[THE bill to distribute the proceeds of the public lands,
introduced by Mr. Clay, passed both houses of congress on the
first of March, 1832, one day before the adjournment, and the
term of the twenty-second congress expired on Sunday, the third
of March, 1832. The majorities were so large in favor of the
bill, that it was believed if the president had immediately
returned the bill with his objections, on the second of March,
it would have been passed by the constitutional majority of
two thirds of the members present in each house, and thus
have become a law, notwithstanding the objections of president
Jackson. But the president adopted the unprecedented course
of retaining the bill until the next session of congress. In
December, 1833, the twenty-third congress assembled, and the
president sent a message to the senate, returning the land
bill which had been passed by the previous congress, with his
objections to the same, and stating that for want of time he
had not pursued the usual course. The message of the president,
assigning his reasons for the return of the bill, having been
read, Mr. Clay rose and made the following remarks.]
THIS measure had been first introduced into congress at the
session before the last, under circumstances which must be within the
recollection of every member of the senate. Its object was, to dispose
of the proceeds of the public lands for a limited time. The subject had
been greatly discussed not only in congress, but throughout the country.
The principles and provisions of the bill were well and generally
understood. The subject had attracted the attention of the chief
magistrate himself, and this bill was made the subject of commentary
in his message at the commencement of the last session of congress. It
must, therefore, be considered as a subject perfectly well understood
by the president, for it was not to be supposed that he would have
commented upon it, and recommended it to the attention of congress, if
it had not been understood. During the last session, this bill, which
had previously been before the house, was introduced in this body, and
was passed, and sent to the other house, whence it was returned with a
slight amendment, taking away the discretion which had been vested in
the state legislatures as to the disposal of the proceeds. This bill,
which had been before congress the session before the last, which
had passed at the last session, having been before the country for
a whole year, when it passed the two houses, was placed before the
executive, with a number of other measures, just before the close of
the last congress. As the subject had been before the president for
consideration so long previously to the passage of the bill, and he
had reflected upon it, it was not to have been expected that he would
take advantage of the shortness of the session to retain the bill until
this time. Yet such had been the fact, and a proceeding had taken place
which was unprecedented and alarming, and which, unless the people of
this country were lost to all sense of what was due to the legislative
branch of the government, to themselves, and to those principles of
liberty which had been transmitted to them from the revolution, they
would not tolerate. It was at least due to the legislature, that the
president should have sent a few lines, courteously informing them,
that when his own mind was made up he would communicate the result. But,
without deigning to make known his intention, or to impart the reasons
which influenced him, he despotically kept silence, and retained the
bill. He begged leave to congratulate the senate on the return of the
bill. The question which now presented itself was, whether the bill
was dead, in consequence of the non-action of the president, or whether
it had become an existing law. He was not now about to discuss that
question; but he had felt himself called on to make a few observations
on the extraordinary course, and to say that it was due to congress,
to the people, and to the executive himself, to have informed the last
congress in reference to this subject, concerning which he must have
made up his mind. He would now move to lay this bill on the table, and
would afterwards give notice of a day when he should ask leave to bring
in a bill in order to submit it again to the action of the senate.
Mr. Kane wished to know if it was the intention of the senator from
Kentucky that the bill should lie permanently on the table, or only to
be called up at an early day.
Mr. Clay replied that the only alternative was to consider the bill as
defunct, or as an existing law. If the gentleman from Illinois could
point out any other course, he had read some clause in the constitution
which he (Mr. Clay) had never been so fortunate as to find.
Mr. Benton said he would wish to make a remark; and, if he was
precluded by the pressing of this question, he would find some other
opportunity of making it.
The question was then taken on the motion to lay the bill upon the
table, and decided in the affirmative――ays nineteen.
Mr. Benton then moved to take up the message for consideration.
After further discussion, Mr. Clay said, he did not rise to reply
to any one who had felt himself called upon to rise in the senate to
_vindicate_ the president. If there were any such member, he did not
wish to disturb him in his office of vindicator of the president, or
to affect the complacency with which he might regard _his_ vindication.
But he (Mr. Clay) stood here to sustain his own course, to vindicate
the constitution, and to vindicate the rights of congress under it.
And he must repeat, that the withholding of the land bill, at the
last session, under the circumstances of the case, was a violation
of the constitution, and disrespectful to the senate. What were the
circumstances?
