SENATE.]

President's Protest.

[MAY 7, 1834.

to the full extent that bank intelligence and bank publica- diction, exercising extrajudicial power, and conducting tions could go, the public mind was warned and prepared an ex parte proceeding, but clouds of new charges, to witness an attempt to get up a formal impeachment volleys of new epithets, and torrents of new invective; against President Jackson, as soon as Congress met. The with an affected cry of danger, and standing in the dismissal of Mr. Duane, because he would not give the breach; as if public attention could be drawn off from order for the removal of the deposites; the appointment the true point in dispute-from the examination of the of Mr. Taney to give that order, and the consequent ex- Senate's, conduct-by mere dint of clamor, by reckless ercise of illegal and unconstitutional power over the accumulation of fresh accusation, by distortion and perTreasury of the United States, which was held to be the version of every word in the protest, and by pursuing the Bank of the United States, were the notorious and pro- President, like a constable's posse, with one incessant upclaimed grounds for demanding the contemplated im-roar, as if engaged in the hue-and-cry pursuit of a fugipeachment. Congress meets on the third day of Decem-tive from justice. No, sir, said Mr. B., this is not the ber; day after day, and week after week, passes away, business now in hand. The present question is to examand no member is found to rise in his place to move the ine into the constitutionality of the Senate's proceeding impeachment which the bank presses had so openly de-against the President, and not to try the President over manded and so confidently foretold. No member of the again upon the old accusation, or to eke out stale charges House rises in his place to commence that proceeding with new aggravations. The Senate has judged the Preswhich, under the constitution of the country, could only ident, and the country will now judge the Senate. Our commence in the House of Representatives, the immedi- present occupation is the defence of the Senate; and ate organ of the people's grievances, as well as of the what is that defence, stripped of all additions and glosspeople's rights, and appropriately styled the grand in-es, and reduced to its point and essence? What is that quest of the nation. No member of that body rises in defence, now that all the defenders have been heard; his place to obey the impulsion of the bank, to avenge its when the last advocate has spoken, and the case is ready cause, to verify its proclamation, and to move the im- for submission to the judgment of the people? What is peachment of the President. In a body of two hundred this defence? Sir, it is nothing more nor less than a refand forty-eight members, many of them young, many uge under a subterfuge-a flight from every thing like warm, impetuous, daring, none could be found to minis- defence-and a palpable confession that no defence can ter to the vengeance of the bank, and to redeem the be made; for the whole excuse of the Senate rests upon a pledge for which that institution stood committed in the solitary assumption which every speaker has made, and face of the country. The im- which assumption is neither true in fact nor material in peachment could not be commenced in the House of law. It rests upon the assumption that the motives of Representatives! What next? It is actually commenced the President were not impugned! that wicked, corrupt, in the Senate! On the 26th day of December-just three and criminal intentions were not imputed to him! This weeks after Congress had met-and when the whole sub- is the sum total of the defence. "The resolution is ject of the finances, the treasury, and the bank, had silent as to the motive," says one, [Mr. CLAY.] "It been referred to the Finance Committee, to originate the carefully abstains from the imputation of a criminal inlegislative measures which the case might require, a reso- tent," says another, [Mr. LEIGH.] "It imputes no crime; Jution is laid upon the table of the Senate, by a member it charges no corrupt motive; it proposes no punishment," of that body, to condemn the President for the identical says a third, [Mr. WEBSTER.] Here then, said Mr. B., is acts for which the bank presses had foretold, and demand- the whole point and power of the defence. Its concened his impeachment. trated essence lies in the allegation, that criminal intentions are not imputed to the President.

Upon this defence Mr. B. took two distinct and separate issues: first, that it was not true, in point of fact; and secondly, that if true, it was not material in point of law. In discussing the first of these issues, he said he should not commit the folly of confining himself to the words which were inserted in the resolution, especially as altered, and altered for the third time, in the face of the Senate, and the last hour of the debate.

