The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-05-06


administrations in the last twenty year ., oi Pu'''ns
into Office those who expected 70 DC HOS. %,
viceable in elections, that General layioi lhi
with perfect safety, and IN aocoruanoe VA
princples have turned out every once noiaer IN
The northern States. They had been put IN by the
Democratic party, and were sT qtIcto active parti-
sans So far was this policy OF requiring me ac-
five seryce of office holders carried during Gene
raj Jackson's administration that remember a
case in Ohio in which one Jackson postmaster was
turned out and another put in, ON the express
Ground that he was better Jackson man and more
Influential in elections than his predecessor And
/ repeat that General Taylor might, with little
risk of violating his principles, have turned out the
whole corps of Office holders North; not SO IN the
South and Southwest. In those sections once
holders are not uniformly active partlsans. In
one of the most populous counties OF tennessee
there is Democratic postmaster, Tor example,
who cannot be removed upon the Prinf'Pite
by the present Administration, though the wings
who hold that the principle upon which removals
made should be the same in both parues' mink
ii great hardship.
trine advanced by Jefferson as republican-the
equalization of the public offices between the TWO
parties-one which the present Administration may
consider sound; and insists that il has not been re-
parded in the removals made by General Taylor.
The State of Tennessee has been referred TO by the
Senator among others, as evidence OF the truth OF
this allegation. should like to know who 1t was
that gave the Senator the information he relies upon
in re gard To removals in that State.
Mr. BRADBURY II was member OF Congress
from that State.
Mr. BELL No matter, i am not disposed to ques-
ton the general correctness of the statement Most
of the important offices in that State have been
changed-some upon removals, and others upon re-
sgnation and the exprations OF the ofhciai terms;
but know that some five or six offices held by
Democrats, and ranging in value, should estimate,
from some four hundred to eight hundred or thou
sand dollars, are still in the hands of Democratic
incumbents. But will the Senator from Maine con-
suit again with the gentleman from Tennessee TO
whom ne has referred, and see if he knows Of any
office of value in Tennessee held by Wing when
General Taylor came into powers am obliged to
say that recollect none, not even one, worth so
much as two hundred dollars ! would inquire of
my friend, the Senator from Pennsylvania, If ne
has any knowledge that single Wing was in pos
session of any office of value when this Adminstra-
ton entered upon its duties!
Mr.. COOPER. No, sir.
Mr. DAWSON, in his seat. Take the State Of
Maine,
MIR. BELL will ask my friend from Maine
whether in his own State he knew of any Wing
who held Office of any value when General Tay
lor came into the possession of the White House?
Mr.. BRADBURY. There were Wings in office in
the State of Maine.
Mr.. BELL. ] mean offices of any value.
MIR. BRADBURY. Not large number, sir.
Laughter
Mr.. BELL. Let the same inquiry be made in ref
erence to every State Of the Union, and the same
response would follow. And cannot refrain from
saying, under all the facts admitted, disclosed
and established, connected with this subject that
the speech ofthe honorable Senator, and all the
gumens by which he has sought to sustain his at
tack upon the course of the President, most
traordfnary. ! do not mean to say that the man.
nsr the matter of the Senator is improper for de-
bate, or unparliamentary. mean to say, that it
is extraordinary and surprising that a member of
the Democratic party, holding to the principles of
that party on the subject OF removals from office,
should persist in these attacks.
There is one other question connected with the
subject before thesSenate that wish to say few
words upon How can the Senator from Maine or
any of his political friends, with any consistency
or propriety, support resolution calling for the
reasons or causes upon which removals from office
have been made by the President, when it is well
known that the Democratic party has for twenty
years past resisted all such calls when proposed by
their opponents. The Senator, in his first speech
upon this subject took the ground that the jackson
party in 1880, when this question most fully
considered, had voted down series of resolutions
offered by MIR. Holmes in the Senate, making
similar call, because some of the resolutions en-
braced matter foreign the object of the CALL and
were Objectionable in other respects and therefore
the Senator concluded that the then jackson, now
Democratic, party were not committed against
such calls. But the Senator cannot shelter himself
and his friends, under the assumption Of the facts
stated in relation to the resolutions of Mr. Holmes
At the same session of Congress Mr.. Barton, then
Senator from Missouri, offered single resolution
calling upon the President to communicate to the
Senate bis reasons or the causes for removing the
recorder Of land titles in that State forget his
The Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. DopoE) or the
Senator from Missouri (Mr. BESToN) may recol-
IL
assented The argument upon which the call
resisted by the Jackson members in the general
debate which took place upon that and MIR. Holmes 3
resolutions was, that the power Of removal was abb
solute and discretionary in the President by the
Constitution; that be alone responsible; that
the Senate had no right 10 demand his reasons for
doing act exclusively within his power and con-
troll that the Senate had no other power in the mat
Ter Of removals from and appointments TO Office,
than 20 reject confirm the appointments when
the President nominated But Mr.. Barton, in the
g. a.. Z.
Of the propriety Of making the call for the reason
and cause Of the removal, that the Senator from
Maine has urged in pressing the adoption Of his
solution. Mr. Barton contended that the fact Of re-
mova implied cause Of some sort derogatsry 10
the character Of the dismissed functonary; that 10
dismiss public officer and refuse TO communicate
the cause, was TO infct an injury and do gross in
justice 20 private character. IL was injury TO his
family and his means of livelihood. 1.-THE party
removed innocent Of any misconduct, com.
mon justice required that his innocence should APP
pear; IL guilty Of any misdemeanor IL was due alike
20 himself and the public that the extent Of hs guilt
should be known. IL will be remembered that re-
movals from Office during the administration Of
General Jackson were justified under the pretert
Of reform, which necessarily increased the pre-
sumption Of delinquency Of some kind on the part
Of the dismissed officer. But Mr.. Barton's resolu-
ton was laid on the table by strict party vote.
Now, II any thing can be regarded as settled by
the Democratic party, IL seems 10 that this ques-
ton Of the right Of the Senate % call for the
Of removals from office must be regarded, when,
az lar as recollect, every such call has been re-
lected by that party when in power in the last
twenty years.
Mr.. Dawson. On every occasion since 1889 they
have resisted these inquiries.
MIR. BRaDBUHY. The Senator IL mistaken.
Mr. BELL. ] am not prepared 10 60 80 far back
as that, but think ] am not mistaken as 10 the
Of the Democratic party upon this subject
during the last twenty years
did not intend when ] Iosc 10 occupy the time
Of the Senate at all this occasion further than Ia
say that upon some future occasion would ask the
attention Of the Senate upon the general princi-
Piles involved in the resolution, and Il IL my inten-
tion II no Senator anticipates me, TO offer for the
consideration Of the Senate proposition 10 restrict
the Discretionary power claimed by the Executive
over all the civil officers Of the country and reg
ulate removals from Office by law; and am glad
70 ind that the Senator from Maine, If under.
stood him, Is ready 10 cooperate with me that
point.
Mr.. BaIeHT. Il was not my intention TO hav,
said word ON this subject, but the remarks Of the
honorable Senator from Tennessee have struck IN,
with 20 much surprise, and differ 90 widely from
what regard as the facts in the case, that fee
compelled (late ! Ia aak he fndnIoratre al