Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1834-10-14

and q at the judgments OF tho eor,t. arc 70 h. sS,r5
',e interference either Of the legis-
AZURE IL Is this complete separation o. the mowers of
government vested in different hodcs Of tnaesracv
mncn' next to The responsibility every branch 10 The
mtnt. s" S'-~ gwen
Duty and the interest the Nation alike REQUIRE there
o,e, ulat eech body OF mnsistacy should guard with
Jsy 'nc powers n'ruSied 10 from the
OF Other branches OF the Government The frs, Instance
ny ono department! of powers hrlorgpg
o"'' OF OF control successfully exeTted nv one De-
PMmeh over another in the performance OF duties conf
eo py e Constitution End Laws exclusively 10 the lat
ter may he the commencement of 80 es of vio,tops of
nonsuona principles. 10 end ony the total desruc-
uoh however formally they may be preserved Of the bar
"sn me wisdom OF the People has placed between
'hrm whilst these principles deny TO the legislature
porc'paon In the performance Of Executive ect they do
noI IA any iuanner Affect ts right pecrlbr by Corsu-
uonsi eSacnenis, the duties OF Executive officers
" "hou poicng the peculiar organisa ion OF the Post
Ohce department, Distinguishing from Other Executive
10 s, iM OBSERVE That the power OF appointment
70 ONCE s IN us nature an Executive power Accordingly
INC constitution vests IL in the Executive branch nj The
with some few exceptions such as Clerks OF
Oour onlcers OF Congress- Sc whose sppontinep of bein
oherFe specially directed proves the correctness of be
poIon assumed. and shows, that whilst the arners Of
me constitution proceeded upon certain aenera pncines
'hey admitted exceptions, where propriety sn ronvepi
ence u,ea'ed them In appointing Postmaster a, Put.
nam, Ohio, therefore, the Postmaster (;enera ~,
unctsn In the discharge of duty the legis-
suve branch had no right or par icip,e Tho
me oibe appointment and tie person be selected were
aeIs Tor Executive consideration. To the discreicn of
the POSTMASTER General under the responsibilities beora
mentioned, Twas by the Constitution and Laws xcIusvelv
" 10
ine reasons 70 influence the conclusion were submitted
10 him they may have existed in public menorials in
private letters, or in his mind. lie was not bound TO
suon" their suceucy 10 The udgmt nj OF either Uorss
OF eongres- any OF their committees The law vested
IN him iLe hos determination, aud the power TO act
coruingly Can IL be urged now when an onnointu.,t.
made that Committee Of the Senate Which youII ba,
haJ 10 night TO REORGANIZATION Of the case 10 which 10
was not bound by law to submit il before sens nno =,
nag Sh 10 examine The reasons upon which he proceed
ed For what purpose is The exercise OF the rio b
~ his me. 'ne oomn,tes may revise and, If proper
II so, would II not be bet once TO provide lor ,Ln
beforehand the opiRon of the Senate, or its Ccmniite
sne thus save the necessity for two decisions.
II the Committee have the right 10 look for y,osons T.;
me letters on he in The Department not equally en-
nsd 10 examine the Head Of The Department PEI sonay
ana ask what motive induced him 10 make The apnoi,,
men" II NOT, the inquiry might be very mperlec Tor
10 particular case there might be papers on file re-
iaung 10 ihe appointments the Head of The D,naran,
might have been governed by ares,on within he 49,,
knowledge but not stated in any document r.c.iy,d b.
him. And if the principle Which alone can sanc,; 10y
inquiry on e omnittee be correct and the appoining
officer be hound 10 exhibit his eaons is il no, erSs
IN oIder NAT ths exhibition, whenever required NAV be
perfect mat record should be made OF the reasons in
every case? Yet, this ever med reouisi,e or %
proper, in any Executive Department.? ''
lie appointment oil superior officers OF The Governments
- vested IN me PRESIDENT and Senate. When the Presi
dent dominates an individual lov office has the senate
n 10 uenanu an inspection OF all The letters and pspes
Ieset'ed oy hn relating TO IL? And If the Senate should
ask Tor such inspecoD will il be said the President ia
ally does, lay before the Senate such OF the
ceivcd by him resrecog the appointment, as he dsena
no cba
acier and qualifications OF the person nominated IN i no.