At two different sessions of congress, the land subject was before
it. At that which preceded the last, a bill had been introduced to
distribute among the states the proceeds of the public lands. The whole
subject, by the bill and by reports of committees, was laid before
congress and spread before the country. A copy of the bill, when it was
first introduced, according to the constant practice of congress, was
sent to the president. He was thus, as well as the country generally,
put in entire possession of the matter. It attracted great public
attention. It engaged that of the president. And, accordingly, at the
commencement of the last session, in his annual message, he adverted to
it, in a manner which evidently showed that the writer of the message
fully understood it, and all the views which had been developed about
it.
[Here Mr. Clay read the message of the last session, so far
as it related to the public lands, to show that the president
had himself invited the attention of congress to it, as one
of urgent and pressing importance; that the _discretion_ of
congress to make any disposition of the public lands, which
they might deem best for the harmony, union, and interest
of the United States, was uncontrolled; that the question
ought _speedily_ to be settled; and that the president had
_considered_, but objected to the bill of the previous session,
proposing, as a substitute, a plan of his own, which, while the
message on the table argued that the public lands belonged to
_all_ the states, proposed to give the unsold lands to _some_
of them.]
Thus was congress, at the commencement of the last session,
officially invited to act, and to act speedily, respecting the public
lands; and thus did the president manifest his knowledge of the
provisions of the bill of the previous session. Well, sir, congress
again took up the question. The identical bill of the previous session
was again introduced, and again, prior to its passage, placed before
the president, along with the other printed documents, according to
standing usage. And it was passed by both houses, substantially in the
shape in which at the previous session it was passed by the senate,
except that the restriction as to the power of the states to apply the
sum to be distributed among the several states, after the deduction of
the twelve and a half per centum first set apart for the new states,
was stricken out.
In this form, the bill was laid before the president on the second day
of March last. It was no stranger, but an old acquaintance. He had seen
it repeatedly before; and he must have been well informed as to its
progress in congress. He had commented on the very project contained
in the bill, when he had brought forward his own in his message, at
the opening of the session. Without deigning to communicate to congress
what disposition he had made, or meant to make of it, he permitted the
body to rise, in utter ignorance of his intentions.
It may be true, that there was a great press of business on the
president on the second of March, and that he may have acted upon
some ninety or one hundred bills. But this is what occurs with every
president on the day before the termination of the short session of
congress. With most of those bills the president must have been less
acquainted than he was with the land bill. Of some of them he probably
had never heard at all. Not one of them possessed the importance of
the land bill. How did it happen that the president could find time
to decide on so many new bills, and yet had not time to examine and
dispose of one which had long been before him and the public; one
embracing a subject which he thought the union, harmony, and interests
of the states required should be _speedily_ adjusted; one which he
himself had pronounced his judgment upon at the commencement of the
session? By withholding the bill, the president took upon himself a
responsibility beyond the exercise of the veto. He deprived congress
altogether of its constitutional right to act upon the bill, and to
pass it, his negative notwithstanding.
The president is, by the constitution, secured time to consider bills
which shall have passed both branches of congress. But so is congress
equally secured the right to act upon bills which they have passed, and
which the president may have thought proper to reject. If he exercises
his veto, and returns the bill, two thirds may pass it. But if he
withholds the bill, it cannot become a law, even although the two
houses should be unanimously in its favor.
Mr. Clay denied that the constitution gave to the president ten days
to consider bills, except at the long session. At that session, the
period of its termination is uncertain, and dependent upon the will of
congress. To guard against a sudden adjournment, by which the president
might be deprived of due time to deliberate on an important bill, the
constitution provides for ten days at that session. But, at the short
session, it is not an adjournment but a dissolution of congress, on
the third of March, and the day of that dissolution is fixed in the
constitution itself, and known to all.
Mr. Clay contended, therefore, that the act of withholding the bill
was arbitrary and unconstitutional, by which congress, and the senate
especially, in which the bill originated, were deprived of their
constitutional right of passing on the bill, after the president had
exercised his powers. Respect to congress required of the president,
if he really had not time to form a judgment on the bill, or,
having formed it, had not time to lay his reasons before the body, a
communication to that effect. But, without condescending to transmit
one word upon the subject to congress, he suffered the session to
terminate, and the members to go home destitute of all information,
until this day, of his intentions.
Mr. Benton then withdrew his motion to take up the bill.
ON THE REMOVAL OF THE PUBLIC DEPOSITS FROM THE BANK
OF THE UNITED STATES.