.•■••_ v o 
 
 
 r*V . o • . - *fc 
 
 * A % 
 
 o 41 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 & ' 
 
 .* *> 
 
 
 
 
 rf ^!*» **/ 
 
 v • • • •• ^ 
 
 
 Of. •• 
 
'o. »* 
 
 
 
 
 L *°* 
 
LETTER 
 
 ION. HUGH L. WHITE, 
 
 LEGISLATURE OF TENNESSEE, 
 
 LINING TO OBEY CERTAIN OF THEIR RESOLUTIONS OF INSTRUCTION, 
 
 RESIGNING THE OFFICE 
 
 SENATOR OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 PRINTED AT THE KADJSONIAN OFTJCfi. 
 1&10. 
 
« 
 
 3%L 
 
 ■ 
 
 i 
 
 

 CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 
 Washington, January 13, 1840. 
 
 Sir: 
 
 We have been deputed by a large number of your fellow citizens of both Houses of Con- 
 gress who had the happiness to hear in the Senate ol the United States, to-day, your reply to 
 sundry resolutions lately adopted by the Legislature of Tennessee relative to your course as 
 one of her Senators in Congress, to request that you will be pleased to furnish them with a 
 copy of that reply for publication. 
 
 Those in behalf of whom we now address you have been prompted to make this request 
 as well by the high admiration so lucid an exposition of your principles could not but excite, 
 as from the conviction, that going with the sanction of your deservedly exalted reputation 
 before the American people, it must be productive of the most salutary effects upon the public 
 
 mind. , . 
 
 Persuading ourselves to believe that you will not refuse to gratify this desire, in which 
 we feel assured of the almost unanimous concurrence of your fellow citizens generally, we 
 beg leave to subscribe ourselves, 
 
 With the most perfect respect, 
 
 Your obedient servants, 
 
 WM. D. MERRICK, of Maryland. 
 CHRISTOPHER MORGAN, of New York. 
 Hon. Hugh L. White, of Tennessee. 
 
 Washington, Januanj 14, 1840. 
 
 Gentlemen : 
 
 I have read with great sensibility your kind note of yesterday, asking a copy of my 
 answer to the General Assembly of Tennessee, which I read in the Senate of the United 
 
 States. . " 
 
 I cannot do otherwise than comply with such a request, from such a quarter, and clothed 
 
 io terms so highly flattering. 
 
 I have so little confidence in my own ability to say any thing worthy of preservation, that 
 I very much fear when yon peruse my answer you will find it was the novelty of the scene, 
 rather than the matter contained in the document, which excited any interest in favor of us 
 
 author. 
 
 Accept for yourselves and those whom you represent, my most grateful acknowledgments 
 
 or the good opinion so kindly expressed, and believe that 
 I am, with the highest respect, 
 
 Your most obedient servant, 
 
 HU: L. WHITE. 
 
 The Hon. William D. Merrick, of Maryland, and 
 The Hon. Christopher Morgan, of New York. 
 
LETTER. 
 
 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 January 13//*, 1840. 
 Mr. WHITE rose and addressed the Senate to the following effect: 
 
 Mr. President :— I have a duty to perform this morning, before we proceed to anv regular 
 order of the day. Presuming that the business of presenting petitions is now over, I proceed 
 to discharge it with as little delay as possible. . 
 
 When I reached this place on the twenty-ninth of November last, I was furnished by one 
 
 to attend to the business of the Senate, in the manner 1 had been accustomed to no, uniu some 
 of the subjects specifically mentioned in the resolutions should be placed before the body for 
 discussion. On this day" oi the last week, the Hon. Chairman of the Committee of Finance- 
 reported a bill, commonly called the Sub-treasury Bill, and gave notice that on this day he 
 Vould ask ior its consideration. This being one of the subjects mentioned in the resolu- 
 tions the time has arrived when, in my opinion, it it respectful to the Legislature oi my 
 State that I should present them to this body, to the end that the members of it, as welt as 
 the community at large, may be made acquained with what the General Assembly has chosen 
 to express as public opinion in Tennessee. I move that the preamble and resolutions, which 
 I now send to the Secretary, may be read, printed, and laid on the table. 
 
 After the resolutions had been read, Mr. White proceeded and said, 
 
 Mr President— As I am now a member of this body, and my instructions have been read 
 and ordered to be printed, I consider it proper that I should follow the example set by others, 
 and make equally public the conclusions to which I have come in relation to them. _ 
 
 The subjects of which they treat, are of vital interest to the country, and I am anxious that 
 the opinions I entertain and express upon them should neither be misunderstood nor misre- 
 presented; I will, therefore, take the liberty of deviating from my usual course of delivering 
 my sentiments, (which has been not even to use notes,) and will now read Ihe answer which 1 
 have prepared, and intend, without delay, to forward to the same body which adopted the 
 resolutions. 
 
 Mr. White then read his answer in the following words : 
 
 To the Honorable the General Assembly 
 
 of the Slate of Tennessee. 
 
 Gentlemen— On the 29lh of November last, in the city of Washington, I re- 
 ceived a copy of sundry preambles and six resolutions, which appear to have been 
 adopted by you on the 14th of that month, instructing your Senators, and request- 
 in"- the representatives in the Congress of the United States how to act on a variety 
 of subjects. 
 
