New-York tribune., 1866-04-28


stric,ed The revenue appointments TO loyal men
Upon this matter the explanation OF the ffe'ldent Is
less full than might be wished. Mr.. Johnson argu-
ment. if it means anything. means that because 10
has violated the law. Congress ought TO repeal IT,
we can. indeed conceive of case in which inc
President might be justified in diSregarding law
though we cannot conceive the administration of inc
revenue laws to constitute under any circumstances
one Of those pressing emergencies where the lie OF
nation might need to be preserved at the expense oil
broken statute But was there in this case any need
20 break the statute even for the sake OF administering
the revenue aws-that is. of appointing certain
persons to office in the Rebel States for the collection
of revenue' The Secretary Of the Treasury gives
list of So officers appointed in violation OF law, and
bis apology is this:
I'm most of the Southern States nearly eyory man OF the
character and intelligence necessary to qualify hin Tor
tlon Ss revenue in bositie against tie Govern
ment Of the United states, or held willingly or unwngy
olce under Rebel authority Hence has been necessary 40
bs,re ssd TO employ in few important but not remunera
tive positions and in most Of the subordinate ones t 81
this class especially as the salary ana MTtbsro mem 10 &C.
cept lbem,
The Committee think the Secretary might have
found LOYAL mon if no had looked. They lind from
the records that the Rebel States furnished no loss
than A. COS mon to the Union armies. Is it possible
that out Of this multitude there were no % eompe'
tent TO Gil the revenue offices to which the Secretary
preferred to appoint traitors' Congress in 1865 re-
solved that soldiers ought to have the preference in
appointments to civil othces-a resolutions which ap'
plies with peculiar force to those noble loyalists from
the Southern States who fought in the Union armies
Can there be a doubt that the Federal offices might
aud should be filled by them Where then was the
necessity of violating the law, and what becomes oil
the argument for repeating it
II must even be doubted whether the President and
his Secretary can in all cases plead the excuse oil
Ignorance for violating the law. We fnd in one III
stance. Mr. j. j. Giers of Alabama applying for an
appointment backed by such certificates as these;
"Mr Gers is loyal citizen Of Alabama and has done
M 4, l!Gj g. IT. THOMAS Mijor General"
II know Mr. Gers well and have always foand him ready
to aid tao Government in e'ey way possible s
'.Febraary Is I966"
.NAsHyILLT Tenn. September 30. 1864.
II, Prsdsa lincoln Mr. ters is gentleman oil intes'
ry and espectabty he Of the few in that country
who stood arm to the onion Any kindness you may snow
him will confer personal favor upon me
ANDREW JOHNSON .
Yet Mr.. Giers was not appointed. and Mr.. Sykes
A member of the Rebel Legislature of Alabama,
was Other cases might be cited; but 1t can
scarcely be necessary to pile up PROOF Ill
order 10 show that the pretext OF necessity
for violation of the law breaks down utterly, and
that the argument for repeal on the same ground iS
left without a leg to stand on. While there are
thousands and tens of thousands of loyal men IN the
Rebel States who have served i'll the Union armies,
and are capable to ill Union Offices, the North VIII
not listen with patience proposition to repeal the
test oath in order to pass over these oyalsts and
smooth the path Of traitors to preferment and power