Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1827-06-09

own showing, he has 10 peculiar fitness Tor the
Office, and this fact naturally leads the reader 10
refer 10 the real source of his popularity and
the cause Of the preference of his party Tor him,
his military renown. This they believe they can
successfully employ with the mass OF the peo'
pie, the better 10 crafty their bitter and reent'
less hostility 10 the present incumbent, and 10
promote their own views of personal aggran-
dzemen,. They are grossly mistaken, Gene
raj Jackson owes the large support formerly re-
ceived TO a combination IF circumstances which
can never again conspire in his behalf, and 10
prejudices which time aid experience have Ell
feetualy removed.
We are RECALLED with numerous specifications
form as if they had been drawn up by a court
martial, urging the necessity of turning them
out of office "though they be as pure as the an
gels TINT stand at the rigM hand Of God."
First-"Because although the forms OF the
Constitution were observed, the spirit OF that
sac red instrument was violated.
Assertion is easily made and as easily con-
tradcted He who seeks the truth honestly,
will rely implicitly neither on simple affirmation
or ncgation. He will seek il in the fountains Of
knowledge. In regard to the present inquiry,
these will be found in the principles which 60
verned the trainers Of the Constitution in the
enactment Of the provision under which MIR
Adams was elected, and the testimony borne to
them by the whole system of election. Both
principles and practice will sanction the inter-
probation which justfes those who voted tor
him on their consciences and judgments.
The artists of that illustrious instrument, not
only attended to an immediate, but looked with
a prophetic eye 10 distant and probable state
of things. They saw in the multiplication Of
states and the diversity of interests arising from
local and other causes, reason TO apprehend
great conflict OF opinion relative 10 The candl-
dates for The presidency, as well as the proba-
bility OF their being numerous from these very
circumstances. With view to preserve the
fundamental republican principle Of election by
a majority of the people, the Constitution pro-
vides for the election Of the chief magistrate, by
majority of The people Should this be i'm
practicable from the division ofpublic opinion,
Several candidates being presented to their sui
frages,) contingency would arise calling for
constitutional provision. The experiment of
electing president by majority of the people
would have failed. They would be undecided.
No choice would have been made. The trainers
Of the Constitution did not deem it wise to har-
rasS the country with repeated appeals 10 The
popular voice. the result Of which might ever
be doubtful Tie Constitution therefore enr
powered an enlightened body enjoying the con
fdence o.! The citizens of the republic, -ema-
mating Immediately from its bosom,-repre-
senlng the various interests Of the different
sections Of the Union anG peculiarly capable OF
Judging of the positive or comparative fitness
Of the candidates, TO choose for the presidency
the best qualified of those presented 10 their Sc
lection.
From the moment Of the adoption Of theCon-
stitution by those authorized by the people 10
frame and adop, that instrument, it became the
declared will Of the people hat Presdenl, in
the event of the contingency stated, should be
elected in the mode prescribed. The very
language of the provision proved the reference
to be to the conscience, judgment * wisdom Of
the House Of Representatives. Choice neces-
sarily implies ,olition, and it is clear that no
greater absurdity can be imagined than to pre-
scribe to man one course of action and then
require him to exercise the right Of choice to
be influenced by contingencies.
Is the contrary construction at all tenable or
consistent with the system OF primary election
by majority Of the people?
"The representative in Congress, says the
address is bound by the ascertaned will of his
constituents" True In ordinary legislation. But
was not the provision Of the Constitution in
ves,ing one branch of the government with the
right to choose President founded precisely
on the fact that the will of the people was I'M
known and uncxpressed on that important point
was it not on the failure Of an experiment to
obtain an expression Of public opinion9 The
obligation to obey the will ofconsti,uents could
not therefore have been looked 10 by the Con-
stitution, but the general representative char
acler OF that legislative body of the wisdom Of
the nation. Suppose each representative bound
10 adhere to the will Of the inhabitants of his
district as expressed by a plurality of votes in
favor Of one of the candidates. In the first place,
there being more candidate than Two, accord
ing to the presumption of the Constitution; he
who had received the plurality OF votes in such
district might not have received majority of
the whole, but in that respect be in consider.
able minority. How then could the represen-
ta,ive act on this theory? In the second place,
supposing the candidates to whom plurality
of the votes of his district had been given, had
actually received ajorty Of all the votes of