530 SENATE.] Amendment of the Constitution-Caucus System. [MARCH, 1824. liberty of the country and seking to overthrow | cord. Mr. B. said, as he was not a prophet, the constitution. Where was the meeting nor the son of a prophet, he could not tell what held? In the chamber of the House of Repre- the effect of the meeting would be. The wissentatives-in public-in the very face of the dom of the people, perhaps, might substitute people-those people whose rights it is said something else the people care little about We have adopted a plan, by which we we met to betray-and the result is well known. names. Was there any intention to recommend a man proposed to surrender our private feelings, who was abhorrent to the people? If the peo- whatever they might be, upon the altar of the Here are five candiple are united in favor of another man, the public good. I ask gentlemen to propose a recommendation would not weigh a feather. substitute for the caucus. If they were not united, the meeting might dates, all good men; there is no union among have a tendency to produce that effect. Men the people-they are divided into five parties. are apt to attach too much importance to What is to be the result? The other day we were a band of brothers. What is now the themselves and their acts, when "dressed in a little brief authority;" they are found, how-case? In consequence of a difference of opinever, to be but the merest insects, when acting ion, slander is poured out from the press; a in opposition to the views of the people. thousand pens are employed in the work of Nothing important can result from such a defamation; every infirmity is displayed; calmeeting, unless the candidate selected is a popu-umny is spread, upon every side-and it is lar man. The simple reason for holding such melancholy, indeed, to reflect, that too many a meeting is, that the persons who go into it are ready to believe the fabrications. This is are the representatives of the people-that now but a little spark, but it may spread out they best know the sentiments of the people- till it consumes every thing that is good and they, therefore, meet to recommend candidates. valuable. How is the monster to be stifled? If this be not the correct way, what other will Only by making useful sacrifices. A meeting, you substitute? By private recommendation, for that purpose, was called-all were invited and, as a consequence, irresponsible, or to the to attend-the object was to arrive at some Mr. B. said he was the union; to close these flood-gates of iniquity. conflicting presses? last man who would lift his voice to curtail the We regretted that our brethren did not all Mr. B. said he arraigned liberty of the press. No, even in the rank come in with us. no man's motives-each one must go his own luxuriance of its licentiousness, let it be uncurbed. When honestly directed, it is the great ways. Other counsels might prevail-he dreadsource of light and liberty. Its abuse must be ed to hear what might be the result of the tolerated, on that universal law which belongs malignity which this controversy had excited. to human things, that there is no unmixed bless-He was prepared to unite with the majority. ing; but it must not be disguised, that, when prostituted, it scatters any thing but correct information. We are told, that the President and the Heads of Departments may, with equal propriety, meet, and make a nomination. But they do not come immediately from the people; and they are not going back to the people, as the members of Congress must. They are not so immediately identified with all parts of the community. What we have done, is on record -every man is responsible for his own act. The old adage is, that, by its fruit the tree shall be known. What has been the result of this practice for the last twenty years? Where has been the mischief? Has your constitution been violated? Is not our happy situation an object of congratulation? Is not every nation which is striving to break the fetters of slavery, looking to us as the landmarks by which they are to be guided? These are the fruits of this system, which has been followed, in relation to the Presidential election, from 1800, up to the present day; which has been sustained by the people; and which has some of the greatest names in the country to support it. The honorable gentleman from South Carolina says, that the grounds of holding this meeting were, to produce union-but, from the signs of the times, he gathers the belief that it will, on the contrary, produce nothing but dis This, that, or the other name, was insignificant MARCH, 1824.] Amendment of the Constitution-Caucus System. wishes of the great body of the people. It is not the official station that gives weight to an expression of the opinion of members of Congress; but it is the confidence they enjoy among their fellow-citizens that made them members of Congress. This confidence is a part of their character, and is made available in their private capacity. [SENATE. it concerned his personal views, he was above, and he rejoiced in his attitude, every change in political opinion; and if the Government be honestly administered, he cared not by what hands, or to whom were distributed the loaves and fishes. