Sir, I regret that it has fallen to the lot of the humble individual who addresses you, to assist in exposing the fallacy of this humiliating and alarming doctrine. [SENATE. a large number of the members of the other House, have been appointed to important offices, and this, too, against Gen. Jackson's own solemn pledge; and, after this, never tell me that the remedy for any abuse of power is impeachment. dented in this or any other civilized country in modern peachment? Now, to name it provokes me to an involuntimes. tary smile-not a smile of approbation, but of a very dif ferent character. Impeachment! Convict a President of the United States by two-thirds of the Senate, for an exercise of a power in which a majority of the same Senate Sir, the powers of this Senate, once surrendered to the had repeatedly determined that he could do no wrong? President, can never be reclaimed; once gone, they are Sir, such a proposition carries upon the very face of it its gone for ever. You will, probably, never find a Presi- own condemnation. Besides, the Senate has no control dent so very complaisant, so very modest, as to ask you to over impeachments; it cannot impeach; it can only try. It take them back. Surely it is not to be expected from the stands here as the guardian of "State rights;" and is it present Chief Magistrate. If the President of the United probable that the House of Representatives, the popular States abuses this power of removal, as we know that this branch, would ever impeach a President for violating President has done, and most wantonly, where is the re-these? Sir, the framers of this constitution were never dress? Can Congress legislate to reach the case? In 1826, so stupid as to entertain a thought that impeachment was a bill, with an elaborate report, was presented by a select the remedy for this abuse of executive power. Mr. Madicommittee, to restrain executive patronage, which pro- son and others, to be sure, entertained an opinion that it vided that whenever the President removed and appointed was an impeachable offence. Mr. Hamilton was of the in the recess, it should be his duty, on his nomination to the belief that the power of removal by the President did not Senate of the officer thus appointed, to communicate to exist at all. But I shall tremble for my country when the them the reasons for the removal! The bill and report time shall come that the President of the United States have, after slumbering for four years, been revived this shall be tried on an impeachment. It would be a perilsession, and are now on your orders of the day. Whether ous experiment, and testing the constitution in its weakest it is intended to act upon this subject or not, it is very cer-point. Nothing, perhaps, but absolute, palpable, overt tain that this remedy can never reach the mischief. Sup-treason could justify the attempt. The event would agipose that this bill should pass both Houses of Congress, tate the Government to its centre. It would be the shock of and you, the friends of the President, should, in a body, an earthquake. May I never live to see the time when a present it to him for his signature, what would probably President of the United States shall be tried on an imbe his reply?"Gentlemen, you have, over and over, peachment! However, sir, I never shall live to see it. So again and again, determined that I had a right to remove long as the executive patronage is thus profusely poured and appoint in the recess, ad libitum, and upon my into both Houses of Congress, my life for it, no President high responsibility.' I have you here before me in will ever be impeached, much less convicted, let him do black and white.' You have repeatedly settled the point, what he may. One-eighth of the last and this Senate, and that this was a business exclusively my own, and that you had no right to question my reasons or motives; and if you should, I was not bound to respond. Now, gentlemen, if I have this power, pray where did I get it? Surely not by legislation; for Congress has never given it by law. There is, then, but one answer to the question: I derive But the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. LIVINGSTON] it from the constitution itself; and if it is a grant in the can feel no danger of executive patronage from appointconstitution, what right have you to take it from me by ments from the Senate; and his reason is, that a seat of a legislation? Your law is, therefore, unconstitutional. Take Senator is so exalted and so desirable, that no gift of the it back; and if two-thirds can be found to take this power Executive could detach him from it. It might have been from me, which a majority of you have repeatedly declared so once, and I wish to heaven it were so still. But I am I now have by the constitution, do it, and I will appeal to a practical man; I take things as they are, and I consider the people, and we shall see what credit you will get for one fact worth a hundred theories. We know full wellconsistency." Now