heved, however, that would express the oninio
.'' nc oouhu 70 lay oil The papers before The Senate
ana yet THIS Is the case OF appointment vested in he
President and senate jointly There nigh, he some
n'iy IN requiring that each branch Of me appointing
power should have the benefit OF the information eceived
by The other II the Senate possessed the night 10 demand
Of Tho President the Why ne made nor,ina,;on
might II not with equal pfopriety he urged flat Inc pra
sident may demand OF tbs Sena e. and The senate h b,
10 answcr, why il rejecedit? To the es,ahiisI,oet
THIS doctrine presumed the Senate would Object and
o tgl ich xuo 4
ing The principle involved in The call Of the Commute
II Inc Senate have no right 10 call upon the President
!" assign The reasons or, submit the papers refpecr
domination TO which it, is asked with less nr
ney can il be said tha, possesses The fe in Itself or
ny w. Cohmttse TO demand Of The President any other
ENe'nnPe Queer ihe lessons Of an arp0in which
that oiictr has, by the Constitution and Laws Tho exc
I'VE power OF making 1T seems 10 be clear result that
me Hgh ri The Senae TO aa examination OF papers or rea
cons must he less, il possible csso of appojuim,nt
"h which has concern bao in that wherein lis ar
probation. must be had. =
The course pursued by the Committee II sanctioned
aud continued might end in the virtual subsection of o
power OF appointing end removing Posmasers TO its will
u papers aud letters TO be inspected and reasons
anined Ivy ommittce which remain CONSTANTS in
session in my or all if resolve The legal forms
o. appo'n'nents may ne preserved; the Posmsser-Gene
raj may continue TO aix bis signature commissions: bnt
all mus perceive, thai lac would do this under an inAu
encc insfeasine by IT. natural tendency an absolute con-
o IN Tue hands OF others, to whom all participation in The
power OF appointing Pos'mssters is denied by low
The Constitution OF the United slates, ant 81 sec 2d
provides, that Congress may, by law vest The appo,ent
Of such iuefior officers Iley think proper in he pres
dent alone in the Courts OF law or in ihs Head. nj NJ
psftmenis Pursuant 10 this provision, CUnnress has
acted, that the Postmaster General shall tstsli.l pos
Offices, aud appoint POsfmGsieys at all such places AZ
shall appear TO hn eapedent be post routes that are
ray 81 established by law Ia Ihe Postmaster Cefer
al therefore, was vested, by constitutional law ,la
power ePpoio Postmaster at PuiusIn Olto No otbrr
officer o the Government bas Any participation in the
powrr; neither ia the Pos'asteI. epeFal bound Nv law
10 su6st his plecs in regard TO this or other
appointments, 10 any other branch Of the Government
lis only responsibility, in with other officers Of
tie Executive Department, being 10 the PRECEDENT and 10
the power Of impeachment and s confdtd 10 The Honss
VI Representatives and Senate.
he case has been treated OF appointment fnereIv
and nothing has been said oil the al q the fofmSr
Posimssicr because, when appointment Is made
ehd completed by iio competent authority % in The case
al Gihsn, Ohio Tho removal Of tito former incuHbtrt
taxes place by mere operation OF lw. IL results from ,
appointment, aud Is not sepsfsie iroio H. No die
unrt set OF renoys takes pacauO oileF to that feet il
issued by the Department
Bot regarding tie removal distinct sxsrcise Of now
er little ehs ia the Serale ~ committee il per
ceiyed 90 degand The reasons Ct nstt cIicn of e
papers upon hich II made, TIC case Of The sp
poiDnent lie power 10 remove, is Ike the poafy 10
sppoin executive iu lis nature, and niy con.
bded by i've provisions OF lie Constitution 10 HE Exccn
i've Department no participation IN ils POWER il piysn
10 the Seaale es 10 tue power Of appointment At a. ear
iy period m tie hHoryo the Goytrnnrut the question ~
The hight Of tho Prcsiebi remove an oieer appointed
with tho consent Ut tho Senate, was discussed ia Con-
gicss. II resulted in decision In favor OF the right
u tho President The discussion arose in 1882 i'm
tic House Of Representative upon motion 10 strike out
Of ulc bill establish tho Department Of FOREIGN Aa,fs
now called The Department Of State clause which de-
4