clared him out of office, and mean to keep him so. It was certainly bad policy of him to refuse the offer of his friends. The political door is harder to be opened than any other, if once it is thrown in a man's face.

The Senate met, and Mr. Bassett's motion, with respect to the effect of a writ of error as a supersedeas to an execution, was taken up. Mr. Reed spoke long in support of the motion. Mr. Ellsworth equally long against it. I rose, and made sundry remarks; and the amendment was carried. It was not a material one, however, in the bill.

While the minutes were reading, I stepped to Ellsworth, and asked if he would not join me in an attempt to regain the clause we had lost on Saturday. He paused a little, and said he would.

Mr. Ellsworth rose, and spoke long on the subject of a discrimination or some boundary line between the courts of chancery and common law. He concluded with a motion nearly in the words of the clause we had lost. Mr. Lee and myself both rose to second the motion. Mr. Lee, however, sat down, and left me up. I, therefore, determined to avail myself of my situation, and say something. Declared my concurrence of sentiment for limiting chancery strictly. As the bill stood, chancery was open to receive everything. In England, where by the letter of the law, no suit could be brought in chancery if the common law afforded a remedy, yet such was the nature of that court, and so advantageous had it been found to the practitioners, that it had encroached greatly on the common law. Gentlemen would not consider this as an inconvenience. So high were their ideas of English jurisprudence, they said all the world admired it, and every member of this House must admire it. (This was Doctor Johnson's language on Saturday.) I was ready to admire it too, but I would first endeaver to describe it.

English Jurisprudence and Chancery.

It (English jurisprudence) consisted of a great number of grades of courts, rising in succession over each other, common pleas, King's bench, exchequer, chancery, &c., so admirably organized and connected that the one was generally ready to begin where the other ended; and so formed, that as long as a client had money he might purchase delay, or in other words get law for it. That in England, at this time, it was rather a trial of the depth of purse than of right, and, accordingly, nothing was more common than for a man who was going to law to culculate and compare his pecuniary resources with his adversary. The cost, however, being fairly counted, and neither party afraid, at it the angry men go. As they

are eager, and bleed freely, they mount, perhaps, with tolerable rapidity, until they arrive at the regions of chancery. But here their bills are filed and all their facts collected, and in some half dozen of years, it may be, a judgment is given. But mark: the first judgment is seldom or ever final. Here, then, a new number of facts must be adjusted, and some ten or twenty issues, in feigned wagers, must be tried in King's bench. In some three or four years, a new cargo of facts are furnished. The examiner goes to work, and he spends some two or three years. The chancellor, too, perhaps, must have the opinion of the judges of King's bench. Here is a new trial. But at last he gives a judgment. But two of the counsel sign a petition for re-hearing, and the whole business must be gone over again.

But, is the business done? No such thing, Another petition comes in for a review, and the whole business must be gone over a third time.

Here I was interrupted by the President, who said there was an instance of a cause being finished, by the present chancellor, in his life time. I answered quick: one swallow does not make a summer, Mr. President; and went on. But are they done yet. No such thing. The House of Lords is before them; and by the time they get out of the far end of it, one, if not both, are completely ruined. This is the progress of your wealthy parties, where plum is matched to plum.

But what of your unequal matches-your poor and rich parties. Why, sir, if the relative wealth of one is to that of the other as four to one, the poor man will get about one fourth part of the way; if as two to one, half way; if as three to four, three fourths of the way, before the exhausted party drops off into ruin. (Here, by way of illustration, I repeated the Annesley cause.) For, never was so admirable a machine contrived by the art of man, to use men's passions for the picking of their pockets, and to bring their justice into trade. The present bill has been considered as enjoying perfection, in proportion, as it approaches the British system. Sir, I have given you the opinion which, I know, many sensible Americans entertain of the system of English jurisprudence. With such people, English features will be no recommendation of the bill. Sir, I cannot boast a general knowledge of the sentiments of men in the Union. From what I know of my own State, I am confident a great majority abhor a chancery. Those who I have generally heard advocate the chancery, were professional men. I really believed this was the case, generally, over the Union. I know many people complained of chancery in the Jersey. One hundred and twenty-six

truth.

pounds had been paid lately for taking the earning only in a thancery suit in that State Sus had been pending mirty pears in their chancery, and had cost thousands. I was clearly of opinion that everything after the verdiet of a jury was a mere trap to eatin fees, and might be sted the sole of law, abled to perplex the The bill. however, before you, sir as it now stands, is not chancery. It is something much worse. The line between thaneery and common law is broken down Allains may now be mel in the Federal courts by the judges, without the intermption of a jury. The trial by jury is considered the forthright of every AmerIt is a privilege they are fond of; and let me abi. it is a privilege they will not part with See note bei: w..

ican.

This day the committee for considering our commercial injuries reported. I do not like it. The end is answered. perhaps, for which the stir was made when this committee was appointed; and now the business ends in a babbie. I will, however, get a copy of the report before I pronounce on it.

