MARCH 31, 1832.] Wiscasset Collector. [H. OF R. he subagent one year in coming hither, it would require Mr. BELL defended the item, as resting upon estinother year for the return of the deputation, and that by mates regularly furnished from the War Department. It giving him this extra allowance for such services he would would have been inserted in the bill as reported, but the still be only placed, as to salary, in the ordinary situation estimates were not then ready. The gentleman had the of an Indian agent. He repeated his objections to such same means of information with respect to this item, as he leputations in future, and knew such was the opinion of had in regard to any other item in the appropriation bills. he present Executive against them, unless in cases where Mr. ASHLEY denied that the agent had been obliged t could be shown explicitly there was some direct object to travel very far from his own post to collect this deputato be accomplished, the making of a treaty, or the recon- tion, or had been exposed to any peculiar hardships during ciliation of dissensions amongst the tribes, which could most of the time. The agent had told him he did not exnot be otherwise effected. The present expenditure was, pect more than $300 for the service. Unless he was much therefore, in all probability, the last expenditure of the deceived, he had seen the agent at St. Louis last year. It kind that would be required for a long period to ensue, was too much the habit of Indian agents to be found every and he hoped the House would not object to defray it un- where but at their posts. Mr. A. had travelled a great ler all the circumstances which had been submitted them. deal in the Indian country, had been exposed to great danBut if the extra allowance for the subagent was still ob-gers and losses from the Indians, and never, in all that jected to, he would suggest that some honorable member time, hadfound more than two agents at their stations. He might move either to reduce it, or strike it out altogether. professed his determination to examine these accounts to Mr. MASON, of Virginia, moved to reduce the amount the bottom: the charge appeared to him veryextravagant. of this item, by deducting from it $700. The agent had Its having been allowed by the Secretary of War, had no continued to receive his full salary, and also his travelling manner of weight with him whatever. He would leave expenses. This was quite enough, without any further the sanctioning of such an account to no man living, but extra allowance. He had only served the Government in a would examine it for himself. different mode from his ordinary course of action, and his salary was a compensation, for which he agreed to give his time and services. Mr. M. concurred with the gentleman from Missouri, that it was very natural for an agent to recommend these Indian deputations, from a desire op his own account to visit the seat of Government. He was glad to find that the Government disapproved of the policy, and thought it was one which the House ought not to countenance. Mr. IRVIN inquired whether the expenses of agents were allowed them when they were at their own homes; and whether it was not understood to be their duty to go wherever Government might wish to send them. After some further conversation between Messrs. BELL, WHITTLESEY, and DAVIS, of South Carolina, Mr. VANCE expressed his dissent from the opinion expressed by some other gentlemen as to the inutility of these Indian visits to the seat of Government. He considered them highly proper and expedient, and his wish would be that all Indiantreaties should be negotiatedand concluded here. Yet it seemed strange to him, if the present administration disapproved of the practice, that the cityshould have been crowded with Indian deputations ever since the administration had come into power. Mr. BELL disclaimed all intention of setting the two administrations in contrast as to this matter; and he thought it hard that no remark could be made in any part of that House, but it must immediately be viewed as connected with political contests. He was far from holding himself bound to sustain whatever the present administration might have neglected to put down; nor did he claim for the existing administration a whit more in relation to our Indian affairs, than for that which had gone out of power. The evils of the system were as chargeable on the one as on the other; nor had it so much as entered into his head to contrast them with each other. Mr. BELL replied that their expenses, he believed, were not allowed at their own stations; but, in the present instance, very peculiar services had been performed, much more laborious and perilous thanthe ordinaryemployments of an agency. The department, however, did not allow the agent to determine on the propriety of the visit of an Indian deputation to the seat of Government. He had no doubt, however, that agents had often had the address to persuade the department into the allowance of thesevisits, when they were wholly unnecessary. Mr. B. said he entirely agreed in the opinion expressed by the gentleman from Missouri, that the most enormous abuses had long existed, and still continued to exist, in the Indian Depart-propriation to $5,750,) and carried. ment. In fact, that the appropriation in that department amounted to an almost total waste of so much of the national resources. He had no doubt that the immense host of Indian agents, now employed and paid, might be dispensed with entirely; and that a few efficient men at different points on the frontier would be able to accomplish a greater amount of good, both