 An answer to the resolutions would have been immediately given had 1 not 
 believed it my duty to remain at the post assigned me by your predecessors, until 
 some of the mattersspecified in them should be presented to the Senate for its 
 action. Although I might entertain an opinion different from that employed by 
 your honorable body, and might be unwilling to surrender that opinion ; yet if no 
 case should be presented for the action of the Senate, in relation to which such 
 difference of opinion existed, I could perceive no good reason why I should state 
 what course I would pursue, upon a subject, which might never be presented ior 
 consideration. Now, however, bills are presented to the Senate upon some ot 
 the subjects embraced in your resolutions, and I deem it my duty, without farther 
 delay, to inform you, that I cannot obey the instructions contained in some ol 
 those resolutions, and respectfully to assign some of the reasons which influence 
 my conduct. , 
 
 That I may be the better understood, I will notice each of the resolutions in the 
 order in which they were adopted. 
 
First. As one of your Senators, I am instructed " to vote against the char 
 tcring by Cong-ess of a National Bank." 
 
 This instruction corresponds with the opinion I have repeatedly expressed 
 and acted on, and I could now feel no difficulty in conforming my vote to your 
 wishes on this subject. 
 
 Secondly. 1 am instrucfed " to vote for, and use all fair and proper exertions 
 to procure the passage of the measure brought forward in the Congress of the 
 United States, commonly called the Sub-Treasury Bill, or Independent Treasury 
 Bill," &c. &c. 
 
 The following, with many other, reasons induced me to believe I ought not to 
 comply with the instructions contained in this resolution. 
 
 It has often happened, and will generally be the case, that a considerable time 
 must elapse between the receipt of public money from the debtor to the United 
 States, and its disbursement to their creditors ; during this interval the money 
 will be much more safe in the custody of well selected Banks than it can be in the 
 hands of individuals supposing them to be faithful. 
 
 Suppose any one of your honorable body had one hundred thousand dollars of: 
 his own money, which he did not intend to use for six or nine months, and lived: 
 in the vicinity of a Bank of respectable standing, would he keep the money in his 
 own house, under his own care, or would he deposit it in Bank for safe-keeping: 
 until he wished fo use it ? If he was a prudent man, regarding his own interest,: 
 he certainly would deposit it. 
 
 Are we then justified in taking less care of (he people's money than a prudent' 
 man would take of his own? With great deference to your better judgment, I 
 think not. 
 
 It often happens that the receiving officers have on hand much larger sums 
 than that named in the supposed case, and as the sum is increased and the time 
 it is to be kept between its receipt and disbursement enlarged, the danger of 
 loss, when in the hands of an individual, is increased likewise. 
 
 Again. Al! experience teaches us that large sums of public money left in the 
 hands of individuals will be misused and squandered. It will either be used by 
 the individual himself for his own purposes, or loaned to importunate friends 
 whom he may wish to accommodate, and who are sure not to be able to return 
 it when called for. 
 
 It is said Banks are irresponsible, therefore not to be trusted. In my opinion, 
 generally, they are more responsible than individuals. — They have more means 
 with which to pay, and if they fail to make payments when required, they are 
 as much amenable to the process of a court of justice as individuals are ; and in 
 addition, they are to be found with much more certainty, as a corporation aggre- 
 gate can very seldom abscond, or leave the country, which an individual easily 
 can, and often does do when he misuses the public money. 
 
 We need all the checks which can reasonably bo imposed on our collecting and 
 disbursing officers. Banks have been found to furnish one highly beneficial 
 upon both of these classes. By a regulation between the Treasury Department 
 and each deposit Bank, the latter has been required at short periods to furnish 
 its account current with the Treasurer, and on the face of it to show all sums de- 
 posited to his credit, when such deposits were made, and by whom. By com- 
 paring this account with the accounts furnished by the respective officers them- 
 selves, it can readily be discovered whether they are misusing the public money or 
 not. By the proposed change, and allowing the collector or receiver to be him- 
 self the keeper, until the money is wanted for in<e, you have no check whatever, 
 and the whole money received by an officer may be squandered before it is want- 
 ed for disbursement, without any means of detection. 
 
 I, therefore, conclude the Sub-Treasury Bill ought not to be passed, if there were 
 no other objections to it save that of the public money being less secure. But there 
 are other weighty objections. 
 
The only plausible reason which can be assigned why we should discard Banks 
 entirely and appoint Sub-Treasurers keepers of the public funds, must be, that 
 the Banks are unworthy of confidence. 
 
 If that be so, does it necessarily follow that you ought either not to receive any 
 Bank notes in discharge of its due to the government, or if received, that you should 
 order the officer with whom they are deposited for safe-keeping, immediate y to 
 call upon the Banks for specie to their amount. It is absurd to say we will not 
 deposit with the Bank, because we have no confidence in it, and at the same time 
 to allow our officers to receive Bank notes and retain them in the hands of our offi- 
 cer up to the time we wish to pay the money away.— There is less probability 
 that the Banks would redeem their notes in specie when called on, than that they 
 would denv the payment of specie for money received on deposit. 
 
