The Cadiz sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 184?-1851, 1844-07-03
HENRY CLAY AND GHE RIGHT OF
INSTRUCTION.
The Presidential Election of 1925 and
the Bankrupt law of 1871.
lBY AMOS KENDALL

INA AHeIe WaSho popular doctrine 10 which
ne did not subscribe. He was always for the
People and Nth the People; and we believe i'll
was some distinguished EnglIshman who called
him ''the great Commoner"
NO man went further in inculcating the duty
OF obedience TO the will of the People by their
servants IN Congress and the Legislatures of the
States, or was more prompt in denounciug and
attempting 10 punish delinquent Senators and
Representatives. In 1911 the will of the State
OF Kentucky was clearly expressed against re-
chariering the old Bank of The United States ::
but John Pope, then Mr. Clay's colleague in the
United States Senate, d,sobeyed the instructions,
and voted for the recharter For that act Mr..
Clay and his friends but him down in Kentucky,
though man ofeXcellent talents and better char
acter than his rival
Although Mr. Clay afterwards went over to the
Bank, ne continued to profess the same faith on
the subject OF instructions, both popular and leg,
islative. He voted for the celebrated Compen-
satlon Bill at the session of Congress in I8l5-16,
and for its repeal at the succeeding session. The
reason he gave for this change was the sUU of his
Constituents In speech which may be found
IN the National lnelHgencer of 1917, he thus laid
down the doctrine ofinsructions, as he recogui-
sed it both in theory and practice, viz:
"Mr. Clay said he agreed perfectly in the SEN
llment, that instructions given by the People are
obligatory on the Representatives. This was
principle consecrated by the Revolution, ia8ep-
cradle from all free gopernment, and which he
therefore hoped never to see departed from, in
practice, under ours. Whilst, then, he had seat
on this floor, Mr.. c. said, it was immaterial ho7c
he arrived at the will of his constituents, or what
were the erideaccS of it it was sufficient that he
should know it. In all cases of cxpedency, he
held the doctrine of an obligation on his part to
observe the instructions, expressed or implied, of
his constituents"
But Mr. Clay was ambitious to be President.
lie had seen the Secretary of State succeed to
the Presidency, until he looked upon it as the
established order Of succession. He thought he
should be secure Of the prize, if he could but
place himselfin the line of "safo precedcnts,' >
as he himself called that position in 1925.
When, by the result Of the electoral election
in 1924, it was found that the contest in the
House OF Representatives, woud rest between
Andrew jackson and John @. Adams, the Leg.
isature OF Kentucky, by an Overwhelming major
ity, adopted the following resolutions, viz:
"ReSotDed &c. Thai the members of the
House of Representatives in the Congress of the
United States, from this State, be requested tc
vote for General Andrew Jackson as President
of the United State.
"Rcsotped, as the opinion Of this legislature
That Gen. Andrew Jackson is the second choice
of the State of Kentucky for the next President
of the United States; that a very large majority
of the people ofthis State prefer General Jackson
10 MIR. Adams or Mr. Crawford, and that the
members Of the House of Representatives in the
Congress of the United States VIII, by comply
ing with the request herein signfed, faithfully
and truly represent tho feelings and wishes o
the good people ofKeniuciyn
What said Mr., Clay? In letter 10 frienc
in Virginia, dated 18th Feb. 1925, and published
in the National Journal of 29th April, 1928. he
said:
"Nhat do you desire? That | should vote 70
Mr. Crawford! | cannot. For Gen jackson?
WILL NOTr
Sulting the action to the word he voted 70
MIR. Adams; and by his vote and influence made
him President, and received the office of Sccre
tary of State at his hands.
1t was TdE WILL OF Mr.. CLAY, not tn
1ciH Of Kentucky, which gave her vote to Mr.
Adams, and gave President 10 the nation
Whatever weight might be given 10 Mr.. Clay
excuses for his fragrant violation of the will anc
wishes of his State, in giving her vote for Mr.
Adams in 1928, there is u more recent case il
which he stands without the shadow of an apollo
gy. Since that time, he has recognised the doc
trine of instructions in its fullest extent. On th
i4th January, 1889, certain resolutions of th
North Carolina Legislature were presented 4
the United States Senate, of which Mr.. Cav wa
then member, requesting their Senators to vot
for resembling the expungng resolution, for thu
distribution OF the land money, &c. with whic
The Senators from that State refused TO comply
Mr. Clay gratuitously took them TO task, and /
short speech, reported in the National Inle
gencer Of Jan. l6, 1889, thus laid down fhe doc
tfine offnstructions, viz:
Sand what is the doctrine Of instructions, a
it's held by al2 lsitnot that we arc to confon
10 the wishes of our constituents? Is it not thu
We are TO act, not in onr own, but in delegate
character! And will any who stands here plC
tend that, whenever they know the wishes an
will OF those who sent them here, they are NJ
bound to conform TO that will entirely? Is NJ
the doctrine thatwe are nothing more than III
mirror to reflect the will ofthoso who called 1
TO our dgnifed Office? This is the view whic
! take oithe doctrine Of Instructions
sand now ask, is any peculiar language n
cessary, other than that by which the will ofo
constituents may be understood and carried on
Is there but one word that viii answer-no OF
er word bnt the word instruct? Is there no Ia
guage tanamount 10 that? II the Legsatu
simply express their willis that not an cqui,
lent word to instruct? Nay, more; is tnotmo
respectful 70 those receiving The instructions,
avoid than tonso tho word mshuctions?
sand itappears to me, That IL the legIslatr
have the right, and choose 10 give instruction
i is no matter ii what words or language tho
instructions arc given and should feel mys