The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1868-05-02
CONGRESSIONAL.
WASHINGTON, May l,
SENATE.

choice for appointments of Secretaries
al interim in certain cases to the heads
of departments, but he argued that I'M
der the act of 1898, which allowed him
to choose from all the officers employed
| in the departments, the President had
full warrant for the appointment OF
General Thomas, who was then AdJu-
| tant General.
Referring to the action ofMr. Lincoln
in appointing an ad interim successor
to Mr.. Blair, Post Master General, he
said that the appointment was made
under authority, only implied, OF the
acts of 1892 and 1895, which did not re-
! late to the Post Office department at all.
He asked why that conduct was not
considered an impeachable offence. He
maintained it made no difference either
in the theory or practice of the Govern
ment whether the temporary appoint
ments were made during session or
q recess of the Senate, and instanced
tho four examples of Nelson in 1914,
Scott in 1850, and Kelly and Holt in
1851, as ample warrant for his assertion,
Passing TO the first article he said he
should consider at the outset the nature
of the positions occupied by the mem
bcrs ofthe Cabinet. He would again not
refer to the opinions of Mr.. Boutwell,
except to say he might name three more
Senators before him who would share
with others what he had mentioned IN
| the approbrium upon such positions
by the Honorable Manager. He then
read the address to Mr.. Lincoln, signed by
thirty Senators, written in 1862, To urge
the removal of Mr.. Blair, so as to secure
harmonious action. The opinions here
in expressed by fifteen of the Senators
now present on the subject of Cabinet
relations, he (Mr. Evarts) fully Gu
dOrsed.
He further quoted from the speeches
of Mr.. Sherman, and others, in the lie
bate on the passage of the tenure OF
Office bill, and in explanation of the re-
port of the committee of Conference
various expressions and arguments
which uncontradicted opinions and eX'
plantations he claimed were accepted as
proper interpretations of the bill rs
acted upon by the President. He held 4
would be mOnStr0us to convict the Pres
ident ofcTime by the same voices whlcl
gave utterance to or coucurred in these
authoritative declarations that the bill
did not reach or effect the relations oil
Mr. Stanton and the President. lie also
read from the report of Messrs. Schcncb
and Williams on the subject, which he
claimed had bound the House to the
same conclusion rs the Senate.
The argument Of Mr.. Boutwell, that
the practice had always been to send
in the name OF the appOintee before
making the removal, he met by the
consideration that removals are gener-
ally made, not because the incumbents
are unfit, but because political favor
ties are to be put in. The instanc rs Of re
moval of Cabinet officers are only
two, for the simple reason that a polite
hint is usually sufficient to induce re-
signatiOn. lie then referred TO the in
stances of the removals of various of
licers during the session of the Senate
which have been put in evidence, and
went on to argue the necessity for tht
existence of such power Of Instant re
moval by some supposititious cases
where delay would lead to disastrous
consequences.
Abiding to the concessions i'll Mr.
Buffers speech that If the Presiden
had properly notified the Senate OF hi
intention, his action would not proba
bly, been deemed ground for impeach
mcnt, Mr.. Evarts said it appeared tina
a crime was not found in his .tOrtitur il
re. but in the absence of SuGCiter IA mOdO
He characterized the assertion of Mr.
, Boutwell, that it made no difference
whether the law broken is constitu ion
al or not "a desperate attempt to eS
cape from the force of the arguments %
!, the counsel for the President which ht
would not now repeat.
He also quoted the admission of MI
Boutwell, that the President would have
been lust tad il he acted with hon
est intent in violation of the law, which
was ambiguous or cquivocal, and claim
cd it was all they needed after show
inc a. they had that the act was fifty
characterized by those very terms
Taking up the question of the oharac
ter of the offence ofviolating the tenure
of office law, he said no punishment wa
provided IN the law for attempt to re-
move, and that the articles now here
charged the reno al, hence there wa
, no iudictable or impeachable Offence
committed by the attempt to remove
Stanton. He then maintained that NJ
tenure of office could be given by legiS
iation for any longer time than fol
which the officer is appointed, and ap-
plying this doctrine to the case of Stan
ton, argued that he was not appointed,
but held his office by SutfcranCe of the
President, and therefore he could not,
in any case, be affected by the case in
question.
In reference to the argument that if
Stanton is not protected 10y the provIsG
he is by the body of the section, he said
that We must speak of the Office and
not of the man, and il this office is COY.
cred by the section we are led to the
absurdity of admitting that its tenure
can be made perpetual if successive
SenateS adhere to the same views, but
if the law is susceptible of two con.
structiOns lie had the Managers author.
ity for claiming that it wsuld he alb.
hOTrent to the sense of justice to convict
the President. He further argued that
there was no attempt to violate the
statutory right Wf Mr.. Stanton TO hold
his office, but merely to withdraw the
tenure which he held at tho pleasure
of the President.
Briefly reviewing the evidence, he
ridiculcd its inSutficiency rs iustanced
in the testimony of KarSner, the soil
tary witness tn prove the attempted
comp d'etat.
Mr.. Evarts then reminded the Sena-
tors that they must treat each article
separately, without any reference to the
character or force of the others; always
upon the presumption of entire limo
cence, they mast discard political con.
siderations and judge of Mr.. Johnson's
separate acts rs they weuld of Lincoln's
or Grants. He called attention to the
former services of the President, to the
circumstances Of his early life and sub
sequent stormy career, which had made
him what he is. Referring to his polit,
ical training, un1nching loyalty in
times of trial and unwavecing devotion
to the Constitution, which he made the
guide and study of his life, he appeal.
ell 10 the Senate in earnest terms to
grant these considerations the utmost
weight to which they were entitled, illus,
trating the universal truth that upright.