 The practice then of receiving nothing but specie from debtors, or of imme- 
 diately converting the notes received into specie, and locking that up until the 
 time of disbursement arrives must be resorted to, in order to carry out your wishes. 
 
 This I apprehend would be ruinous to society. A large portion of the spe- 
 cie that might otherwise circulate would be withdrawn from the use of every 
 person a considerable portion of each year. This would effect the prices of pro- 
 perty, of labor, and of every thing else, and would render it next to impossible 
 for evera a prudent man, who happened to be in debt, ever to extricate himself. 
 
 Beside this, the heavy draws for specie upon banks would compel them, 
 in a short time, either to wind up or to do a very precarious business. When- 
 ever a suspension of specie payments would take place, we would have a depre- 
 ciated paper currency, on which to do the business of the country, and specie 
 would become an article of merchandise.— The man in office, or who had a job 
 or contract with the government would receive his salary or his pay in specie, 
 which he would immediately sell for bank paper, receiving a premium of some 
 ten or fifteen per centum, and with that paper pay his debts or purchase such 
 property as he might wish. This practice is at this momeut in operation. For 
 every hundred dollars paid me as' a member of Congress. I can receive one 
 hundred and eight or nine dollars in bank notes, and with them pay the landlord 
 who feeds or the tailor who clothes me. 
 
 It has appeared to me, if we commence this entire operation which your Beso- 
 lution contemplates, and go into this thorough hard money system, we shall 
 presently, in Tennessee, especially, be in a deplorable condition. Look at its 
 effects : ail debts and taxes are to be paid to the federal government in hard 
 money, or in bank notes, for which the specie will be immediately received, and 
 tl*.e specie thus received is to be locked up securely, until it is paid out in dis- 
 charge of some debt due by the government. Suppose our first years taxes 
 paid, in all the States amounting to some twenty-five or thirty millions of dollars. 
 That is only to be returned into circulation when the federal government pays 
 the debts which it owes. What chance will Tennessee have to receive, by fede- 
 ral disbursement, any portion of what she may have paid 1 We have no forts, no 
 foundries, no arsenals, no fortifications, no army, no navy, navy yards or dry 
 docks. In short, we have next to no objects upon which the federal govern- 
 ment expends moraev, therefore none of it would be returned to us. We must 
 pay up our full proportion of all indirect taxes in hard money, with a certainty that 
 little or none of it would be returned to us by federal expenditures, and in the 
 course of a very few years we must be drained of every hard dollar we now have. 
 
 There is another class of objections against this measure entitled, and I thmk, to 
 still more grave considerations. 
 
 The addition it will make to the powers of the federal executive. Every offi- 
 cer with which the money is to be deposited, or left for safe-keeping, will be ap- 
 pointed by the President and removable at his pleasure. We might as well give 
 at to the President himself as entrust it. to those whom he can and will control. 
 
 This plan will multiply officers and increase considerably our expenses at its 
 
commencement, and in the end no man can foresee the swarmsof dependents it may 
 generate, and the additions it may occasion to our expenditures of the public money. 
 
 By the use of the patronage already belonging to that officer, we all know and 
 feel that a large portion of the power vested in the legislative department exists 
 only in name ; it is in substance \ested in, and expressed by, the President as he 
 wills ; shall we, then, give him a controlling power over all the pecuniary resources 
 of the federal government? For one I cannot consent to it. 
 
 Lastly, this Sub-treasury is nothing but a stepping stone to a bank created by 
 the federal government, bottomed on its own funds, attached to the Treasury De- 
 partment, and all placed at the control of the President, or of those who will 
 never have any will which does not correspond with his. 
 
 It appears to me, no reasonable man can think if we commence this system 
 we are to stop short of such a bank. 
 
 Let one year only pass with all your revenue in specie, and that locked up, 
 your State Banks and paper currency deranged, and what then? Those who 
 may wish to carry out this system will then recur to the sound doctrine advanced 
 bv the late President Jackson, "that the money of the country ought not to be 
 kept locked up by the government, any more than the arms belonging to the 
 citizens — both will be sure to be misused." And it will be urged that society 
 is suffering for a sound circulating medium: we must pass a law authorizing 
 this money to be loaned, the interest will ease us of the' payment of much taxes, 
 and by circulating Treasury noles or drafts drawn by one of these Treasurers 
 upon another, we will have a sound paper currency, good every where and 
 bottomed on a metallic basis. This doctrine will become the democratic doc- 
 trine, and every man who opposes it, will be denounced as a bank-bought fede- 
 ralist, the law will pass and in due form we shall have the Treasury Bunk ; and 
 what then? 
 
 The purse and the sword tcill be wilted, and a power to increase the purse, as 
 need may require, not by adding eagles and hard dollars to our funds, but by 
 issue:? of paper, i.i such sums as may be deemed necessary and proper. This 
 bank with its pecuniary means, and the credit and resources it will possess, can 
 either destroy or render subservient to the views of the Executive any State Banks 
 which may be in existence. The whole moneyed power not only of the federal 
 government, but of all State Banks being thus placed in the hands of the President, 
 he will be able to control the destinies of the country. 
 
