The friends of the Executive held, on the other hand, that a proper exercise of power in the administration of the law vested the right to remove from, and appoint to office. Moreover, it was essentially fit that the political friends of the President should be associated with him in the government.

The agitation of this subject elicited information respecting appointments of former administrations.

During General Washington's term of office there were nine removals ; of these one was a defaulter. In John Adams' administration of four years, there were ten removals; one of these was a defaulter. In Jefferson's, of eight years, there were thirty-nine. In James Madison's, of eight years, there were five removals, of which three were defaulters. In James Monroe's, of eight years, there were nine removals, of which six were for cause. In J. Q. Adams', of four years, there were two removals, both for cause.

Total removals by the six Presidents, seventy-four. The number of appointments made by General Jackson during the first recess of the Senate was one hundred and seventy-six, principally in consequence of removals of political opponents from office. In answer to a resolution of the Senate, the Postmaster-General reported that, between the 4th of March, 1829, and the 22d of March, 1830, four hundred and ninety-one postmasters had been removed.

Respecting the removal of postmasters; Mr. Niles, a distinguished political writer of that day—a friend of the Administration, says: "Political considerations, except those of the broadest and most noble nature in the spread of intelligence) never entered into the institution of the post-office department. It becomes contaminated when reduced to the dominion of party, and confidence, once lost, is slowly regained. Deeply interested in the



business of the post-office establishment, and knowing the effect that must follow a loss of confidence in its management, we were exceedingly anxious that honest and capable, industrious, and obliging postmasters should not be dismissed for opinion's sake. If there were abuses of the privileges allowed to postmasters, on the one side, they were not wanting on the other. What was improper in one party cannot have been right in its opponent. And there is also this important difference; not one of the postmasters recently in office had been appointed to supersede another because of political opinion, so far as we ever heard ; and even if it had been so, it was to have been expected that these were rather against than favorable to the last Administration-Mr. McLean being understood as a decided friend of the election of Gen. Jackson. Yet we do not believe he suffered his private feelings to enter into the performance of his public duties. But now persons are dismissed without the preferring of charges against them affecting their moral character or personal standing."

It is not our province to depart from history to the discussion of principles, but no reflecting mind can but regard the sweeping changes which accompany every revolution in national politics as most pernicious, and largely destructive of the best interests of the country. Not only this, but its tendency to political and governmental corruption is as sure as it is rapid. Instead of a general election being a contest for principle, it is rendered a scramble for office.

In addition to the displeasure created by Gen. Jackson in his general removals from office, he was censured for his extensive executive patronage of members of Congress-a practice which, in a letter to the Legislature of Tennessee, he declared to tend inevitably to corruption.

A call growing out of the dissatisfaction with the appointment of members of Congress to office by the President, was made upon Mr. Adams, inquiring as to the extent to which this practice had been carried. The list of each administration contained those appointed during its existence, and for six months subsequent to its expiration. The whole number which had been appointed was 117, as follows: Appointed by Washington, 10; by John Adams, 13; by Jefferson, 25; by Madison, 29; by Monroe, 35; by John Q. Adams, in thirteen months, to the time of the report, 5. During the first three months, the number appointed by Gen. Jackson was 12.

The consideration of these topics tended greatly to irritate the public mind, and hasten the formation of parties and party distinctions.

[ocr errors]



[ocr errors]

The terms Federalists" and “ Democrats " became almost obsolete under the policy so successfully commenced by President Monroe; and that too with the advice of Gen. Jackson, who, in his famous letter to Mr. Monroe in 1816, not only earnestly advised him to “destroy the monster Party," urging that the “ Chief Magistrate should never indulge in party feelings,” but recommended the appointment of well-known and distinguished Federalists to high and honorable offices. Yet now, by a strange revolution, those party names were revived with bitterness unparalleled save, perhaps, in the contest of 1798–9. At that period parties were less distantly separated in principle than the masses who constituted them believed. Ultras there were in each party. Yet for “ party's sake' the leaders must be sustained. That party differences were more imaginary than real, we have the expression




of Mr. Jefferson in his inaugural, after passing the ordeal of a most bitter political campaign. “We are all Federalists, all Republicans," said he, and " differences of opinion were not always differences of principle."

Many of those measures maintained by the Federalists and opposed by the Democrats, as a party, were ultimately indorsed by the latter, and became tests of party fidelity. To employ the language of a candid and able political writer of those times wherein the events of which he treats transpired: “Before the war, the Federalists were for a regular and respectable naval establishment, and for the Bank; but after the war, no one of the Democratic party advocated gun-boats (which had once been the test of party !!!) and a majority of this party also favored the re-establishment of such an institution as it had itself destroyed. These were among the Federal triumphs,' as well as in setting forth the principle of protecting the national industry, which belongs more to ALEXANDER HAMILTON than to Thomas JEFFERSON : for, though the latter maintained the application of that principle in his report, as Secretary of State, on the Fisheries--the former, as Secretary of the Treasury, marked out and prescribed its extent TO THE FULNESS OF INDEPENDENCE AND

On the other hand, we had our triumph' in the establishment of more liberal principles, and new responsibilities in public agents. If, on the part of the Federalists, they held erroneous ideas as to the necessity of a strong government,' we were almost as incorrect in our zeal to reduce the general and necessary powers

of government; that, if the Federalists wished too much to extend the foreign commerce and relations of the United States, the Democrats desired too much the establishment of a rigid terrapin policy. And it may be well to remark, that the business of our foreign relations, neither in


[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

its principles nor its practice, was ever so much extended as at this present season of revival of ' Democracy,' but such extensions were among the charges we preferred against the Federalists in 1998–9.”

The force of the above extract applies equally to the policy and practice of a standing army. Ever since the war of 1812, the same writer remarks, we have kept in pay three or four times as many officers as are required for the rank and file in service.” “ It was Democratic in all the South to protect domestic manufactures, and force regulations of trade on the people of the East; but now it is Democratic with many, and not in the South only, to stand violently opposed to domestic manufactures.”

We have instanced in these illustrations, which might be extended much further, the changes wrought in the principles of parties from the period of their formation to the time when President Jackson ignored the "infallibility of the decrees of the Supreme Court," in assuming for the Executive the right to enforce the law as “he understood it.”

At the opening of the new Administration, a generai disposition was evinced among the opponents of the Executive to give his measures a fair trial. It was not definitely known what line of policy he would feel bound to adopt. Certain of his supporters maintained that he would not pursue the course foreshadowed by the votes which he had cast as a member of the Senate. Gen. Jackson had not occupied so prominent a position before the country as many of his compeers, yet, as a senator, he had definitely defined his position on the long disputed question of the constructive power of Congress. He had voted in the affirmative on eight different bills providing for Internal Improvements by the General Government; and his support of the tariff of 1824—which was founded on the principle of protection,-classed him in sentiment with Mr.

« ForrigeFortsett »