The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-08-18

VI
subsequent period OF h's session, he urged Con
gress In special Message, the inability of the Trea-
suy To meet the demands created against by appro-
priations which Congress had made the necessity OF
providing adequate means 10 sustain the Government
by an increase of duties ON imports and every other
means within their power. He also recommended the
repeal of the Distribution act and a pledge of the
land fund for the redemption of the public debt
Though less than half of the Sl2 900 loan autho-
rzed by the act of lS4l had been taken and though
Congress found itself, at early period of this
sion, under The necessity of authorizing issue OF
IS 00 900 of Treasury addition to the loan
OF $i2,OOOOOO, yet no revenue bill reported un-
I'll the Sd day OF June, 1912 after Congress had
been in session SIX months, and when the country
was looking anxIously for adjournment. Con-
gress had gone meanwhile TO appropriate many
millions Of dollars which the Government did not
possess, and which II could not obtain without the
agency of the Legislative department. The Revenue
bill reported the 3D. of june and taken up for
the fret time in Committee ofthe Whole, on the 9Th
of June.
under the Compromise of 1888, to take effect on
the Both of June and then the distribution under the
act OF lo4l was to commence, provided the duties
were not raised beyond twenty per cent. On the 7h
of June, the Committee Of Ways and Means, which
had reported the Revenue bill OF the Sd, brought in
what was called Provisional bill, the ostensibIe OBJ
ect of which was to provide for temporary collec-
ZION odutles until time would be afforded for the pas
sage of the general Revenue bill The necessity for
some such measure was alleged 10 exist account OF
doubt whether duties could be collected after the
Both of June, without additional legislation. The
Revenue bill provided for general increase of duties
beyond twenty per cent and its passage would
sary have enforced the suspendng clause Of the Dis
ribuon act The provisional bill, reported on the
7th of June, contained reference TO this suspend
ing clause Of the Distribution act. On the 9th OF
June, second provisional bill was reported from the
Committee of Ways and Means, with the same gen.
eral objects the first which had been reported only
two days before, and with poVi.o repeating the
pending clause of the Distribution act The first pro-
visiona bill never considered. The second was
passed by The House the 18th of June, the
Senate, returned with amendments which were con-
Cured in on the 18th Of June, and returned by
the Presden! with objections on the 18th of June.
These objections founded on the depOrable con-
dlion of tie Treasury and on the expediency of ad
herring, under the circumstances, to the terms on
which distribution had been authorized Ivy the act of
lS4l The Revenue bill did not pass until the 9Th Of
August. 1t returned with the Presidents obj &C.
tons on the 9th.
These objections are now before the committee.
They are substantially the same those which
companied he provisional bill only on the 18th of
June. The Revenue bill contained clause mos. UNI
equlvocally repeating the suspension of the Disribu
ton ACT which its own passage would have enforced
and thus 1t was in effect the enactment of dis
trlbuton law appended to the Revenue bill. Each
House deliberately refused strike out this clause
and persisted assocating, in ludcrous contrast
measures: the an act 10 raise money for the sup
port of Government by the imposition of taxes, the
other to distrbut the land revenues to the States
The majority Of both Houses had proclaimed, with
the of the President in September, l84l
that distribution should only be made when the duties
were below twenty per cent. The majority of both
Houses had again and again proclaimed, in 1872 the
necessity of raising the duties above twenty per cent;
and yet they insisted distributing the land fund
without regard the conditions they themselves had
recently proclaimed without regard to the situation
OF the Treasury, and without regard to the burdens
which might be imposed on the People. They might
have attempted to raise revenue from imports and to
distribute he land fund in separate bills. Then each
measure would have rested on its intrinsic merits
But they persisted in connecting them in one bill
The restriction in the Distribution act of l84I
designed to guard against increasing the burdens of
taxation to fill vacuum which might be occasioned by
distribution. The legislation Of 1872 is designed to
cIeate vacuum that 1t may be filled by increased tax
alton There is probably precedent in the history Of
any government for the union, under such circum
stances, of revenue and an appropriation bill. AS
there was no necessity for such union appa-
rent to the public at liberty to infer, that
resulted from consciousness that both the
measures could not have separately commanded a
majority The eXgencies of the National Treasury
were supposed to furnish favorable opportunity for
Congress to extort terms which alone the Govern
nent should be supplied with revenue to meet their
II,
under tue circumstances, for Congress 10 annex a
charter Tor bank, or fiscal agent, or fiscal cor
poratiOn, as condition precedent to revenue bill,
and to raise issue with the President or with their
constituents, if such bill had not received the Exc
cutive sanction.
1t is great mistake to suppose that there an issue be-
tween the majority of Congress and the President
There is an issue between this same majority in l84l
and in 1912 The President abides by terms which
this majority prescribed for themselves and the
Treasury in le4l, and they can prefer no accusation
against him for adhering to their own position. He
might with more propriety upbraid them for aban-
doning it. The issue is between this majority and
the country. They who arraign the President for
obstructing the will of Congress should be well as
sured that Congress does not obstruct the will Of the
States and the people it represents. Congress nei
Their infalble nor irresponsible. If this ques-
ton in which none felt any interest besides the Presi
dent OF the United States and members of Congress-
there might be some pausbility in the attempt to
narrow the issue to them. But the sunect Of reve-
nue. is one In which those who pay apt to feel as
deep interest those who levy taxes Every cit
zen Of the United States, moreover feels solcitude
and all that concerns it in the Government in the
fundamental principles on which it is based in the
measures which characterize its Administration in
its justice, its faith and its fame and the Judgment
OF no impartial man can be blended BIASED by the
effort to conceal the true points of this ISSUE under
cover Of apathy, political alteration between party
majority in Congress and the President. The Presi-
dent has either assumed power which does belong
to his office, or he has abused power which does
not belong to it. 1t has not been denied that the
power in question exists under the Constitution;
deed it has been proposed to abolish it by amend
ment If it has been abused, it was done either cor
ruptly and wantony, or under error of Executive
judgment If there is evidence of the least corrup-
lion in the Presidents conduct he should be impeach
ed. The power of impeachment has been confined
to the House of Representatives 1t is the duty,
therefore, of the majority who the President
to arragn him uLder articles of impeachment before
the Senate if they believe him to be guilty of any
Improbable offence If he has neither assumed
power, abused it corrupty, then the issue dwin
dies to mere question who is right as to a measure
of policy If the undersigned were allowed by the
circumstances which compel him to omit many con-
sderations very proper to the subject, he would moi
i,,do