The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-04-26

LEGISLATORS in the passa-e OF this very Law and had
ai,rlned rs oonsii'atonality In the nniurtunae
condlson Of this case the legislators OF the very law
in question became the judges, and thereorc he
must not be understood as arguing the point
with view 70 change their opnons
That was not his object; ii to present tho inquiry
whether in the condition OF the question ana N me
condition of the President he mad right To take the
steps he did take without incurring the charge OF
criininalty. Our government is composed OF three
departments Power has been distributed among
them and they are each independent OF the other
No one Is responsible to the other; they are response
BILE to the people, and they enoined each to take
care OF its own prerogative and to protect Itself
against all possible encroachnents from the
other. This they do, each aud every de-
partment, by observing with the utmost fde-
ity the instructions of the written constitu-
ton At the head OF one OF these departments,
the executive stands the President OF the United
States. ne Is sworn worn, by an oath.the most solemn
execute the office of President and to preserve pro-
tect and defend the constitution. 1t is not an
oath merely TO execute the laws, but also
to the best OF his ability preserve pr oect and de-
fend the constitution II would seem that such an
oath would impress him with the idea that the first
and paramount duty OF the Executive was to act ac
cOrdng to the terms Of the constitution, and that in
all trials and doubts he should take shelter under it,
The learned Managers contended that the President
should simply execute the laws passed by Congress-
and no more. That Is not the Interpretation that
should be given to the language OF the constitution
charge OF of the great departments OF the govern
ment and must maintain the powers conferred by
the constitution on that N department , But shall he
in mere wantonness, disregard any act OF
Congress in any manner Shall he execute
all lawsG He took issue with the learned Manageron
this point in toto rOelO. According to the theory of
the Managers the President should be convicted OF
crime even though the law was not constitutional.
He denied this. II law be declared by the Supreme
Court the third department of the government, and
by the very terms Of the constitution itself, the
Congressional enactments-f that court should de-
clare law to be unconstitutional, the President
would be false to his oath OF Office If he should
execute that law. He would tell the gentleman, In
answer to his long argument, that II q law be I'M
constitutional It is no law. It never was o law
ana never aaS particle the Of FORM validity "a
Congressional enactment. From the beginning lao
iitlO) 1t Is law and Is void, and to execute 1t s
violation OF the constitution; therefore ne should
not execute such law. Again. II law be, upon its
very face in blank contradiction to the plainly ex-
pressed provisions Of the constitution, as for in
stance, law declaring that the President should not
be Commander-in-Chief Of the army and navy, or
declaring that he had power to make treaties the
President should, without going to the Supreme
which, for the time being Is entrusted to him, and Is
bound to executs no such law. He would be untrue
to his high ocial position II he should execute that
arises In doubtful cases-in cases which are not
plainly stated in the constitutiOnand this was the
question Of inquiry in the present case The law Of
Interpretation to be observed In doubtful cases
point to which he called the attention OF the Senate
He would not question the constitutionaty OF the
Tenure OF Office act He did not challenge its con-
stitutionaty here, because the Senate had atrrmed
1t. He would, therefore, simply read few opinions
OF the supreme Court ana quote ron otner standard
here read at length several decisions on this
point and then proceeded with the argument
Now, Senators, l have called your attention to
the decision OF the question by the courts. have
given you the utterance from the bench; have given
you the opinions OF Marshall and of Kent. Now let
me refer you to the Executive Department From
the beginning OF the government down to March Q,
1867 1t has been the uniform construction and prac
tice OF every administration that 1t had the power OF
Washington approved OF the bill. Adams
voted for 1t. Jefferson maintained It, Madison drew
u. Monroe and Jackson maintained the same con-
struction OF It, Every President, including President
Lincoln through all history OF eighty years and
Of twenty administrations maintained this construc
ton on question OF where the power of removal Is
In the construction that the power OF removal Is
lodged by the constitution in the President The
Executive Department, from washington down
through all the Presidents, has acted on this con-
struction and affirmed this practice. Washington
aed the attention o. the rst s 70 1 he fact
had ceased TO exist, and that 1t was ne
cessary to organize new corresponding ones under
the new government; and he suggested that before
Congress egisaed the subject It should in debate
fix the principles and determine the number OF de-
partments necessary. Congress at once entered on
the subject, and agreed to establish three depart
ments.
ter past two, took recess for quarter OF hour.
On reassembling at $3.50 Mr.. GROEsBECK resumed
his argument maintaining that the debates in Con-
dents construction laws then passed. He then
cited acts 9S OF the Post ONCE Department and
those OF Is and 40 creating the Navy Post Office and
Interior Departments, all assuming or affirming the
right OF removal by the President set forth in the
acts of 1883. Against all this preponderance OF con-
structiOn and precedent there was opposed only the
act OF 1867, and Mr.. Gr0esbeck claimed there was
truly ground for doubt and hesitation the part OF
the President sufficient TO induce him to resist IT,
with q view OF having the matter determined
by the Supreme Court He asked II the Pres
lent was to be convicted and deposed because he
constitutional advisers by the Thirty-eghh Congress
and the Supreme Court and the uniform practice OF
The government describing The character OF the rea
Groesbeck insisted II shown by the testimony OF
General Sherman and others that the President acted
IN the public interest in removing him. He also
claimed that the President had prepared quo todr
rd't0, and gladly avaed himself OF the proceedings
brought against Mr. Thomas, In order TO anticipate
The slow proceedings he must otherwise have
adopted to secure the decision OF the court.
TO the charge of evil intention in
he President done in the first placer He had selected
General Grant, man whom the country delighted
20 honor in whom 1t had the utmost confidence, and
'0r whom, probably, the honorable Manager (Mr.
Buer intended TO express still greater confidence.
rhe President had selected such man, and yet this
What next dS the President dos The verS neSt
tep that the President took not to get danger
,us man-not to get q man In whom the
whom he offered the place was General sher- |
nan. Would any one charge wickedness on
nat n1gn Onlcery BuJ Generai sherman would not |
AXE the Office. To whom did the President next |
,Ter its To Major General George H. Thomas. It |
eemed that the President had picked out the three
men Of all Others In the nation who could command
he respect and confidence OF the nation I'm reference
o the proposal which he had In view In the |
natter. You cannot, continued Mr.. Groesbeck.
make out crime OF this, senators. The President |
lad one purpose In view, and that was to |
hange the head Of the War Department, and |
md to have put there permanently any com. |
,etent and thus to get rid OF the |
hen condition OF his Cabinet. What them gentle |
nenf He executed this law in other respects He
hanged the forms Of his commissions; he reported
uspensions under this law and, Senator's 1t Is one
4 the strongest facts in this He did not take
~ this law and tear II to pieces; he did not take up
his law and trample IL under foot; he tried to obey
without the surrender OF his own convictions. II
said that under the suspension OF Mr.. Stanton he
cted under your law. cannot adjust to your law,
md instead OF selling upon that as subject OF CEN
ure I tell you II was an overture from the Presi-
cnt TO get out OF this difficulty and to con-
iliate you. Take that suspension; take the
ct. In the very letter Of the message Of |