The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-12-18

! beg leave 10 say-lhough know il often excI,es
smile here If body says anything about the cons,itu-
ton, and particularly if The remark comes from mem
Der IRON Virginia but without The fear OF that ridcue
undertake to say i was an unconstitutional omission
u being an unconstitutional omission, aud The Senae ey
an overwhelming majority having attempted 70 remedy
that omssion The question whether this House itself
Will refuse It's Unless gentlemen here are pre-
pared decide that the Assistant Secretary OF the Treas
ury is, in view OF the constitution Inferior oficer--
an officer suci messenger clekunless they are
ready 10 decide that man who stands second IN the De-
parmenl 10 the Secretary himself is an inferior ohcer,
whose appointment may be conferred BY law upon the
President alone the heads Of departments they are
/ compelled TO pass this bill
undertake 10 say to my friend from Tennessee that
this amendment OF thereafter does not remedy the de-
iect The whole defect is in the law as II Is, and
ought TO be remedied at The first opportunity WHICH pre-
sens itself. Why insert The word thereafter lsthere
fear that the present Assistant Secretary of the Treas
ury cannot stand the ordeal OF the Senate II he can
not stand that ordeal that is the very best reason in The
wOrld for not inserting this word "hereaer II he can
stand the ordeal. then the amendment Will not AFFECT
hum. aE
| MIR. HOUSTON. In reply 10 the gentleman, would
say far that phraseology is concerned, that have
such fear he has II not for the purpose OF COW
eng any that have already occurred or OF point
ing directly at the Secretary q !he Treasury but o. ma
king the law apply TO that may hereafter occur.
| Mr. BAiLY. do not regard this bill as pointing at
the Secretary at all Ht
| Mr. HOUSTON say, furthermore that the language
of the law relation 10 Assistant Postmasters General
is OF similar character. The Of Of these as
sisiats presented to the Senate the other two are
holding their Offices now, but their names aave never
gone before the Senate for confirmation, because no
vacancy made, aud propose TO do the came IN
this case
Mr. BAYLY am opposed particularly to the amend
meni thereafter" As far The Assistant Secretary OF
the Treasury concerned have not word to say. he
be most efficient officer la the Of my remarks
upon this matter, have not had any reference whatever
e thai Assistant Secretary OF the Treasury aim no
blow at him. .as
The gentleman fran Kentucky, [Mr. EwIk0.] in his
remarkable speech, took occasion to reer two or lhIec
times my action about the Librarian and said that M
Williams, when he turned out, was a whlK ; aud
that not yehementiy Impressed al that Tune with
the propriey OF This House cecting It's own Librarian
beg leave to say 10 the gentleman IN regard 70 mat mat
ter, that he simply mistaken. thought so ihen \
did III the matter in the House. because there
was 10 ptolrity in my doing So Hs was not my con-
against his removal but my remonsahces were OF no
avail $3.50 ss5-. .ss s4.E s.a.s.T
1Ir EWING. / understand the gentleman perfectly.
and give him credit for his explanation. II is preciseyin
accordance with what said before The gentleman did
lind occasion TO in the matter OF the removal OF
Virginian and democrat thought that the gentleman
IRON Virginia, who had voted Tor that high funconary.
onng the Clerk ought al least to be willing 70 stand
up week the responsibility OF the vote he had
given eyen the removal of the late Librarian Mr.
Parker That was the idea had about IT. 49,
Mr.. BAYLY ! beg TO say 10 the gentleman from
Kentucky that the Librarian oil which he speaks Mr..