The resolution is laid upon the table, without any legis. lative object; for the legislative inquiry had already gone to the appropriate committee. It is laid upon the table by a member of the Senate; a speech in the style and temper of the most relentless criminal prosecution, such as the civilization of the age does not admit against the greatest offenders, is prolonged for three days upon it; a debate of the same character rages for three months; the resolution is then three times altered by the mover in the face of the Senate, and a vote is He must be permitted to believe, and to maintain, that taken upon it, defined by an exact party line, finding the omission to charge a criminal intent, and especially its the President guilty of a violation of the laws and the careful and studied omission, operated nothing in favor of constitution, and actually condemning him, without trial, the Senate, but the contrary. The averment, though not for the commission of an impeachable offence, and that in the resolution, in words, was nevertheless effectually by the very body which could neither begin an impeach- there by implication; and, what is infinitely more, it was ment nor decline the trial of one when regularly brought evidently in the hearts, and notoriously in the speeches, of before them. The act of the Senate being finished and all the members who supported the resolution. The consummated, their sentence of condemnation being pro-charge was, therefore, in the bosoms of the judges; it was nounced the President, for the first time, breaks si- in their pleadings; it was promulgated in their speeches, lence, and lifts his voice in a proceeding so extraordi- even in all those delivered on the distress memorials, as nary in its nature, and so unjust in its consequences to on the formal resolution. Even now, within this hour, in himself. He sends in his protest! A calm and digni- the hearing of all present, the last speaker on the side of fied remonstrance, an impressive and temperate appeal the Senate [Mr. WEBSTER] has openly said, that Presiagainst the injustice that has been done him. In this dent Jackson's conduct, in assuming and sanctioning Mr. protest he has taken his stand upon clear, constitutional Taney's appointment of a salaried officer to superintend law-upon the first principles of criminal justice-that the deposite banks-(which appointment Mr. Taney never the Senate, being his judges, had no right to prejudge made!)—that such conduct of a President, in the time of his case, and to pronounce him guilty without trial or Washington and Jefferson, could not have passed a week hearing. This is the ground taken by the President; before it became the foundation for an impeachment. and what is the answer, the defence, the justification After this, what merit can there be in saying that evil inof the Senate! Not a response to the accusation, not a tentions are not charged on the record? The injury to reply to the charge, not a defence for usurping juris-the President is the same, whether in the record or not;

MAY 7, 1834.]

President's Protest.

[SENATE.

