, 1840-03-14
WHOLE NUMBER 3S4.

speech, and the Constitution provides tina
"Congress shall pass NO law abridging th,
freedom Of shsech and Of the press"
This provision in the Constitution was IN
tended for the safety and protection of III.
common citizen who holds NO Office. /
was foreseen that those in office might abxs
their trust, and to protect themselves agains
exposure, might pass the press. Now, il
your resolution, you exactly reverse the
matter, and suppose it wa intended to pro
tect the instruments of the President, who
hold office at his will, in their endeavor.
TO influence & mislead the people in elections
During the administration 0f the elder Mr.
Adams, many complaints were made and
charges urged, both in speeches and through
the press, By the citizens, against him and
those in office under him. With q view 70
silence the citizens, and to maintain ana
shield those tn office, the sedition law wal
passed. The Republicans, ono and all, con.
and they were right in such condemnation.
Your resolution maintains now, exactly tho
same doctrines then advanced by the FEEDER.
alists. They wished to silence the people;
that they might retain their places and pow.
er, and your resolution seeks to allow the
Office holders to 60 forth with all their power
and influence, to mislcad and corrupt the
~people-obtain their votes in election, and
thus retain their Offices with oil their emolu-
menfs.
Does your honorable body intend to af
firm that Congress has no power to regulate
the conduct Of this class Of of6cersi
Are they to be allowed to 20 forth on days
Of election, and with q view to procure
votes for the President or his favoritss, prom
Use money or offices, jobs or contraets, BY
which much money may be made with but
little labori The office holder, in making
these promises to influence voters, would be
using his pouerso Of speech, which the resolution
affims Congress cannot dbridge or lessen. il
the proposition can be maintained, then Con.
gress had better 60 home and yield up every
thing to the President and the corps ,rho hold
office at his pleasure.
We will, after a lite reflection, perceive
that this resolution not only unqualihedly
condemns your Senators for their vote, but
necessarily the conduct and opinions Of 9TH
ers whom the country has most delighted to
honor.
The only reason assigned ia your fssolus
tion why this bill was unconstitutional is,
that it abridged the freedom Of speech.
II you are correct, how dare MI. Jef1erson
s'the Apostle Of Liberty" in his letter to
Governor Mexican, use the language he did
on this subject! Still more, when he came
into office as President, why did he dare to
issue his circular letter. prohibiting this class
Of officers, Oh pain of dismissal, from inter-
fering in elections farther than to give their
own votesf
He was srorn to support the Constitution
and if Congress abridges the freedom Of
speech, secured by this Constitution, by the
enactments proposed in this bill, it follows
clearly that the President IN his circular no
lated the same Prorision, by ~PronouncIng the
like penalty for the like ofencel
ldefy any person to condemn the one
without condemning the other; unless, IN
deed, we suppose there is a class OF politi
clans who believe the Constitution does not,
and ought not to impose any restraint upon
the President.
fear such a sect has lately sprung up.
and is increasing. 1t cannot be too sPssdi-
ly suppressed.
The late President, General Jackson, in
his inaugural address, when "he was fresh
from the people," inculcated the same doc
tririe with Mr.. Jefferson. ITO prevent the
patronage of the Government from being.
brought into conflict with the freedom Of
elections, wasa duty inscribed in characters
too Iegible to be misunderstood" &c. was
the strong language he then used. How
was this duty to be discharged Did we
not, one and all, believe he would discharge
as Mr.. Jefferson had done? II, then,
these Presidents could, without violating the
prohibit these officers from tn
in elections, why could not Con-
yress, by its enactments, prohibit them like
No satisfactory answer can be given is
his question.
The President already had the power
vested in him 10 dismiss these officers at his
and Congress unques.ienably had
he power to limit has discretion, by speci-
wing the cases in which he should exercise
I. II, then, my colleague and I erred on
question Of power, with great defencel
submit that, the company with which our
were associated ought, at least, to-