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

DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 243 JANUARY, 1834.] Removal of the Deposits. [SENATE. I beg permission of the Senate, while I have Without entering at this time, sir, into any the writings of Mr. Jefferson in rmy hand, to discussion of those important principles, I will read what was uttered by this great Republican only say, that if the present Chief Magistrate Oracle on this important subject. In a letter has sinned against the constitution by any docaddressed by him, in 1819, to Judge Roane, trines which he has advanced, or is supposed himself one of the most profound constitutional to entertain on this subject, he has sinned in jurists of our country, he expressed himself company with the great apostle of American thus:-" My construction of the constitution liberty and of the rights of man. is very different- from that you quote. It is, To sum up, then, in a few words, the results that each department is truly independent of of what has been said, I think it has been shown the others, and has an equal right to decide that, according to the true theory of the constifor itself what is the meaning of the constitu- tution, the President of the United States, in tion in the cases submitted to its action; and whom the "executive power is vested," is especially where it is to act ultimately and made responsible for the conduct and proceedwithout appeal. I will explain myself by exam- ings of all the Executive Departments-that, as ples which, having occurred while I was in a necessary consequence of that responsibility, office, are better known to me, and the princi- he has a constitutional right to inspect, superples which governed them. A Legislature had intend, and control the operations of those Depassed the sedition law. The federal courts partments-and that at the very organization had subjected certain individuals to its penal- of the Government, immediately succeeding the ties, of fine and imprisonment. On coming adoption of the constitution, the correctness of into office, I released the individuals by the these principles was acknowledged in the most power of pardon, committed to Executive dis- formal manner, and after the fullest discussion, cretion, which could never be more properly by an explicit recognition of the power of the exercised than where citizens were suffering President to remove from office any of the without the authority of law, or, which was functionaries of the Executive Departments-a equivalent, under a law unauthorized by the power which has never since been questioned. constitution, and therefore null. In the case The power of removal, existing alike in reof Marbury and Madison, the federal judges gard to the Secretary of the Treasury and the declared that commissions signed and sealed other heads of departments, may be rightfully by the President, were valid, although not exercised for reasons so various that it is imdelivered. I deem delivery essential to com- possible to reduce them to any general classifiplete a deed which, as long as it remains in cation. The President, who possesses the the hands of the party, is as yet no deed; it is power, is to judge, in the first instance at least, in posse only, but not in es8e, and I withheld of the reasons for its exercise. In the debate delivery of the commissions." (Yes, sir, I, the of'89, so frequently appealed to on this subPresident, not the Secretary, withheld the ject, Mr. Madison said: "If a head of a Decommissions.) " They cannot issue a manda- partment shall not conform to the judgment of mus to the President or Legislature, or to any the President, in doing the Executive duties of of their officers-(the constitution controlling his office, he may be displaced." The honorthe common law in this particularly.) When able Senator from New Jersey, (Mr. SOUTHthe British treaty of 1807 arrived, without ARD,) who spoke a few days ago, cited the any provision against impressment of our sea- opinion expressed by Mr. Madison in the same men, I determined not to ratify it. The Senate debate, that the President might be impeached thought I should ask their advice. I thought for a wanton removal of a public officer. Sir, that would be a mockery of them, when I was I do not doubt it; but I beg leave to remind predetermined against following it, should they the honorable Senator of a correlative opinion advise its ratification. The constitution had delivered by Mr. Madison on the same occasion made their advice necessary to confirm a — that the President might be properly imtreaty, but not to reject it. This has been peached also for neglecting to remove a public blamed by some; but I have' never doubted its officer, when the public interest demanded it. soundness. In the cases of two persons, antenati, And this, sir, suggests the true mode of testing under exactly similar circumstances, the federal the question which has been raised of the Prescourt had determined that one of them (Duane) ident's constitutional power to remove the late was not a citizen; the House of Representa- Secretary of the Treasury, for his refusal (in tives, nevertheless, determined that the other the language of Mr. Madison, just cited) "to (Smith, of South Carolina) was a citizen, and conform to the judgment of the President" on admitted him to a seat in their body. Duane the subject of the public deposits. Let us rewas a republican, and Smith a federalist, and verse the case, which actually occurred, and these decisions were during the federal ascend- suppose that the Secretary of the Treasury, inency. These are examples of my position, stead of the President, had desired a transfer that each of the three departments has equally of the public deposits-that he did so without the right to decide for itself what is its duty any sufficient reason, and was about to commit under the constitution, without any regard to them to banks of questionable solvency or of what the others may have decided for them- notorious insolvency. If the President, enterselves under a similar question." taining a different opinion of the expediency

Pages

About this Item

Title: Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.
Author: United States. Congress.
Canvas: Page 243
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/ahj4053.0012.001
Link to this scan: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/ahj4053.0012.001/245

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:ahj4053.0012.001

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/ahj4053.0012.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 10, 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