 His will becomes the law of the land. He will never again have to appeal to 
 " the sober second thoughts of the people" to cany any favorite measure. His first 
 recommendation will always secure its speedy enactment into a law. 
 
 In the views which I take of this subject, I may be in error ; but they are sin- 
 cerely entertained. In the first instance, I placed my vote against it, under the 
 belief that such were the sentiments of the people I represented. Afterwards, 
 I was instructed by the Legislature to continue my opposition. I did so, from a 
 conviction that I was right; and nothing would give me more pleasure than to 
 conform my vote to your wishes, if the measure were an ordinary one, or if I be- 
 lieved the error of sanctioning it could be corrected ; but, believing, as I do, 
 that the power once granted to the Executive can never be recalled, and that 
 its exercise will take from the people that freedom of thought and of action which 
 alone entitles our government to be considered Free, I most respectfully, but 
 decidedly, state that 1 cannot and will not obey the instruction contained in v;>ur se- 
 cond resolution. 
 
 Your third resolution unqualifiedly condemns the provisions of a bill of the last 
 session, entitled, a bill to prevent the interference of certain federal officers in elec- 
 tions, declares the same to be a violation of the Constitution of the United States, 
 unqualifiedly condemns the vote given in favor of said bill by my colleague and 
 myself, and instructs your Senators to vote against, and to use all fair and proper 
 exertions to prevent, the passage of the same, or any similar bill. 
 
When my colleague and myself gave our votes in favor of that bill, we acted 
 under the same solemn sanction of an oath to support the Constitution of the 
 United States that the members of your honorable body did when they voted in 
 favor of this condemnatory resolution. We had the benefit of very able ar ail- 
 ments both for and against the bill. We examined it with all the care we could, 
 and came lo the conclusion that it was not unconstitutional, and believing that the 
 prevailing practice of the President interfering in elections, both State and Fede- 
 ral, through the instrumentality of officers, who hold their places during his pleasure 
 called loudly for a remedy, we voted in favor of its passage. 
 
 If your decision was final, I would not be so childish as to ask of you to re- 
 consider the constitutional question. 
 
 To men of ordinary capacity, or equivocal moral character, 1 might make such 
 a request, from a belief that the decision was a hasty one, produced bv some ex- 
 traneous influence, and that a more deliberate investigation of the subject might 
 lead to a different conclusion ; but, when I reflect that the leading members of 
 that majority which passed the resolution are men as much distinguished by their 
 moral character as by their intellectual attainments and deep research on objects 
 connected with constitutional law, and see that my vote is not only " condemned;' 
 but » unqualifiedly condemned," I cannot hope that one of my humble preten- 
 sions could urge any thing which would occasion even a doubt in your minds 
 of the correctness of your decision. 
 
 But there is a higher earthly tribunal than your honorable body, that will jud«re 
 both your vote and mine, and pass sentence dispassionately, without any predis- 
 position to unqualifiedly condemn either of us, but in chanty hoping that each be- 
 lieved, when giving his vote, he was acting correctly. To that tribunal, then, our 
 cvmnwn constituents, through you, their immediate representatives, I be* leave 
 respectfully and briefly to assign some of the reasons which influenced the vote 
 complained of. 
 
 Every officer named in that bill holds his office at the will of the President, 
 and is liable to be dismissed whenever it is the pleasure of the President, to dis- 
 miss him. Each and every one of the offices is created by act of Congress — 
 I he qualification for the office, the tenure of it, and the duties to be performed bv 
 the officers are, and were, matters of legislative enactment. 
 
 The President has no power to dismiss or control one of these officers, merely 
 because he is President, but because Congress, by law, gave him that power. The 
 bill itself expressly provided that all these officers should be secure in the right 
 to vote on all elections, according to their own judgment, and only forbid their In- 
 terference to control and influence the votes of others. 
 
 I affirm that Congress had the power to create these offices, or not, at its 
 pleasure. That, when they were created, Congress could prescribe the duties of 
 the officers. That, if it had been deemed necessary, Congress could have enacted 
 that the officers should hold the office during good behavior ; but that, if any one 
 of the officers interfered to influence the votes of others, in any election either 
 State or Federal, it should be a misdemeanor in office, for winch he should be 
 dismissed. 
 
 When the bill complained of was under consideration, Congress had exactly the 
 same power over the subject that it had when the offices we're first creatine — 
 1 hey might have repealed the law entirely, and thus have turned out every one of 
 these officers. 
 
 Suppose, instead of the bill complained of, a bill had been introduced and pass- 
 ed, stating that, whereas these officers were in the habit of interfering to influence 
 the votes of the citizens in elections, therefore, Be it enacted, that the law creat- 
 ing their offices should be repealed, &c, would your honorable body venture the 
 opinion that such law would have been unconstitutional, and that these officers 
 would still have remained in office ? I think not. 
 
