Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1834-03-05

commandments He therefore reJolced that, as
If was the most powerful, that it was then reel
ing and totterng under the same dow Whlch iau
nearly DESTROYED the two others, which had ST.
milar origin-intefnal Improvement, and the Ia
riff. He could not wish to mitigate It's fate ana
honed that those who contended SO successful
ly in arresting the progress or consolldatlo'l,
would not be led away under the influence VI
excitement, and thus abandon their principles.
Mr. P referred to the opinions expressed Dy
Mr.. Madison, in his various letters under the
SIGNATURE of Publius, showing the dangers OF
concentrating power, and argued at length 10
prove. that if the preamble to the resolutions
was adopted as there was in 1t what ne con-
tended was an unfounded assumption OF power,
the natural conclusion must be that it must re-
suit in erecting a principle which IS alike uli-
sound. In commenting upon the resolutions
adopted by the Legislature of his State, he was
compelled to deny that the trainers Of the Con-
stitution deemed the act of the President, in re-
moving from Office to be dangerous or alar-
ming usurpation. He maintained that the pow
er of removal was more properly an Executive
than legislative power.
Mr. p said that no one contended that the Pre-
sident had the right to use capriciously the pow
er of removal and appointment. Such right
would set up all the offices of the country TO be
scrambled for, and establish the detestable prin-
ciple that the spells Of the vanquished belong to
the victors. He would oppose this principle
by whomsoever it might be advanced. Mr.. +.
here read the passage from the speech OF Mr..
Calhoun, stating that the power OF removal
could be constitutionaly exercised, and viewing
it's exercise, in the present case, as an aDuse
and not as an assumption of power. This gen.
teman rested his opposition to the measure on
the supposed improperly of the motives of the
President in exercising the power If he could
believe that the Presidents motives were cor
rupt. he would go as far as any one in condemn
ing Them and he would be willing that any in
quiry should be instituted into the facts.
But the question did not rest upon reason or
argument. There was the highest authority
for the right Of the President to exercise the
power 1t rested on Legislative act, passed in
1889, nine days after the organization OF the
department, establishing the salaries of the EX-
ecutive Departments. But the question was put
forever at rest by the fact that the act creating
the Treasury Department imposed upon the Sc
cretary Of the Treasury to report to Congress
plans for the improvement Of the revenue, &C.
and that Congress is not bound to act upon those
plans, but may lay them aside. He censured
Mr.. Duane not for refusing to resign, but for
giving pledge to resign. He maintained that
the President had acted honestly and faithfully
in that matter and that he had the constitutional
right to remove Mr.. Duane, and that he would
have been recreant to his trust if he had not re-
moved him.
If the correctness of the Presidents motives
were questioned, let them be inquired into and
ascertained.
But it was said that the House Of Representa-
tives had declared that the deposites were safe
in the Bank of the United State. To this he
answered that the opinion was forced from Con-
gress by the application ofthe gag without con
sideration or the examination Of evidence
There was nothing in the vote Of Congress, or
the resolutions, which ought in the least degree,
to have Influenced the action of the President
on this subject But it was said that the House
Of Representatives had the exclusive control of
the Treasury. There was not clause in the con-
stitution which gave countenanee to this asser
ton The revsnue bills to originate in the
House of Representatives. This had no reference
to the present question. All laws respecting the
keeping of the deposites belong to the Legisla-
tive Department, in the constitutional use OF the
term, and are not the peculiar province of the
House of Representatives.
But General Jackson had not seized the purse;
he could not touch even dollar of his own sal
ary without the forms of law. 1t was said that
he could turn out the officers, and put in those
creatures who would sign such warrants as
were presented to them. But it was as vain to
talk about that as to say that the Legislative de-
partment might take the whole surplus revenue
and distribute it among ourselves, as extra COM
pensation. Wehad the power to do it, but would
- be exercising our just anu proper pow
ers! 1t was idle to argue against the exis-
tence of powers from their possibility Of being
abused. 1t was the part of wisdom to restrain
the powers of Government within just limits,
and by proper checks, to prevent those limits
from being transcribed. If gentlemen think
that this is an arbitrary assumption Of power by
the President, he submitted that they ought to
proceed to inquire into the facts. Let us not act
as overseers and judges. If the charges were
true, the President ought to be impeached, and
if they were true, he ought to be convicted Ac.
cording to his present impression, he could not
see the distinction between this question and
that of rechartering the bank. Unless he could
be convinced that the restoration of the depo-
sites would relieve the community, he should
vote against their restoration.
He could not agree with the Legislature that the
safetyIofthe public money was the only reason for
which the deposes could be removed-on the
contrary, he did not think it leading conside-
ration. If that were intended by the charter it |
would have been SO stated. Why should the |
charter require the Secretary of the Treasury
to give reasons" when they contemplated
but one reason? The charter also required that
the notes of the Bank should be received in pay
ment of the revenue; and if in giving this pow