for the Indians and for the people of the United States, than the whole army of agents, subagents, and inspectors, now in that service. He was glad to see such a sentiment becoming general, and he was ready, in his place, to apply the pruning knife in the most thorough and effectual manner. The question was soon after taken on the amendment proposed by Mr. MASON, (which went to reduce the ap Mr. THOMPSON, of Georgia, was in favor of the appropriation. The service had not been sought by the agent, but had been imposed upon him by the Government. Mr. WARD inquired whether charges of this kind were usual. Mr. BELL replied in the negative. Mr. BATES, of Massachusetts, said that this whole Indian concern presented one great dark gulf, which he could not fathom. He should like to have it explored, and to see the bottom of it. He was not prepared, without further information, to act upon the subject before him. The whole matter was to him totally in nubibus. Mr. BELL'S amendment, as thus amended, was then agreed to. Mr. VANCE now moved an amendment in the item "for building of blacksmiths' shops and houses for Indian agents, $7,000," by adding the words "by treaty stipulation." On this motion a very desultory debate, or rather conversation, arose, in which Messrs. VERPLANCK, CARSON, VANCE, BULLLARD, ALEXANDER, BELL, WICKLIFFE, FOSTER, INGERSOLL, SUTHERLAND, MCCARTY, BURD, and DICKSON took part. The past practice of the Government in reference to the building of agency houses, the frauds and abuses practised on that subject, and the propriety and facility of agents erecting their own houses, were severally discussed. Repeated motions were made for the rising of the committee, which at length prevailed; and the committee rose, and reported progress. Adjourned. SATURDAY, MARCH 31. This subject coming up as the unfinished business of yesterday, H. OF R.] Wiscasset Collector. [MARCH 31, 1832. judging from the countenances of some of those who set around him, that his remarks were regarded as furnishing a rather delicious treat. It may become necessary, hereafter, for me also to notice this unpleasant subject, which is so often animadverted upon by the enemies of the administration: for the present, however, I will desist, and endeavor to call the attention of the House to the sub ject-matter before it, or rather to that which legitimately grew out of the resolution. When the present administration came into power, they found, as collector of the district of Wiscasset, in the State of Maine, a certain gentleman who had held the office ever since the formation of the Government, and who wa superannuated and worn out. The gentleman who then remove this officer, and to give the office to one who was physically more competent to discharge its arduous duties Accordingly the present collector was appointed, and be subsequently appointed. or caused to be appointed, one McClintock as an inspector of the said district. By the act of Congress regulating affairs of this kind, it is made the duty of the inspector of customs to make oath quarterly of the amount he has received of fees or emoluments This inspector, as he alleges, was removed by the collector, on the ground that he refused to give him (the collector) a certain portion of his income of office; while, on the other hand, it is stated by the collector, in his letter to the Secretary of the Treasury, that he removed him for habits of intemperance. Now, sir, this is the issue made up between the two contending parties; and the great question to be decided is, whether this House shall clothe itself with all the solemn forms of a court of impeachment, sitting as a grand inquest, hearing charges, and (if they shall be deemed true) prefer articles of impeachment, march in solemn procession to the bar of the Senate, and there, in the name of all the good people of these United States, impeach the collector of high crimes and misdemeanors; or shall it be referred to the Secretary of the Treasury, with instructions to investigate the matter, and, if true, to remove the collector? Now, sir, this is the ques tion to be decided, and concerning which the House has, for several days, been harassed about proscription, "reform," &c. &c. Mr. SPEIGHT, of North Carolina, expressed his extreme regret that this debate should have assumed a shape which rendered it necessary for him again to obtrude himself upon the patience of the House. With regard to the manner in which this subject had been brought under their notice, he had nothing to say; he presumed, however, that the gentleman from Maine, who had last spoken, [Mr. EVANS,] had felt it his duty to pursue the course which he had taken in bringing it forward, and he [Mr. S.] should, therefore, most cheerfully acquit him of any thing like impropriety of design in doing so. But, sir, said Mr. S., whatever may have been the purity of intention by which the gentleman was actuated in that respect, one thing is very certain, and that is, that all who heard his concluding remarks on yesterday, could not possibly be mistaken as to the ob-presided over the Treasury Department felt it his duty to ject which he then had in view. If, sir, the gentleman had confined his remarks exclusively to the subject-matter of the resolution now pending, and the facts legitimately connected with it, I should not have deemed it incumbent on me to notice any remark that may have fallen from him; but, sir, the gentleman will pardon me for saying that I think he has very unnecessarily travelled out of the record to attack the administration for adopting a course of policy, in the exercise of its constitutional