to the Marshal to "restore the money," which was done. Hamilton was clearly of the opinion, that the President has no power to restore a fine once levied—that the people of the United States when they adopted the National Constitution, not only directed, that all its Executive powers should be vested in a President, but they defined and limited those powers in the Instrument itself, that no power can be legally exercised by him unless given by express provision, or resulting by fair construction. He was no advocate for the diminution of those powers, nor by a forced inference would he abridge the salutary prerogatives of the Executive, which he considered essentially necessary to the welfare and happiness of the people, but he was rigidly tenacious of the principle by which those powers were to be tested. "We are to be governed,” he said, "BY THE CONSTITUTION, as we find it, not as it MIGHT BE MODIFIED." No express provision authorized the Executive to order the restitution of a fine, and thus to divest the United States of moneys legally vested by a payment to one of their officers for their use. Did any such power exist by fair implication? This reduced the inquiry to the single consideration, whether the power to pardon offences necessarily implies a power of restitution? In England the Crown may pardon, not only crimes and misdemeanors, but debts; and by a separate and distinct prerogative may award restitution of goods and chattels, or lands forfeited, but the power of the President is expressly limited to granting "reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." "In England, fines constitute part of the revenue of the Crown, for the sole use of the KING. In this country fines are not paid into the exchequer for the use of the President, but into the Treasury for the use of the UNITED STATES." 66 "The theory of our Government," he said, never once contemplated a power in the Executive over the Treasury, in any shape. And this is the material distinction, in reference to this subject, between the King of Great Britain and the President of the United States. "But the power of the King was so far limited, that, where the subject or subjects generally have an interest in the fine, there the Crown cannot interpose to order restitution, though the fine had not been levied. The United States having the sole interest in the penalty, the President can have no right to restore it, or in any way interfere with it. "The fine when levied is a vested part of the National revenue, and subject only to the disposition of Congress; the Constitution having expressly enjoined that, 'no money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.' Stronger language could not have been used to guard the public property." The distinction, that the money was yet in the hands of the Marshal, Hamilton regarded "as one which would render all the provisions of the Constitution nugatory; would defeat its preventive wisdom, and would render the President the absolute and uncontrollable Governor, if not proprietor, of all the public revenues. If it is law, to proceed as he has done in this case, he may cancel all the bonds for customs, issue his warrants to Collectors, intercept and dispose of all the public moneys before they are lodged in the Treasury." It was in the next place shown, that a charter of Pardon, without words of restitution, could not operate to "The Crown's Share only of a forfeiture is pardoned by an act of general pardon." Temp. Ann. Parker 290. & 1 Salk. 333-5. Cro. 31; also Str. 530. restore the money. Thus, the President in remitting the fine, had assumed a prerogative unknown to the Constitution; and in his charter of pardon had not made use of legal terms sufficient for his purpose; and a daring attempt is made by one of his officers to ascribe to an official act of the Executive an effect directly in the face of the law. It will be remembered that Jefferson thus violated the Constitution, and usurped a power greater than that of any limited Monarch of Europe, to purchase the suppression of a menaced disclosure of his relations with a foreign hireling, the traducer of his predecessors. The usurpation was committed, but its object was not attained. The correspondence of Jefferson shows how he writhed at this time under the exposures of Callender. Rankling with disappointment at the disregard of his claims for office, he returned to Virginia, and there made public the letters addressed to him by Jefferson. The first of these letters commenced with an apology for his delay of a few days in answering a communication of Callender. It informed him that his agent was directed "to pay him Fifty Dollars on account of the Book he was about to publish," with a request he should "send him two or three copies and the rest only when he should ask for them." It assured him, that "the violence which was meditated against him lately had excited a very general indignation in that part of the country-" and, to prompt his libels against Adams, informed him that "the delivery of Robins to the British excites much feeling and inquiry." This extraordinary epistle concluded with the assurance "of every wish for his welfare, and of his great regard." A second letter from Jefferson to Callender acknowledged a recent communication, then gave the information requested on certain points;-and, in order to escape remark, enjoined upon him secrecy as to the source of it, and suggested that a false representation should be made on that subject, for the purpose "of keeping himself out of the way of calumny." It then proceeded "to thank him for the proof sheets he inclosed to him," observing, "such papers cannot fail to produce the best effect.* They inform the thinking part of the Nation, and these again supported by the tax-gatherers as their vouchers, set the people to rights. You will know from whom this comes without a signature: the omission of which has been rendered almost habitual with me by the curiosity of the Post-offices." The "Proof sheets" inclosed were those of a pamphlet entitled "The Prospect before us." After the first part had been put to press, a second remittance, of the same amount as the previous one, was sent to the author by the same person. The last of these letters was written when Jefferson was Vice-President, and at the moment when an Insurrection to prevent the collection of these taxes was showing itself in Pennsylvania. The work thus patronised commenced with a bold attack upon the Constitution, and upon the Senate, which had been the object of hate in Virginia, to whose people the volume was addressed. Her odious prejudices against New England were flattered, and the eastern States were denounced as wishing to lay the foundation of "an absolute monarchy." Passing from the Federal system to its * Yet Jefferson writes to Mrs. Adams afterwards-(Jefferson's Works, iv. 23) "With respect to the calumnies and falsehoods which writers and printers at large published against Mr. Adams, I was as far from stooping to any concern or approbation of them, as Mr. A. was respecting those of Porcupine, &c. I knew myself incapable of that base warfare-that dirty work." See Jefferson's Works, i. Sept. 6, 1799. ii. Oct. 6, 1799. supporters, the lesser leaders of that party were first successively the objects of his calumnies, which increased in grossness until they reached Washington and Hamilton. Washington was charged with the "violation of his oath to preserve the Constitution;" with having admitted himself to have been "twice a traitor;"† with having authorized the robbery and ruin of the remnants of his own army; with corruption; ‡ with "a perfidious desertion of France;" with "the most audacious usurpation and despotism;"|| Adams was accused of "murder," ¶ and Hamilton held up to "execration." Though Jefferson had professed his attachment to the Constitution, had lauded Washington, had commended Adams in his addresses to the public,** and had in private expressed to him his personal regard, he is here seen covertly inculcating hostility to the Constitution, exciting to a severance of the Union, and abetting a foreign hireling in his foul de famations. These calumnies were written under the roof of a senator of the United States, founded on information derived from the confidential friends of Jefferson, and paid for by him. 66 When prosecuted for these libels, Jefferson even deemed him worthy of the protection of Virginia, and thus wrote to Monroe, then Governor: †† "I think it essentially just and necessary that Callender should be substantially defended. Whether in the first stages, by publick interference or private contribution, may be a question. Perhaps it might be as well that it should be left to the Legislature, who will meet in time, and before whom you can lay the matter so as to bring it before them. It is become peculiarly their cause, and may fur $ 34. § 97. * Page 12. † 16, 19. |