Weekly Trinity journal. [volume] (Weaverville, Calif.) 1857-1972, 1868-04-11
NUMBER IA.
Daniel webster's Opinion.

We presume our Democratic saUdas Will not
deny that Webster was great lawyer-at least
it has been SO said. Before the advent OF so
many constitutional expounders" as now COM
prise the Democratic party, it was considered
that he knew little about constitutional ques-
tons. In view of that fact we submit the fol-
lowing extracts-his views on the Tenure of Of
fee Act In 1885 bill for the regulation of the
tenure of civil offices was under discussion, and
supported by all the great men of the day. In
the debate, referring to former decision in the
matter, Webster said;
believe it to be within the just power of Con-
gress to reverse the decision of 1885, and 1 in
tend to hold myself at liberty to act upon that
question, hereafter, as I think the safety of the
Government and the Constitution may require.
\ The regulation of the tenure of office,
is common exercise of legislative authority,
and the power of Congress, in this particular, is
not at all restrained or limited by anything con-
tanned in the Constitution, except in regard to
judicial officers. All the rest is LEFT to the ordi-
nary discretion of the legislature. Congress
may give the Offices which it creates, except
those of judges, what duration it pleases. when
the Office is created, and is to be filled, the Pres
ident is to nominate the candidate to fill it; but,
when he comes into office, he comes in upon the
have attached to it. If Congress were to de-
clare by law that the Attorney General, or Secre-
tary of State, should hold his Office during good
behavior, l not aware of any ground upon
which such law could be held unconstitutional.
X X I think that the power of appoint
ment naturally and necessarily includes the
power of removal, where no limitation is ex-
pressed, nor any tenure but that at will de-
clared The power of appointment being con-
ferred on the President and Senate, think the
power of removal goes along with it, and should
have been regarded part of it, and exercised
by the same hands think, consequently, that
the decision of 1889, which implied power of
removal separate from the appointing power,
was erroneous. | think that the Legislature
possesses the power of negotiating the condi-
tons, duration, qualification and tenure of office
in all cases where the Constitution has made no
express provision on the subject. - Websters
Speeches. voL. II, p. 46l.
The Oregonian, in speaking of Webster's opin-
ions in the matter, in connection with the ready
cry of Democrats to pronounce everything Gun
constitutions" which does not exactly accord
with their treacherous principle aptly says it is
easy enough for Copperhead editors and orators
to talk fippantly about the Tenure of Office Act
being unconstitutional; but it would be entirely
safe to say that not one in thousand of them
has ever examined the matter, acquired the
smallest knowledge in regard to it, on which
respectable opinion could be founded. They cry
!" unconstitutional " without knowing why, and
never seek any rational ground on which to base
an argument to support their assertions. If
they knew anything about this subject most of
them would be less ready to give their opinions
upon it.