suppose he should make this concise the truth stares us in the face--that there are many offices but pungent argument, how would you answer him? I in the gift of the Executive, which Senators will gladly think it might puzzle the wisest to give an answer satisfac-accept, because they have accepted them. This throws tory to him. his theory to the winds. But as he has indulged in speBut he might add: "Gentlemen, this is not all. Your culation, let me speculate too; and I think I can find bill and report were presented at an early period of the strong reasons why Senators would become solicitous for administration of my predecessor; it was permitted to executive offices. It would seem to me there were two sleep till this time; now, when I, at your own instance and classes that would desire them: The first is, the young request, have exercised the power of removal beyond all and ambitious; and ambition, properly tempered and unprecedent, you offer me a law to restrain me. Whatever der reasonable restraint, is a virtue. The Senate is not a may be your motives, the public will draw but one infer-stepping stone" to the highest offices in the gift of the ence from the transaction; they will say, this subject was republic; it is not "ambition's ladder," on which to not acted on under Mr. Adams's administration, because it climb to the two first honors. Since the first organization was unnecessary; he never abused this power; there was of the Government, I do not recollect a single candidate no mischief, and therefore no need of a remedy. But the for President or Vice President (whether successful or danger has now become so alarming, the distress and misc-not) taken from the Senate. There have been, and I ry which I have created have produced such sensations, trust there are now, men in the Senate, quite as well qualithat I must be restrained by my own friends; if, therefore, fied for these offices as those officers are, but it seems to be I approve this law, I sign my own condemnation, my own the settled custom, that neither of them shall be taken death warrant. Take it back, and if two-thirds of both from this body. How, then, are the aspirants here to Houses will pass this vote of censure on me, let them do reach the object of their ambition? By being made "preSo we see, sir, that this remedy by legislation would miers," or other heads of departments. This is the road be visionary; when a President conducted correctly, there to glory. The other class consists of those in advanced would be no necessity for the law; and when, as in the case life, who have been long here, and are fatigued, and before us, he abused the power, his approval of the law perhaps disgusted, with the toils and conflicts which have would be an acknowledgment of the abuse; consequently the remedy by legislation is the merest vision. it." What other remedy do grave Senators propose? lately become but too common, and yet from long habit they would not wish to retire to private life, as the otium Im-cum dignitate would not exactly suit them. They would SENATE.] Executive Powers of Removal. [APRIL 28, 1830. be gratified with a comfortable office, sufficient to sup- been summoned to the bar of this Senate to answer for a port them, and give them an employment which would contempt. But it would now have been madness to have keep the mind from rusting. Hence the facts and rea- proposed it. We are the humble servants of these petty sonings prove that Senators would be as likely to become tyrants. They all act upon their "high responsibility." office seekers as other men; and, as they are subject to You will not allow us to ask the President why he is doing like passions, they would be influenced by like consider- this? And if you yourselves know the causes, you refuse ations, and therefore might become the creatures of exe- to inform us. Can it be doubted, that if you of the majocutive will. From all these considerations, it seems to me rity had satisfactory reasons, you would not withhold them most manifest, that, to check this abuse of power by im- from us. We invite you to join us in an inquiry of the peachment alone, would be a hopeless experiment. President, why this extraordinary course has been purBut another remedy has been named--"public opi- sued-why this general sweep has been made. If you nion." If the last would provoke a smile, this would pro- know, tell us; give us the satisfactory information, and voke a laugh. Surrender to the President the power of there is an end to the call. It may be that you do know removal and appointment in the recess, and at his will the President's reasons for his removals, and that they and pleasure, and then correct his abuses by public opi- will not bear the light. His friends, I am sure, have nion! Sir, can gentlemen be serious in this? He has the not the moral or political courage to avow, and justify to right to withhold the evidence on which he acts; he is not the world, that it is all a system of rewards and punishobliged to