The unrestricted power of removal from office is a very great one to be trusted even to a magistrate chosen by the general suffrage of the whole people and accountable directly to them for his acts.  It is undoubtedly liable to abuse, and at some periods of our history perhaps has been abused.  If it be thought desirable and constitutional that it should be so limited as to make the President merely a common informer against other public agents, he should at least be permitted to act in that capacity before some open tribunal, independent of party politics, ready to investigate the merits of every case, furnished with the means of taking evidence, and bound to decide according to established rules.  This would guarantee the safety of the accuser when he acts in good faith, and at the same time secure the rights of the other party.  I speak, of course, with all proper respect for the present Senate, but it does not seem to me that any legislative body can be so constituted as to insure its fitness for these functions.

It is not the theory of this Government that public offices are the property of those who hold them.  They are given merely as a trust for the public benefit, sometimes for a fixed period, sometimes during good behavior, but generally they are liable to be terminated at the pleasure of the appointing power, which represents the collective majesty and speaks the will of the people.  The forced retention in office of a single dishonest person may work great injury to the public interests.  The danger to the public service comes not from the power to remove, but from the power to appoint.  Therefore it was that the framers of the Constitution left the power of removal unrestricted, while they gave the Senate a fight to reject all appointments which in its opinion were not fit to be made.  A little reflection on this subject will probably satisfy all who have the good of the country at heart that our best course is to take the Constitution for our guide, walk in the path marked out by the founders of the Republic, and obey the rules made sacred by the observance of our great predecessors.

The present condition of our finances and circulating medium is one to which your early consideration is invited.

The proportion which the currency of any country should bear to the whole value of the annual produce circulated by its means is a question upon which political economists have not agreed.  Nor can it be controlled by legislation, but must be left to the irrevocable laws which everywhere regulate commerce and trade.  The circulating medium will ever irresistibly flow to those points where it is in greatest demand.  The law of demand and supply is as unerring as that which regulates the tides of the ocean; and, indeed, currency, like the tides, has its ebbs and flows throughout the commercial world.