The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1868-04-02
Removal from OfIice-Henry Clsy the
Author Of the Tenure of Once Bill
IFrom the Frsnkfors {Ky.) Csmmonwsaish.,

of the United States upon the power OF
appointment and removal. The Consti.
ton, it viii be remembered, is wholly
silent on the question of removal. To
pending bill, Henry Clay offered the
following amendment
''BE 1T FURTHER ENACTED, That in sill
instances of appointm ent to office by
the President, by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate, the power of
removal shall be exercised in concur
renee with the Senate aud when the
Senate is Il ,t in session, the President
may suspend any snch officer, communal
eating his reasons for the suspension
during the firs. month OF its succeeding
session, and if the Senate concur with
him, the officer shall be removed: but
if it do not concur with him. the officer
shall be restored to Office
This amendment covers the whole
ground assumed In the Tenure of Office
law. 1t is that law in condensed form
1t contains every principle Of that law.
Mr.. Clay supported his position by
the following arguments, among others:
II is Legislative authority which ere
ates tie office, defines its duties and may
prescribe its duration 1 speak,, of
course, of Offices not created by the
Constitution, but the law The Office
coming into existence by the will of
Congress, the same will may provide
l,<x i,of a. 4
officer shall cease to exist. It may di-
rect the conditions on which he shall
hold the Office. and when and how he
shall be dismissed Suppose the Con.
stitution had omitted to prescribe the
tenure OF the judicial oath, could no:
Congress dc it ? 5sf
But the Constitution has not fixed the
tenure Of any subordinate officers, and
therefore Congress may supply the
omission. Ii would he unreasonable to
contend that although Congress, in pur
suance of the putlic good, brings the
Office and the officer into being, and~as-
signs their purposes. yet the President
has control over the officer which Con-
gress can not reach and regulate. =
The precedent Of 1889 WAS established
in the House of Representatives against
the opinion of large and able minority,
and in the Senate by the casting vote Of
the Vice President, John Adams. It is
impossible to read the debate which it
occasioned withious being impressed
with the conviction that the just conf
dence reposed in the father of his coun-
try. then at the head of the Gov ernment,
had great, if not decisive Influence in
establishing it. 1t has never, prior to
the commencement Of the present Ad-
minlstration, been submitted to the
process of review. = No one can
carefully examine the debate in the
House of Repi esentatives in 1889. with.
out being struck with tue superiority of
the argument on the eide of the minor
ity, and the unsatisfactory nature of that
OF the majority. nla Too 8lga.
Daniel Webster agreed with Mr. Clay
in his position. in the followi. g language
used by him on the occasion :aY9.a
think, then, sir, that the power of
appointment naturally and necessarily
includes the power Of removal, where
no Limitation is expressed, nor any ten
ure but that at will declared The pow
er of appointment being conferred on
the Presitleat and Senate. think the
power Of removal went along with it,
and should have been regarded as part
O! it, and exercised b. the same hands.
l think the Legislature possesses the
power of regulating the condition. dura-
ton. qualification. and tenure Of office
in all cases where the Constitution has
made no express provision on the sub
ject- am. therefore, of opinion, that
it is competent for Congress to decide
by law, as one justification of the ten
ure of office, that the incumbent shall
remain in place till the President shall
remove him, for reasons to be stated to
the Senate. And am Of opinion that
this qualification. mild and gentle az It
is, will have some effect in arrestine the
evils Which beset the progress Of the
Government, and seriously threaten its
future prosperity"
This view was sustained by the Hon.
Thomas Ewing. of Ohio ro6 .7EE .;x
4 ''Mr. Ewing spoke at length upon the
question o. removals, maintaining that
the Constitution does not confer on the
President alone the power of removal
that it is a matter Of legislative provis
ion, subject to be vested, modified,
| changed, or taken away ut their will;
and il it is not regulated at all by law.
it rests in the President, in Conjunction
with the Senate, as part of the appoint
| ing power" t9s