The

for being a man of sound mind, he is presumed to act with tially differed from prosecutions on indictments. intentious, and to violate the law and the constitution with difference, he said, was marked and essential, and exerbad intentions, if he violates them at all. Having sworn cised a decided influence over the whole proceeding. In to support them, the breach of the oath involves perjury. the United States, the sentence upon conviction on imTo the Senate the consequence is the same, whether the peachment, extended only to a removal from office, and a evil intention is retained in the heart, spread upon the rec- disqualification for holding future office, with an express ord, or proclaimed in the speeches of the Senators: in liability in the person thus removed and disqualified, to either case they pass upon the guilt and innocence of the a prosecution upon indictment, and judgment and punishaccused; and become disqualified, upon every principle ment upon that indictment, for the same offence, accordof honor and decency, for the office of judge, in the event ing to the law of the land, in the same manner as if no that a regular impeachment for the same offence should impeachment had taken place. Thus, the effect of conafterwards be preferred. Surely those Senators who viction upon an impeachment in the United States was have thus spoken, and thus impugned the motives of the purely preventive-purely to prevent further crime-to President, can never be impartial judges, although their prevent the same person from acting longer in a station in recorded opinion, upon the passage of the resolution, is which his actions were hurtful to the community; while limited to the fact of violated law and constitution. Rest-punishment, if any, was left to flow from the ordinary ing upon the notoriety of the speeches daily delivered on tribunals, and where the trial by jury was a safeguard to the floor of the Senate-widely diffused over the country the life and liberty and property of the innocent. In the in pamphlets and newspapers; pressed into the hands of eye of the American constitution, there is no punishment all readers, and stuck up in taverns, steamboats, and bar- following impeachment; for removal from office is not rebers' shops, to rouse the people against the President, and garded as punishment, which must follow from the indictto render him odious-relying upon the speeches, thus ment, if necessary, and be superadded to the removal and pressed into notice, replete with every violent epithet, disqualification; which could not be if the removal from crammed with every odious comparison-Cæsar, Nero, office, either in law or in fact, was punishment; for no Caligula, Cromwell, Bonaparte, and the infatuated Stu- man can be twice punished for the same offence. In Engarts; and referring to every lawyer's knowledge, that land, on the contrary, the sentence on conviction under the law presumes the bad intention for every illegal act, impeachment extends to legal and actual punishment, to he (Mr. B.) would go no further for evidence to prove punishment in person and in property; for the party may his first issue, that the Senate's defence was not true in be both fined and imprisoned. On indictments, as every point of fact. body knows, both in England and America, the direct obBut he meant to take, and to maintain, his great stand ject of the prosecution is punishment-punishment in upon the second issue, that the omission of the averment life, limb, person, or property; and preventive justice is of the criminal intent was not material in point of law; that only an incident, resulting from conviction for crimes, the resolution was the same without the averment as with which presumes too much depravity to admit of further it; and, that the infraction of the constitution, the wrong trust or confidence in the offender. Whenever, then, to the President, the subversion of all the rights of the punishment would follow conviction, whether on indictaccused, the invasion of the privileges of the House of ment or impeachment-whenever the life or limb of the Representatives, and the misconduct of the Senate, were party was to be touched-whenever his body might be cast just as complete and just as flagrant, in the adoption of into prison, or his property taken by fine or forfeiturethe resolution, as finally modified and passed, as it would in every such case, the quo animo, the state of the mind, have been if passed in the form it first wore, or if stuffed the criminal intent, was of the essence of the offence; and and distended with all the tautologous averments of wick- must be duly averred, and fully proved, or clearly infered intentions and corrupt motives-" moved and seduced rible from the nature of the act done; but, in the case of by the instigation of the devil, and not having the fear of impeachment under the constitution of the United States, God before his eyes"-which are to be found in the black-where the sentence could extend no further than merely letter editions of common law indictments.

to prevent the party from using his power to do further Briefly recapitulating what had been said by other Sen- mischief, leaving him subject to a future indictment, then ators opposed to the resolution, and especially by his old the intent of the party, whether good or bad, charitable friend from Tennessee, [Mr. GRUNDY,] whose skill as a or wicked, became wholly immaterial; not necessary to criminal lawyer he had been almost amused to see called be alleged, nor requiring to be proved, or to be inferred, in question; briefly adverting to the high and clear ground if the allegation should chance to be made. Every avertaken by these Senators; first, that the criminal intent was ment relative to the intention would be surplusage; for always presumed by the law when the illegal act was the mischief to the public was the same, whether a public proved; and, secondly, that the Senate's resolution was functionary should violate the law from weakness or wicknot an indictment, but a judgment; not the preferment, edness, from folly or from design. In either case the inbut the conclusion, of an impeachment; and that judg- jury to the community was the same; the unfitness of the ments never recited intentions; grounds which Mr. B. party to remain in office was the same; the inducement to undertook to affirm entirely upset the defence of the remove him the same; and, in both cases, the removal Senate. Leaving all these solid considerations where would be effected by impeachment; the community would others had placed them, he would proceed to a new point be protected from further injury by the sentence under in the case-to a new reason for the immateriality of crim-impeachment; and the offending party, if deserving punmal averments in prosecutions of impeachment. And ishment, would be turned over to the ordinary tribunals, upon this new ground would strip the Senate's defence of and to all the technicalities and formalities of a jury trial, the last disguise, and leave their resolution ready for the upon indictment, to receive that punishment. spunge of obliteration, and ripe for the knife of expurga- Young as the United States were, Mr. B. said, brief and tion, the moment the representation in the Senate should scanty as their history, and especially their criminal hisbe brought into harmony and concord with the feelings tory, yet was, still the history of these States already afand sentiments of the people. forded ample illustrations of the truth of the positions

