Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-04-02

sioic event, nave any thing to do with nj. 1t
cannot be possible, therefore, for Members of
Congress, as such, TO meddlc with it. Not be-
ing private matter, if they act on it ali collec-
lively, as body, and by virtue Of their office, il
cannot be said that they act in their pirate ca
{. Pdcities. viii proceed, said Mr.. Haync to
! give one or two illustrations of this subject,
which l think will remove any doubts which
may still rest upon it. Suppose the Pre-
sdent and Heads Of Departments were to
meet together in their private capacities, were
to nominate their successors, and were 10 pre-
claim such anomination to the American people.
| The country would ring with denunciatons
OF the act, the charges of usurpation, tyranny,
and corruption, would rise up i'll every corner OF
he land, and they would meet the lust VEN
gcancc of an injured people. And yet, have not
the President and heads OF departments as much
a right to act, ana to speak in their private ca
capacities, any other members Of the go
veinment? They more prohibited from
nominating President than are the Member;
oil Congress; and moro danger is to- be apIre-
hcnded from tss influence of the latter than H..
former. Suppose the Judges of the Supreme
Court were to step from the bench, put off their
robes, and after pubic notice, were t. proceed
IN their private capacities, TO nominate Presi-
dent, and publish that nomination to the world
How would such 4 proceeding be rci;shed !.
And yet the Executive and Judiciary have Ger.
tainly an equal right with the Legislature 10
proceed to such q nomination. in their private
capacities. AGAIN: Suppose the Governors of
the several states were 10 consult and vote on
the subject, and announce the result TO the
world, IN order to produce union among. the poo
| ple,-What would we think of such a proceed
ing' But l will pat, said Mr. uayrc a sill
stronger case-one perfectly analogous to that
under consideration. Suppose a.jui,y appointed
to try 4 cause, civil or criminal. The law brc-
scribes the place, the time, the mode and man
ner, In which the question is TO be officially in
vestigatcd, and decided But these Jurors think
proper to meet together, previous to The trial,
IN their Plicdte capacities, to investigate the me-
rlts ofthe case; they come to decision, and
publish the result! Would it be any excuse
for such proceeding 10 allegc, that they did
not act as jurors, but in their private capacities
And with what color of reason cot: such an
excuse be made, II it were shown that the,
were summoned 10 fine meeting, rs 9n,ors 60
aomi1e, that none other were admitted that they
appointed q foreman, passed through all The forms
ofd trial. and, iii the name and character Of
jurors, proclaimed the result. Now, said afr.
Hayne, there is q more striking analogy be-
tween that case and the proceeding now under
consideration, than gentlemen will be disposed
to admit. The House of Representative may,
Ill one event, be called upon To choose the Presi-
dent. The constitution has prescribed the time
and place, AID all the formalities of that pro
cccding; but before the occasion occurs the
members of that House meet together in their
/ private capacities, and examine the claims oil
the candi iates, and, without the light which far
! Their time and more deliberate examination
might afford, TO make I choice and publish the
result. 1t IS true, that the proceeding, in both
cases, is without legal authority, and is not bind
ing, but is calculated to produce dangerous
| influence, ami is therefore, wholly indefensible
To illustrate the truth that legislators cannot
. - a. ~, It
| act i'll their private capacities on matters which
may come before them officially, it may be ask
cd, whether it would be justiiiablc for majority
OF this Senate, as party, TO meet together habit
uaiiy, III their private capacities, and determine
by majority, what measures they should, as :,
body support or oppose BY such an arrange
ment, all the guards by which pure and enligIl-
tened legislation is secured, would be destroyed,
and small minority might sway the SENATE A
Congressional caucus Is open to the same OBJ
lection | confess, Sir, said Mr.. III. have
serious fI1rs that should the Caucus system be
firmly established in this country, it will even
tually lead to the total destruction of the rights
Of the small states, and that the clause in the
constitution, which secures their just weight in
; the choice of a President, will be piiigaHy re-
pcated. Oacc recognize the distinction BE-
tween mans pul.iic al private Capacity, in
relaion to public matters, aid what is 10 restrain
a few of the Iarga stat - from appointing dele
gates, or iDstructiIiE i If Members oil Congress,
| 10 meet in cauc'ig, a;'i determine, by MAORI
ty of votes, how these states Shall act and whom
they shall support? shall add nothing further,
said Nfr. II. in answer to tiIe honorable gentle
lGcn, Oh this point.
| The next argument urged, is that Congress
sional caucus is free from objection, because il
does not profess II eicct but only To- 7lJminatc 2
| President. Now, would ask whether the de-
sign OF this nomination is not to procure the
election of some individual who would not be
elected without il If such be not the object.
and if such were not the results hoped for no
nomination would be made no caucus would be
held. But, if a nomination is to have the effect
oil promoting man TO the Presidency who wu;Id
not otherwise be promoted, IL virtually amounts
to an election; and is it any answer 10 tlIis ar
gumeni TO say, that it is produced altogether by
the authority anl niucnCc of Members Con-
gress Or is not that the most Objectionable
means by which election can be effected /?
But, Sir, said Mr. RI. let us bring this question
to the test OF principle, and see if the practice
am controycrting will not directly deprive the
people of the right of choosing among the scyc-
ri candidates for the Presidency if Il Con
gressional CAUCUS he right ia principle, as the
gentlcrpcn alegc, il fJows, that the friends OF
all the candidates 0'tgtt TO oftend, and that the
strength of each being asccrtaincd, The strongest
should be SMpp1,icdby all, AMI tire others shJud
be oojthdJu.gn. Thus, tic people will be de-
priyed of the right of choosing, and must, of ne
Ccssity, trte the H,na recommended 10 them.
Take the case Of trro candidates onlr, and such
a case has occurred a caucus decides between
them, the other is bound to Withdraw; lac can,
I Il, l.. IL l.