Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.

DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 551 MAY, 1826.] The Judicial System. [SENATE. committed to them, the Senate theirs, and the If there was one man that did, there were 100,000 President his. Was this House, when their that did not; the advice might be given, but rights were, as they supposed, infringed, to wait the man would go his own way. for the interference of the House of Represent- Mr. M. said it had been stated, in the course atives? There was, Mr. M. said, a tendency in of debate, that there was no stir among the every Government to create power. The con- people. In the mess in which he boarded, he stitution had given the courts power to declare did not recollect having received one letter, what was unconstitutional, and why so? Be- from a man that attended at all to the public cause the Government would go beyond the business, but what it mentioned this claim of limits. Governments were made on the sus- power. Since the publication of the documents, picion that all those who had power would go he had received two letters in which it was wrong. He would go further, and suppose it a asked whether they meant to let the resolution doubtful question whether the Executive, in his sleep? In every State of the Union there were message, had claimed this power or not. Most as clever men as any here, who watched this of the gentlemen who contended that he did not, body and commanded them to take care of the had contended that he had the right to do so. constitution and their rights. If any thing was If the majority of the Senate thought differ- wrong, it must be put down; but if truth was ently, was it not prudent in them to express on the side of the administration, they never their opinion? Had they not the same right to need mind any investigation. Mr. MI. said he express their opinion on their powers, and was wished the administration would so act that he it not as much their duty to do so as for the might vote for all their measures. Judging President to declare his? A law had been from the letters he received, he should suppose passed which the Supreme Court declared to be this subject was much agitated in the country.. unconstitutional, but it was never enforced. As he said some time ago, it seemed to him, There was no analogy, Mr. M. said, in the cases from reading the message, as coming to Congress cited, between European Governments and this on the expediency: if it applied to the acceptGovernment. There, even in the most limited ance it was a little remarkable it had not been monarchy in Europe, the appointment of Minis- put in the same sentence: for, at the next parters was in the crown alone. He meant England. agraph, it made a new start. It was like going How was it here? Every thing was divided to a new section. He could not discover the and carved out, this to one, that to another, and connection. that to a third. But, in all those cases in Eu- The Senate adjourned. rope, there was an understanding that those Ministers were to meet, and what they were to do. How was it in the present instance? They WN were to do any thing or nothing; they were to Judiciary Bill. talk of matters and things in general. Was it The Senate proceeded to the re-consideration ever doubted that the British Executive could of their amendment to the bill "further to exnot appoint a man to be an Ambassador to do tend the Judicial System of the United States," any thing? That is not the case here, and all which had been disagreed to by the House of this reasoning, derived from the practice of Eu- Representatives. ropean Governments, had no analogy at all with Mr. VAN BUREN said that he would state, in our Government. Balance any thing-get a rail a few words, the points of difference between and place it on a fence, and play at see-saw; the two Houses. One related to the arrangegive one a little more than the other, and away ment of the circuits, the other to the provision he would go: so it was with these powers; requiring the judges to reside within their regive one of them only a hair's breadth more spective circuits. He had not particularly adthan it ought to have, and the balance would be verted to the latter when the bill was under destroyed. First the power was denied abso- consideration, because, at that time, he had lutely; then a little was done, then a little more, entertained the belief that no objection would and now, Mr. M. said, it had become a matter of be urged against it. Its rejection, therefore, course, and his objections were considered as by the House of Representatives, was as unexmuch out of fashion as his boots, to say the least pected as the reasons assigned for it were, in of them. They had a strong impression, in his opinion, untenable. coming here, that this was to be a meeting of By the Judiciary Act of 1793, it was left to Republics, and that the United States claimed to the Judges of the Supreme Court to allot themgo as the oldest republic. They were to settle selves to the different circuits of the United the public law for America. As well as sisters States, once a year, at their discretion. By there were to be brothers there. Brazil, Britain, the act of 1802, it was thought proper to allot and probably France, were invited, and all this them, by law, to certain circuits, within which was to settle the public law for America. they were required to reside. He would not On the subject of our going to advise, Mr. M. consume the time of the Senate by reading the said they had the right of advising the President, act. It will readily be perceived, by a reference and he had never heard of a nation that wanted to it, that this is the effect of the provision, althe advice of another. He never knew a single though somewhat ambiguous in its phraseology. individual who wanted the advice of another. The act of 1802 also provided that, in the

Pages

About this Item

Title: Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.
Author: United States. Congress.
Canvas: Page 551
Publication: New York, [etc.]: D. Appleton and company [etc.]; 1857-61.
Subject terms: United States -- Politics and government

Technical Details

Collection: Making of America Books
Link to this Item: https://name.umdl.umich.edu/ahj4053.0008.001
Link to this scan: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/ahj4053.0008.001/553

Rights and Permissions

These pages may be freely searched and displayed. Permission must be received for subsequent distribution in print or electronically. Please go to http://www.umdl.umich.edu/ for more information.

IIIF

Manifest: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/api/manifest/moa:ahj4053.0008.001

Cite this Item

Full citation: "Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856." In the digital collection Making of America Books. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/ahj4053.0008.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 17, 2025.

Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.

Annotations Tools

Actions

About this Item

Technical Details

Rights and Permissions

Related Links

IIIF

Cite this Item