From 1,.act No. ID
{"character_count": 5512, "word_count": 982, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9768999814987183], "ccnet_perplexity": [623.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
LAW OF lsfi.

 During the first portion of Henry Clay's political career, he was emphatcally THE | DEMOCRAT. There was no popular doc Urine to which he did not subscribe He was always for the People and 'cih the People and we believe it was some distinguished Englishman who called him ''the great Com nlORer.n

 N man went further in intoxicating the duty of obedience to the will of the People by their servants in Congress and the Legis- latures of the States, or was more prompt in denouncing and attempting to punish delin- quent Senators and Representatives. In 1911 the will of the State of Kentucky was clear ly expressed against the rechartering the old Bank of the United States; but John Pope, then Mir. Clay's colleague in the United States Senate, disobeyed the instructions, and voted for the recharter. For that net Mr. Clay and his friends put him down in Kentucky, though man of excellent talents and better character than his rival.

 Although Mr. Clay afterwards went over to the Bank, he continued to profess the same faith on the subject of instructions, both pop

  brated Compensation Bill at the session of Congress in 1Sl5-l6, and for it's repeal at the next session. The reason he gave for this change was the wiH ot his constituents. In a speech which may be found in the National lntelligencer of January, 1877, he thus laid down the doctrine of instructions, as he re- cognized ii both in theory and practice, viz :;

 'sMr. Clay said he agreed perfectly in the sentiment, that instructions given by the peo- pie are obligatory on the Representatives This was a principle consecrated by the Re- volution, insepdrable from all free gorcrn- meat, and which he therefore hoped never to see departed from, in practice, under ours. Whilst, then. he had seat on this floor, Mr. C. said, 1t was immaterial hoc he arrived at the will of his constituents, or what were the eridences of it; it was sufficient that he should know it. In all cases of expedieney, he held the doctrine oi aii obligation on his part to observe the instructions, express or implied, of his constituents.n

 But Mir. Clay was ambitious to he Presi- dent. He had seen the Secretary df State succeed to the Presidency, until he looked upon 1t as the established order of succession. He thought he should be secure of the prize, if he could but place himself in the line of 'ssafe preeedents,n as he himself called that position in 1925.

 When, by the result of the electoral cleo ton in 1891, it was found that the contest ill the House of Representatives, would rest between Andrew Jackson and John e. Adams, the legislature of Kentucky, by an over whelming majority, adopted the following resolutions, viz:

 "Resolped, Sc. That the members of the House of Representatives in the Congress of the United States from this State, be request ed to vote for General Andrew Jackson as President of the United States.

 "Resolred, ds Me opinion of this LegiSia- lure, That Gen. Andrew Jackson is the se- cond choice of the State of Kentucky for the next President of the United States; that a very large majority of the people of this State prefer General Jackson to Mir. Adams or Mir Crawford; and that the members of the House of Representatives in the Congress of the United States will, by complying with the request herein signiied, faithfully and truly represent llle feelings and wishes of the good people of Kentucky"

 What said Mr. Clay' In letter to friend in Virginia, dated 4th Feb. 1925, and pub lished m the National Journal of 2Sth April 1928, he said

 ''What do you desire2 That l should vote for Mr. Crawford : cannot. For Gen Jackson? l WILL NOT"

 Suiting the action to the word he voted ioi MT. Adams and by his vote and influence made him President, and received the office of Secretary of State at his hands.

 It was THE WILL OF MIR. CLAY, mol tfe ,eiH of Kemucky, which gave her vote to Mir. Adams, and gave President to the nation.

 Whatever weight might be given to Mr. Clay's excuses for his fragrant violation of the will and wishes of his State, in giving hel vote for Mir. Adams in 1925, there is more recent case in which he stands without the shadow of an apology. Since that time, he has recognized the doctrine of instructions in it's fullest extent On the l4th January 1S39 certain resolutions of the North Caro- lima Legislature were presented to the United States Senate, of which Mr. Clay was then { member, requesting their Senators to vote fol resembling the expunging resolution, for the distribution of the land money, &c. witt which the Senators from that State refused ic comply. .Mr. Ciay gratuitously took then to task, and in short speech, reported 1T the National Intelligencer of Jan. l6, 1899 thus laid down the doctrine of instructions viz.

 And what IS the doctrine of instructions as 1t is held by all , Is it not that we are to conform to the wishes of our constituents Is it not that we are to act, not in our own but in delegated character; And will any who stand here pretend that, whenever the, know the wishes and will of those who sen them here, they arc not bound 10 conform to that will entirely, Is it not the doctrin' that we are nothing more than the mirror t' reflect the will of those who called us to ou digni6ed office This is the view which take of the doctrine of instructions.

 ''And now ask, is any peculiar languag necessary, other than that by which the vii of our constituents may be understood an carried outs Is there but one word tha, w;l