Year: 1867

1 TOhE Of r


How far the duty of the President to pre-
serve. protect and defend the constitution
requires him to go in opposing an uncoR.
stitutional act of Congress, is a very serious
and Important question, on which / have
deliberated much and felt extremely anx-
ions 10 reach proper conclusion. Where
an act has been passed according TO the
forms Of the constitution by the supreme
legislative authority of the country, Execu-
tive resistance TO it, especially in times of
high party excitement, wOuld be likely TO
| produce violent collision between the re-
spectiye adherents of the two branches of
the government This wouId be simply
civil war, and civil war must be re-
sorted to only as a last remedy for the
worst of evils.


Whatever might tend to provoke it
should be most carefully avoided. A faith
ful and conscientious magistrate will con-
cede very much to honest error, and some
thing even to perverse malice, before he
will endanger the public peace; and he
will not adopt forcible measures, or such
as might lead to force, as long as the
chances which are peaceable remain open
to him, or to his constituents. 1t is true
that cases may occur in which the Execu-
tive would be compelled to stand on its
rights and maintain them regardless Of
consequences.


WHEN THE EXECUTIVE MAY RESIST AN


ACT OF CoNGRE ESs.


If Congress should pass an act which is
not only in palpable conflict with the con-
stitution, but will certainly, if carried out,
produce immediate and irreparable injury
to the organic structure of the government,
and ifthere be neither judicial remedy for
the wrongs it inhicts, nor power in the
people to protect themselves without the
aid of their elected defenders; il, for in
stance, the legislative department should
pass an act, even through all the forms of
law, to abolish coordinate department
of government in such a case the Presi-
dent must take the high responsibilities of
bis Office and save the life of the nation at
all hazards.


The so.called reconstruction acts, though
as plainly unconstitutional as any that can
be imagined, were not believed to be with
in the class last mentioned. The people
were not wholly disarmed of the power of
self-defense. In all the Northern States
they still hold in their hands the sacred
right TO the ballot, and it was safe to be-
lleve that in due time they would come to
the rescue of their own institutions. 1t
gives me pleasure to add that the appeal
to our common constituents was not taken
III vain, and that my confidence in their
wisdom and virtue seems not 10 have been
misplaced.


MALFEAsANCE IN oFFICE-THE TENURE
.a.EEFt OF-oFFICE LAW


1t is well and publicly known that enor.
nous frauds have been perpetrated on the
treasury and that colossal fortunes have
been made at public expense This spe-
cies OF corruption has increased, and is in
creasing, and if not diminished will soon
bring us into total ruin and disgrace.
The public creditors and tax payers are
alike interested in an honest administration
of the finances, and neither class will long
endure the high-handed robberies recently
exposed For this discreditable state of
things there are several causes; some of
the taxes are so laid as to present an ire
sistable temptation to evade payment. The
great sums officers are rendered for conni>
vance at fraud create a pressure which is
liOiE thdh tue Nlllhr Ol LldnN tdll Mltil-
stand, and there can be no doubt that open
disregard of constitutional obligations
avowed by some of the highest and most
influential men in the country has greatly
weakened the moral sense of those who
serve in subordinate places.
The expenses of the United States, inr
cluding the interest on the public debt, are
more than six times as much as they we're
seven years ago. To collect and disburse
| this vI2d amount, requires careful super
vision, as we'll as systematic vigilance
| The system has never been perfected and
was much disorganized by the tenure of
Office bill, which has almost destroyed Of
| fetal accountability. The President may
| be thoroughly convinced that an officer is
| incapable, dishonest or unfaithful to the
| constisution, but under the law which
| have named, his utmost endeayOrs to com-
| plain to the Senate and ask the privilege
| of supplying his place with better man,
1 (if the Senate be regarded as personally
hostile to the President,) it is natural and


not altogether unreasonable for the officer
to expect that it will take his part as far
as possible to restore him to his place, and
give him a triumph over his executive
| It HAS OlllSI


Of impunity arising from accidental de


fects of evidence made in investigating il


aud secrecy of hearing it, and it is not Won


derfnl that official malfeasance should be-


come bold in proportion az delinquent:


learn TO think themselves safe. / am en-


tirely persuaded that under such a rule


the President cannot perform the grea


duty assigned to him of seeing the law


fasthfnlly executed, and that it disable


him most especially from enforcing tina


rigid accountability which is necessary L


the due execution of the revenue laws.


The constitution invests the Presiden


with authority to decide whether a re


moval shall be made in any given case


The act OF Congress declares in snbstanc


that he shall only accuse such as he sup


poses TO be unworthy of their confidence
| The constitution makes him sole Judge il
the premises, but the statute takes ava,


his jurisdiction and transfers it to tn


Senate, and leaves him nothing but tn


odious and sometimes impracticable dut.


of becoming a prosecutor.


The prosecution is to be conducted be


fore tribunal whose members are not lik


him responsible TO the whole people, BIZ


TO separate constituent bodies, and VIII
may hear his accusation with great dis


favor. The Senate is absolutely withou


any known standard of decision applicable


to such a case. Its judgment cannot b.


anticipated, for ii is not governed by an
rule. The law does not define what shal


be deemed good cause for removal. 1t


impossible even to conjecture what may o


may not be 80 considered by the Senate
The nature Of subject forbids clear proof


if the charge be incapaeiiy, what evidenc


will support it? Fidelity to the constitu
! ton may be understood or misunderstood


in thousand different ways, and by vic


lent party men in violent party times un


faithfulness TO the constitution may eve
come to be considered meritorious.


If an officer be accused of dishonesty
2 how shall it be made out? Will it be in
r ferred from acts unconnected with publ
: duty, from private history, or from genera
reputation, or must the President await tn
: commission of an actual misdemeanor i
I Office, and shall he in the meantime ris


the character andthe interest of the natio


in the hands of men to whom he cannc
5 give his confidence, and must he forbea
2 | his complaint until the mischief is don
j and cannot be prevented If his zeal i
E the public service should impel him t
anticipate an overt act, must he move z
f the peril Of being tried himself for III
| offense Of slandering his subordinates /
. | the present circumstances of the country
{ some one must be held responsible for OF
| | cial delinquency of every kind. 1t Is ex
| Al fys o,,le ,ov fb,4