Entering upon the examination of this new point, Mr. which he had taken relative to impeachments under the B. first called the attention of the Senate to the nature of constitution of the Union. It afforded examples of two an impeachment under the constitution of the United impeachments tried before the Senate, in one of which States, and wherein it differed from an impeachment in there could be no corrupt or wicked intention, for the England; while impeachments in both countries essen-party was insane, and therefore incapable both in law and

SENATE.]

President's Protest.

[MAY 7, 1834.

in fact, of being either corrupt or wicked; and in another, move and dispel that doubt. The first of these articles, of which a mere naked violation of law was charged, with- which is No. 1 in the impeachment, relates to the trial of out the slightest reference to the intentions, or quo animo Fries, at Philadelphia, and charged the judge with three of the party: he alluded to the cases of the Judges Pick- specific instances of misconduct in conducting that trial; ering and Chase. Mr. B. then went into a statement of and concluded them with the allegation that they were the impeachment of these two judges, to sustain the view" dangerous to our liberties," and "in violation of law he had been taking, and to apply historical facts and ju- and justice," but without the slightest reference to the dicial decisions to the legal doctrines which he had laid quo animo of the judge, or the state of mind in which down. Judge Pickering, a district judge of the United the acts were done. The article is wholly silent with States for the State of New Hampshire, was impeached respect to his intentions. The fourth article contains for acts of flagrant illegality, and which, in truth, implied four specifications of misconduct; all charged to have ocgreat wickedness. The articles of impeachment charged curred on the trial of Callender, in Richmond, and alwicked and corrupt intentions; yet it was proved that he leged them to be "subversive of justice," and "diswas incapable in law, or in fact, of wickedness or corrup- graceful to the character of a judge;" but were wholly tion; for he was utterly insane, both at the time of com- silent as to the intentions of the judge, and left the quo mitting the acts, and at the time he was tried for them; animo with which he did the acts entirely out of the record. and could not, and did not, appear before the Senate to The fifth article charged a specific and single violation of make any defence. His unfortunate condition was pro-law in ordering the arrest of Callender upon a capias, inved and admitted, and the Senate was moved, by counsel, stead of directing him to be called in upon a summons; to stop the proceedings against him, and to remit or post- but without imputing any motive or intention whatever, pone the trial; but the Senate took the clear distinction good or bad, to the judge, for preferring the capias to between a proceeding which could only go to a removal the summons. The only averment is, "that Callender from office and a disqualification for holding office, and was arrested, and committed to close custody, contrary a prosecution which might involve a criminal punishment; to law, in that case made and provided." Such were the and they proceeded with the trial, heard the evidence, three articles, said Mr. B., which charged violations of found the illegal acts to have been committed, and pro-law upon Judge Chase, without imputing criminal intennounced the sentence which the good of the community tions or corrupt motives to him; and upon which the judge required, and which the unfortunate judge was a proper was as fully tried, and made as ample a defence, both subject to receive-that of removal from office. They upon the law and the facts, as he did upon the five other did not add a sentence of disqualification for holding future offices; for he might again recover his understanding, and become a useful citizen. The Senate limited itself to a sentence which the good of the community de manded-which was applicable to misfortune and not to criminality—which was suited to the acts of the judge, and not to his intentions; a sentence which virtually acquitted him of evil intentions; for the acts were of such a nature as to have required, if committed by a person of sound mind, not only disqualification for future office, but prosecution and punishment upon indictment. Mr. B. relied upon this case as one of the strongest which history could present, or imagination could conceive, to show the immateriality of criminal intentions to support impeach ments under the constitution of the United States. It was a stronger case than it would have been if corrupt and wicked intentions had not been charged; for being charged, and then disproved, it was a positive decision of the Senate upon the total immateriality of the allegation; it was a clear declaration that the averment was surplusage, and that an officer should be impeached, and removed from office, for illegal acts alone, without the least reference to his intentions, and even in the face of the fact that he was incapable of legal volition, and therefore, could have no intentions in the eye of the law.