10 
 
 On the question of constitutional power, there can be no distinction between 
 the caie stwosed and the bill compiled of. If the one would have been con- 
 
 stitutional, so is the other. ..',,,. n- i ■ ~ 1 „ .,.„ p nnffr pc<i 
 
 Prior to the year 1 820, these officers held their office durtng ^n.C«ff» 
 then believed many of them h: d misdemeaned themselves, ™**ff™^ c l 
 and, with a view to provide a remedy, on the 15th of May, m hat >car, an act 
 was passed changing their tenure, and limiting each of .hem to the M of four 
 vears and made them removable at pleasure within these four > ears. Has it ever 
 bTnSthat ac, was unconstitutional ? Not at all. Yet such an objection 
 
 * ha T b6e " ■ l tt2d iTytr^ 
 
 I he oiiiv reason assKOietl in your reouiuuuu " »v _ . 
 
 is th at "took i Yon these officers the liberty of speech and the Cons,, ution 
 pr'ondes that "congress shall pass no law abridging the freedo.n of speech and 
 
 ° f ThVPsion in the Constitution was intended for the safety and protection 
 of the common citizen who holds no office. It was foresee n ***■«£ t s 
 right «&«« their trust, and to protect ^^ W9 ^^^^JS 
 laws restraining the citizens from censuring them, eithe rm speech *>"™wg 
 
 the press Now, in your resolution, you exactly reverse the matter, and suppose 
 was intended to protect the instruments of the President who hold office at 
 l,s nU n 1 r mleavorsto influence and mislead the people in elections.- 
 D rm al nistration of the elder Mr. Adams, many complaints were made 
 
 a^d "lia es u"ed, both in speeches and through the press, by the citizens, against 
 him XV*. X him. With a view to silence *|>«~^ 
 maintain and shield those in office, the sedition law was passed. The Repub hen* 
 one and all, oondemned it as unconstitutional and unjust, and they were right in 
 
 SU tu^i:^ n maintains now, exactly the same doctrines then advanced by 
 the FederHt They wished to silence the people, that they might retain the r 
 Sacesand I power" and your resolution seeks to allow the officeholders to , go forth 
 whh 1 t. P power and influence, to mislead and corrupt^ people-obtain their 
 rotes in elections, and thus retain their offices with all the.r emoluments. 
 
 Does your honorable body intend to affirm that Congress has no power to 
 rp<nilitp the conduct of this class of officers? ' 
 
 A e they to be" lowed to go forth on days of election, and with a view to pro- 
 cure votes y fo : tho President or his favorites, promise money or f^jo^ora^ 
 mr/W which much money mav be made with but little labor? 1 he ort.ee- 
 X, L ma^Jg Lse prlise's to influence voters, would be using his ^ 
 of sfieeeh which The resolution affirms Congress cannot abridge or lessen it 
 1^ ron s ion can be maintained, then Congress had better go home and yield 
 u \ en n to the President and the carps who hold office at his pleasure 
 
 P VVe vi art a little reflection, perceive that tins resolution not only uo- 
 n„- ifiodveon demns vour Senators for their vote, but necessarily the conduct 
 a d.inions of others whom the country has most delighted to honor 
 "iff only reason assigned in your resolution why this bill was unconstitutional 
 is. that it abridged the freedom of 'speech. ' ' : _ „ „ . v- 
 
 If you are correct, how dare Mr. Jefferson, "the Apostle of Libe rty in tag 
 letter to Governor McKean, use the language he did on this subject fe U 
 nore, when he came into office as President, why did he dare ™" 
 cular letter, prohibiting this class of officers, on pain ot dismissal, liom inte,leun 
 in elections farther than to give their own votes? . _ 
 
 HeWas worn to support .lie Constitution, and if Congress abridges the free- 
 do n of ",eec securely the Constitution, by the enactments proposed in this 
 b^it follows 'clearlv thaUhe President in his circular plated the same prov, 
 sion, by pronouncing the like penalty for the like offence < 
 
11 
 
 I defy any person to condemn the one without condemning the other; unless, 
 indeed, we suppose there is a class of politicians who believe the Constitution 
 does not, and ought not to impose any restraint upon the President. 
 
 I fear such a sect has lately sprung up, and is increasing. It cannot be too 
 speedily suppressed. 
 
 The late President, General Jackson, in his inaugural address, when (i he 
 was fresh from the people," inculcated the same doctrine with Mr. Jefferson. 
 " To prevent the patronage of the Government from being brought into con- 
 flict with the freedom of elections, was a duty inscribed in characters too legible 
 to be misunderstoc d," &c. was the strong language he then used. How was 
 this duty to be discharged ? Did we not, one and all, believe he would discharge 
 it as Mr. Jefferson had done ? if, then, these Presidents could, without violating 
 the Constitution, prohibit these officers from interfering in elections, why could not 
 Congress, by its enactments prohibit them likewise ? 
 No satisfactoiy answer can be given to this question. 
 
 The President already had the power vested in him to dismiss these officers 
 at his pleasure ; and Congress unquestionably had the power to limit his discre'ion r 
 by specifying the cases in which he should exercise it. If, then, my colleague 
 and I erred on this question of power, with great deference I submit that, 
 the company with which our opinions were associated ought, at least, to have 
 softened the asperity of the language in which our condemnation was pronounced. 
 If there was anyone subject above all others, upon which I believed my colleague 
 and I could not mistake the sentiment of our constituents, it was that embraced 
 in that. bill. 
 
