Cheraw gazette. [volume] (Cheraw, S.C.) 1835-1838, 1836-02-09

ing disavowal of every phrase they might
deem offensive, and an explanation of every
word to which an improper Interpretation
could be given. The principle, therefore,
has been adopted, that no foreign power
has a right to ask for explanations of any
thing that the President, in the exercise of
his functions, thinks proper to communi-
cate to Congress, or of any course he may
advise them to pursue"
We cannot, sir, admit such principles; !;
we cannot admit it at least without condi-
ton or limit, in an absolute, general, and
peremptory sense.
1t does not depend upon a nation from
the mere fact of its having adopted such, or
such form of government, to acquire with
regard to foreign powers, more rights than
it would have had, or to arrogate to itself
other rights than those which it would have
enjoyed under any other form Of govern
ment.
Nations are free to chsose, without any
constraint, the government: they please
precisely for this reason,and under this con-
dition, that such choice concerns them er-
clusiuely, and that whatever that choice may
be, it cannot affect the rights or injure the
legitimate interests of other nations.
Now it is the acknowledged right of e.
very Government, when the legal represen-
tative, or when the official organ Of ano-
ther government, expresses himself pubhcty
in reference to it, in language which is DEEM
ed offensive, to demand an explanation of
it. Such right the Constitution of the U.
States can neither abolish, modify or res.
trict. 1t is an international right (undroit in.
ternational. )-It suits the people ofthe Uulted
States to divide the power of the Union be-
tween President and Congress. Be it
so. 1t suits them to obligc the President
to give publicly, to Congress, an account
of the state Of foregn relations. Their
right is unquestionable. But that the Pre-.
sident of the United States, the official Or
gan, the legal representative of the Union
towards foreign nations, thereby acquires
right to express himself, publicly, of for.
eign governments in language offensive to
those governments that he should, in as
serting the liberty, the freedom necessary
for such communications, dispense with all
reserve in his language, and with all respon-
sibility towards the powers whom that Ian.
guage concerns, is what we cannot ad-
NIT.
responsibility l'inviolabilitie) whether
it relates to persons, to acts, or to words
responsibility, when it is legally established,
is pure national institution, purely inter-
nal regulation, and can never be used as an
argument in the intercourse which govern
ments hold with each other. If it were o.
therwise, and we were disposed, after the
example of Mr.. Livingston, to carry the
argument to its extreme consequences, 1t
might be maintained t at the Presi1e,t ofthe
United States has the right, provided it be
in a message to Congress, to impute public
ly, to foreign governments and to foreign
nations the most odious acts the most per-
ye.se intentions; to hold them up publicly
to the animadvcrsion of the world, without
these governments or these nations having
the right to manifest the slightest resent
ment, since, according to this very strange
doctrine, they would not even be allowed
to take official notice of it.
To state such doctrine, is to reflte it.
However, sir, we do not wish to exager-
ate any thing, Mr.. Livingston is perfectly
right, when he says that the cause is, in
general sense, common to all free countries:
That all governments founded on the divi.
sion of power and on the publicity of de-
bates, have an interest in repellng, on the
part of foreign powers, any interference
with the communications which the Prince
and his ministers in constitutional monar-
chies, and in repuclcs the magistrates en-
trusted with executive power, are called up
on to'make to the Legislature. And this is
the reason, as Mr.. Livingston very judi.
ciously observes, that in France and in En-
gland, the language of the royal speeches
is so reserved in every thing that concerns
Foreign relations: and it is this same mo-
tive, as you will OBSERVE, sir, to the cabinet
of Washington, that has directed the con-
duct of France in relation to the message of
President Jackson.-Ifthe expression con-
tanned in that message had been inserted in
a proclamation, or any other act OF the cx.
ecutive power Of the Union, we would at
once have called for an explanation. Out
of respect for the very nature of the act,
the French Government deemed it duty
to manifest the sentiments it felt on that oc-
casion, by instantly recalling its minister,
and stating in communication the motives
for that recall but it did not ask for cxpla-
nations; it was contentdd to expect them
from the Justice of the government Of the
United States, and from the ancient friend
ship of the American nation, not doubling
that the Government of the United States