Nebraska advertiser. [volume] (Brownville, Nemaha County, N.T. [Neb.]) 1856-1882, 1868-04-23
Removals from Office Henry Clay
Ghe Author OF TenuFe-Of.O .Olilce Bill.
FrOm Zee FrankfOEt ComnonRealth.

Removals from Office Henry Clay
Ghe Author OF Tenure.Of.O .Ofllce Bill.
From the Frankfort Commonwealth.
Il so happens that Henry Clay was
the author of this bill. In 1885 there
was lengthy discussion In the Senate
of the United States upon the power of
appointment and removal. The cOnstit-
ution, it will be remembered, is wholly
silent on the question Of removal. To a
pending bill, Henry Clay offered the
following amendment:
''Be it further enacted. That in all
instances of appointment to Office by the
President by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate, the power Of re-
moval shall be exercised In concurrence
with the Senate; and when the Senate
is not in session the President may susp.
end any such officer, communicating his
reasons for the suspension during the
first mOunth of the succeeding session,
and if the Senate concur with him, the
officer shall be removed; but If it do not
concur with him, officer shall be restored
to Office"
This amendment covers the whole
ground assumed in the tenure. of-ofice
law. Il is that law in condensed from.
Il contains every principle Of that law.
Mr.. Clay supported his position by
the following arguments, amoung others;
l. is Legislative authority which creates
the Office, defines its duties and may
prescribe it's duration. Ispeak, of course,
of Offices not created by the constitution,
but law. The offices coming into ex-
istence by the will of Congress, the
same will may provide how and IN what
manner the Office and officer shall cease
to exist. It may direct the conditions on
which he shall hold the Office, and when
and how be shall be dismissed. Sup.
pose the constitution had omitted to pre-
scribe the tenure Of the judicial oath,
could not Congress do II?
But the constitution has not fixed the
tenure of any subordinate officers, and
therefore Congress may supply the ON.
mission. Il would be unreasonable to
contend that although Cangress. in pur-
suanee Of the public good, brings the
officer and the Office into being,a nd as
signs their purposes, yet the President
has a control over the officer which Con-
gress can not reach and regulate. = y
The precedent of 1859 was established
in the House of Representatives against
the opinion of large and able minority,
and in the Senate by the casting vote of
the Vice Presipent, John Adams. Il is
impossible to read the debate which it
occasioned without being impressed with
the conviction that the just country, then
at the head of the government, had great,
if not decisive influence in establishing it.
1t has never. prior 10 the commencement
of the present administration, been sub
mitted to the process of review. .
No oDe can carefully eramine the debate
in the House of Representatives in 1859,
without being struck with the superiority
of the argument on the side Of the minor.
ity, and the unsatisfactory nature Of the
majority.
Daniel Webster agreed with Mr.. Clay
in his position, in the following language
used by him on the occasion;
Il think, then, sir, that the power Of
appointment naturally and necessarily
includes the power Of removal, where no
limitation is expressed. nor any tenure
but that at will declared. The power of
appointment being conferred on the Pres.
ident and Senate, think the power of
removal went along with it, and should
have been regarded as part Of it, and
exercised by the same hands. think
Legislature possesses the power of EeGE-1 IilL.
=, .L-L[.IsrTrIUn, Uuranon, qualIflcat-
ion and tenure of Office IN all cases where
the constitution has made no express
provision on the subject. ] am, therefore,
of opinion, that il is competent for Con-
gress 10 decide by law, as one qualifica-
ton of the tenure Of office, that the In
cumbent shall remain in place till the
President shall remove him, for reasons
to be stated to the Senate. And ! am
of opinion that this qualification, mild
and gentle as it is, we'll have some effect
in arresting the evils which beset the pro-
gress of the government, and seriously
threaten It's future prosperity"
This view was sustained by the Hon.
Thomas Ewing, Of Ohio:
'Mr. Ewing spoke al length upon the
Question of removals, maintaining that
the constitution does not confer on the
President alone the power Of Femovsl-
that 1t is a matter of legislative provision,
subject to be vested, modified, changed.
or taken away at their will; and Pres
idenG, in conjunction with Senate, as part
Of the appointing power"
These authorities settle conclusiVely
that Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, ThOm-
as Ewing, and others were heartily in
accord with the Congress of the United
States in their construction Of the bill.
and were equally as Radical in their
opinions,
In suit before the Judicial Court of
~