articles, which contained the ordinary averments of wicked and corrupt intentions. Neither the learned judge himself, nor any one of his counsel, numerous and eminent as they were, made the least distinction between the articles which charged, and the articles which did not charge, corrupt intentions. They went to trial upon the whole alike; put in no demurrers; made no motions to quash; reserved no points; and defended the whole uport the law and the facts of each separate case. This, said Mr. B., should exterminate doubt, and silence cavil. It is the decision of the managers, and they were eminent lawyers and profound statesmen!-it was the decision of the managers who prepared the articles of impeachment — the decision of the House which preferred them—the decision of the Senate who tried them-and the admission of the learned judge who was tried upon them, and of the able counsel who conducted his defence, that the quo animo averment, the allegation of wicked intentions, was entirely immaterial in an article of impeachment under the constitution of the United States.

Mr. B. made an apology, or rather stated his justification to the Senate, for having gone so minutely into the cases of the Judges Pickering and Chase. He had done so from a sense of duty to the President and to the country, and to prevent the law of the land from being borne The case of Judge Chase, Mr. B. said, was a case of a down by the weight of names, and the array of authority. different kind, to prove the some point: it was a case Many Senators had taken their stand upon the legal posiwith, or without, averments of criminal intentions. Judge tion, that these proceedings against the President are not Chase was impeached u, on eight articles; five of them tantamount to impeachment, because the resolution does charged corrupt and wicked intentions; three charged not contain the formal allegation of corrupt or wicked no intentions at all; being wholly silent upon the question intentions. Two, at least, of the Senators, [Messrs. WERof motives, and merely alleging the commission of the STER and LEIGH,] thus staking themselves upon this legal act, and the violation of the law. The three articles, position, were eminent lawyers, and possessed high and thus silent on the question of motives, were distinct and deserved reputation as jurists. Their opinions, if left substantive articles in themselves, not variations of the uncontroverted, if not completely overthrown, could not other articles, but containing new and distinct charges; but have great weight in the country. It was necessary and, therefore, to stand or fall upon their own merits, to encounter the high authority of their opinions, with without being helped out by a reference to the same the still higher authority of adjudged cases; and this was charges in another form, in another part of the proceed- most effectually and thoroughly done in the production ings. They were the articles first, fourth, and fifth. and application of the two impeachment cases of Judge Mr. B. would state them particularly; for, if the least Pickering and Judge Chase, in which the solemn judg doubt remained on the mind of any one, after seeing the ments of two full Senates, and the acquiescence of all case of Judge Pickering, the tenor of these three articles concerned, were set in opposition to the solitary opinions in the impeachment of Judge Chase would entirely re- of individual Senators: and thus the sole ground on which

MAY 7, 1834.]

President's Protest.

[SENATE.