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, said he should vote against an indefinite postponement. The State of Maryland, said he, has instructed its Senators to use their best endeavors to obtain such an amendment to the constitution as will insure a uniform mode of election throughout the United States, of President and Vice President. The district mode is preferred by that State, which meets my concurrence, and I shall vote for any of the resolutions that will be most likely to succeed, and will assure that mode. Having entered yesterday into my reasons on the subject, I will not again trespass on the time of the Senate, by repetition. Indeed, Mr. President, I had no intention of speaking on the subject again, nor should I, but for an observation made by the honorable gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. HAYNE.) He has said, "that I was the first who introduced the word 'caucus' into the discussion." Why this observation? For what purpose? Was it any The honorable gentleman from South Carolina says he never attended a caucus. This is certainly a little extraordinary for a member of this body. There may be some few individuals here who have not attended such meetings; but when he recollected how common they had been, for the last forty or fifty years, he apprehended there were few who had not taken part in them. When he was very young, Mr. B. said he recollected to have gone, with his honorable colleague, to the first meeting of this kind which he ever attended. Under authority so respectable, and in such a school, he had first become acquainted with the system; and he had, ever since, continued believing that its results must be beneficial. When he knew that this system was approved by older men; that it had been used effectually in the days of Jefferson, he could hardly believe that the younger members knew all the bene-way necessary or useful to his argument? fits that had been derived from it. It is too old in this country-opposition to it will not do. Some may be opposed to it, from their private views; others may not think it expedient at this time. There are regular cycles in political events; and, Mr. B. said, he did not doubt but these meetings, by and by, would become popular enough; for, as they have been so heretofore, it will be seen that they are still necessary. In regard to the anti-caucus, which had been spoken of, he did not wish to become the accuser of any man. He should, therefore, say nothing of it. This whole subject had gone out to the people. It ought not to have been touched here. There has been a fair and open appeal to the people, and the Senate should not have been troubled with it. There we are willing to meet it; not before a few changelings in the country, but before the great mass of the people, who are independent, and who stand clear of prejudices on this subject If, when these acts are fairly laid open, such a tribunal condemns us, be it so. Mr. B. said, when he embarked on the sea of political life, he well knew that there were shoals in it. Some get their vessels over them safely; while others strike upon them, and sink forever. But he made the declaration in the face of all who heard him, that he had the approbation of what he had done, in his own conscience-that was placed beyond all human control; and, when the plaudits of this world should cease, that approbation would be imperishable; it would enable him to tread the shadowy vale of death, without fear or trembling. Standing on this sure foundation, unseduced by ambition, whose giddy heights he had never essayed, as far as Mr. HAYNE explained. He certainly meant nothing unkind towards the gentleman. Regret had been expressed that this word had been used; and he had merely observed, that he believed that it had first been used by the gentleman from Maryland. Mr. SMITH resumed. Mr. President, I feel perfectly confident that the gentleman entertains no unfriendly feelings towards me personally; but, as the remark had been made, I am unwilling that the discussion of a subject so unprofitable, that I feel mortified at its being introduced, and so little comporting with the dignity of the Senate, should be attributed to me. I regret that the honorable gentleman from New York (Mr. KING) should have deemed it proper to introduce it. It is true that he qualified it by a new name "central power." However, either my ears deceived me, or I heard him use the word "caucus," and one member opposite took it down; but, whether he did or not, his meaning was perfectly understood; and, if I used it, it was because I wished to give it the known name-I wished to call a spade a spade. When first introduced, I considered it as accidental, and treated it lightly, as I thought it merited. But, sir, the second speech of the introducer, and the elaborate view taken by the honorable gentleman from South Carolina, have given to it form and substance. Effect seems now to be contemplated, and we must meet it as we best can. I am not surprised at the course taken by the honorable gentleman from South Carolina. He was too young to know the extreme difficulties the Republican party had to encounter, and the dangers it has been exposed to by attempts SENATE.] Amendment of the Constitution-Caucus System. [MARCH, 1824. the strength of the party, and to bind each to the other, that they would use their best exertions to promote the election of Mr. Jefferson. I did not attend, but, I believe, every other member of either House, friendly to Mr. Jefferson, did attend. Who were they? Men certainly as capable of expounding the constitution as any gentleman now in my hearing; one of them the writer, in part, of the Federalist, (to which we daily refer,) in fact, all of them leaders in the Republican ranks, and to whom we are indebted for the change by which the Republican party came into power; those great men are now charged, by the gentleman from New York, with being promoters of a system which, in its consequences, is to destroy the constitution, and to introduce all the plagues of Egypt. Well, sir, I