The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1868-03-06

al by and with the advice aud consent
of the Senate.
The fourth section of the same act re-
stricts the term Of offices to the limit
prescribed by the law creating them.
That part of the first section which
precedes the prOriso declares that every
person holding a civil Office to which
he has been or may he appointed, by
and with the advice and consent of the
Senate. shall hold such Office until
successor shall have been in like man
ner appointed. 1t purports TO take
from the Executive, during the fixed
time established for the tenure of the
office, the Independent power of re-
mOvaI, and to require for such removal
the concurrent action of the President
and the Senate.-The provisO that fol-
lows proceeds to fix the term of Office
of seven heads Of departments whose
tenure never had been defined before, by
prescribing that they ''shall hold their
offices, respectively, for and during the
term of the President by whom they
may have been appointed, and for one
month thereafter, subject to removal
by and with the advice and consent of
the Senate"
Thus, as to these enumerated officers,
the proviso takes from the President
the power of removal except with the
advice and consent Of the Senate. By
its terms, before he can be deprived of
the power to displace them, it must
appear that he himself has appointed
them. 1t is only in thai case that they
have any tenure of office or any inde-
pendent right to hold during the term
of the President, and for one month
after the cessation of his official func
tiOns.
The proviso, therefore, gives no ten
ure of Office, to any one ofthese officers
who has oeen appointed by former
President beyond one month after the
accession Of his successor.
In the case Of Mr.. Stanton the only
appointment under which he held the
office of Secretary of War was that
conferred upon him by my immediate
predecessor, with the advice and con-
sent of the Senate. He has never held
from me any appointment as the head
of the War Department. Whatever
right he had to hold the office was de-
rived from that original appointment
and my own sufferance.
The law was not intended to protect
such an incumbent of the War Depart
ment by taking from the President the
power to remove him. This, in my
Judgment, is perfectly clear, and the
law itself admits of no other just con-
struction. We find in all that portion
of the first section which precedes the
prOVisO that as to- civil officers gener-
ally, the president is deprived of the
power of removal and it is plain that
if there had been no provisO, that pow
er would just as clearly have been TAX
en- from him, so far as it applies to the
SCNSii hS6ltto Vi tilC bub
for reasons which were no doubt salts
factory to Congress, these principal
officers were specially provided for, and
as to them the express and only re-
quirement is that the president who
has appointed them shall not, without
the advice and consent of the Senate,
remove them from Office. The con-
sequence is that as to my cabinet, en-
bracing the seven officers designated in
the first section, the act takes from me
the power, without the concurrence Of
the Senate, to remove any one of them
that have appointed, but does not
protect such of them as [ did not ap-
point -nor give to them any tenure of
Office beyond my pleasure.
An examination of this act then,
shows that while in one part of the
section provision is made for officers
generally, in another clause there is a
class of officers designated by their
official titles, who are excepted by the
general terms Ofthe law, and in refer
ence to whom a clear distinction is
made as to the general powerof remov-
al limited in the first clause Of the sec
tion. This distinction is that as to
such of these enumerated officers as
hold under the appointment of the
President, the power of removal can
only be exercised by him with the
consent of the Senate, willie rs to those
who have not been appointed by him
there is no like denial of his power to
displace them. 1t would be u viola
tion of the plain meaning of this enact
ment to place Mr.. Stanton upon the
same footing as those heads of depart
ments who have been appointed by
myself. AS to him, this law gives
him no tenure of Office.
The members of my cabinet, who
have been appointed by me, are by
this act entitled to hold for one month
after the term of my Office shall cease; !;
but Mr.. Stanton could not, against the
wishes of my successor, hold moment
thereafter. If he were permitted by
that successor to hold for the first two
weeks, would that successor have no
power to remove him? But the power
of my successor over him could be no
greater than my own. If my successor
would have the power to remove Mr.,