Daily American telegraph., 1852-07-13
should Cen. scott Rsslgn :

4
the following article from the Philadelphia Ledger,
a. independent journal, but sometimes accused
of Democratic afinties:
Some of the newspapers are calling very earn
estly upon General Scott TO resign his commission
IN the army and, as pressing reasons for this
step, they refer to designations by others while
candidates for the Presidency. We recollect no
case, excepting that of General Taylor, who was
the first General in commission ever nominated TO
that office. Neither General Washington, nor
General jackson, nor General Harrison, nor
General Cass, was in military commission when
so nominated. And we do not regard the case
OF General Taylor as affordng rule for any
other candidate. He acted upon his opinion, and
had sufficient motives for resignation. If other
generals entertain a different opinion upon the
subject, and have no sufficient motive to such
step, we cannot comprehend why they should re-
gard Gen. Taylors step as precedent, and still
less as law, Other generals have right to
act upon their opinions equal to that possessed
by General Taylor; and we know not why they
should be censured for taking their choice, more
han he was. Nobody censured General Taylor
for resigning his commission, or would have had
right to censure him for retaining it till after
his election. Why is the same latitude denied to
Gen. Scott?
Any officer, civil or military, is eligible to the
Presidency Civil officers have been candidates
without resigning their Office Mr.. Adams, while
a candidate, was Secretary of State Mr.. CAL
houn, while a candidate, was Secretary of War
Mr.. Crawford, while candidate, was Secretary
Of the Navy Mr.. Clay, while a candidate, was
Speaker of the House. General jackson, while
a candidate, was Senator. These Offices did not
render them ineligible, and their respective nom
nations did not induce either of them to resign
Candidates for the Vice Presidency by dozens
have been selected from those holding Office at
the time of their respective nominations. Yet
none of them felt under any obligation to resign
in consequence of such nomination. II, then, civil
Office may be held by candidates for the Presi-
dency or Vice Presidency, why may not military
office, when the constitution does not make any
office an inpediment? The constitution does not
allow the President to hold any other civil office
or any other military Office than the chief COM
mand of the army and navy and it imposes such
chief command upon him. And it makes the
Vice President the presiding officer of the Senate
though it restrains him from holding any other
Office. But as a candidate is not President or
Vice President till after election, these consttu-
tional prohibitions do not operate upon candi-
dates. The holder of any other Office, civil or
military, must resign it before he can be inaugu-
rated as President or Vice President. But he is
not required, by either constitution or statute,
to resign it before such Inauguration.
Why, then should General Scott be required
eXpeCueu 10 resign MS COMMISSION because he
is candidate for the Presidency? Those who
make the demand may plead custom. But Gus
tom is not law or constitution in such cases, and
we have already proved that, in such cases, no
such custom has existed. General Taylor's case
is the only one that can be cited: one example is
not sufficient to establish custom, and such Gus
tom is not binding. Mr.. Graham is quoted for
his recent resignation as an example to General
Scott. Mr.. Graham, doubtless, had good rea-
sons for this step. But not considering him
under any obligation to it. we do not participate
in the eulogies which some bestow upon him for
it. and probably for the purpose of operating
upon General Scott. If he had remained in the
Cabinet till after election, no enlightened and
honest minds would have censured him for it.
and simply because his SO remaining involved
no illegality or impropriety. Why then, should
he be SO loudly praised for an act of which the
omission would have involved no wrong? Such
praises seem to be rather too loud, and too much
connected with the call upon Gen. Scott to fol-
low the example, to be prompted by any honest
| motive. We therefore hope and trust that Gen.
Scott will not resign his commission till after the
election, nor then, if he be not elected. In the
first case, the nation will loose good Major
General, but will probably gain good President
In the second case, the nation will still have
good Major General in Gen. Scott, and doubtless
| a good President in somebody else If he resigns
before election, the nation may lose him entirely;
and he is too valuable as military officer to be
lost without an equivalent in some other respon-
sible position. Therefore, let him be kept where
he is at least, if not destined to the Presidency
Perhaps those who are so eager for his resignation
have an interest in helping somebody else 10 his CON-
mission.