Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1865-03-25

1t not strange that in free countries
where public officials hold their power from
the people, there should be an active jeal-
ousy as 70 the manner in which such dele
gated powes is used Not only is this
entirely natural, it is also entirely right,
for the moment such jealousy ceases to exist
thst moment freedom is in jeopardy. Yet
ss history plsinly shows, there is sometimes
such 8 thing as unreasonable Jealousy.
Hence the ingrstitude of republics has
long since become prOverbisl. We belong
to the number of those who believe that
great injustice is often done TO public mes
in the Judgment Of the public respecting
them. Men often judge upon either q
false or an imperfect statement of facts
which, of course, often leads to hasty con
demnstion, and sometimes 10 the removal
of worthy and experienced men from Office.
Especially is this the case when the action
Of the oficisl is of such nature as to touch
private interests, always the surest way to
arouse the passions of men. How many
public officers who deserved well of their
cotemporariss have received rather their Sc
verest condemnation, and have been COM
PEELED to wait for their Justification, to use
Bseon's phrase "till after some time be
past"
Wehsve been led at this time into this
train of reflection by the unmeasured and
unreasonable denuncistion now beng Wis
tied upon certain members of Congress for
their votes in favor of the late amendment
to the enrollment law. There has been not
little discussion in our country as to the
limits of constituency's control over 8
representative, and yet there seem to be
no we'll defined public ideas with regard to
it. We hsve heard of an Hon, NJ. G. who
asserted his willingness to vote for or
against measures, according Sc his constit-
usnts might approve or disapprove them,
provided he could ascertain their opinions.
We are not aware that this theory Of rep
reentstion is sanctioned by any great
names, nor do we think the man who will
avow it fit tohold Office. All such language
ssy0rs far more Of demsgogueism than Of
statesmsnship, or Of an honest solicit
tude for the interests of the people. An
other and more plausible notion is that a
representative who cannot vote in accord
snce with the wishes of his constituency
is in duty bound to resign, his Office into
these hands. This theory seems to US
to be without foundation. we have never
bean able to see why 8 constituency have
the right to make such demand because
che political majority has changed since
the date of the incumbents election, nor do
We consider him under any obligation to
heed the demand if made. Should he
change his opinions upon the distinctive
issues upon which he was elected, it may
become his duty to ask the judgment of
his constituents upon the matter. But for
the changes, as manifested in any ordinary
case, he is not to answer.
When a man IS proposed for high Off
cisl station the people enquire respecting
his opinions upon the great issues of the
day, and if they approve them by elect
ing him, he is morally bound, withlthe
above qualification, to be true to his former
svowals. But outside Of those issues quiet
freedom Of opinion and of action should be
allowed. The condemnation visited upon
public men for not always voting IS con-
stituents approve is strikingly suggestive
Of Procrus'eg fashion Of fitting the
--.l ra-tt H5IEso 4s''--' -ii-l. - t'
= ssf- isesg fHaJ bro ..sslss 1suii s7e
.54HIs3si s,lf,1sJ .-l1..l- "a
q q hIAQEaE 500