am not surprised at this charge, for the honorable gentleman was one of those who lost the power. Losers will complain, and we ought not to be surprised that the gentleman is very willing to put down a system by which his party has lost their power; it is natural, and it is as natural for me to wish to continue a system, by which I (as one of the gainers) have succeeded. I have said that I did not attend the first caucus; but, sir, I assured those who did, that I would act with them, and I did, as the people of Maryland know. I used exertions, that I think I should not, if the caucus had not been held. Its decision-induced me, and others, in Maryland, to unexampled exertion; much depended on its vote. At that time the State was decidedly in favor of Mr. Adams. It was changed by the exertions made by the Republicans, which, I speak with confidence, would not have been made, if no caucus had been held. calculated to create schisms that might have, Į to make a conjoined effort to concentrate all by dividing, exposed it to great danger; which, in my humble opinion, have been mainly obviated and avoided by the caucus system Nor am I at all surprised at the opposition to it by the honorable gentleman from New York, (Mr. KING.) That gentleman was a leading chief of the Federal party, and he, no doubt, thinks, | what I know and believe, that, owing to the caucus system, his party was prostrated, and the Republican party brought into power; by which change, I firmly believe, and every Republican does believe, that the nation has greatly benefited. I adhere to that which has rendered such essential service to my country, and the party to which I belong. The bridge which has carried me safe over, I call a good bridge. The caucus system has heretofore been approved. I attended several, was president at one and consistency of conduct called imperiously on me to attend that lately held, and which has met with the disapprobation of the two gentlemen. It appears, also, to have met with the displeasure of several gentlemen with whom I have served in caucus more than once. Well, sir, they have their reasons, such as are satisfactory to themselves, with which I have nothing to do. That of being conscientiously against it, they cannot offer. There are certainly some who think the system wrong on principle. The gentleman from South Carolina has said so; but their numbers, among politicians, are few. I have not met with many. May we not, without offence, believe that men are much governed by the consideration of whether the caucus will or will not support their favorite candidate? And must we not believe that those who have heretofore attended caucuses, will find it difficult to assign any other reason for absenting themselves from that which they now censure? Indeed, Mr. President, I must think that it had a powerful influence, although, perhaps, unknown to themselves. I mean no reflection on any one; but form my opinion from man as he is constituted. I will now, Mr. President, take a view of the caucus system, as it has operated; and, I trust, I shall be able to show that it has enabled the Republican party to mount into power, and has tended, mainly, to maintain them in it. Upon this theme I act as a party man, and have no hesitation in saying, that I wish to keep my party in power; that I believe the caucus system is the most effectual means; and that, when we cease to use it, we shall thereby deprive ourselves of one most powerful instrument. Divide and conquer, is as old as history -keep together, you cannot be subdued. Mr. President: On the first contested election, between Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Adams succeeded by, I believe, a small majority. It was believed that his success was owing to want of a conjoined effort, a concentration of force, on the part of the friends of Mr. Jefferson. A caucus was, in consequence, held in Philadelphia, the object of which was, A caucus was held at the second election of Mr. Jefferson, at which almost every Republican member did attend. It was not then thought a crime; on the contrary, it was deemed meritorious. If I had not attended it, I am sure my constituents, at that time, would have been displeased; no one then talked of a caucus being an assumption of power; I mean no Republican. I believe the Federalists did, but it was attributed to the injury the system did to them as a party; we did not think them in earnest; we considered their opposition as arising simply from opposition. The next caucus selected Mr. Madison, and I never heard that he thought their act other than constitutional; he had attended the first caucus in Philadelphia, and was a principal leader in it. He accepted the nomination. We all know that he was opposed by Mr. Monroe. A schism was threatened (by that opposition) in the Republican party; it was supported by the Federal party, and never was the Republican party in greater danger. What prevented that great evil? The caucus nomination. No other course could have succeeded. The people rallied round that nomination, and a schism was thereby prevented. MARCH, 1824.] Amendment of the Constitution-Caucus System. [SENATE. Mr. President: Some (now present) know | whom he might, and thus preserve the union that a schism in the Republican party had nearly of the party; and those who did not attend, taken place, on the election of the present Chief were willing to risk all, rather than run the Magistrate. The opposition to him was strong risk of their candidate being in the minority. in numbers and character, and there was every From this last, I except, of course, the gentlereason to believe that the Republican