Page images
PDF
EPUB

to prejudice the Vice-President in the good opinion of General Jackson. He appeals to all who have been actors in the transactions referred to, for the correctness of his declaration-dated the thirty-first of February, 1831.

In this controversy it happened, as in most others, that neither party went unscathed. Mr. Calhoun, though he was perfectly justified, and it was even creditable to him to wish to hold a successful and popular General amenable to the laws which he had violated, seems liable to the charge of receiving a credit, both with General Jackson and his numerous friends, for a defence of him, to which he was not entitled-and to passively see (even if he did not actively promote it) Mr. Crawford receiving a censure which he himself much better deserved. In his letters to General Jackson, he seemed rather to deprecate, and try to soften the General's resentment, than to repel it with the indignation which the harsh and offensive language of Jackson was calculated to provoke in one who was conscious of his own rectitude, and who had a high sense of self-respect.

Nor could General Jackson altogether escape censure, though he was less injured by the affair than Mr. Calhoun. If he felt himself ill-treated by Mr. Calhoun's attempt to subject him to censure for transcending his orders, he might have considered that offence expiated by Mr. Calhoun's subsequently uniting in the course of forbearance recommended by the President; and yet more, by the valuable aid afforded him in the Presidential canvass. Besides, as Mr. Calhoun had the concur rence of the rest of the Cabinet to justify his opinion. that General Jackson had exceeded his orders, and as he could have had no other motive than a sense of official duty for taking that ground, it would have been mag

nanimous in General Jackson to admit that he himself might have erred, and though he had not, to forgive a censure which he who made it alleged was dictated solely by a sense of public duty, and which there was no good reason for believing had been caused by any other motive. It indicated a haughty and vindictive spirit, that recent benefits, of a substantial character, were deemed no compensation for former censure—a censure, moreover, not persisted in, and followed ever afterwards by a support at once warm and efficient.

The General's course seemed, however, to have had no effect in lessening his popularity, as already he was nominated for the next Presidency by the Legislatures of Alabama, Illinois, New York, North Carolina, and Tennessee, though the election was not to take place until the next year. His opponents looked to Mr. Clay as their candidate; and at the close of the twenty-first Congress, the members returned to their homes to canvass for the coming contest.

Among the subjects which were most productive of debate, at this session, was the claim of Mr. Monroe, the late President, against the United States, for extra losses and services, while he was Minister abroad; which debate was, to all appearance, exempt from the wonted influence of party spirit.

The bill for the relief of Mr. Monroe was the one reported at the last session, and which proposed to pay him about sixty-eight thousand dollars. It was warmly and ably supported by Mr. Mercer, in whose district Mr. Monroe then resided.

In consequence of the failure of the claim at the preceding session, memorials, with numerous signatures, from Virginia, New York, and Maryland, had been sent to Congress, in favor of the claim. It met, however, with

decided opposition, principally on the ground that a similar claim, to the amount of twenty-eight thousand dollars, had been allowed to Mr. Monroe in 1826: that, by express stipulation, he had been denied an outfit, which he had since received; and that the United States were not in the habit of paying interest: and after having been repeatedly discussed, and undergone several amendments, the bill was rejected (by striking out the enacting clause) in the Committee of the Whole. In the House, however, the bill was restored in a new form, by which the sum proposed to be given was much reduced; and in this form it passed by one hundred and four votes to eighty-eight.' The bill, as thus modified, authorised the payment of thirty thousand dollars to Mr. Monroe, "for public services, losses, and sacrifices;" provided that the accounting officers should, on examination, "believe so much due to him, upon the principles of equity and justice."

As no member who opposed the claim questioned the losses and expenses stated in Mr. Monroe's account, and as it was notorious that the Ministers of the United States abroad must often exceed their stated compensation, or be subjected, as well as their country, to the imputation of meanness, the allowance made would seem to be an act of sheer justice; but, since it had not also the sanction of strict law or usage, several members, of known liberality as well as probity, were induced to state calmly to the House that, after examining the claim, they did not consider any thing due to Mr. Monroe. Disapprobation of this character greatly alloyed the pleasure afforded to his friends, who were pained thus to see a shadow cast on the sunset of a meritorious life which had been otherwise so unclouded.

[blocks in formation]

A spirited and able debate also occurred in the Senate on the relative powers of the Executive and the Senate in making certain appointments. During Mr. Adams's administration, he had appointed two agents as Commissioners to negotiate a commercial treaty with Turkey; but not having succeeded, General Jackson appointed a third Commissioner, Mr. Rhind, who succeeded in negotiating a treaty. These appointments had all been made. in the recess of the Senate, and had never received the sanction of that body, or been communicated to it.

While the general appropriation bill was before the Senate, Mr. Tazewell moved to strike out that part which allowed compensation to the Commissioners employed in negotiating a treaty with Turkey, as their appointment had not been submitted to the Senate at the ensuing session.

He supported his views with his wonted ingenuity and ability; and he maintained that, for the President to make an appointment without nominating to the Senate, three things must concur: there must be a vacancy; this vacancy must have happened; and this happening must have occurred during the recess of the Senate: not one of which existed on the twelfth of September, 1829, when the appointments were made.

After some discussion of the question, Mr. Kane, by way of obviating a part of the objections made by Mr. Tazewell, offered an amendment, "to strike out the item as proposed by Mr. Tazewell, and to appropriate a certain sum to the persons heretofore employed in our intercourse with the Sublime Porte."

After a few days, the discussion was renewed. Mr. Tazewell renewed his opposition. He professed himself willing to give these Commissioners compensation for their services, but not to vote them salaries and outfits,

as a matter of right, under an appointment which the President had no authority to make.

He was opposed by Messrs. Kane, Livingston, Brown, Smith of Maryland, and Forsyth, principally on the ground of precedents during every Administration, from Washington to Adams; and on account of the inconvenience which would arise if Mr. Tazewell's construction of the Constitution was adhered to.

Mr. Tazewell was supported by his colleague, Mr. Tyler, who moved an amendment to Mr. Kane's proposition-a proviso that nothing contained in the act should be construed as sanctioning the appointment of Commissioners to negotiate a treaty, "during the recess of the Senate, and without their advice and consent."

Mr. Kane's amendment was adopted by twenty-two votes to twenty-one; and then Mr. Tyler's proviso, by twenty-five votes to eighteen.'

According to the first of these decisions, the President may appoint secret, or informal agents, without consulting the Senate; and according to the second, Mr. Tazewell's construction of the Constitution (which seemed to be logically deduced from its language) received the sanction of the Senate, though it might lead to practical inconvenience, and occasionally defeat the seeming intention of that instrument.

When the bill was returned to the House with the Senate's amendments, the whole discussion was renewed; the result of which was, that Mr. Kane's amendment and Mr. Tyler's proviso were struck out. The two Houses disagreed on this point; but, after a conference, they concurred in passing the appropriation without these amendments: and thus a sanction was given to the pre

'Register of Debates, for 1831, page 310.

« PreviousContinue »