THE FIRST ANNUAL MESSAGE OF GENERAL JACKSON TO THE TWO HOUSES OF
CONGRESS.
The first annual message of a new President, being always a
recommendation of practical measures, is looked to with more
interest than the inaugural address, confined as this latter must
be, to a declaration of general principles. That of General Jackson,
delivered the 8th of December, 1829, was therefore anxiously looked
for; and did not disappoint the public expectation. It was strongly
democratic, and contained many recommendations of a nature to
simplify, and purify the working of the government, and to carry
it back to the times of Mr. Jefferson--to promote its economy and
efficiency, and to maintain the rights of the people, and of the
States in its administration. On the subject of electing a President
and Vice-President of the United States, he spoke thus:
"I consider it one of the most urgent of my duties to bring
to your attention the propriety of amending that part of our
Constitution which relates to the election of President and
Vice-President. Our system of government was, by its framers,
deemed an experiment; and they, therefore, consistently provided
a mode of remedying its defects.
"To the people belongs the right of electing their chief
magistrate: it was never designed that their choice should,
in any case, be defeated, either by the intervention of
electoral colleges, or by the agency confided, under certain
contingencies, to the House of Representatives. Experience
proves, that, in proportion as agents to execute the will of the
people are multiplied, there is danger of their wishes being
frustrated. Some may be unfaithful: all are liable to err. So
far, therefore, as the people can, with convenience, speak, it
is safer for them to express their own will.
"In this, as in all other matters of public concern, policy
requires that as few impediments as possible should exist to
the free operation of the public will. Let us, then, endeavor
so to amend our system, as that the office of chief magistrate
may not be conferred upon any citizen but in pursuance of a fair
expression of the will of the majority.
"I would therefore recommend such an amendment of the
constitution as may remove all intermediate agency in the
election of President and Vice-President. The mode may be so
regulated as to preserve to each State its present relative
weight in the election; and a failure in the first attempt may
be provided for, by confining the second to a choice between the
two highest candidates. In connection with such an amendment,
it would seem advisable to limit the service of the chief
magistrate to a single term, of either four or six years. If,
however, it should not be adopted, it is worthy of consideration
whether a provision disqualifying for office the Representatives
in Congress on whom such an election may have devolved, would
not be proper."
This recommendation in relation to our election system has not yet
been carried into effect, though doubtless in harmony with the
principles of our government, necessary to prevent abuses, and now
generally demanded by the voice of the people. But the initiation
of amendments to the federal constitution is too far removed
from the people. It is in the hands of Congress and of the State
legislatures; but even there an almost impossible majority--that
of two thirds of each House, or two thirds of the State
legislatures--is required to commence the amendment; and a still
more difficult majority--that of three fourths of the States--to
complete it. Hitherto all attempts to procure the desired amendment
has failed; but the friends of that reform should not despair. The
great British parliamentary reform was only obtained after forty
years of annual motions in parliament; and forty years of organized
action upon the public mind through societies, clubs, and speeches;
and the incessant action of the daily and periodical press. In the
meantime events are becoming more impressive advocates for this
amendment than any language could be. The selection of President
has gone from the hands of the people--usurped by irresponsible and
nearly self-constituted bodies--in which the selection becomes the
result of a juggle, conducted by a few adroit managers, who baffle
the nomination until they are able to govern it, and to substitute
their own will for that of the people. Perhaps another example
is not upon earth of a free people voluntarily relinquishing the
elective franchise, in a case so great as that of electing their
own chief magistrate, and becoming the passive followers of an
irresponsible body--juggled, and baffled, and governed by a few
dextrous contrivers, always looking to their own interest in the
game which they play in putting down and putting up men. Certainly
the convention system, now more unfair and irresponsible than the
exploded congress caucus system, must eventually share the same
fate, and be consigned to oblivion and disgrace. In the meantime
the friends of popular election should press the constitutional
amendment which would give the Presidential election to the people,
and discard the use of an intermediate body which disregards the
public will and reduces the people to the condition of political
automatons.