 To prevent the President, through those officers, from interfering in elections, 
 was a theme upon which the friends of the late President. (Jackson) had dwelt 
 the most, both in and out of Congress. In 1826, a committee of the Senate, of 
 which I was a very humble member, through their chairman had made a most 
 able report, the principles of which were applauded by the whole party, and by 
 our State in particular. Upon them, mainly, General Jackson came into power; 
 he gave them his solemn sanction in his inaugural address, in presence of thou- 
 sands of witnesses. I had been twice elected after my opinions were well known 
 upon this subject, and now, when I endeavor faithfully to carry them out, to be 
 unqualifiedly Condemned fbr ; doing so, and that by those who then professed to think 
 as I sincerely did, was what I did not anticipate. I am sure that, upon this sub- 
 ject, my practice has corresponded with my professions. Still, I should feel de- 
 graded if I were to pronounce any old associate a traitor, or liken him to Ben- 
 edict Arnold, because at this time he disagrees with me in opinion. 
 
 They are greatly mistaken who suppose the object of this bill was to take 
 from this class of officers any right whatever. Precisely the reverse was the 
 intention. It was to emancipate them from the slavish, bondage in which they 
 were held. It was to enable every man of them to vote according to the dic- 
 tates of his own judgment, and to absolve them from the painful alternative of be- 
 ing compelled to, not only vote, but to electioneer for candidates not of their 
 choice, but of the President, on pain of dismissal from office. 
 
 The great object w&u, to prevent the President from controlling the people in 
 the choice of their officers, State and Federal. This class of officers, whose 
 daily bread for their families, depended on Executive favor, were constrained, 
 as a part of their official duly. not. only to vote as the President wished, but to en- 
 deavor to influence others to do so likewise. If they did not perform this duty 
 they were dismissed, and with their families left t> starve. An enlightened 
 statesman once called them " the enlisted soldiers of the President." ° 
 
 A politician, who knows as well as any other man the motives by which men 
 are influenced in relation to elections, says: — "Whenever he sees an office-hol- 
 der interfering in eltctions, he concludes lie is thinking of his salary and his bread 
 
12 
 
 and is a very unfit adviser of the people."" By the passage of this bill it was 
 hoped the instruments for misleading the people would be taken from the Presi- 
 dent, that these "enlisted soldiers" would be discharged from electioneering duties 
 and yet receive their pay; and that if they performed the duties of their offices 
 faithfully, they might safely vote according to the dictates of their own judgment, 
 and yet be secure in " their salaries and their daily bread." 
 
 By your fourth resolution, as one of your Senators, I am instructed to "vote 
 against the measure heretofore brought before Congress, which had for its ob- 
 ject the distribution among the States of the proceeds of the sales of the Public 
 Lands." 
 
 In justice to myself, as well as to my constituents, I must be permitted to state 
 the manner in which my mind has operated on this subject at different times, and 
 under different circumstances. 
 
 When a bill was first introduced, having such distribution as that spoken of 
 for its object, I voted against its passage, and in favor of the veto of the Chief 
 Magistrate, on the ground that no such distribution ought to be made uniii the 
 public debt was all paid. 
 
 Upon looking into the deeds, by which those lands were ceded to the United 
 States, by the respective States, I found that they were conveyed in tntst t to 
 pay out of the proceeds of their sales, our public debt then owing by the United 
 Stales, and that the residue should be for the joint benefit of each of the several 
 States including those making the cessions. 
 
 At that time a portion of the Public debt was unpaid, and I deem it improper 
 to distribute any part of this fund until the debt was fully discharged, that being 
 the primary object of the donor. 
 
 When a like bill was afterwards introduced, I not only voted for it, but gave it 
 such support as my feeble abilities enabled me. 
 
 By this time the public debt had been fully paid and we had a very large sum 
 in the Treasury beyond the necessary wants of the Federal Government. 
 
 1 could not "doubt the power of Congress to make the distribution, because there 
 was an express trust that this fund should be for the use of the respective States; 
 we had a large sum on hand which I thought, in honesty, belonged to the Slates, 
 and the proportion belonging to Tennessee, I believed, would be highly useful 
 in enabling her to make internal improvements, and in providing a system for 
 the education of those who might be unable to bear the expenses of educating 
 themselves. In addition to these considerations, I perceived if this large sum was 
 not distributed, it would encourage a system of extravagant expenditure incon- 
 sistent with the welfare of the country. 
 
 I slid believe these views were sound, and that if I committed any error, it. was 
 not giving my support to the first bill as well as the last. I believe it would be 
 unwise, perhaps unconstitutional, for the Federal Government to impose taxes for 
 the purposes of collecting more money than is necessary to carry out its affairs, 
 to the end that it might have a surplus to distribute among the States: hut this 
 fund stands on a different ground, it is a trust fund which belongs not to the Fede- 
 ral but to the, State Governments. 
 
 The ordinary duties necessary and proper for the regulation of our commerce 
 with foreign nations, ought to be sufficient, to bring into the Treasury as much 
 money as would defray the economic;.! expenses of the Federal Government, and 
 each of the States ought to receive its fair proportion of the proceeds of the sales 
 of the public lands. 
 
