The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1839-01-17

oil Executive powers and duties, The attempt OF Con-
gress 10 investigate The condition Of The Executive
Departments, or into the conduct Of public officers az
late session, was an impairment intrusion into
matters that concerned others; attempt IN fact at
usurpaiion on the part OF Congress, the supervision
Of the conduct OF public officers being an act in its
nature Executive, and the President being also ex-
clusiyey responsible for the conduct Of all the de-
parlments, and all public officers.
The tremendous power of removal, claimed with
out any other responsibility than that which attaches
and duty of seeing that the laws be faithfully execut-
ed and that the Constitution be preserved, Is also
well founded according 10 these views Of the extent
of Executive power. And, sir, il will be found that
all these extravagant notions Of Executive power
were sustained by the majority in this House during
the late administration. The Postmaster General
Mr.. Kendall took ground boldly in his letter to the
investigating committee Of this House in 1886, re-
fusng to communicate any information as 10 the
motives or reasons upon which he had removed one
postmaster and appointed another in his place, aeg
ing that he considered IL his duty 10 regard the con-
sttutonal limitations Of power, and 10 give the in
formation required would tend to subvert them !"
and this doctrine was acquiesced in by the House.
have already referred TO the opinion OF another COM
mittee, which was acquiesced in by the House, that
il is no msdemeanor in The Executive, and matter
OF no public interest or concern, whatever, that
public officer should be removed on account OF his
politics. Thus, sir, was system OF tyranny lately
upheld and established upon alleged constitutional
grounds, which possessed The merit at least, Of con-
sstency in all its assumptions Of power II was upon
the ground OF the exclusive responsibility Of the
Executive Tor the conduct OF all his public ohcers
and his absolute power over them, and because II
was highly convenient at the same time, that when
any one under the late administration venured TO
find fault with any subordinate officer ofthe Govern
ment, the answer in this House invariably was
Why do you not attack The President himselfa He
is responsible for the faithful execution OF the laws
Why do you not have the manliness 10 attack him
directly, who is an antagonist worthy OF you Why
do you seek to vent your hostility to Gen Jackson in
attacks upon the officers appointed by him, and for
whose good conduct he is bound 10 answer9
But sir what do we find to be the duties Of the pre-
sent Chief Magistrate upon these fundamental doc
trnesa II true, sir he is silent upon some OF them,
but we may Justly congratulate ourselves and the
country that the proper constitutional rights and
powers OF Congress over the public treasure have
been fully recognised in principle whether the Pre-
sdent intended TO go thai length not II is OF no
use now to inquire under what circumstances this
recognition has been made. The power OF Con-
gress to inquire into and supervise the conduct Of
all public officers we also regard yielded without
Limitation. But, above ALL we have reason TO re-
joce that the foundation upon which that most obi
Gus, mischievous, and de>potic of all powers, me
unlimited power of removal, has been maintained,
is removed. am lar from thinking that the Presi-
dent would put this construction upon his own Mes
sage but such will be the force OF the principles he
does admit The doctrine Of exclusive duty and re-
sponsibity in taking that the laws be faithfully
executed, and that the Constitution be preserved, is
expressly abandoned. II is admitted to be both the
right and the duty of Congress to interfere both by
legal enactments and by direct supervision OF the
conduct of public officers Again, il is admitted
that Executive supervision is incompetent TO the task
Of seeing that the laws be faithfully executed with
out the aid Of Congress! In truth, the Executive
power in the hands OF the present ncumbents is pro-
claimed by the President himself in the Message
before u.s. to be failure He is not only willing TO
divide the responsibility of the Executive Depart
ment with Congress- but he admits that, without the
cooperation of Congress in the discharge OF Exec
utive duties, the public service must suffer. There
is, therefore, no longer any plausible ground re-
naming upon which 10 rest the unlimited power of
removal.
But, Mr.. Chairman. while applaud the candor of
the President in making the important admission to
which have alluded cannot agree that his PROPOSE
ton Of Congressional committee upon the terms he
suggests is entitled to be treated with equal respect
II looks though he wished to stpulate equivalent
for the concessions he has made. When we come to
anayze the character and tendency Of the proposition,
nothing could be more insulting to Congress.
In the first place, it appears 10 in the shape of
boon-an act Of grace and favor by the President.
Congress may will hereafter be permitted by the Ex-
ecutiye institute committees OF inquiry to Limited
extent Heretofore, 1t is that this power in Con-
gress has been actually denied but still the country did
not acquesce in the prohibition and the President will
not acquire any credit for conceding Congress prvi
lege which was always its right, primarily and funda-
mentally. Bot this Is not the most Objectionable fea
ture in the proposition If understand the nature Of
the duties the committee Of Congress proposed by the
President would have to perform they would be the
mere scavengers OF the President compelled to grope
their way into the private recesses the inner closets of
suspected public oflcers-pursung their victims
through all manner Of tainted and infected places, often
bound to disregard every feeling and sympathy that
honorable TO our nature dragging TO light the concealed
and venia weaknesses and alterations Of men standing
high in the estimation of society," and who pehap are
still mn honest than their uh have
passed through such ordeal and to what end pur
pose, at last will Congress have descended to take up
on itself Of its ordinary duties service revolt,
ing! Can they give effect to their investigation No
they cannot remove single officer Our committees
will only act in the capacity of nformers and cachpoles
for the Executive; and when shall have presented
wretched delinquent to the President he may may
not punish him. remove him from office, his discre-
ton. But besides The degradation, there two capt.
tai objections this plan Of Congressional committee,
founded on higher principles. First, the entire espon
slbity of seeing that the public moneys in safe
hands, and that the public officers generally honest
and capable, will be shifted from the President and
thrown upon Congress. Who, after such system of
Congressional supervision Of all public officers shall 60
into operation, would dream Of making the Pres-
dent responsible for any defalcation in subordinate Off
GERS! II would be said at once, to any at
tack upon the Executive that it the business Of
Congress to have been digent in their inquiries
into the conduct of the defautng officer Secondly
nothing could add more to the nhue OF the Exec
tive than plan which proposes to leave him in the full
possession not only of the appointing power hereto
fore exercised but Of the power of discretionary
val and at the same time relieves him from the burden
and odium of official scrutiny into the conduct Of po
cal and personal avontes, and Of removing them upon
his own suggestion. He would thus be left in the full
possession OF all that is benehcent and desirable con-
neced with the appointing power and the distribution
Of Executive patronage, and relieved Of all that is I'M
gracious. When he would be called upon to remove an
old friend and partisan from Office for good cause, the
report OF the committee would shield him from any I'M
pleasant responsibility Of personal nature. Another
objection to this plan would be- that Congress, from
composition and constitution would be incompetent to
examine and supervise the conduct Of public ocersas