Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1868-04-15

III OoiiiorHIty 10 t1ls view. OH the outpi0"n
of the civil war, the War Department was
IN disloyal hands. President Buchanan told
Floyd that he must give it up, and Floyd had
too much good sense and something else to
refuse. Without this immediate action there
is no telling what disastrous consequences
might have ensued. Having argued the
right of removal, Mr.. Curtis proceeded to
argue it's propriety and necessity in this case.
He recited the circumstances attending the
first correspondence with Mr.. Stanton and
his suspension. and went on to claim there
might be instances in which the highest pa
trlotlsm and duty required citizen to raise
the question Of the validity and binding force
of law. Such would be the duty of a trus-
tee in protection of the rights of thirl par
ties, who were unable to assist them. Such
was the duty nobly fulfilled by IIampden,
when he opposed the payment of ship money.
The President took no extreme ground, but
while believing it his duty to see the laws
faithfully executed still in cases where a
portion of his prerOgatiyes are sought to be
invaded and no one else can raise the ques-
ton he must do it. Suppose a law passed
depriving him of his power as Commander
in-Chief. Would it not be his duty so to
resist it as to bring about decision by the
courts? \ power denied by implication Is
unassailable one directly granted by the
constitution Inc cOuTtel 90 not coilcti'c
it to be essential to THEN case to maintain
this position but deem it plainly proved.
Mr.. Curtis then enumerated some of the
considerations which had influenced the
President, and referred to Sto,ys Commenta-
res on the Constitution and other authOri-
ties to show the rule Of construction
Practice is the best exponent of law. From
1889 70 1857 every President ane every Con-
gress has participated in, and aced under,
the construction of former year namely
that the President has the sole power of re
moval
The Senate then took recess fortwenty
minutes.
On re-assembling at $50, Mr.. Morrill,
made motion to adjourn which was Iega-
tived, p to ,.
Mr. Curtis then resumed his argument
and cited numerous authorities and judicial
decisions to prove that the effect of cOnten-
pOraneous legislative constructions Is to ty
and determine the Interpretation of law
He referred to different opinions advanced
during the debate on this subject in 1889
and claimed that the construction-that thu
power of removal was properly subject t
legislative enactments-had at least nevel
been established.
Recapitulating his arguments to prove
that the President could not be impeachec
IDT an dcJ ucel1Ildictl merely W pICtuAC Il
dicial decision on a disputed point, he quoteC
from Mr.. Buffers speech to show that tho
managers admitted this view, and had sale
the removal in itself perhaps not al
impeachable offense if made with the fore
going motive, and not accompanied with Z
defiant message to the Senate. Mr.. Curtis
said that it was n matter of taste as TO how
they should be notified. The manager'
claimed that the reason for removing Mr.
Stanton assigned by the President, was al
after thought, and that he was estopped from
now alleging it by certain things he haC
done and said previously. The rule OF es
toppel was of very limited application anC
could not be used TO convict person 0
crime. nor brought forward IN this case
To have informed the Senate of his reason
would have been construed into a threat, anC
now the managers claim that he was no
deferential. There was no inconsistency IL
the Presidents acting with regard to thl
law. In a similar way an individual may
set up plea with regard 10 a law First
that it is unconstitutional second, that /
does not apply to himself; and third. that /
it be a law ne is able to maintain his cas'
und"r ii 80 lonS 40 tiio tvnurv-of-ui'ice Law
affected unimportant matters. The Presi
dent avoided conflict with it. but when
proper occasion arose he asserted his Owl
views without being prejudiced by forme
action in regard to lesser and unimportan
matters The change made in the form of
commission does not state or tend to deter
mine where the power of removal is lodged
but merely acknowledged it as existing some
where by virtue of the law.
At this point Mr.. Curtis begged pcrmis
sion to suspend lis remarks until to-morroy
as he was greatly fatigued, and the Cour
adjourned accordingly at 3.45, and the Sen
ate went into executive session.
Mr. Curtis Of the counsel for the Prcsi
dent resumed his argument al fifteen minute
past twelve O'Clock Friday. He commence
by referring to a statement made by Mr.
Butler that the Presidents letter to the Sec
rctary of the Treasury notifying him Of tn
suspension of Mr.. Stanton claimed no Iustifi
cation Of his authority under the consttu
ton lie read the letter and claimed tina
it did specify under what authority the Pres
ident acted
The charges made in the second articl
were then discussed by Mr.. Curtis, who pre-
ceedcd to argue that Mr.. Stanton did nc
come within the provisions of the section a
legged to he violated. He said the first tw
sections Of the tcnurc-of-oilice act referred t
the removal and suspension arising from an
cause during a recess of the Senate. but tn
third section applies only to vacancies cause
by death or resignation. The penalties prc
scribed in the fifth section were directe
solely against violations of the third section
The present case, he claimed, was outsid
of its provisions, but, said Mr.. Curtis. til
main charge of the article is that the lettc
of authority was given without authority
law Reading the act of 1875, he elaine
that it applied to vacancies of all kinds, an
that the act of February 20, 1863, applied t
vacancies arising from sickness and temporar
disability, and only to that extent repeale
the former under which the President ha
full authority for the act referred to.
In reply to the charge made in the thir
article, that the designation of Gen. Thoma
as Secretary of War dd interim was in viola
ton of the constitution, Mr.. Curtis cited I'll
acts of 1892 and others which authorize tt
temporary filling of vacancies, without NAL
= ing any distinction between vacancies duriu
a recess and when the Senate is in session
and said that the practice of the GovernmeI
had been uniform in filling vacancies as SOC
t as they occurred lie illustrated the fir
quent necessity of immediate action in sue
? cases by another reference to the appointmel
t by Mr.. Buchanan of Mr.. Holt in the place
: Secretary Floyd.
The eighth article was met by his reply
: the third and proceeded to consider forthwit
: the charge made of appointing Gen. Thorn;
? without the advice and consent of the Sena
; could not be sustained because no appon
ment was made; simple commission to a,
l dd interim was not an appointment and coul
. not of course be submitted to the Senat
The allegation that no vancancy then existc
: is begging Of the question. The vacanc
l was created as soon as Mr. Stanton receive
: the order removing him, and vacancy coul
properly be contemplated by the Presider
: at the time of his writing Gen. Thomas tt
letter of authority.
After recapitulating his arguments. Nj