Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1868-04-02

der the Constitution of the United States thisgow
er was lodged by the constitution IN the President
of the United States and that consequently it could
be lawfully exercised by him, and the Congress
could not deprive him thereof; and thisrespondent
in his capacity of President of the United States
and because in that capacity he was both enabled
and bound to use bisbest judgmentupon this ques
tion, did, in good faith and with an honest desire
to arrive at the truth, come to the conclusion ano
opinion, and did make the same known to the hon
orable the Senate Of the United States by mes
sage dated on the End day of March, 1867. That
the respondent was then aware Of the provisions o
by constitutional majority of Congress as follows
'That any person holding any civil Office tc
which he has been appointed by and with the ad
vice and consent of the Senate, and every person
who shall hereafter be appointed to any such Office
and shall become duly qualified to act therein, is
and shall be entitled to hold such Office until sue
cession shall have been in like manner appointed
and duly qualified, except as herein otherwise pro
vided. Provided, that the Secretary Of State, ol
terror, the PostmaasterG General and the Attorney.
General, shall hold their Offices respectively, and
during the term of the President by whom they
may have been appointed, and for one month there.
after, subject to removal by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate" %.
That the respondent was also aware that this
act was understood and intended to be all expires.
remove executive officers for cause might by law be
taken from the Presidentand vested in him and the
Senate jointly, and although this respondent had
arrived at and still retained the opinion above ex
pressed, and verify believed, as he still believes,
that the said first section Of the last mentioned act
was and is wholly imperative and void; by reason
of its conflict with the Constitution of the United
States; yet, inasmuch as the same had been enac-
ted by the constitutional majority in each of the
two Houses of that Congress, this respondent con-
sidered it to be proper to examine and decide
whether the particular case of the said Stanton, on
which it was this respondents duty to act, was
within or without the terms Of that first section OF
theact or if untrue, whether the President had not
the power, according to the terms of the act, to
remove the said Stanton from the Office of Secreta-
ry for the Department of War, and having, in his
capacity of President of the United States so ex-
amined and considered, did form the opinion that
the case of the said Stanton and his tenure Of Office
were not affected by the first section Of the last
named act. -
That although case thus existed, calling for the
exercise of the executive power of removal, under
the constitution, and believing that Mr.. Stantens 8
case was not affected by the first section OF the
Tenure-of Office act, the respondent desired, If
possible to avoid any question Of the construction
and affect of that law, and also the broader
tion of the executive power conferred on the Pesi
dent by the constitution to remove the principal
officer Of one of the executive departments; that
in these questions of difference between the execu-
tive and legislative departments OF the govern
ment, we desire that they should be in some prop
er way submitted to the judicial department en-
trusted by the constitution with the duty of deter
mining finally the construction and effect of all acts
of Congress, and comparing them with the consti-
tuition itself, with view of pronouncing them in
operative when found in conflict with that funda-
mental law which the people have enacted for the
government Of all theihseryants-andt to these ends:
First. That through the action of the Senate Of
the United States, the absolute duty of the Presi-
dent to substitute some tit person in place OF Mr.
Stanton, as one Of his advisers, and as principal
subordinate officer whose official conduct he was re-
sponsible for and had lawful right ocontrol, might
if possible, be accomplished without the necessity
of raising any one Of the questions aforesaid; and
second if this duty could not be so performed,
then that these questions such of them as might
necessarily arise, should be judically determined
and for no other end or purpose this respondent,
as President of the United States, on the 18th day
of August 1867, seven days after the reception of
the letter of the said Stanton of the 5th of Au-
Stanton the order requiring him to turn over the
War Department to General Grant, Secretary of
War ad interim, to which the said Stanton yielded
under protest to superior force" Further, that
the respondent believes that the executive power
of removal con6ded to him by the constitution, in
cludes the power of suspension from Office, at the
pleasure of the President, and that this respon.
dent, by the order aforesaid did suspend the said
Stanton from Office, not until the next meeting of
the Senate, or until the Senate shall have acted
upon the case, but by force of the power and au-
of the United States, indefinitely and at the will Of
the President; and the order, in form aforesaid,
was made known to the Senate of the United States
on the 18th day of December, A. D., 1867.
That by his order of August 18th, 1867, the re-
spondent authorized General Grant to perform the
duty of Secretary of War ad interim, according to
law-not until the next meeting of the Senate, and
until the Senate should act in the case, but at the
pleasure of the President, subject only to the imi
tation of six months, and copy of the last named
order was made known to the Senate Of the United
States on the 18th day of December, A. D., 1867 Z;
and in pursuance of the design and intention afore
said, if it should become necessary to submit the
said question to judicial determination, this re-
spondent, at or near the date of the last mentioned
order did make known such his purpose to obtain
a judicial decision.
That after the President message to Congress,
December 18th, 1867, making known the order
above cited the President was compelled, either to
allow the said Stanton to resume the said Office and
remain therein, contrary to the settled convictions
of the President respecting the powers confded to
him and the duties required of him by the consti-
tuition of the United States; and contrary to the
opinion that the first section of the Tenure of Of
fee act did not affect the case of the said Stanton,
and contrary to the fixed belief of the President
that he could no longer advise with or trust, or be
responsible for the said Stanton in the Office of the
said Secretary for the Department of War, or else
he was compelled to take such steps as might in
the judgment of the President, be lawful and ne
cessary to raise for judicial decision, the question
affecting the lawful right of the said Stanton to re-
sumo the said office, or the power ofthe said Stan,
he should persist in actually refusing to quit the