Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1829-06-08

Iitical sentiments; but few have, as yet, thought
Of his constitutional right for so doing. To our
readers generally, therefore, the following OPT |
Mons will be interesting. In the debate on
adopting the Federal Constitution, MIR Law
renee said
nf the President abuse his trust, will he escape the
popular eensire when the period which terminates his
elevation arrvesl And would he not be liable to I'M
parchment for dispacing worthy and able man, who
enjoyed the confidence the peoplef"
MIR. Hamilton was not member OF that Con
eres.; but his opinion Was unequivocally OPP
posed to the RICH, Of The President alone 10 re-
move. In No IT, PIP. AIS, Ala, of the fede-
rais,; appears the following
"Ithas been mentioned as one of the advantages to
be expected from the cooperation OF the Senate, IN
the business of appointments that Il wou'a coh'pu.e
TO the stability of the administration he consent OF
that body would be necessary to dIspace rs wen as
to appoint change of the chief magistrate, therc'
FORE would occasion so violent or so general re-
voluton in the officers of the government as might be
expected If he were the sole disp0ser OF ofhces.-
where man, in any station, had given satisfactory
! evidence of his fitnt 81 for il, new President woud
be restrained from attempting change IN favor OF
person more agreeable to HIM, by the apprehension
that the discountenance of the Senate might Illustrate
the attempt, and bring some degree OF disced' upon
himself"
| Mr.. Madison said
"The danger, then, consists in this, the President
can displace from office man whose merits require
that he should be continued in It. What VIII be the
motives which the President can feel for such abuse OF
his power and the restraints to operate to prevent
| In the first place. he will be impeachabe by tins
House before the Senate, for such an act OF mai admit
nstraton; for contend, that the wanton removal OF
meritorious officers would subject him to impeach.
rent and removal from his own high trust"
Again This subject was discussed in the
House Of Repre- sentatives, in 1889. An alb
s,rac, of the opinions of several members, is
thus given by the National Journal
Mr.. Smith, of South Carolina, entertained
doubts of the power Of the President 10 remove
an officer.
Mr. Bland said he ",hought the power given
by the Constitution 10 the Senate respe cllnS
the appoin men, TO Office would be rendered
| almosr nueatory ifhe President had the po,oer q
removal IL the frs, nomination OF the Presl.
dent should be disapproved by the Senate, and
the second greed to, lie had nothing 10 do but
to wal, the adjournment of Congress, and then
, fill the vacancy with his iavoiitr, who, ny mus
getting into the possession ot the Office, would
: have considerable chance OF permapency IN H.
He thought il consistent with the nature oil
Y things hat the power which appointed should
r remove"
Mr.. Jackson, from Georgia, said" He a
+ greed with the gentleman on the general pin
D chile tina: the body who appointed ought %
, have the power OF removal, as The body whic h
! ---ee'------.-,-4J-, - IT -, - so
. case of Impeachmen,, he willing 10 go SO far as
:, to give the power Of suspension 10 the Presi-
= den, "
Mr.. White concurred that, in all cases, the
: parry win" appointed ought to judge Of the re.
2 moval. except in those cases which by the Con-
S situiion are excepted.
, Mr.. Smith said" If no precise period was
fixed, he concei, ed the officers appointed TO be
during good behaviour, and that the person could
not be yemored by The President"
? Nj, Sylvester toought "the Senate ought to
5 be Joined with the President in the removal, as
hey were joined by the Constitution in the APP
poin,ment TO Office"
MIR. Gerry Said" If there is power Of re q,
; movaI, beside that Of impeachment, il rests
: with he President, by and with the advice OF
the Senate, who Ire the body that appoints"
Mr. Lnermore considered "that the same
power which appointed ali officer had the right
, OF removal" He took it, therefore, IN the pre-
; sent case, that the President and Senate would
have the power Of removing"
Mr. Bland, referring again to the power in
; the President, asked If it would not in fact
make The President monarch, and give him
absolute power?
The motion Of Mr.. Band 10 add "by and
. wi h the advice of the Senate" was lost.
) We have made these extracts simply for
| The purpose Of marking the differences OF opin-
ion which existed and exhioI'ed themselves,
on he agitation in Congress, Of the first sub
ject which brought the question Of removal
within the view Of the House. They snow
the doub; and jealousy on the subject which
possessed the minds Of men cormporaneous
with the establishment, of our Constitution. A
bill was introduced, soon after the debate TO
which we have referred took place, for estab-
fishing On Exec u,ive Department, 10 0e dcnom-
mated the Department Of Foreign Affairs
IN The discussion Of this bill on the ION Of
June, 1889, Mr. Whie moved to strike out The
words recognising the power Of he Pre- sident
TO remove the officers.
Mr.. Smith of South Carolina, commended
IL n