The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-03-31
MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT


After a delay, which has afforded me ample time
for reflection, and after much and careful debera-
ton, l find myself constrained by an imperious
sense of duty, coordinate branch OF the Fede-
raj Government, to protest against the trst two
clauses of the first resolution adopted by the House
of Representatives on the 9Th instant, and pub
lished in The Congressional Globe on the sue
ceeding day. These clauses are in the following
words
Resolved, That Committee of five members be APP
pointed by the Speaker for the purpose, first, of nves
eating whether the President the United States any
other officer of the Government has by money, patron
age or other improper means sought influence the
passage of any law appertaning 10 the rights of any
State Territory and second also to inquire into and
investigate whether officer officers of the Govern
ment have, by combination otherwise prevented or de-
feated attempted to prevent or defeat the execution of
any law laws upon the statueboOk, and whether
the President has failed refused to compel the
tion of any law thereof.
| confne myself exclusively to these two branches
of the resolution, because the portions of it which
follow relate to alleged abuse in the Postofiice,
Navy Y ards, public buildings, and other public
works of the United States. In such cases in
quries are highly proper in themselves, and belong
equally to the Senate and House as incident to
their legislative duties, and being necessary to
enable them to discover and provide appropriate
legislative remedies for any abuses which may be
ascertained. Although the terms of the latter por
tiOn of the resolution extreme vague and gen
era, yet my sole purpose in adverting to them at
present is to make the broad line of distinction be-
tween the accusatory and the remedial clause of
this resolution. The House of Representatives
possesses no power under the Constitution over the
first or accusatOry portion OF the resolution except
as an impeaching body, while the last, in
common with the Senate, their authority egis
lative body is fully and cheerfully admitted.
1t is solely in reference to the first impeachng
power that propose to make few observations.
Fycept in this single case the Constitution has in
vested the House of Representatives with no power
no jurisdiction, no supremacy whatever, over the
President In all other respects he is quite indie
pendent of them as they are of him. As co-ord-
nate branch of the Government. he is their equal
Indeed he is the only direct representative earth
of the people of all and each of the sovereign States
To them, and them alone, is he responsible
while acting within the sphere Of his constitutional
duty and not in any manner to the House of Repre-
sentatives. The people have thought proper to in
vest him with the most honorable responsible, and
dignifed office in the world, and the individual,
however unworthy, now holding this exalted posi-
ton will take care, far in him lies, that their
rights and prerogatives shall never be violated in
his person, but shall pass to his unim-
paired by the adoption OF dangerous precedent.
He will defend them to the last extremity against
anv unconstitutional attempt come from what
quarter it nav to abridge the constitutional rights
of the Executive. and render him subservient to
anv human power except themselves.
The people have not confined the President to
the exercise of the Executive duties. They have
also conferred upon him large measure of legiSla-
tive discretion. No bill can become a law without
his approval, representing the people of the
United States, unless it shall pass after his veto by
a majority of two-thirds of both Houses In his
legislative capacity he mi ght, in common with the
Senate and the House. institute inquiry TO ascertain
any facts which ought to influence his judgment in
approving vetoing any bill. This participating
in the performance of legislative duties between
ordinate branches of the Government ought to in
spre the conduct of all of them in their relations
toward each other with mutual forbearanee and
respect; at least each has right to demand Justice
of the other. The cause of complaint is that the
constitutional rights and immunties of the Execu-
tive have been violated in the person of the Presi-
dent. The trial Of an impeachment of the Presi-
dent before the Senate on charges preferred and
prosecuted against him by the House of Represen-
tatives, would be an imposing spectacle for the
world. In the result, not only his removal from
the Presidential Office would be involved, but what
is of infinitely greater Importance to himself his
character, both in the eyes of the present and OF
future generations, might possibly be furnished.
The disgrace cast upon him would in some degree
be reflected upon the character of the American
people who elected him. Hence the precautions
adopted by the Constitution to fair trial.
On such trial, it declares that the Chief Justice
shall preside. This was doubtless, because the
trainers of the Constitution believed it to be posi-
Bile that the Weep resident might be biased by the
fact that, in of the removal of the President
from office, the same shall devolve on the Vice
President. The preliminary proceedings in the
House, in case of charges which may involve i'm
parchment, have been well and wisely settled by
long practice upon principles of equal Justice both
to the accused and to the people.
