The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-01-14
Executive UsurpatiOn OF the Appointing
Power.

Executive UsurpatiOn of the Appointing
Power.
In the Senate recently, the bill regulating
appointments to office being under considera-
ton. Senator Reverdy Johnson, OF Maryland,
said he was free to give the opinion that the
practice of reappointing men rejected by the
Senate ,gas In conflict lUitb the spirit Of the
Constitution. He had expressed this opinion
once as Attorney-General. In his judgment,
such a practice was at war with the spirit oil
the Constitution, because 1t enabled the Pre-
sident to take from the Senate all its pOtoer
and responsibility IN the matter Of appoint
1ents. With regard to the Presidents power
of removal, it had not been seriously ques-
toned since the first session of Congress,
when it was settled, by a majority OF one,
that he had that power. Madison held that
the pOaver of remoodL might be so abused
as to render President liable to impedch-
ment but since that time the practice had
been upon different belief.
1t is difficult to see how any other opinion
than the one here expressed by Senator
johnson could ever have obtained currency.
That the opposite opinion has not only OBJ
tanned currency, but has been made the prac-
tical rule of action, is a significant illustra-
ton of the fatal tendency of our Government
towards Executive usurpation and supremacy.
The language of the Constitution is so clear
that 1t admits of no doubtful construction.
Enumerating the powers of the President, it
says:-"He shall nominate, and by and ooith
the Gd0tce and consent Of the Senate, shall
appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers
and Consuls, Judges OF the Supreme Court,
and all other officers Of the United States
whose appointments are not otherwise pro-
vided for, and which shall be established by
law; but the Congress may, by law, vest
the appointment of such inferior officers as
they see fit in the President alone, in the
courts of law, or in the heads of departments"
No man can doubt, OF ever has doubted,
that the intention of this clause of the Con-
stitutlon is to require the advice and consent
of the Senate to the appointment Of every
officer of the United States, except those
whose appointment is otherwise provided for
by law. Yet in the face of this clear and
express provision OF the Constitution, Pre-
sident johnson keeps persons in office who
have not only never been confirmed by the
Senate, but who have been rejected by it.
more plain and palpabe violation of the Con-
stitution it would be impossible to conceive
Of Nor is it easy to imagine one more dan
gerous. When the G Institution was adopted
the nation numbered but about three mil
lions; now we have more than thirty. Then
the officers of the United States were few in
number; now their name is legion. Then
cur annual receipts and expenditures were
but mere tri1e: now they are hundreds of
millions. Yet even at that time, when our
population was so small, the number
of officers so few, and their functions so
insignificant, it was deemed dangerous to
intrust the appointing power to the Presi-
dent alone, and it was vested in the Presi-
dent and Senate conformity. Now, when the
Federal officers have become an army, spread
ing all over the country, handling untold
millions of money, and penetrating with their
researches to the details Of private business
and the arrangements of mans household,
the Senate is openly ignored, and the Presi-
dent trampes the Constitution under his feet,
and wields this vast appointing power practi-
cally unchecked. He goes through the empty
form ofsending a name in for confirmation,
but if the Senate refuses its advice and con-
sent, the appointment is made in defiance of
that body, and the man holds the Office and
draws the salary attached to it. Hundreds
OF such cases now exist all over the country.
Well may such a gross and fragrant abuse of
power rouse even the sluggish conscience OF
such a conservative as Reverdy Johnson.
We trust Congress will make thorough
work of this matter. The constitutional
power of the Senate should be maintained to
its fullest extent. What with veto after veto
of every important bill passed by Congress,
the usurpation Of legislative powers in the
assumed creation of State Governm ents
under laws passed by the fiat of the Execu-
tive, and the usurpatiOn of the appointing
power in defiance OF the Senate, there will
soon be no occasion for Mr.. Stewards alterna-
tive question, "Wheth9 we will have Mr.
johnson tor President or for King~
Documents for All Kinds of Theories.
Our Democratic contemporary quotes with
great gusto an old article from the Nashville
Times and linton, which it says was writer
by Andrew johnson in December, 1864
Suppose il should extend its quotations to tht