functions, imperiously demanded by the situation of the country, and by the circumstances which brought it into power. I have heard it, sir, whispered in different parts of the House that this is an attack upon the administration. If it be so, I regard it as a very feeble one. It seems to me that this and similar movements which have been made during this session, evince a rather cowardly disposition to lay an ambuscade and to attack the outposts, and thereby to shun the responsibility and risk of defeat in marching up to the main breastwork. He asked why it was that gentlemen shrunk from an honorable combat. If the administration is to be put down, why do not its enemies at once assume an attitude which will enable its friends to defend it? If gentlemen are disposed to make battle, let them come up to an object which is tangible, and the friends of the administration would be the last to shrink from an honorable combat. But wherefore was it considered necessary that, in the discussion of this resolution, the President should be attacked for the exercise of his constitutional functions? If this Hall is to be converted into a theatre of political crimination and recrimination, and every triviál question which comes before us is to be argued with reference to the pending contest for the Presidency, it is in vain for the people to look here for the speedy redress of those grievances which is so loudly called for all over the country. Subjects of national importance, in which the liberty and happiness of the country are deeply involved, will be made to yield to those of minor importance, and which, in my opinion, do not strictly comport with the dignity of the House. Sir, said Mr. S., I regret to see that those subjects which call loudly for our speedy action, seem likely to be laid aside as objects of secondary importance: but mainly and chiefly do I regret that this debate should have assumed a party aspect, because it tends greatly to disturb the peace and harmony which ought to characterize a deliberative assembly. We are the representatives of the people, chosen for our devotedness to the constitution, and to their interests; and we should ever remember that party contention is the bane of beneficial legislation. But, sir, if, in the course of the few remarks which I feel it my duty to make on the present occasion, I shall bring to the notice of the House subjects which may not sound so very pleasant in the ears of some gentlemen, they will bear in mind that this is a controversy not of my seeking. The honorable gentleman from Maine, who addressed the House yesterday, [Mr. EVANS,] expatiated with much emphasis on the subject of "reform," an object which the present administration has pursued;andIthought, Sir, before I proceed to examine this great and grave question, I trust the House will pardon me for a small digression, in order to notice some remarks which have fallen from gentlemen in relation to an observation made by me the other day, when discussing this subject, or rather that it will lend me its attention whilst I repeat, now, in sub stance, what I then said. Every gentleman who has addressed the House in opposition to the course recommended by the Judiciary Committee has, and for what purpose I pretend not to say, charged this collector with attempting to commit a crime which, if accomplished, would have amounted to subornation of perjury. Well, gir, what did I remark the other day? It was this, that, in my opinion, he could not be convicted of the crime imputed to bin, because, had the inspector been so base as to have sworn falsely, at the instigation of the collector, there was no evidence of it but that of the inspector himself, and that he, having perjured himself, could not give testimony as a witness. But, sir, let us examine this question a little further. It is asserted that the attempt to procure false tes timony is of itself sufficient to amount to the crime of subornation of perjury. I believe not. So that, even putting this accuser's testimony on the fairest possible grounds, it amounts to nothing more nor less than a simple charge against the accused of attempting to bribe the accuser to swear falsely, which he refused to do. Now, it occurs to me that the offender in this case is more strictly chargeable with the crime of bribery, for which, if substantiated by good testimony, he is punishable at common law, and not by the constitution. I contend that neither 317 MARCH 31, 1832.] OF DEBATES IN CONGRESS. Wiscasset Collector. [H. OF R. ribery nor subornation of perjury is an offence against ed to this House, are established, I will further pledge sir, I repeat, is the only legitimate course it can take, and Yes, sir,subjects of high importance to the welfare and fuBut, sir, let us examine the oath of the accuser. I think, ture happiness of the country are now before the House. I am not greatly mistaken, that myhonorable friend from They call loudly for our speedy and immediate action, and laine, who first addressed the House, [Mr. JARVIS,] has we ought by no means to waste our time in endless debate atisfactorily proved that this accuser is not only guilty of on such trivial subjects as the one now before the House, discrepancy in the statement of facts which he has given, to their everlasting prejudice and ruin. Sir, I contend nd which are totally irreconcilable, but that he is abso- that if we had the express constitutional power to impeach utely, and to all intents and purposes, guilty of the basest this officer, prudence and propriety would dictate to all erjury himself. What are the facts, sir? Why, he swears rational minds the