disclose a single reason, but public opinion is ments; that honest and independent officers must be to judge him! Yet all this while he is perverting and hurled out, however faithful, to give place to partisans, corrupting "public opinion. He can remove and ap- however worthless. But, sir, is it uncharitable for us to point at pleasure; he has the army at his heels; he has say that these removals are all a partisan, a personal affair? the navy at his beck; he has the treasury at his control; Whenever there is, or you think there is, a removal for during four years he holds the purse and the sword. Is good cause, you are ready enough to communicate it; this all? No; he has more--the post office and the press. you seize it with alacrity, and proffer it to us with a sort He has a sentinel at every post office; he has a recruit- of triumph. But there is only now and then one of this ing officer at every press. This, then is the way to check description; most of the cases are yet involved in the these abuses! During all this period of four years, of deepest mystery. You know that nothing has been gainficial influence will be subduing our liberties and indeed, but much lost, by this relentless proscription: for, as pendence; the gangrene will have been spreading, the a general remark, the officers removed were unquesleprosy will have become broad and deep, and nothing tionably better than those who succeeded them. Now, but the interposition of Heaven can save us. Did our if the President has removed hundreds of faithful and cacivil fathers, who gave us this constitution, deem it pos-pable officers for political opinions, he has flagrantly sible that the time would ever come, when any man should abused his trust, and violated the constitution. If it is not imagine that an Executive usurpation for four years could so, give us the true constitutional reason, and we will be only be corrected at the end of the term? Yet this is the satisfied. But there is good ground to suspect that, if the consolation which gentlemen would administer when they | President had any satisfactory reasons, his friends would seem to admit, or cannot deny, the abuses of which we never have attempted to shield him by the slavish doccomplain. Here I present, concisely and at one view, the trines we have heard advanced. I confess I was thunonly remedies of Executive usurpation-legislation, im-derstruck, that old fashioned republicans, "dyed in the peachment, and public opinion; each, or all, entirely in- wool," should attempt to enforce the principle of soveadequate, utterly visionary. This enables us to define a reign will and unlimited confidence. If the doctrines interm lately introduced into our modern political code-- culcated by the Senator from Louisiana are sound, there "high responsibility." Now, as words are only intended is not a monarch in Europe more absolute than the Preto convey ideas, it will be well to ascertain the meaning sident of the United States. If no one can inquire, no of the term. The President can remove from office and one can judge; and if no one can judge, how can it be appoint in the recess, and no one has a right to inquire determined that the President has abused his power? the cause; and, if he docs, the President is under no ob- How can the guilt be made manifest, and the abuse corligation to answer. He is responsible, but not obliged to rected, when the President has a right to keep all his rearespond to any earthly tribunal which has any right what-sons and motives for ever locked up in his royal bosom? ever to consider of the response; and this is "high re- Sir, in the name of that liberty so dear to man, and in the sponsibility! "High responsibility," then, is unquestion- presence of my country and my God, I here enter my able, unlimited, illimitable discretion; and unquestionable, most solemn protest against these doctrines, as fit only for unlimited, illimitable discretion is sovereign will, and tyrants and slaves. But the Senator from Louisiana would sovereign will is absolute despotism; wherefore "high re-humble us still further. The President may remove and sponsibility" is absolute despotism. Now, I think, sir, appoint in the recess, and decline to nominate the officer that this is reasoning syllogistically, or a fair conclusion from thus appoined to the Senate at the next session, or, if the your premises. It hence follows fairly, if not irresistibly, Senate rejects him in either case, as I understand, the that there is no other check upon this abuse of power but temporary commission would not expire until the end of the Senate. Here the people and the States are to look, the Senate's session, and thereupon the President may and here they have hitherto looked. appoint the officer again to fill the same vacancy, again But, sir, each subordinate executive officer, also, is happening in the recess. If the President could be sussecurely intrenched behind this high responsibility. At tained in this construction by a professed constitutional