the defence of the Senate rested, was swept from under rying it on; a grossness and turbulence of invective; a their feet, and expunged from the face of the earth. readiness to draw inferences without warrant, and to imAuxiliary to this defence of the Senate, but subordi- pute charges without evidence, which was never before nate to it, and insufficient in itself, was another point, exhibited in any American assembly-which has no paralMr. B. said, which several speakers had pressed into the lel in England, since the time that Jeffries rode the Westservice of a hopeless cause, but which had been most ern circuit, nor in France, except in the days of the exfully brought out, and chiefly relied upon by the last Sen- istence of the revolutionary tribunal-which cannot be ator who had spoken, [Mr. WEBSTER,] and who was un- tolerated in any country where civilization has advanced derstood to be charged with closing the defence on the far enough to require competitors for high office, in bepart of the Senate. It was this: That the resolution was coming adversaries, to remain gentlemen; and which, on a legislative act, and came within the legislative compe- this occasion, has presented the American Senate, and tency of the Senate; and, therefore, was not a judicial, that in reference to the American President, as sitting or criminal, proceeding. Mr. B. would rapidly examine, for the picture which General Hamilton, in the Federalist, and quickly explode, this forlorn auxiliary of a ruined has drawn of a heated and factious assembly, borne away cause. That it was not a legislative act, nor intended to by envy and hatred, running down an envied political adproduce legislation, was proved by every test to which it versary upon groundless accusations! in which passion could be subjected, and by every fact with which it could furnished charges; animosity supplied proof; the cunbe connected. 1. The nature of the resolution; which ning found tools; and the decision was regulated, not by complained that the President had violated the constitu- the guilt, or innocence, of the accused person, but by fion in dismissing Mr. Duane, and appointing Mr. Taney, the strength and numbers of the accusing party. and in exercising ungranted power over the Treasury; Continuing his remarks upon the indelicacy and indewhich, if true, could not be remedied by legislation; for corum of the Senate's conduct towards the President, Mr. Duane could not be put back into the Treasury De- Mr. B. said that Senators were the constitutional judges partment, nor Mr. Taney put out of it, nor the exercise of the President, selected by that instrument to sit upon of ungranted power be punished by a law of Congress. him, and, therefore, could not be challenged or set aside 2. The resolution averred the President's acts to be dan- for ill will or prejudice towards him. They were not gerous to the liberties of the people; which is matter for like jurors, to be set aside propter affectum, propter delecpunishment, and not for legislation. 3. The President's tum; and, therefore, should be the more delicate and acts, whatever they were, were done, and must be tried scrupulous in abstaining from all pre-occupation and judg by existing laws, and not by new ones; for ex post facto ment against him. If called to sit upon the trial of a laws cannot be passed. 4. The resolution was single, person to whom they were inimical, the question was in not joint; and therefore not capable of taking the form their own breasts to sit or retire. Withdrawal was cerof a law, as it could not go to the House of Representa- tainly the commendable course; and the Senate had wittives. 5. The whole legislative consideration of the nessed one instance, at least, of that conduct, and that question had been sent to a legislative committee, before within a few years past; but the example did not seem this resolution was brought in; and, therefore, it was to threaten, at present, to become contagious. wholly unconnected with a legislative object. 6. It was The refusal, or omission, of the House of Representnever referred to a committee, as legislative resolutions atives to impeach the President, the failure of any memalways are. 7. No legislative act has ever been predica- ber of the House to move against him, was next relied ted upon it, though passed long since. 8. No legislative upon by Mr. B. as an aggravation of the Senate's conduct act can be predicated upon it, for the subject-matter of in usurping the function of the House; although, by an it is not of a nature to admit of legislation. It complains infatuated perversity of logic, that omission of the House of a breach of the constitution; and laws cannot heal was expressly relied upon by one of the Senators, [Mr. those breaches. CLAY,] as a reason for the Senate to assume their office. Mr. B. having fully encountered, and, as he trusted No member from the House of Representative, fresh from and believed, entirely overthrown the whole defence set the ranks of the people-no member of that body, conup by the Senate, would now extend his view to some stituting the grand inquest of the nation, and exclusively auxiliary considerations, and examine the propriety and charged with the origination of impeachments-no such decorum of the Senate's conduct in adopting a resolution member could be induced, or stimulated, to follow the of this character against the President. lead of the bank press, and to prefer charges against PresThe Senate is composed of individuals, said Mr. B.,ident Jackson for violations of the law and constitution in some of whom aspire to the occupation of the place which dismissing Mr. Duane, because he would not give the President Jackson now holds, others of whom have con-order for removing the public deposites; in appointing tended with him for that place, and have been left by the Mr. Taney to give the order; and in assuming the exerpeople-longo sed proximus intervallo --at a long interval cise of ungranted power over the Treasury of the United behind; and others, again, who, having real or fancied States, which was alleged to be the Bank of the United grievances to complain of, appear before the public as States. No member of the House could be found to his implacable enemies and incontinent revilers. From make such a motion; and it was left for the Senate, by all such Senators, the laws of honor, a sense of decorum, an extra-judicial and ex parte impeachment, to usurp an respect for public opinion, and a due regard to the sanc-office which the appropriate organ would not exercise; tity of public justice, would require a rigorous impar- and thus to aggravate, by contrast, a proceeding wholly tality in the discharge of an acknowledged duty, and a unconstitutional in itself, and sufficiently odious in all its panctitious refusal to engage in any proceeding which attendant circumstances.

