similar abuses in others; nor
as affordlng an Interpretation which, II
erroneous, should have the force OF ju-
dicial decision but merely as the means
by which the objects and meaning OF the
law may be ascertained, as Illustrative
of the sense in which lis provisions have
been received and understood by the
most distinguished statesmen, and the
ables, constitutional lawyers OF The coun-
trv, and by the common consent OF all
whose duty it was to obey them.
They refer to them, as demonstrating
cotemporancous practical conslruc-
ton, which has prevailed, without con-
cert, in all of the Departments, and to
which an officer, entering the Office
long after the construction had become
adopted, might naturally conform. his
conduct.
On the whole, the committee have
seen nothing in the case submitted TO
them, which can lead to the presunp-
ton, that either ofthe individuals con-
cerned had any intention either to ylo-
late the provisions OF the law, or 10
abuse or disregard the spirit and policy
ofour Institutions.
| They are of opinion that the en-
ployment of Mr.. Thomas to examine
the land Offices originated in desire
honestly to discharge an important pub
lie duty; that the peculiar importance
of the trust at the time, and the charac-
ter and elevation of the individual en-
ployed, were calculated rather to invite
than forbid the selection. n or have the
committee any reason to believe that
the duty has not been faithfully perform
ed, and in manner conducive to the
cubic good.
Under these circumstances, and with
such impressions, the committee do not
deem it necessary to single out this case
Tor particular animadversion, or to pro-
;. nounce upon the comprehcnsiveness
or precise import Of the act Of 1903.
They content themselves with referring
to the construction which it has nniform-