the request of a friend who had been very unceremo. lawyer; if he could have a pretext so plausible as this, niously removed from the post office, I wrote a letter to my life for it, he will assume the power, for it is characterthe Postmaster General, to inquire the cause of his remo-istic of the man. What, then, would your Senate become? val. This new fledged, or rather unfledged head of a re- Less, if possible, than it had already become, not even cently created department, did not condescend to an- the register of the royal decrees. The Senate reject the swer the inquiry of a Senator, and I received a note from nomination of an officer who had been appointed in the one of his subordinates, which was in substance this: recess! He holds, says the Senator, his temporary com"I am directed by the Postmaster General to inform you mission until the end of the session. As the commission that you are not permitted to know, sir." In the proud and the session expire together, the commission did not days of the republic, when the Senate was what it should expire in session; it consequently did in the recess. With be, the Postmaster General would, for such a reply, have unlimited, illimitable descretion, sovereign will, and a APRIL 28, 1830.] Executive Powers of Removal. [SENATE. power to pass by the Senate entirely, and take the ap-ed; scarcely "frocked" before he was "unfrocked." No, pointment of every officer into his own hands; and what sir, there is some reason why "rotation" should be the more is necessary to constitute the despot? And the Se- principle in the State Governments, especially in the nator tells us that the President, if we reject his nomina- small States. The appointing power would be perfectly tions, will pass by the Senate, and appoint in the recess. acquainted with the qualifications of the candidates, and One gentleman will affect an alarm at doctrines or symp- there would be little danger in changing. But the framers toms of a monarchical tendency; another apprehends a ju- of this constitution saw that this Federal Government would dicial tyranny, and that the Supreme Court will prostrate extend over an immense people and territory, and it would the liberties of the people; a third verily believes that be next to impossible that the appointing power could be Congress is usurping power, unknown to the constitution. acquainted with the merits and qualifications of the candiYet, thus tremblingly solicitous for the constitution and li- dates. The ability and fidelity of the officer in office berty, we can tamely surrender into the hands of a single would be better evidence than ten thousand recommendaindividual every office, to be bestowed at his will and tions in favor of the candidate who would supersede him. pleasure. Sir, is not this "straining at gnats and swallow- Here is a reason at once, plain and palpable, why "rotaing camels?" Let the President subdue the Senate, no tion" has not been practised under this constitution. Genmatter how; let him at the commencement of his term re-tlemen seem to reason as if offices were made for the move, and fill every office with his own creatures; let the officers: not so; they were made for the people. The post office be his, the press be purchased in; and, all this compensation should be adequate to the service, and no done, let him at an early period of his administration an-more; and then the longer a faithful officer is in, the better nounce himself as a candidate for re-election. You could will his experience enable him to perform the duties. Such no more resist him than if he had an army of half a million has been the understanding heretofore, but now every thing at his heels, devoted to his person, and ready to execute is subverted, and we already feel the deleterious effects. his will. Is this hypothetical, or is it matter of fact? Is Again, sir. The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. it prophecy, or is it history? Sir, it is all done already. WOODBURY] would make us believe that these removals Compare the Senate as it is, with the Senate as it was. were to restore to "the republican party" the control. See every office secured; see the source and the channels If he will look at the President's professions, and again at of information corrupted, and see the President already his practice, he will see nothing of that. In 1817, and at announced a candidate for the next term. With all this the commencement of Mr. Monroe's administration, Genecorrupt and corrupting official influence to struggle against, ral Jackson wrote him a letter of advice in regard to apthe most sanguine friend of a free government must pointments to office. I believe I have it here, and I like despair. At these prospects the face of the patriot will to recur to it; it is well written, and I am disposed to give gather paleness. At the expiration of this four years, the President full credit for all his literature, as he does farewell, a last farewell, to the hopes of freemen. not