involved the assumption of gratuitous powers, or required The variations which the resolution had undergone at the discharge of invidious offices. It was a case even in the hands of its author, since it had been first introduced, which the refusal of many Senators to sit in judgment, was the next aggravation which Mr. B. pointed out. although a regular impeachment had been brought in, When first introduced it covered the very points which might have attracted the admiration, and commanded the bank press had indicated, and was couched in the very the applause, of all honorable men. This impartiality-words which they had used in demanding the impeachthis abstinence-this refusal to sit in judgment, had not ment of the President; and, in addition to that, contained been witnessed on this occasion; on the contrary, there the precise criminal averment which is usually found in had been witnessed an eagerness and promptitude in vol- impeachments for public offences, and which was actually unteering for attack; a violence and personality in car-contained in the first article of the impeachment against

VOL. X.--107

SENATE.]

President's Protest..

[MAY 7, 1834.

Judge Chase "dangerous to the liberties of the people!" circumstance, or a description of any one act, on which The first form contained three specifications of violated an issue could be taken? Why all this? Sir, said Mr. B., law and constitution, to wit, dismissing Mr. Duane, the why and the wherefore of all this was nothing more appointing Mr. Taney, and exercising ungranted power nor less than this: that no majority could be found in the over the Treasury of the United States, with an averment Senate (and that after three months' drumming and drillthat all this was dangerous to the liberties of the people. ing) to vote that the dismissal of Mr. Duane was a violaThe next shape it assumed left out the specifications on tion of the laws and constitution; no majority could be the subject of dismissing Mr. Duane and appointing Mr. found to vote that the appointment of Mr. Taney was a Taney, but retained the clause about exercising ungrant-violation of the laws and constitution; no majority could ed power over the Treasury, and the danger to the liber-be found to vote that the President had exercised unties of the people! The third metamorphosis of this granted power over the Treasury of the United States; most flexible and pliant resolution, left out all the speci-no majority could be found to vote that he had done any fications, and even the concluding averment of "danger-thing that was dangerous to the liberties of the people; ous to the liberties of the people!” and assumed a shape-no majority could be found to vote that the Bank of the "if shape it can be called, which shape has none," of United States was the Treasury of the United States; for such vagueness and generality, such studied ambiguity it was over that Treasury, and by assuming the responsiand duplicity of signification, such total independence of bility of recommending the removal of the public moneys facts, date, and circumstances, that the identification of it from that Treasury, that the specification was predicated, with the bank denunciation became impossible; the most of having exercised ungranted powers over the Treasury discordant confederates could unite in its support, for of the United States. No such majority could be found there was nothing specified to require their assent; and in this chamber; but a majority was found to hang a genall responsibility to public opinion was apparently evaded, eral charge over his head, which malignity and faction in the omission to specify the acts under the general might fill up and interpret as it pleased; but which concharges for which the President was condemned, and to tained no averment of any one illegal act whatever. the justification of which the accusing Senators could be was well understood that this general charge would be held down. received by the public, (which has neither means nor To expose the true nature of these resolutions, and to time to examine such things to the bottom,) as the full exhibit the variations which their flexible forms had un-conviction of that eminent magistrate of all that was laid dergone, Mr. B. contrasted them together in the Senate, to his charge in the first and second resolutions, and of all as they are here exhibited, in three parallel and confront- the fanfaronade about "seizing the Treasury," and uniting ing columns. "the sword and the purse," which was bruited in the "Resolved, That, by "Resolved, That, in "Resolved, That the speeches made in their support. Every speech made dismissing the late taking upon himself President, in the late was made upon the specifications in the first and second Secretary of the Treas the responsibility of re-executive proceedings resolutions; and these being abandoned, the speeches ury, because he would moving the deposites in relation to the pub- should share the same fate. But it was well known that not, contrary to his of the public money lic revenue, has assense of his own duty, from the Bank of the sumed upon himself the case would be otherwise; that the speeches would remove the money of United States, the authority and power stand, and the specifications in the first and second resothe United States in President of the Uni-not conferred by the lutions would be considered as adopted; and that deluded deposite with the Bank ted States has assumed constitution and laws, of the United States the exercise of a power but in derogation of and deceived multitudes would go on repeating, maintainand its branches, in over the Treasury of both." ing, and promulgating, as truths, the statements which the conformity with the the United States not President's opinion, granted to him by the opposition Senators had to give up, abandon, and surrenand by appointing his constitution and laws, der, as untruths, in the full face of the whole Senate. successor to effect such and dangerous to the removal, which has liberties of the peobeen done, the Fresi-ple."

