The writings of James Madison, comprising his public papers and his private correspondence, including numerous letters and documents now for the first time printed. |
TO JAMES MONROE. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | The writings of James Madison, |  |
TO JAMES MONROE.
Dear Sir,—I have received your two favors of the
10th & 23d inst. The prospect of a favorable issue
to the difficulties with Spain, is very agreeable.
I hope the ratification will arrive without Clogs on
it; and that the acquisition of Florida will give no
new stimulus to the Spirit excited by the case of
Missouri. I am glad to learn that a termination
of this case, also is not despaired of. If the new
State is to be admitted with a proviso, none better
occurs than a declaration that its admission is not
to imply an opinion in Congress that its Constitution
will be less subject to be tested & controuled by the
Constitution of the U. S. than if formed after its
now members of the Union.
It is a happy circumstance that the discussions
renewed by the offensive clause introduced by
Missouri, are marked by such mitigated feelings
in Congress. It argues well as to the ultimate
effect which you anticipate. The spirit and manner
of conducting the opposition to the new State, with
the palpable efforts to kindle lasting animosity
between Geographical divisions of the nation will
have a natural tendency, when the feverish crisis
shall have passed, to reunite those who never differed
as to the essential principles and the true policy of
the Gov.t. This salutary reaction will be accelerated
by candor & conciliation on one side appealing to
like dispositions on the other; & it would be still
farther promoted by a liberality with regard to all
depending measures, on which local interests may
seem to be somewhat at variance, and may perhaps
be so for a time.
Your dispositions towards Mr. T. Coxe are such
as I had counted on. I shall regret, if it so happen,
that nothing can properly be done for him. I feel
a sincere interest in behalf of Doct Eustis.[19]
The
expedient at which you glance would I suppose be
in itself an appropriate provision; but I am sensible
of the delicacy of the considerations which I perceive
weigh with you. I wish he could have been
his public career with the most apt felicity.
Is not the law vacating periodically the described
offices an encroachment on the Constitutional attributes
of the Executive?[20]
The creation of the office
is a legislative act, the appointment of the officer,
the joint act of the President & Senate; the tenure
of the Office, (the judiciary excepted,) is the pleasure
of the P. alone; so decided at the commencement of
the Govt. so acted on since, and so expressed in
the commission. After the appointment has been
made neither the Senate nor H. of Reps. have any
power relating to it; unless in the event of an impeachment
by the latter, and a judicial decision
by the former; or unless in the exercise of a legislative
power by both, abolishing the office itself, by
which the officer indirectly looses his place; and
to get rid of the tenant, and with a view, by its
reestablishment, to let in a new one, on whom the
Senate would have a negative, it would be a virtual
infringement of the constitutional distribution of the
powers of Government. If a law can displace an
officer at every period of 4 years, it can do so at the
end of every year, or at every session of the Senate,
and the tenure will then be the pleasure of the Senate,
as much as of the President, & not of the P. alone.
Other very interesting views might be taken of
the subject. I never read if I ever saw the debates
on the passage of the law. Nor have I looked for
precedents which may have countenanced it. I
suspect that these are confined to the Territories,
that they had their origin in the ordinance of the
old Congress in whom all powers of Govt. were confounded;
and that they were followed by the New
Congs. who have exercised a very undefined and
irregular authority within the Territorial limits;
the Judges themselves being commissioned from
time to time, and not during good behaviour, or the
continuance of their offices.
William Eustis was elected to Congress from Massachusetts in
1820 and served till 1823, whea he was elected Governor of Massachusetts,
holding the office until his death in 1825.
The act of May 15, 1820, "to limit the term of office of certain
officers," provided that district attorneys, collectors of customs,
naval officers, surveyors of customs, navy agents, receivers of public
moneys for lands, registers of the land offices, paymasters in the
army, the apothecary general, the assistant apothecaries general and
the commissary general of purchases should be appointed for a term
of four years, but should be removable at pleasure.
On this subject Madison wrote to Jefferson, January 7, 1821:
In the late views taken by us, of the Act of Congress, vacating
periodically the Executive offices, it was not recollected, in justice
to the President, that the measure was not without precedents. I
suspect however that these are confined to the Territorial establishments,
where they were introduced by the Old Congs. in whom all
powers of Govt. were confounded; and continued by the new Congress,
who have exercised a like confusion of powers within the same
limits. Whether the Congressional code contains any precedent of a
like sort more particularly misleading the President I have not fully
examined. If it does, it must have blindly followed the territorial
examples.—Mad. MSS.
| The writings of James Madison, | |