now appear to be in a situation to improve it, espeSir, some gentlemen seem to admit (very liberal) that cially if he relies for instruction upon some members of an officer ought not to forfeit his office for exercising the his "Cabinet." It will be recollected that this was writelective franchise; but insist, that if he uses his official in-ten soon after the close of the late war, when party anifluence in an election for President, it is good ground to mosity had not subsided, when the lines were distinctly remove him. The reason, I suppose, is, that if the influ-marked, and each party was smarting under the wounds ence of office is brought to bear upon the people, it inflicted by the other. abridges or controls their elective rights. Now, if you "Upon every selection, party and party feelings should can draw a distinction between the officer's personal and be avoided. Now is the time to exterminate that monster, official influence, I will not object to your rule. But, then, party spirit. By selecting characters most conspicuous you should carry it through-go the whole--no partiality. for their probity, virtue, capacity, and firmness, without But there is partiality. The agent for managing the regard to party, you will go far to eradicate those feelings Northeastern boundary question was appointed by Mr. which, on former occasions, threw so many obstacles in Adams. He did use his official influence in the election, the way of government, and perhaps have the pleasure and very lavishly; but instead of a removal, he was pro-and honor of uniting a people heretofore politically dividmoted to one of the best offices at the President's disposal. ed. The Chief Magistrate of a great and powerful nation To be sure, his influence was in favor of the successful should never indulge in party feelings. His conduct candidate. But that should make no difference. If there should be liberal and disinterested; always bearing in is any reason in the rule--if it is a good rule, it should mind that he acts for the whole, and not a part of the work both ways. I presume, however, that the rule in community. By this course you will exalt the national practice is to reward every officer for official influence in character, and acquire for yourself a name as imperishable favor of the present incumbent, to punish every one for as the monumental marble. Consult no party in your the same influence against him, and to presume his guilt choice--pursue the dictates of that unerring judgment without a shadow of proof. which has so long and so often benefited our country, and 99.66 Some insist that "rotation in office" is a republican rendered illustrious its rulers." maxim, and that this is the ground of these removals. Here, sir, we have his unequivocal sentiments on this Here your practice is utterly at war with your principles. point. Be not the President of a party--party is a "bubProve to me how, where, and in what "rotation" is your ble,' strangle the monster”--“consult no party in your rule. I do not find the principle in this book. It is not choice," &c. Had this President practised upon his own there. It has never been practised since the adoption of principles, he would, indeed, have gained "a name as imthe constitution, and it is not now practised. Rotation in perishable as monumental marble." "Be the President office! General Harrison, minister to Colombia, was re- of the United States"--" act for the general good-for moved before it was ascertained that he had arrived at the your country." Had he acted up to this, it would have place of his destination--rolled out before he was rolled in; been the brightest laurel which ever adorned his brow. and this is" rotation in office." Miserable! No, sir, His victory at New Orleans would have been nothing to it. your "rotation in office" is to roll out all who did not He has acted up to it, so far as this--republicans have been throw up their caps for the chieftain, and to roll in those excluded from office, who were not active supporters of who did. If he was your man, and as old as Methusaleh, his election, and federalists have been substituted, who and had held his office from the commencement, he is no were. Is any thing more necessary to prove that personal subject of your "rotation." But if he did not go the whole considerations govern exclusively? The inquiry is not, for Jackson, he was scarcely seated before he was unseat-what has been your conduct towards your country, but heart. [APRIL 28, 1830. what has it been towards me and my friends? Sir, we are if I have erred, it is the error of the head, and not of the forced to this conclusion; it is inevitable. But, if his friends will give us a different account; if they will present us other facts and reasons; if they will permit us to ask the President, respectfully, his causes, and they shall be good, or even reasonable, we will take all this back, and be satisfied. What other principle can govern? The administration of Washington commenced on the 25th of