 I consider Tennessee as honestly entitled to her proportion of this fund, as any 
 of your honorable body is to a tract of land devised to him by his faiher. 
 
 It appears to me even at this time, our State very much needs her propor- 
 tion of this fund, and that in a short time we shall be much more in want of it. 
 
 Jfour honorable body may be satisfied that a majority of our citizens arc willing 
 
13 
 
 to relinquish their interest in this fund, hut I am not so satisfied, and as a Senator 
 in Congress, I will not do any act by which such an idea is to he sanctioned 
 
 It mav be in the course of a very short time, that, this fund will be indispensa- 
 bly necessary to save our citizens from heavy taxation, and I should never forgive 
 myself, if by yielding to your instructions, 1 did an act which produced a serious 
 injury to the people, who have so long honored me with their confidence. 
 
 By the last clauses in your fourth resolution, I am instructed to vote for gradu- 
 ating the price of the public lands, and for granting pre-emption rights to occu- 
 pants. ° * v ° 
 
 These instructions correspond with the opinions I have maintained and 
 acted on. therefore, I should find no difficulty in conforming to your wishes in 
 relation to them. 
 
 In the fifth resolution, your instructio s are " to vote for and use all fair and 
 proper exertions to procure the passage o( a law repealing the duties on imported 
 salt." ° 
 
 This subject has been before the Senate on several occasions since T have been 
 a member, and my votes have ever been in favor of removing this duty, and I 
 should still conform my conduct to my settled conviction, that my past course on 
 this subject has been correct. 
 
 In your sixth resolution you state, that you M henrtily approve the leading mea- 
 sures and policy of the Administrations of Andrew Jackson and Martin Van 
 Buren, and" instruct "your Senators to support in good faith, the leading 
 measures and policy, as brought forward and advocated by the present Presi ent 
 ol the United States, and to use all fair and proper exertions to carry out, sustaia 
 and accomplish the same." 
 
 The phraseology of this resolution is so general and indefinite, that I am not 
 sure I comprehend the meaning of your honorable bodv ; but believe you intend 
 that I shall support all the lending measures of the Chief Magistrate, as well 
 those hereafter to be brought forward as those heretofore recommended. 
 
 To instructions of this description, I could not with propriety, pay any atten- 
 tion whatever. ' 
 
 Our fathers and statesmen believed they had done much towards the security 
 of civil liberty, when, by the Constitution, they divided the great powers conferred 
 into three Departments, each, in its sphere, independent of the other two. These 
 we e the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial. 
 
 If the powers of any two of these Departments should be placed in the same 
 hands, the whole machinery of the Government is destroyed, and the checks 
 interposed are removed. 
 
 You instruct your Senators to conform their votes on all the leading measures, 
 to the will of the President, who is at the head of the Executive Department — 
 I you have a right to give such instructions, and your Senators are bound to 
 obey, every oth -r Legislature in the Union has the same right, and their Senators 
 would be equally bound to yield obedience. 
 
 Why not let the President at once make the law and then execute it ? If we 
 are bound to vote as he recommends, it is a solemn mockery to consult us at all. 
 J he law would not be the will of the Senate, but the will of the President. By 
 this process the whole legislative power would be yielded up and surrendered to 
 the Executive. 
 
 j I have been educated to believe, that continued watchfulness, and constant 
 jealousy of those in power, are essential to the preservation of liberty. 
 
 Your honorable body would now teach me a different lesson, and instead of 
 being a sentinel on the watchtower, to guard the liberty ot mv constituents, I am 
 to betake myself to slumber, examine nothing, but vote on all leading measures 
 as the President may recommend. 
 
 If this be the kind of service to which your Senators are to be applied, I never 
 can perform it, and feel myself unsuited to a station, which I have heretofore con- 
 sidered most honorable as well as confidential. 
 
14 
 
 After your Resolutions shall have performed their wonted office and my resigna- 
 tion shall have been received, before electing my successor, I hope in your wisdom 
 you will either rescind or expunge this sixth Resolution. Our common consti- 
 tuents, the free and chivalrous citizens of Tennessee, I hope will ever he 
 represented in the Senate hy those whose principles and feelings are in accord- 
 ance, with their own ; and while this Resolution is suffered to remain, no man can 
 accept that high station but one who is- himself mslavtd and fit only to represent 
 those in the like condition with himself. 
 
 I have now troubled you with all the remarks I deem it necessary to makft 
 upon your six Resolutions, taken separately, but do not feel that I will have dis- 
 charged my whole duty until I have shown the deduction to be drawn from them 
 when connectedly considered. ■ 
 
 They contain the political creed of the present Chief Magistrate of the Lmted 
 States, as expressed through his friends in the Tennessee Legislature ; and what 
 is it? 
 
 By the 2d Resolution it is proved he wishes the whole moneyed power of the 
 United States vested in him and subject to his control. 
 
 By the 3d it is proved he will not agree that the patronage and power he now 
 exercises shall he either lessened or regulated by law. 
 
