Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1860-04-14

which grs at stress is laid. cannot take away
the full discretion allowed by the Constitu-
ton, nor make the law either shorter or mar
rover than it is written. In such a case each
House of Representatives will determine for
itselfits mode Of procedure, without sugges-
tons from a sco-ordinate, I" and rely upon the
highest law as its charter. There Is no judge
presiding over the representatives of the sov-
ereign people of the sovereign STATES to teach
and incnlcafe legal prophecies. When they
shall permit even the President 10 do so. then
there will be law superior to the Constitu-
ton. and discretion locked in chains.
The resolution of the Senate of the 18th OF
March. 1884. upon which the President SEEM
ingly had his eye in the preparation of bis
protest. presents case very different from
the present one. That body resolved as fol-
lows: E
That the President, in the late Executive
proceedings in relation 10 the public revenue.
has assumed upon himself authority and
power not conferred by the Constitution ami
laws. but in derogation, of boIh-o
The complaints made by President jack
son TO this proceeding were that the acts
charged upon him constituted one of the
highest crimes v bich that officer can commit,
impeaehable from It's very Dature; that the
Senate. as his constitutional judges in such
case, not only accused, but found him
ty on bis part to defeue himself. And Mr..
Buchanan. January 16. 1887, speaking on
the subject, declared that the Senate had
transcribed its constitutional power, because
the res olution charged an impeachment Of
fence against the President. That criminal
int mt was involved in the charge, as it was
to be presumed, from an illegal or criminal
act. n
The resolutions of the House, on the con-
trary. do not even imply ceusure, much less
pass judgment. They propose an examine
ton merely, such a. may be instituted by
any member OF society against any other
member of society. TO test Internally either
honesty or respcctability. And has it never
been conceived bef,re that such privilege
that of inquirv-ducs not pertain 10 every
human being? The fact that such investiga-
ton may lead to the conclusion thai the
party against bom it is brought TO bear is
guilty of DeiaTious practices cannot affect
the right; it is preliminary 10 accusation
trial, and judgment. SO here it cannot be
made an objection to the action of the House
that evidence may thus be- found tainting
the official character of any or many officers
OF Government. II il shall be found, in exc
cutting the command of the resolutions, that
The President is open 10 direct charge of
high crimes OF misdemeanOrs. it will but
pr owe the wisdom of the proceeding. Then,
and not till then, may the party sought to
be implicated demand the full hearing Sc
cured TO him by the Constitution. As yet
be is subject To the law of the citizen; here
after, possibly, he may invoke the law OF the
officer.
1t Is proper 10 make this additional re-
mark in reference to the protest oil 1884
that it was not presented to the Senate dur
ing the consideration of the resolution. 1t
was not till after formal determination
against him that the President demonstrated.
Here the inteTposition comes 10 prevent all
invest gation.
The Pr, sident esieems it "a violation of
tie principles of univ ersal Justice" that the
member moving the resolution should have
been appointed one of the committee provid-
ed for by it, His ten years of service as a
component of this body, OF which he reminds
us not TO speak of his protected Senatorial
career, ought TO have enabled him TO recall
To mind the presidents OF Congress in such
cases. This is new and startling objection.
cOndemnipg, as it does in terms OF severe re-
prOdch. a practice in legislation cOcxtensive
with our national existence. Certainly it
has been the practice 10 appoint the mover of
Il sp cisl inquiry chairman, of the committee
raised. Mr.. Gushing, in his Law and Prac-
tice," says:
.'On the occasion of the appointment COM
mittee to prepare articles of impeachment
against Lord Melville which had been ordered
on the motion of Mr.. Whitbread, that gentle.
man was first appointed one OF the commit
tee raised"
A reason for this course is doubtless to be
found in the presumption that the person pro-
posing examination has grounds to believe it
important. and is. on that account, the best
qualified tp conduct the proceeding.
The President likewise disapproves, in
terms of severity. Of the phraseology and
scope of the resolutions. His expression is !:
1T is as vague and general az the English
language affords words in which to make it,"
If it be true, a. before urged, that there is
general right to inquire into the couduct of
private citizens aud public officers, which
may or may not look to accusation and trial,
then the remark sinks 10 a cavil. Under snch
circumstances it is not necessary to apDriZ'
The individual upon whom he inquiry bears. of
either the subject or object of inquiry. The
first opportunity for him 10 require notice is
in the legal proceeding which is to end III his
acquital or condemnation. What would be
thought of rule of law requiring even
prosecutor to drfine hi charge. and frame his
indie ment. without prelim nary proceedings
or opportunity to inform himself as 10 its
true character. A bare suspicion would
scarcely be regarded defensive prudence.
A nd in the case of an officer controlling mil
lions of patronage, and an influence penetra-
ting every city. town. and hamlet of II vast
it would be unsafe to assume inform
crs, and witnesses would volunteer against
him. especially as favoritcs aud ben ficiaries
would be the most likely to possess the knowl-
edge needed in the ascertanment of the truth.
For Congress to reach the conclusion to which
the President would lead them. would lie to
practically settle for,ver that impeacbprnts
were obsolete, and that Exc cutive officers
had the immunity OF perfect responsibility.
Indistinctness and uncertainty must neces-
sarily prrceilc research. IL il were otherwise,
all Investigation would be render, d useless.
AS far as bounds may be set for Investigation.
the resolution in question will compare ia
vorably with that Introduced into the Senate
Icy Mr.. Mason, December 5. 1859. bearing
upon the invasion OF Harper's Ferry. This
will be readily admitted from a comparison
of the two. The following is the resolution
last referred to.pasSed by the Senate, Decem-
be- II 1859. und,r which the mover was ap-
pointed chairman at the cummittee coniern-
plated by il. and testimony is now icing Ia
ken:
.'Rosoired That committee he appointed
to Inquire into the FACTS attending The lat
Invasion and seizure oi the armory and ar
sepal OF tn, United States at Harpcr's Ferry,
in Virginia, by band of armed men, and
report
Whether the same was attended by armed
resistance TO the authorities and public force
oi the United States, and by the murder of
any OF the citiz ns OF Virginia, or of any
troops sent there 10 protect the public pto-
perry;
whether such invasion and seizure was
made under color 81 any organic 'iion in-
tend 10 snbyrri the government OF any OF
the Stairs OF the Union; Shat was The char
scIrr and extent OF the az ganizaIi, and
whether any citizens If the United States
not pFrss.nt were implicated therein. or az
ct~sory thereto by cottritti ions of money