New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-01-29
REPRESENTATIVE AND PEOPLE.

TIE Courier ard Enquirer of yesterday makes
the recent protest of some OF Mr. Brentons con-
stuents the occasion for denying the responsibility
of the Representative TO those who elect him.
The facts in the case of Mr.. Brenton seem to be
that having been elected to Congress as a Jealous
Anti-Nebraska man, he for a time voted with the
body of the Anti-Nebraska representatives for the
candidate for Speaker whom they had decided to
support; lut on the 9TH inst, without any con-
sultatiOn with the others, he declared that he
should vote for Mr.. Banks no longer, and to that
declaration he steadily adhered voting now for
Mr. Bennett and now for Mr.. Thurston, until the
18th inst. when he decided to return to the candi
date of his party, whom he has since continued to
support.
The declaration thus made by Mr. Brenton on the
9TH inst. was duly recorded in THE TRIBUNE, as
was his subsequent action in accordance with it; and
some of his constituents, feeling that an expression
of their sentiments was proper in the case, drew
up and signed the protest which appeared in our
columns on Friday last In publishing it, having
failed to notice the last change in Mr.. Brenton's
position we proceeded TO sustain the remonstrance
of bis constituents with severity of remark which,
however natural in view of the great confidence
that had been placed in Mr.. Brenon by his cOnstit-
uents and by the Republicans generally, was not
appropriate, considering that he bad already re-
turned to the path of duty, and was now steadily
cooperating with his colleagues for the triumph of
the common cause. This error we corrected yes
terday by prominently giving place to letter in
which the facts were correctly stated; and had
The Courier merely repeated the same correction,
We should have had nothing to say against it.
Bat The Courier Omits this duty to give its at
tention exclusively to two other points, in regard
TO both of which it seems to be altogether ia the
wrong. In the first place it says that the proceed
ing of the citizens Of Indiana was impertnent,
the people having no right to rebuke their repre-
sentatives OF call them to any other account than
through the ballot-bcx, in case they should seek
reelection. This is preposterOus. The people
have perfect right TO canvass the acts of public
official at any time and in any manner they may
see fit They may pronounce upon them in pri-
yate conversation, in public meetings in letters, in
the newspapers, or in any other orderly manner.
If Representative prOcures his election as the
adherent of one line of policy, and afterward for
sakes it for another, everybody has the right to
have an opinion on his course, and to express it.
This is a responsibility no public man need think
of escaping-an "impertinenee" long practiced,
and sure to continue in vogue in spite OF The
Courier.
But our contemporary alleges that the constitu-
ents of Mr.. Brenton were specially guilty of i'm
pertinence because they based their protest on in
formation derived from the columns of THE TRIB-
UNE, and because they ventured to object to his
deserving Mr.. Banks. In our view on the other
hand if there is any impertinence in the case, it is
on the part of The Courier, which ventures TO
descant on what it does not understand. The in
formation in question was not, as our contemporary
alleges the mere assertion Of this Journal but the
declaration of the honorable Member himself, il
Illustrated by the Congressional proceedings for FIVE
days subsequently, showing that he had done what
he threatened to do. On such information, we
contend that it is perfectly legitimate for the
stituents of any public official to form and express
an opinion upon his course They may be right in
their judgment or they may be wrong, but it is
judgment which cannot be suppressed and ought
not 10 be. Nor does il interfere with the proper
independence of the Representative, for he acts as
he deems advisable after all. In the present case
the correctness of such judgment is admitted in the
most decided manner for, even before it had come
to his knowledge, Mr.. Brenton had adopted the
line of conduct which it suggested and our only
regret in the matter is that it should have become
public after the occasion for it had been removed