 By the 4th, it is proved that in order to have full coffers, he wishes the States 
 to surrender their right to the moneys arising from the sales of the public lands, and 
 
 By the 6th, it is proved that he wishes Congress compelled to vote for every lead- 
 ing measure he may recommend, and I am instructed in good faith to give my aid 
 to maintain this creed. 
 
 These instructions I cannot and will not obey. So far from it, my creed 
 upon these points is : 
 
 1st. That the power over the public, purse ought to be constantly kept under 
 the control of the legislature. 
 
 2d. That the patronage as well as the expenditures of the Executive are 
 already too large, and ought to be reduced. 
 
 3d. That instead of surrendering the rights of the States to any portion of the 
 public moneys, they ought to adhere to those rights, and m due season provide 
 t'oi a fair di.->tributio.i of the land funds ; and 
 
 Lastly, for no consideration ought we to agree that any other portion of the 
 Legislative power shall be vested, either directly or indirectly, id the President, 
 save that which is already vested in him by the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 At last, no person can help seeing that the difference between your honorable 
 body and myself is, that you wish to add to the power and patronage of the 
 Executive, I wish to lessen his power and patronage. 
 
 On the decision of this contest by the American people, in my opinion, the liberty 
 of the country depends. Should your creed prevail, ere long the whole Legislative 
 power, vested in Congress by the Constitution, will be. transferred, substantially, to 
 the President, and the only use of Congress will be to stand between the President 
 and Public Odium, when laws are enacted which are disapproved by the people. 
 
 In addition to this, the election of State officers, and State legislation, will be 
 regulated according to the will of the Executive of the Union. Should mine 
 prevail, the States will retain the powers they now possess— the powers of the 
 Federal Government will remain divided into different departments in substance as 
 well as form. . 
 
 Which of these creeds will best secure the liberty, the happiness and pros- 
 perity of the people, 1 cheerfully submit, for decision to the Freemen of Tennessee. 
 
 Ill England, this would be the common contest between the prerogative of the 
 crown and the privileges of the people. Those maintaining your side would be 
 called Tortus, those maintaining mine would be called Whigs'. 
 
 Here it is a contest between the patronage of the President and the right of 
 suffrage of the people. I will not at present give those who maintain your creed 
 any name— you may give those who maintain mine any one you choose. 
 
15 
 
 " Names are nothing with me." My motto is, " Principles in preference to 
 men ;" while I sometimes think that of some of my opponents ought to be, " Men 
 without principles;" though [ would be sorry to intimate that such a molto would 
 suit your honorable body. 
 
 I shall trouble you with no further observations on these important topics. It 
 has been my aim to state my opinions with candor, and to maintain them with 
 firmness ; but, at the same time, to treat your honorable body with the most 
 perfect respect. 
 
 I was called to the service of my State, fifteen years ago, without any solicita- 
 tion on my part. With reluctance I accepted the high station [ now occupy. I 
 have been, continued in it, perhaps, too long for the interest of the country. I 
 have been thrice elected, by the unanimous vote of your predecessors. My 
 services have been rendered in times of high party excitement — sometimes 
 threatening to hurst asunder the bonds of this Union — and your resolutions con- 
 tain the high compliment that bitter political opponents can find only a solitary 
 vole worthy, in their judgment, of " unqualified condemnation." 
 
 I hope it will be in your power to select a successor who car; bring into the 
 service of the State more talents — I feel a proud consciousness, more purity of 
 intention, or more unremitting industry, he nevei can. 
 
 F-ir the sake of place, 1 will never cringe to power. You have instructed me to 
 do those things which, entertaining the opinions I do, I fear I would not be 
 forgiven for, either in this world or in the next ; and practising upon the creed I 
 have long professed, I hereby tender to you my resignation of the trust confided 
 to me, as one of the Senators from the State of Tennessee to the Congress of 
 the United States. 
 
 Allow me to add my sincere prayer that the Governor of the Universe may so 
 over-rule our dissensions as to secure the liberty and promote the prosperity of our 
 common constituents. 
 
 I have the honor to be, gentlemen, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 HU. L. WHITE. 
 Senate Chamber, Jan. 11, 1839. 
 After which he proceeded and said, 
 
 Mr. President — I iiave now finished my task; henceforth, T am to cease being a member 
 of this body. I cannot share with former associates, the honors, the privileges, or the emol- 
 uments of a Senator in the Congress of the Uniiect States. At the same tune, I will be re- 
 lieved from my portion of the labors, and from sharing with you the High responsibilities which 
 necessarily pertain to the station. 
 
 In taking my leave of yoa, in the utmost sincerity my prayers are, that collectively and 
 individually you miv b: enabled to pursue a course, which will afford yon the highest com- 
 forts in this life; and that your labors may be so blessed as to secure you the grateful remem- 
 brance of the present and all succeeding generations. 
 
W46 
 

 * <U 
 
 
 
 ?■*+. 
 
 
 
 .vsSShir. o A* SmatoZ* V G° .^sw.. °o .<* /'^ 
 
$K 
 
 fey 
 
 A* 
 
 
 
 ^°^ 
 
 : .ho. 
 
 | BOOKBINOINC ti 
 
 Jan • feb 1989 H A> , ^