The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-09-04
HE MADISONIAN.
ExECUrIvE POWER AGAIN.

THE MADISONIAN.
EXECUTIVE POWER AGAIN.
There would be no use of any Cabinet at all ifthe
Secretaries were but instruments of the Presidential
will Il is their duty to advise him freely all sub
ects; il is his to hear their advice and follow
rule il as he shall think proper"
The above is a portion of an article copied by
the National Intelligencer of yesterday morning,
from the New York Tribune, and pronounced
by the former to be "very just and sensible re-
marks" After the recent full and fair exposition
we have given of the relations of the President
and the Cabinet, we confess we are surprised at
the reappearance Of such doctrines in the Intell-
gencer. We defy any man to find any thing either
in the law or the Constitution to justify such
theory. We can find no apology for them in
the "indiscretions of young and ardent poll
tician," much less in the inadvertences of men
of age and experience. The Constitution says
the President may call upon the heads Of De-
partments for their opinions in writing, and the
law declares that the heads Of Departments shall
obey his orders and instructions. But the idea
of council is no where recognised among the
legal forms Of our system. II is not the duty of
Secretary to advise the President freely on all
subjects except when called upon--nor is it his
duty to hear the advice however given. Mr..
Madison compares the heads Of Departments to
"eyes and hands" And are they not "inslru-
ments" of the will of their possessor2 Yet if
Mr.. Madison's doctrine be true, there will be,
according to the Intelligencer, g no use for any
Cabinet" .sanaI sT aeisast euL aa aaae9
The Intelligencer has occupied on this subject
an embarrassing position from the beginning
1t first denounced our doctrine of the unity, in
dependence, and responsibility of the Executive
\ as the most odious Of Jacksonisms 1t subsequent
ly retreated from background and admitted the in
dependence Of the Executive to the extent of
denying any right in the Cabinet to control the
| President, but denied also thatthe President was
! responsible for the acts Of the heads Of Depart
ments. 1t now avails itself of the first appa-
rent coincidence Of opinion in any press to adj
vance backwards to occupy in part at least a
ground from whichit was originally driven.
We intimated in former article that the ar
guments and authorities on this subject were by
no means exhausted. As our motives were mis-,
| construed we had hoped that the necessity Of
bringing them forward, either in whole or in
part, would be avoided. We have, however,
received several letters, echoing the Intelligen-
GERS expressions of repugnance to our views of
Executive unity, independence, and response
bilily, which will furnish us sufficient apology
for showing that they had their origin long be-
fore Jacksonism or Anti Jacksonism was heard
Of ... .ta t,a.sr 4. .>@ ;1aaane @a @a& ,#L##
In the debates of the Convention in 1889, Mr..
Madison said: II is evidently the intention of
the Constitution that the First Magistrate should
be responsible for the Executive Departments"
"The principle of UNITY and RESPONSIBILITY in
the Executive Departments is intended for the
security ofliberty and the public good" @a@
Mr.. Lawrence said: SIN the Constitution,
the Heads of Departments are considered as
the mere assistants Of the President in the
/ performance of Executive duties" s
Mr.. Ames said: "The Executive powers are
delegated to the President with a view to have
a responsible officer 10 superintend, control, in
spect, and check the officers necessarily employ
ed in administering the law"
In letter addressed by Mr.. Jefferson to M.
de Tracy, on the question of plural or single
Executive he declared a decided preference for
the latter; and, after appealing to the French
Directory to show the evils and disadvantages
of the former, he says: 6 The failure of the
French Directory, and from the same cause,
seems to have authorized belief that the form
of plurality, however promising in theory, is
| impracticable, with men constituted with the or
binary passions" . ~. ." ~"
| l.aer'aI 5a trf* @"'*
90 Aided by the counsels of Cabinet of
Heads of Departments originally four, but
| now five-with whom the American President
consults, either singy or all together, he has the
benefit of their wisdom and information, brings
| their views to one centre, and produces an UNITY
of action and direction in all the branches OF the
Government" A. ~i:... .-.
| In the circular addressed by Mr.. Jefferson to
the Heads of Departments, in 1901, he reviews
the practice of General Washington OF receiv-
| ing communications from the Heads of Depart
ments in relation to the concerns OF their respec
tive offices, and says: "by this imeans he was
always in accurate possession Of all facts and
proceedings in every part of the Union, and to
whatsoever Department they related he formed
central point for the different branches; pre-
served an UNITY of object and action among
them; exercised that participation in the geston
Of affairs which his Office made incumbent upon
him and met himself a due responsibility for
nhateper aods DONE" >"''
In letter addressed by Mr.. Jefferson to Mr..
Hay, U. s.. Attorney at Richmond, he says:
The Constitution intended that the three great
branches of the Government should be ordinate and
independent Of each other. As to acts, therefore,
which to be done by either it has given control
| to another branch" ...