The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-08-02

The history Of the Senate exhibits no parallel 10
the Of that body during the last sessions Of
Congress. II has been well termed faclious body.
The great interests of the country have been lost
sight Of 10 giving Indulgence to individual preju-
dices-a advancing the aspirations of certain mem
beers, and in uniting its action with future political
movements. frf iati
There wa, a time when the American Senate was
oi.y-toned, dgni6ed body-when nought but what
was calculated to uphold the honor and dignity OF
the country occupied its proceedings. How does the
action OF the Senate during the last two sessions
compare with that of those days.
The movements of the present Senate have been
arrsyed against the Executive in almost every man
ner possible. They have sought TO embarrass him
and cast obstacles in the way of his administering
the Government. They have, by implication,
charged him with dishonesty and falsehood. lie has
been pronounced the floor Of the Senate with be-
ing guilty Of piracy and fitting out pracai exped-
tions-of having lent himself and exerted the pow
eu of the Executive to advance the interests of land
spectators and dealers in scrip These few Of
the allegations made against John Tyler on the floor
Of the Senate not one of which could those who
made them adduce the smallest particle Of evidence
to subsaptiate. The Wing party in the Senate, as
well as some of the Democratic members, were jea-
Gus Of President Tyler. They sought to prejudice
the public mind against him-cestroy confidence IN
him, and thus effect the object that has for a long
time past, directed their action, 10 break him down.
One of the most sacred rules of the Senate has
been violated, and the odium attached to such a
transaction attempted to be fastened on innocent in
dividuals. The Globe endeavored to screen the
transgressor by imputing to US the offence.
It is strongly suspected that of the Senators
held free and unrestraned intercourse with the repre-
sentatives ofsome of the foreign powers Crcumstan
Cos justify such suspicion. The declaration of Sir r.
Peel. of some the British prints, and of the Mex
lean Minister of Foreign Affairs, shows clearly that
they had BEEN well informed Of what would be the
fate of the Texan Treaty. in the Senate, long prior
to the final action of that body took place.
10 the rejection of the Texan and Zoll verein
Treaties the Senate wholly dsregarde the great in
teresis Of the country, in their deep rooted hostility
TO- and Jealousy of Mr.. Tyler. They resolved
that he should not have the merit of concentrating
either. BY the rejection Of the Texas Treaty, the
"golden moment" may have passed by forever of ac-
quiring that country peaceaby The possession Of the
sovereignty that country necessary to the
rity Of Of institutions and the safety of
portions of the Union. So strongly will these consi-
derations be made apparent, ere long, that this
try will find itself compelled to obtain the possession
and control over that country, even al the cost of
millions Of treasure and streams of blood.
The Zoil verein Treaty contained provisions of
mutual recprosy il either party had the advantage,
it was on our side 1t had been negotiated after
n n. ,oC, bo IN;
at Berlin, backed by all the influence Of our own Go
vsrnment This Treaty provided new and important
advantages to the producers Of some of most i'm
portsnt staples. The growers Of tobacco, rice, and
cotton, and the dealers in lard, would have derived
great and essential benefits under its provisions
Great and important were the interests embraced
in this Treaty the Senate did not even consider IT,
they laid it on the table on the simple report Of one
Of its committees. FL.
The Senate has, by its action, sought to deprive
the Executive of Of his constitutional powers.
In his hands is lodged the appointing power, "by and
with the advice and consent Of the Senate" The
trainers Of the Constitution intended this undoubt-
eddy, az mere supervisory power. Many of the
members of the convention that framed the Consti-
tuition were strong advocates of leaving all appoint
ing to the Senate any participation whatever in
them
The Senate have denied to MIR. Tyler the prvi-
lege Of selecting his confidential advisers In
four instances those W HON he first selected and nom
mated TO the Senate to aid him in sdm terng the
Affairs Of tho Government that body rejected. Ia
consequence, in some cases at the last moment Mr.
Tyler was left TO select, the Instant without time
for reflection, some indiy TO Office in the place
of those who had been rejecied.
Such proceedings were unheard Of until the year
1884, when a Wing Senate rejected Mr.. fancy,
Chief Justice OF the United States. The Jour
nal Of the Senate in Executive session was never
before stained by such outrsges. In former tunes
the only inquiry with the Senate when the name Of
ind ividual was sen, to tina, body by the Esecu-
live, was, "ls he capable is he honestln-
The individuals, whom Mr. Tyler nominated as his
advisors, and rejected by the Senate, have the
confidence Of their countrymen. No one, where
they are known, questions their capsbility OF their
honesty. The Senate has acted lncopsistently and
without, any 6red principle. They have confirmed to
equally important and responsible stations Of those
whom they had previously rejected. The number
Of reflections OF nominations to subordinate appoint
inents IS almost innumersble. Two and three, for
the same office, have, in succession been rejected.
The Senate, in fact sought to become the appointing
power and make the Executive subordinate TO hem.
To these epcroaohments Of a recusant Senate we
have to add dereliction OF duty. The Senate left
FIVE States Of the Union unprovided with the Judi
eisl tribunals provided for in the Constitution. Two
judicial circuits, made vacant by the death Of the
Ii. tho 10 a.,