expediency of referring it to the Secrehat he was inspector for seven quarters, when it has been tary of the Treasury. If we go on to take cognizance of atisfactorily shown that he only served six. He swears such trivial subjects as this, can we ever expect to reach dollars for the same, when it ap- those great subjects of national importance which demand he was entitled to ears, from his own oath at the Treasury Department, the speedy action of Congress? Sir, I cannot refrain from -dollars. So that, instead expressing my sincere regret that this subject has been hat he was entitled to onlyof the collector's being guilty of the crime of subornation brought before this House. The course which the debate of perjury, the one who makes the accusation is guilty of has taken shows but too plainly the effect it is likely to .much higher crime himself. But, sir, as it is not my in- have; and I repeat what I said in the outset of my remarks, ention to detain the House long, I proceed to examine that, if gentlemen are disposed to raise the cry of party, I he true question now before us, viz. Shall the investiga- would advise them to openly and fearlessly attack the Preion be referred to the Secretary of the Treasury? Sir, Isident, and I presume they will find his friends ready to rotest against the exercise of this power by the House of sustain him. I regret to see the course which has been Representatives, because it will, in my opinion, very ma-pursued this session with reference to the executive. erially detract from the representative dignity. I ask Gentlemen seemed disposed to avoid the responsibility of rentlemen to reflect and pause for a moment, before they attacking him, but level their artillery at his subordinates ake a boundless leap in the dark. Are gentlemen pre- and friends, mainly and chiefly, I fear, with a view to pared to carry the principle to its full extent-to play out injure him in the confidence and affection of the great he game, and thereby to extend the inquisitorial func-mass of the people who so much delight to honor him. I reions of this House, so as to embrace the malpractices of peat, again and again, that, if thisbethe objectof gentlemen, every petty officer of this Government? Whenever the the effort is a feeble one, and evidently shows a disposiprinciple shall be established that this House will extend tion to avoid an honorable combat. Sir, permit me to say ts impeaching prerogative to every petty postmaster and to gentlemen that the President shuns no responsibility, nferior office under the Government, you open an ever- but, on the contrary, rather seeks it; and, so far as he is asting field of litigation-a field which has no bound or immediately concerned in removals from office, I chalimit. The impeaching power has been wisely confided lenge the most rigid scrutiny of his bitterest enemies. His o this House; but I am certain the framers of the consti- head has grown grey in the service of his country, and his ution never intended it to extend to officers whose tenure civil acts will not lose by a comparison with his military of office is during the pleasure of the Executive. Those exploits. The gentleman from Maine [Mr. EVANS] has officers of the Government, and those only who are ap-indirectly charged the Secretary of the Treasury with bepointed by the President and Senate for life, are proper ing a volunteer accuser in the matter, by throwing open and legitimate subjects of impeachment before this House; his office to afford testimony against the removed officer. and when you extend it beyond the bounds I have pre-Sir, it would very ill become me to say any thing in jusscribed, you invest this House with an engine of power tification of that officer, either morally or politically. All wholly unknown to the constitution. But we have been who know him know that he is incapable of a wilful deold that we should not send this investigation into the reliction of duty. In affording the colleague of the genintechamber of the Secretary of the Treasury. It should tleman from Maine the facts which he adduced, so much be open to all the world. Sir, suppose it is sent into the I hope to the satisfaction of the House, I presume he did. intechamber of the Secretary, it will only be there while nothing more than his duty, and what is the universal cushe is examining the case, and afterwards it will be made tom at the department. Every member of Congress who public, just as much so as if you send it into one of your calls at a department of this Government, and asks for inCommittee rooms. I do not suppose, when gentlemen formation, is entitled to it, if the imparting of it does in no alk of giving publicity to this matter, that they mean to way disparage the public interest. So that, I think the oring the parties to the bar of the House, and examine gentleman will see, on reflection, that the Secretary has them here. I assure gentlemen I have no disposition to done nothing more than his duty in affording to an honorsmother the matter. They may make it as public as the able member of this House important information conheralds of the day can make it. All that I am contending nected with a very material issue now pending before it. against is the right of this House to interfere in such But the gentleman from Maine informs us that this is not petty matters. There is a different remedy whereby to exclusively a matter between the collector and inspector, reach such offenders as these: it is that salutary remedy of but between the collector and the violated laws of his Is there any law on your statute book reform which has been so beneficially and