The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-08-24

THE ALTERNATIVES.


disrespect, or to discuss any topic hut with good
temper. Mr. Clay endeavored TO set us this
example in his review Of the Veto Message
And although we feel constrained to notice the
alternatives he presented, which he thought
might have occurred to President Tyler as pre-
terable 10 the Veto, yet il is not done in the
slightest spirit of unkndness to him. But Mr..
Clay has lived 100 long, performed too much ser
vice, and achieved too lofty fame, TO be reach
ed or affected, in any manner, either by our hos
tility or our friendship. He can afford 10 be in
different alike TO our praise and our censure.
Let us therefore look at these alternatives in
spirit Of candor and freedom. Are they just,
are they reasonable? Could Mr. Clay himself,
at the moment, have been fully conscious Of the
plain meaning and tendency Of his suggestions
Could any one have drawn any other inference,
but that il was meant that the President ought
TO have kept the Bank bill ten days, and ought
even to have resigned rather than resort to the
Veto? Did not the bare putting them forth as
alternatives, without any argument TO give them
preference over the Veto, or TO show how pro-
perly and consistently the President might have
adopted them, of ITSELF necessarily imply that
they were more proper and defensible than the
Veto2 How else could they have been alter
natives2 If alternatives comprehend wrong
and inadmissble things, then every man, in
every thing he does, has numerous alternatives.
HIS purpose, as avowed, was to show that the
President was not obliged TO veto the BILL To
show this, he must show there were other
things, which, as alternatives, were presented
10 the President, which he might properly do,
and more properly do, than resort TO the Veto
TO show that there were other things which he
could have done, but not proper to be done, was
showing no alternative for that man surely
has no alternative who must do what he does,
something worse. He only has an alterna-
tive who has something else which he can do,
which is better than what he does. The Presi-
dent could have thrown the bill in the fire, but il
would sound strangely to say he had that as an
alternative.
And now let US examine these alternatives
The first is, that the President could have kept
the bill unobjeced to for ten days, so that ii
would have become law without his sigma
ture
We suppose no mans passions can SO blind
him as TO make him think that, by such course,
any degree of responsibility was avoided. The
Presidents oath binds him, 'to the best of his
ability" TO 'preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution" All have agreed, always, what
ever they may have thought of the Veto, that it
must be applied TO an unconstitutional act. The
crime Of President, the violation OF his oath,
consists in his suffering an act TO become law
which violates the Constitution,-not in his
signing it for whether he allows The violation,
by signing the act, or by keeping it, is perfectly
immaterial. He does not ''preserve, protect,
and defend" the Constitution, "to the best OF his
ablity,n who allows il to be violated, when he is
armed with the power to prevent it-a power ex-
pressly given to him that he may prevent it.:
and whether he allows the violation by one way
or another, the guilt Of the violation and bro
ken oath rest upon his conscience forever.
1t is not possible that Mr. Clay can deliberately
defend such construction OF the constitutional
obligations OF President-we are sure he wonld
see that it is ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS it destroys the
sanction Of oaths--is disre spectlul in the highest
degree to the President, and to the Constitution.
No, it must have been the language OF excite
ment. He cannot have desired that the Presl-
dent should have done an act disgracing his
high office, and the nation, and the Consttu-
ton, which would have added TO the guilt of a
violated oath, the ignominy of confessing that
he did il knowingly and wilfully. He would
not deal thus with his own oath. He has sworn to
support the Constitution, an oath, not in the same
words, but of the same import with the oath OF
the President.
Ii a law violating in his judgment, the Con-
stitution, was on It's passage in the Senate,
what would he say TO the who should dare
to propose TO him, as an alternative, in lieu of
voting for it, TO go out and 1T 1t pass
Then, as to the other alternative, presented to
the option of The President. He could have re-
signed his station Would not this be substan-
italy doing the same thing, as signing the bill
or keeping il the ten days 1t would be allow
inr the Con ,tution to be violated, when he
could have prevented il, in face of an oath,
obliging him to ''preserve, protect and Defend
il "A 10 the best Of his ability" He had been
elected by the people Vice President, with the
contingency of being President. The contin-
gency occurs, and he is called to this high Of
fce-accepts it and takes the oath. How could
he, without disgrace, well as guilt, resign, TO
let alaN pass, which, he believed, violated the
Constitution
But Mr. Clay thinks the principle Of obeying
instructions applied, and thus put the alterna-
tive of resignation properly before the President.
Admitting (only for the sake of argument) the
applicability of the principle, we may ask where