May, 1789, and continued to the 3d of March, 1797, eight years. During that time, his removals were eleven. As this period is so remote, and there is no accurate account of the causes, it is not to be expected that I should give them. But I have, upon examination, found that one Are these removals on account of the restrictive or con- (a collector in New York) was removed, being a defaulter structive doctrines of the officers removed and appointed? to the Government. From the notes which I shall subOn roads and canals, or tariff? Prove to us that the Pre-join, it is probable that those who were in active life in sident has done this upon principles like these, and if we those days, will be able to recollect the reasons which led are not satisfied with his reasons, we will admit the inte- to the removals of the others. But it is not to be presumgrity of his motives. What his principles are upon these ed that Washington ever removed upon party grounds. subjects is somewhat doubtful. If I understand his mes- The duty of first organizing the Government devolved sage, his tariff policy is a protection of manufactures to upon him, and, in this, he was no doubt deceived in the meet foreign competition. If I am right in this, he goes qualifications of some of the candidates. Yet, such was as far as heart could wish for the protection of "home in- his accurate knowledge of men, that, after all, he was dustry." And so far as I have observed his course on obliged to remove but eleven officers in eight years. This "roads and canals," and other objects of "internal im- is a pretty good comment upon your doctrine of "rotaprovements," he has no constitutional scruples on the sub-tion in office." ject. But be these things as they may, it is most manifest Mr. Adams's administration commenced on the 4th of that none of his removals and appointments have been March, 1797, and, during four years, his removals were made upon either of these grounds. I leave it to the Se- eleven. Four of his appointments, upon removals, were nators from New Hampshire and Louisiana to settle the annulled by his successor, Mr. Jefferson; and, I think, point between them on which side of these questions the three of the four officers removed were restored. It was President is; which would be the most republican, and believed that Tench Coxe, of Philadelphia, was removed what bearing the removals and appointments were intend-by Mr. J. Adams, from the office of supervisor of the reed to have on these great national questions. Show us a venue, on party grounds; and this single act of supposed single case where there is the least appearance of princi- proscription produced an excitement through the whole ple, and we will excuse it, whether the principle be right country; so much so, that I am told even Virginia, who or wrong, if the President will tell us that he conscientious- has never indulged at all in exacting a political test as ly believes it to be right. I have thus proved, as I think, a qualification for office, did, in this case, refuse to re-elect (but of this the Senate and the public will judge,) that for her Speaker of the Assembly, a Mr. Larkin Smith, on the President to remove and appoint in the recess, to fill party grounds, to show her resentment, and to retaliate vacancies created by him, without causes assigned, is an for the removal of Coxe. But the cause of Mr. Adams's abuse of power; that the President has thus abused his removal of Mr. Pickering, his Secretary of State, will be power, unless he gives us satisfactory reasons; and that it recollected by all. He differed with Mr. Adams on the is the right and duty of the Senate to check such abuses, policy of sending the second mission to France, persisted and to this end to call for the reasons; and that, until we in his opposition to the measure; and as this pertinacity of have an explanation from the President, this conduct is his principal cabinet minister was not to be subdued, it against the spirit of the constitution. I shall now proceed was the duty of the President to remove him. Mr. Adams, to contrast other administrations with this, and will show I believe, was never blamed for that act, even by his enethat its course is as unprecedented as it is unprincipled. mies. The principal complaint was, that he had not reIt will be well for us, so far as we can, to examine the moved him before. But if there have been instances facts, and to exhibit a brief sketch of the practice of the during our history of proscription, or what may now apGovernment, in regard to removals and appointments. pear such, these have been few, are only an exception to The history, I admit, is very imperfect, as to the causes; the rule, and can be no justification for the present course, but, from what I shall disclose, i am inclined to believe which we so decidedly and emphatically condemn. that the public will be astonished at the result. I know Mr. Jefferson's administration commenced on the 4th of full well that this detail will