The Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn. Territory) 1849-1855, 1851-12-04
Can the President make Law!


duties and powers of The Executive Of the U. S.
are as plainly limited and distinctly defined. as
the duties and powers of marshal or of any
other officer. II is rather late for Republicans to
subscribe to that exploded dogma of royalty, that
'.ihe king can do no wrong" The President can
no more collar subordinate officer Of the govern
ment and thrust him out Of office, without war
rast Of law, than he can thrust his hand into the
Treasury, without Treasury warrant; if he
could, the time might when President
would walk into the Halls of Congress, like
Cromwell, exclaiming ''begone we caititis"'--an
&C, Of Executive authority afterwards repeated in
France by Napoleon Bonaparie. backed up and
enforced by the bristlins bayoue,s Of Murat and
his brother Lucien. We hare not been nursed
upon this SORT of Democracy. We shall take the
privilege Of examining and Judging the acts Of the
President, with just as much freedom as we would
the acts Of any body else. The President has at
tempted 1--WE say attempted, because we believe
that is all he can dog has attempted, to remove
judicial officer, commissioned unqua6edly for the
Supreme Coart of the United States for the Ter
ri,ory Of Minnesota" This is act, on the part
Of the President, without parallel or precedent, in
the history Of the government; and as n novel
exercise Of Executive power, it devolves upon the
President, at least to show ,otere his authority
comes from, to exercise it. No Federal Judge
has ever been removed. No one in Michigan; no
one in Florida; no one any where else. This
Star Chamber proceeding on the part of the Presi-
dent seems to stand, for its authority solely upon
the opinion Of Felix Grundy, Attorney General of
the United States in 1899, found in his reply to
letter from Judge Doty, Of Wisconsin, inquiring
"whether Territorial Judges were. under the Con-
sti,u,ion Of the T.. s. liable to ard subject to re-
moval by impeachment
His opinion aud the easons offered for it, we
shall consider and comment upon, and show the
iailacy of, if we can, regardless of "what Mrs.
Grundy will say" Mr.. Grundy reasons in this
wise: The Constitution provides that ''the Judges
both Of the Supreme and Inferior Courts, shall
hold their offices during good BEHAVIOR bat as
ia some insta noes, Congress has limited the term
Of Judges in the Territories to four years, they
are not GIRL officers, within the meaning Of the
4th Section of the second Article of the Consti-
tuition, which is in these words: ''rhe President,
vce-Presiden,, and all civil officers Of the United
States, shall be removed from Office on impeach-
ment for, and conviction Of, treason, bribery, or
other high crimes and misdemeanors.' MIR.
Grundy then reasons, that as these Judges not
ciril officers, they cannot be impeached; and as
they cannot be impcached, it follows, ex necessi-
tate rel, that they must be removable at the will
of the President Now in the first place, how
does the Limitation Of their term by Congress, to
/ Are the President and Vics-President the less
civil officers. because their terms are limited to
four years; We had supposed that the nature Of
the duties devolving upon officer, would deter
mine whether he were ciril offieer--not the
length Of his commission; the functions he is to
discharge; and not the length Of time he has to
discharge those functions. We apprehend that
no limitation of the commission OF Maj General
Vi - N2 """io Sua"tS" t"C SA"'"SsS'
of that office. from mIiaryto cicI. 1t seems
puerile 10 lawyer, who has learned the distinc-
ton made by Blackstone and every elementary
writer upon law, between the different estates
and classes Of Offices, the civil, military aud &C.
cesias,ic, to end the Attorney General Of the
United States, regardless Of all such definitions
and distinctions, arguing that officers cannot be
civil officers, whose terms Of Office limited
Those who framed the Constitution, knew the
legal meaning Of every word in it. If Fedora
Judge in the N. w. Territory, was civil officer
is not a Federal Judge in the Territory of Mime
sofa, also civil officer: The ordinance Of TIL
N. w. Territory, provided that the commission
Of the Judges should continue during good be
hayior.'' Mr.. Grundy's reasoning admits, that
Judge Of the N. w. Territory was cirh officer
and could be impeached; but insists that Judg
precisely the same powers, forscoth is not a civi
officer, cannot be impeached, and therefore is tn
creature Of the President, removable at his will
without his assigning a reason for it, any NOR
than he would for removing deputy postmaster
I, or mis- own private Secretary. Mr.. Grundy's rea
soning does no, involve merely this absurdity, @
making one Federal Judge Of Territory, n
Judge under the Constitution, but a ga mer
creature of legislation and Of making other Ter
ritorial Federal Judges clothed with the san
powers, Constitutional judges, making one Judg
: removable only by impeachment, and the other
by slip Of paper from the President. This SO,
. Of reasoning viii not do. 1t seiates ITSELF Nh
Grundy does not meet this question, by sayin
! that Territorial Judges are mere creatures Of leg
, isa,on. They are no more creatures of legisla
J ton, than are the Circuit and District Courts
the United States, and the Courts in the Disric
: Of Columbia. Neither does the case referred t
3 by Mr. Grnhdy warrant any application to th
: Territories Of Wisconsin or Of Minnesota.
In that case (ths American Insurance Co. VS.
Cantcr ct al. Peters, 5is) the Cour, held tia