The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-07
CITY OF WASHINGTON, FRIDAY MORNING, JUNE !, 1850


account very much. and feel leviy upon The occasion
My colleague has referred TO the late marshal Of III,
western district OF Tennessee as another o removal
IN opposition to the principles have stated, and he
tain hun
Mr. TURNEY, Gn his seat) Not at all
acquainted with him, when on casual visit 10 Nash.
vile, and gave him such views of the probable o
the administration as encouraged him to believe that
would interest myself in his behalf
Mr. TURNEY You were under no obligation at all
Mr. Chester did notexpect 10 be removed upon the app
cation Of my colleague He had sent letter stating
That he was satisfied my colleague would so far as he
could, have him retained until his term expired
Mr.. BELL lpresune he depended upon my pro-
scptye feeling and ne may not have been conscious o
having subjected himself TO anything which deemed le
gitimate cause OF removal AS 10 that gentleman, hap
| pen to know him personally | regard him gen.
tleman. do not remember the specific grounds upon
State which have seldom had occasion to visit, and
know nothing from personal observation as to his conduct
while IN Office presume, however, that he was re,
moved the ground that he was On active partisan.
will state to my colleague that casually meeting gen.
tleman from Tennessee since he made his remarks upon
this subject mentioned that the propety OF removing
that was understood, IN the district n which MIR Ches-
Ter resided, that he had been active and influential par
isan in elections He particularly referred to his success
IN betting upon elections as he had heard Mr. Poiks
election and he had from the winner, that he lost
house and lot OF the towns OF his district in the last
presidential election mention this fact only upon such
information as have stated and, if true, consider It as
furnishing alr presumption that Mr. Chester was re-
moved Tor some other Cause than difference Of
political sentiment
My colleague has also referred 10 the case OF Mr.
McNely. never heard Of that Of removal until
received letter from Mr.. McNey the other day, and
know nothing Of the grounds upon which be was re.
moved; nor had any knowledge that The postmaster at
Tazewe had been removed. until my colleague made his
remarks.
Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, raise d point OF
order If all the cases are going over the United States
in the way. il would at least last three years
Mr. BELL. Well, / will have done. / believe have
now fully answered my colleague, who supposed he had
mitied that there may have been removals made upon
false allegation Of The President may have been
misled in many cases stated the other day that would
not be responsible in all for The correctness OF the
information upon which the removing power in Washing
Ion had proceeded In regard TO my State, could
do So unless had personal observation oil the conduct
OF these individuals will further say to my colleague,
that a removal OF gentleman of Tennessee made
against my recommendation and wishes.
After few remarks by Mr.. TURNEY, as published
yesterday
that he should have been removed from Office by the
present administration account OF political opinions
know OF no democrat who makes such complaint.
The point OF complaint is that the present Executive
went into the presidential chair under pledges 10
no man account of his political sentiments, and that
having since removed several thousands Of individuals,
OF pure character and good ability well qualified for their
Offices charge is thereby made by the Executive that
they were wanting in fidelity and competency 10 fulfil
their rust and those who know the men who have thus
been removed do not believe that the charge which the
Executive thus makes against them, by implication,
true So far as many OF them concerned, know
that the charge Is false and that they bear character
hIgh in every Of the word, he who makes the
charge against them All that ask therefore, is this
that when the Executive of this nation makes charge
ability, proby, and uprghtness. he shall prove that
charge 10 be true, else that he shall Withdraw H. and
acknowledge it TO be untrue The charge is one OF inf
deity and ncompetency The President pledged himself
No IN an ms rom offlc such
cause and he has since removed several thousands in
direct violation OF that solemn pledge. And now the
senator from Tennessee MIR BEL tells US that none OF
the democrats who have been thus removed from office,
in violation OF the pledges OF the Executive, have sui.
lered in their characters.
Mr. BELL. Will the honorable senator allow me 10
marks the other day
Mr.. DOUGLAS | heard them day
Mr. BELL. lido not think my honorable fnend (ifhe
will allow me 10 call him sol can have understood my
remarks to-day, IN relation 10 this point. stated the
other day that Gen. Taylor, in his inaugural, dill not
and could not be considered as having pledged himself
that he would remove Tor no other cause than the
want OF "honesiy, capacity, and fidelity" lie intended
express his determination, that for the want OF those
requisites, or OF either OF them, he would remove,
whether The incumbent was political friend or not II
had been felt evil in past administrations that
when favore put in Office there great reluc
lance ie 10 put him out and though be might not have
capacity equal TO the demands OF hrs office, or might be
negligent or loose the discharge Of his dutes he
generally retained until his conduct default became
fragrant This was the evil which Gen. Taylor promised
TO correct Whoever remembers the which led TO
the passage OF the act OF S20, which limited the terms OF
nearly all the most important ocersan act which was
revolutionary s purposes IN regard 10 the tenure oil
oifice-knows that II the extreme decacy felt by
the Executive in making removals Tor any cause, but OF
the most palpabe necessity, which led TO its passage.
Hut since Thai time the former evils have multiplied IN
consequence Of the growing practice OF rewading ayor-
ties and paItisans with Office, and retaining them oce,
whether competent or not
Mr. DOUGLAS understood that, and il does not
NEE, the point that am making. The point is that the
President into Office substantially under pledge
10 remove no man for opinions sake. Thus the Amer
lean people understood Il thus the wing leaders
derslands II and thus IL is attempted 10 be car
ried out by whig orators and whg newspapers, by
asserting that none have been removed yet except
for causes coming within the meaning OF the Ex-
ecutive declaration, OF want Of competency and o.
deity Thus every removed IL stgmatzed By the
administration being deficient in those quaihca-
tons. The whole country knows that the charge ~
uBuethai il is SANDER attempted TO be liked upon good
men and true And. sir, when the senator from Ten
nessee argues that this sander does the removed no
injury, what is the inference from that declaration Why.
IL does not inure their character, II i does not make
their neghbors believe that they dishonest and in
competent ~ is because these neIghbOrs do not believe
the truth OF the statement ol the Executive, that he
would not except for cause. II these men are
held guiltess, il their characters do not suffer, il is be-
cause the country knows that the pledge has been viola
ted has been fased to such that thousands oil
removals have been made OF political opin-
ions | do not believe there is whig in America who
does feel his heart that these removals have been
made on account OF political differences, and for other
cause but differences OF opinion u is cruel after having
stricken down and deprived him OF his Office, 20