judiciously ex- country. Now, sir, I should like to be informed what law tended by the present administration, and for which it he has violated. has called down the maledictions of the aristocracy of the which inflicts punishment on a person for attempting to country. Let this case be referred to the Secretary of the procure false testimony? This, sir, is the extent of this Treasury, and I pledge my honor that it shall receive man's crime; and whilst I am free to confess that I very the most thorough investigation, and that in such man-much doubt the truth of what the inspector has sworn to, ner as shall give satisfaction to all parties. And if the yet, if true, and if it could be substantiated, the offender charges set forth in the bill of complaint, as exhibit-is in no way amenable to the laws of the land for it. I H. OF R.] Wiscasset Collector. [MARCH 31, 1832, so pretty much with the last administration, though not to so great an extent, for that administration found it convenient to make a few removals. readily admit that the charge, if true, exhibits a state of human depravity much to be deplored; but the individual is responsible to his God, and not to us, for it. But, the gentleman says, the House should examine the case, be- The train of succession to the Presidency, as I before cause it is our duty to see the laws executed. This, sir, stated, which existed for twenty-nine years, alarmed the is the very reason why I wish the whole subject to be re- people. They saw that, by such a succession, and the inf ferred to the Secretary of the Treasury. If he shall re-ence of theGovernment being brought to bear upon aPres fuse to do his duty, after he shall have examined the case, dential election, an evilaccrued, which, if not timely resist I will most willingly join with the gentleman from Maine ed, threatened disasters of a very serious nature,and which in taking such a course as will hold him responsible to this in their consequences, unless promptlycounteracted, would House for tolerating such malpractices in his department. tend to a usurpation of the liberties of the people. GeneSir, it is proper I should observe that this officer was not ral Jackson was brought out as the people's candidate, appointed by the present Secretary of the Treasury, and and by them, against the aristocracy, aided by all the mohe is in no way responsible for his conduct. The whole neyed influence of the Government patronage, was sustainof the transaction took place before the present Secretary ed and elected. Sir, I do not wish to be understood as came into office, and it is, therefore, unjust to suppose charging the last administration with giving sanction to that the Secretary can have any particular partiality for the unprincipled opposition which was raised against the him. But it is said the Secretary has no power to inves- present incumbent, nor do I know that they tried to pretigate this matter that he cannot issue a commission to vent it; one thing is certain, it was done under their intake testimony, &c. Now, sir, I consider this the least of mediate eye. There was scarcely a Government paper all objections to the course I am advocating. Suppose in the United States which did not give currency to the you refer this matter to the Secretary, and he directs the vilest and basest slanders not only on the well-earned fame district attorney of the State of Maine to examine into it, of the President himself, but of the partner of his bosom. and report the facts to him. Do gentlemen suppose that Not content with abusing him for his public acts, his dothe truth could not be come at in this way? Why, sir, mestic circle and his fireside repose were invaded by the we all know that the accuser would gladly come before ruthless hand of his enemies, and his most private acts any tribunal to give testimony; and this being done, the dragged before the public. And, sir, in this disreputable accused would not, I suppose, omit to rebut any charges drama, what part did the officers of the Government which might be laid against him. It seldom fails that ac- throughout the country perform? Why, sir, there is cusers are loath to go before any tribunal; and this being scarcely one that has been removed, that had not in some the first step in the investigation, the accused feels it his way or other extended the patronage of his office to give duty to go as a matter of defence. So that, I apprehend currency to the base slanders which were propagated that on this score there could be little or no difficulty. through the venal presses. But, sir, in defiance of all, General Jackson prevailed, and was elected by a majority unprecedented in the history of this country, and which not only manifested the deep rooted confidence in which he was held in the affections of a grateful country, but showed, in an unexampled manner, the patriotism and virtue of the people. Elected by such an overwhelming majority, and coming into power under the circumstances he did, he was bound to reform the abuses which had crept into the Government. One class of those whom he felt it his duty to remove from office, was a set of superannuated, worn out officers, who had grown rich with treasury pap, and of such, understand, was the officer removed at Wiscasset. Another was a train of defaulters; and a third, those who had abused the patronage of their offices by endeavoring to influence the elections. And, sir, for all this salutary reform, the President has been traduced in the most unexampled manner. With this short and cursory view of the question, Mr. Speaker, I should have felt it my duty to stop, had not the gentleman