The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-05-02

rst time in their HISTORY. After briefly considering
the point whether the PRESIDENT nad done any act
late the dinerent articles that had been charged
against the respondent Continuing ne said.
articles all relate to the War Department, and
to that alone Article one sets out an attempt
others relate to the ad Interim appointment OF
Thomas to be acting secretary Of that department.
stanton from holding his onice as Secretary of the
Department OF War; or to seize the public property
in that department or to control the disbursements
of moneys appropriated for the services Of that de-
partment. Now, first Of all, 1t must not escape
notice that these articles founded upon the ex-
statement on the Inconvenience OF the Senate Mr..
Stanton became the lawful secretary for that depart
entered into possession Of the War Department and
into the lawful exercise OF its duties secretary,
and that ,,ns up to the date Of the arti;
actual possession had remained undisturbed;
that all the acts charged in these eight articles were
these acts, Stanton remains lawfully and actually in
possession; and that the office has been at no time
Ss to the
succeed In getting Mr.. Stanton out OF office Of put
ting General Thomas In, either in law or in fact We
see according to these articles, that the President
did not succeed either by force or otherwise in pre-
venting MIR. Stanton from holding his office, or in
department., or in controlling the disburs a-
ments of public money appropriated for the
use q that department. There has been
articles no public mischief. The lawful
o1icer has not been disturbed. The lawful custody
department has not been changed No injury has
been done either to the public service the public
oficer. There has been no removal of Mr.. Stanton
only an abortive attempt at removal There has
been no acting Secretary put In an office vacant by
DEATH RESIGNATION or disability there during the
period OF such actual vacancy temporary absence
all the time the Secretary himself has been there In
the actual performance OF his duties. No dd tfeTan
In Iox IN Imam fftr1f0d
law or fact there has been Interim to the Secre
tary himself. There has been no moment OF time In
teina Secretary, either in law In fact for it s
impossible to conceive Of od interim Secretary of
lawful Secretary is in his place and in the actual
discharge OF his duties Mark It,, then, Senators,
that the acts charged az hign crimes ana misde.
Mr.. stanton out and General Thomas in, are things
attempted and not things accomplished. 1t is the
formed that the President Ii to be held responsible
for. So that 1t comes to be question Of vital
whether the high crimes and misdemeanors pro-
vided for In the Tenure Of ONCE act and In the
second section Of the Military Appropriation act
acts but to punish as well the abOrtve attempt to
commit them. limit myself in what has been last
Stanton and the appointment of General Thomas.
As TO the four conspiracy articles there can be no
question that the actual accomplishment of the thing
Intended is not made necessary to constitute the
offence, for the statute against cOnspracies expressly
provides for the punishment OF the unlawful intent
and the unlawful conspiracy ITSELF without reference
to any further act done In pursuance OF it, or to the
partial or complete accomplishment Of the unlawful
design. But cOntrawise, the other two acts do not
punish the intent alone, but only the commission Of
the thing intended and the offence provided for in
these two acts while it requires the unlawful intent
to be part OF the crime requires something else to
supplement 1t, and that Is the actual commission OF
the thing intended. Mr.. Stanbery then proceeded
to consider whether the President had been guilty
Of an impeachable offence. He argued with great
force that he had not that the act of attempting to
misdemeanOr. He then took up the Tenure Of ONCE
law and referred to the right OF removal and TO the
qualifications in the general clause. Continuing he
qualifying this general clause then it would be
clear-First, that it would apply to all civil
President, with the advice Of the Senate, including
judicial officers well executive officers 1t gives
all of them the right to hold and subjects all Of
them to the same liability to be removed. From the
exercise OF the power OF suspension by the tnde-
ass os b
Of the United States are expressly excepted. We
find no such exception, express or implied as
clared In the first section. Judicial officers as well
as executive officers arc made to hold by the
Of the President and the Senate, and cease to hold
when the President and Senate appoint successor.
To- 20 ac Wa 70
the pleasure pr the President rs to those who were to
hS o. n take 1T s o% t fSoP
dent the power to remove any ocer at any time for
any cause by the exercise OF his own power Alone
the concurrence Of the Senate In this process
of removal the separate action Of the President and
come from the President and from him alone 1t is
upon his action as taken that the Senate proceeds,
and they give or withhold theI consent to what he
exercise his part of the proceedings is merely for
NAL. 1t may be simply by the nomination Of 9 sue
removed. Then, upon the confirmation by the Sem
ate and the issuance OF commission to him, removal
becomes complete Or the President may exercise his
part Of the process by issuing an order of removal,
followed by a nomination. Neither the order for
removal nor the nomination works achange In ITSELF
Both are necessarily conditional upon the subse-
quent action OF the Senate. So, too, the order Of
removal the nomination and the confirmation of the
Senate are not final further act remains to be
done before the appointment OF the successor Is
complete and that Is an Executive act exclusively
the signing Of the commission by the President.
teftio; for although the Senate have advised
him to appoint his nominee, the President Is
the prior action by allowing the incumbent to remain
in onice. Thus far we have considered the first
erence to the context Standing alone, it seems to
have universal application to all civil officers, and
to secure all Of them who hold by the concurrent
action OF the President and the Senate against
removal, otherwise than by the same concurrent
action and to make all Of them liable to removal by
universally Of the tenure Of ONCE SO declared :
We say they are. Mr.. Stanbery said that
they osS 81 By sna %saS %
pressly by the act; and argued at length to
sustain this position. He then referred to the
position which the President was placed In by the
law and in connection with this subject proceeded
to say:-The officers In the Cabinet OF President
| who were nominated by him, who were appointed
| by him with the concurrence OF the Senate, are
those to whom this new and better tenure is given
They are officers Of his selections they his chosen
agents He has once recommended them to the
Senate as t persons for the public trust, and they
have obtained their Office through his selection and
choice. The theory here Is tnat having had one free
/ a choice.
OF selection he shall be bound by It, He shall not dis
miss his own selected agent upon his own pleasure
caprice He is in legal language, estopped" by
the selection he has made, and Is made incapable by
his own act OF dissolvng the official relation which
he has imposed on himself. Having selected his
| Cabinet officer he must take him as man takes his
| chosen wife, for better or worse. But as to such
Cabinet officers are not Of Preaident SELECTION
President-as "a those whose title was given BY