Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1872-01-16
THE oEE-TERM PRINCIPLE.

THE 0EE-TERH PRINClPLE.
The proposed Amendment to the Con-
stitution limiting the service of the Presi-
dent of the United States to single term,
presents a question not at all new IN the
political history of our government. The
whole subject was as fully and ably dis
cussed in the convention of 1857 as it could
be now. Upon the knowledge then avail
able, our fathers resolved to place no such
restrictions upon the popular will, but to
trust to the good judgment and patriotic
purposes of the people to choose for that
important position only those who were
worthy and capable The principal ar
gument then advanced in favor of the
one-term principle, was that it would pre-
vent designing President from securing
Il reelection bya corrupt use of the patron
age at his disposal. Other arguments were
used-that it would prevent Chief Magis-
trate not capable for his duties from foisting
himself upon the people, &c.-but they are
hardly worth considering, FOR they are based
upon the suppositiOn that the people are
Incompetent to choose their chief ruler. 1t
is folly to argue upon such premise, for II
it were true, it would be as good an argu-
ment for monarchy as for the one term
principle. The argument at first stated is
the one most worthy of consideration. The
Inauguration of the new civil service reg
ulations takes even from it most all the
weight it has heretofore received. This re-
form, taking from the President the power
of appointing mere place hunters-men
making politics their trade-tO office, re-
moves the great corrupting influence from
this high position. To make promotions
and appointments to civil offices depend
upon merit and fidelity, insures stable
tenure and an honest discharge of public
trusts. If these results are secured, it
matters less whether the appointees are adj
herents of the President in office or not.
There is a reasonable certainty that this
reform will succeed, and therefore the
greatest argument in favor Of limiting the
term of service to one term falls. But
weighing this argument by the experience
of the past, with the corrupting temptation
alluded to, constantly before the President,
it proves far less dangerous than sup
posed. The American people are intelli-
gent and patriotic, and they may safely be
trusted to dismiss from further service a
Chief Magistrat, so false and weak as to use
his powers for selfish or corrupt purposes.
They have shown that they possess these
virtues, for they have never called to Sc
cond term an unfaithful President. Sena-
tor ConkIing, in his recent argument on
this amendment i'll the Senate, reviews
our political history and presents for COLI
sideration the significant fact, that of the |
twelve Presidents who have served outone |
full term, six of them only were elected to |
second terms, and these six representing the |
ablest and most worthy of the distinguish |
ed list Washington, Jefferson, Madison, |
Monroe, Jackson and Lincoln were those |
whose fidelity to their trusts gave them a
second term. If we look over these names |
and recall the circumstances under which |
they were reelected, it suggests the fact |
that if the people had then been restricted |
i'll their choice, 10y the amendment now |
proposed, it might have proven disastrous !
TO the government itself. Conspicuously |
80, would this have been true in the case of
Mr.. Lincoln, and it certainly would have |
been unfortunate, to say the very least, in |
the cases of Washington and Jackson. If,
in 1864, when the country was cOnvulsed |
by terrible civil war, when the very fate
of free institutions trembled in the bal
ance, when every patriots eye was turned
upon Abraham Lincoln, in whose judg
ment, fidelity and ability all had confidence,
the people could not have re-instated him,
thereby to proclaim to the rebelliOus South
that the policy Of his administration
would be pursued even to the end,who can
tell what would have been the result?
The critical danger, limitation upon the
popular will would then have subjected us
to, outweigh by far the remote and specu-
lative dangers of possible corrupt use of
the patronage that might be made by an
unfaithful President, and proves the wis
dom of the trainers of the constitution in
repOsing in this, as in other respects, con-
tidence in the discrimination Of our peo-
pie. We can see no new reason now to
the change proposed by Mr..
Sumner; on the contrary, we believe that
now, more than ever, as we are about
to inaugurate reform of our civil service,
are the reasons for such a change fewer and
weaker.
On Friday last Senator Brownlow pre-
scented to the Senate numerously signed
petition from citizens of this State, late
soldiers in the Federal army, asking to be
allowed to enter lands granted by Congress
without the requirement of settlement and