The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-09-13
From the PhiiadeIphia Ledger.
THE PROTEST.


THE PROTEST.
We are almost daily surprised at the ignorance OF
deliberate violation of fundamental principles, eA-
hbited not only by partisan editors and cohce-house
or stump politicians but by public iunctionaries IN
high places When old Politicians, veteran statesmen,
whose heads have whtened anna the iaoors OF once,
and who are therefore supposed 10 understand tor-
oghy the aaaioay and physiology Of our institutions,
make awkward mistakes in the very rudinents, the
A. b. c. of politics, what can we expect IRON their
los learned followers Yet such mistakes are made
NV tbat political veteran, John Quincy Adams. We
have no right to expect any thing very profound from
MIR Bolts but may well wonder at the occasional po-
Iiticsl plumbers of his veteran coadutor MIR. Adams
both able and learned but is too often the sport of
passions inherited on large scale, and never suf-
fciently restrained.
One of his last oddities, greater than his de-
fence Of the British for numbering the Chinese be-
they would not consent to be poisoned, pay
for the poison, his attack on the President for
refusing to sign the double revenue bill. The veto
being referred TO select committee of which Mr.
Adams was chairman, that committee reported some
resolutions severely censurng the Pres dent for
cising his constitutional right and dschargng his
constitutional duty. This proceeding was gross VI
olaton of the Federal Constitution, for which the
veteran Mr.. Adams responsible. In adopting it,
the House of Representatives left undone the thing
which they ought To have done, and did the thing
which they ought not to have done. The Constitu-
ton says that when the President refuses to sign
ceving it, return il to the House in which it orgina
ted, with his objections; that this House shall mme
diately reconsider it that IT, such reconsidera-
ton shall be passed by majority Of two-thirds of
such House, ii shall be sent to the other House Tor
reconsideration and II, after such reconsideratioit
be passed by majority of two thir OF such House,
it shall become law without the signature OF the
Executive. All this is PLAIN as the English Ian
guagc can speak, and under it, the duty OF the House
OF Representatives upon this occasion could admit OF
dufy of ne
slider the BILL and submit II to the test OF another vote,
and to send it to the Senate if twothirds should vote
for it, Until this done, all reference OF the sub
ect to a seec, committee, or any committee, unless
perhaps committee Of the whole House, was UNI
CONSTITUTIONAL The Constitution expressly declares
what shall be done and until that be done or thorough
ly tried, anything else is unconstitutional.
This extraordinary and unconstitutional proceed
ing, the reference OF the bill TO Select committee,
having been consummated, the President protests
against it, and requests that his protest be entered
upon the Journal of the House This request is re-
fused, and in manner which, 10 us, appears like
studious insult Here too MIR. Adams is chiefly re-
sponsibe. He opposes the Presidents request as an
indignity to the House. Now we wish to know in
what consists ndignity protest against any pro-
ceeding the right of every public functiOnary, and
never of ITSELF implies want of respect or courtesy
or any thing else but difference OF opinion about
right or expediency. 1t may become disrcspectful
through its terms, but this is the fault of the manner
in which the thing is done, and not OF the thing itself
A protest by minority of committee is a frequent
occurrence, but nobody has yet imagined that such
protest was an indignity to the House which appoint
ed the committee. The Judiciary might protect
against an act of Congress restraining its constu-
tlonal rights, or resolution Of either House assa-
ing its own dignity Could that rotest be construed
into an ndignity' Such suppostion contradicts all
governmental practice and experience in protests,
which have never before been regarded as anything
but mode Of expressing difference of opinion
upon right or eXpediency, when no other mode was
left. o
The House had not only violated the Constitution,
but had done il for the very purpose of arraignng
the President. How could the President answer this
The only mode known, according to Constitution or
usage, was the only mode in which he can communi
cate with either House, message-and the Pres dents
messages always entered upon the Journals OF the
House, as part of its proceedings And why should
not the President send message this occasion
He had been dby the House through an uncon-
stitutional proceeding his character as man, and
his conduct as an officer, had been arragned by that
House before the world and he knew and felt that
the accusations were unjust. Must he bear 1t all In
siencei Must he do nothing in his own vindication
This IS too much to require of men who have moral
enough to feel wrongs, and it requires what
ms itutions forbid condemnation without hear
ing He was therefore, bound, in justice to himself
and his country to vindcate himself, and he did in
the only mode authorized by Constitution usage
message to the House which arraigned him Why,
then should not this message be received by the
House, and entered on its Journals, like all other
Executive messages
But MIR. Adams says this is ndignity. The
tone does not render it So for it is frank, manly
vindcation Of his character from unjust imputaons,
and an independent defence of the Constitution, vo-
lated in this assault upon himself. And this assault
upon himself is gross ndignity to the Executive.
And shall the House complain of ndignity, after Of
ferng indignity to another branch of the Govern
ment2 We should be among the very last to sane
ton Executive usurpatons and have sand more against
them than any partisan press which now assails the
President But, while ready to defend the rights OF
the legislature shall defend, with equal zeal and
constancy the rights of the Executive and Judiciary
From the Troy Budget.