party man from South Carolina, and the conscienwould be severed. How was it avoided? The tious. Republicans met as brethren of the same family, agreed on Mr. Monroe, and all supported him. He and the Vice President were informed, by letters, signed by me and the secretary of the caucus, of their nomination, to which they replied, by letters, which have been published. Neither showed any reluctance at the mode of nomination; neither objected to a caucus power of nomination; they both seemed well satisfied, and appeared to accept with pleasure. The present President expressed himself, with strong approbation, of the source of nomination. His words are- Deeply penetrated by this distinguished mark of confidence, emanating from such a source." What source? The caucus. I have shown that the caucus system has been considered, by our three Republican Presidents, as not only constitutional, but expedient. They have never said that it was dangerous to the liberties of the country. It has existed for twenty-four years, and the liberties of the people appear just as safe, and rather safer, than some of us thought they were prior to its being adopted. Now, sir, suppose that all the Republicans had met (agreeably to open invitation) like brethren of the same family, as they did on all former occasions, and had agreed (as they might have done) on a candidate, what would have been the consequence? It might have continued the union of the party. And of what mighty consequence is it, which of the candidates shall be successful? Either of them will do tolerably well. Congress will take care that neither shall do much harm. I have my preference, I admit; but, had another been selected, I would have supported him; for my object is union in the Republican party. Gentlemen (many of them my friends) with whom I have acted through the worst of times, declined to attend; their motives are their own. But what is the effect? A complete disunion of the Republican party, divided into at least four parties; the whole in a state of distraction. Father against son, brother against brother; all in a state of complete confusion; and what for? For a principle? No, sir, there is no principle involved. What, then, is all this noise about? Why, whether you shall choose A, B, C, or D; and, choose which you will of the candidates, the nation will (if the people choose such Congresses as the three last) move on majestically towards its great destiny. When I look around, I am surprised at the excitement artificially created. Now, Mr. President, the difference between those who attended the caucus, and those who did not, I take to be this: that those who went, were anxious to unite on some one Republican candidate, and support him, be he Mr. President: In a Government like ours, where many of our great officers are elected, there must be some mode adopted by which to concentrate the votes of the people. They cannot (scattered as they are) know the candidates-it is morally impossible: the voters must therefore depend on some person, some public bodies, or on private meetings for information, as to the best character for the office. For instance, "for President." Well, sir, it has been thought, for twenty-four years last past, that the members of Congress, elected by the people, and in whom they had deposited all confidence, was the best source for information. Has that source deceived the people in any one instance? I understand that the Congressional caucus recommended Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe. The people elected them; and experience has shown that the reliance placed by the people in the caucus nomination of all three has turned out perfectly satisfactory, and no injury has resulted therefrom. It is rational to suppose, that the members of Congress have better opportunities of knowing the character and talents of the several candidates, than those who have never seen them, and never acted with them. However, the caucus mode is denounced, and now let us see what is to be substituted, for there will be a substitute. It is in the nature of our Government. It cannot be avoided. Well, sir, one State, by an act of its Legislature, nominates its favorite, that is, the favorite of a majority of the body; another Legislature, in their private capacity, nominate their candidate, and forbid their members of Congress, chosen, as they are, by the people, from recommending a candidate. Now, sir, I would ask, how many of that Legislature knew any of the other candidates except the one recommended by them? perhaps three or four, who may have been in Congress. Other States have pursued a similar course, with as little knowledge of the candidates. Each State has its favorite candidate; of him they may know something. But how they can be capable of forming a judgment between him and those who are opposed to him, I know not. Many State Legislatures have undertaken to recommend, whilst they reprobate the caucus nomination. Another mode has been adopted: by convention. I should like to know how the delegates to the convention are chosen: are they by the people? I believe not. A few people meet; their numbers may be ten, fifty, or any other number, and they appoint the delegates; and, thus chosen, they meet in convention, and select their candidates. Now, Mr. President, whether either of those modes is preferable to a caucus, or whether any of them SENATE.] Amendment of the Constitution-Caucus System. are equal to it, is to be determined. For my part, I thought the old mode was the best, and I have adopted it. I have exercised my own opinion. I have given myself no uneasiness about that of others. And I