Weekly American. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1858-1858, 1858-04-17
SHALL THE EXECUTIVE RULE CON-
GRESS, OR BE MADE TO RESPECT
TdE WILL OF THE PEOPLEf

Il
We have the extraordinary spectacle now
presented to us, of the President and his Cab,
met setting at defiance what is known to be
the will of full two-thirds if not e-fourths,
of the people of the United States, and attempt
ing, by the use Of iattery, threats, solicitation,
and temptations of base character, to in
fiuence the action of the popular branch Of the
National Legislature; and when failing to ac-
complish this, setting its opinions at defiance,
and obstinately persisting in measures thus
emphatically condemned
| Is there no check upon the President and his
Cabinet2 Can they continue to go on in a
course which a large majority Of the nation dis
approve just long as they please setting
public opinion at defancep Surely there should
esome check. The Executive ought, by some
means, to be made to respect public sentiment
and the will of the people. "They manage these
things better in France" They manage these
things better in England, too. There, public
sentiment is brought to bear directly upon the
ministry and when the House Of Commons
corresponding with our House Of Representa-
tives-directy or indirectly, condemns any
Government measure, or when ministers find
themselves in minority upon any important
measure or bill, custom, which has become a
law, requires that they should at once "resign
the seals" and let the Queen form another min
istry. Thus suppose Lord Palmerston, or
any other minister, should bring in bill to
give to Canada representative in Parliament,
and the bill should be, as they express it,
"thrown out" or defeated. If it were gov
eminent, or ministerial measure, the memorable
law of custom would require that " the minis
try" should retire, and surrender up the seals
of office.
And why is this so? Because the House of
Commons is supposed to represent and to ex-
press, in its action, the will of the nation, which
must be respected and obeyed; and that, too,
in the most prompt and implicit manner.
1t may be, however, that ministers may be
fully impressed with the belief that the nation
is with them, and that the majority Of the
House of Commons do not fairly represent or
express its will In that case Parliament is
dissolved; new elections are ordered, and the
issue is fairly tried at the ballot-box. If
majority is returned favorable to ministers,
they, Of course, retain their positions; if not,
they promptly resign. r.
Thus we see, that, even in monarchical Eng
land, the public sentiment is the platform"
upon which the ministry or administration,
stand, and that whenever it is made to appear
that this is against them, that their measures
are unpopular with, and condemned by, the
nation, they at once bow with respect to this
supreme power, dretire This, though under
monarchical form of government, is the very
essence ofRepublicanism the wilof the people,
that is to say, of the voters, being the supreme
law which none, not even the Queen, dare set
at naught But how is II here2 Do our Ex-
ecutive and his Cabinet obey the will of the
nationp by no means; on the contrary, fixed
in their seats for four years, they set 1t at def
ance, and hold on. This ought not to be SO.
The custom should be established here that
when the measures of the President and Cab
met, or the Administration" are unequivo-
cally condemned by public sentiment the Pres
iueht shouiu po Iedoiieu w uisnniss his Secre-
taries, or Cabinet, and call others around him,
changing at the same time his course of
policy. i .t
Thus, and thus only, can the sentiment of
the nation be brought TO bear directly upon the
Executive, and its will, instead of his, become
the supreme law. Shall we be less republican
than England? Shall our Government be more
monarchical than that of a monarchy