{"character_count": 5570, "word_count": 966, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9693999886512756], "ccnet_perplexity": [1009.2000122070312], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
mantle is claimed to have EaIlen and hear from one end of the land to the other the principles of Jackson ism proclaimed as his Own,-who can doubt that the cheek of the sage would mantle up with indignation and that in the GulOess of his soul he woa!d excIaim "VeriIy know you no, r? This ''hoisling false col ors' has been Ofncalculabe advantage to the Tories in the recent elections and will continue to be 50 un :i the mass Of the people comprehend and understand their deception and dupIiciy and learn the truth of the maxim that "all is not gold that gtters."

 JEFFERsoEIAN DEMOCRAT. POLITICAL SPECULATIONS-No.4 4.

 At an early period or the history of our government the question as the powers of removal by the Pre- sident was discussed In l789, when inc bill organiz- ing the department of foreign affairs, tnow the depar- ment of s,a,e,) before the House of Represents. ,ives in committee of the whole, there was a motion made by Mir. White strike the clause which de- clared the secretary removable by tire President. He said the power Of removal where express provision made, in the nature of things incidental to that of appointment; and as the Senate was, by tbe constitution, associated with the President in making l appointments tha; body must, n the same degree, participate in the power ot removing from office. Mir. White supported by Mir. Smith of S. c. Mir. Page, Mr. Stone, and Mir. Jackson. Those gentlemen con tended that the clause either unnecessary, or i'm. proper. lf the constitution gave the power to the President, repetition of the grant in act of Con- gress nugaiory 1.-the constitution did give it., the attempt confer it by law was improper. If it belonged conjointy to the President and the Senate, the House of Representatives should not attempt to abridge the constitutional prerogave of the other branch of the legislature. However this might be, they were clearly oflhe opinion that it placed

 in the President alone. In the power over all the ex- ecuve officers which the bill proposed to confer upon the President. the most alarming dangers liberty were perceived. IL in the nature of monarchi- cal prerosaliVe, and would convert them into the tools and creatures of his will. dependence vile individual would deter men of high and honorable minds from engaging in the public service and il, contrary to expectation, such men should be brough, into office, they would be reduced to the ne cess" of sacrificing every principle of "depe ndence to the will Of the Chief Magistrate, or of exposing themselves the disgrace of being removed from nf fee, and that too a time when ii might be longer 1 in their power to engage in other pursuits.

 Gentlemen they feared were too much dazzled with the spendor Of the virtues which adorned the actual President 10 be able to look into iHnrity But the framers of ihe constitution had confined their 10 the person who would most probably first fl the Presidential chair. The House of Representatives ought to follow their example. nod contemplate this power in the hands of an ambitious man, who migh, apply it to dangerous purposes; who might from price remove most worthy men fIom office.

 The amendment was opposed very srenuousIy. It argued by the oppoaers ,ha, ",he danger ,ha, a As ska. men from c6sce was treated as imaginary. IL was not by ,he spandor s.'acte& the chasaer os the pre. Chief Magistrate alone. that is opinion was to be defended. It was founded the structure of the office. The in whose favor majority of the peo. pie of this continent would unite, had probability a, least in favor of hs principles; in addition to which, the public odum that scoud ireuitaby attach to such conduct, 'ooutd De efectuGi security against t."

 From the above learned and able exposition of the powerr oft President by these men, as removals, it would seem there could be doubt as the course which he ought to pursue. Indeed theirs would seem

 to be te only rational and proper construction of tha, part Of inc coDstitution because preserves the stitutional powers of the Senate unimpaired. But if the power of removal is vested solely in the President does it not entirely subvert the principle which is the pride and boast of the American people, that of ap- pointing their oficers and of making their own laws? does it not render government absolutely despoIic, SO far as appointments concerned?

 1.-the views that have been advanced in the forego. ing observations in relation the and appointing power exercised by the President are true, ougl,. not those who so zealousy support him and the adm- nsraton tn pause, and examine the subject canddIy

 Ifthey will, believe they will sufficient reason to change their course, and endeayor to remedy what has been improperly done. They will not any longer slumber upon their posts; but will let the world know an opportunity presents that they deter mined that constitution which has cost these United States millions of and the best blood of patriots from the hands ambitious men, and place h in hands that will be governed by inc plain meaning of that they will teach the President and hs inter- esied adherents that they treading on forbidden ground; that their encroacIments upon the liberties of the people seen, and that they not 10 be- come precedeDs for others o follow. And if the peo pie be brought to Their danger while they have the of escape, our government may again move on in its proper sphere, and retain Iiberes- But ifa blind Zeal for party power is to take the place of sober reason, before aware of i, shall be