from Maine [Mr. EVANS] caught at this as a favorable opportunity to animadvert strongly upon the course which the present Executive has felt bound to pursue in relation to removals from office. I am very far, sir, from being one of those who would at any time, or under any administration, lend my sanction in aid of a system of reformation which amounts to an unlimited proscription of all those in office who might choose to differ with the Executive. Such a course I humbly conceive to be unjustifiable under any administration; and, sir, I have yet to learn that this administration has pursued this course, or even one approximating to it. I am frank to admit that abuses haveexisted under this administration in some few cases, and pray point to me the administration under which such has not been the case. And, sir, under this administration, where an abuse has existed, it has been those in whom the President confided that abused the trust, and not him. And I now not only challenge, but defy the most malignant enemy that the President has, to point his finger to one single removal he has made, in which he was not justified. General Jackson was pledged to the country to reform the abuses which had crept into the Government, and, in extending it, it is only to be regretted that he has not gone further, What, sir, was the situation of the Government when he came into office? From the days of Mr. Jefferson down to the time which brought General Jackson into office, including a period of twenty-nine years, there had been a continual succession to the Presidency, of the Secretary of State; each successor stepped in upon the heels of his friend. Mr. Jefferson, when he came into office, reformed the abuses which had crept into the Government, in equally as extensive a manner as General Jackson has done. He appointed his friends to office indiscriminately; and his most intimate friend and companion in politics, Mr. Madison, succeeded him. There was no need of reform by him, because those who were the political friends of his predecessor were his also: and so with Mr. Monroe, and I have said thus much in justification of the course of the administration which has caused so much noise in the country, not that I concede the point that the President is responsible to this House for the exercise of his constitutional prerogative, but because I fear no consequence which can possibly grow out of the clamor which is raised here or elsewhere against him. In those sections of the country where the evil is said to have existed to its greatest extent, he is this day more popular than when he came into office; and, sir, this speaks volumes to his enemies. He is responsible to his constituents, and not to this House, for his conduct; they will judge him correctly, and, sir, I fear not the result. It is matter of small moment to them who is collector here or there, or who shall fill this office or that. They look to the President to take care of the national affairs. The foreign relations of the country, under this administration of "misrule," present a spectacle of unexampled prosperity. The efforts of other administrations to raise the national honor, and the prosperity of the country, sink into insignificance and contempt when compared with those of the present one. The people of this country will not be deceived by the cries of "proscription," for the removal of a few petty officers, when they know the object of the individual who resides over the destinies of the nation is their peace, iberty, and happiness. I feel, sir, that I owe the House an apology for so long respassing on their patience, and for a seeming deparcure from the subject before the House. Other gentlemen have thought proper to take a survey of the politics of the day, and I trust I shall be pardoned for following their example. I have felt it my duty to say thus much, and I cannot conclude my remarks without again expressing my regret that this subject should have found its way here. But such having been the case, I hope that the resolution of the Judiciary Committee, praying to be discharged from it, and that it be referred to the Secretary of the Treasury, will be agreed to. [H. of R. I understood that it was in consequence of the remonstrances of the Delegate from Arkansas, that the contract was not completed. There is one fact, however, for which I am indebted to the Telegraph; and that is, that the President had full knowledge of the business, and that it did not meet with his disapprobation.. Is not William B. Lewis still suffered to hold his office? And is any fur ther proof needed to convince any man of his guilt? Unlimited confidence in the President is a doctrine unknown to the constitution. We are placed here to check the Executive. But now, it is thought the only mark of genuine patriotism to profess the most unbounded devotion to the will of the President; and the conduct of every officer, favored by the President, must be exempt from all inquiry or censure. "It does not become us," said a Roman knight, in the Senate, boasting of his friendship Mr. SPEIGHT, of North Carolina, was followed by for Sejanus, and addressing himself to Tiberius-" It does Mr. STANBERRY, of Ohio, who said he hoped the not become us to inquire into the person you are pleased motion to discharge the Committee on the Judiciary from to prefer above others, or into reason. To you Heaven the further consideration of this matter, would not prevail. has given a consummate judgment. To us there remains It is admitted, said he, that the collector is an officer liable the glory of a cheerful obedience." Language fit for the to be