The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-10-28

thing improper or any evidence of those intentions
which are imputed to him by the writers OF the Mani
festo.
For these reasons the President could not concur
with the majority in Congress. In this insist that
he acted consistently and according the best of his
ability II be erred IL is impossible for the reasons
stated by him IN the Veto Message to suppose he de-
cided TO reject the Bank bill from improper consdera
TONS since he could have no possible motive for a
piece Of conduct so shameful and at the same time so
wen calculated to give offence to his political friends
In point SO liable to Misrepresentation and nisrepre
sentatlon and so likely be used as a means Of ex-
citing public odum against him. it is far more proba
pie tna mad he been capable Of bending his consltu-
tionai opinions TO other motives he would have sane
TONED the bill to charter National Bank.
The President had sworn TO support the Constitu-
ton of the United States and 10 perform all the duties
OF his ONCE according the laws of the United States
II in deciding the legislation of the Federal Gov
eminent to be violation Of the Constitution the Pre-
sdent performed his duty he ought not to be CHARGED
win being guilty OF improper conduct. But we will
rest his conduct upon the ground of analogy
What, then, is the whole amount of The crime of
the Chief Magistrate on this occasion That he, al
the head Of the Government, with whom the Constr
tuition has lodged the important Veto power has had
holiness enough TO form opinion upon grave
constitutional ques ton that CELEBRATION
from full consideration, both Of the precedent esab
ished by his predecessors and the principles involved
70 refuse his appreciation 10 bill bills, which he
believed to trench upon and overthrow the Cons uon
IL II not the full measure and amount Of the Presi-
dents crime If the President has right to have
any opinion of his own in the matter and il the opn
ION ne formed was correct one, and il is admitted or
at least not denied by many where or whence sprnps
the charge that he acted from improper motives The
opinions he advanced in his Veto message have re-
ceived the sanction of great number of his fellow
citizens But admitting his opinions to be erroneous
and who, at sometime other has not erred Quon-
do quidem HoDierius ipse dormit-wI YOU establish
the doctrine that his Intentions were impure? We
view the question upon the ground Of analogy. l.
ignorance OF law in Judge, the ground upon which
| correct motfres TO be inferred
This, as general principle, cannot be admitted
Miserable would be the condition of Judge if error
of Judgment was construed into corruption. Called
INTO office TO decide complicated cases. arising from the
confctlng views ofndivduals 10 punish the crimes and
the vianles Of mankind more cannot be required Of
HIM than that he should carry to the judgment not
talents, but clear head and pure heart Then,
upon the doctrine of analogy, the reasoning of the
Manifesto is inconcusve Ii this principle be defensi-
Bile when applied to the case of judge upon what in
telligibe prime pie will il be excluded in cases of anal
ogous characters Ii the President, is but mere man
and, from the mperection of human nature must be
incident its railties-in what code is he Ia be
deemed infallibe} By what means is he to become
so2
We will not inquire whether on abstract principle
This doctrine was correct The inquiry is unnecessary
for the present purpose. Should il ever become ne
cessary, we prepared to the question and en-
terrain opinions concerning it which are ready to
asow and maintain. Ii is sufficient for the present
purpose, and must be well known to the members of
Congress, that the President always maintained The
doctrine that he could not sign bill that contained the
provisions of forcing branches within the jurisdiction
of a sovereign State, without their assent and the
power to discount local paper--on all occasions he
manifested fixed determination recede from these
points.
In support Of the first assertion we refer to the bill
reported to the Senate by Mr. Ewing and the deyel-
opments Of The seeding ministers In support OF the
second Mr.. Ewing expressly declares that the Presi
dent SAID that he could not sanction any II that al
lowed the corporation to deal in local paper
The authors of the Manifesto assume that Mr.. Ty-
Ter intended to sign the bill chartering banking
poration and from that assumption OF intention they
assume that as he has refused to sanction the bill that
improper influence directed his judgment. From
these, his assumptions they infer that he operated
upon by gcprehensible considerations There is no
evidence to support either of the assumptions. The
intention to sign the bill with the discounting and
branching powers not being proved, the differences
which they have deduced the views which prompt.
ed him to return the bill TO Congress could be proved
10 have existed The writers oft is address, therefore,
do not prove that which TO be demonstrated They
however must be admired, not for making out their
case but for the ingenuity of then deductions from as
sumed pemises-we must consider these rather as ex-
hbtions Of the general ability Of the authors than as
| evlctlons oftruth undertaken to be proved
In respect to Mr. Kennedy, that modesty or elo-
quence is prominent among his political virtues, or
that his character novel. writer likely to be di.
mnshed by nfusons of talent into his cellaneous
writings OF him him it will never be said,
+" How sweet an Ovid was in Murray lost /"
Here let us pause. Let bear in mind the testI-
mony in the case and having done So where is the
evidence TO convict the President of having acted
from improper views 2 Have the authors of this ac-
| eusation named the witness Have they 20 nted to
the proof on which they rely No and for the best
OF possible reasons because there is none to Justify
the Charge there Is not shadow of proof in support
of II not hint, not enumeration unless it is TO
O ne mi IF thp adj
dress themselves, and in differences which they draw
from unsupported facts. We would not pay so i'll a
compliment to their talents to suppose that these
charges were not framed with view TO particular
proofs nor can we suppose seeing many gentlemen
OF distinguished abilities connected with this address
that they have not adduced the strongest proof in sup
port of their allegation As, therefore, they have not
| condescended to point out any Witness who in man
ne goes to prove that Mr. Tyler acted from the views
imputed to him, call on them TO respond TO satisfy
you OF this fact to satisfy common country,
whose high name is used, and let the world determine
between us.
state of irritation which then existed in every part OF
the Union, on the subject of Bank nor of that *
treme offence which must be given by any conduct OF
his, in regard 10 the application of his qualified mega
tive lie could not be ignorant that the rejection OF
the Bank charters extremely capable of being
tortured to his injury, and would hardly fail
sumo that appearance in the state of political feeling
which then existed. He is admitted on all hands to
be man of sense and would man of sense with
out strong motive, nit deliberately an act so
likely to blow up a flame of resentment nganst him
self and those with whom he was connected.
What motive could the President have for reject.
ing, improperly, this charters To secure the support
of his personal friends No for he equally sure
of that, without the rejeciion To concia,e the con
tdence of his political adversaries Mo- he incurred
their dspeasure by the repeal of their favore measure
the Sub-,reasury bill. II then he rejected this mca-
sure believing it to be conrsrent to the high com.
mandnents of the Constitution, he committed the &C,
without improper motive or object.
Had he been actuated by the intention of lending
his influence to the formation of a new party as il is