Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Wayne County, Ind.) 1831-1837, 1837-02-11

fsar. ae.Arieks sssseA .. tAs Is..s.s Re..l.tss..
! Mr. HENDRICKS said that, At this late hour ol
the day, il would be out Of place to attempt an
gument or speech to the Senate, and such was
not his purpose in the few words b. had at present
to say. 1t had bees his intention, some time ago.
to have troubled the Senate with hss views some
what 1t large this subject: but he would content
himself now with saying very few words: and this
was perhaps necessary, owing TO the peculiar posi-
ton he occupied in relation 10 the proposition Be.
fore the Senate. II would be recOllecfed that he
had voted against the resolution Of 1884, 90 much
compiained Of, the resolution which it was now pro-
posed to expunge from the journals Of the Senate
He did for many of the reasons contained in the
preamble 10 the resolution now on our tables. In
some Of tho reasons, however, contained in that
preamble. he did not concur, and, Of course. could
not vote for it. For some Of the reasons contained
in il he could most cheerfnliy vote. No member
Of the Senate more than HIMSELF (ssid Mr.. H. re-
GREETED the passage Of that resolution. No one
could have been more opposed to il. He viewed
it ample Of discord set in motion, freLrand
thrown INTO the community, calculated to do more
harm than any other measure proposed 1t that
eventful session: and he now believed that il had
done more Larm in exciting party spiri: to its pres
eDt dangerous height than any other measure
which could have been proposed. The danger ap-
pretended to the Constitution by this act Of expun-
gng (said Mt. H. is a natural consequence Of the
measure Of 1884 as much as that one act Of vio-
lence should succeed another. A party in power
to-day, and who shall use tina. power ,ndscreetly.
will be sure to meet With retaliation a. soon as the
opposite party shall triumph. Hence, violent mea-
sures of this kind TO succeed each other in
the mutations OF party power effect 10 to follow
cause.
Much, however, as he was opposee to the re.o-
luton Of 1884, he could not vote TO expuoee il
from the journals. That q question, in his
IOpinon, having nothing TO do with the merits or
dement's Of the original proposition. The question
befiHe the Senate was one Of power to expunge the
journal, no matter what Journal it might be. He
nor any where else; and his oath to support the
constitution Of the United States was imperative.
and prohibited him from giving any such vote,
whatever may have been his opinion Of the resolu-
ton proposed to be exPunged. II was, in his view
Of the Constitution, much duty to keep and
preserve the journals Of unconstitutional proceed
ings, It such there be, Of any other. Our con-
stituents have as much right to know our bad acts
as good ones: because it is for these thew will
call To account, and il would he strange doc.
trne, that we could shield ourselves from respon-
s,bity by exPunging the josrnals The argument,
then, of'he Senator from Pennsylvania, that the
re solution of 1884 was uncons tit uiional and there
fore ought TO he expuDged, did not IN the least re
lieve hrs mind. He understood. too, that this was
the basis Of the votes ofoher members of the SEN
ate IN favor Of expunging. Much as he disaproved
"f the resolution Of 1884, he believed that it was
constitutional. and that il was such proposition a.
the Senate might entertain and adopt. He saw
nothing unconstitutional about it, Il might, or il
might not. be considered abstract proposition
Il had indeed, remained "a a mere declaratorv ex-
preston Of the Senate. but Il might have been the
basis Of legislation Whether It be true or FALSE is
a MATES Of opinion. Those who voted for il, un-
questionab'y believed that the President had, in
relation to the revenue, exercised authority and
power not conferred by the constitution and laws.
but in dcrogation both. He,who voted against il,
believed that authority and power exercised BY the
President was not in deTogatiOh of the Consiu-
ton and laws and, however much he dissentcd on
the ground Of expediency from that winch had been
done, he never doubtedthe constitutional and legal
power Of the President to do what he did,
1t had been said Continued Mr.. H.) that the res
oluiion Of 1884 contains impeactabe matter against
the President, and that on this account, il j. not
entitled TO place on the joumals. He did not
think, however, that IL contained any impea enable
matter. ID charged no evil or corrupt intention.
" hch was the essential Ingredient Of impeachcble
matter. He referred to the Of peck's trial be-
fore the Senate, and stated that the absence Of
proof Of corrupt intentions was the basis Of his ae-
quital by the Senate. This had been the reason
Of his vote Of acquitial, and this, he had good
reason to believe, the basis Of oes of acquital
generally.
In voting against expuneing, he did not vote to.
affirm the resolution Of 1894. He bad slready sta
ted the reverse. He believed that The President /
had the power, whatever he might think Of it, ex-
ercise under the circumstances Of that case. But
his opinion that tho resolution proposed to Be ex-
plunged, was, aud untrue, had nothing to do with
his duty in the PRESENT case, and could not, in any
degree, influence his vote. The Senate bad no
power to expunge the journals. He could, without
The least difficulty, vote upon the journals Of the 4
present session. resolution scind that o. 1884,
% to affirm contrary proposition This, while it
would clearly assert the opinion Of the Senate in
relation to tho proceedings Of 1884, would not OBJ