Bill for the Department of Foreign Affairs,

July 14. The Senate met, and one of the bills for organizing one of the public departments, that of foreign affairs, was taken up. After being read. I begged leave of the Chair to submit some general observations, which, though apparently diffuse. I considered as pertinent to the bill before us. The first clause was there shall be an Executive Department, &c. There are a number of such bills, and may be many more, tending to direct the most minute particle of the President's conduct. If he is to be directed how he shall do everything, it follows he must do nothing without direction. To what purpose then is the executive power lodged in the President, if he can do nothing without a law directing the mode, manner. and, of course, the thing to be done? May not the two Houses of Congress, on this principle, pass a law depriving him of all powers? You may say it will not get his approbation. But two thirds of

NOTE. In the preface to Dicken's Bleak House, it is stated: At the present moment, August, 1853, there is a suit before the court, (meaning of chancery,) which was commenced nearly twenty years ago; in which from thirty to forty counsel have been known to appear at one time; in which costs have been incurred to the amount of seventy thousand pounds; which is a friendly suit ; and which is (I am assured) no nearer to its termination now than when it was begun. There is another well-known suit in chancery, not yet decided, which was commenced before the close of the last century, and in which more than double the amount of seventy thousand pounds has been swallowed up in costs. If I wanted other authorities for Jarndyce and Jarndyce, I could rain them on these pages.

both Houses will make it a law without him, and the Constitution is undone at once.

Gentlemen may say how is the Government then to proceed on these points. The simplest in the world. The President communicates to the Senate that he finds such and such officers necessary in the execution of the Government, and nominates the man. If the Senate approve, they will concur in the measure; if not, refuse their consent, &c., when the appointments are made. The President, in like manner, communicates to the House of Representatives that such appointments have taken place, and require adequate salaries. Then the House of Representatives might show their concurrence or disapprobation by providing for the officer or not. I thought it my duty to mention these things, though I had not the vanity to think I would make any proselytes in this stage of the business ; and, perhaps, the best apology I could make was not to detain them long.

I, likewise, said that if the Senate were generally of my mind, a conference between the Houses should take place. But the sense of the House would appear on taking the question upon the first clause. The first clause was carried.

Now came the second clause. It was for the appointment of a chief clerk by the Secretary, who, in fact, was to be principal, when-\ ever said principal officer shall be removed from office by the President of the United States. There was a blank pause at the end of it. I was not in haste, but rose first.

Mr. President, whoever attends strictly to the constitution of the United States, will readily observe that the part assigned to the Senate was an important one; no less than that of being the great check, the regulator and corrector, or, if I may so speak, the balance of this Government. In their legislative capacity, they not only have the concoction of all bills, orders, votes, or resolutions, but may originate any of them, save money bills. In the executive branch, they have, likewise, power to check and regulate the proceedings of the President. Thus-treaties, the highest and most important part of the Executive Department, must have a concurrence of two thirds of them. All appointments under the President and Vice President, must be by their advice and consent, unless they concur in passing a law divesting themselves of this power. By the checks, which are intrusted with them, upon both the executive and the other branch of the Legislature, the stability of the Government is evidently placed in their hands.

The approbation of the Senate was certainly meant to guard against the mistakes of the President in his appointments to office.

joy among the members that I have seen among children in a school, on giving leave; and away all hurried, except a few that remained a little to see if the conference would finish. Among them, I was one who wished to know the result of the conference.

June 27. The Senate met. The managers of the conference reported an agreement of a number of articles. But the bill was not in the Senate. It seems when the conference was agreed to by the Senate, and notice of such concurrence sent down to the House of Representatives, our wise Secretary sent down the bills along with the communication. I was for insisting that, in parliamentary language, the bills were still before the Senate; they had been there when the conference was appointed; no vote of the Senate had been passed to send them down; the conference was appointed only on the disagreement. There was a great deal said, the amount of which resolved itself into this, that a mistake had been committed. Mr. Morris said if the bills had been fairly in his possession, he would have brought them back to the Senate. He actually went to try to get them from the managers on the part of the House of Representatives. There seemed to be a jealousy between the two Houses, who should act first, as the one which acted last would reject the bill, or, at least, have the blame of rejection, if the bill was lost. Gentlemen could not reconcile themselves to act without the bills, (for there were two of them, one on impost and the other the tonnage act.) Some moved to act on the report of the managers. After, however, much desultory conversation, it was agreed to take up the bill for the judiciary.

We were proceeding on this, when a message was announced. Sundry communications were brought by the clerk, and the amendments of the Senate were all adopted, on the impost bill, save on the articles of porter and coal. Such was the haste of the President, that he put one question on both these articles at once, and both agreed to. But the tonnage bill was retained, and the principle of discrimination between nations in treaty and those not, was still adhered to by the House of Representatives, on this bill.

Made some further progress in the judiciary, and adjourned about two o'clock.

Monday, 29. Attended at the Hall.
I made a remark where Ellsworth in his

Now for the judiciary. diction had varied from his, and he defends it

the Constitution. This bill is a child of with the care of a parent, even with wrath and anger. He kindled, as he always does when it was meddled with. Lee, however, after some time, joined me. Although the President showed himself against us, we carried the amendment.