First Form.

dent has assumed the exercise of a power over the Treasury of the United States not granted to him by the constitution and laws, and dangerous to the liberties of the people,"

Second Form.

Third Form.

Mr. B. took a nearer view of the resolution, as finally altered for the third time, and adopted by the Senate. He did so to show its studied ambiguity, its total want of certainty, and utter destitution of one visible or tangible point, either of law or fact, on which an issue could be taken. "Late executive proceedings." Here, said he, are three words, and three ambiguities. 1. Late. How late? When? at what time? this year? last year? or the

Mr. B. analysed these resolutions, more changeable year before. 2. Executive. Which part of the executhan the chameleon, which only changes color, while these tive? The Presidential, or the departmental? the act of change their form; he analysed these protean resolutions, the President, or the act of Mr. Taney? 3. Proceedings. which had changed their form three times in the face of Which of them? what proceedings? The dismission of the Senate; and found that the first contained three speci- Mr. Duane? the appointment of Mr. Taney? the cabinet fications of violated law and constitution, to wit: 1. The opinion? or the exercise of ungranted power over the dismission of Mr. Duane. 2. The appointment of Mr. Treasury? "In relation to the public revenue." What Taney. 3. The exercise of ungranted power over the part of the revenue? That which is in bond, or in the Treasury of the United States. The second contained hands of the collectors? or in the deposite banks, or in the one specification, to wit, the exercise of ungranted power in the first and second forms of the resolution, is definite, Bank of the United States? The expression, said Mr. B., over the Treasury of the United States; and the third contained no specification whatever, and dropped the clause and susceptible of an issue. It is this: "over the Treascontained in both the others-dangerous to the liberties ury of the United States;" a phrase which imparts to the of the people mind a precise idea, while the phrase, "in relation to the

Mr. B. wished to invoke and concentrate the attention public revenue," which is substituted for it, is not only of the Senate, and of all good citizens, upon these not equivalent in precision, but entirely different in meanchanges in the forms of the resolutions. Why were they ing; the first implying mastership over the money in the changed, and specification after specification dropped, Treasury; the second only indicating an action towards until not one remained? Why were all these facts, public money, which might be in the hands of collectors, charged upon the President, and sustained in elaborate never passed to the credit of the Treasurer, and, therespeeches for three months, why were they all dropped on fore, never in the Treasury. "Assumed upon himsel the last day of the debate, and the vote taken upon a authority and power. Assumed, but not exercised_ vague and general resolution, without a fact, a date, or a Why not use the word exercised? Assume the exercise