Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1868-04-15

whom he succeeded
There was a purpose in the difference Of
the phraseology between the section and its
proviso The Constitution authorizes the
President to call upon the members of his
Cabinet for advice respecting matters concern
ing his own duties as well as respecting mat
tiers connected with their various department,
aud such had been the inyariable practice
since the foundation of the Government hey
were the voice and thehandso of the President f;
in them he was to repose confidence, and for
them he was to be responsible
For this reason they were placed by their
Tenure of Office in the same position as the
President, by whom they were appointed
They were to serve out their term Of services.
but as to other, holding over the case was DIFF
lcrent.
Mr. Curtis then proceeded to show what
the feeling and intention of both Houses of
Congress was in the framing and passage of
this bill, maintaining that they were in accord
with the views he had just expressed. lie
quoted from a speech explaining the report Of
the Committccon Conference made by Schench;
also from speeches Of Messrs. sherman, VIII
liams and Others in the Senate, in which they
denied that either the purpose or effect OF the
mll was to Keep Mr. stanton ~ ONCE lie
read these not as expressions ol Individual
opinion, but a. explanations OF the report 'i
the Committee on Conference.
Returning to the consideration OF the arti-
Giles, he said that the sixth section ior5ids any
removal contrary to the provisions of the act,
but MS MIR. Stanton did not yield there was mo-
removal and n there had been 1t would not
have violated the act, since he had Just shown
that Mr. Stanton ana not come Wlihlh ITS 10
visions. The House oil Representative charged
the President win lhientlonal ''o,''ioh ni 'nls
section when ungu'Silonanly ADMITS OF ul-
ierent CONSTRUCTIONS put lhey Ilu 10 prove
that ne eoncnrreu IN lher interpretation ana
'hcm wiliu'ly acted IA con'r'Venuon OF IT,
Inc nrSt uu'y oil inc Iresioent o. 10 COM
s'rue an act ana 10 decide what is l's true
meaning. ms duty ne performed u.s. me
constitution provided ny consulting with hN
constitutional advisers ana they all put the
same construction upon the act IN question a'
had been assigned TO II oy lts trainers me
ease OF Mr. stanton Is OF Secretary holding
Office under the law OF ~ which, without
cNprcs'l giving the President power to re-
move hlln' implies 1t by directing what 'hall
be done by the President after removal.
Nothing IN the Constitution iorblds the eNer-
clSc OF TINS power by the PRESIDENT lndepen-
dent OF the Senate, The declslon OF Congress
IN ltS9 affirmed by implication that such pow
er was granted to the President by the Con
sutntlon' and neither subsequent legislation
nor amendments to the Constitution denied 1T.
Ihe practice OF the Government also was
III conformity to tins view. On the outbreak
OF the civil war the War Department was in
disloyal hands. President buchanan told
Floyd that he must give it up, aud Floyd had
too much good sense and something else tore-
fuse, Without this immediate action there Is
no telling what disastrous consequences, might
have ensued. Having argued the right of re-
moval, MIR. Curtis proceeded to argue IFS pro-
priety and necessity in this case lie reeted
the circumstances attending the first CORE
spondence with Mr. Stanton and hi, .uspen-
sion, aud went ON to claim there might be IN
stances in which the highest patriotism and
duty required citizen to raise the question
Of the validity and binding force of law
Such would " the duty of trustee in pro-
lection of the rights of third parties, who
were unable to assist them. Such was the
duty nobly fulfilled by IIampden when he op-
posed 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 eases where
4 portion of his prerogatives are sought to be
invaded and no one else can raise the quest
ion he must do it. Suppose law passed de-
priving him of his power AS Communder-in-
Chief Would it not he his duty so to resist
it as to bring about decision by the courts ?
\ power denied by implication is us unass,l-
able rs one directly granted By the Constitu-
ton The counsel do not conceive it to be
essential to their case to maintain this posi-
ton but deem it plainly proved
The Senate then took recess for twenty
minutes.
On re-asscmbling ut 100 Mr.. Curtis re-
sumed his argument aud cited numerous au-
thorities and Judicial decisions to prove that
the effect of contemporaneous legislative con-
structions Is to fix and determine the inter-
probation of law, He referred to different
opinions advanced during the debate ON this
subject IN l1S9, and claimed that the con-
struction-that the power of removal was
properly subject to legislative enactmcnts-
had at least never been established,
Recapitulating his arguments to prove that
the President could not be impeached for an
act designed merely to procure Judicial
decision on Il disputed point, he quoted from
MIR. Buffers speech to show that the Mana
gers admitted this view, and had said the re-
I mot an INN. astflat