Closely allied to this proposed reform was another recommended by
the President in relation to members of Congress, and to exclude
them generally from executive appointments; and especially from
appointments conferred by the President for whom they voted.
The evil is the same whether the member votes in the House of
Representatives when the election goes to that body, or votes and
manages in a Congress caucus, or in a nominating convention. The
act in either case opens the door to corrupt practices; and should
be prevented by legal, or constitutional enactments, if it cannot
be restrained by the feelings of decorum, or repressed by public
opinion. On this point the message thus recommended:
"While members of Congress can be constitutionally appointed
to offices of trust and profit, it will be the practice, even
under the most conscientious adherence to duty, to select them
for such stations as they are believed to be better qualified to
fill than other citizens; but the purity of our government would
doubtless be promoted by their exclusion from all appointments
in the gift of the President in whose election they may have
been officially concerned. The nature of the judicial office,
and the necessity of securing in the cabinet and in diplomatic
stations of the highest rank, the best talents and political
experience, should, perhaps, except these from the exclusion."
On the subject of a navy, the message contained sentiments worthy
of the democracy in its early day, and when General Jackson was
a member of the United States Senate. The republican party had
a POLICY then in respect to a navy: it was, a navy for DEFENCE,
instead of CONQUEST; and limited to the protection of our coasts and
commerce. That policy was impressively set forth in the celebrated
instructions to the Virginia senators in the year 1800, in which it
was said:
"With respect to the navy, it may be proper to remind you that
whatever may be the proposed object of its establishment, or
whatever may be the prospect of temporary advantages resulting
therefrom, it is demonstrated by the experience of all nations,
who have ventured far into naval policy, that such prospect is
ultimately delusive; and that a navy has ever in practice been
known more as an instrument of power, a source of expense, and
an occasion of collisions and wars with other nations, than
as an instrument of defence, of economy, or of protection to
commerce."
These were the doctrines of the republican party, in the early
stage of our government--in the great days of Jefferson and his
compeers. We had a policy then--the result of thought, of judgment,
and of experience: a navy for defence, and not for conquest: and,
consequently, confinable to a limited number of ships, adequate to
their defensive object--instead of thousands, aiming at the dominion
of the seas. That policy was overthrown by the success of our
naval combats during the war; and the idea of a great navy became
popular, without any definite view of its cost and consequences.
Admiration for good fighting did it, without having the same effect
on the military policy. Our army fought well also, and excited
admiration; but without subverting the policy which interdicted
standing armies in time of peace. The army was cut down in peace:
the navy was building up in peace. In this condition President
Jackson found the two branches of the service--the army reduced
by two successive reductions from a large body to a very small
one--6000 men--and although illustrated with military glory yet
refusing to recommend an army increase: the navy, from a small one
during the war, becoming large during the peace--gradual increase
the law--ship-building the active process, and rotting down the
active effect; and thus we have been going on for near forty years.
Correspondent to his army policy was that of President Jackson
in relation to the navy; he proposed a pause in the process of
ship-building and ship-rotting. He recommended a total cessation of
the further building of vessels of the first and second class--ships
of the line, and frigates--with a collection of materials for
future use--and the limitation of our naval policy to the object of
commercial protection. He did not even include coast defence, his
experience having shown him that the men on shore could defend the
land. In a word, he recommended a naval policy; and that was the
same which the republicans of 1798 had adopted, and which Virginia
made obligatory upon her senators in 1800; and which, under the
blaze of shining victories, had yielded to the blind, and aimless,
and endless operation of building and rotting peaceful ships of war.
He said:
"In time of peace, we have need of no more ships of war than
are requisite to the protection of our commerce. Those not
wanted for this object must lay in the harbors, where, without
proper covering, they rapidly decay; and, even under the best
precautions for their preservation, must soon become useless.
Such is already the case with many of our finest vessels;
which, though unfinished, will now require immense sums of
money to be restored to the condition in which they were, when
committed to their proper element. On this subject there can be
but little doubt that our best policy would be, to discontinue
the building of ships of the first and second class, and look
rather to the possession of ample materials, prepared for the
emergencies of war, than to the number of vessels which we can
float in a season of peace, as the index of our naval power."