be entirely uninteresting to March, 1801, and continued eight years. I know it has the Senate. It is always tedious, and will be especially so been insisted that his is a precedent on which the present at this late period of the session, when every one is worn administration might safely repose. I have examined it, out with debates. Still, it is not to the Senate exclusively and it is an act of duty as well as justice to the memory to whom I address myself. At this crisis I have a much of that distinguished statesman, to redeem him from the higher duty to perform. I consider our constitution and parallel which is here attempted. The cases are so adliberty in danger. I fear that the rights of this Senate verse that it is less difficult to perceive where they differ have been surrendered. It is, therefore, due to me, and than where they agree. Indeed, there is no resemblance those who may come after me, to leave behind the reasons at all. That was a great political revolution. The parties why I was not a party to this surrender, that my name were divided upon principles, as they believed. Those may be redeemed from the reproach which, I fear, will in office were chiefly the supporters of the unsuccessful inevitably follow. It may be matter of history, an "ab-candidate. Mr. Jefferson, in his letter to the New Haven stract and brief chronicle of the times," and it is possible merchants, gives, as the reasons for removals, that it was that republicans of future days, if any there should be, right to produce something like equality. But that obmight observe the rock on which we have been wrecked, ject accomplished, his only inquiry thereafter would be, and shun the danger. It is important to contrast what has is he honest, is he capable, is he faithful to the constitubeen done with what is now doing; and to point the pa- tion?" And, when an attempt was made to remove Genetriot to the causes which have produced such effects. "Iral Huntington, of the same State, on party grounds, he shall nothing extenuate, nor set down aught in malice." refused, declaring that he should be governed by no such The exhibit will astonish all, as the result of the research considerations. And he has publicly denied that he ever has astonished me. I have carefully examined the Exe-removed an officer because he was a federalist. Whether cutive Journals, and I believe I am correct. I have in- the facts will justify this declaration, I leave to his more intended to give a fair and impartial narrative of facts; and, timate friends to determine. It will be recollected, more 66 APRIL 28, 1830.] Executive Powers of Removal. [SENATE. over, that, at the time, none of those officers, except mar- of the Supreme Court was impeached by the House of shals, I believe, held their offices by a tenure limited by Representatives, and barely escaped a conviction of the law. The instances were, therefore, few, where he could Senate. So near did he come to it, that one of the manaexpect to restore an equilibrium, except by removal. gers of the House afterwards pronounced him "an ac"Few die, and none resign." Besides, it was believed that quitted felon." There was, no doubt, great exaggeration many offices had been created for the purpose of being in all this. It is unnecessary now to believe or disbelieve filled by an expiring administration. the complaints; it is enough that such was the spirit of the times. We find that, of the seven marshals removed, there were those of Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. Now, at this late period, we can find that, of thirty-six removals, there was good cause for nineteen; and we have, consequently, a right to infer that there were reasons equally good for the rest. Mr. Monroe commenced on the fourth of March, 1817; The judiciary act, giving to this expiring administration an appointment of sixteen judges of circuit courts, and with the promotions from district courts, &c. say thirty permanent officers, opposed to Mr. Jefferson and his policy, was deemed by him and his friends to be intended to throw an influence againt his administration. It was believed that those courts were unnecessary, and the belief Mr. Madison's administration commenced on the fourth was strengthened by subsequent experience. This was of March, 1809; and during eight years his removals not all. The alien and sedition laws" had been passed were five! Sir, it will be useless to stop to inquire into and executed, as it was insisted, with unusual rigor. It the causes. Five removals in eight years! it cannot be was believed that these laws were unconstitutional. They pretended that there was no party conflict during this were, to say the least, unpopular, and exceedingly odious. period. Though his first election was not contested, Consequently, the attorney's, the judges, and marshals, yet his second was fiercely contested. It was during the who prosecuted, decided, and executed them, became al- last war, when all the angry passions were excited, and so odious. I