The Southern Literary Messenger, Vol. II., No. 9, August, 1836 — John Shaqi
The Southern Literary Messenger, Vol. II., No. 9, August, 1836Various
History
The Southern Literary Messenger, Vol. II., No. 9, August, 1836
Various
American literature -- 19th century -- Periodicals
my opinion, the very time and occasion where a Senator _should not
resign_, are where his place is wanted for such a purpose. It is then
peculiarly his duty to keep his post, because it is always his
paramount duty, _as a Senator of the United States_, to protect the
Constitution of the United States. May he put it at the mercy of a
State Legislature, issuing, from year to year, or from month to month,
its contradictory orders, as party or caprice may prevail? What is the
Constitution, under such a dictation, but a fabric built upon the
sand; a rag floating in the wind? It has neither permanency nor
strength.
It is to be lamented that good and talented men, sometimes unadvisedly
and without looking far enough to consequences, entangle themselves in
theories, which afterwards embarrass and constrain them, in the sound
and practical exercise of their understanding, and compel them to
participate in acts condemned, at once, by their judgment and
conscience. In such cases it is more honest, more safe and noble, to
shake off the webs which their own ingenuity has wound around them,
and give a free use and exercise to their better knowledge and true
convictions. There is a sensible maxim in common life which is equally
wise in public affairs—that “the shortest follies are the best.”
Mr. Tyler tells the Legislature that he would have complied with their
wishes, if they had put them in another _form_; indeed it is only a
change of form—he would have voted, at their bidding, to _rescind or
repeal_ the offensive resolution of the Senate. Why would he do so,
unless he thought it ought to be rescinded or repealed? If he did not
think so, he was as much bound by a conscientious performance of his
duty to vote against the repeal as the expunging. If the latter be a
stronger case, the principle is the same. But will he say, that in the
one case he is called upon to violate the Constitution, in the other
only to give up an _opinion_ upon the conduct of the President? This
is altogether an illusion; there is in truth no difference in the
cases. In the one case he was of opinion that the President had
transcended his constitutional powers; he is of the same opinion
still, but his Legislature do not think so, and he yields his opinion
to theirs, or rather he votes against his own opinion to give effect
to theirs. In the other case he holds the _opinion_ that to expunge a
part of the records of the Senate is a violation of the Constitution,
but his Legislature are of opinion that it is not so; it is a question
of opinion between them, and nothing more. Why, then, should he not
give up this opinion to their power or their judgment, as well as the
other? Why must he not on this question surrender his judgment and
conscience, and become the “mere automaton” of the majority of the
members of the Virginia Assembly? He casts off and treads upon the
robes of a _Senator of the United States_, to bind himself in a
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account