must think, an interference with the opinion of those who attended the caucus, was wholly irrelevant to the subject matter before the Senate. Mr. EATON, of Tennessee, said, he considered this subject of discussion as altogether improper, and thought it ought not to be permitted to remain any longer before the Senate. The Senate has now spent two days in debating the question, whether it is proper for members of Congress to go into caucus. He sincerely believed that such a subject was unbecoming the dignity of the body, and that it would place the members in no very elevated view before the public. His object was to put an end to the discussion. He suggested to the consideration of the Senate, whether it was not better to let it end here. He moved that the resolution be ordered to lie on the table. The question on Mr. E.'s motion was put, and passed in the negative. The question then recurred on indefinite postponement. Mr. MACON, of North Carolina, next addressed the Chair. He said that these resolutions had been referred to a select committee; they had been maturely considered and reported upon by that committee; and now, because a certain other subject, not connected with them, had been introduced, no vote was to be taken upon them. What is the question before the Senate? It is upon the indefinite postponement of the resolutions; and not upon their subject-matter. Why should not a fair vote be taken on them? Gentlemen who are not entirely decided on business before the Senate generally vote for a postponement. He thought no proposition to amend the constitution, that had ever been before the Senate, had so much in favor of it, as the one that had been reported by this committee. It had, first or last, been recommended by almost every one of the States. And now, after all the time that has been spent about it, after one of the propositions had been discussed at full length, they are all to be thrown by. He well knew that men would do, in relation to these things, as they thought right. He considered it an extremely unfortunate circumstance, that a subject which had nothing to do with the real question before the Senate had been introduced, and was about to destroy all chance of considering the amendments to the constitution. [MARCH, 1824. It is time enough to postpone them, when we find that we cannot make one that is fit to be adopted. We shall, then, have done our duty to our constituents as faithful men. But now we are about to postpone them at the very threshold. If there ever was a time when the subject could be met gravely, it is the present. What was the condition of the country at the time of the difficulty in the election of Jefferson and Burr? Great anxiety was spread from one end of the country to the other. The House of Representatives was voting thirty times without coming to a decision-the most serious alarm pervaded the country. And yet, with this knowledge before us, we are not willing to make provision against similar occurrences. There was a charge of foreign partiality on each side of the great parties existing at that time. One was accused of fondness for the British; the other, for the French. There is no disposition of that kind now. We have peace, and we have plenty to eat; and, thank Heaven, the tariff bill has not yet passed. Some think that the amendment will produce a consolidation of the Government, and that the State lines will be lost. But almost all the States have agreed to it-almost all of them have called for the districting system. Mr. M. said he did not believe that it would destroy the constitution. He had heard so much, and so often, of the destruction of the constitution, that he had almost become an infidel in respect to it. We have stood a sedition law, and an alien law, and there is not much danger but we may get along with any thing else. We have had these amendments regularly brought before us; and now, all at once, because allusions have been made to another subject, we cannot look at the amendments-we have got into a passion, and we must give them up. Nearly all the States have approved the districting system— and how is it to destroy the constitution? The liberty of this nation does not, nor does that of any other, depend upon paper. It must have a foundation in the hearts of the people. Let a man depend upon himself, and he is free. If he is dependent on another, black or white, he will not be free. Freedom rests upon our dependence or independence. The people had, at first, a great dread of the President and Senate; but that fear has passed away. We have now more candidates for the Presidency than we have ever had before. How are my people, said Mr. M., to know these men? Why, when I go home, they will ask me whom I think to be the best man; or, Mr. M. said he knew that no amendment rather, who will tax them the least? which is could now be made to affect the next election. the same thing. And, I presume, the same There must be a concession of opinion some- questions are put to other members. I am glad where everybody feels the embarrassments we my colleague called for the yeas and nays on are laboring under; and yet we are not per- this question, for I hope the subject will not be mitted to go on and discuss the amendments by postponed. In regard to caucuses, I have no which these evils might be remedied. This confessions to make. I have gone into cancus amendment, he thought, would insure an elec-as honestly as I go to church. I do not care tion, without going to the House of Representa- how many caucuses, or how few, there are. I tives; and he hoped it would not be postponed. I care nothing about them. Once, however, I |