have heard of great complaints against pro- his rival [Mr. Clinton] received, if I do not much mistake, secutors for persecutions, judges for partiality, and mar- quite as strong a vote as Mr. Adams had at the last shals for packing juries, and vindictively executing the election. judgments of the courts. Some of these complaints might have been groundless; but, considering the madness of and during eight years his were nine. We have now arparty, others were probably well founded. Now, in this rived at a period when memory will supply the defect of state of things, and with all these inducements, it might records. Of these nine, two were consuls, who failed as be fairly presumed that more removals would be made at merchants, and, therefore, forfeited their consular offices. this than at any other period of our history. Mr. Jeffer- Another, Auldjo, [consul] for insanity. This was a good son and his friends saw, or thought they saw, a policy to cause, then. It is doubtful whether, under this adminisstrengthen and give weight and influence to the opposi-tration, it would be any cause of removal, or, indeed, any tion, and to cast a millstone about the neck of his adminis- impediment to appointment. The removal of the consul tration, which would sink it. But great complaints were at Glasgow was demanded by the British Government, made at these removals. Proscription and persecution on account of quarrels in which he had been concerned. were the cry every where; and we most of us believed Another was recalled on the complaints of American citithat they were cruel and vindictive. And were I now to zens. A district attorney, of Florida, was removed for ask any Senator here, who has not examined the journals, abandoning his office, and remaining among his friends in what was the number of removals, during his eight Maryland. David R. Mitchell was Creek agent. He years, few would place them at less than three hundred, was removed, and Crowell was appointed. We all refewer still at two, and none so low as one. I am sure they collect this case. Mitchell was charged with conniving will be astonished when I inform them that, after diligent at an illegal transportation of slaves. The charges were search, I have found but thirty-six! Sir, quite as much made to the President, Mitchell was notified, and all the official patronage was thrown into the hands of President evidence on both sides was referred by the President to Jackson, by postponing the nominations of his predeces- the Attorney General. He reported the facts in the case, sor to the fourth of March last, as Mr. Jefferson had, by and on these the President removed him. Whether the removals, during his eight years. As much, did I say? decision was right or wrong, I know not; but sure I am, Yes, more, by far! for, upon examination, I find that four it was a fair exercise of Executive discretion. Of these of Mr. Jefferson's were of officers to fill vacancies created nine removals, I have been able to give the causes in seby his predecessor, which he himself had made; six were ven, and I leave it to our opponents to prove or infer that defaulters to the Government; and one was a removal of the other two were removed from political or party conhis own appointment. There were, moreover, one dis- siderations. trict attorney and seven marshals, and these were chiefly Mr. Adams commenced on the fourth of March, 1825, in those districts where the complaints were that the sedi- and his removals were two! one, a citizen of Maine, and tion law had been prosecuted most rigorously and vindic- a personal and political friend of Mr. Adams, who was aptively. The district attorney and marshal of Vermont pointed a collector by Mr. Monroe, by the request of were removed. You all recollect that a member of Con- Mr. Adams. Charges were preferred against him, that gress from that State [Mr. Lyon] had been prosecuted, he had some fifteen years before violated the embargo tried, and punished there, for a libel, under this act. Com- laws. The charges were pending when Mr. Adams came plaints were loud and strong, that, in the prosecution, into office, and he ordered a commission to examine the trial, and punishment, he was treated oppressively. The charges might be groundless, but they were believed to be true; and, since I have been a member of this Senate, this same Matthew Lyon has presented a petition here, claiming redress for the injuries which he suffered. Cooper, of Pennsylvania, suffered by a conviction under the same law, and he has a petition now pending here for relief. Callender, of Virginia, was also a convict; and, I believe there had been other trials and convictions, in New York and Maryland. Such was the public feeling in regard to these and other proceedings, that not only the ministerial officers of the courts, but the judges themselves, became exceedingly unpopular; so much so, that a justice case and report the facts. There was a full hearing; a These Allow me to make one remark. General Jackson did |