Weekly national intelligencer., 1850-05-18
ADJUTANT GENERAL ROGER JoENs.
IN SENATE MAY l6. 1ssn-


motion some days but then yielded 10 other matters
that considered Of pressing importance hone
the Senate will now indulge by accedng to the motion
which have made.
The motion agreed to, and the bill was read second
time by its title and considered in Committee Of the Whole
There being proposition amend the BILL was reported
to the Senate and the question required its for
Mr. SEWARD ask for some explanation Of the reasons
for passing that bill.
Mr. GREENE. Mr.. President, I will state very briefly
the reasons and they such as think, will commend
themselves to the consideration of the Senator from New
York. At the period of the reduction Of the army in 1921
there in commission Adutants General. The bill
passed at that time reduced the number to The Adu-
ans General then in office Colonel JONES' the petitioner
the present Adutant General, and Colonel Butler. The
President Of the United States dismissed both these officers
and appointed General Atkinson General Atkinson, how
declined accepting the appointment and the President
Of the United States then nominated Colonel Gadsjen Off
Ger of great merit and that nomination 10 the Senate
for confirmation The Senate rejected the nomination of
Colonel Gadsden admitting at the time his high qualif
cations, and his meorous services but rejecting the nom
nation the ground that the President should have made,
and by law required make the selection from the
Adutants General in Office the time the bill passed.
The President enominated Colonel Gadsden after bis rejection
by the Senate and accompanied that nomination with
gument The Senate reconsidered the question: and by
increased aoy rejected the nomination Of Colonel Gadsden
on the ground before stated The President of the United
States did acquesce the decision Of the Senate Col
Jones reduced to his nea rank and received compensa
inauguration Of the President in 1885, be nominated
Colonel Jones for the appointment which had been
from the time Colonel Gadsden jeced to the me
referred to, when Colonel Jones nominated The Pres-
dent by this nomination. and the Senate its action assert
ed the right of Colonel Jones the office which he held
the time OF the passage Of the law of 1921
The Military Committee, to which this question
feed were unanimously of opinion that during the whole
period between the time that Gen. Jones
pved of his Office and the time he was renomnated he was
IN fact and in right the adutant general and entitled
the pay and emouments belonging that Office They have
therefore reported the bill which your table, by
which they provide for the payment Gen. JONES' during this
period of three years. Of the difference between the pay Of
captain nthe army and the pay that he entitled
ceive as adlutant general They consider it matter of right
In this they agree entirely with the committee which the
same subject referred the last session, who unan-
mously made similar report
Mr.. DOWNS. Mr.. President, this to me to be
very extraordinary measure and should like TO hear
further explanation from the committee that reported this bill
doubt we should thus pay for constructive service for
vices which were rendered. especially when the officer
whom it is proposed pay that way received pay the
other capacity in which he acted thought paid for
vices rendered, and not for services rendered Now,
whether the officer rgbtfutly wronguly deprived of
The exercise of the duties of the office of aduant general he
went into service another capacity and received pay for
services which he rendered But now for services which he
did not rende he here and asks compensation.
not know to what extent this principle will carry other
cases think we should be somewhat cautious before
taking step of this kind for there may be hundreds Of other
officers removed from the service for Other
who may forward and claim compensation for the time
they of service There may be such cases. for augh
know standing for twenty years, and this might
furnish some precedent for such applications therefore
opposed to the bill.
Mr. DAVIS If Mississippi. Mr. President this question
was brought before the Mihy Committee at the last session
and again at this session, and agreed 10 report the bill
which is your table, considering that the legal right
to receive the pay OF adatant general vested in this officer
is not must nfess, Of those complete against
which no argument can be brought 1t is true, stated by
tbn
performed by this officer during the for which be claims
compensation This is very different from that OF the
officer going out of service and ten coming back it and
claiming compensation for the time he of it. The
case simply this There adjuans general dur
ing the of 1912. On the organization of the peace
bshmen after tie close of the war; the number reduced
to The President did not consider that the law
fined him in his nomination to either of the two adjuans who
had served during the war But the Senate consue tho
law differently They considered that it only authorized the
President to discard and retain the other of the aduans
that had served during the They accordingly rejected
the nomination OF the President. Thus the stool
between the Senate ard the Executive for the few years
during which Adutan! General Jones went TO duty
captain of artillery He served captain of artillery be-
ese, for about three years. and then the nomination Of Ad
uan General Jones made by the President and confirm
ed by the Senate He claims now and think with equity,
tha. he duan general throughout the whole PERIOD
though he denied the right Of performing his des hav
been ordered the subordinate functions captain of
tiery. II he adjuant general during the whole period
and we have the fact that else confirmed during
that tme-he has equitable right to the pay. The
of compensation officer of the army is his rank
and not the amount of duty performed. We may, and we
do on certain OCCASIONS give pay officer Of the army
for performing higher duties than his command authorized
him to do; but in deprive officer Of the
pay Of his command because he does perform the duties
oft think therefore, that the bill properly recognises his
right to be legally the adutant general that PERIOD and
consequently, ne entitled to the pay But STILL have
stated objections be made this The Senator
from Louisiana has presented The fact that the officer
did not perform the duty. and required perform
the duty only be answered by explaining that the officer
sought perform the duty and denied the right Of per-
forming it.
Afer further debate the bill ordered be
crossed for third reading, and by unanimous
subsequently read third time and passed.