The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-05-03

/ IFS Jurisdiction prescribing defnite powers had been
created BY the lawnol executive po~er Of reuEal
anacr fLe constitution and officer protesting 70
the lsw hsd exceeded his jurisdiction then i Eshi
be conseaded that bs acts void. But ccrtainiy
this 10 NOT case hike that Assume that the frrsl-
dent had power but b. the provisions Of the Law,
and did yoa not rcst the seereiAry with &svaeA n pre-
scribing The regusiionxf And al least ehai
lcnxe raussiou OF this proposition II the Secretary in
the exercise Of that 6sGoA did not violate the cOnsttn
tion then hs regulations lawia and all the In
pursuance ther~of valid and you have now statute -
gauy executed suppose II wl nst be seriously urged
that the regeisons prescribed violation Of the
ssifuiion lh1 that 10 cont<nded for that the spirit
Of justice has been disregsrded In my judgment there
is no power IN congrss that place ihe officers
~ The ssrns posuon tneJ eeens.ed before hs sIesa
Of the Senate appoint The officers rellrea 10
supply the vacancies but this wonIa be The exercise Of
executive and legislative power repeal Of the
law iherefor~ would do than deprive the
tired odlees the psyst from receiving what had by
the law hren mos literally provided for the The fAet
Is the foundation of the complaint from
misocnesrion OF The character Of the board Itsas not
court csvii military naval II did take the char
whose personsi aggregate judgment was nvoksd 10 advise
the President who 10 retire from the navy. Thai acg
10 he formed from personal knowledge, by Tree
interchange Of opinion among themselves from the lights
afforded BY Official documents 10 the archives Of the Navy
Department and the result OF that Judgment 10 be
ported The Secretary prescribe the rules Of pro-
eecding In rrcording that Judgment, directed by fhe
statute in antheuticAung and reporting il
II well known that upon The passage Of the statute,
4
distinctly made and after full discussion Con-
gress expressly decided in favor Of the mode Of processing
prescribed by the Secretary Now suppose the Secretary
had attempted by regulation the decision OF
Congress- and in defiance OF its authority and expressed
will had required the board hold proceedings pub
lie woud this chamber have resounded with eloquent
drnuncation of executive usurpaton and would the
Secretary have been visited with meriied rebuke and
sare2 While am strongly inclned against all secret A.
in this country and consider the principle Of
seret socetics general rrpugnant TO the spirit
and genius Of our Institutions from The necessity Of the
compelled, in the administration Of the
government, to not only admit but sometimes
mand, officials to observe secrecy in their Off
eaN conduct Our negotiations with foreign govern
generally conducted in and ought be-
The councils of the Prssident and his cabinet
exposed the public The President according the
7, ,s g prcsasnh and Psssc IRON as foaasa
for rsmoval This body acts all execu-
tive business including the appointment Of officers and
Communicated tbs public and the grand iIr Of
country keep their proceedings secret Here
was hoard constituted pass their judgment upon their
professional peers in advisng the President what
retire from the active list Of the nary The idea Of
holding this consultation in public thai every remark,
Discreet ndiscretfo that every inquiry and answer
might be heard by or reported To- the publcls TO nv
miad snpremey prePostercus and certainly this obec
ton il very unexpected and passing strange 10
from the senators from Texas and kfntucky. Imagine
yourselves this board assembled in room; the
reporters Of the press At their desks; the public not
e1e,ed u friends q enemies vho are 70 Be ps
upon by the board. The Of ofoer 10 called
member remarks Il have hrard he is hsbiual drunk
ard another responds II know him intimately be was
somewhat intempeie but for many years he
has entirely sober man One says II have
dersood be has chronic disease that readers him in
~cisns another rxpliss @He from
An inquiry made whether that matter and his
nfemp habits have not been the subject Of court Of
inquiry eous-mArtia One member sugsess that ssch
inquiry held long ago; another insists
that, il long tbs evideucr upon the hnong
eorrups partial These with The thousand variations Of
inquiries r~usAr that different might provoke
the free interchange Of inquiry and opinion arrive at
conclusion the result be beard by
reported the pobliceni sosof Would Il induce the
board 10 deal frankly and faithfully, Would il in
surs careful examination and scrutiny which
-oontesnplss-d9 Would il be pfreshng 70 the officers
or their friends who's faults or crimes were thus ex-
,o~-d wosld IL promote the sacred principles of
iassie~ shout which hare heard 50 much II tho
proceeding psrook Of any Of The ch.raeierses Of coart
Of oomon law the result VI whose judgment the in
position hoe penalty then The forms OF such court
ought 10 ,-e observed. Ord officers daily removed
without notice triAlwithoas exposing TO the public
N. gronnAs OF removal In pr~cpk there disinc-
,ios In p~oesce consequence OF the peculiar crce
stances and sacrifices attending military and naval officers
an,rsnt rule has obtained in thisthat the President
doe not fe-I justified In exercising his executive Of
removal generally upon the occra Of the army and navy
without some legislative action And nos WIN thas a.
vantage in prAc these officers pesstenty insist that
ali the os ms Of Of Law shall be observed
Ia their before they shall BE- removed from The public
servc~-~lhoagh tbe country demands reiorp-And De-
.n.r sneh form, have not been observed and
have commtsrd fArsor Congress is arged and e1-
p~ced to cennus thsss great abuses by fastening upou
Il
drones-tben indeed in my Judgment the most violent
blew struck the not the erfnsneney Of the
navy of the United States
In affirming the action OF Congress The Secretary Of the
Nary and the naval board only by allowing but re-
curing the board hold their consultations IN private
and full IL given 20 the other causes q
complaint for strip IL Of the character OF court o. com
mon law coart o any kind and ihe denuneiauons OF
courts OF nquison and stsr-ohsmber as sppicaoe 70
this board vanish and the other obscnons alluded 70
I have no force
Rat ss To the complaint that the Secretary should have
limited the time b~yond which the hoard should not have
hen permitted 20 make inquiry-whst rule should he
hxr, precriheA7 One year eve yesrs years, ten
daysf snppos~ for aasrAcoa, be had prescribed three
years the limit: AT that nse an Officer, hy pre-
rous vicious and ntemperste Of ooodn had not
dersng~d fos the time being but bad brought
dis~ase that totally dssual6ed him sor the ecsent dis
Charge of his duties for years past be has been
apparently reformed in mind and body. The board
required examine into his sc'eney running osck
three 0oe personally unscquainted with the oi-
crr ghs doubt wbesher the reformation Of two years
aurason permanent asd could be relied on auoiher
knew that ofoer had many years ago reformed he
previous habin but had reapssd The board baFinz per-
sona knowledga and other reliable nfcrmson rccoa-
nenaed dismissal Of the ocer The board sayi
In Justification, thas three years ago MAS Hntversa
admitted that The ocrr nef<ent and the Secretary
required 60 that far back TIE dnmss
cd cfcyr app<Au before Congress aFas7fy reform
\ ed and ehheeat | ask Ia such case me seefea'y
woaa have heee subjected 10 severn 0r
Y the nrkrsvy and dsx rule of nrer yesrs nsf ne hsa
prescrh~d The board, hcveve, were 70 efemane a ~
n The efficiency OF the ccer b< fms re fnqAsg sna
u cannot perceive she Prepsieu Of any hmsauon "t
4 time
Bat nos;os oaxhi have bssn gives and r-oeri kept
y. .nrfrzex nnffNn Al