The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1837-03-24

Aud where did the President End The
power Tor this most extraordinary acli I,
has been seen that the Constitution. iea-
lous 81 all Executive interference with
the Treasury Of the nation. has eonIided
u 70 The exclusive care 81 Congress. By
every precautionary guard. from the firsi
imposIilon Of the taxes 10 the final dis
bursemeni of the public money.
Il has been seen that the language Of
the slxleenih section of the law ii 1916 Il
express aud free from all ambiguity; and
that The Secretary Of the Treasury is the
sole and exclusive deposilary Of The All.
shorty which il confers.
Those who maintain The power Of the
President have 10 support u against the
positive language OF he Constitution.
against the explicit words Of The statute.
and against the genius and theory Of al
our institutions.
And how do they sormoun, these in.
superable obstacles! BY series OF far
fetched implications. which. IL every one
Of them were as true as they are believ.
ed 70 be incoreci or perverted. would
stop far short Of maintaining the power
which was exercised.
The FIRST Of these implied powers Is.
that OF dismissal. which is claimed Tor
the President OF all ihe questioned
powers ever exercised by this Govern.
mens. this is The most questionable. From
the fret Congress down 70 the present
Administration, il had never been examin.
ed. II was carried. then. in the Senate
by the casting vote or The Vice President.
And those who. al Thai day, argued 10
behalf oi The power. commended for il upon
conditions which have been utterly dlsre.
garded BY the presen, Chief Magistrate.
The power OF dismissal is nowhere in
the Constitution granted. lnexpress terms.
10 The President. Il is M, a necessary
incident 10 any granted power; and the
friends Of the power have never been
able % agree among themselves as TO the
precise par, Of the Constitution from
WuttU " opttuk1s
But, il the power Of dismissal was as
inconieslable as il is justly eonlrovertible.
We utterly deny The consequences deduc.
I'll fron It. fhe argument is. that the
President has. by implicauon, the power
Of dismissal. From this Ore. implication
another is drawn. and ina, is, that The
President has the power 10 control the
"tfcer, whom he may dismiss, in the
discharge ii his duties. IN all cases what
ever: aud that THIS power of control is $"
ca Gprshensl'e as 10 include even the
Ease Of a specific duty expressly assignee
BY lsw to the designated officer.
Nu~, We deny these results from the
dismissirg power. That power. il it
exists. can draw after 1t only a right OF
general superlnIendence. Il cannot au.
lhOrize the President 10 substitute his
will To the will Of Inc officer charged with
the performance ut official duties. Above
all. il cannot justify such a substitution
n case wnere the law, as in the presenl
instance, assigns 10 designated otieer
exclusively the performance nf a psruc-
ulsr duiy, and commands him To reprrt
mol tn the President, but To Congress.
IN case regarding the public purse Of
the nation, commiiled to the exclusive
control Of Congress. III
Such consequence as that which |
am cuntesiing would concentrate in the
hands &c one man the entire Executive
power Of the nation, uncontrolled and I'M
checked. ..
II would be utterly destructive Of all
| Official responsibility. Instead of each
officer being responsible. in his own
separate sphere, for his official acts. he
would shelter himself behind the orders
of the President. And what tribunal, in
heaven above or on earth below, could
render judgment agains. any officer for
an act, however strocious, performed by
The express command of the President,
which. according I" the argument. he was
absolutely bound 10 obey! -.
Whilst all official responsibility would
be utterly annihilated in subordinate
| officers. there would be no practical OIL
available responsibility in the President
himself. 81
But the case has been supposed. OF q
necessity for the removal of the deposi,es
and a refusal of the Secretary Of the
Treasury to remove them: and il i:
riumphantly asked il, in such case. the
President may no. remove him, and com
mand The deed TO be done. That is al
extreme case. which may be met b,
another. Suppose the President. with.
gu, any necessity, orders the removal
from place Of safety to place Of hazard
| II there be danger that Secretary may
neglect his duty, there is equal DANCE
,hs. Presiden, may abuse his authority
Infallibility is not human attribute
Aud there is more security for the Publi'
in holding the Secretary Of the rreasur,
to the strict performance Of an officia
duty specially assigned 10 him. under al