The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-04-28

the Senate, was perhaps pom pied by a
DOUBT whether the step was advisable at
that pFticnIar time Dut however tnaJ
might be, he would consider him as ne is
now. aud as he had been since he came
into power.
Williams held that the master help 10
all his Ouduc as President was his desire
to favor and uphold traitors, and force the
rebel states into the Union on his own
plan, against the expressed viii Of Con-
gress and the loyal people, and went on to
recfte a great number of acts of the Presl-
dent which he claimed were u~surpatiOns
and onenses explicab!e or y on the anOVe
suppOstttOn. The culmiE alton Of a long
ser es of u-surpatiOns of his oath OF Office
n in~decencies, was his attempt to dis
place stanton, in contempt Of the Tenure
of-Omee Law. Mr.. W. took up the answers
made by the Presidents counsel, to the
char Q of viOlat ng that law, ana first
discussed the provisO, winch u
was alleged, excluded stanton. nom
its operation. He had himself
suggested that amendment, and eXPialneo
its meaning, and he had eve belleVeo
that such construction would be put upon
IL as read by the Pre- ident's counsel. II
would be contrary to the purpose OF the
bill. StantoE's case W8s certainly meant
TO be covered if IL was not the originating
cause of its Introduction. He Gained that
principles of construction require the pro-
visO to be construed in the ltgh OF the pur-
pose OF the law, and held that the ObJec-
ton made was that stanton did not come
within its effect because he was not form.
ally appOin ed by Johnson. n might
almost be termed a quib0le-
9 The Senate nere took a recess.
On reassembling, Williams considered
the pOintsset up by the defense, that the
law is unconstitutional, which he charac-
terized IS a defiance and challenge to Con-
gress. From the fact that the Constitution
does not provide for removals except by
impeach ment, lie drew the inference that
q legislative body must possess the sole
power of Iudgfng when good behavior
ceases, and when removals should be
made. He also claimed the right to re-
move IN certain cases was either a power
delegated TO the Executive by Congress, or
merely implied By the Constitution, and
therefore not to be Intended to apply to all
cases.
He then discussed tue judicial authori-
ties cited by the Presidents counsel. ar
guing that they afforded no cOuntenance
to his views, but settles the point that
Congress may nix tenures of office so as TO
prevent removal by the President, and
that his power TO remove, so TAR as II eX-
listed, was only Implied frOn his 20 yer 10
appoint against the legislative. On the
construction which was adduced in sup
port of the Presidents theory on this sub
ject he cited passages from WeOster's and
CalhOuniS speeches., and writings Of Kent
put on the Constitution by the congress
of 1889 was and worthy of re-
verSal, and called attention to the
TACT that the laws referred to were passed
by a very small majority in the
House and Senate only by the vote of the
Vice President, VINO had a direct interest
in their passage. He denied that all WIS.,
dom had died with our fathers, and claim
ed that this COngres had as good a right
to cOnStrue the constitution as its prede-
ces .ors. Mentioning the power OF Con-
gress to determine the Uenure-Of-Ofdce. he
referred to numerous laws fixing the ten
ure of various offices at a certain number
Al this point, a O'Clock on motion OF
Mr.. Morrill,, of Verm )nt. who stated that
Mr.. Williams was unwell and would not
be able 10 finish his speech to-day, the
Court adjourned. and the Senate, after re-
ceiv-ng several executive communications,
also adjourned soon afterward.