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

nate, having refused % as., = 1 IaTKsnN
Report ofthe Committee Of Finance on me aoore
Message
In SENATE, May l, 1884.
Mr.. TYLER, from the Committee on Finance,
20 which was referred the Message OF the Pre-
rvD. Gilpin. Peter Wager, John T. sullivan,
and Hugh McElderry, as Directors OF the BANK
of the United States, submitted the folloWlngr re-
port:
The committee have bestowed upon the SUBJECT
the reflection which respect for the Chlef ags-
trate would at all times command The Presldent,
at an early day of the session, submitted the
nomination to the Senate, OF i've persons, DIS
Directors Of the Bauk of the United States. 10
one of these nominations the oenate dssehteu'
and the person nominated was appointed In
regard to the four others, beingthe same persons
now re-nominated to the Senate, no dehnltve
decision was made until the 9th OF February,
when they were each separately feJected ny
ayes and noes The subjects, in the mean
time. with which these nominations were IN
in some degree connected had undergone
full and elaborate discussion IN the Senate IL he
decision. therefore, was well calculated to sat
isfy the President that the Senate entertained
decisive objections to the confirmation OF these
four persons; and the journals OF which the Pre-
sident usually sees copy; could not lall 10 snow
that each and every one Of them was rejected
by a clear majority of the whole Senate Inc
precise character Of the objections taken by
each and every member OF tile majority, or
even the general character OF such oDJecuons, IL
would be preSumptuous in the committee 10 al
tempt to ascertain They cannot be expected
70 Go into private conference with members,
and to interrogale either those of the majority
or minority, upon this or any other question, as 10
the reasons Of their votes. 1t must be obvious
that from the constitution OF the Senate; from
the manner of its proceedings; from the abso-
lutte right ofevery member to vote Tor or against
particular nominations for reasons or his own,
whether others concur with him in those reasons
or not, the grounds of the votes OF individual
members can never be set forth, nor authentl-
cay known The committee cannot undertake
any inquiry into such grounds OF Individual
opinion; nor do they know any form IN winch
the Senate itself, if it were SO inclined, could
compel individuals to state the reasons OF their
votes. The committee therefore, do not sup
pose it proper for the Senate by any proceeding
to be adopted on its part, to undertake to set
forth the reasons Of members for rejecting these
persons. II is enough that the Senate in the eX-
ercise Of an unquestionable constitutional right
has refused its advice and consent to the neml-
nations. This has been officially certified to the
President, and the committee think there Is no
ground for further inquiry.
The President discams, indeed, in terms all
right to inquire into the reasons OF the Senate Tor
rejecting any nomination; and yet the message
immediately undertakes to infer, from facts and
circumstances, what those reasons, which lndu-
enced the Senate in this case, must have been,
and goes on to argue, much at large against
the validity of such supposed reasons The
committee are Of opinion, that it, as the Presl-
dent admits he cannot inquire into the reasons
r>f fI,a Son ofa for
nations it is still more clear that those reasons
cannot, with propriety, be assumed, and made
subjects ofcomment
In cases in which nominations are rejected
for reasons affecting the character Of the per-
sons nominated, the committee think that no
inference is to be drawn, except what the
vote shows; that is to say, that the Senate with
holds its advice and consent from the nom-
nations And the Senate, is not bound, nor
would it to be properfor it, as the commit
tee think, to give any answer to remarks found
ed on the presumption ofWhat such reasons must
have been, in the present case. they feel them
selves therefore, compelled, to forego any re-
spouse whateverto the message of the President,
in this particular, as well by the reasons before
assigned as out of respect to that high officer.
The President acts upon his own views of pub
lie policy, in making nominations to the Senate;
and the Senate does no more when it confirms
or rejects such nomination. For either Of these
coordinate departments to enter into the cOnS-
deration of the motives of the other would
and could not fail, in the end, to break all har-
monious intercourse between them. This, your
committee would depore highly injurious
to the best interests of the country. The-Pres-
dent, doubtless, asks himself, in the case of
every nomination for Office, whether the person
be fit for the office; whether he be likely to be
influenced by those considerations which should
alone govern him in the discharge of his duties;
is he honest, capable, and faithful? Being sa-
tshed in these particulars, the President submits
his name to the Senate, where the same inqui-
ries arise, and its decision should be presumed
to be dictated by the same high considerations
as those which govern the President in original
ing the nomination. For these reasons the COM
mittee have altogether RETAINED from entering
into any discussion of the legal duties and obi
cations of directors of the Bank appointed by
the President and Senate, which form the main
topic of the message.
The committee would not feel that it had full
ly acquitted itself Of its obligations if it did not
avail itself Of this occasion to call the attention
Of the Senate to the general subject of renomi-
nation
The committee do not deny that right ofreno.
min alton exists: but they are of opinion that in