The Manitowoc tribune. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1866-1878, 1868-05-07
ThaddeGs Stevens argument.


The venerable Thaddeus Stevens, In
his speech which we publish elsewhere
manitests that chief talent of a debater,
which has made him the leader of the
House-the ability to seize upon the de-
termining facts, the pivotal points of the
question under consideration, and to pre-
sent them with a force that is logic
itself, and simplicity that is above elo-
quence.
His analysis of the question whether
Mr.. Stanton was included in the Tenure
of Office act presents the point so clear
ly, that we smile involuntarily at the
idea that is should ever ESCAPED the no
tice of any person who read the act 1t is
briefly as follows: The first clause of the
act declares that all officers whatsoever
shall hold their Offices until the Senate
shall consent to their removal, except
those mentioned in the second clause
The second clause provides that members
ofthe Cabinet shall hold their offices during
the term of the President by whom they
were appointed, ana one month thereaf-
ter, unless they are sooner removed with
the consent of the Senate Now the first
and the second clause togather include all
officers whatsoever If Mr. Stanton as
argued by the Pre- sident's counsel, is not
included in the secondor excepting clause,
he is included in the first or comprehend
ond clause into the first is "out of the
frying pan into the fire. . La the Ian
guage Of Mr.. Stevens:
The first section povides that every
person holding civil office, who has been
appointed with the advice and consent
of the Senate and every person that
hereafter shall be appointed to any such
office shall be entitled to hold such office
until a successor has been appointed and
duly qualified except as herein otherwise
provided. Then comes the proviso which
the defendant counsel says does not en-
brace Mr.. Stanton, because he was not ap-
pointed by the president in whose term
be was removed. If he was not embra
ced fn the proviso. then he was nowhere
specially provided for, and was consequen-
tly embraced in the first clause Of the
first section which declares that any
person holding any civil Office not other
wise provided for comes within the pro
vision of this act.
This point we think is sunanswerable and
ends the discussion as to wether Secre-
tary Stanton is embraced in the law.
Every office appointed with the advice
and consent OF the Senate is embraced in
1t.
Mr.. Stevens next telling argument is
found III the letter f'the President sto the
Secretary of the treasury, notifying him
Of the suspension of Mr.. Stanton Sin
compliance as the President states in
his letter with the requirments of an act
to regulate the tenure of certain civil Off
ces. Here we have the written acknowl-
edgmenr of the President himself not
only of his obligation to obey the Tenure
of Office act but of the fact that applies
TO aud goveraS the case of Secretary
Stanton. He recognized the same facts
also in his order suspending Stanton a
proceeding authorized only by that law,
and in his message communicating
TO the Senate the reason for suspen
sion Well may Mr.. Stevens declare
How necessary that man should have
either good concence or good memory
that he should either obey the law, or II
he attempts'tc defyit that be should be
able to remember whether he has not
recognized its vahditv