The precedent established in the case of Judge
Peck of Missouri, in 1881, after a careful review
of all the former precedents, will, venture to pre-
dict, stand the test of time. In that case Luke
Edward Lawess, the accuser, presented petition
to the House, in which he set forth infinitely and
| specifically his causes of complaint He prayed
that the conduct and proceedings in this behalf o
the said Judge Peck may be inquired into by your
honorable body, and such decision made thereon
to your wisdom and justice shall seem proper
! This petition referred to the judiciary Com
| mittee. Such has ever been deemed the apprOpri
| ate Committee to make similar investigation.
| is Standing Committee supposed to be appointed
without reference tn any special case, and at al
! times is presumed to be composed of the most emf
nent LAWYERS in the House, from different portion
! of the Union, whose acquaintance with judicia
proceedings and whose habits of investigation quail
| ify them peculiarly for the task. No tribunal
from their position and character, would, in the
| of Judge Peck, the witnesses selected by thu
Committee itself, with a view to ascertain th
| truth of the charge. They were cross examined
| by him. and everything done in such a man
ner, as to afford him no reasonable cause of com
! p laint In view OF this precedent, and what is
far greater Importance in view OF the COustitutiO
and principles of eternal justice, in what name
has the President of the United States been trea
ed by the ouse of Representatives? Mr.. job
| Coyode, Representative from Pennsylvania
the accuser of the President. Instead of follow
| ing the wise precedents of former times and e.
| pecially that in the case of Judge Peck, and II
| ferrng the accusation to the Committee on Jud
ciary, the House have made my accuser of III
| Judges ... T...
To make the accuser the Judge, is a violation
the principles of universal justice, and is con
demned by the practice OF all civilized nations
Every freeman must revolt at such a spectacle.
am to appear before MIR. Covode, either PERSONAL
or by substitute, to cross-examine the witness
which he may preclude before himself to sustai
his own accusations against me, and perhaps eve
| hOon m V he denied n =
And what is the nature of the investigation whc
this resolution proposes to institute? 1t is vagr
and general the English language affords wore
in which to make it. The Committee is to inquir
not into any specific charge charges but whetl
the President has, by ''money, patronage,
'other improper means, sought to influence" n
the action of any individual member member
| of Congress, but 'the action of the entire BODY
Congress tself,' or any Committee thereof I'll
President might have had some glimmering of Il
nature of the offence to be investigated had his
cuser pointed to the act acts of Congress whiC
he sought to pass or to defeat by the employmel
OF "mOney, patronage, or other improper means
: But the accusation is bounded by no such limits;
extends to the whole circle of legislation to int
' ference ''for or against the passage Of any la
E ''appertaining to the rights of any State or TIE
''ritory." And what law does not appertain
the rights of some State or Territory? And VIII
, law or laws has the President failed to execute?
These might easily have been pointed out, had al
: such existed. ..
had MT. LaWless dskeu an inquiry 10 DE made
the House whether Judge Peck, in general term
had not violated his Judicial duties without speci
cation of any particular act, | do not believe the
would have been a single vote in that body in
of the inquiry. Since the time of the st
Chamber and of general warrants, there has be-
no such proceeding in England. The House of
, representatives., the high impeaching power of Il
l country, without cOnsenting to hear a word of e
PLANTATION, have Endorsed this accusation again
the President and made it their own act. Tb,
even refuse to permit a member to inquire of Il
Presidents accuser what were the specific charg
against him. Thus, in this preliminary acoustic
!, of ''high crimes and misdemeanors" against a
n ordinate branch of the Government under the il
n peaching power, the House refused to hear a sing
| suggestion even in regard to the correct mode
S proceeding; but without moments delay, pass
n accusatOry resolutions under the pressure of Il
. previous question. In the institution of prosec
e ton for any offence, against the most humble eli
e Zen-and claim for mysef no greater rights thi
5 he enjoys-the Constitution of the United Stat
! and of the several States require that he shall
Y informed in the very beginning of the nature al
cause of the accusation against him, in order to
$ able him to prepare for his defence.
T. There other principles which | might en-
merate, not less sacred, presenting impenetrah
S shield to protect every citizen, falsely charg
Y with criminal offence These have been violate
/ in the prosecution instituted by the House of Re
l. resentatives against the Executive branch of t
i Government. Shall the President alone be depriv
n OF the protection of these great principles whit
g prevail in every land where raw of liberty per
, | trates the gloom of despotism? Shall the Exec
;, tive alone be deprived OF the rights which all
fe!lowcitizens enjoy? The whole proceeding agar
! him justtes the fears of those wise and great me
= who, before the Constitution was adopted by t
Il | States aDnrahended that the tendency of the Or