Wllliamsl Vlfginian, and that he was removed
against my renonstrance. have also TO say that COL
Parker VINO was subsequently, appointed, was not ap-
pointed upon my Recommendation, but WAS recently re-
moved agains, my remonsances. And am Tree TO say
TO my friend from Kentucky, Mr EWING, that ii was
fact thai constituent OF mine. who is also democrat,
aud belonging democratic family, which il seemed to
make il proper Tor me to move in the matter. 45
Mr.. HlBBARD | must raise point OF order upon
my friend from Virginia. Ii seems TO This train OF
discussion has been carried on lar enough Il cannot be
| in order .5s. Il -f4eF
The SPEAKER. The Chair sus.ans the point Of or
der. .8r
Mr. BAYLY. I regre, that the gentleman from New
Hampshire dad not raise his question OF order before.
He has allowed me to be assaed, and refuses 10 permit
me to say few words in my deience. 81 sls4.. =
Mr.. STANTON, of Tennessee. After that clause OF
the constitution which ha, been read upoa The sugges-
uon OF The gentleman from Virginia, Mr.. BAYLrl IL is
unnecessary to add word TO the proprlety or the
necessity OF the passage OF this bill . t.s s1,sH
had intended TO say word with regard TO the amcRd-
ment suggested by myself suggested that amendment,
not Tor the purpose OF securing s passagc.or regard
altogether impropTbut for the purpose OF obtain
ing the action oi The House upon the bill al The present
tune. seE .tf rI
Now, sir. II the idea advanced by the gentleman from
Alabama lSlr. HousTosl be corec--hat The othcsr ap
pointed The law OF the last Congress appointed
without the advice aud consent OF the Senate, and ii
the original enactment altogether wrong IN this re-
spec,, then there has been sb iains; and the
nom OF the present ocer ought 10 be sunitted to
the Senale or confirmation. II he was appointed under
law wrongly constructed. then why should his appoint
be sabmtted 10 The ordeal as the appoint
mens TO be made that office IN fn,ufe Let it TO
the Senate, and II he be worthy ofcer. the Senate
Will doubtless confirm his appointment; but II be be,
10 whether he is or no5ui II he be an unworthy othl
Ger, he ought 10 be TI.ced, and neither he nor his
friends ought 10 attempt TO screen him IRON IT, under
provision oil law which was passed without proper
| consider ration. .... +. sa tl..aN
II it be true, as the gentleman from Alabama Nr.
HousToal suggested, that other officers have
appointed under the circumstances, who have not
been submitted 10 the Senate, let him propose amend
ment that shall embrace Them and subject them to The
same ordeal, and will vote Tor il. teF4 b.l
Mr. HOUSTON, (nierposng The gentleman has
misunderstood me altogether. WHAT said WAS. that
until the last Congress- Assistant Postmaste G>uesa,
three in number appointed by the Postmaster Cen
era hmsef At the last Consress however, We passed
law substantially in The phraseoIogy which pro-
pose give this BILL requiring that in iutare the appoin
OF these officers must 60 10 the Senate The rssa
has been that of them has been removed and hs
poniee confirmed by the Senate. Two OF the Ass'saAnt
Postms.ers, appointed before the passags OF ths law.
however, now hold their Offices and have never bsen
confirmed by the Senate their appointment having
gone before ha, body Here 10 the law TO which refer.
passed during the last Congress; ~ aea .3mf
THAT hereafter, office OF Assistant Postmaster
General eiiher OF them shall become vacated tbs ap
pon OF his shall be made by the Prssisns
OF the Unted States by and with tho advice and
of the Senate" W&a ss#ls1 lnsa5H
MI STANTON. wish 10 call the atlentioa Of the
House 10 another point The consultation 0 the Unitsd
Stztcs as understand 1t, requires that oacsvs Of this
description shall be appointed by the President Of the
United States by and with the advice and consent OF the
Senate. tl asse1o asfA f&t9A sFtH
Mr.. HEM, (interupting) desire 10 inquire Of the
gentleman from Tennessee to the limitation OF the
OF Office OF the Assistant Secretary Of the Trea.ury or Of
the Assistant Posnasers General whether there - any
limitation end to their terms Of office 1850 HA
Mr. STANTON. There il positive Limitation, eK-