Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-07-26

I0EAL PRE,CEPT AND PRACTICE.
From the New York Times.l
In the House, on Thursday, Mr.. SPALD-
ING, of Ohio, from a Committee Of Confer
ence, reported III favor Of a provision that
the present United States Minister to Portu-
gal should receive no compensation for any
further services he may render in that ca
pacity. Mr.. RAYMOND asked him if he had
any objection to stating for THAT reasons the
Committee made this unusual report Judge
SPALDING replied that he would State no
reason, except that the Committee was
unanimous in its recommendation and re-
fusing very PeremptOriy and emphatically
10 permit Mr.. RAYMOND TO ask any further
question or make any further remark on
the subject, he moved the previous question,
and forced the report, without debate, ex-
PLANTATION or delay, through the House.
There is nothing very remarkable in
Judge SPALDING's action in shutting OF de-
bate and forcing action upon delicate and
doubtful party question. 1t has come to be
the common practice under the pressure Of
party emergencies, and Judge SPALDNG
only follows the fashion-discourteous and
discreditable as it is.
But the action Of Congress on this matter
| is worthy of a more full and distinct state
ment. Mr.. JAMES +. HARVEY has been for
| the last four years and is now United States
Minister at Portugal. Some three months
since he wrote sc unofficial letter to Secre-
tary SEWARD on current political topics, in
! the course of which lie expressed his con-
currence in the policy of the President and
/ his dissent from the action of Congress.
| 81 Fh,
at once attracted the attention Of the men,
bers of the House. Mr.. STEVENS, when the
Diplomatic Appropriation Bill was before
| the House, moved an amendment that the
Mission TO Portugal be abolished, and the
House cOncured. On reaching the Senate
this amendment was rejected; and when il
came back the House refused to concur and
asked Committee of Conference, and thi:
| Committee, finding that the Mission could
not thus be abolished, and yet determined
to get rid of Mr.. HARVEY, resorted to the
means reported by Judge SPAULDNG, but
which Judge SPAULDING refused to explain
| or to allow anybody else to explain on the
floor of the House.
Congress has thus Endorsed, in the strong
est possible manner, by its own action, the
removal of ofice-holders for expressions o.
opinion hostile 10 its own. The Ouly Offence
alledged against Mr.. HARVEY is the writing
Of private letter expressing dissent from
the political opinions and actions of Con-
gress! Congress, by the Constitution, has
nothing whatever to do with appointment
or removal of oflice-holders yet it resorts
to the remarkable and extraordinary pro
cess of legislation, for the sole purpose o
accomplishing the removal of an ofhce-h0l
der guilty Of the henious crime of differing
from Congress in opinion and of expressing
that difference in a private letter.
And at the very time Congress is thus re
sorting to such means Of exercising power
never conferred upon it, for such a reason, il
is trying to rouse the indignation of thu
whole country against the President Of the
United States for doing the same thing il
the exercise Of power expressly conferred
upon him by the Constitution, and in exac
conformity with what has been the usage o
the Government from the day Of its fOunda
ton until the present time.
The zeal of Congress in regard to reno
walls from Office evidently is very one-sided
and not very disinterested sentiment. ThOy
have no sort of objection to such removals
when they can make them on their own be
half and against those who differ from then
in opiOion. In all other cases they are op
posed to them on principle Judge SPALD
ING isnot exactly the man we expected t.
lead off in such a practice.