This was written twenty years ago, and by a President who saw
what he described--many of our finest ships going to decay before
they were finished--demanding repairs before they had sailed--and
costing millions for which there was no return. We have been going
on at the same rate ever since--building, and rotting, and sinking
millions; but little to show for forty years of ship-carpentry;
and that little nothing to do but to cruise where there is nothing
to catch, and to carry out ministers to foreign courts who are not
quite equal to the Franklins, Adamses and Jeffersons--the Pinckneys,
Rufus Kings, and Marshalls--the Clays, Gallatins and Bayards--that
went out in common merchant vessels. Mr. Jefferson told me that this
would be the case twenty-five years ago when naval glory overturned
national policy, and when a navy board was created to facilitate
ship-construction. But this is a subject which will require a
chapter of its own, and is only incidentally mentioned now to remark
that we have no policy with respect to a navy, and ought to have
one--that there is no middle point between defence and conquest--and
no sequence to a conquering navy but wars with the world,--and the
debt, taxes, pension list, and pauper list of Great Britain.
The inutility of a Bank of the United States as a furnisher of a
sound and uniform currency, and of questionable origin under our
constitution, was thus stated:
"The charter of the Bank of the United States expires in 1836,
and its stockholders will most probably apply for a renewal of
their privileges. In order to avoid the evils resulting from
precipitancy in a measure involving such important principles,
and such deep pecuniary interests, I feel that I cannot, in
justice to the parties interested, too soon present it to the
deliberate consideration of the legislature and the people. Both
the constitutionality and the expediency of the law creating
this bank, are well questioned by a large portion of our
fellow-citizens; and it must be admitted by all, that it has
failed in the great end of establishing a uniform and sound
currency."
This is the clause which party spirit, and bank tactics, perverted
at the time (and which has gone into history), into an attack upon
the bank--a war upon the bank--with a bad motive attributed for a
war so wanton. At the same time nothing could be more fair, and
just, and more in consonance with the constitution which requires
the President to make the legislative recommendations which he
believes to be proper. It was notice to all concerned--the bank
on one side, and the people on the other--that there would be
questions, and of high import--constitutionality and expediency--if
the present corporators, at the expiration of their charter, should
apply for a renewal of their privileges. It was an intimation
against the institution, not against its administrators, to whom
a compliment was paid in another part of the same message, in
ascribing to the help of their "judicious arrangement" the averting
of the mercantile pressure which might otherwise have resulted from
the sudden withdrawal of the twelve and a half millions which had
just been taken from the bank and applied to the payment of the
public debt. But of this hereafter. The receipts and expenditures
were stated, respectively, for the preceding year, and estimated for
the current year, the former at a fraction over twenty-four and a
half millions--the latter a fraction over twenty-six millions--with
large balances in the treasury, exhibiting the constant financial
paradox, so difficult to be understood, of permanent annual balances
with an even, or even deficient revenue. The passage of the message
is in these words:
"The balance in the treasury on the 1st of January, 1829, was
five millions nine hundred and seventy-two thousand four hundred
and thirty-five dollars and eighty-one cents. The receipts of
the current year are estimated at twenty-four millions, six
hundred and two thousand, two hundred and thirty dollars, and
the expenditures for the same time at twenty-six millions one
hundred and sixty-four thousand five hundred and ninety-five
dollars; leaving a balance in the treasury on the 1st of January
next, of four millions four hundred and ten thousand and seventy
dollars, eighty-one cents."
Other recommendations contained the sound democratic
doctrines--speedy and entire extinction of the public
debt--reduction of custom-house duties--equal and fair incidental
protection to the great national interests (agriculture,
manufactures and commerce)--the disconnection of politics and
tariffs--and the duty of retrenchment by discontinuing and
abolishing all useless offices. In a word, it was a message of the
old republican school, in which President Jackson had been bred; and
from which he had never departed; and which encouraged the young
disciples of democracy, and consoled the old surviving fathers of
that school.