impeached by the constitution; and that, if the ears of a tyrant, master of the lives and property of his charges made against him be true, they constitute an im-subjects; but most unfit for the ears of the Chief Magispeachable offence. But it seems to be thought that be- trate of a free people, holding his power by their will, cause he was appointed by the President, and remova- and responsible to them for its abuse. ble at his pleasure, it would be encroaching upon the President's prerogative for this House to meddle with the officer. I rise chiefly for the purpose of entering my protest against this doctrine. If this House sanction it, we will relinquish the most salutary power vested in us by the constitution. Mr. ALLAN, of Kentucky, said the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. SPEIGHT] has denounced this proceeding, in the fashionable language of the times, as being an attack upon the present administration. Of late a new criterion is established, by which the merits not only of men but of measures are determined. When the courts decide causes according to their sense of justice and the laws of the land, they are severely censured for aiming blows at a particular individual. The resolves of the national Senate are placed under condemnation, because it is asserted they are covert attacks on men in power. If the people petition Congress to establish a national bank, their petitions are represented to be false clamors, and the measure as a political movement, intended to benefit or injure the election of some aspirant to office. When the people present a request to us to make inquiry into the conduct of one of their own officers, it is construed into an offence against the President. The question is no longer, are measures right or wrong? Will they benefit or injure the people? But the sole inquiry seems to be, how will the decision of questions affect the election of great men? Is it certain, if the most satisfactory proof were made of the guilt of this officer, that he would be removed by the head of the Treasury Department, or by the President? Sir, the people whom I represent, have tried the experiment of endeavoring to effect the removal of a United States' officer, by making complaints against him to the head of a department. The superintendent of the Cumberland road in Ohio was guilty, not only of defrauding the Government, but of oppressing and defrauding individuals with whom contracts were made for the construction of the road. Added to this, he was notoriously incompetent for the discharge of the duties of his office. Complaints were made to the late Secretary of War, who sent a respectable and intelligent officer of the army to investigate the charges. This officer (Major Talcott) did on the spot enter into a laborious investigation of the conduct of the superintendent. He took the testimony of witnesses on oath, and the superintendent had every opportunity of making his defence. The testimony, accompanied by the report of Major Talcott, was transmitted to the War Department. I have heard (for I have not read the testimony or the report, but I have no doubt of the fact) that the testimony did most fully prove the charges made against the superintendent, and the report of Major Talcott recommended his removal. Well, sir, was the superintendent removed? No such thing. He still holds the office; and, notwithstanding the great interest which Ohio has in the continuation of this road, I believe most of her representatives feel almost indifferent whetherany furtherappropriations be made, if this superintendent is permitted to hold his office. We know that the money will be wasted, and that the work will languish. The superintendent of the Cumberland road is not the only officer who has been suffered to continue in office, after proofs of his transgressions had reached the President. Was the late Secretary of War removed in conse-stands charged with high crimes and misdemeanors. All quence of his attempt, fraudulently, to give to Governor Houston the contract for Indian rations? I derive my knowledge of this transaction not from the columns of the Telegraph. The whole affair was known to me at the time it took place. The editor of the Telegraph gives himself too much credit for defeatingthis attempted fraud. VOL. VIII-146 We are rapidly advancing to the point where, forgetful alike of the requirements of the constitution and the interests of the people, our Government will be administered solely on mere personal consideration, for the benefit of the governors, and not for the benefit of the governed. In my place here, as a representative of the people, my course shall not be controlled or influenced either by a desire to injure or benefit any man. No matter who may be in power or out of power, the Government ought to be administered on fixed principles, not with a view to put up or put down political men, but solely and exclu sively for the interest and prosperity of the people. This is the people's Government. Of the facts in the case under consideration, I know nothing. With the individuals referred to in this proceeding, I am wholly unacquainted, and so far feel no particular interest. But the novel and anti-republican doctrines which have been boldly advanced on this occasion deserve some notice. An officer of your Government admit that an inquiry ought to be made; but the gentlemen contend that it is not fit and proper that this House should make the inquiry-that the charges ought to be referred to the decision of the Secretary of the Treasury-that the representatives of the people should only exercise appellate jurisdiction. |