if constitutional government is to be preserved, the legality of the means used must be looked upon as no less important than the rightfulness of the ends pursued. His conception of the executive power, at least while he wielded it, was extravagant in the extreme. There is a constitutional theory growing up now — if it is not formulated, it is at least some times acted upon — that the general government possesses, not only the powers granted and those incidental thereto, but all powers not expressly withheld from it by the Constitution. Jackson anticipated that doctrine as applied to the Executive. He sincerely believed that as President he was authorized to do whatever the Constitution did not expressly forbid. The “original executive powers” mentioned in his “protest” contained an undefined fund upon which he could draw as occasion required. He held himself to be the sole “direct representative of the people,” and in that character he found a source of authority for doing almost anything in the people's name. After his reëlection in 1832 he felt that the people had formally set the seal of their approval upon all his acts and thoughts, past, present, and future, so that his will was equivalent to a popular edict.
He treated the legislative power with a contempt almost revolutionary. Not only did he, in the absence of Congress, set on foot measures, especially of financial policy, which Congress had already disapproved beforehand, and which he was sure would be rejected if submitted to Congress;
